ACTION

             Erickson claims that “Salem never had any idea what to do with RedState and it was very obvious.” Well, no, that isn’t quite true. The problem is that RedState has now faced an overdue reckoning, and that reckoning was coming in part because of Erickson.
               Back in 2016, we called out the site over its track record of tactical and strategic incompetence, notably backing bad candidates in Senate races in the 2010 and 2012 election cycle and bad strategy in the 2013 government shutdown, and for its failure to understand that the changing threats and media landscape required a fundamental reevaluation of the current array of strategy and tactics.
               Now, in the face of growing evidence that our liberties are at great risk from, among many things, bureaucrats who have  chosen to play politics, as well as a Democrat Party whose senators and attorneys general are willing to use RICO on those who dissent from their position on climate change, Erickson seems unwilling to do what many grassroots Republican primary voters did in the 2016 campaign.
               They rejected the dynastic succession of Jeb Bush (despite some interesting ideas on education reform), the doctrinaire conservatism of Ted Cruz, and the mushy moderation of John Kasich. Even Marco Rubio’s media savvy and Scott Walker’s successful fight against government employee unions were rejected in favor of Donald Trump. Why?
               Trump had the guts to do something different — to do things his way, even in the face of vehement (and principled) conservative objection. Judging by the results so far — tax reform, the defeat of ISIS, numerous conservative judges, and things moving the right direction with North Korea being the highlights — it’s working.
               While Erickson can see the bullying from the Left for what it is, whether on gun control, its view of non-progressive Americans  as backwards racists, or even the efforts to compel speech by bakers or crisis pregnancy centers, he can’t resist his own form of asserting superiority over “Trump humpers” who “cop out” when they argue they are looking for a president, not a pastor.
               Erickson argues that RedState was unfairly purged of any conservative voices that still dissent from Trump. But, in a sense, Trump is securing for conservatives the right to hash out what the post-Trump future of conservatism will be.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55749

             In the past, Democrats have stuck mostly to regurgitating a tired, old refrain — Congress needs to enact another so-called “assault” weapons ban. And Rep. Swalwell is no different. In a new USA Today op-ed, he critiques firearms like the AR-15 as “a hand-held weapon of war, capable of spraying a crowd with more lethal fire in seconds.” He adds: “Reinstating the federal assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994 to 2004 would prohibit manufacture and sales.” But even he acknowledges what conservatives argue when opposing new gun control measures — a gun ban “would not affect weapons already possessed,” he says.
               That’s where Swalwell turns to promoting even more extreme measures. He opines: “Instead, we should ban possession of military-style semiautomatic assault weapons, we should buy back such weapons from all who choose to abide by the law, and we should criminally prosecute any who choose to defy it by keeping their weapons[emphasis added].” During the last ban, guns that were targeted but were already possessed were grandfathered in. But Democrats are sliding further down that slippery slope today by promoting outright confiscation.
               And this is where the Left’s campaign against the Second Amendment is chock-full of irony and recoil. The urge by leftists to “get military guns off our streets” means that confiscation is becoming more of a mainstream idea among party members. Strangely, Democrats think the enforcement of this plan would be as simple as prosecuting those who chose civil disobedience. They wrongly surmise that millions of gun owners don’t view the God-given right to bear arms as something worth dying for. Here’s the unvarnished truth: Attempted gun confiscation would result in a war far worse than what leftists ostensibly endeavor to avoid.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55746

