Tag Archives: Face the Nation

I Hope There Are Consequence For This

Posted on by

The dust-up over the video made by six legislators telling the military to disobey illegal orders does not seem to be going away. I hope it doesn’t until there are some consequences for the video. I don’t think too many people would argue with the concept that it is right to disobey illegal orders–but that is not exactly what the video is about.

On Monday, Townhall reported:

Last week, Senator Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and other Democrats shared a video directed at members of the military and intelligence communities. In that video, they said our armed forces have an obligation to disobey “illegal orders” given by President Trump and his administration.

…Now, Slotkin went on ABC and admitted the President has not issued any illegal orders.

“To my knowledge, I am not aware of things that are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related to Venezuela,” Slotkin said.

Is enforcing the Monroe Doctrine illegal? Asking for a friend.

The article notes:

The legacy media isn’t dumb. They know exactly what Slotkin and her colleagues meant by “illegal orders” — orders Democrats don’t like. And those Democrats were fine with men and women of our military facing serious consequences under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which can include the death penalty for treasonous behavior.

No one believes the Democrats would “have their backs” because Congress cannot change the outcome of a court-martial. A President could, in theory, pardon or commute a sentence handed down by the military, but that’s a heck of a gamble. What if a Democrat doesn’t win in 2028 or 2032? Is Slotkin expecting a member of the military to spend the next decade in prison so Democrats can brag they resisted Trump?

Vice President J.D. Vance reminded Slotkin and friends that what they did was, in fact, illegal.

J.D. Vance tweeted:

If the president hasn’t issued illegal orders, them members of Congress telling the military to defy the president is by definition illegal.

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse noted:

CIA Analyst and Senator, Elissa Slotkin, appears on ABC’s Face the Nation to defend herself from accusations of unlawful conduct following a video she produced telling military and intelligence officers to defy President Trump’s orders.

Senator Slotkin’s behavior is classic tradecraft when she appears in media.

Slotkin claimed the video was intended to draw attention to the unlawful orders that President Trump has used; however, when asked to give an example of a illegal order issued by President Trump, Slotkin nervously admits there aren’t any.

Stay tuned.

When Being Interviewed, Always Make Your Own Copy Of The Interview

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about a recent CBS interview with Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. Thankfully, Speaker Johnson (unbeknownst to CBS) had his staff also recording the interview while it was taking place.

The article reports:

One of the most blatant examples of media manipulation was recently discovered when CBS 60-Minutes deceptively edited a response from Kamala Harris, replacing her ‘word salad’ answer with a completely different answer to an entirely different question. [SEE HERE]

This past Sunday, House Speaker Mike Johnson appeared on CBS Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan and the editing and manufacturing was done again before broadcast.  Unbeknownst to CBS, Speaker Johnson’s staff were recording the interview from his side of the camera.  Johnson released a series of video segments today (via Twitter) showing how CBS intentionally took out the important elements of his responses.

Please follow the link to The Conservative Treehouse to watch the videos of what was actually said and what was shown to the viewers. If you are still relying on the mainstream media for your news, you are not only misinformed, you are also uninformed.

Connecting The Dots

Posted on by

There is a theory that has been floating around for a while that the reason many deep-state politicians are so concerned about President Trump possibly having classified documents is that those documents relate to bad behavior on the part of the deep state in the Russian Hoax and impeachment trials. Every day that theory becomes more plausible.

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article with some very interesting comments by Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) Chairman Mark Warner.

Here are some of the comments taken from an interview on Face the Nation:

“I’ve got bipartisan legislation that would reform the whole classification process. We way overclassify. We, frankly, should have a process in place so that no president or vice president ever takes documents after they leave office.”

MARGARET BRENNAN: I have to pick up where your Republican colleague just left off. Are the Trump and Biden classified documents that were in their personal possession, and not in controlled areas, equally egregious?

MARK WARNER: Well, Margaret, three things quickly. One, the administration took way too long to get us these documents. Two, while Mike and I have a great working relationship, I believe, based on the documents I’ve seen, that there is a difference in terms of the potential abuse that came from the Trump documents. And, third, it’s one of the reasons why I’ve got bipartisan legislation that would reform the whole classification process. We way overclassify. We, frankly, should have a process in place so that no president or vice president ever takes documents after they leave office. That is kind of the lowest common fruit.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

The one thing the Senator said that I agree with is that the government does overclassify. Many times things are classified to protect questionable government actions–it has nothing to do with national security.

Something to keep in mind is that a lot of information is going to come out if President Trump stands trial in Georgia. Most of that information will be information on voter fraud that the courts have so far avoided hearing, but it is very possible that other information regarding the deep state may be revealed.

The statements by Senator Mark Warner indicate to me that if someone like President Trump is elected in the future and decides to go after the deep state, the Senator wants to make sure they do not have access to the relevant material. I believe the bill the Senator is proposing is unconstitutional.

When The Focus Group Goes Awry

Posted on by

On Sunday, Townhall posted an article about a bipartisan focus group on CBS that didn’t quite go the way the producers of the show expected it would.

