RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2019/05/01/its-barrs-baby-now-not-muellers/

For nearly two years, Robert Mueller worked for the U.S. Department of Justice as a special counsel appointed by then-Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. Despite the Left’s attempt to deify Robert Mueller as an omnipotent figure somehow unbound by the constraints of the Constitution and law, in reality, he was an employee of the Justice Department. He was a publicly-appointed prosecutor paid with U.S. tax dollars.

On March 22, 2019, Robert Mueller’s job ended when he submitted his long-awaited report to Attorney General William Barr. At that point, according to the federal regulation governing the appointment of a special counsel, Mueller’s task was over: “At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.”

https://amgreatness.com/2019/05/01/clinton-projection-syndrome/

Hillary Clinton recently editorialized about the second volume of special counsel Robert Mueller’s massive report. She concluded of the report’s assorted testimonies and inside White House gossip concerning President Trump’s words and actions that “any other person engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted.”

Psychologists might call her claims “projection.” That is the well-known psychological malady of attributing bad behavior to others as a means of exonerating one’s own similar, if not often even worse, sins.

After 22 months of investigation and $34 million spent, the Mueller report concluded that there was no Trump-Russia collusion—the main focus of the investigation—even though that unfounded allegation dominated print and televised media’s speculative headlines for the last two years.

While Mueller’s report addressed various allegations of Trump’s other roguery, the special counsel did not recommend that the president be indicted for obstruction of justice in what Mueller had just concluded was not a crime of collusion.

https://www.nysun.com/national/in-barrs-battle-with-congress-hes-in-the-right/90669/

In the battle unfolding in Congress between the Democrats and Attorney General William Barr, I’m on the side of the United States Constitution. That means defending not only Mr. Barr but also President Trump. The two men stand on America’s legal bedrock.

Click Image to Enlarge

Which is why Mr. Barr was able to make short work of his Democratic questioners at Wednesday’s hearing in the Senate. His calm, straightforward testimony made it clear that he isn’t the caricature the Democrats have been drawing of him.

And events aren’t the conspiracy the Democrats are still trying to validate, even after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s finding that there was no collusion, actual or attempted, ­between Trump’s camarilla and the Kremlin. Nor any prosecutable obstruction case.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-real-attorney-general-11556752279

Washington pile-ons are never pretty, but this week’s political setup of Attorney General William Barr is disreputable even by Beltway standards. Democrats and the media are turning the AG into a villain for doing his duty and making the hard decisions that special counsel Robert Mueller abdicated.

Mr. Barr’s Wednesday testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee was preceded late Tuesday by the leak of a letter Mr. Mueller had sent the AG on March 27. Mr. Mueller griped in the letter that Mr. Barr’s four-page explanation to Congress of the principal conclusions of the Mueller report on March 24 “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Mueller team’s “work and conclusions.” Only in Washington could this exercise in posterior covering be puffed into a mini-outrage.

Democrats leapt on the letter as proof that Mr. Barr was somehow covering for Donald Trump when he has covered up nothing. Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, the Democratic answer to Rep. Louie Gohmert, accused Mr. Barr of abusing his office and lying to Congress, and demanded that he resign. The only thing she lacked was evidence.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/8-times-barack-obama-abused-his-power-to-appease-his-base/

Joe Biden, now all in for 2020, has his sights set on Donald Trump. With daily attacks, he’s lobbing any accusation he can against Trump in the hopes that such attacks will get traction. His latest attack is to claim that President Trump has abused his powers. “There’s only one thing that stands in our way. It’s our broken political system that’s deliberately being undermined by our president to continue to abuse the power of the office,” Biden claimed, calling Trump “the only president who has decided not to represent the whole country. He has his base. We need a president who works for all Americans.”

Has Creepy Uncle forgotten that thanks to Trump, African-American unemployment is at an all-time low? So is Hispanic unemployment. Last I checked, African Americans and Hispanic vote overwhelmingly Democrat. Women also vote more Democrat, but are thriving in the Trump economy. Looks to me as though Trump has been working for all Americans—even those not in his base.

But what really got me about Biden’s comments was the part about Trump allegedly abusing power. President Trump has spent much of the past two years trying to undo Obama’s abuses of power—which Obama did, not in the best interests of the whole country, but for the benefit of his base. Has Biden forgotten Obama’s presidency or is he just a bad liar? Many of these abuses should have resulted in Obama’s impeachment. Unfortunately, Republicans in Congress didn’t have the guts to impeach him, but they tried everything could to reign in on his pseudo-dictatorship. Two pieces of legislation were drafted in order to stop his abuses and force him to follow the law. Obama threatened to veto both bills rather than risk any limits on his ever-expanding legislative authority.

Below are 8 examples of Obama doing exactly what Joe Biden just accused Donald Trump of doing.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-economy-trump-gdp-growth-unemployment-20190428-story.html

The U.S. economy is growing at such a fast clip and the unemployment rate is so low that … there must be something terribly wrong. Does that make sense? No, but the healthy state of the country seems to be too much for some economists, talking heads and others in the chattering class. They struggle to find something nice to say about 3.2 percent growth accompanied by 3.8 percent unemployment.