             While government (rightly) gets some blame for its taxation schemes and its crazy regulations regarding ethanol, oil industry experts will tell us that the cost fluctuation of a gallon of gas is mainly based on the going price for the primary ingredient — crude oil.
               Since the early part of 2016, when prices bottomed out at $27 a barrel, we’ve seen the rate for West Texas crude reach nearly $70. Prices haven’t topped the $100-plus per barrel we saw a decade ago, but this increase has prompted some sticker shock and a prediction that this will be the most expensive summer driving season in four years.
               In its heyday, OPEC could bring the U.S. to its knees with a production cut. At first, our response to the cartel was that of enforced conservation, such as CAFE standards for vehicles. And then there’s the ethanol boondoggle, which has created a dependent class within the agricultural industry — one that wails each time its ethanol subsidies are threatened. More recently, though, advancements in extraction technology and the economic interest of cashing in on the higher per-barrel prices has created a new surge in domestic oil exploration. Thus, we’ve rebooted our own oil industry to a point where the OPEC cartel has less influence on our supplies.
               But while it isn’t as much of a factor on the supply side, OPEC can still be a price driver. In this case, both Saudi Arabia and non-OPEC Russia have put aside their foreign policy differences and enforced an 18-month-long production cut between themselves — a slowdown that has eliminated the supply glut (and low prices) we enjoyed over the last few years. And since those two nations are the second- and third-largest producers of crude oil (trailing only the U.S.), their coalition significantly influences the market. The higher prices also buy Russia greater geopolitical influence, as oil revenue is crucial to its economy.
               This may be the shape of things to come: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman recently revealed that a decades-long pact on oil between the two nations is possible. “We are working to shift from a year-to-year agreement to a 10- to 20-year agreement,” he said. “We have agreement on the big picture, but not yet on the detail.” If such an agreement comes to pass, the era of sub-$2 gasoline may be gone for good.
               That’s not to say, though, that everyone is a loser in such a deal. The rebound in prices has allowed good times to return to the oil patch, particularly the Permian Basin in West Texas. One oil patch company has such a need for skilled labor that half its employees can now boast a six-figure salary. Of course, this also makes other avocations less attractive. “The biggest problem I face is low unemployment — finding workers,” said Jerry Morales, who serves as the mayor of Midland and also owns two restaurants in the city. He’s resorted to twice-yearly wage increases and raising menu prices to keep up.
               Oddly enough, some of that West Texas crude may be finding its way to a nation that’s awash in oil. Venezuela, which boasts the world’s largest supply of proven reserves, has made  such a mess of its oil industry that it’s resorted to importing  200,000 barrels of American oil daily in order to distill its own crude oil stock, which is a heavier variety unsuitable for refining into gasoline.
               That presents a problem for Venezuela’s socialist regime, because gasoline is a commodity subsidized so heavily by the government that filling one’s tank costs pennies. This may have worked nearly two decades ago, when the nation produced 3.5 million barrels a day and could pocket the profits from its exports, but with production having collapsed to less than half of that high-water mark, importing $90-a-barrel distillates isn’t sustainable.
               For a nation that has so much, Venezuela provides precious little due to the damage done by its horrendously short-sighted socialist policies. While the U.S. could stand some improvement in its own energy policy, our system has allowed us to weather the inevitable market fluctuations while fully enjoying such luxuries as the summer driving season.
               Maybe that’s the next thing Venezuela needs to import.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55767

             April saw another 164,000 jobs created, which isn’t fantastic but it’s progress, and the headline unemployment rate dropped to just 3.9%, an 18-year low. The fuller measure of unemployment fell to 7.8%, a 17-year low. Black unemployment hit a new record low of 6.6% — doubly interesting in the midst of the Kanye West controversy. March’s jobs numbers were revised up from 103,000 to 135,000. Government payrolls declined by 4,000. People applying for unemployment benefits for the first time is now at the lowest level since 1973. Wages grew at an unimpressive 2.6% annualized rate, which bewilders experts, but according to the Employment Cost Index, first-quarter wages grew at the fastest pace in 11 years. That would be prior to the Democrat-caused financial collapse of 2008 for those keeping score.
               The lone dark cloud was that unemployment dropped in part because more people aren’t even looking for work. As Reuters reports, “236,000 people dropped out of the labor force. The labor force participation rate, or the proportion of working-age Americans who have a job or are looking for one, fell to 62.8 percent from 62.9 percent in March.” That said, job growth can’t help but slow when the labor market is at essentially full employment.
               Meanwhile, the Commerce Department recently announced its estimate for first-quarter GDP growth of 2.3%, which is better than expected. Of course, Americans who rely on nightly newscasts didn’t hear about that good news. Other news organizations spun it in a negative light for President Donald Trump.
               And that right there is the key. A lot of the Leftmedia churn undermines consumer confidence, and the economy is all about confidence. To the extent Democrats — with the help of their Leftmedia allies — can erode confidence in the administration, the more they undermine the economy. The trick is for Republicans to hammer home the message of tax cuts, deregulation and a growing economy.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55772

