RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/05/obama_appointees_in_the_communist_orbit.html

This week Rush Limbaugh repeated a quote from James Comey in a  New York Magazine interview: 

“I’d moved from Communist to whatever I am now. I’m not even sure how to characterize myself politically. Maybe at some point, I’ll have to figure it out.”

It’s hard to pin too much on that quote.  Perhaps Comey was joking by calling his vote for Jimmy Carter a vote for a Communist, in mockery of his supposedly fellow Republicans. 

Joking about support for Communism is not all that funny in the Obama administration. Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan actually did vote for a Communist presidential candidate.  Brennan and Comey are two of the central players in the Russia Collusion Hoax.

Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA.  These facts are not in dispute.  Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control.  Our press  chooses not to report them.

Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.

John Brennan

Brennan (who was sworn in as CIA director on a draft of the US Constitution, without the Bill of Rights, instead of a Bible) said that while he had voted Communist, he wasn’t an official member of the Communist Party – and was relieved that he had been accepted into the CIA.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/444802-ag-barr-puts-former-intel-bosses-on-notice

Things seem to be moving quickly now. It has been a remarkable few weeks in American history. Momentum is building toward uncovering the distasteful possibility that the targeting of a U.S. presidential campaign was actually a political operation, fostered at the highest levels of government, masquerading as an FBI counterintelligence investigation.

Attorney General William Barr has signaled that his interest in examining the origins of the investigation into the Trump campaign extends beyond whether the FBI operated “by the book,” as former FBI Director James Comey asserts. Barr also wants to understand the role that the larger intelligence community, or IC, may have played in all of this.

Barr has thrown punches that have left an interesting mix of characters with a standing eight count. Certain eyes around D.C. are a little glassy right now.

Barr’s words and actions are telling. First, he raised the concern that the Trump campaign was “spied” upon. His use of the word “spying” appears more calculated than casual. The wailing and gnashing of teeth that followed is also telling. “The FBI doesn’t spy” became the sputtering counter-refrain of those trying to mask their nervousness.

https://amgreatness.com/2019/05/22/federal-rats-are-fleeing-the-sinking-collusion-ship/

The entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative was always implausible.

One, the Washington swamp of fixers such as Paul Manafort and John and Tony Podesta was mostly bipartisan and predated Trump.

Two, the Trump administration’s Russia policies were far tougher on Vladimir Putin than were those of Barack Obama. Trump confronted Russia in Syria, upped defense spending, increased sanctions and kept the price of oil down through massive new U.S. energy production. He did not engineer a Russian “reset” or get caught on a hot mic offering a self-interested hiatus in tensions with Russia in order to help his own re-election bid.

Three, Russia has a long history of trying to warp U.S. elections that both predated Trump and earned only prior lukewarm pushback from the Obama administration.

It’s also worth remembering that President Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation had been recipients of Russian and Russian-related largesse—ostensibly because Hillary Clinton had used her influence as Secretary of State under Obama to ease resistance to Russian acquisitions of North American uranium holdings.

As far as alleged Russian collusion goes, Hillary Clinton used three firewalls—the Democratic National Committee, the Perkins Coie law firm and the Fusion GPS strategic intelligence firm—to hide her campaign’s payments to British national Christopher Steele to find dirt on Trump and his campaign; in other words, to collude. Steele in turn collected his purchased Russian sources to aggregate unverified allegations against Trump. He then spread the gossip within government agencies to ensure that the smears were leaked to the media—and with a government seal of approval.

No wonder that special counsel Robert Mueller’s partisan team spent 22 months and $34 million only to conclude the obvious: that Trump did not collude with Russia.

https://issuesinsights.com/2019/05/23/schumer-nadler-compared-impea

When President Bill Clinton, over 20 years ago, was probed by a special investigator, and 11 possible grounds for impeachment were found, including perjury, witness tampering and obstruction of justice, Democrats didn’t defend their party’s President the way Republicans defend Trump today.

No, Democrats were far more extreme.