We’re puzzling over the negativism because we’re certain everyone will miss the good times when they inevitably fade. The debate we’d like to see is how to extend this era of prosperity — and delay the next recession — as long as possible. Instead, there’s skepticism in the air, which is potentially damaging because part of what drives economic growth is confidence. If business owners and consumers turn skittish, they’ll invest and spend less. Fear of recession could hasten one.

Here’s what we’re talking about: The Bloomberg consensus estimate for first-quarter annualized GDP growth was just 2.3 percent, meaning the experts had undershot the actual result by nearly a full percentage point. That happens, given that forecasting is an inexact science. But when Friday’s numbers were released, a scramble ensued to downplay the results to justify previous pessimism. That 3.2 percent growth figure? It was illusory, due to a host of one-time factors, such as companies boosting inventories as a precaution against escalating trade friction with China. This fast growth can’t last, said the experts. “The first-quarter number is overstating the strength of the economy,” Ben Herzon of Macroeconomic Advisers told The Washington Post.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/04/29/why-are-clapper-and-brennan-not-in-jail/

The clearest of all the laws concerning U.S. intelligence is Section 798, 18 U.S. Code—widely known in the Intelligence Community as “the Comint Statute,” or “the 10 and 10.” Unlike other laws, this is a “simple liability” law. Motivation, context, identity, matter not at all. You violate it, you are guilty and are punished accordingly.

Here it is:

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, . . . any classified information—

(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or

(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States …or

(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or

(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence . . .

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

On December 9 and 10, 2016, the New York Times and the Washington Post independently reported that anonymous senior intelligence officials had told them that, based on intercepted communications, the intelligence agencies agreed that Russia had hacked the Democratic National Committee to help Donald Trump win the election. Their evidence was the fact of their access to U.S communications intelligence. A flood of subsequent stories also cited allegations by “senior intelligence officials” that “intercepted communications” and “intercepted calls” showed that “members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election.”

Incontrovertibly, the officials who gave these stories to the Times and Post violated the Comint Statute, and are subject to the “10 and 10” for each count. There is no clearer instance of what the governing law is, of how it was violated, and of the punishment that this incurs.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/04/29/the-real-bombshells-are-about-to-hit-their-targets/

The next bombshell report to drop from the Justice Department likely will earn none of the breathless fanfare and media coverage that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report received, but it could be far more incriminating.

In the next several weeks, Inspector General Michael Horowitz is expected to issue his summation of the potential abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by top officials in the Obama Administration and holdovers in the early Trump Administration who were overseeing the investigation of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

And the perpetrators of the so-called FISAgate scandal now are scrambling for cover as the bad news looms.

Horowitz announced last March that his office would examine the Justice Department’s conduct “in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) relating to a certain U.S. person.” That U.S. person is Trump campaign associate Carter Page. In October 2016, just two weeks before the presidential election, the Justice Department submitted an application to the FISC seeking authorization to wiretap Page. The court filing accused Page, a Naval Academy graduate and unpaid campaign advisor, of being an agent of Russia.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/heroism-at-the-synagogue-11556580251

When a gunman filled with anti-Semitism opened fire Saturday at a synagogue in Poway, Calif., worshipers turned into heroes. Sixty-year-old Lori Kaye was killed after jumping between Rabbi Yisroel Goldstein and the attacker, according to witnesses. Others shielded nearby children or hurried them to safety. Rabbi Goldstein, who was shot in the hands and lost his right index finger, wrapped his bloody wounds in a prayer shawl and rallied his congregation outside.

Two men confronted the attacker. An Army veteran named Oscar Stewart, 51, shouted and charged the gunman, who ran. An off-duty Border Patrol agent at the service, whom the Rabbi identified as Jonathan Morales, also gave chase, firing his own weapon at the getaway car. The assailant was arrested shortly afterward and is charged with murder and attempted murder.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/judge_nap__the_mendacious_magistrate.html

“What is even more mystifying is this: whatever made Napolitano think he, an on-air legal “analyst” for Fox News Network, was of sufficient juristic eminence to be appointed to the highest court in the land?”

I’m not a daytime watcher of Fox News, but as an always-on television is within earshot, I do tend to be a bit of a detached daytime listener. As such, I have been mystified by the one-eighty-degree turn of Fox legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano from being an ardent Trump-supporter to a constant critic of the president. It was one of those mysteries we must sometimes wait years for to get an explanation of what led to such a sudden, inexplicable political reversal. But thanks to that titan of tweeting, our nation’s chief executive (Dems would prefer that to be Titanic), we now know what inspired this sudden onset of anti-Trump hostility from Judge Nap.

Following his hugely successful Wisconsin rally Saturday night, Donald Trump tweeted this:

….Ever since Andrew came to my office to ask that I appoint him to the U.S. Supreme Court, and I said NO, he has been very hostile! Also asked for pardon for his friend. A good “pal” of low ratings Shepard Smith.