Someone Needs To Be The Grownup And End The Charade

On Friday, The Daily Caller posted an article about President Biden’s interview with George Stephanopoulos. If the purpose of the interview was to illustrate President Biden’s fitness for office, I don’t think it achieved that goal.

The article reports:

In an interview meant to dissuade Democratic panic, President Joe Biden appeared to be in complete denial that his campaign is in a tailspin.

Biden sat down with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos for a pre-recorded interview which aired Friday to reassure voters that he is mentally and physically capable of being president. While insisting that his debate performance was just a “bad night,” the president went on to deny that he is trailing in polls and that his approval rating is historically poor for an incumbent seeking reelection.

“Do you really believe that you’re not behind right now?” Stephanopoulos asked the president.

“All the pollsters I talk to tell me its a toss up, its a toss up. And when I’m behind, there’s only one poll that I’m really far behind, CBS poll and NBC – I mean, excuse me, and uh…” Biden started.

“New York Times and NBC have you about six points behind in the popular vote,” Stephanopoulos interjected.

Notice that when Biden started to wander off verbally, Stephanopoulos interjected.

The article concludes:

Biden denied any reports or evidence that he may have declined over the last few years.

“Do you dispute that there have been more lapses, especially in the last several months?” the ABC host asked.

“I’m still in good shape,” Biden said.

“Are you more frail?” Stephanopoulous followed up.

“No” Biden retorted.

And to calls for him to take a cognitive test, something former President Donald Trump and the GOP have spurred on, the president deflected.

“I take a cognitive test everyday,” Biden said.

Obviously, President Biden is not running the country, and the people who are running the country like the current arrangement. I believe President Biden will be out of the 2024 presidential race by the end of the week, but I am not sure if he will be replaced as President. The people behind the curtain have a good thing going and may not be sure it will continue under Kamala Harris.

Reading Between The Lines

On Sunday, The Hill quoted a statement by New York Governor Kathy Hochul.

The article reports:

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) addressed New York business owners in a new interview and told them there was “nothing to worry about” after former President Trump was hit with a $355 million fine and a ban on conducting business in New York for three years.

Hochul joined John Catsimatidis on “The Cats Roundtable” on WABC 770 AM, where she was asked if other New York businesspeople should be worried that if “they can do that to the former president, they can do that to anybody.”

“I think that this is really an extraordinary, unusual circumstance that the law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are business people have nothing to worry about, because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior,” Hochul responded.

They are very different than Donald Trump because they are not Republicans who do not support globalism who are running for President and may win. If you honestly believe that President Trump’s real estate practices were significantly different than other New York City real estate businesses, I admire you naivete. If you honestly believe that President Trump would have been tried even if he were not the probable Republican nominee for President, you haven’t been paying attention. Before President Trump became a Republican and ran for President, he received awards from civil rights groups and New York City organizations thanking him for the role he played in rebuilding the city after the city almost went bankrupt. Obviously those currently in power have chosen to forget that. This is political. It has nothing to do with the law.

The radio host who commented that if “they can do that to the former president, they can do that to anybody” got it right.

 

A Word From Someone Who Has Been There

On Thursday, The New York Post posted an article quoting one of the freed Hamas hostages on what she saw while she was held hostage.

The article reports:

A 21-year-old Israeli-French tattoo artist who was abducted by Hamas has recalled the horrors that she faced in Gaza in her first interview, saying she “went through a holocaust” during her 54 days in captivity.

Mia Schem was asked in a preview clip of an interview with Channel 13 why she decided to open up about her experience at the hands of the terrorists.

“It was important to me to relay the truth about the nature of the people who live in Gaza, who they are truly are and what I experienced there,” the young woman tells journalist Lior Veroslavski in the clip released Thursday.

Veroslavski replies, “It was important to you that the world understands what?”

“That I went through a holocaust,” the former hostage says, matter-of-factly. “Everyone over there is a terrorist.”

The article notes her realization that she was held prisoner by a family:

“Suddenly I realized that I’m with a family,” she says. “Suddenly I’m asking myself questions: Why am I in some family’s home? Why are there kids here? Why is there a wife?”

Do families in peaceful countries host hostages?

 

The Double Standard At Work

There is a meme going around Facebook that misquotes Joe Biden as saying, “The things I did while in elected office should not be made public while I am seeking a higher public office.” The meme is close, but not exact. In the interest of truth, I am posting a portion of the interview that the quote is based on.

On May 1, 2020, Breitbart reported:

Co-host Mika Brzezinski asked Biden why he did not grant open access to papers from his Senate career that he had given to the University of Delaware. The following exchange ensued:

Brzezinski: The first [question], about the University of Delaware records. Do you agree with the reporting that those records were supposed to be revealed to the public and then they were resealed for a longer time until, quote, after you leave public life. And if you agree with that, if that’s what happened, why did that happen?

Biden: The fact is, that there’s are a lot of things — speeches I’ve made, positions I’ve taken, interviews that I did overseas with people, all of those things relating to my job. And the idea that they would all be made public, and the fact while I was running for public office, they could really be taken out of context. The papers are position papers — they are documents that existed, for example, when I met with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, or when I met with whomever. And all of that to be fodder in a campaign at this time — I don’t know of anybody who’s done anything like that. …

Brzezinski: I’m asking why not do the same [as the National Archives] in the University of Delaware records, which have raised questions because they were supposed to be revealed to the public, and then they were sealed for a longer period of time. Why not do it for both sets of records?

Biden: Because the material in the University of Delaware has no personnel files, but it does have a lot of confidential personal conversations that I had with the president about a particular issue, that I had with the heads of states of other places. That that would not be something that be revealed while I was in public office, or while I was seeking public office. It just stands to reason — to the best of my knowledge, no one else has done that either.

Oddly enough, at the same time Joe Biden was refusing to release his records, he was demanding that President Trump release his tax returns. Disclosure for you, but not for me!

Transparency Is Coming

In his daily memo at The Washington Examiner, Byron York reported that the transcripts of the 53 secret interviews the House Intelligence Committee conducted during its Trump-Russia investigation are ready to be released. Having Rick Grenell as Acting Director of National Intelligence has already had an impact–he has made it clear that the transcripts need to be released and that he will release them if Adam Schiff does not.

The article reports:

…Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell has sent a letter to chairman Adam Schiff notifying him that transcripts of all 53 interviews, over 6,000 pages in all, have been cleared for public release. “All of the transcripts, with our required redactions, can be released to the public without any concerns of disclosing classified material,” Grenell wrote to Schiff in a letter dated May 4.

The Intel Committee did the first probe into Russia’s 2016 campaign interference and allegations of Trump-Russia collusion. Even today, its findings make up most of what we know about the affair. As part of that investigation — it was run by then-majority Republicans — the committee interviewed some key witnesses in the Trump-Russia matter: Donald Trump Jr., Steve Bannon, Andrew McCabe, Sally Yates, Michael Cohen, Hope Hicks, and many more.

The article lists the names of the 53 people interviewed.

The article continues:

The interviews were conducted in secret. But by September 2018, with the committee’s report long finished and made public, the Republicans who still controlled the committee decided the interview transcripts should be released to the public. In a rare moment of comity, Democrats agreed, and on September 26, 2018, the committee voted unanimously to release the transcripts. But there was a catch: The documents would have to first be checked for classified information by the Intelligence Community. So off they went to the IC — never to be seen again.

Now, in May 2020, they’re still secret. Two weeks ago, the Wall Street Journal editorial board reported that the IC had finished its review of 43 of the transcripts, but Schiff was refusing to release them. The paper said Schiff was also preventing declassification of the remaining ten transcripts.

In the letter, Grenell revealed that the 43 transcripts have been finished since June 2019. Schiff has been sitting on them all that time. Grenell said the final ten have just been finished as well. “I urge you to honor your previous public statements, and your committee’s unanimous vote on this matter, to release all 53 cleared transcripts to Members of Congress and the American public as soon as possible,” Grenell said. Just in case Schiff is still not interested, Grenell added, “I am also willing to release the transcripts directly from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, as to ensure we comply with the unanimous and bipartisan vote to release the transcripts.”

I think we are about to learn a whole bunch of things that are going to make some of our Congressmen look very bad.

This Is Simply Sad

CNS News reported today on another serious gaffe by Joe Biden. It is really sad to see former Vice-President Biden publicly lose a step or two while running for President.

The article reports:

Former Vice President Joe Biden accidentally called “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace “Chuck” at the end of his interview, thinking he was talking to NBC’s “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd.

