Connect with us

Media

NYT: Let bygones be bygones, as long as it’s Clinton and Uranium One

Published

on

New York Times chief White House correspondent Peter Baker thinks it’s wrong for President Trump to ask the Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton’s Uranium One scandal. He thinks it’s okay to let bygones be bygones, as long as they are committed by Democrats.

Look at the quotes he included in his latest piece “Trump shatters longstanding norms by pressing for Clinton investigation.”

From Karen Dunn, one of the Obama White House lawyers and a Clinton adviser: “This is exactly what he said he would do: use taxpayer resources to pursue political rivals.” From former Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon: “It is another thing entirely to try to weaponize the Justice Department in order to actually carry it out.”

Trump Shatters Longstanding Norms by Pressing for Clinton Investigation | Peter Baker, New York Times

The request alone was enough to trigger a political backlash, as critics of Mr. Trump quickly decried what they called “banana republic” politics of retribution, akin to autocratic backwater nations where election losers are jailed by winners. The issue will almost certainly energize what was already shaping up to be a contentious hearing scheduled for Tuesday morning, when Mr. Sessions is scheduled to testify before the House Judiciary Committee.

He buried the lede of the substance of the Justice Department’s review many paragraphs down. In July, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to the Justice Department asking them to look further into Uranium One (Baker doesn’t mention the timing here, only Trump’s tweets about it). In late September, the Judiciary Committee again requested the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to investigate Uranium One, since that investigation appears “to be outside the scope of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.”

Finally, Baker closed the case all by himself.

Donors related to Uranium One and another company it acquired contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation, and Bill Clinton received $500,000 from a Russian bank for a speech. But there is no evidence that Mrs. Clinton participated in the government approval of the deal, and her aides have noted that other agencies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, signed off on it as well. The company’s actual share of American uranium production has been 2 percent; the real benefit for Russia was securing far greater supplies of uranium from Kazakhstan.

Nothing to see here. Move along, because “there is no evidence.” That doesn’t mean “no evidence has been found,” or “investigators have turned up no evidence.” Baker is asserting that no evidence exists, therefore, no investigation is necessary.

Thank you to the New York Times for closing the case.

With Democrats in office, it’s okay for the Justice Department to help craft deals to funnel settlement slush fund money to liberal causes and away from conservatives. It’s okay for then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch to meet with Bill Clinton in a hush-hush private-plane on the tarmac confab just days before then-FBI Director James Comey recommended no prosecution for Hillary. It’s okay for the Obama White House to exert political pressure to end the Clinton email investigation before the election. It’s okay for the FBI to continue investigating Donald Trump’s Russia connections, paying the same operative used by Fusion GPS to compile the “Trump dossier,” and use secret FISA wiretaps against targets.

It’s okay for those FISA warrants and investigations to become the foundation of Robert Mueller’s cases against George Pappadopoulos, Carter Page and Robert Manafort. It’s okay for Mueller to strong-arm those indicted individuals (convicted, in Pappadopoulos’ case) in order to move further into President Trump’s inner circle. It’s okay to use Wikileaks-obtained documents to force release of White House communications, against the advice of White House counsel Don McGahn, to further the Russia investigation.

And it’s okay with the New York Times to continue the Trump-Russia collusion investigation despite the fact that no evidence of collusion has turned up yet (at least not leaked to the public yet, and we know if it existed, it would be leaked).

But when it comes to things that Hillary did and got away with (so far), it’s called “weaponizing” the Justice Department to revisit those things when the House Judiciary Committee has requested it.

It’s so nice to let bygones be bygones, when you’re an unabashed liberal pretending to be impartial.

Further reading

Goodlatte & Judiciary Republicans Renew Call for Second Special Counsel to Address Issues Outside the Scope of Mueller’s Investigation | U.S. House of Representatives

https://goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=978Recently, we wrote to you to request responses to those and other unanswered questions pertaining to the Clinton investigation. However, as the most recent Comey revelations make clear, ignoring this problem will not make it go away. Director, did you make the decision not to recommend criminal charges relating to classified information before or after Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI on July the 2nd?

Jeff Sessions considers investigating Hillary Clinton, others involved in Uranium One deal

http://noqreport.com/2017/11/13/jeff-sessions-considers-investigating-hillary-clinton-others-involved-uranium-one-deal/Update: President Trump Tweeted a teaser last night. Some are betting on it being and announcement about the investigation. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/930320191699017730 https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/930330913094885376 https://twitter.com/libbybakalar/status/930329180599861249 Original Story Reports out of DC indicate Attorney General Jeff Sessions is weighing the options for investigating the Obama-era Uranium One deal that gave a Russian-owned company partial control over our nuclear energy…

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Media

Sean Hannity responds incoherently to Roy Moore’s open letter

Published

on

Sean Hannity responds to Roy Moores open letter

Fox News host Sean Hannity called on Roy Moore to respond to the sexual misconduct allegations that have dominated the news for a week. Moore sent an open letter, which Hannity read on the air Wednesday night. He then responded and essentially said nothing.

It’s not that he didn’t speak words. He spoke many. It’s that Hannity sounded borderline incoherent. The transcript of his response reads like a President Trump off-the-cuff statement.

“The people of Alabama, they need to know the truth, and they’ve got to have all the facts that they need,” he said. “And that means that the Alabama voters can make an educated, informed, inclusive decision for their state when they go to the polls.”

If you just read through it casually or hear it passively, it might sound somewhat normal. Read it more carefully and it’s really not saying much at all. What is an “inclusive” decision?

It got worse:

“And if that means whatever it means to get to the truth, if it means more time, I believe the governor according to Greg Jarrett has the ability to make that decision. The Alabama people deserve that. Greg Jarrett said the governor can delay the race if need be. Now, the people of Alabama deserve to have a fair choice, especially in light of the new allegations tonight.”

Look, I’m not trying to pick on Hannity. This is a tough situation considering he’s backed Moore. But he failed to respond to the substance of Moore’s letter. He made the demand for an open letter, then didn’t discuss it. Instead, he gave a passionate plea for… fairness? Delaying the election? Inclusive decision-making?

Hannity drew a huge audience who wanted to hear him respond to Moore’s letter. Instead, he applied doublespeak to say as little as possible. It was as if this was his exit plan to distance himself from Moore in case more heat comes down, which will likely happen whether the allegations are true or not.

Continue Reading

Media

Ben Shapiro on Roy Moore: “Of course he needs to go”

Published

on

Ben Shapiro on Roy Moore Of course he needs to go

Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro hit Fox News’ “Outnumbered” this morning and spoke out against Alabama’s controversial Senate candidate Roy Moore. He said the allegations seem credible, but more importantly he believes Moore hasn’t done enough to refute the claims.

“Of course he needs to go. He has not provided any explanation as to why the allegations are false.”

Source: Fox News

‘Of Course He Needs to Go’: Ben Shapiro Slams Roy Moore Over ‘Highly Credible’ Sex Allegations | Fox News Insider

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/11/15/ben-shapiro-slams-roy-moore-highly-credible-sex-allegationsBen Shapiro said anyone still considering supporting Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore must ask themselves whether they believe someone with child molestation allegations against him should be sitting in the U.S. Senate.

Two women have accused the GOP nominee for Jeff Sessions’ Senate seat of sexually assaulting them when they were underage and he was a district attorney in his thirties back in the 1970s. Moore has denied the allegations, but the stories kept coming last week, including one that he had been banned from a mall for trying to pick up teenage girls.

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Gun confiscation bingo

Published

on

By

Gun confiscation bingo

Hey boys and girls, it’s time to play the hottest new game for fun and fabulous prizes.* The lie from the Left has always been “We’re not talking about taking guns away from people”, while they talk about taking guns away from people.  So the trick now its to find one of them who HASN’T demanded gun confiscation by the process of elimination.

The rules are simple – List out the major media outlets of the socialist–Left around the nation in these categories:

  • National political figures of the socialist-left.
  • Major print outlets of the socialist-left.
  • Major media outlets of the socialist-left.
  • National media figures of the socialist left.

Then each player must search and find an instance of a gun confiscation demand by these media outlets or person of note. The two at the top of this piece from ABC news and the Boston Globe are freebies, and the odds are 5 minutes after this is published there will be many more.

Points will be awarded for the type of demand as well as completing a card in a particular category, so there are two ways to win – by points and by category. The one who completes all categories will win the grand prize!*

How Points are Awarded:

  • Five points for each instance of an outright demand for gun confiscation.
  • Four points for each instance of the demand for an offer gun owners can’t refuse‘Australian’ style gun confiscation.
  • Three points for each instance of a demand for the outright banning of guns.
  • Two points for each instance of a demand for the repeal of the 2nd amendment.
    Note: Only one point will be awarded for each instance of a demand for the banning or confiscation of ‘Assault Weapons’ since this happens so often it’s not even sporting to dig them up and there is no real definition of that term.

Bonus points will be awarded for cases of a Leftist media outlet detailing it’s plans to confiscate guns via Intergalactic Background Checks and registration. [Yes, they are out there – extra points for digging them up!]

In some cases we must restrict the total number of points available for certain national print outlets of the socialist-left [e.g. The New York times] given that those outlets come up with new ways of demanding gun confiscation almost on a weekly basis. Please note that with the progression of time, it will be that much easier to win the game – particularly after another “Serious Crisis” brought on be the Left’s insistence on indoctrination in the precepts of cultural Marxism.

So everyone grab your gun.. confiscation bingo cards and start playing, it’s fun for the whole family!
[*no prizes will be awarded – sorry].

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.