             Recall that Giuliani, a renowned prosecutor before he became mayor of New York City, recently joined Trump’s legal team with the stated objective of bringing Robert Mueller’s investigation to a swift end. Last month, after the story broke that the FBI had raided Cohen’s home and office, it was learned that Daniels’ allegations that she had been paid off were confirmed. Questions then arose as to whether the payoff broke any laws, specifically regarding campaign finance. With the long-running Mueller investigation seemingly having given up on finding any crime of a Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy and instead turning to other possible infractions, Trump (via Giuliani) decided to go on the offensive.
               But in order to aggressively do so, the one potentially significant and legally dangerous card the Mueller investigation has to play — a charge of violating campaign finance law — must be dealt with. That explains Giuliani’s public confirmation of the payment to Daniels, while at the same time denying that Trump had knowledge of the payment before a month ago. It also explains the comments about Cohen being paid a regular retainer to look out for any potential problems for Trump, without Trump having to be directly alerted to them. In other words, while it may seem a dubious assertion to claim that Trump had no knowledge of the payoff, it does give him the legal room for plausible deniability. Giuliani is seeking to get any legal entanglements for Trump out of the way before hitting hard on the Mueller investigation. Needless to say, it’s messy and it comes at the cost of a hit to Trump’s credibility.
               In the long run, that may be the bigger hurdle for Trump. If the events surrounding this affair eventually show clearly that Trump knowingly and deliberately lied to the American people, that may prove to be the most damaging aspect of this whole scandal. As is often the case, the cover-up becomes worse than the offense. So will Trump and Giuliani’s intentional chaos play work to confuse and keep everyone guessing until a deal is done? Time will tell. In the meantime, it’s bound to get even more, er, stormy.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55771

             Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus Mark Meadows (R-NC) explained, “There is really nothing to comment on there, but just give me the documents. … I have one goal in mind, and that is not somebody’s job or the termination of somebody’s job; it is getting the documents and making sure we can do proper oversight.” He added that there are “no current plans to introduce an impeachment resolution.”
               Rosenstein reacted in a surprisingly defiant and personalized manner, arguing, “There have been people making threats privately and publicly against me for quite some time. They should know by now the Department of Justice is not going to be extorted, and that any kind of threats that anybody makes are not going to affect the way we do our job.” However, Congress is fully within its constitutionally granted oversight powers to demand that the DOJ turn over requested documents, so long as doing so does not pose significant danger to national security. Meadows pointedly replied, “If he believes being asked to do his job is ‘extortion,’ then he should step aside and allow us to find a new deputy attorney general.”
               Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) seemed to have a different opinion, asserting that he was “satisfied” with the DOJ’s cooperation. “I appreciate Rosenstein’s willingness to work with the committees,” he said, “and I have confidence in his leadership.”
               The question here is why Rosenstein has chosen a course of subtle resistance. It’s clear that what he considers personal attacks have impacted his willingness to comply with congressional demands. It’s also quite apparent that Rosenstein doesn’t trust Congress. He insisted Tuesday that it would be dangerous to “just open our doors to allow Congress to come and rummage through the files.” The trouble is the DOJ has a serious image problem, most of it self-inflicted. It doesn’t help when the man responsible for giving the green light to the Mueller investigation — an investigation that has clearly strayed far from its original justification — appears unwilling to work with Congress to dispel legitimate concerns over politicization of the department. Americans’ trust is not a commodity easily regained once it has been squandered. Rosenstein’s defiance may prove only to push that trust lower.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55740

