On “Face the Nation,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) discusses current stalled status of immigration reform efforts and the possibility of a compromise bill that could come up for a vote this week.

.

Immigration twitter thread HERE.

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte discusses the latest issues surrounding the ongoing congressional review of DOJ and FBI corruption.  Within the interview Chairman Goodlatte outlines the upcoming deposition of “former(?)” FBI Agent Peter Strzok which is scheduled to take place on Wednesday June 27th, 2018.

.

Initial letter from Goodlatte to DOJ and their response yesterday below:

Original request:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/382469417/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-W0nNT9RjT1rKtRMgroiN

.

Response from FBI:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/382417850/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-EW2VxtysrSgnAncrDfn8

.

The Washington Post interviews Stephanie Wilkinson, the owner of the Red Hen restaurant, who kicked Sarah Huckabee Sanders and her family out for holding political views Ms. Wilkinson finds abhorrent.  The expressed hypocrisy is typical of the progressive worldview.

Apparently Ms. Wilkinson was not at the restaurant at the time, her staff called her at home asking what they should do. Wilkinson told the Washington post “that her restaurant and its half-dozen servers and cooks had managed to stay in business for 10 years by keeping politics off the menu.” “And she knew — she believed — that Sarah Huckabee Sanders worked in the service of an “inhumane and unethical” administration. That she publicly defended the president’s cruelest policies, and that that could not stand.”

Wilkerson Family

Several Red Hen employees are gay, she said. They knew Sanders had defended Trump’s desire to bar transgender people from the military. This month, they had all watched her evade questions and defend a Trump policy that caused migrant children to be separated from their parents.

[…] “Tell me what you want me to do. I can ask her to leave,” Wilkinson told her staff, she said. “They said ‘yes.’ ”

[…] she walked up to the press secretary’s chair.

“I said, ‘I’m the owner,’ ” she recalled, ” ‘I’d like you to come out to the patio with me for a word.’ ”

They stepped outside, into another small enclosure, but at least out of the crowded restaurant.

“I was babbling a little, but I got my point across in a polite and direct fashion,” Wilkinson said. “I explained that the restaurant has certain standards that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty, and compassion, and cooperation.

“I said, ‘I’d like to ask you to leave.’ ”  Sanders’s response was immediate, Wilkinson said: ” ‘ That’s fine. I’ll go.’ ”

[…]  Wilkinson had no regrets about her decision.

“I would have done the same thing again,” she said  “We just felt there are moments in time when people need to live their convictions. This appeared to be one.”

As she headed out the door to a weekend Main Street festival she had helped organize, she sounded hopeful that the Red Hen could open for business as usual Saturday night. Yes, she had seen calls for #MAGA protests on Facebook. “But this is a small enough town, and we’re known,” she said optimistically. “This is not going to be a giant surprise to anyone.” (read more)

This will not end well for the Wilkerson family, their business interests, or the employees who found their tender sensibilities too triggered by the appearance of a Trump supporter in their restaurant.

The intersection of business and politics is littered with the carcases of failed enterprise who made similar decisions.  The NFL, Macy’s, Starbucks, Target, etc. The list is long and the stupid is strong.  Never underestimate the ability of a public business to destroy itself.  No policy is ever idiot-proof, merely idiot resistant; and there are always newer, bigger and more stupid idiots even in the sandwich business.

In the mind of a far-left progressive they believe their insane political perspectives are the only views that matter.  They consistently over-estimate their geographical support, and find their need for superiority such that it affords them a bizarre moral right to force their positions upon others.

Control is a reaction to fear. Think in terms or politics and society – the fear behind liberalism is the fear that someone might withhold things (opportunities, money, whatever) from me.

Fear that if you live your life in a way I dislike that it might affect my life; fear that if you get that job, there will be nothing left for me. Fear that if you make tons of money, it’s means there’s less money out there for me.

So people who believe in liberal ideologies seek control as a means of trying to create guarantees and safeguards against those circumstances they fear. Liberals try to control the world and people to enable their comfort and happiness. Which, as we know, is an endless quest.

Trying to control others does nothing in the way of making oneself happy. By extension, voting in this mindset so that government can try to control others will also –shockingly– not lead to a happier, more comfortable life.

The conservative (and moderate, independent, but for the sake of expediency, the conservative), on the other hand, relies on herself to meet her own needs. And the trade-off of being free to live her life as she wishes is also understanding that she has to make peace with how you live yours.

By extension, aware that she wants to be able to hold onto this liberty and freedom forever, the conservative votes accordingly, so that everyone can remain free and in charge of his or her own life.