What makes the rhetorical record so glaringly hypocritical is that in Donald Trump’s case, unlike Clinton’s, the investigator found no evidence of presidential crimes.

As congressional Democrats’ current leaders endure the pressure of their younger, further-to-the-left colleagues, who want Trump’s head on a platter ASAP, they’re going to find themselves haunted by their own ghosts of impeachment past.

Here is then-Congressman Charles Schumer of New York City, member of the House Judiciary Committee, on the House floor on Dec. 18, 1998, the day before Clinton was impeached. Schumer had won election to the U.S. Senate the month before.

“Voting against these articles will be my last act” as a member of the House of Representatives, Schumer declared, lamenting that “now we are routinely using criminal accusations and scandal to win the political battles and ideological differences we cannot settle at the ballot box … And it is hurting our country, it is marginalizing and polarizing this Congress.”

It sounds familiar. But Schumer then added, presciently: “I expect history will show that we have lowered the bar on impeachment so much, we have broken the seal on this extreme penalty so cavalierly, that it will be used as a routine tool to fight political battles. My fear is that when a Republican wins the White House, Democrats will demand payback.”

https://pjmedia.com/trending/la-mayor-garcetti-standing-by-his-support-for-u-s-embassy-in-jerusalem/

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti said on Wednesday that he’s not going to apologize for publicly stating his support for moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem amid criticism from the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The Trump administration announced the move in December of 2017. The embassy opening in Jerusalem took place in May of 2018.

The Greater Los Angeles Area office of CAIR “condemned” Garcetti’s support for relocating the embassy.

“It is highly disturbing that Mayor Garcetti would declare support for such a reckless decision made by President Donald Trump to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem,” said CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush.

Garcetti was asked for his response to CAIR demanding an apology.

Watch the full video of Garcetti’s response:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-impeachment-democrats-11558565156

President Trump walked out of a meeting with Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer at the White House Wednesday over their accusations against him, and all of Democratic and media Washington is appalled. Doesn’t this President understand that he is supposed to take a daily beating on his way to impeachment while also giving Democrats some policy victories?

Mr. Trump turned what was supposed to be a meeting about infrastructure spending into a display of Trumpian pique. “Instead of walking in happily into a meeting, I walk in to look at people that had just said I was doing a cover-up. I don’t do cover-ups,” he told reporters after the meeting.

He was referring to Mrs. Pelosi’s comments earlier in the day that “we believe that the President of the United States is engaged in a cover-up.” The remark is part of her now-daily act of political cognitive dissonance in which she accuses Mr. Trump of committing impeachable offenses to appease her anti-Trump ultras while opposing impeachment lest it jeopardize swing-district Democrats in 2020.

Mr. Trump has decided to call her bluff and offer a choice—impeachment or bipartisan progress. He probably realizes by now that Democrats don’t want to give him any political victories before 2020 even if they could also take credit. And that may be just as well given that most of the potential compromises—on drug prices or financing for public-works spending—would be bad policy.

But Mrs. Pelosi is facing a momentous choice. If she opens a formal impeachment inquiry, the momentum toward a vote would be hard to stop. Her moderates would be squeezed to take a vote that could cost them re-election. The process would consume media attention for as long as it lasts and well into next year. Forget about what Mrs. Pelosi calls “our agenda for the people.” The new House majority will define themselves as the Impeachment Democrats.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/22/trump-slams-left-flanked-pelosi-dumps-infrastructure-talks-rose-garden-remarks/

There was supposed to be a meeting about infrastructure today. Remember infrastructure? The policy area where Democrats and Republicans can find agreement and move forward? Well, not so fast. The scheduled meeting between President Trump, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer didn’t quite go as planned after Pelosi buckled to the far-leftists in her caucus and accused Trump of engaging in a cover-up over obstruction of justice allegations stemming from the Robert Mueller report.

Pelosi’s comments came this morning after an emergency meeting in which she apparently barely managed to stave off calls from her colleagues to impeach President Trump. For the time being, her efforts were successful and Democrats in the House will not start impeachment proceedings. But that agreement came at a price for the speaker, who having been outflanked by the left made the damning statements about Trump being involved in a cover-up.

