Attorneys representing House Democrats have told a federal court that House Democrats intend to continue impeachment investigations against President Donald Trump after they vote on impeachment this week, regardless of the eventual outcome of the Senate’s impeachment trial.

“In a filing to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, House General Counsel Douglas Letter argued that the House’s demands for grand jury materials connected to former special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation were still urgent because such evidence might become relevant to the Senate’s expected impeachment trial next month,” Politico reported. “But Letter went further to note that even apart from the Senate trial, the House Judiciary Committee intends to continue its impeachment investigation arising from the Mueller probe on its own merit.”

In the court filing, Democrats accused the Department of Justice (DOJ) of essentially engaging in a cover-up to protect Trump, claiming that the DOJ took an “extraordinary position in” the Democrats’ impeachment investigations by not “disclosing grand-jury material needed for the House’s impeachment of President Trump and the Senate’s trial to remove him from office.”

Democrats’ insistence at continuing to investigate the findings of the Mueller probe comes after Attorney General William Barr said last week in an NBC News interview that “there was and never has been any evidence of collusion.”

House Democrats have said in recent days that there is no limit to the number of times that they can impeach the president.

“A president can be impeached more than once,” Rep. Al Green (D-TX) said earlier this month. “So, we can do this, we can move forward with what we have on the table currently, we can take this before the Senate and we can still investigate other issues and when the president has committed additional offenses, and my suspicion is that he will, we can take those before the Senate.”

“There is no limit on the number of times the Senate can vote to convict or not a president, no limit to the number of times the House can vote to impeach or not a president,” Green continued. “So, my belief is that the speaker will probably say we’re going to move forward with what we have now, but we’re not going to end investigations and that there may be possible opportunities to do other things at a later time.”

Neal Katyal, an acting solicitor general under former Democrat President Barack Obama, made remarks along the same lines earlier this month.

Katyal tweeted: “[Important] note on future: If the Senate doesn’t vote to convict Trump, or tries to monkey w his trial, he could of course be retried in the new Senate should he win re-election. Double jeopardy protections do not apply. And Senators voting on impeachment in the next months know this.”

Democrat Rep. Jeff Van Drew (NJ) is leaving the party and becoming a Republican over the issue of impeachment, which he has long been opposed to.

Van Drew told CNN earlier this month that Democrats should “be careful what [they] wish for” because impeachment “is tearing the nation apart.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Democrats Vow To Continue Impeachment Investigations Regardless Of Senate Outcome

Far-left climate extremist Greta Thunberg tweeted a photograph of herself riding on a train over the weekend that showed her sitting on the floor while complaining about the train supposedly being “overcrowded” which earned a sharp response from the train.

“Traveling on overcrowded trains through Germany,” Thunberg tweeted. “And I’m finally on my way home!”

The Guardian reported that in a two-part tweet, Deutsche Bahn (DB) responded to Thunberg’s tweet, writing, “Dear Greta, thank you for supporting us railroaders in the fight against climate change! We were happy that you travelled with us on Saturday in the ICE 74 … but it would have been even nicer had you also reported how friendly and competently you were looked after by our team at your seat in the first class.”

After being repeatedly mocked online over the incident, Thunberg claimed, “Our train from Basel was taken out of traffic. So we sat on the floor on 2 different trains. After Göttingen I got a seat. This is no problem of course and I never said it was. Overcrowded trains is a great sign because it means the demand for train travel is high!”

Thunberg has been at the center of controversy over her push for extreme climate proposals and has been mocked by leaders around the world, and was even mocked in the most recent episode of South Park.

Earlier this month, famed British tv personality Jeremy Clarkson unloaded on Thunberg after a series of extreme speeches she delivered during 2019.

“She’s mad and she’s dangerous and she’s causing young children sleepless nights with her idiocy,” Clarkson said in an interview this week, according to The Daily Mail. “I think she needs to go back to school and shut up.”

“But rather than having her jumping up and down and waving her arms in the air, you can actually go there and say, ‘Bloody hell, fire! Look at what this climate change has done to this place,’” Clarkson continued. “We simply said, ‘Here’s an example of it.’ What do you want me to do now? Get on my carbon fiber yacht and go and shout at Donald Trump?”

When Clarkson was further asked about what he thought about Thunberg, Clarkson responded: “She’s a stupid idiot.”

“I think she’s a weird Swede with a bad temper. Nothing will be achieved by sailing across the ocean in a diesel-powered yacht, and then lying about the diesel engine,” Clarkson continued. “And did you see she went to Chile for the climate conference which was then moved to Madrid? I literally s**t myself laughing. She’s an idiot because scientists will solve this, and nobody is going to solve it by running around and going on strike and not going to school, because then you’re not in your science lessons, so she’s a fool.”

Thunberg recently admitted in an op-ed that her extreme climate plan was about more than just the environment, it was also about fighting the “colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression.”

Thunberg noted that the goal of her “climate resistance movement” is “to change everything.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Greta Thunberg Tweets Pic Of Herself On Floor Of ‘Overcrowded’ Train. Train Company Rips Her For Not Telling Full Story.

Justice Department Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz confirmed during his testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that the FBI used fraudulent evidence that it created as the basis for a sworn statement to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that it used to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act application to surveil the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.

“A lawyer at the FBI creates fraudulent evidence, alters an email that is in turn used as the basis for a sworn statement to the court that the court relies on,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said. “Am I stating that accurately?”

“That’s correct,” Horowitz confirmed. “That’s what occurred.”

The IG report found: “In an email from the liaison to the OGC Attorney, the liaison provided written guidance, including that it was the liaison’s recollection that Page had a relationship with the other agency, and directed the OGC Attorney to review the information that the other agency had provided to the FBI in August 2016. As noted above, that August 2016 information stated that Page did, in fact, have a prior relationship with that other agency. However, the OGC Attorney altered the liaison’s email by inserting the words ‘not a source’ into it, thus making it appear that the liaison had said that Page was “not a source”; the OGC Attorney then sent the altered email to SSA 2. Relying upon this altered email, SSA 2 signed the third renewal application (that again failed to disclose Page’s past relationship with the other agency).”

Earlier during the hearing, Horowitz essentially implied to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham that what the FBI did was tantamount to “illegal surveillance.”

Here’s the interaction between Graham and Horowitz:

Graham: Let’s play this out. They never told Trump about the concerns, is it fair to say there came a point to where surveilling Carter Page became unlawful?

Horowitz: I will let the court decide that. The court has this report and will make that decision.

Graham: Let’s put it this way, if you don’t have a legal foundation to surveil somebody and you keep doing it, is that bad?

Horowitz: Absolutely.

Graham: Is that spying?

Horowitz: ‘It’s illegal surveillance, it’s not court authorized surveillance.

Graham: What ever illegal surveillance means, they did it. … They had no legal basis after the January 2017 data dump by the Russian guy to believe that the dossier was reliable. They alter exculpatory information in June of 2017 that would have further proven that Carter Page is not a Russian agent and he was actually working with the CIA.

On Tuesday, Attorney General William Barr told NBC News that “in January, after the election, the entire case collapsed when the principal source says ‘I never told — I never told Steele this stuff and this was also speculation and I have zero information to support this stuff.’ At that point, when their entire case collapsed, what do they do? They kept on investigating the president well into his administration, after the case collapsed.”

Barr continued, “But here to me is the damning thing: They not only didn’t tell the court that what they had been relying on was completely, you know, rubbish, they actually started putting in things to bolster this Steele report by saying, ‘we talked to the sources and they appeared to be truthful,’ but they don’t inform the court that what they’re truthful about is that the dossier is false.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Horowitz: FBI Created ‘Fraudulent Evidence’ In Investigation, Implies ‘Illegal Surveillance’

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) slapped CNN with a massive lawsuit seeking nearly half a billion dollars on Tuesday over a report last month that he says was “demonstrably false” which claimed that an indicted associate of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was willing to testify that Nunes met with a Ukrainian prosecutor last year in Vienna to dig up dirt on former Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Fox News reported that the 47-page lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, seeks “at least $435,350,000 in compensatory and punitive damages.”

“CNN is the mother of fake news. It is the least trusted name. CNN is eroding the fabric of America, proselytizing, sowing distrust and disharmony. It must be held accountable,” the lawsuit, obtained by Fox News, states. “The ulterior purpose of the CNN Article is to advance the impeachment inquiry, to seed doubt in the minds of Americans, and to influence the outcome of the 2020 election.”