But here’s the crucial difference, perhaps, particularly where misery on the left stems: The conservative does not worry, so to speak, about you. The conservative knows that you were born with the same access to self-love, self-empowerment, self-determination and self-reliance that we all were, no matter the circumstances into which you were born. Think about the millions of people this country has allowed to crawl up from poverty into prosperity – the conservative KNOWS this is possible.

And the conservative believes that if you want prosperity, or a good job, or a good education, you can make it happen – but you have to work hard. The conservative hopes and intends that the free markets bring you all of the affordable and positive opportunities and resources that you need. The conservative also knows that on the other side of that hard work is great reward – material and, more importantly, emotional, spiritual and mental.

The conservative understands that not only is it a waste of time to try to control you, it’s actually impossible. Humans were born to be free; and if we put a roadblock in front of you, you’ll find another way around it.

So we see attempts at control as a waste of resources, energy and time at best, and at worst, creating detrimental results that serve to hinder people’s upward mobility or teach dependence. We see much more efficiency, as well as endless opportunity, in leaving you to your own devices. And we want the same in return.

This is where democrats miss-view republicans as heartless. But really, the conservative believes that there is one and one path only to sustainable success and independence – and that is self-empowerment. All other avenues – welfare, affirmative action, housing loans you can’t actually afford – ultimately risk doing a disservice to people as they teach dependence on special circumstances, the govt, or arbitrary assistance (that can disappear tomorrow). And the real danger – they will ALWAYS backfire, and leave the recipient in equally or more dire circumstances. Any false improvement will always expire.

The conservative believes in abundance. The liberal believes in scarcity.

The conservative believes man is born free and will be who he is, no matter what arbitrary limitations or rules are put on him. The liberal believes man is perfectible, and by extension, believes a society at large is perfectible, and command and control is justified in the quest to a “perfect” utopian society. (Sounds familiar!)

The conservative tends to be more faithful – and not necessarily in God, but in the ability of the individual to find great strength in himself (or from his God) to get what he needs and to be successful. Therefore the conservative has an outlet for his fear and disappointment – trust and faith in something bigger. The liberal believes the system must be perfected in order to enable success. Therefore disappointment is channeled as anger and blame at the system. Voids are left to be filled by faith in the govt, which they surely then want to come in and “fix” things.

And therein lies the roots of love and fear respectively. For the conservative, when life presents great struggles, she knows she has the power to surmount them. Happiness stems from internal strength and perseverance. For the liberal, when life presents great struggles, the system failed, therefore they were at the mercy of a faulty system, and they believe that only when the system is fixed can their life improve.

A progressive liberals’ happiness is built on systemic contingencies, which they will then seek to control or expect someone else to.

One blames herself.  The other blames anyone and everyone but herself. And there it is. There’s where the origin of hate comes from.

The liberal ideology causes that person to cast anger at the world when things go wrong or appear “unfair.”  She constantly chooses only to see the “injustices” – and that makes for a very miserable, mean, toxic, shallow, blame-casting existence.

.

.

Due to the ongoing and unresolved scale of corruption within the administrative offices of the DOJ (Sessions/Rosenstein) and FBI (Wray/Bowdich), it is no longer possible to provide any benefit-of-doubt regarding their obstruction of oversight.   The IG report; the manipulation (red-lining) of the draft content therein; and the subsequent DOJ/FBI willful blindness toward the remaining content; affords no leniency toward motive.

In essence, if we are to honestly call the baby ugly, we are also to admit: there is an ongoing and institutional cover-up taking place. Yes, even by Trump officials.

In the latest development(s); and against the backdrop of previously unknown subpoenas from several House committees (HPSCI, Judiciary and the useless House Oversight/Reform committee), the FBI sends two compliance letters to congressional leadership.

It should be noted, lest we leave any transparent motive unspoken, the FBI responses are not from U.S. Attorney John Lausch, the *supposed* Sessions appointed facilitator of congressional requests and the person *reportedly* in charge of compliance production. I digress.

Backdrop: On June 15th, Paul Ryan, Devin Nunes, Trey Gowdy and Bob Goodlatte met with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Chris Wray.  According to later media statements, the House congressional group notified Rosenstein and Wray of their intent to hold Rosenstein and Wray subject to “House Floor Measures”. That is  codespeak for *contempt of congress*, and/or *impeachment*.

What we did not know (they never said publicly) was that Ryan, Nunes, Gowdy and Goodlatte filed a compliance subpoena as an outcome of that June 15 meeting, listing a myriad of document requests previously ignored by the DOJ, specifically the FBI.  We discover this aspect in the response letter(s) from the FBI Acting Asst. Director, Offfice of Congressional Affairs, Jill Tyson.  (both pdf’s below)  [John Lausch, ::crickets::]

The first response letter (cloud pdf here) is from the FBI to House intelligence committee chairman Rep. Devin Nunes.  The letter describes the status of document requests from Congress related to the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Russian election meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign.

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/382417806/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-N0qW8mcB86rlZYKmeBZ5

(Via The AP) A spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan said Saturday that the department has partially complied with subpoenas from the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees after officials turned over more than a thousand new documents this week. House Republicans had given the Justice Department and FBI a Friday deadline for all documents, most of which are related to the origins of the FBI’s Russia investigation and the handling of its probe into Democrat Hillary Clinton’s emails. Ryan spokeswoman Ash Lee Strong said the department asked for more time and they will get it — for now.

“Our efforts have resulted in the committees finally getting access to information that was sought months ago, but some important requests remain to be completed,” Strong said in a statement Saturday. “Additional time has been requested for the outstanding items, and based on our understanding of the process we believe that request is reasonable. We expect the department to meet its full obligations to the two committees.” (link)

The second letter (cloud pdf here) is specifically toward the two joint committee chairmen Bob Goodlatte [Judiciary] and Trey Gowdy [Oversight/Reform], and is more interesting because the dynamic extends beyond intelligence oversight (Nunes expertise) and goes directly to the primary oversight of the DOJ and FBI (Goodlatte expertise).

Because we did not see the actual subpoena, we are at a disadvantage in explaining the scale of the compliance notification within the response letter to Goodlatte.  However, that said, it does appear to go toward an overlooked question from the IG House Hearing.

I think both Katica and myself are in agreement that the second letter is more pertinent in relation to the ongoing FBI corruptive behavior within the Clinton/Trump investigations.

Representative Keith Rothfus was inquiring as to whether the IG investigated to see if the FBI team used the FISA (DOJ/NSA) database in their efforts to retrieve and verify Hillary Clinton emails/documents.   In essence, did the FBI use that investigative tool?  If not, why not? And if so, were they successful?

Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte wants EVERYTHING.  The IG said they held over 1.4 million pages, Goodlatte wants that.  Also, beyond the IG holdings, the FBI has hundreds of thousands more documents, Goodlatte wants them too.

Jill Tyson says the department has already provided more than 800,000 documents for review and “the FBI produced over 1,400 pages of responsive materials” on Friday, among other documents already sent to the panel.

The letter says FBI is also working to address a request about “proposed, recommended or actual” surveillance on the Clinton Foundation. Tyson said the department was responding in a separate, classified letter, and that the request had proven “difficult to address.” She said the department hoped to talk to lawmakers further about it.

Here’s where you put the flashy warning sign:

Here’s the letter:

https://www.scribd.com/embeds/382417850/content?start_page=1&view_mode=&access_key=key-EW2VxtysrSgnAncrDfn8

.

It appears to us, the current DOJ/FBI leadership is still attempting to protect the institutions by covering up the conduct of Lynch/Yates and Comey/McCabe.   The career administrative officials, under and surrounding the leadership offices, are controlling the actual documents and evidence.

There’s a strategy behind national corporate media not discussing the Utah Senate Primary runoff this coming Tuesday. The avoidance strategy is designed to support the scheming, self-interested, manipulative lying-liar-who-lies, Mitt Romney, over Utah state lawmaker Mike Kennedy.  (Website Here)  Romney is destined to replace Bob Corker as a staunch anti-Trump Senator.  Romney supports all Decepticon causes.

Despite beating Romney in the Utah republican primary convention vote, Mike Kennedy is considered the underdog.  Mail-in and in-person early voting started earlier this month. Only registered Republicans may vote in the GOP primary.

SALT LAKE CITY — U.S. Senate candidate Mitt Romney has spent nearly $2 million on his Republican primary election campaign, about five times that of his opponent Mike Kennedy.

A state lawmaker from Alpine, Kennedy opened his wallet for the second time in the race, putting another $45,000 in his account on top of the $250,000 he previously loaned the campaign. (read more)

President Trump will be delivering remarks at the Nevada Republican Party Convention today.  The speeches are ongoing, President Trump remarks approximately 3:15pm:

UPDATE: Video Added

Livestream Link  #1 – Livestream Link #2

There are billions of dollars at stake.

Accidents happen; this isn’t one of them.

Via NBC – South Carolina lawmaker Katie Arrington, who defeated U.S. Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., in the Republican primary for his seat last month, was seriously injured in a fatal car accident on Friday night.

Campaign adviser Michael Mule said that Arrington, 47, a state representative, was on her way to Hilton Head, South Carolina, for a Saturday morning event when another car, which was driving in the wrong lane, struck her vehicle head on.

According to a spokesman, she suffered a fracture in her back, several broken ribs and she will have major surgery to remove portions of her small intestine and colon. Because of the accident, a main artery in her leg also partially collapsed and will require a stint.

Her spokesman said she will require multiple surgeries and will be in the hospital for at least two weeks.  (read more)

Liberalism is a mental disorder.  Violence, bigotry, discrimination, hate, these are the underlying principles of shallow progressive conduct. Story Here

Tweet Link – Story Link

Mrs. Sarah Huckabee Sanders has a conscious orientation to her sense of Cold Anger.

Remember, Do Not Look Away

There’s a level of anger far deeper and more consequential than expressed rage or visible behavior, it’s called Cold Anger.

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.

Cold Anger absorbs betrayal silently, often prudently.

Cold Anger is not hatred, it is far more purposeful.

Cold Anger takes notice of the liars, even from a great distance – seemingly invisible to the mob. Cold Anger will still hold open the door for the riot goer. Mannerly.

Cold Anger evidenced is more severe because it is more strategic.

Cold Anger does not gloat; it absorbs consistent vilification and ridicule as fuel. This sensibility does not want to exist, it is forced to exist in otherwise unwilling hosts – we also refuse to be destabilized by it.

Cold Anger is not driven to act in spite of itself; it drives a reckoning.

Cold Anger receives hate the way a long-term battered spouse absorbs the blow in the hours prior to the pre-planned exit; with purpose.

….. More

Possibly Russian CNN broadcaster buried amid hot dog avalanche, when banana Harlow loses familiarity up as inside apple never reaches. Frustrated, perhaps, but Arnold around cheese investigation from more of it, finds yes. Although in never it wasn’t today – she said, and unimaginable later; it was awaited.  [word assemble as needed] rEsIsT wE mUcH:

.

We’ve been sharing this intensely predictable issue since late 2017. Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or “AMLO”, is going to be the next President of Mexico.  The self-described “soft Marxist”, a Mexican Hugo Chavez, has been so far ahead of all other candidates – the outcome of the July 1st Mexican election is a foregone conclusion.

Interestingly, people are only now starting to take notice because AMLO is openly telling his fellow countrymen they must flood the U.S. border.

(From the Daily Caller) […] “And soon, very soon — after the victory of our movement — we will defend all the migrants in the American continent and all the migrants in the world,” Obrador said, adding that immigrants “must leave their towns and find a life in the United States.”  He then declared it as “a human right we will defend.”

Most political observers read this and think it sounds crazy. They make comparisons to a U.S. presidential candidate telling Americans to flee to Canada (Daily Wire example). That type of perspective shows a disconnect.  The paradigm, and frame of reference, is entirely wrong.

What AMLO is saying is not a surprise, nor is it an ideological proclamation; there is an actual strategic policy behind these statements.  This has been AMLO’s strategy for years, and no-one was paying attention.   Andrés Manuel López Obrador has long proposed a key economic plan for Mexico to become wealthy. However, his idea has only recently gained broad mainstream Mexican understanding.

Conservative U.S. media have no idea; but democrats, activists and far-left immigration radicals certainly do. AMLO has thought this through, and he has seen the mistakes made by allies in Cuba and Venezuela.

AMLO has an economic plan where hundreds-of-thousands of his fellow Mexicans flood the Southern U.S. border region; overwhelm the system and essentially create an initial border economy; then, with the door and pathway created, begin a process of exfiltration of U.S. economic wealth directly into Mexico.

Andrés Manuel López Obrador is not crazy; he has a pretty ingenious strategy.

Through overwhelming the Southern border regions, the nation of Mexico will be able to influence local U.S. laws and overwhelm the local U.S. political structures.  The Ameri/Mex zone penetrates into the U.S. and provides a borderless opening for migration, trade, commerce and the education of Mexican citizens through the utilization of U.S. social and economic systems.

All of the long-held grievances of Mexican nationals toward the disparity of their level of poverty and the wealth within the United States can be fixed through this plan.

Within the plan AMLO envisions the U.S. training, educating, employing and eventually paying for a growing standard-of-living for Mexico.  It is a fast way for Mexico to gain wealth; as opposed to the long process of building out an entire societal system of education, investment, infrastructure and commerce.

It would take Mexico several decades to achieve a level of wealth even close to the U.S., and they have no structural (political) systems in place to form the foundation of such an approach.  So, AMLO’s faster plan is to use migration into the U.S. to break down barriers, collapse the economic dam and allow the natural flood of U.S. wealth to flow into Mexico.

From the Mexican perspective this is a pretty solid economic approach that just might work; and they have open-border comrades within the progressive, democrat, republican and corporate political systems (all over the U.S) who already support such a strategy.

So when you see the headlines about the Mexican President telling his people to leave; and when you see him telling government officials to formulate plans and policies to expedite entry into the U.S., don’t laugh them away.  It is a viable plan with just as much possibility of success as any other.