The article reports:

A balanced focus group on CBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday morning surely didn’t go quite as producers expected when the Democrat and the independent voter both found themselves agreeing with the Republican on key issues, including “woke culture” in schools.

The discussion, moderated by anchor Margaret Brennan, started off pretty tame and predictable, with participants describing the effects of a sputtering economy, inflation, and high gas prices on their own lives. But when the topic turned to raising children in America, even Brennan seemed surprised by the level of agreement.

What are your biggest concerns about raising children in America right now?” Brennan asked John, the self-identified Republican on the panel.
“The whole woke culture affecting our children,” John responded. “All these elementary schools and middle schools having woke culture pushed on them from the LGBT plus community for sexual identity and gender. We should be pushing the actual school studies, math, social studies, science. Not, you know, gender studies or sexual identification.”

Seemingly hoping for a counterpoint, Brennan next turned to Lashawn, the Democrat, and asked her to “weigh in on this.”

“I can also agree with some of his points,” Lawhawn said. “I say sex education, I feel like some things are brought to the children’s attention, they wouldn’t even think about.”
And you have eight kids,” said Brennan. “I imagine you have some pretty specific ideas in your mind when you’re speaking about this?”
The article concludes:

After a brief discussion about crime and border security concerns, Brennan made a point to note how this focus group has been different from others the network has done.

“Often when we do these focus groups we have people from different party affiliations disagreeing with each other, but I’m hearing all of you echo a lot of the same concerns and agreeing with each other,” she said. “None of you are very optimistic about the country right now.”

“No,” Stephanie replied dryly.

Sure, it’s just one focus group. But it also aligns with current polling. With midterm elections quickly approaching, when ordinary people of all political persuasions start agreeing on key conservative issues, it can only mean bad news for Democrats.

Education seems to be one issue where the party affiliation of parents does not matter. All of us want a good education for our children and grandchildren. All of us want our children and grandchildren to grow up to be happy and successful adults. I believe that the next two years will see even more parents fighting back against some of the garbage being taught in our public schools.

 

Is Leaking A Problem?

Posted on by

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article yesterday about a very interesting television interview of Jim Jordan by Margaret Brennan.

The article reports:

Representative Jim Jordan appears on CBS Face The Nation to discuss the ongoing impeachment fiasco. Ms. Brennan struggles to define a new journalistic concept for “first-hand” information as she claims David Holmes, who claims to have overheard half of a phone conversation that two other people were having, is a “first-hand” witness.

Jordan points out that Ms. Brennan is quoting from a seal(ed) transcript given to her by Adam Schiff that has not been released.

Whoops!

The video and the transcript are posted in the article. You can follow the link above to see them both.

It’s also interesting to see exactly how the interview ended:

REP. JORDAN: Well, I don’t think that’s what took place here, because there was never an investigation undertaken. There was never an announcement from President Zelensky–

MARGARET BRENNAN: But the request for one that was overheard and testified to.

REP. JORDAN: But it didn’t happen. There’s- there’s all kinds of talk about things, but they- it didn’t happen. And well, remember when this all broke? What the Democrats tell us?

MARGARET BRENNAN: And the attempt itself doesn’t bother you?

REP. JORDAN: What the Democrats tell us? There was a quid pro quo. The scary thing is the Democrats have been out to get this president. I was struck by listening to Speaker Pelosi’s comments, her answer to your second question. She used the word impostor. I’m talking about the president of the United States, who 63 million people voted for, who won an Electoral College–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Right.

REP. JORDAN: –landslide. And yet these Democrats have been trying to get him- the start of this Congress, Congresswoman Tlaib said–

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yeah.

REP. JORDAN: –she wants to impeach him before any evidence. Five members, think about this–

MARGARET BRENNAN: I understand.

REP. JORDAN: –five members of the Dem- of the Democrat- five Democrat members on the Intelligence Committee have voted to move forward with impeachment even before the whistleblower complaint was filed.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I’ve got to go to a commercial break. Thank you very much, Congressman.

REP. JORDAN: Thank you

I suspect that Ms. Brennan was very glad to see that interview end. Life is hard when you have to deal with smart people who tend to be at least one step ahead of you.

The Best Question Asked On The Sunday Morning Shows

Posted on by

The following video was posted at YouTube yesterday:

Most of the interview is a classic example of media bias and rehearsed talking points, but the question as to why the Democrats did not focus on the places the Russians knew to focus on is wonderful! Just for the record, there is no evidence that the Democrats were behind the hacking of the DNC. Remember that the DNC would not let the FBI examine their computers.

The Conservative Treehouse has a few relevant comments on this intervieiw:

Interesting interview. The Russians didn’t keep Hillary out of Wisconsin; the Russians didn’t make Hillary use personal email; the Russians didn’t hire Fusion-GPS; the Russians didn’t pay Christopher Steele; the Russians didn’t make a dossier or deliver work product to the State Dept; the Russians didn’t do the unmasking of campaign officials.