             As National Review explains, “In defending the proposed revisions to the liar-nObama-era standards, the EPA has cited falling fuel prices, which increase demand for larger cars and SUVs and make it more difficult for automakers to hit average fuel-economy targets.” Nevertheless, 18 states are retaliating against the EPA’s rollback by urging the courts to intercede.
               The Los Angeles Times reports: “Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday announced a lawsuit by California and 17 other states against the Trump administration to protect national vehicle emission standards from being rolled back by the federal government. The lawsuit filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, seeks to set aside and hold unlawful the Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to weaken the existing clean car rules.”
               In Brown’s declaration, he stated: “The states joining today’s lawsuit represent 140 million people who simply want cleaner and more efficient cars. This phalanx of states will defend the nation’s clean car standards to boost gas mileage and curb toxic air pollution.” It goes without saying that not every one of those 140 million people agree with the lawsuit — especially those who understand what the standards will do to their wallets. But California and its other Blue State allies will attempt to force their will on us anyway.
               On the one hand, California wants more autonomy. As National Review points out, “California, which represents roughly 12 percent of all U.S. auto sales, had received a series of federal waivers that allow it and twelve other states involved in the suit to implement emissions standards that are stricter than the EPA’s. The administration has moved to revoke those waivers.”
               But the state also wants to foist its agenda on everyone else. The Washington Free Beacon recalls, “Starting in 2010, the EPA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the California Resources Board worked together to craft a uniform nationwide economy standard for vehicles manufactured between 2012 and 2025.” The bottom line? National Review says, “Automakers and industry groups … are now concerned that the nascent legal battle could lead to a divided market as certain states require more stringent emissions standards than others.” And that’s what nobody wants — another legal circus.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55718

              Israeli intelligence collected a massive amount of intelligence — literally half a ton of materials — proving that Iran hid its nuclear weapons program for two decades. And the U.S. has verified it. “I am here to tell you one thing: Iran lied,” Netanyahu said. “After signing the nuclear deal in 2015, Iran intensified its efforts to hide its secret files.” He continued, “We’ve known for years that Iran had a secret nuclear weapons program called Project Amad. We can now prove that Project Amad was a comprehensive program to design, build and test nuclear weapons. We can also prove that Iran is secretly storing Project Amad material to use at a time of its choice to develop nuclear weapons.” Those weapons include a goal of five 10-kiloton nuclear warheads, all to go with its ballistic missile program that Obama allowed to continue.
               As part of the ruse, Iran ensured that some of its program was dual-use — nuclear energy, not weapons. But it continued covert work on nuclear weapons, particularly at its Fordow facility, and lied to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) about that work and Project Amad. So much for what it insisted were “peaceful purposes.”
                liar-nObama’s nuclear deal was built on lies, just as we said from the beginning. The worst part is that liar-nObama and his secretary of state, hanoi-John Kerry, weren’t duped — they were part of the con, all in search of a legacy for liar-nObama. And what a horrible legacy it was, too.
               Bloomberg’s Eli Lake observes, “Advocating for a pact in 2015, hanoi-John Kerry said American agencies had ‘absolute knowledge’ about the regime’s past nuclear efforts. Oops.” Except it wasn’t an “oops.” Team liar-nObama deliberately looked the other way and deceived the world. Now, Lake says, “Beyond the fate of the nuclear deal, the Israeli intelligence also presents a crisis for the [1970] Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a member. If verified, it shows that Iran has systematically lied to weapons inspectors for nearly 20 years. If Iran doesn’t pay a price for its deception, then what is to stop future rogues from following the Iran model?”
               Even if Trump now pulls out of the deal, however, Europe may stand by it. The Washington Examiner’s Tom Rogan argues, “Yet while Israel’s intelligence community, the Mossad in particular, deserves immense credit for successfully seizing and extricating this material from an Iranian stronghold, it is unlikely to persuade Europe’s big three (Britain, France and Germany) to join Trump in withdrawing from the deal. To persuade those leaders to do so, Netanyahu would have needed to show evidence of continuing, covert Iranian efforts either to construct a nuclear weapon or to secretly enrich uranium beyond the low-level cap the current agreement allows for medical research. That was not on display [Monday].”
               Time will soon tell what Trump does, but in discussing Netanyahu’s report in a Monday press conference, he made another important strategic point: Pulling out of the Iran deal would send “the right message” to North Korea.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55683-yes-obamas-iran-nuke-deal-really-was-the-sum-of-all-lies

             Among the young voters who have switched support to Republicans, the largest shift has been with whites. White Millennials, who voted 47% to 33% Democrat to Republican in 2016, now are divided equally at 39% in their party support. Perhaps the Left’s all-race-all-the-time message doesn’t resonate. But it’s not just among white voters that support for Democrats has been waning. Terry Hood, a mid-30s black man interviewed by Reuters, voted for liar-Clinton and is no fan of Trump, but he opined, “It sounds strange to me to say this about the Republicans, but they’re helping with even the small things. They’re taking less taxes out of my paycheck. I notice that.”
               That may truly be the catalyst for this sizable shift. As James Carville famously opined, “It’s the economy, stupid.” And the good economy, thanks in large part to Trump’s deregulation campaign and the Republican tax cuts, does seem to be the largest motivating factor. As Investor’s Business Daily put it, “A funny thing happened over the past two years. The millennial generation started growing up. They are getting married, buying homes and starting families in increasing numbers. And as a result, they’re starting to realize that the liberalism they espoused as youths comes at too high a price in adulthood.”
               Moreover, Trump’s commitment to America first and bringing jobs back to the U.S. seems to genuinely resonate with many of these voters — young adults who want to pay off college and build their careers. Hope for the future might be the best way to explain the trend, which we hope only continues and serves as an impassable roadblock to Democrats’ aspirations of regaining control of Congress.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55690

             However, such ignorance is unexpected coming from a conservative senator who was one of the last standing in a very crowded field of 2016 Republican presidential candidates.
               Regarding corporate savings from the GOP tax cuts, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) toldThe Economist, “There’s no evidence whatsoever that the money’s been massively poured back into the American worker.” He continued, “There is still a lot of thinking on the Right that if big corporations are happy, they’re going to take the money they’re saving and reinvest it in American workers.” Instead, he argues, a “few gave out bonuses,” while the remainder engaged in stock buybacks, increasing the share price for investors.
               During negotiations on the tax cut bill, Rubio pushed for a less generous corporate tax cut and an even greater child tax credit, winning a substantial increase. So he’s at least being consistent.
               In his interview, Rubio criticized supply-side “Reaganomics,” which reduced tax and regulatory burdens on businesses and unleashed a quarter-century of economic growth, benefitting the vast majority of Americans.
               Following the GOP tax cuts, hundreds of businesses announced bonuses and wage increases. Apple alone announced more than $300 million in bonuses to rank-and-file workers, and America’s largest employer, the much-maligned Walmart, raised its minimum wage to $11/hour, a whopping 52% higher than the federal minimum wage.
               Rubio contradicts himself by admitting that the tax cuts “make the U.S. economy a more attractive place to do business.” More business means more jobs, which creates a labor demand, which raises wages. More business means economic growth, which means higher tax revenue (because of, not in spite of, the lower rates).
               Even his railing against stock buybacks reveals a lack of understanding of how investments work. The tax cuts free up money for corporations to make capital investments, which increases productivity. Increased productivity brings higher wages for workers because workers produce more goods in less time.
               There is also the fact that, as the National Taxpayers Union’s Andrew Wilford explains, “Research continues to show that corporations only engage in stock buybacks when opportunities for productive capital investment are exhausted. There is no connection between increases in stock buybacks and decreases in economy-wide investment.”
               Additionally, stock buybacks increase the value of the remaining shares. More than half of all Americans own stock directly or through mutual funds, which means their retirement accounts gain value when corporations buy back stock. Is this not a good thing? The National Taxpayers Union Foundation estimates that shareholders (including tens of millions of American workers and retired seniors) will see a 4.32% to 4.95% increase in their portfolios as a direct result of the tax cuts.
               In other words, Wilford says, the stock buybacks are “not proof that corporate tax reform is failing to benefit the economy. They’re proof that it is succeeding.”
               Whereas workers can see an immediate benefit when they receive a bonus, the greater positive impact will come in the next 18 months to three years as the effects of the tax cuts take hold. Businesses make decisions over a much longer horizon, which is why it was so important to make the corporate tax rate cuts permanent. Businesses would not make major investments based on a tax cut that expired in a year, or two or even five.
               It’s hard to tell whether Rubio’s statements are rooted in economic ignorance or political calculus, but either way, they are unhelpful to the Republican Party — a gift that Democrats were quick to exploit.
               While President Donald Trump has been wildly successful in slashing regulations, securing the border, nominating conservative jurists to the bench and dealing with foreign adversaries, the Republican Congress, thanks to a handful of turncoat GOP senators (Rubio is not among them), has precious little to brag about besides tax cuts as we go into the midterm elections — elections in which the majority party typically loses seats.
               Republicans are banking on Americans seeing the positive impact of the tax cuts in the form of wage increases, bonuses and job creation. Having a well-respected Republican senator torpedo that message is a deeply hurtful, self-inflicted wound. Rubio should be praising the tax cuts, not criticizing them. He took a step toward fixing things and better explaining himself with a new op-ed at National Review, but some significant damage was already done.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55707

               What’s especially concerning about the government losing track of these 1,475 children is the status of their well being. It is known that illegal alien children are especially susceptible to becoming victims of human trafficking, often because they are reticent to go to the police due to their immigration status. In light of this problem, Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) has called on the Department of Homeland Security to come up with a way of improving monitoring the status of illegal alien children. Portman states, “These kids, regardless of their immigration status, deserve to be treated properly, not abused or trafficked. This is all about accountability.” That’s something in short supply in government at most any level.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55668-govt-lost-track-of-1475-illegal-alien-children

              While it is still rare for a failed vote of the entire Senate, it has in recent decades become standard procedure for Democrats to gratuitously attack, smear and obstruct qualified men and women chosen to serve America.
               Since the presidency of liar-Bill Clinton, 13 Cabinet nominations were withdrawn from consideration due to “political dustups.” In the almost 16 months of the Trump administration, there have been 24 nominations withdrawn from consideration. Why the discrepancy? The #Resistance. When Democrats are not in power, their only objective is to return to power. Period.
               There is no authentic effort for bipartisan accomplishments or dialogue. Despite the high-soaring rhetoric demanding civility and work for a common good, when Democrats are in the minority, they operate through tantrums, petulance, anger dripping with hatred and a high level of self-declared intellectual and moral superiority. Hence, when it comes to operating the federal agencies of government or the judiciary, the end goal for Democrats is to create dysfunction and failure.
               And, yes, there’s proof. Let’s look at three nominees — one in office, one just confirmed and one rejected.
               Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is being dogged by allegations of a list of expenses deemed extravagant. If spending was ever an issue, we wouldn’t have seen the IRS employees of the Barack liar-nObama years sitting in hot tubs sipping beverages from fluted glasses.
               The real issue is that Pruitt’s successfully tearing down the altar of worship to the most-high god of the radical dirt people. These ecofascists know that Pruitt will continue to enact the same philosophy toward environmental regulation that he sought as Oklahoma’s attorney general, where he sued the EPA more than a dozen times to restrain its malignant growth. Democrats aim to halt his work, which they view as sacrilegious.
               Then there’s Mike Pompeo, confirmed last week as secretary of state. In June of last year, the West Point grad received a Senate vote of support of 66-32 to become director of the CIA. It was a bipartisan vote — albeit still woefully inadequate for a man so abundantly qualified.
               Dial the clock forward not even a year and a few Democrats couldn’t seem to remember the qualifications and recommendations that drove their approval a few months earlier, despite world events needing America’s representation. Notwithstanding the urgent needs of the North and South Korean peace efforts, the Syrian conflict, a renegotiation of the Iran nuclear deal and the list goes on, the Senate only reluctantly confirmed Pompeo as secretary of state by a vote of 57-42.
               Just a reminder: liar-Hillary Clinton was confirmed as secretary of state by a vote of 94-2. And hanoi-John Kerry was confirmed by a 94–3 vote, despite his traitorous history. That’s because Republicans put national unity first when it comes to foreign policy. With Democrats, it’s always politics.
               But the cherry on top of this mud-pie smear approach of the Democrats came last week when Rear Admiral Ronny Jackson removed his name from consideration to serve as the director of Veterans Affairs. Jackson was accused of earning the nickname “Candy Man” due to his easy dispensing of narcotics, as well as engaging in drunken, reckless behavior while on the job.