As a result of those remarks President Trump apparently entered the meeting with Pelosi and Schumer, did not shake anyone’s hand, and basically told them to kick rocks until their endless investigations into him are over. It is not clear if the president even had time to sit down. It was clear from his blistering comments a while later in the Rose Garden that he was not happy, and would not be working with Democrats anytime soon.

Our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com created an interactive map of all 22,000+ rat sightings in 2018/2019 alone.

However, our co-investigation with the New York Times found that rat sightings are up 38% between 2014 and 2018. In the first four months this year, rat sightings are again up versus the same period last year.

HERE IS THE NYTIMES COLUMN

Rats Are Taking Over New York City Gentrifying neighborhoods are a key reason behind the vermin outbreak, which extends beyond New York — Philadelphia, Chicago and Los Angeles are also confronting issues. By Winnie Hu

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/nyregion/rat-infestation-nyc.html

So many rats regularly lurk on a sidewalk in Brooklyn that it is the humans who avoid the rats, not the other way around. Not even cars are safe: Rats have chewed clean through engine wires.

A Manhattan avenue lined with trendy restaurants has become a destination for foodies — and rats who help themselves to their leftovers. Tenants at a public housing complex in the South Bronx worry about tripping over rats that routinely run over their feet.

New York has always been forced to coexist with the four-legged vermin, but the infestation has expanded exponentially in recent years, spreading to just about every corner of the city.

“I’m a former Marine so I’m not going to be squeamish, but this is bad,” said Pablo Herrera, a 58-year-old mechanic who has counted up to 30 rats while walking on his block in Prospect Heights, just around the corner from the stately Brooklyn Museum.

Rat sightings reported to the city’s 311 hotline have soared nearly 38 percent, to 17,353 last year from 12,617 in 2014, according to an analysis of city data by OpenTheBooks.com, a nonprofit watchdog group, and The New York Times. In the same period, the number of times that city health inspections found active signs of rats nearly doubled.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/05/democratic-government-officials-epidemic-electronic-deletions/

Many Democratic government officials, not just Hillary, have gotten away with destroying evidence.

One method might be to see whether those targeted by Robert Mueller had ever begun accusing each other of “collusion” to save their own skins. That did not happen.

Even the perjurer Michael Cohen, who accused Trump of all sorts of improper business practices in an effort to negotiate a lighter sentence, never claimed that the president had colluded with the Russians — the Holy Grail search of the Mueller “all-stars.”

Yet John Brennan, James Clapper, James Comey, and Andrew McCabe are suddenly alleging that someone other than themselves is the guilty instigator in seeding the dossier into a presidential intelligence report, is the guilty party that deceived a FISA court, and is the guilty culprit who was leaking to the media. So apparently the new climate is now no longer “There was no crime committed” but rather “He did it, not me.”

Yet another calibration might be who exactly is deleting documents and who is not. So far Robert Mueller has not accused Donald Trump or his subordinates of deleting Trump’s emails. Indeed, Trump’s campaign and administration reportedly turned over 1.4 million documents to Special Counsel Mueller. Again, no one has claimed that they have been destroyed.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/don-mcgahns-immunity-11558479763

Democrats are fuming that Don McGahn skipped a Congressional hearing on Tuesday, and they plan to hold the former White House counsel in contempt. But Mr. McGahn has every constitutional right not to appear, and this isn’t a close legal call.

“Our subpoenas are not optional,” declared House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler, speaking to the TV cameras in front of an empty witness table with Mr. McGahn’s name card. The symbolism is more apt than Mr. Nadler recognizes. Congress’s authority to force one of President Trump’s intimate advisers to appear before Congress is also empty.

This isn’t a novel legal doctrine. For nearly 50 years, multiple administrations have held that Congress cannot compel the appearance of a close adviser to the President. That judgment has been backed by numerous legal memos from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, starting in 1971 when future Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist ran the shop. The view was reinforced and invoked by Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama.