Wow, earlier tonight the great Lou Dobbs shared some incredible information with his audience that highlights just how Machiavellian the DC system of tiered justice can be.
In a tremendous exposé on Fox Business with Lou Dobbs, the intrepid bringer of sunlight outlined how the Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director James Wolfe leaked the FISA application used against Carter Page and how DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu dropped all charges related to the leak and instead only charged Wolfe with one count of lying to FBI investigators. Wolfe only received a 60 day sentence. WATCH:
.
It would appear Mr. Dobbs expose’ helped bring sunlight ultimately resulting in the withdrawal of Ms. Liu’s nomination. Dobbs is terrific. Thank You !
Complicated business folks, complicated business....
WASHINGTON – President Trump is withdrawing his nomination for former U.S. attorney for D.C. Jessie Liu to serve as the Treasury Department’s undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes, a top position overseeing economic sanctions, according to two sources with direct knowledge.
[…] This was “the president’s call,” according to a former administration official familiar with the situation. The decision, which was made today, has administration officials questioning the circumstances that led to Trump changing his mind — with the developments in the Roger Stone case today being the only one they are aware of. (read more)
Great job folks. Apparently the Senate will not have to ask Ms. Liu any pesky questions…. Imagine that.
It is now obvious the Mueller prosecutors in the Roger Stone case intentionally inflated the sentencing recommendation (7 to 9 years prison) in a coordinated Lawfare effort to set-up a narrative of Attorney General Bill Barr interference.
After lying to main justice officials, in an effort to deploy their plan, all four prosecutors, Michael Marando, Aaron Zelinsky, Jonathan Kravis and Adam Jed have resigned from the case. Their resignations follow the DOJ filing a supplemental sentencing memorandumrebuking the prior sentence recommendation:
Ultimately responsibility for the the issues created by this internal “resistance” deployment falls directly on the shoulders of Attorney General Bill Barr who refused to purge the DOJ of corrupt and politically motivated lawyers.
These Lawfare-minded legal activists weaponized the DOJ against their political enemies and used the cover of former special prosecutor Robert Mueller to carry out their misdeeds. Ironically this Friday will be the one year anniversary of AG Bill Barr being sworn into office. Full DOJ filing below:
It is an unfortunate reality but if AG Bill Barr could be caught off-guard by the corruption within his own DOJ; as contrast against such high profile cases as Roger Stone and Lt. General Michael Flynn; what does that say about Barr’s ability to see the ongoing institutional corruption evident within the FBI?
Continuing to sing the praises of institutional officers like Robert Mueller, Christopher Wray and Rod Rosenstein; while simultaneously being marginalized by efforts within Main Justice; does little to indicate AG Bill Barr possesses the fortitude or skillset to recognize the severity of corruption that surrounds him.
As CTH has shared for more than eight months, Bill Barr’s biggest challenge is not only confronting the corruption that surrounds him, but also navigating through what We The People are fully aware of.
There are far too many people who have joined us in the sunlight for Bill Barr to try to maintain the ridiculous premise that all is well within the institutions of Main Justice and the FBI. His lack of intellectual honesty has now become his Achilles heel.
It seems odd to accept, but AG Barr seems to have forgotten that truth is actually on his side. However, in order to deploy the most effective use of truth as a weapon against the liars, the Attorney General must first admit the problem within the deceit.
Bill Barr could learn lessons from President Trump about using truth as a weapon against the liars.
When we see that justice is measured, not by due process, but by compulsion; when we see that in order to invoke our right to due process, we need to obtain permission from those who rebuke the constitution; when we see that justice is determined by those who leverage, not in law, but in politics; when we see that representatives get power over individual liberty by graft and by scheme, and our representatives don’t protect us against them, but protect them against us; when we see corruption holding influence and individual liberty so easily dispatched and nullified; we may well know that our freedom too is soon to perish….
Cold Anger does not need to go to violence. For those who carry it, no conversation is needed when we meet. You cannot poll or measure it; specifically because most who carry it avoid discussion… And that decision has nothing whatsoever to do with any form of correctness.
The intelligence apparatus of our nation was weaponized against our candidate by those who controlled the levers of government. Now, with sanctimonious declarations they dismiss accountability.
Deliberate intent and prudence ensures we avoid failure. The course is thoughtful vigilance; it is a strategy devoid of emotion. The media can call us anything they want, it really doesn’t matter…. we’re far beyond the place where labels matter.
Foolishness and betrayal of our nation have served to reveal dangers within our present condition. Misplaced corrective action, regardless of intent, is neither safe nor wise. We know exactly who Donald Trump is, and we also know what he is not.
He is exactly what we need at this moment.
He is a necessary, defiant and glorious fighter.
He is our weapon.
Cold Anger is not driven to act in spite of itself; it drives a reckoning.
Breaking reporting out of Chicago indicates a special prosecutor in Chicago has indicted hate hoax actor Jussie Smollett.
The construct of the hate crime itself appeared to be connected to a DC scheme to advance the presidential ambitions of Kamala Harris who launched her bid for office simultaneously with the racially driven hoax.
CHICAGO – Former “Empire” actor Jussie Smollett was indicted Tuesday in Chicago by special prosecutor Dan Webb, stemming from the alleged racist and anti-gay attack on him that occurred in January of 2019, a source confirms to FOX 32 News.
He is due in court February 24.
Smollett told Chicago police last year that two men physically attacked him and yelled racial and homophobic slurs. But prosecutors insist Smollett faked the racist, anti-gay attack on himself in the hopes that the attention would advance his acting ca
CBS News Catherine Herridge reported earlier that top DOJ officials were stunned by the 7 to 9 year prison sentence recommendation; and that DC prosecutors were rogue in this decision and had not informed DOJ leadership.
Additional reporting from Herridge said the DOJ informed the court “they would clarify its position later today with the court after calling the 7-9 year sentencing recommendation for lying and obstructing congress “extreme, excessive and grossly disproportionate to Stone’s offenses.”
Hours later Aaron Zelinsky, who worked as a prosecutor for Team Mueller, “resigned effective immediately… as a Special Assistant US Attorney for the District of Columbia,” according to a filing in the Roger Stone case:
It looks like the over-the-top sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone was a planned set-up by Aaron Zelinsky et al, to force AG Bill Barr to step-in and reduce the sentence; thereby giving fuel to those in media/lawfare who are accusing AG Barr of political influence. This reeks of Lawfare scheming.
However, Zelinsky is only departing the special assistant to DC role, and it appears he is still an assistant US attorney for the District of Maryland.
The Robert Mueller team assembly was a den of snakes. However, they may have just overplayed their hand on this one. The seven to nine year sentence recommendation for Roger Stone is so over-the-top even Democrats are admitting it.
Prosecutors recommend up to NINE YEARS in prison for Roger Stone.
They call foreign election interference a “deadly adversary” even though Stone was never accused of working with Russians or WikiLeaks. https://dailycaller.com/2020/02/10/prosecutors-nine-years-prison-roger-stone/ …
Former U.S. Attorney for DC, Jessie Liu, is scheduled for a Senate confirmation hearing this upcoming Thursday at 10:00am. There’s also an unreported background story connected to the DOJ, Rod Rosenstein and Ms. Liu so controversial, it’s as big as Spygate.
In the event any Senator on the approval committee would be brave enough to question the participant here’s the story:
EVENT ONE – On February 9th, 2018, the media reported on text messages from 2017 between Senate Intelligence Committee Vice-Chairman Mark Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer, a lobbyist named Adam Waldman. In 2017 and 2018 Mr. Waldman represented the interests of dossier author Chris Steele and Russian Billionaire Oleg Deripaska.
There was some initial media discussion of the text messages, and some eyebrows raised over why the Vice-Chairman of the SSCI would make statements saying “he would rather not have a paper trail” around the Steele communication, but generally speaking the DC media dropped the story quickly. It just didn’t fit the anti-Trump narrative in early 2018.
Unfortunately, because of the lack of media curiosity some rather elementary questions were never asked (let alone answered). Questions including: •Why were the 2017 text messages between Mark Warner and Adam Waldman captured? •Who captured them?.. and, perhaps more importantly: •why were they released?
The February 2018 story soon disappeared, and no-one ever paid enough attention to go back and see the answers to the questions….
We did.
EVENT TWO – Four months after the Mark Warner texts were made public, on June 8th, 2018, another headline story surfaced. An indictment for Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Security Director James Wolfe was unsealed on June 7th, 2018.
Mr. Wolfe was indicted for leaking information from within the SSCI to four journalists; and lying to FBI investigators.
Within the indictment we discover the FBI were conducting an ongoing leak investigation throughout 2017. Within that investigation a top-secret document was transferred to the custody of SSCI Security Director James Wolfe on March 17, 2017. The details inside that document were leaked to the media.
The indictment describes FBI investigators informing Mr. Wolfe in October of 2017 about their investigation of national security leaks. In December of 2017 Mr. Wolfe was confronted with evidence of his leaking to journalists including a woman now working for the New York Times named Ali Watkins, with whom he was having a sexual relationship – implied as a possible quid-pro-quo.
Wolfe left the SSCI quietly in mid-December and resigned shortly thereafter. No-one, outside of the principle characters involved, knows about the investigation until six months later, June 2018, when the indictment is made public. [Keep this in mind]
The June 2018 media coverage of the Wolfe indictment primarily focused on the affair with Ms. Watkins and Wolfe’s lying to investigators. Headlines quickly disappeared as the case moved into the formality of legal proceedings between the DOJ and Wolfe’s defense.
No-one drew a connection between the February ’18 publicity of SSCI Vice-Chairman Warner’s text messages and the June ’18 release of the FBI investigation of Wolfe from inside the SSCI the prior year (2017).
EVENT THREE – Slightly less than two months after release of the Wolfe indictment, another headline story. On July 21st, 2018, the DOJ/FBI declassified and publicly released the FISA application(s) used against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
The release was connected to a FOIA case filed by the New York Times the year prior [NOTE THIS]. There has never been a good explanation why the application was declassified and released. Despite the pre-existing NYT FOIA case, it never made sense why the DOJ/FBI did not attempt to deny the FOIA request. The request was a FOIA for FISA information, the highest security classification possible. It would have been very easy to deny the FOIA simply because the NYT was seeking classified documents. A no brainer for shielding any release. FISA is classified “Top-Secret”.
So, given the nature of the FISA application itself; and considering the DOJ had denied a similar request from congress; why did the DOJ/FBI suddenly decide it was okay to release the FISA application to the public?
[Short Answer (ah-ha moment): The DOJ/FBI knew the New York Times already had it.]
The media discussion of the FISA application release was very heavy. The story consumed a great deal of air time, print coverage and debate from the release on July 21st, 2018, all the way through to the Inspector General Horowitz report of December 2019, and that coverage continues through today. However, just like the Warner Texts; and just like the Wolfe indictment; no-one bothered to go back and connect the three component stories.
♦ Within the Wolfe indictment you’ll notice the “Top Secret” document picked-up by SSCI Director James Wolfe took place on March 17th, 2017:
♦ Within the Mark Warner text messages you’ll note the SSCI Vice-Chairman went into the SSCI Secured Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) on March 17th, 2017, shortly after 4:00pm:
♦ Within the declassified and released FISA application you’ll notice the copy date from the FISA clerk for the FISA application was March 17th, 2017:
The information within the three events (Warner Text release, Wolfe Indictment release, and Carter Page FISA release) shows the connection of the events. James Wolfe took custody of the Carter Page FISA, delivered it to the SCIF, it was reviewed by SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner, and then leaked by James Wolfe.
It was the Carter Page FISA application that James Wolfe leaked to Ali Watkins as outlined within the unsealed June 2018 indictment.
Sidebar, a fourth albeit buried public release in December 14th 2018 confirmed everything. The FBI filed a sentencing recommendation proving it was the Carter Page FISA that was leaked:
I only share the sidebar (out of chronological sequence) to emphasize there is no doubt it was the FISA application that James Wolfe leaked. (Don’t get hung up here).
This explains (slightly, but there’s a much bigger story) why the DOJ/FBI released the FISA application in July 2018, as the result of a New York Times FOIA request.
The investigators within the DOJ/FBI knew the New York Times already had the FISA application from the James Wolfe leak to journalist Ali Watkins.
It’s going to get complex and I’m likely to lose all except the most dedicated readers who can understand what comes next…..
Keep in mind when the FISA court released the application copy to Wolfe on March 17th, 2017, there was only the original application from October 21st, 2016, and one renewal from January that existed. [The release was March 17th, 2017 – the April and June 2017 renewals had not taken place.]
Additionally, within the July 2018 public release (of the March 17th 2017 copy), the FBI investigators redacted all dates relating to the copy they released to Wolfe. AND, in all subsequent releases of any information from the FBI -through the declassification process- (including the initial version of the IG report on FISA) those dates were always redacted.
There has purposefully never been a clean copy release of the original FISA application and the three renewals. Therefore there has never been a clean copy release without date redactions – which includes the FISC copy dated March 17th.
When the DOJ/FBI released their July 2018 FOIA compliant set of FISA application(s) they didn’t just print a new copy, instead they re-released the Wolfe version and then added the last two renewals.
RECAP Chronology: February 2018 release of Warner Texts. June 2018 unsealed Wolfe Indictment. July 2018 release FISA application. All three of these releases are connected to one much larger story.
Knowing that James Wolfe was caught by the FBI and DOJ leaking the FISA application, why wasn’t the SSCI Security Director ever charged with leaking classified information?
Here’s where the poop hits the fan.
Here’s the cover-up.
Here’s where another event comes in.
Keep in mind SSCI Vice-Chairman Senator Mark Warner was the impetus for the FISA Court releasing the March 17th copy; also keep in mind the purpose of the text messages between Senator Warner and Chris Steele’s lawyer Adam Waldman.
During his initial summer and fall negotiations with the DOJ, James Wolfe threatened to subpoena the SSCI in his defense. The implication was that Wolfe was directed to leak the FISA by members of the committee; and/or Wolfe was operating independently but under the assumption of alignment with SSCI members who were not adverse to Wolfe’s leak.
The investigation of Wolfe (October through December 2017) explains how and why the Warner text messages surfaced in Feb 2018. It’s highly likely Warner’s communication with Waldman was intercepted by FBI investigators who then questioned the Vice-Chairman about those texts. Or it’s possible/probable the FBI investigators asked Warner if he was aware of Wolfe’s leaks.
That investigative scenario prompted Senator Warner to attempt to get out in front of the story about his secret and covert communication efforts to contact and meet with Christopher Steele. Thus in February 2018 the Warner texts hit the media. The texts go from February 2017 though May 2017 [SEE HERE] and encompass the exact period when Wolfe leaked the FISA application – March 2017 (with April discussion).
As the Wolfe defense team discussions with the DOJ played out throughout the fall of 2018, there was little movement. Then came another event, the November 2018 mid-term election where Democrats took control over the House.
Meanwhile, in the lame-duck congressional period Senators on the SSCI asked the DOJ to go easy on Wolfe:
Immediately after the 2018 mid-terms DC Attorney Jessie Liu dropped most of the charges against Wolfe, and he was allowed -under a plea agreement- to plead guilty to only one count of lying to investigators.
December 11th, DOJ sentencing memo [HERE], and then a very pissed-off FBI follow-up within the DOJ response to the Defense sentencing memo [HERE] dated December 14th.
In essence, after the November election, SSCI Director Wolfe was allowed to avoid prosecution for leaking top-secret classified documents; and the bigger issue was covered-up.
DAG Rod Rosenstein was in charge; the Mueller investigation was ongoing; and DC U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu signed-off on the plea deal.
OPPORTUNITY – Ms. Jessie Liu is scheduled for her confirmation hearing on Thursday at 10:00am. Ms. Liu will be under oath. If any Senator on that committee is brave enough, they would ask:
♦ Did the DOJ or FBI have evidence that SSCI Security Director James Wolfe leaked the Carter Page FISA application to the media?
We know the honest answer is yes.
The next follow up:
♦ Why was James Wolfe not prosecuted for that leak of classified information?
And then things would get really interesting… Consider the ramifications.
An honest answer would prove the media lied for 18 months about the content of the FISA application. They’ve had it since March 2017. That’s how the New York Times knew to FOIA it. That’s why the New York Times filed the FOIA, to use it more openly.
An honest answer would prove the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) was a participating entity in the coup effort.
An honest answer would explain why the SSCI would only approve of nominees who would not expose their activity. Remember, the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI, DNI, etc. all require confirmation from the SSCI (including Chair and Vice-Chair); and the answer would highlight SSCI members were engaged in a seditious conspiracy against the office of the presidency.
An honest answer would explain how Vice-Chairman Mark Warner’s text messages surfaced. Mark Warner entered the dragnet of the FBI investigation of James Wolfe…. and he was questioned by the FBI about his text messages. THAT is why Warner got out in front of them.
An honest answer would also explain why former DOJ-NSD lawyer Michael Atkinson was recommended to become Intelligence Community Inspector General…. And why the SSCI approved. An honest answer would explain why ICIG Atkinson participated in the second soft-coup effort via the “whistle-blower.”
An honest answer would explain the unique nature of all the interests in/around Adam Schiff, Mark Warner, the House intel committee, the SSCI, the DOJ-NSD… Almost everything reconciles within the sunlight of an honest answer.
An honest answer would highlight several members of the 2016 U.S intel community oversight known as the “gang of eight” were participating in a covert effort against candidate Trump; and how some of the current Go8 members have legal exposure.
The ramifications are far reaching:
Who was Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and DC Attorney Jessie Liu protecting?
What institutional interests did Rod Rosenstein and Jessie Liu consider too stunning, too damaging, too overwhelming, to confront in their decision to allow such a weak plea contrast against such severe criminal conduct?
Is it even possible for the United States Dept. of Justice to conduct a trial where members of the Gang of Eight were implicated in the activity?
How could the institutions of the United States government survive the publicity of members within the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence conspiring with foreign and domestic actors to eliminate the President of the United States?
How could the highest and most widely recognized U.S. media institutions (NYT, WaPo, CNN and more) survive exposure within that same trial. The media caught participating in a government effort (receiving leaked classified information) intended to eliminate the presidency of Donald John Trump?
The downstream consequences are quite dramatic. The answer to those questions could create an explosion strong enough to split the atom within the swamp.
Earlier today President Trump hosted a business luncheon with U.S. governors to discuss economic expansion and administration policy efforts to assist the states.
[Video and Transcript Below]
.
[Transcript] – THE PRESIDENT: Wow. Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. It’s a great honor to have you at the White House, a very special place. Beautiful and so meaningful in so many ways. And our country has never done better. You’re all doing really well. Every state is doing well. I can say most every state in the room today is setting records. And we’d like to think that the federal government has been helping you a lot.
But it is wonderful being with you. And we had a great evening last night. And the talent of those musicians — they could be anywhere in the world. Many of them could work in the great opera houses, but they love the military.
When you heard the violins and the talent, the great talent — I don’t know if anybody has an ear for music. Believe it or not, a long time ago, I was told I have a great ear for music by somebody. (Laughter.) I took a test. They said, “He has a wonderful aptitude for music.” I said, “I do?” (Laughter.)
But when you listen to that, it’s really incredible, the talent. They’re great people. They want to be in the military; they don’t want to be anywhere else. So it’s really — really something.
As I said in my State of the Union last week, we’re in the midst of a great American comeback. With the help of many of the people in this room — and you’ve done, really, a fantastic job — I think I can say that just about everybody — I’ll say “just about,” just in case. Someday, somebody is going to run or do something that I won’t like, and I can have a little bit of an out when I say “just about.” (Laughter.) I said, “No, he was included in the ‘just about.’” But we’re creating the most prosperous economy and the most inclusive society ever to exist, actually.
Since my election, America has gained 7 million new jobs. We added 225,000 jobs in January alone, crushing expectations. The unemployment rate reached the lowest level in 50 years. And a statistic that’s incredible to me is: The average unemployment that we’ve had during this three-year period is the lowest in the history of our country. Compared to any other administration, the lowest in the history of our country. The unemployment rate for African American, Hispanic American, and Asian Americans have reached the lowest level ever recorded.
Low-income workers have seen a 16 percent pay increase since my election — something that’s so great to see. When I campaigned, they hadn’t had rate increases, pay increases for 20 years, 21 years. They were working three jobs and two jobs, and making less money than they made 20 years ago.
Median household income, as you all know very well, is the highest ever recorded, by far. Since 2016, 28 states have reached or matched their lowest unemployment rate on record. So we have 28 and you — I think, soon, we’re going to have just about everybody. And at the end of last year, a record 39 states had unemployment below 4 percent. Again, another record.
Just as I promised during my campaign, we’re fighting every day to expand opportunity for African American communities all across our country. African American youth — we have such great news on African American youth — unemployment has reached its lowest level ever recorded. It’s a great statistic. African American poverty rates have plummeted to their lowest rate ever in history. And wages for African American workers have increased $2,400 a year. That’s also a record.
At the center of our economic agenda are Opportunity Zones. I hope you’re embracing them. I think many of you are. My administration has worked with the governors in this room to create nearly 9,000 Opportunity Zones in our most vulnerable communities. Jobs and money are pouring into these areas that have never seen investment. I mean, they haven’t seen them in decades and decades and decades. And hundreds of millions of dollars are pouring into certain communities — individual communities. Hundreds of millions of dollars. And there’s never been anything like it: Opportunity Zones. Tim Scott did a great job on that. Senator Tim Scott.
I urge all governors to create a state-level version of our White House Opportunity and Revitalization Council to coordinate the efforts of state government to provide maximum support for the Opportunity Zones. And we’re there to help you. If you have a problem, call me. Literally, call me and we’ll work it out. But the Opportunity Zones — and that’s Democrat or Republican, by the way. Opportunities have been fantastic.
We must not stop until we have delivered equal and abundant opportunity for every community in our land. And that’s what’s happening.
To give former prisoners a second chance — this has worked better than any program ever — I was proud to sign the landmark criminal justice reform into law. And since that time, 10 states have passed legislation following our lead. And there were numerous states. I know Texas was there, Governor, with criminal justice reform. Amazing. And Kentucky and a few others that were thought of as being very strict states and yet they had criminal justice reform. We looked at a lot of what Texas did and some of the other states where it worked so well.
And Alice Johnson, as an example, she was in for 22 years and she had another 20 years to serve on something that — everything is bad, but to be in jail for 40 and 50 years for what Alice did on a telephone was crazy.