The lawsuit came in response to a CNN report last month that stated: “The attorney, Joseph A. Bondy, represents Lev Parnas, the recently indicted Soviet-born American who worked with Giuliani to push claims of Democratic corruption in Ukraine. Bondy said that Parnas was told directly by the former Ukrainian official that he met last year in Vienna with Rep. Devin Nunes.”

“Mr. Parnas learned from former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Victor Shokin that Nunes had met with Shokin in Vienna last December,” Bondy told CNN. “Nunes had told Shokin of the urgent need to launch investigations into Burisma, Joe and Hunter Biden, and any purported Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election.”

CNN reported that Bondy claimed that Parnas and Nunes began communicating with each other around the time of the Vienna trip and that Parnas worked to set Nunes up with Ukrainian government officials who could begin looking into Biden.

Nunes slammed the story shortly after it was published last month, telling Breitbart News: “These demonstrably false and scandalous stories published by the Daily Beast and CNN are the perfect example of defamation and reckless disregard for the truth. Some political operative offered these fake stories to at least five different media outlets before finding someone irresponsible enough to publish them. I look forward to prosecuting these cases, including the media outlets, as well as the sources of their fake stories, to the fullest extent of the law. I intend to hold the Daily Beast and CNN accountable for their actions. They will find themselves in court soon after Thanksgiving.”

CNN claimed last month that they began to ask Nunes questions about his Vienna trip in mid-November and that he responded to their questions by stating: “I don’t talk to you in this lifetime or the next lifetime. At any time. On any question.”

CNN said when it published it report that it again asked Nunes to comment on it and that he again responded: “To be perfectly clear, I don’t acknowledge any questions from you in this lifetime or the next lifetime. I don’t acknowledge any question from you ever.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Devin Nunes Hits CNN With Massive Lawsuit Over ‘Demonstrably False’ Ukraine Report

Attorney General William Barr reportedly has taken issue with a key claim made by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz in his soon-to-be released report on possible FBI misconduct toward the Trump campaign in 2016.

Barr has told associates that he disagrees with the conclusion that “the FBI had enough information in July 2016 to justify launching an investigation into members of the Trump campaign,” The Washington Post reported, citing numerous sources that were familiar with the matter.

“Barr has not been swayed by Horowitz’s rationale for concluding the FBI had sufficient basis to open an investigation on July 31, 2016,” The Post continued. “The attorney general has privately contended that Horowitz does not have enough information to reach the conclusion the FBI had enough details in hand at the time to justify opening such a probe. He argues that other U.S. agencies, such as the CIA, may hold significant information that could alter Horowitz’s conclusion on that point, according to the people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.”

The Post notes that the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign was launched after then-Trump campaign volunteer George Papadopoulos made statements to Clinton-connected Australian diplomat Alexander Downer about Clinton’s emails.

Papadopoulos responded to The Post’s report by writing on Twitter: “It’s not difficult to understand why the Attorney General is objecting to Australia’s version. Truth is Australia was spying on me in London to set up Trump. Durham has been interviewing both Israeli and Australian officials who know EXACTLY who Alexander Downer’s handlers were!”

In late November, CNN reported that an FBI official is under criminal investigation for allegedly altering a document that was key to the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign.

“The finding is expected to be part of Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s review of the FBI’s effort to obtain warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide,” CNN reported. “Horowitz turned over evidence on the allegedly altered document to John Durham, the federal prosecutor appointed early this year by Attorney General William Barr to conduct a broad investigation of intelligence gathered for the Russia probe by the CIA and other agencies, including the FBI. The altered document is also at least one focus of Durham’s criminal probe.”

It is important to note that the IG report from Horowitz — who will testify in front of Congress next week — is separate from the criminal investigation that U.S. Attorney John Durham is conducting on the origins of the Russia investigation.

At the end of October, The New York Times reported that Durham’s probe had shifted from an administrative review into a full fledged criminal investigation due to the amount of evidence that was being uncovered.

“Mr. Durham has indicated he wants to interview former officials who ran the C.I.A. in 2016 but has yet to question either Mr. Brennan or James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence,” The Times reported. “Some C.I.A. officials have retained criminal lawyers in anticipation of being interviewed.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: BREAKING: AG Barr Disputes Key Finding In IG Report On FBI’s Russia investigation

The United States Supreme Court is set to hear its first Second Amendment case in nearly a decade on Monday which has caused panic among left-wing activists who worry that the case could undo their freedom-restricting agenda.