               Leading the charge was Montana Democrat Jon Tester, whose hit job will most certainly be returned with campaign visits in the fall for his Republican opponent by President Donald Trump. The president has already called for the resignation of the attacking senator. While Trump was Trump in his bombastic criticisms of Tester and the Democrats, a beaten down doctor who had been promoted from within the medical corps of the White House in 2013 to White House physician charged to care for the First Family offered this: “The allegations against me are completely false and fabricated. If they had any merit, I would not have been selected, promoted and entrusted to serve in such a sensitive and important role as physician to three presidents over the past 12 years.”
               In the U.S. Senate, America has witnessed the constitutional role of offering advice and consent become weaponized by Democrats, who attack and disable any Republican administration through slanderous insults and false charges.
               When you have no policies except those that fail and no platform to win hearts and minds, and when you have become so hungry for power that you prioritize your own extreme agenda over the nation you serve, the only way to win is to destroy others. Today’s Democrats are destroying processes meant to work for a balanced and healthy government.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55681-to-dems-advice-and-consent-means-attack-and-contempt

               Trump responded to the news by slamming the leaks, while noting that the questions did not directly ask about any attempt at Russian collusion. Trump declared, “So disgraceful that the questions concerning the Russian Witch Hunt were ‘leaked’ to the media. No questions on Collusion. Oh, I see…you have a made up, phony crime, Collusion, that never existed, and an investigation begun with illegally leaked classified information. Nice!” He added, “It would seem very hard to obstruct justice for a crime that never happened! Witch Hunt!”
               This is now the second time the Mueller team has leaked significant information to the press. Back in October, the special investigation leaked that it had raised charges against several individuals. At the time, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, blasted the Mueller investigation for the leak, stating, “In the only conversation I’ve had with Robert Mueller, I stressed to him the importance of cutting out the leaks. It’s kind of ironic that the people charged with investigating the law and the violations of the law would violate the law.” And Gowdy has been one of the few Republicans defending the Mueller investigation.
               As for the questions themselves, they make even more clear that Mueller has given up the Russian collusion angle, instead honing in on a case of obstruction. The number of questions dealing with Trump’s past public statements surrounding his firing of former FBI Director James Comey, for example, indicate that Mueller is looking for inconsistencies to exploit. And Trump, who so often shoots from the hip when publicly commenting on his decisions, could easily become entangled in a legal trap. He would be wise to avoid giving Mueller the opportunity.
               That may explain the motivation behind Mueller’s leak. Is it a gambit designed to keep the negative news spotlight on Trump, thus building public pressure to force Trump into an interview? Could it also be an attempt to justify to the public the “need” to keep the investigation going by implying that the answers to these questions are the only way to determine whether a crime was committed? Whatever the motivation, Gowdy’s observation back in October bears repeating: “People charged with investigating the law and violations of the law” should not themselves be violating the law.   ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/55684-muellers-leaky-investigation-getting-desperate