Thanks to our roaring economy, former inmates are now finding jobs. And the employers are so happy. Now, the economy is really helping, but it’s the first time ever where prisoners coming out of jail are finding jobs, loving it. And the employers — the feedback we’re getting from so many people, so many employers are: These are among the best people they have. And they were, in a way, forced by the economy, the good economy, because it’s hard to get people. Down to 3.5 [percent] and actually, it went to 3.6 [percent] because we’re opening up the valve. They’re hiring more and more people. That was a positive. Two hundred and twenty-five thousand, as I said.
But the prisoners are now working and they’re doing a phenomenal job, for the most part.
Our booming prosperity is being fueled by our historic regulatory reduction campaign. In my first month in office, I imposed a “two-for-one” rule, requiring for every one new regulation, two old ones must be eliminated.
Well, that turned out to be — we went to four, we went to six, we went to eight. We had a period where we were at 22 to 1. Twenty-two to one. And we’re eliminating, on average, $3,100 in regulation costs per family a year. Nobody has ever even heard of such a thing.
And we’re getting housing built too. We have rules and regulations — made it impossible. I hope California gets their act together because the cost of regulation is almost the cost of a house. And they need housing, and they can’t — they can’t build it. They don’t know what they’re doing.
The Governors’ Initiative on Regulatory Innovation is designed to continue our unprecedented progress through straight — state-level deregulation.
Governor Doug Ducey has achieved 3 for 1 on cuts. Where’s Doug? Good job, Doug. (Laughter.) Well, you only won by about 17 percent, so, you know. He should be — in fact, at 17 percent, you should be at 4 to 1, I think. Right? (Laughter.) That was a big win. A big win. That was a great win.
And Governor Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma has reached 2 for 1 and going to 3 for 1. Where’s Kevin? Hi, Kevin. Good job. Great.
We’re also working together — and many of you in the room have done much better than 1 for 1. Some of you, you’re up to four.
We’re also working together to reform occupational licensing. Just this year, at least 12 governors have taken action to reduce burdensome occupational licensing requirements. That means licensing, where either it’s unnecessary or where you actually can do it very quickly. There are some licensing requirements that takes years to get approved, and it could take a matter of days. Could take a matter of days.
Governors understand the need to get infrastructure projects quickly approved. To speed up permitting and reduce traffic conjection — congestion, last month, we issued a proposed new rule to reduce permitting and the permitting time for new infrastructure by more than 70 percent. Highways that were taking 12 years to get approved, 14, 15, 17, 21 years, we’re trying to get it down to one year. That means you may get rejected if you have an environmental problem or a safety problem. In many cases, these highways became much more unsafe and they took a long time because they’d try and get away from certain problems, including nesting. But they’d try and get away, and instead of having a straight run, they’d create curves in the highway, which obviously make it much more dangerous. And they had problems with some of those highways. And they’re much more expensive to build — not only the time — the design but the time. I mean, by the time they get it approved.
So we have highways that would take 21 years. We have roads that took 10 years, 11 years, 12 years to get approved. And Elaine Chao has been fantastic. Elaine, thank you very much. The job you’re doing at transportation, we appreciate it very much.
And, Jeff, you were over there for a long while, I will tell you, so I have to give you at least partial credit. Right now you’re at a different location. (Laughter.)
But you really did — you did a great job on that. And — so we have it down to two years now, but we — I think we’re going to get it down to one. And very good chance you’ll be rejected if it doesn’t meet environmental standards and tests.
And we are rescuing students from failing government schools by introducing the Education Freedom Scholarships and Opportunity Act, which will replicate the great success of tax-credit scholarships available in 18 states. We believe very strongly, or at least many of the people in this room — not all of them — but believe very strongly in school choice.
We’re also working closely with the states to improve public safety. This includes the incredible work being done by our nation’s heroic ICE officers. We’ve moved thousands of MS-13 out of the country, back to where they came from — whether it’s Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Mexico.
And, as you know, we reached agreements with those countries so that we can do that. And the past administration, they wouldn’t accept them. They’d come from one of the countries, tough countries, and we would send them back and they wouldn’t take them. Not me. They take them now. Now they say, “Thank you so much for sending them back. We were looking for this killer. Thank you very much. We appreciate it.” But they all take them now. They take them very quickly.
Before, they used to say, “Don’t ever even think about landing that airplane. We don’t want those people.” So they take them back rapidly. Someday they’ll tell the real story as to why, but that’s the way it has to be. We have thousands and thousands of killers and gang members that we’re bringing back to countries that now accept them. They were not taking them back.
Last year alone, ICE officers arrested 120,000 criminal aliens charged with nearly 10,000 burglaries, 5,000 sexual assaults, 45,000 violent assaults, and 2,000 murders. You know, some of them we keep here when they — it’s very egregious. We don’t necessarily trust other people to take care of justice, so we keep them here. But, you know, we don’t like having people in our prisons for 50 years, 60 years. And we have to pay for it. And so, for the most part, we bring them back to their countries and give them a very bad recommendation.
State and local cooperation is the backbone of this effort. We have a tremendous relationship with many of the states and governments, cities. It’s essential that all of our states and cities honor ICE detainer requests to ensure that safe transfer of criminal aliens into federal custody takes place.
Jurisdictions that adopt sanctuary policies that instead release these criminals put all of Americans in harm’s way. A very, very, serious problem. I mean, we’re all here for the same thing. I know we have different policies, different feelings, different everything, but sanctuary cities are causing us a tremendous problem in this country.
We have stone-cold killers that they don’t want to hand over to us, and then they escape into communities and they cause, in some cases, tremendous havoc.
Another vital element of federal and state cooperation is the relentless fight against opioids and the drug epidemic. We’ve had great progress. We’re down 18, 19, 20 percent in some of the communities. The First Lady has been very much involved in that. Kellyanne has been very much involved in that. A lot of the people in this room — almost everybody in this room has been involved in it.
So — and I want to thank you for that. We’re making progress. Very tough. All over the world — this is a problem all over the world. This is a big problem here, but it’s a big problem almost everywhere.
For the first time in three decades, we’ve achieved a decline in drug overdose deaths, including, as an example, Ohio. Mike is around here someplace. Mike? Mike? Mike?
AIDE: He left, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Twenty-three percent in Ohio. Nineteen percent in Pennsylvania. Ten percent in Wisconsin. And we’re averaging probably about 16, 17 percent. So it’s been — it’s not enough, but we’re making a lot of progress. And if we had more help in Congress, we could get it even lower.
My administration is truly grateful for the leadership, cooperation, partnership, and friendship of the governors in this room. No matter our party, we must work together and really do the job. And I think that’s what’s happening. Our country is now receiving thousands and thousands of companies that are coming into the United States. Some had left and some had never been here before, but they all want to be where the action is.
We lost 60,000 plants and factories over the years. Sixty thousand. It’s hard to even conceive. And we’ve got many of them back, and many are coming back. And they’re moving to a lot of your states. I know a lot of them are coming into Texas and Florida and a lot of different locations — South Carolina, North Carolina, Pennsylvania. It’s incredible what’s happening. Ohio is a big beneficiary. Michigan is a tremendous beneficiary, with the car companies. Tremendous. Somebody was saying they’re so happy in Michigan.
And I meet with Prime Minister Abe of Japan. I say, “You have to — Shinzo, you have to get more car companies here. We have a deficit with you. You have to get them in.” And they are — they’re sending a lot of companies. We hadn’t built a plant in years and years and decades, frankly. And now we have car plants being built all over the United States. And we have expansions — a lot of expansions of existing plants.
So it’s been, really, an incredible thing. We’re doing incredible work. And we’re the number-one country in the world right now, in terms of the economy.