The case centers around New York City’s handgun “premises” licenses which, according to NBC News, allow residents with the proper permit to “take a handgun outside the home to a city shooting range, provided it was unloaded and in a locked container” but prohibit the gun from being taken “beyond the city limits.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Editorial Board slammed Democrats on Sunday for using politically motivated tactics to get the Supreme Court to drop the case:

Democrats have gone to great lengths to get the Justices to drop the case. After the High Court accepted it in January, the New York Police Department revised its ban to allow gun owners to take their handguns (locked up and unloaded with the ammunition stored separately) “directly to and from” second homes and shooting ranges outside the city.

But as amicus briefs note, the Court has criticized this kind of strategic “voluntary cessation” of challenged conduct by defendants to preserve favorable judicial outcomes or avoid adverse rulings. Courts are only supposed to review “live controversies,” but the Justices are loath to rule a case moot unless it is “absolutely clear” a defendant won’t resume the challenged conduct.

New York’s behavior offers no such confidence. Crafty city officials coaxed fellow Democrats in the New York State Legislature to pass a law pre-empting their abandoned transport ban.

“The court has steadfastly declined to take up any gun rights cases since ruling in 2008’s Washington, D.C. v. Heller that the Second Amendment provides a right to keep a handgun at home for self-defense, and later clarifying in 2010’s McDonald v. Chicago that the right applies nationwide,” NBC News added.

Gun control advocates, who promote an anti-freedom agenda that seeks to restrict constitutionally guaranteed rights, have started to panic about the upcoming case over the possibility that the court could rule in a manner that gives those who want to protect the United States Constitution the legal backing needed to fight against many of the hundreds of anti-gun laws enacted across the country in recent years.

Leftist Giffords Law Center litigation director Hannah Shearer said, “The future of life-saving gun safety laws across our country is very directly on the line with this case.”

Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg, an extreme anti-gun activist who has pumped tens of millions of dollars to anti-gun activists and politicians, tweeted: “The NRA’s latest effort to undermine public safety may be its most absurd yet – and its most dangerous. The Supreme Court must side with the millions of Americans fighting for gun safety and send the NRA packing.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) – the same U.S. Senator who questioned then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh about farting in high school – said about the Supreme Court’s decision to take up the case: “The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps particularly on the urgent issue of gun control, a nation desperately needs it to heal.”

Senate Republicans fired back at Senate Democrats, saying, “The implication is as plain as day: Dismiss this case, or we’ll pack the court. We share Justice Ginsburg’s view that ‘nine seems to be a good number,’ and it will remain that way as long as we are here.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: SCOTUS Takes Gun Case That Could Decimate Gun Control Laws. Left-Wing Activists Begin To Panic.

Marie Yovanovitch, who was appointed to be the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine by former President Barack Obama, allegedly made false statements under oath during her October 11 closed-door testimony in House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry.

“Before the contents of the whistleblower complaint were known publicly, a Democratic congressional staffer contacted the former American ambassador to Ukraine to discuss what the staffer described as ‘quite delicate and time sensitive questions,’” Fox News’ Tucker Carlson exclusively reported.

“This show has obtained exclusively an email for that Democratic staffer for the House Foreign Affairs Committee sent by private email to the former American ambassador Marie Yovanovitch,” Carlson continued. “Yovanovitch, you know, is a key player in the Democrats’ impeachment probe and was recalled from her post in Ukraine by President Trump in May 2019 following allegations of serious partisanship and political bias.”

The email Carlson obtained states:

I’m writing to see if you would have time to meet up for a chat — in particular, I’m hoping to discuss some Ukraine-related oversight questions we are exploring. I’d appreciate the change to ground-truth a few pieces of information with you, some of which are quite delicate/time-sensitive and, thus, we want to make sure we get them right.

“That email was sent on August 14, that was two days after the whistleblower complaint was filed and a month before that complaint became public,” Carlson stated. “The whistleblower, however, went to Adam Schiff’s team before filing the complaint.”

“The question is, did Schiff’s office tell other Democrats on Capitol Hill what was in the complaint?” Carlson continued. “In other words, how long did this effort play out in secret before the rest of the country learned of it?”

Carlson noted that Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) asked Marie Yovanovitch about the email during her testimony and she allegedly stated that she never responded to the email.

“In fact, it turns out that she did respond,” Carlson revealed. “She said she ‘looked forward to chatting with [the Democratic staffer].”

“As Congressmen Zeldin pointed out, the ambassador’s original answer, which was dishonest, was given under oath,” Carlson concluded.

Zeldin confirmed Carlson’s segment on Twitter, writing: “It appears Ambassador Yovanovitch did not accurately answer this question I asked her during her ‘impeachment inquiry’ deposition under oath.”

Zeldin included the following excerpts from Yovanovitch’s testimony in his tweet:

MR. ZELDIN: When was the last time you had communicated with that person?

MS. YOVANOVITCH: Well , I should actually clarify. So she emailed me. I alerted the State Department and, you know, asked them to handle the correspondence. And she emailed me again and said, you know, who should I be in touch with?

MR. ZELDIN: To try to get you to come in and testify to the House Foreign Affairs Committee?

MS. Y0VAN0VITCH: It wasn’t clear to me whether it was going to be whether this was a discussion with her, whether this was a discussion with other staffers, whether it was a deposition. I mean, it just didn’t get that far, because I transferred that information to the State Department lawyers well, H, actually.

MR. ZELDIN: And what specifically was she asking you to speak about?

MS. YOVANOVITCH: I think I think it was the circumstances of my departure, or maybe she just kept it more general and said to catch up, but I understood it as that.

MR. ZELDIN: Do you know if she had reached out to other people about that?

MS. YOVAN0VITCH: I don’t know

MR. ZELDIN: And you one more time. And what did you do after you received the email?

MS. YOVANOVITCH: I alerted the State Department, because I’m still an employee and so matters are generally handled through the State Department.

MR. ZELDIN: Was that person responded to by you or someone else?

MS . YOVAN0VITCH: I believe, yes, by [redacted] in the Legislative Affairs office.

MR. ZELDIN: Did you receive any subsequent requests to testify to the House Foreign Affairs Committee or to come in to speak to someone at the House Foreign Affairs Committee following that initial email? Was there any follow-up?

MS. YOVANOVITCH: Well, as I said, there was the second email where she said, oh, okay, you know, who should I be talking to? I didn’t respond to that email, because I had already transferred everything to the State Department and I figured they would be in touch, and they were.


Fox News’ Gregg Re later reported that Yovanovitch replied to the staffer, identified by Fox News as Laura Carey, saying she “would love to reconnect and look forward to chatting with you.”

“I would highly suspect that this Democratic staffer’s work was connected in some way to the whistleblower’s effort, which has evolved into this impeachment charade,” Zeldin told Fox News on Thursday night. “We do know that the whistleblower was in contact with [House Intelligence Committee Chairman] Adam Schiff’s team before the whistleblower had even hired an attorney or filed a whistleblower complaint even though Schiff had lied to the public originally claiming that there was no contact. Additionally, while the contents of the email from this staffer to Ambassador Yovanovitch clearly state what the conversation would be regarding, Yovanovitch, when I asked her specifically what the staffer was looking to speak about, did not provide these details.”

“I specifically asked her whether the Democratic staffer was responded to by Yovanovitch or the State Department,” Zeldin concluded. “It is greatly concerning that Ambassador Yovanovitch didn’t answer my question as honestly as she should have, especially while under oath.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Obama’s Ukraine Ambassador Allegedly Lied Under Oath In Impeachment Inquiry, Congressman Suggests

A top ally of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan met far-left Democrat Ilhan Omar (MN) last month and donated a large sum of money to her campaign, a revelation that comes one day after Omar refused to sanction Turkey for their actions in northern Syria and refused to recognize the Armenian Genocide, which was committed by Turkey.

Halil Mutlu, who is the co-chairman of the Turkish American Steering Committee (TSAC), donated $1,500 last month to Omar’s campaign.

“Founded in 2015, TASC has orchestrated a public relations push to cast doubt on whether the Ottoman empire committed genocide against Armenians more than a century ago,” The Daily Caller News Foundation’s (DCNF) Chuck Ross reported. TSAC is “a U.S.-based nonprofit that has for years waged public relations campaigns in support of Turkish government policies and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan … [and] maintains close ties to Erdogan, routinely hosting the Turkish president during his visits to the U.S., including on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly last month.”

The DCNF added that Mutlu, who is reportedly Erdogan’s cousin from Connecticut, made the $1,500 contribution to Omar’s campaign on at the end of last month and was featured in a photograph with her.

On Tuesday, Omar was one of the only members of Congress that did not vote to recognize the Armenian Genocide and was the only Democrat member of Congress to vote against sanctioning Turkey for their actions in northern Syria.

Omar released a statement on why she did not vote for the resolution recognizing the Armenian Genocide:

I also believe accountability for human rights violations—especially ethnic cleansing and genocide—is paramount. But accountability and recognition of genocide should not be used as cudgel in a political fight. It should be done based on academic consensus outside the push and pull of geopolitics. A true acknowledgement of historical crimes against humanity must include both the heinous genocides of the 20th century, along with earlier mass slaughters like the transatlantic slave trade and Native American genocide, which took the lives of hundreds of millions of indigenous people in this country. For this reason, I voted ‘present’ on final passage of H.Res. 296, the resolution Affirming the United States record on the Armenian Genocide.

Aram Hamparian, the executive director of the Armenian National Committee of America, told the DCNF regarding Omar’s statement: “Essentially, this is a Turkish talking point that she’s throwing out. She is lining up to carry Turkey’s water on this.”

Omar was widely slammed across the political spectrum, including from her supporters on the far-left.

A man named Hrag Vartanian, who describes himself as a vocal defender of Omar’s, said that her refusal to recognize the Armenian Genocide was the final straw for him.

“I’ve been a vocal supporter of @IlhanMN but no more. There was absolutely no reason for her to not vote on something that is solid historical fact and use the typical [word] salad of denialists,” he wrote. “I once saw her as a human rights defender. The other present or no votes I care less about, because I never supported them, but this really hurt.”

“Omar — who likes to portray herself as a champion of human rights — has repeatedly condemned using sanctions against Iran, Turkey, and Venezuela because she claims that sanctions hurt innocent people, yet, Omar has repeatedly called for using sanctions against Israel,” The Daily Wire reported on Tuesday. “Omar is an avid supporter of the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement which is designed to destroy the state of Israel.”

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Top Ally Of Turkish President Erdogan Donated To Omar’s Campaign Last Month

Former National Security Adviser and documented liar Susan Rice complained on Sunday that President Donald Trump did not inform former President Barack Obama about the raid in which ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed.

“Well obviously it’s a major milestone and it’s one that we all should be welcoming quite plainly, but it doesn’t mean that the fight against ISIS is over. And it doesn’t mean that we can declare mission accomplished, and just walk away,” Rice said. “What we’ve seen time and time again in this part of the world is that when the pressure is relieved on terrorist organizations, whether al-Qaeda or ISIS, they are able to reconstitute. So we need to be vigilant. We need to maintain a minimal presence in order to ensure that the pressure stays on ISIS and they don’t come back roaring.”

“Do you know, was President Obama informed of the death of al-Baghdadi by the administration?” Brennan asked.

“There’s no reason why I should know. There is a tradition of common courtesy of presidents informing their predecessors of things of significance like this,” Rice responded. “Since the White House seemingly didn’t feel it necessary to inform the leadership of the intelligence committees on a bipartisan basis, I’m quite confident that they didn’t do the normal protocol with respect to predecessors either.”

Rice continued by saying that Trump should have informed Obama “as a matter of courtesy,” despite the fact that Obama holds no power in government anymore and was not needed for any of the decision-making that went into authorizing the raid to get al-Baghdadi.


Rice has been in the news recently after appearing on a far-left podcast where she repeatedly called Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) a “piece of s**t.”

“Former National Security Adviser Susan Rice called Senator Lindsey Graham a piece of s*** during the recording of a podcast episode,” The Daily Mail reported. “The short clip shows Rice’s outburst as a preview for this week’s episode of ‘Pod Save the World,’ where the panel discuss the 2012 Benghazi controversy.”

“He’s been a piece of s***,” Rice said. “I said it, I said it, da s***. Finally. He’s a piece of s***.”

“In the weeks immediately after the [Benghazi] attack, Republicans, often led by Lindsey Graham, accused Rice, who was U.S. Ambassador to the UN at the time, of ‘misleading the public’ with her representation of the situation,” The Daily Mail added. “Rice had claimed that the jihadist military action was not premeditated and told the public that the attack had evolved from a protest. This was all later found to be false. “

Graham responded to Rice last week on Fox News, saying, “Everything she touched turned to a piece of crap, national security-wise. It does bother me that the person who lied about Benghazi is still relevant. Here’s her greatest hits: The Iran nuclear deal, withdrawal from Iraq, the rise of ISIS. At the end of the day, the Rwanda genocide, the Syrian red line. The bottom line is I hope the American people will remember that it’s Susan Rice and Barack Obama who brought you ISIS, who gave the Ayatollah $150 billion, and at the end of the day, if she doesn’t like me, I must be doing something right.”


Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: Susan Rice Complains That Trump Should Have Informed Obama About Killing ISIS Leader

Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) was mocked Sunday evening after a new report revealed that he appears to have used a secret Twitter account to defend himself against critics online.

During an interview with The Atlantic, Romney made the revelation that he had a secret Twitter account:

“That’s kind of what he does,” Romney said with a shrug, and then got up to retrieve an iPad from his desk. He explained that he uses a secret Twitter account—“What do they call me, a lurker?”—to keep tabs on the political conversation. “I won’t give you the name of it,” he said [emphasis added], but “I’m following 668 people.” Swiping at his tablet, he recited some of the accounts he follows, including journalists, late-night comedians (“What’s his name, the big redhead from Boston?”), and athletes. Trump was not among them. “He tweets so much,” Romney said, comparing the president to one of his nieces who overshares on Instagram. “I love her, but it’s like, ah, it’s too much.”

Hours later, Slate published a report that appears to have identified Romney’s secret Twitter account: Pierre Delecto.

Slate identified what appears to be Romney’s secret Twitter account by identifying which of Romney’s family member’s had the smallest followings on the platform and then going through their accounts to find it and then using a variety of other techniques to add validity to the claim that it was his secret account.

“This account joined the site in July of 2011, just one month after Romney announced his run for president,” Slate wrote. “The majority of people it follows are either political reporters, politicians, political operatives, or pundits.”

CNN investigative reporter Andrew Kaczynski noted that the account followed “a lot of Romney 2012 aides.”

The most hilarious part of the story is the fact that Romney had compared President Donald Trump to one of his nieces, suggesting that Trump was an immature child, while Romney appeared to be using a secret Twitter account to defend himself against criticism — which is childish and cowardly.

In May, far-left Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin, who falsely describes herself as “conservative,” tweeted a link to an article on Romney and wrote: “Inside Romney’s Trump strategy – his strategy is nonconfrontation verging on spinelessness”

Romney appears to have responded to her tweet by writing: “Jennifer, you need to take a breath. Maybe you can then acknowledge the people who agree with you in large measure even if not in every measure.”

In June, leftist Soledad O’Brien tweeted about Romney: “Utter lack of a moral compass.”

Romney appears to have responded by O’Brien by writing: “Only Republican to hit Trump on Mueller report, only one to hit Trump on character time and again, so Soledad, you think he’s the one without moral compass?”

Earlier this month, Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume suggested that Romney was “an unreliable ally.”

Romney appears to have responded to Hume’s tweet by writing: “Loyal to principle trumps loyalty to party or person, right Brit?”

Online, Romney was widely mocked over the apparent revelation that he was using a secret Twitter account to defend himself from criticism.

Republican strategist Arthur Schwartz tweeted: “What a total loser.”

New York Times reporter Mike Isaac tweeted: “I think the saddest version of the anon-alt-burner account is the one used to defend yourself in public”

Isaac noted how cringeworthy some of the tweets were that Romney appears to have “liked” from his stealth Twitter account.

UPDATE: Romney has confirmed that the Twitter belongs to him.

Author: Ryan Saavedra

Source: Daily Wire: ‘A TOTAL LOSER’: Romney Mocked After Using Secret Twitter Account To Defend Himself, Report Suggests

Ad Blocker Detected!

Advertisements fund this website. Please disable your adblocking software or whitelist our website.
Thank You!