The Russians didn’t apply for a FISA warrant; the Russians didn’t lie to a FISA court; the Russians didn’t leak Mike Flynn monitored phone calls; the Russians didn’t use DOJ and/or FBI databases to download FISA 702(16)(17) queries and extract the data to private contractors; the Russians didn’t hire Nellie Ohr and Russians didn’t approach president-elect Trump and warn him of politically weaponized intelligence surveillance…

The… wait…. then again, THAT’S ENTIRELY THE MOTIVE to blame the Russians:

If the Russians were actually successful in influencing the 2016 election, it was because Americans were not paying close attention to what was going on. The Russians will always try to influence our elections. We will always try to influence elections in other countries. We live in the world of Spy v. Spy illustrated by Mad Magazine in the 1950’s. It is our responsibility as Americans to do our own research into what we see on social media. The best defense against foreign meddling in our elections is an informed electorate!

 

A Concise, Honest Statement About The Fiscal Cliff

Posted on by

Yesterday Real Clear Politics posted a video and transcript of a statement made by Senator Tom Coburn on Face the Nation.

This is the statement:

SEN. TOM COBURN (R-OKLAHOMA): The characterization is no matter where we raise taxes, what’s going to happen wit the money? We’re going to grow the government with it. We’re not going to reduce the deficit, because we refused to solve the bigger problems like saving Medicare, insuring Social Security Disability (SSI). We’re not going to use that money to do anything except continue to grow the government.

So, the characterization is that we’re wanting to protect — what we’re wanting to do is to make sure we have a dynamic economy. And I have no problems, I’ve been out there for a long time with saying those who are making more ought to contribute more, but where does that money go? And what do you do with the money? Do you do something with the money that will actually get us further down the road and fix our ultimate long-term problem, which is we’re bankrupt? And we went off the cliff two years ago when we covered 90% of our debt-to-GDP? And by the way, if you actually look at it the way every other country [does], our debt-to-GDP right now is 120%. Not 90%, not 100%, it’s 120%.

So, if you look at that, what’s ultimately going to happen — one last fact, the average Greek citizen‘s debt, for their country, is $36,000; we’re at $51,000 per person in this country. We’re becoming Greece, and we have a government where we’re willing to pay the taxes for 65% of the cost of it. We need to change that. We need both, we need to do both.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Taken To The Woodshed For Telling TheTruth

Posted on by

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today about some recent comments by Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley. On “Face The Nation” yesterday, Governor O’Malley told Bob Schieffer that he couldn’t say that we were better off now than we were four years ago, but “but that’s not the question for this election.” Really? (or ‘seriously?’ as my three-year-old granddaughter likes to say)

Here is the video:

The logical question at that point was, “Then what is the point of this election?”

Today Governor O’Malley has changed his mind.

According to the article:

A day after saying, no, the country was not better off than it was four years ago, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley reversed course on Monday and said, yes, indeed it was.

“We are clearly better of as a country because we’re now creating jobs rathare than losing them,” O’Malley, a Democrat, said on CNN’s Starting Point. “But we have not recovered all that we lost in the Bush recession. That’s why we need to continue to move forward.”

He then motioned to a panel that included Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, among others. “Is there anyone on this panel that thinks we’ve recovered all we lost in the Bush recession? Clearly we’re moving forward, we’re creating jobs, unemployment is down, job creation is up. And that job creation would not happen without the president’s leadership.”

I get it–it’s George Bush’s fault. These people are getting so desperate they are becoming comical. We need to make sure no one votes for them out of sympathy.

This is the chart posted at Hot Air:

The Republicans are echoing Ronald Reagan:

I am sorry (but not surprised) to see the failure of the Obama Administration in so many areas. President Obama has done nothing that had a positive impact on our economy, and he has treated many of our friends around the world badly. I celebrate the fact that America elected a black President, but I fear that because President Obama has done such an inadequate job in the office that it will be difficult in the future for a black man to convince Americans that he is qualified to be President.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

This Is Not Even Remotely Surprising

Posted on by

One of the agendas of the Obama Administration is to find a way to invalidate the Second Amendment. Fast and Furious did not work (even before it was discovered that they were the ones selling the guns) and various court cases have not been successful. But, they haven’t yet given up.

Breitbart.com reported today that Vice-President Biden stated on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that the shooting of Trayvon Martin should spark a national debate over gun control. Really?

The story at Breitbart points out that we don’t yet have all of the facts on this case. The author reminds us that if Zimmerman shot in self-defense, the gun laws saved his life. If Zimmerman did not shoot in self defense, he violated already existing gun laws–we don’t need more!

The article reminds us:

Beyond that, Biden’s bizarre notion that concealing and carrying guns doesn’t provide additional security is plainly nonsensical. Misuse of guns is always an issue – but as a general rule, of course carrying a gun makes you more safe than not carrying one. John Lott has pointed out clearly in More Guns, Less Crime:  “Concealed handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much better position to defend themselves.” This is called common sense, and the data backs it up.

The call for stricter gun laws is generally made by those who do not understand that the right to bear arms is part of what makes the United States Constitution work. Tampering with that right would be a huge mistake.

Enhanced by Zemanta