Skip to content
Advertisements

William Barr to investigate the FBI’s actions during the 2016 election

April 10, 2019

 The two years spent pushing a phony Russia collusion narrative might finally be starting to come back to haunt the Democrats. First we learned that Devin Nunes, claiming it was time to go on the offense, is preparing to refer 8 people to the Department of Justice for criminal charges and now it looks as if William Barr is beginning an investigation into the allegations that Barack Obama’s FBI acted inappropriately in the months leading up to the 2016 election.

Here is more:

US Attorney General Bill Barr assembled a team to investigate decisions made by Obama’s corrupt FBI and DOJ, including actions taken during the investigation of Trump’s campaign going back to the summer of 2016, according to a source who spoke to Bloomberg.

It appears AG Barr is investigating allegations made by Republican lawmakers for over two years that the Trump-Russia investigation was corrupt from the beginning with anti-Trump FBI and DOJ officials who weaponized the agencies to target a political opponent.

“I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016,” Barr told the House Appropriations Committee earlier Tuesday.

Bill Barr’s internal investigation by the Justice Department is separate from the Inspector General’s probe.

Barr told Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-AL) that Inspector General Horowitz is investigating the FISA abuse during the Obama administration to spy on Trump. The Attorney General said the report will be completed in May or June.

  It is also being reported that William Barr will be looking into the apparent false allegations against Jeff Sessions which convinced him to recuse himself from the investigation.

  It is now no longer a case of “if” the Obama administration spied on Donald Trump and wiretapped Trump Tower, it is now a question of “when” and “why.” Remember the ridicule Donald Trump took when he made these accusations? I do not think the Democrats are laughing now, with any luck they will be caught in their own trap.

  It looks like we finally have an Attorney General who is willing to fight and because of it he is already coming under attack by the Democrats. We can only hope he does not prove to be as week as Jeff Sessions was because the attacks are only going to get worse and all the people responsible for this need to be held accountable.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Advertisements

Judge stops another portion of Donald Trump’s immigration policy

April 9, 2019

  Back in January Donald Trump instituted a policy whereby some asylum seekers were sent back into Mexico while they awaited their court date in the United States. The President was set to expand this program but now it is on hold because a Federal Judge has issued an injunction against the policy.

  Here is more:

A U.S. judge on Monday halted the Trump administration’s policy of sending some asylum seekers back across the southern border to wait out their cases in Mexico, stopping a program the government planned to expand to stem a recent flood of migrants.

The ruling is slated to take effect on Friday, according to the order by U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg in San Francisco. The preliminary injunction will apply nationwide.

Seeborg said the Immigration and Nationalization Act, however, does not authorize the government to return asylum seekers to Mexico the way the government has applied it.

He also said the policy lacks safeguards to protect refugees from threats to their life or freedom.

Here is what Donald Trump had to say about this decision:

In a late night tweet, U.S. President Donald Trump said, “A 9th Circuit Judge just ruled that Mexico is too dangerous for migrants. So unfair to the U.S. OUT OF CONTROL!”

  The theory behind this policy is simple and it makes sense. Many people who cross the border illegally never show up for their court date so this would force them to go to the hearing if they really want to come to the United States and live here legally.

  But this was a 9th Circuit Court Judge so it was to be expected. Now it is on to appeal and just like almost everything else Donald Trump tries to do this policy has an eventual date with the Supreme Court, but until then it is business as usual at the border.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Conservative majority on the Supreme Court? Not so fast

April 7, 2019

  When Donald Trump first nominated Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court there were concerned voices out there on the right warning that this nominee was not the conservative he was being touted as. Brett Kavanaugh is weak on privacy and other issues, and he was the establishment pick.

  Unfortunately the false accusations came along and with it a critical analysis of his positions was dropped as conservatives rallied around the nominee and came to his defense. These accusations unified the support on the right for Brett Kavanaugh and feeling the need to defend him at all costs, understandably, because of the nature of the attacks against him any concerns about how the nominee would rule was forgotten.

  Now, according to this article, it looks as if those concerns are coming true. Here is more:

Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s newest member, Brett Kavanaugh, have voted in tandem on nearly every case that’s come before them since Kavanaugh joined the court in October. They’ve been more likely to side with the court’s liberal justices than its other conservatives.

The two justices, both alumni of the same District of Columbia-based federal appeals court, have split publicly only once in 25 official decisions. Their partnership has extended, though less reliably, to orders the court has issued on abortion funding, immigration and the death penalty in the six months since Kavanaugh’s bitter Senate confirmation battle ended in a 50-48 vote.

Roberts and Kavanaugh have obvious reasons for their reluctance to join the court’s three other conservatives in ideological harmony. The chief justice has voiced concern about the court being viewed as just another political branch of government. Kavanaugh, a former top White House official under President George W. Bush who was accused of a 1980s sexual assault during his confirmation, may just be laying low.