The article includes the transcript of the interview. This is a portion of that transscript:

Wallace: Mr. Vice President. Thank you. Thanks for your time. Please come back in less than 13 years, sir.

Biden: Alright, Chuck. Thank you very much

Wallace: Alright, It’s Chris, but anyway.

Biden: Chris, I just did Chris. No, no, I just did Chuck. I tell you what, man. These are back-to-back. Anyway, I don’t know how you do it early in the morning too. Thank you Chris.

All of us make mistakes when we are tired, but I feel as if the mistakes being made by the former Vice-President are an indication of a deeper medical problem. It is time for the former Vice-President’s family to take a good look at the continuing mental slip-ups and encourage him to end his campaign.

Am I Supposed To Be Surprised By This?

A while back, General Flynn got a new lawyer. It was probably the smartest thing he has ever done. Sidney Powell is an amazing lady. She has no fear of going after corruption, wherever it lies. Her efforts are definitely revealing things that were terribly wrong about the way the government handled General Flynn’s case.

The Gateway Pundit posted an article today about the latest development in the case against General Flynn. Please follow the link to read the entire article. It includes some very revealing screenshots.

The article reports:

Sidney Powell filed a motion a couple weeks ago revealing that General Flynn was indeed set up by the FBI with an ambush, damaging leaks and altered 302 reports.

Powell revealed that former FBI lawyer Lisa Page EDITED General Mike Flynn’s 302 report, then lied to the DOJ about the edits.

A 302 summary report consists of contemporaneous notes taken by an FBI agent when interviewing a subject.

The DOJ on Friday argued in a surreply that Sidney Powell’s motion should be denied because there were “no material changes made after 2/10/2017 to the draft of the January 24 interview report.”

However, there is evidence to the contrary.

The article shares some information from a website called Techno Fog which undermines the DOJ’s claim.

The article continues:

The DOJ argued that “Even if an earlier draft of the [302] once existed, there is no reason to believe it would materially differ” from the agents’ notes.” — SERIOUSLY??

So where are the original FBI notes taken on January 24, 2017? The government is now saying if they exist, they wouldn’t be any different than the reports drafted 2 weeks after the ambush interview!

The Justice Department’s decision is that Peter Strzok’s notes were taken contemporaneously during his interview with General Mike Flynn on January 24, 2017.

The article contrasts two pictures of notes supposedly taken during the interview. Peter Strzok’s notes are a little to neat to have been taken during the interview. Special Agent Joe Pientka, who was with Peter Strzok, took notes that look much more as if they were taken at the time of the interview.

Why are we not surprised that the DOJ seems to have lost the original notes of Peter Strzok’s interview of General Flynn?

When You Never Look In The Mirror

ABC News posted an article today about a shocking statement made by President Trump during an interview with ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos.

This is the controversial quote:

Asked by ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos in the Oval Office on Wednesday whether his campaign would accept such information from foreigners — such as China or Russia — or hand it over the FBI, Trump said, “I think maybe you do both.”

“I think you might want to listen, there isn’t anything wrong with listening,” Trump continued. “If somebody called from a country, Norway, [and said] ‘we have information on your opponent’ — oh, I think I’d want to hear it.”

The mainstream media is shocked–simply shocked. Somehow they have overlooked the fact that the Clinton campaign actually paid for the Steele dossier.

The article continues:

President Trump lamented the attention on his son, Donald Trump Jr., for his role in the now-infamous Trump Tower meeting in June 2016. Stephanopoulos asked whether Trump Jr. should have taken the Russians’ offer for “dirt” on then-candidate Hillary Clinton to the FBI.

“Somebody comes up and says, ‘hey, I have information on your opponent,’ do you call the FBI?” Trump responded.

“I’ll tell you what, I’ve seen a lot of things over my life. I don’t think in my whole life I’ve ever called the FBI. In my whole life. You don’t call the FBI. You throw somebody out of your office, you do whatever you do,” Trump continued. “Oh, give me a break – life doesn’t work that way.”

“The FBI director said that is what should happen,” Stephanopoulos replied, referring to comments FBI Director Christopher Wray made during congressional testimony last month, when he told lawmakers “the FBI would want to know about” any foreign election meddling.

Should Hillary Clinton have called the FBI after she paid Steele for the dossier? Oh yeah, I forgot, she did call the FBI in order to make sure the information in the dossier was leaked to the press. There was never an investigation into the fact that the Clinton campaign paid for the dossier or that it was information from a foreign source. Had President Trump called the FBI with a foreign source claiming to have damaging information on Hillary Clinton, I wonder what their response would have been.

I am hoping American voters will begin to think about the implications of this question and how it reflects the bias of the press.

The Game Being Played

Yesterday I posted an article about the release of Bruce Ohr’s testimony by House Judiciary Committee Georgia Representative Doug Collins. There were some obvious differences between Bruce Ohr’s testimony and other testimonies. At some point that will have to be sorted out, but there is another interesting aspect to the story.

The Conservative Treehouse posted an article today about the release of the transcript.

The article notes:

NBC News penned an article about the unorthodox release of DOJ official Bruce Ohr’s transcript.  Within the article NBC notes current DOJ officials responded to the congressional request for release by sending them an approved “redacted version”:

…Having read the Ohr transcript (also provided below), there didn’t appear to be any national security interests, sources or methods, beyond investigative embarrassment for DOJ and FBI, simply because of the sham of it all.

What parts did the current DOJ redact, and what would have been their justification? What did the current DOJ attempt to hide? …Maybe Representative Doug Collins could provide the redacted version, so we can find out.  Curiouser, and curiouser…

Can we all agree that redactions supposedly in the name of national security have become redactions in the name of keeping the misconduct of the government under President Obama out of the public eye?

Some People Who Don’t Want To Talk To Congress

The Daily Caller is reporting today that sources have told The Daily Caller News Foundation that Nellie Ohr, the wife of Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, is refusing to appear before Congress for a closed-door hearing that was scheduled to take place this Friday. Former FBI general counsel James Baker has also refused to cooperate with requests for an interview.

The article reports:

Ohr was slated to appear before the committees to discuss her work for Fusion GPS. Ohr, an expert on Russian affairs, worked for Fusion GPS from December 2015 until just after the election.

Bruce Ohr, the former assistant deputy attorney general, was in contact with dossier author Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson before and after the election.

The Ohrs both met Steele, a former British spy, in Washington, D.C. on July 30, 2016, a day before the FBI formally opened its counterintelligence investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.

Congressional sources have told TheDCNF that Bruce Ohr briefed then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe about his interaction with Steele within days of the meeting.

Ohr’s contacts with Steele increased after the FBI cut ties with the dossier author just before the election because of unauthorized contacts with the press. Ohr provided at least a dozen briefings to the FBI about his interactions with Steele from November 2016 to May 2017.

The article concludes:

Baker, a close ally of former FBI Director James Comey’s, resigned from the FBI on May 4. Congress has wanted to quiz him about his knowledge of the Trump-Russia probe as well as the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

Neither Ohr nor Baker responded to emails seeking comment.

Just by watching the squirming about declassification and the people who do not want to talk to Congress, I can’t help but believe that the scandal around spygate extends even further than we have been led to believe.

One Way To Deal With A Dishonest Media

Al Jazeera TV is not known as an unbiased news outlet. They usually get away with unanswered propaganda because they control the editing of any interviews that they do. However, Gates of Vienna posted an article today illustrating how to deal with the editing of an interview.

Tommy Robinson is the head of Pegida UK, an organization formed in response to the Islamization of Britain and Europe. He was interviewed by Al Jazeera. Obviously, there were going to be some areas of disagreement. In order to protect himself from the editing that he knew would happen, Mr. Robinson recorded his side of the interview on his cell phone. He has released that video. It is posted below:

The article at Gates of Vienna reports:

First the interviewer tried to trick him by reading from the Old Testament, with a deliberate attempt at misdirection to make him think the source was the Koran. Notice the sly way the fellow, without actually telling a lie, made it seem as if he were describing the text of the Koran. It didn’t work — Tommy sussed him out immediately.

Next Tommy discussed Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha when she was just six years old, and the prophet’s deflowering of her when she was nine. That was too much for Al Jiz — they cut that segment out completely. But the clip below shows the missing section, as recorded by Tommy’s cell phone.

In order to make it difficult for Al Jazeera and other dishonest media outlets to manipulate their audience with selectively edited footage, please publicize this clip as much as you can. If it goes viral, their efforts will have been in vain.

We can’t stop the media from biased reporting, but we can keep our own records of interviews in order to expose biased reporting. I honestly don’t know anything about Mr. Robinson, but I applaud his quest for honest news coverage.