When I was running, and long before I was running, I’d always heard that China — I have great respect for President Xi and great respect for China, frankly — but that China was going to be the number-one economy in the world during 2019. Actually, it was 2018, 2019. You all heard it, that we were going to go to number two.
And I will tell you, we had our battle. And we took in hundreds of billions of dollars in tariffs and other things. And you saw the — it was just announced the trade deficit was the lowest it’s been in years with China. It just happened two days ago. They just announced.
But we are now so far ahead of China, in terms of the size of our economy, that if somebody is smart that’s at this position for times into the future — hopefully, after five years — I won’t joke by saying “nine, thirteen, fifteen.” (Laughter.) It drives them crazy — for the governors. It drives them crazy. (Laughter.) Even when I joke, it drives them crazy, so I won’t say that. But if somebody smart is in this position, it’ll never happen where China overtakes us. It’ll never happen.
So we, right now, have — we’re so far ahead of them. They’re not catching us for a long time. If the wrong person stands here or sits in the White House — that beautiful chair in the White House, in the Oval Office — sure, they’re going to — you know, they’re going to catch. They have 1.5 billion people; we have 350 million people. But we have a very special place and a very special country, and nobody is going to catch us if we have great leadership. And you have been great leaders for your states, and we appreciate very much that you’re at the White House. Thank you very much.
So what we’re going to do is — I thought maybe we could take a few questions. If you want, we could leave the press there. The press would love that, I’m sure. Or we could have them leave and we could talk in a different fashion. You won’t have to showboat. (Laughter.)
So would anybody prefer — we’ll leave them here for a little while, and then we’ll go a different route perhaps. Any questions, please? Please.
GOVERNOR PARSON: Mr. President, (inaudible) do you feel like your infrastructure? You’ve got a budget coming out, I think, today. Where are you going to be on infrastructure?
THE PRESIDENT: We’re doing a big infrastructure potential deal. We need — obviously, we need help from — we need the votes of Democrats. They’ve been so focused on something else and wasting a lot of people’s time, although my poll numbers have been driven way the hell up, so that’s one way to do it, I guess.
But they have been so focused on the impeachment hoax that they haven’t had time to do anything else. But we’re ready to go with a big infrastructure bill if they’re ready to approve it. We’re also ready to lower drug prices very substantially. We did — last year was the first time in 51 years that drug prices — prescription drug prices — went down. First time in 51 years.
But to get them really down, we have to do exactly what we’re doing. We’re — we have — we need the votes of the Democrats, and they just didn’t have the time to do anything. So maybe they will now have the time.
But we’re all ready to go on infrastructure, on reducing drug prices very substantially. We can reduce drug prices unbelievably easily and substantially, but we have to get Democrat votes. Okay?
Thank you. Thank you, Governor. Please.
GOVERNOR RICKETTS: Mr. President, you’ve had a lot of successes on trade — USMCA, China, and Japan. What’s next on your agenda for trade?
THE PRESIDENT: So, Europe has been treating us very badly. European Union. It was really formed so they could treat us badly. So they’ve done their job. That was one of the primary reasons. But they treat us badly there and they treat us badly, frankly, on NATO. But NATO, I’ve gotten, as you know, $130 billion more they will pay.
Because NATO was going down like a rocket ship. Our past leaders would go over, make a speech, and leave. I went over, made a speech, and said, “You got to pay more.” Because the United States was paying everything. Essentially, they were paying close to 100 percent. And I let them know: “You have no choice.” And they are paying more. They paid $130 billion.
I think my biggest fan in the whole world is Secretary General Stoltenberg, head of NATO. And he said he can’t believe it, because for 20 years it went down. It’s like a roller coaster dip. No — none of this; just down. They paid less and less and less. And it got more expensive and more expensive with time.
But I raised $130 billion my first meeting, and I raised $400 billion the second meeting. So now it’s in good shape. But, you know, we were taken advantage of by a lot of countries — a lot of allies, frankly. Sometimes allies do a better job on you than the enemy, because the enemies you watch out for, right?
So, Pete, I think that the next thing could be Europe where we talk to them very seriously and they have to do it because they’ve — there’s been a — over the last 10, 12 years, there’s been a tremendous deficit with Europe. They have barriers that are incredible. I didn’t do — I didn’t want to do them while we were doing China, Japan, South Korea. You know, I didn’t want to do the whole world at one time. Does that make sense? (Laughter.) People have learned that doesn’t work out too well, even on trade.
So we’re going to be starting that. They know that. They know that. They’re ready for it. You know, we made a good deal with Japan. We’re going to do a bigger, much more comprehensive deal. But we’re taking in $40 billion from Japan, which they didn’t expect. Nobody expected. We’ve done great on the trade. It’s going to have a tremendous impact.
Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat — as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April. We’re in great shape though. We have 12 cases — 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now. So — but a very good question.
Yes, please. Colorado.
GOVERNOR POLIS: Yeah. You mentioned deporting criminal aliens. What about also — what are your ideas for fixing it for the — for the, kind of, for the DREAMers and the folks who are here that are hardworking? And, you know, it’s really tough out there, and they work on our farms, and the kids who grew up here. And how do we do that, and at the same time you’re also, kind of, enforcing the other side for those who violate our laws?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we almost had a deal on that with the Democrats, as you know. It was done. And then we lost the decision, and the Democrats said, “Trump? Who’s that? Trump? Who’s that?” But we were very close to having a deal on the DREAMers with the House and with the Senate. It would’ve been a very good deal for everybody.
So we’re looking at that, but now we’re before the Supreme Court. I think we’re going to win, because if we don’t win, that gives the President of the United States unbelievable powers.
You know, President Obama signed that bill. It was an executive order. And when he signed it, he said — essentially, he said, “I don’t have the right to do this, but I’m going to do it anyway.” And he was upheld by a judge. And anyway, it will be before the Supreme Court pretty soon. And at some point, I think we’ll probably make a deal on that. I do feel that way. Okay? Good question.
A question? Yes, please, Gary.
How’s Mitt Romney?
GOVERNOR HERBERT: I haven’t talked to him.
THE PRESIDENT: You keep him. (Laughter.) We don’t want him. Go ahead.
GOVERNOR HERBERT: States are used to —
THE PRESIDENT: Doing a great job in Utah, by the way. Go ahead, Gary.
GOVERNOR HERBERT: States are used to balancing the budget. So I think, by and large, we don’t spend more than we take in. And I know you’ve unveiled your budget today, and I know there’s — a concern for you is the growing debt.
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah.
GOVERNOR HERBERT: I know we’ve had nonpartisan economists talk to us as governors saying this is going to come back to bite us in the future if we don’t do something about it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yeah, I agree.
GOVERNOR HERBERT: What are we doing, and how can we get to a more balanced budget — certainly reduce the debt as opposed to continuing to grow the debt?
THE PRESIDENT: So we’re putting out a plan today that, over a period of — not that long a period of time, brings our budget and our deficit down to what it should be, which is close to zero. And I think people are going to be very impressed by it.
We’re not touching Medicare. We want to keep Medicare. We’re not touching Social Security. We’re making our country stronger again. We’re not decreasing Medicaid. But we’re doing a lot of things that are very good, including waste and fraud — tremendous waste and tremendous fraud.
So we’re doing that, in terms of certain programs. And we’re taking good care of our military. We’re increasing spending on our nuclear program because we have no choice — because of what China is doing, what Russia is doing in particular. And so we have a very big number in for that.
Now, at the same time, Russia and China both want to negotiate with us to stop this craziness of spending billions and billions of dollars on nuclear weapons. But the only way, until we have that agreement — the only thing I can do is create, by far, the strongest nuclear force anywhere in the world, which, as you know, over the last three years, we very much upgraded our nuclear.
But we’re buying new. We have the super-fast missiles — tremendous number of the super-fast. We call them “super-fast,” where they’re four, five, six, and even seven times faster than an ordinary missile. We need that because, again, Russia has some. I won’t tell you how they got it. They got it, supposedly, from plans from the Obama administration when we weren’t doing it. And that’s too bad. That’s not good. But that’s how it happened. And China, as you know, is doing it.
So we have a tremendous $740 billion for military. But again, it’s also jobs in the United States. So it’s — you know, everything is made in the United States, proudly. And we have the best in the world. We have the best equipment in the world. The best missiles, planes, rockets. Everybody wants our equipment. We have to be very selective, obviously.
But we’re — we’re going to have a very good budget with a very powerful military budget because we have no choice — okay? — about that.
Ron, do you have something about, for instance, your plan of buying and cutting prescription drugs? You want to tell them what we’re doing?
GOVERNOR DESANTIS: Well, so we had a panel about the — your administration’s approval under an old 2003 law that prior administrations did not utilize to allow safe and affordable drugs to be imported from Canada. So that’s going through the regulatory process.
We, in Florida, are working our own parallel track. As soon as your rules are done and in place, you know, we’re looking to buy. And, you know, we can save a lot of money just for things like our prison system —
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
GOVERNOR DESANTIS: — because the drugs are a lot cheaper.
So we think there’ll be good savings here. But I think it opens up a larger conversation, which I know you want to have, about: Why are we funding the drugs for everyone in the world?
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
GOVERNOR DESANTIS: You know, Americans want relief and I know you’ve fought hard for that. But thanks for approving the Florida program.
THE PRESIDENT: You can go — and Colorado is doing that also — you can go to certain countries, and the exact same pill, made in the exact same plant, factory — wherever it may be — from one of the big companies will sell for 50, 60, 70 percent less than the United States is paying, because it’s broken; it’s a broken system.
And so one of the things I’ve authorized is that certain states have requested — probably after this, everybody in this room will go back — (laughter) — but if we buy from Canada, you’ll save 50 percent at this moment.
Now, that may go up or everything may come down. One thing is going to happen or another. Either the drug companies are going to raise it and not make it possible to buy. They’re going to raise it in Canada, meaning so you won’t be able to do it, or everyone is going to go down. Because you have a middleman in the middle that are making a fortune. Nobody knows who these people are, but they’re getting rich. Because we had a broken system and it’s about time it gets fixed. So a lot of — a lot of shakeup is going to take place.
But if we had Democrats helping us, we could solve this problem in one day, but they don’t want to vote again. They don’t have any time to vote. They don’t have any time to do anything other than what they do. So they seem to be freed up a lot now. They’re freed up a lot, actually, I hear.
How about a couple of more and then we’ll let the press go and relax and take it easy? (Laughter.)
Please, Governor.
GOVERNOR ABBOTT: Your administration has done a — your administration has done a great job with regard to addressing the opioid crisis.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
GOVERNOR ABBOTT: An aspect about that is the growing problem of fentanyl, especially fentanyl coming across the southern border.
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
GOVERNOR ABBOTT: And it is my understanding that there’s some information about a lot of that coming from China.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
GOVERNOR ABBOTT: What I’m curious about is what the status is with regard to the reduction of fentanyl coming from China and our ability to corral that and to reduce that.
THE PRESIDENT: So, as you know, it’s gone down. I met with President Xi on the trade deal. And I said, “You have to stop fentanyl coming into our country. You have to do me a favor and stop it. You have to get it stopped.” It has to end — because it’s a favor for our country. And we’re losing thousands and thousands of people to fentanyl. I mean, the size of a pinhead can kill a lot of people. It’s unbelievably bad. And they send it direct and they send it through Mexico and through the border. And we would catch a lot of it, but even if a little bit got through, it’s a very deadly drug.
And they have cut it way back. And they’ve also criminalized — it wasn’t a criminal. They considered a corporate kind of a thing. It was a drug of a different nature. And now, they’ve put it into their criminal statutes. And criminal, in China, for drugs, by the way, means that’s serious; they’re getting a maximum penalty. And you know what the maximum penalty is in China for that. And it goes very quickly.
It’s interesting: Where you have Singapore, they have very little drug problem; where you have China, they have very little drug problem. States with a very powerful death penalty on drug dealers don’t have a drug problem. I don’t know that our country is ready for that. But if you look throughout the world, the countries with a powerful death penalty — death penalty — with a fair but quick trial, they have very little, if any, drug problem. That includes China.
But they’ve put fentanyl now into their — he’s working on that, and we’ve — it’s gone down a lot, as you know. They’ve put it into their penalty system, and people will be getting the death penalty in China now for fentanyl. That was a big thing. It’s not — it’s not part of the trade agreement, but it is part of the trade agreement. And they have acted on it.
Now, of course, they’re working on something else. And I think they’re doing a good job on that, on the virus. I had a long talk with President Xi — for the people in this room — two nights ago, and he feels very confident. He feels very confident. And he feels that, again, as I mentioned, by April or during the month of April, the heat, generally speaking, kills this kind of virus. So that would be a good thing.
But we’re in great shape in our country. We have 11, and the 11 are getting better. Okay?
It’s a great question. I think that fentanyl is a huge problem. It’s almost, at this moment, 100 percent made in China. And they are starting to enforce it on our behalf. We have a good relationship with China now. Probably the best we’ve ever had. Okay.
Okay, so I think what we’ll do — any other questions from the governors? Yes, please.
GOVERNOR HUTCHINSON: Mr. President, I want to thank you for giving the states more flexibility in healthcare, particularly. Last week, your Health and Human Services announced the Medicaid block grant —
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
GOVERNOR HUTCHINSON: — waiver authority for the states. Arkansas will be pursuing that. But I wanted to thank you for that and also ask you: In terms of your State of the Union Address, you talked about healthcare. Is there anything that we can expect this year in Congress, with an election year — is there anything that we can get done that you’re going to be a priority in Congress this year?
THE PRESIDENT: So we did a big thing on healthcare. We got rid of the individual mandate on Obamacare, which basically made Obamacare not Obamacare anymore. It was the most unpopular thing in Obamacare, and basically, you paid a lot of money for the privilege of not paying to have bad healthcare. And nobody wanted that. And we got rid of it. Big, big move.
And I had a choice: I can make — so it really isn’t Obamacare anymore, but I can — and we do — as you know, we left preexisting conditions and everything. We left it. Because preexisting will always have — and I think I can speak for Democrats too. But we are all going to have preexisting conditions. We are always going to make sure that that’s taken care of, the preexisting condition situation.
I think I can speak — I know I can speak for Republicans. I think I can speak for Democrats. It’s a — it’s a part of our society right now, and nobody is going to change it. If a law is overturned, that’s okay because the new law is going to have it in. The new law would replace the old law that was overturned. It would have preexisting conditions. So I think that’s important to say.
But one thing that we will be doing is, at least from a Republican standpoint — you have 180 million people out there that have great health insurance. They love it. Private health insurance. And we’re going to save it. Other people are thinking about terminating it, which is brutal for unions and others. So I don’t know how they’re going to get around that, but we’re going to be saving that.
But when I took over, I had a choice. We got rid of the most unpopular thing in Obamacare, almost got rid of Obamacare, but essentially we did. But now I said: Do we run it really well, or do we run it really poorly? Do we make everybody unhappy and blame the Democrats, or do we make people relatively happy with a bad law? It’s a bad law. Bad — it’s a bad policy. But do we make people relatively happy? And I chose — I felt I had an obligation to do the latter.
So it’s been working out pretty well, and it goes along, and we’ve done block grants. We’ve done a lot of different things with different states. And we’re tailor-made — really, it’s tailor-made for different states. We are doing thing for states. Some people want block grants, some people want something else. And we’re working with individual states, and I think governors are really happy and really surprised that we’re doing that.
I could’ve just cold-lined it and just said, “We’re not doing anything,” and everybody would be happy, everybody would be complaining. But I think the best thing for our country to do is the way we’re doing it, until we get a replacement for Obamacare, a full replacement, that’s going to be great.
And I would say this: If we change the House — if we get the House, the Republicans get the House back, we will have that; otherwise, we’ll just have to negotiate with the Democrats. And I think at some point they will come around and start negotiating these things, because they really are good.
So, media, thank you very much. We appreciate it and we’ll have a little more discussion. Thank you very much. (Applause.)
In November of 2019 a federal jury found Roger Stone guilty of five counts of lying to the House Intelligence Committee (bragging mostly), one count of obstructing their bogus investigation (based on fraudulent Trump-Russia); and one count of tampering with his former friend/witness Randy Credico (sent a text saying: “Prepare to die cocksucker”).
Today the DOJ recommended seven to nine years in prison (pdf here).
WASHINGTON – Federal prosecutors are urging that longtime Donald Trump adviser and Republican political provocateur Roger Stone be sent to prison for about seven to nine years for his conviction on charges of lying and witness tampering during investigations of ties between Russia and the Trump campaign.
Following a weeklong trial last November, a Washington jury took found Stone guilty on all seven felony counts he faced: five of making false statements to Congress, one of obstruction of Congress, and one of witness tampering with both the House Intelligence Committee inquiry and special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe. (read more)
While delivering a press conference about DOJ indictments from the Equifax data breech AG Bill Barr was questioned about receiving information on Ukraine corruption from Rudy Giuliani. AG Barr explains the “filtering” process he has instituted.
People must be catching on to Graham’s wimpy kick-the-can routine of empty promises; and apparently he’s feeling the heat from his compulsive do-nothingness.
Today we get the outline of the DC Deep State defense strategy within a CBS interview of Senator Lindsey Graham. Within the interview Graham notes he talked to Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr about documents Rudy Giuliani has recovered from Ukraine outlining Biden corruption.
First, SSCI Chairman Richard Burr was a participant in the coup effort; and is an ongoing member of the cover-up; so why would anyone direct anything to Richard Burr and Vice-Chair Mark Warner?…. Unless cover-up was the intent. Beyond sketchy.
Additionally, Senator Graham conveys that he has spoken to AG Barr who has cautioned Graham that Giuliani’s information could be Russian propaganda. How convenient.
.
[Transcript] SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM: Good morning.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The president’s up. He’s watching, apparently, because he sent out a tweet this morning about you appearing on this program. He said, “DeFace the nation will tell Lindsey Graham they must start up the Judiciary and not stop.” I’m not exactly sure quite what that means, but it sounds like he’s giving you marching orders.
SEN. GRAHAM: I think what he’s talking about is oversight of the FISA warrant system that failed. I can promise the president and your viewers that I’m going to call witnesses about–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Foreign surveillance warrants–
SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah. The Horowitz report. You know, McCabe, Comey, Rosenstein, Yates. How did you miss it so badly? How could you issue four warrants against an American citizen based on information that was unreliable? But here’s what I want to tell the president. I’m not gonna be the Republican Christopher Steele. So Rudy Giuliani last night said he’s got the goods on Hunter Biden. I called the attorney general this morning and Richard Burr, the chairman of the Intel Committee, and they told me take very cautiously anything coming out of the Ukraine against anybody. So what I will do is I will get to the bottom of how the FISA warrant system failed and make sure we reform it, doesn’t happen again. I think questions about the conflict of interest regarding Hunter Biden in the Ukraine need to be asked. The State Department had warnings and they ignored the conflict of interest. The whistle blower episode needs to be investigated by Richard Burr. But if Rudy Giuliani has any information coming out of the Ukraine, he needs to turn over the Department of Justice because it could be Russian propaganda.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You last time you’re on this program now in December, you said Giuliani should come to the Judiciary Committee with what he said was a suitcase full of documents he picked up in Ukraine on the Bidens. Are you saying you don’t want any part of this anymore?
SEN. GRAHAM: After talking to the attorney general and the intelligence chairman that any documents coming out of the Ukraine against any American, Republican or Democrat, need to be looked at by the intelligence services, who has expertise I don’t because Russia is playing us all like a fiddle. And Christopher Steele was played by the Russians that started the Russian investigation against President Trump.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
SEN. GRAHAM: It was all garbage.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Are you saying Rudy Giuliani–
SEN. GRAHAM: I don’t want to do the same thing.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Rudy Giuliani is getting played by the Russians?
SEN. GRAHAM: I don’t know. I’m saying that the attorney–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well it sounds like that’s what you’re suggesting.
SEN. GRAHAM: I’m saying that anybody who’s got any information coming from the Ukraine needs to turn it over to the intelligence community. As to Senator Schumer warning Parnas and the audience, if you don’t understand–
MARGARET BRENNAN: This is one of Rudy Giuliani’s business associates.
SEN. GRAHAM: Yes, crooked as snake–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –who’s been indicted.
SEN. GRAHAM: –facing indictment. So Schiff gets called by Russian hoaxster. I’ve got photos of President Trump in a compromised situation. To every American politician, you should be very cautious about receiving information coming out of the Ukraine–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.
SEN. GRAHAM: –and other countries that may be backed by Russian misinformation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Does the president know that? Because he–
SEN. GRAHAM: I hope so.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –apparently has continued to–
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, if he’s watching the show, here’s what I would tell the president.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –believe that Ukraine had a role here.
SEN. GRAHAM: I’m going to get to the bottom of the FISA work process because it was an abuse of power of the Department of Justice, the FBI. And we’re to make sure that Hunter Biden’s conflict of interest is explored because it’s legitimate. How could Joe Biden really fight corruption when his son sitting on the Burisma board?
MARGARET BRENNAN: Can you clarify? You said you talked to Attorney General Barr–
SEN. GRAHAM: This morning.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –this morning. Has the Department of Justice been ordered to investigate the Bidens?
SEN. GRAHAM: No. The Department of Justice is receiving information coming out of the Ukraine from Rudy–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Already?
SEN. GRAHAM: –to see. He told me that they’ve created a process that Rudy could give information and they would see if it’s verified. Rudy Giuliani is a well known man. He’s a crime fighter. He’s loyal to the president. He’s a good lawyer. But what I’m trying to say- to the president and anybody else, that the Russians are still up to it. Deterrence is not working. So let’s look at Hunter Biden’s conflict. Let’s look at Joe Biden. Vice President Biden, what did you do when they told you your son was on Burisma’s board? It undercuts your ability to fight corruption. Did you take it seriously? Obviously he didn’t. But when it comes to documents coming out of the Ukraine, to Republicans and Democrats, be very cautious turning–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But the–
SEN. GRAHAM: –anything over you got over to the intel community.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have you ever said to the president when he repeats things like the idea that there’s the DNC server- server hidden in Ukraine, that this is Russian propaganda that he is repeating and apparently believing?
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, I’ll–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Have you ever said that directly to him?
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, I don’t have any information about the server being in the Ukraine.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But you just said–
SEN. GRAHAM: It was the Russians—
MARGARET BRENNAN: –things coming out of Ukraine should be looked at with high scrutiny–
SEN. GRAHAM: Here’s my point–
MARGARET BRENNAN:– because of Russian interference.
SEN. GRAHAM: –my point. It was the Russians who hacked into the DNC, not the Ukrainians. But there are people in the Ukraine that were pulling against Trump because they hated Manafort. To suggest there was no political interference coming out of the Ukraine directed toward the president, I think would be- would not withstand scrutiny.
MARGARET BRENNAN: When- you have a role as chairman of Senate Judiciary to have oversight–
SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –of justice department.
SEN. GRAHAM: I’m not in charge of the whole government.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But- I understand that. However, when you’re talking about being asked to do these things in a channel being open between Rudy Giuliani and the Justice Department, this sounds a lot like this is in some ways a taxpayer funded oppo-research operation against Joe Biden. Isn’t this exactly what was at the heart of the impeachment probe to begin with?
SEN. GRAHAM: No, not at all. There are plenty of people being contacted by folks from the Ukraine. Adam Schiff got contacted by somebody thought to be a Russian and he was willing to get on a plane apparently and go find the documents. Schumer believes that Parnas has got the goods. Parnas says I’m in on it. I’ve never met Parnas. So Democrats are being played and I’m not going to be played. So we’re going to look at the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden connection to the Ukraine. We’re going to ask the State Department, why didn’t you do something about the conflict of interest. When the- John Kerry’s chief of staff was warned about Hunter Biden’s conflict on Burisma, what did you do, if anything? That’s all legitimate. Rudy says he’s got the goods. All I can tell Rudy and anybody else, if you got some information connected to the Ukraine against anybody, go to the Intel Committee. Not me.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You- you don’t want a part of it right now. We need to finish this conversation–
SEN. GRAHAM: OK.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –because you brought up a number of things. So we’re going to have to take a quick break. I do want to- to- to say, though, that to this point, nothing has been in any way substantiated in regard to corruption when it comes to Joe Biden himself. His son served on the board and was paid for it.
SEN. GRAHAM: I just think the media is so in the tank over this issue–
MARGARET BRENNAN: No but–
SEN. GRAHAM: It makes me sick to my stomach.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You just said–
SEN. GRAHAM: We’ll talk about it in a minute.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right but you were saying it needs to be investigated–
SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah nobody’s investigating it.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re acknowledging there’s no proof of it–
SEN. GRAHAM: CBS hasn’t sent- sent one reporter.
MARGARET BRENNAN: To Ukraine? Yes we did.
SEN. GRAHAM: Yeah. I don’t think you take it seriously.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We are, so we’re taking a break and come back to talk to you about it–
SEN. GRAHAM: Good.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –on the other side of it. So stay with us, all of you.
SEN. GRAHAM: Good.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Senator Graham is going to stay with us. We’ll continue in a few moments.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MARGARET BRENNAN: Welcome back to FACE THE NATION. We continue our conversation now with South Carolina Republican Senator, Lindsey Graham. Senator, we were talking about the president’s tweet this morning, the requests that have been made of you in terms of continuing investigations. This morning on Fox, Rudy Giuliani is continuing to say, quote, you are telling him, “Not my job. Not my job, man” when it comes to information he says he’s handing over. You were just saying that any information coming out of Ukraine needs to be dealt with carefully and skeptically because it’s likely the product of some kind of–
SEN. GRAHAM: It- it–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –Russian intelligence operation.
SEN. GRAHAM: Have we learned anything from Christopher Steele dossier? It was all a bunch of garbage fed to Christopher Steele to go after Trump.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And that’s what you think Rudy Giuliani–
SEN. GRAHAM: And I’m telling Schumer–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –is delivering? Garbage?
SEN. GRAHAM: I don’t know. I’m telling Schumer, don’t vouch for Parnas.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK.
SEN. GRAHAM: Don’t put him in the gallery. I’m telling Rudy, you think you got the goods? Don’t give it to me, because what do we know? We know that the Russian disinformation campaign was used against President Trump. They hacked into the DNC system. Not the Ukrainians, and they’re on the ground all over the world trying to affect democracy all over the world.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Who’s paying Rudy Giuliani?
SEN. GRAHAM: I don’t know. Here’s my message to Rudy: If you’ve got something coming from the Ukraine, turn it over to the intelligence people, the Department of Justice, to any Democrat.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Got it.
SEN. GRAHAM: You think Parnas has got something on me? Well, then go to the Department of Justice and the Intel Committee. Do not pass this stuff on.
MARGARET BRENNAN: OK. I want to ask you as well, because you have served in the U.S. Air Force. You are a military lawyer, a JAG. Do you support President Trump’s decision to dismiss Alex Vindman, the lieutenant colonel who was serving on the National Security Council, who was compelled by a subpoena to go under oath and testify against the president?
SEN. GRAHAM: I think his reassignment was justified. I don’t think he could be effective at the NSC. As much as I support our military people telling the truth when asked, it”s important they do, what have I learned in the last two years? CIA agents, Department of State, Department of Justice lawyers, FBI agents have a political agenda and they acted on it. And we found that out through the FISA investigation. As to Colonel Vindman, who was not allowed to be asked questions about his connection to the alleged whistleblower, to people working on Schiff’s–
MARGARET BRENNAN: He was asked, and he denied having any–
SEN. GRAHAM: No, he was not.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well–
SEN. GRAHAM: They did not allow him
MARGARET BRENNAN: –he was asked during the testimony.
SEN. GRAHAM: They did not allow the Republicans to go down that road. Two things–
MARGARET BRENNAN: His brother was also marched out of the White House–
SEN. GRAHAM: All I can say is–
MARGARET BRENNAN: His brother also serves in military–
SEN. GRAHAM: Right.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And had no connection–
SEN. GRAHAM: He has no- he has no right–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –to this impeachment.
SEN. GRAHAM: Nobody knows this. I can promise you this. He’s never been asked questions did you leak to the whistleblower people in his chain of command have been suspicious of him regarding his political point of view?
MARGARET BRENNAN: The national security adviser to the president sat in the chair you’re sitting in last week and said he was confident that there were no leaks from the National Security Council.
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, I am not. I want the man to be asked about what he did with the information. I appreciate his service, but there are FBI agents who took the law in their own hands. There are CIA agents who took the law in their own hands. There are Department of Justice lawyers who lied to the court. There has been a movement since President Trump was elected by people in our government–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is this retaliation–
SEN. GRAHAM: –to take him down.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –because the president has tweeted, basically saying that Vindman was forced out, not because of–
SEN. GRAHAM: He is–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –any kind of policy issue, not because of anything else except for–
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, MARGARET, we’re going to get–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –what he said was listening in on his phone calls and giving–
SEN. GRAHAM: We’re not going to be intimidated in- against asking–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But doesn’t this–
SEN. GRAHAM: –asking questions to the whistleblower.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Somebody–
SEN. GRAHAM: Who is the whistleblower?
MARGARET BRENNAN: He is an officer, and he is not allowed to speak out on his own behalf. Neither are his fellow military officers allowed–
SEN. GRAHAM: He was shut down.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –to do so.
SEN. GRAHAM: I don’t know what role he played with the whistleblower, if any, but we’re going to look. I like Joe Biden. He’s a fine man, but we’re not gonna give you a pass because you’re–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Should Gordon Sondland have been fired as well?
SEN. GRAHAM: He’s a political appointee. He serves at the pleasure of the president. He came before the country–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Of course–
SEN. GRAHAM: under oath–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –but it was retaliation.
SEN. GRAHAM: Gave- gave the story as- as he said it. We’re not gonna live in a world where the Department of Justice, the CIA and the FBI can cut corners, go after Trump, and nobody gives a damn. As to Colonel Vindman, thank you for your service. But I’m going to- hopefully somebody will ask questions of you about the role you play with the whistleblower, if any. And if there’s nothing there, fine.
MARGARET BRENNAN: All right. Senator Graham. Thank you–
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 