Whatever their reasons, the chief justice and the newest justice together have provided ballast for a court in transition. Following Kavanaugh’s replacement of retired Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, Roberts has become the court’s swing vote, and Kavanaugh often appears to be his wingman.

  Chief Justice John Roberts has already become a major disappointment during his time on the Supreme Court and it looks as if Brett Kavanaugh is taking the same path.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Sunday, April 7th open thread: ‘The Cure Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction set’

April 7, 2019

“This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.” (Psalm 118:24 KJV)

  open-threadHere is this week’s open thread. Please feel free to post links to interesting articles and to discuss whatever issues arise during the course of the day. Nothing is off-topic here.

 You can subscribe to America’s Watchtower to receive email updates and you can also follow America’s Watchtower on Facebook and Twitter by clicking the links on the right.

  The Cure were officially, and finally, inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame at the end of March so I have decided to share their whole induction set with you. They kicked off the set with Shake Dog Shake, which was a tribute to Andy Anderson who recently passed away, then went into A Forest, Lovesong, Just Like Heaven, and Boys Don’t Cry.

House sues to stop border wall

April 6, 2019

  Once the Congress failed to stop Donald Trump’s emergency declaration we knew it was only a matter of time before they took the President to court and on Thursday they voted to do just that. Here is more:

Top Democrats voted to authorize a lawsuit against President Trump emergency declaration on Thursday.

Pelosi announced that the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, which is comprised of five people, voted 3-2 (on party lines) to authorize a lawsuit challenging the President’s decision to transfer funds from appropriated accounts for his border wall.

“The President’s sham emergency declaration and unlawful transfers of funds have undermined our democracy, contravening the vote of the bipartisan Congress, the will of the American people and the letter of the Constitution,” Pelosi said in a statement Thursday.

“The House will once again defend our Democracy and our Constitution, this time in the courts,” Pelosi added. “The President’s action clearly violates the Appropriations Clause by stealing from appropriated funds, an action that was not authorized by constitutional or statutory authority.”

  I still get a kick out of it when I hear Democrats who suddenly claim to care about the Constitution, what they care about is simply making sure they do not lose a grip on pushing their agenda through and Donald Trump is a clear and present danger to that agenda.

  We know how this is going to end, the Democrats will shop this lawsuit around until they find a sympathetic judge who will rule this national emergency declaration is unconstitutional and order a stay while the lawsuit makes it through the court system. It will eventually make it to the Supreme Court, but the game plan here is not to let it get that far. The Democrats are hoping to stall the wall until Donald Trump is out of office and then it will not matter how the Supreme Court would rule because the construction would be stopped.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

 

Judicial Watch postpones Clinton email deposition after DOJ misses court ordered deadline

April 5, 2019

  You would not know it by watching the mainstream media but Judicial Watch is still trying to get information on the Hillary Clinton email scandal. The organization has scheduled several depositions of Obama-era officials and they have been ordered by the court to answer any questions Judicial Watch has.

  Today Judicial Watch was supposed to take John Hackett’s deposition but had to delay it because the State Department and the Department of Justice missed a court imposed deadline to turn over documents.

  The more things change the more they stay the same. It is clear the deep state is still in control and we are never going to get to the bottom of this.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Rutgers professor claims that ‘time’ is racist

April 3, 2019

  Over the last several years we have seen political correctness run amok on college campuses. We have seen college theme parties either cancelled or apologized for after the fact on the grounds they were insensitive to one particular group or another.

 I have done several posts on this but that one that comes to mind first tonight is Stevenson College. This college apologized for serving Mexican food at a space themed party because comparisons could be drawn–they said–between space aliens and illegal immigrants.

  It has been awhile since I have written a post about something like this but then along comes Rutgers professor Brittany Cooper claiming that “time” is a white man’s concept and therefor must be inherently racist. Here is more:

According to a report from The College Fix, Cooper spoke with NPR last week about how white people “own time.” In the interview, Cooper made the case that white Americans have solely been responsible for conceptualizing the notion of “time.”

“If time had a race, it would be white,” Cooper said. “White people own time.”

Yes. So when I say time has a race, I’m saying that the way that we position ourselves in relationship to time comes out of histories of European and Western thought. And a lot of the way that we talk about time really finds its roots in the Industrial Revolution. So prior to that, we would talk about time as merely passing the time. After the Industrial Revolution, suddenly, we begin to talk about time as spending time. It becomes something that is tethered to monetary value. So when we think about hourly wage, we now talk about time in terms of wasting time or spending time. And that’s a really different understanding of time than, you know, like seasonal time or time that is sort of merely passing.

And here is the kicker:

Time has a history, and so do black people. But we treat time as though it is timeless, as though it has always been this way, as though it doesn’t have a political history bound up with the plunder of indigenous lands, the genocide of indigenous people and the stealing of Africans from their homeland. When white, male European philosophers first thought to conceptualize time and history, one famously declared, Africa is no historical part of the world. He was, essentially, saying that Africans were people outside of history who had had no impact on time or the march of progress.

So there you have it, how can you even argue with that logic?

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium