August 5th – 2020 Presidential Politics – Trump Administration Day #1294

In an effort to keep the Daily Open Thread a little more open topic we are going to start a new daily thread for “Presidential Politics”. Please use this thread to post anything relating to the Donald Trump Administration and Presidency.

trump-president-3

This thread will refresh daily and appear above the Open Discussion Thread.

President Trump Twitter @POTUS / Vice President Pence Twitter @VP

Kayleigh McEnany Twitter @PressSec

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1,061 Responses to August 5th – 2020 Presidential Politics – Trump Administration Day #1294

  1. sunnyflower5 says:

    Horrible.
    Patriots know what a magical 6 ft looks like. They also know to wash their hands and all sorts of ways to manage cleanliness.

    Liked by 1 person

    • sunnyflower5 says:

      I hope this mask stuff isn’t part of negotiations —the Dims would like nothing more than for this to set precedent for ever more. Stop the madness.

      Liked by 1 person

    • petszmom says:

      Then I am not a patriot. I have never worn a mask and don’t plan to do it even though Comrade Greg Abbott has mandated them. I will respect the opinions when the administration steps up and admits the terrible, catastrophic outcome of shutting our country down needlessly is their responsibility. I also keep waiting for justification and apologies for allowing two quacks to control our country and the reasoning on them not being fired.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Henry says:

        Da, tovarisch….apparatchiks wear masks.

        I don’t.

        Liked by 1 person

        • petszmom says:

          Lucky I have a medical exemption but tell that to the businesses around here that DO NOT care and ban you from entering.

          Like

          • Debra says:

            Ask them to put their objection to you in writing, signed by a manager . . .

            Like

          • Little Berkeley Conservative says:

            California guidance says:

            If you have difficulty breathing you don’t need a mask!!!!!

            Nothing about medical doctor.

            Two other exemptions:

            Medical and
            Job precludes mask wearing because mask wearing might cause you injury, due to another hazard at your job.

            Here, in Little Berkeley, they just added additional language to the Health Order, that permits businesses to not allow people inside, without a mask, even though they meet an exemption.

            I’m talking to everyone I meet and suggest they use the exemptions available and challenge local businesses.

            If the business won’t let you in, after understanding the exemptions, then take your support a business that does.

            It’s really simple.

            Trump2020 Sticker Starfish is a local way we deal with people. The ones who think it’s fun to destroy a Trump 2020 stickered vehicle!

            It’s been going on since 2016, but seriously….

            How do you as a Democrat, get mad, because another Dem destroyed your car because they mistook you for a Trump supporter?

            Alinski is a person who the Dems worship.

            Some people around here are guilty of a little cultural appropriation.

            I have no problem sleeping at night, well except when that twig snaps outside, and then I rack the slide, check the perimeter and go back to bed.

            Like

      • thedoc00 says:

        Granted Abbot is acting like a Uni-Party buffoon because of his EO, especially the >20 rue to e exempted from the EO, but he did not “mandate” masks, he clearly said masks if 6 feet separation not possible.

        The mask requirements are due to businesses denying service if one is not worn and GOP lead government now at all levels being too cowardly to end the sham-demic response, period.

        Liked by 1 person

        • petszmom says:

          Yes, he did. I carry the order around to show the businesses and folks that never bothered to read it. The gist is on page 2. And because they are too lazy or fearful they just do a blanket ban UNLESS they read it like my gym, HEB, and several others. I agree the GOP has failed miserably. Abbott isn’t acting like a buffoon, HE IS a buffoon. RINO.

          Liked by 1 person

          • In NC, mandate also says only have to wear mask if cannot keep 6 ft distance; I carry it around also. I do social distance as I have no reason to want to get near anyone so insane as to wear a mask to the grocery store.

            Liked by 1 person

            • petszmom says:

              Same here. I carry a mask in my purse but I have yet to use it. I stated at the gym I have an exemption and I was welcomed in. The gym I was at did not read the orders and couldn’t care less about exemptions. Guess what? My money will go elsewhere. If they go under, that’s their fault. Our grocery store has a company policy, we don’t harass anyone but folks are masking. These are the warriors we have to choose from? lol

              Like

      • auscitizenmom says:

        I have started wearing a wide brimmed straw hat and avoiding the mask, which I carry in my purse. It evidently confuses people. They stare with a puzzled look on their faces. LOL

        Liked by 1 person

    • stella says:

      There is a difference between encouraging something and ruling that you MUST do it! President Trump has always said that it is a matter of choice and it is fine to encourage it. According to our President you still have the option.

      Liked by 9 people

      • alligatriot says:

        Now you’ve done it, stella! Resorted to “common sense”. I’m pretty sure that tactic has been outlawed by the Geneva Convention as totally unfair.

        Thank goodness Our President possesses more than his fair share of the stuff!

        Liked by 4 people

    • gda53 says:

      Yes, lets punish him by voting for Biden instead. /s

      Instead of acting like we’ve been asked to do something beyond the pale, why can’t people wise up to what PDJT is doing.

      He’s trying to sooth FEARS. Some people here are just refusing to see the obvious.

      And he continually emphasizes ONLY when social distancing is impossible.

      Some people seem more concerned about having their own opinions validated than getting PDJT reelected.

      It’s not all about YOU, mask-haters. (And BTW, I’m a mask-hater too, but I at least don’t let my personal feelings overcome my common sense).

      Liked by 4 people

      • cjzak says:

        I agree. Based on what goes on around my neck of the woods. there are plenty of people who think masks are necessary and are afraid not to wear them. PT is trying to walk a fine line here and show Americans he considers the feelings and fears of every one of them. I don’t have aproblem with him doing this especially before the election. At the right time, he will tell us no more masks needed.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Mariposa323 says:

          I think you hit the nail on the head . I don’t believe in the masks , but as my husband is currently a probable COVID positive , I can’t in good conscience not wear one if I’m in a public indoor area . I will not wear one to walk the dog or inside the house as that is quite illogical . Do what makes sense . I think that is all the President is asking if us . Keeping the distance is more important than the mask , and he’s been very consistent about that .

          Liked by 1 person

          • betseyross says:

            Gathering info from a few sources I am appalled at how many people are ‘afraid’. There have been few cases in my town, but the silver haired crowd wears them all over the place. I get that, but way too many young people wear them, too. I think Trump is just tapping into that fear. It just isn’t worth all the fussing. Wear ’em if you got ’em mentality
            If it keeps the economy open I just think he decided it isn’t worth the fight right now. Personally, I felt that he caved, but I think I understand. I only wear my Trump 2020 mask to the grocery store. It always gets a comment. Other than that, most of my dealings have been outside this summer. Outdoor landscaping etc etc. Dr.’s offices and the dentist are a royal pain, but my mask does stimulate conversation.

            Like

    • I’m not a patriot. I wrote the White House and told POTUS I believe not wearing a mask is patriotic. I was offended by that email from the campaign…they can stuff it.

      Liked by 2 people

      • petszmom says:

        Absolutely! Patriots fight back, not sit around. Just an FYI, our local group of ‘PATRIOTS’ has already folded. Keep (my town) Open formed a group back (though FB) in June to fight back. The only problem is they thought…we need, we should, we must, we could type TALKING was going to do it. Wrong! They all docilely wear their masks, get tested because they think they should, and write endless, pointless letters to government that doesn’t care and isn’t listening. Where has that gotten them? no where. It would be funny if I didn’t have to look at all the local businesses going out of business almost daily.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Same thing here…people are caving to the mask wearers because it is easier to go along to get along than to stand up for your beliefs. It is so disappointing. I am the only one I know who is not wearing a mask. I have two grocery stores left that I can get into and the leftist are on their case. No one has confronted me in either of these stores but most of the time I am the only one without a mask.

          Today, I brought ear plugs in with me because they keep playing this message on their audio system telling people about the mask mandate. I figured if anyone said anything to me, I would tell them that Dr. Fauci said the virus could enter through ears.

          Here is an article a friend sent me and this person in Virginia is going to talk to a lawyer to find out if it is actionable to deny service to someone for not wearing a mask. I wrote him and explained I am in similar situation and would like to know if he finds out anything. It seems to me corporations used to deny service to people based on skin color and that was found to be wrong; at some point denying service to people for not defacing their bodies may also be found to be wrong.

          https://www.theburningplatform.com/2020/08/03/going-after-friends/

          Like

          • petszmom says:

            Same here. I am the only one in stores without a mask. Saturday I saw two ladies at TJMaxx without a mask and I stopped to chat them up. They felt people go along to avoid confrontations. How weak, right?

            I don’t know where you live but here in my part of Texas it is absolutely true you cannot deny entrance to a business based on medical, mental, health exemptions. I called the city attorney and she said you state it at the door that you have an exemption as per the ADA and it is in the state orders. If they cannot make an accomodation they have discriminated against you based on our civil rights (religion, sex, race, disability). She said to proceed to an attorney’s office and you can sue and you will win. A pandemic does not cancel our contitutional rights. I have not worn a mask and I do have an exemption but the herd follows along like docile sheep. Most businesses around here are choosing to stay open instead of harassing folks.

            Like

      • stella says:

        What is patriotic about not realizing the validity of the choices of others, even if it doesn’t agree with what you believe?

        Like

      • bessie2003 says:

        This is why I’m expecting a big shake up in whoever’s running the President’s re-election campaign,

        not only over-spamming with the donate now or we’re all gonna lose text messages and Facebook ads (I will see 20 of them to one regular other kind of ad), but the ads are increasingly negative; complete opposite of “the best is yet to come” message the President himself is promoting.

        It’s almost like the GOPe has taken over his social media messaging.

        Like

    • sunnyflower5 says:

      I missed Dr. fauci apologizing for misleading the country when he told the nation masks weren’t effective. Or, do we pretend that never happened?

      Liked by 4 people

      • booger71 says:

        Falsi only said masks where ineffective earlier because they were trying to get every mask into the hands of hospitals, doctors, and nurses because of the shortage. Notice when masks became available on the retail level again, then everyone said we must wear them or everyone dies. It is a game

        Liked by 2 people

    • wolvybat says:

      Sunnyflower ( pretty name)
      Could it be that P. Trump is asking us to wear masks as to not give the demons any reason “excuse” to block us from voting when the time comes if we don’t have masks on?
      Maybe he says to start wearing them now because he knows this will take some getting used to for lots of us.

      Liked by 5 people

    • momofpoms says:

      This was very disappointing. Very……

      Liked by 1 person

    • JCM800 says:

      NEGATIVE TO MASKS

      Liked by 1 person

  2. gsonFIT says:

    She will be prosecuted, but Lindsey wasted valuable time calling her to testify

    Liked by 2 people

  3. beach lover says:

    so here’s the summation so far.. Yates is blaming the FBI for the FISA information, but had no idea employee Ohr was working with Steele.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Patience says:

    What a hostile beach!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. gsonFIT says:

    I have always questioned Horowitz entire “bias” report. It was a carefully placed tool for the coups denial.

    Liked by 1 person

    • gsonFIT says:

      Here is something that just dawned on me. If someone asks the coup plotters if their attacks were “politicized” is not an accurate way to look at it. The FBI was “militarized” to attempt a cyber/digital coup and now a coverup. Political bias is not relevant to their actions. This was a military operation

      Liked by 1 person

    • tpwbama says:

      Well I just love his reasoning for the no “bias”…..According to Horrorwitz…because no one admitted to it nor wrote it down …..I guess the text messages between the lovers was not evidence enough to convince Horror that their bias would spill over to their handling of the investigations. Or Strzok saying we will “stop it”. Can’t wait for the Barr excuses.

      Like

    • Paprika says:

      Yup! Imagine, if you will, the same standard being applied to Congress or even anyone in President Trump’s campaign or in his Executive branch or anyone at all–unless you state as a fact to me that you are politically biased when I ask the question if you are politically biased you are not politically biased unless you say you are, so all’s well and there is no political bias in the entire world!

      Let’s move on as we’re all safe and sound with no bias and the world is at peace and totally unbiased when it comes to politics or beliefs as we never take that into consideration when making a decision. /s

      Liked by 1 person

  6. gsonFIT says:

    Someone should ask her exactly what her job is in approving a FISA

    Like

  7. Patience says:

    Kennedy rocks!!!!
    >Yates is a very disrespectful………….., nasty, self-righteous, liar.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. fred5678 says:

    Miss Lindsey’s job is to apologize to the witness for harsh questions from the very few GOP Senators asking substantive questions.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. Zorro says:

    Folks, the Uniparty has been corrupt for a very long time and are experts at coverup. Nothing is going to stop the organization they have in place.

    Read the following thread. A lot of familiar names. By the end of it you will wondering even if Joe D. Is a good guy or someone who is soothing you that some justice will take place.

    Like

  10. winky says:

    Sally Yates should have been testifying in person. Total bullshit. I could barely understand what she was saying and her remote testifying did not sit well with me. Absolute crap.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. beach lover says:

    FinallY! Ted Cruz getting to it!

    Like

  12. Mikgen says:

    A question that one would have liked to be asked. If, as Yates claim, that the FISA applications were “only” directed to investigate Carter Page, why was Candidate Trump not warned by the FBI/DOJ.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. Patience says:

    Ted Cruz has gotten Yates to physically squirm. literally
    > HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

    Like

  14. sync says:

    Do not talk to the police…

    Mayor de Blasio announced NYC will set up checkpoints for the bridge-and-tunnel crowd to comply with the state’s mandatory 14-day coronavirus quarantine rule for those arriving from COVID-19 hotspots.

    https://www.nydailynews.com/coronavirus/ny-coronavirus-de-blasio-quarantine-checkpoints-20200805-oyjatyegm5aadhzxiddrzh7m6e-story.html

    Like

    • Henry says:

      Is that with or without the 22,000 he’s going to lay off?

      Liked by 2 people

    • Robert Smith says:

      What if you’re going through the tunnel to get to the other side?

      Like

    • thedoc00 says:

      With correct data mining software, they know who went out of state by air and can match cars that went out of state to owners. The question is if non-legislated “rules” put in place unilaterally by a mayor and governor give legal probable cause for police to stop a person and if this rules have the same legal standing as law. The State Supreme Courts in democrat run states will likely side with the governor and mayor most of the time, but federal courts is where the lottery begins, depending on the judge(s) assigned.

      Like

    • Paprika says:

      Why in the SamSnot would anyone in their right mind now(or in the past 4 months) travel anywhere near NYC unless they absolutely had to? For anyone that has to travel there, my condolences and heartfelt prayers for safe passage!

      Like

  15. islandpalmtrees says:

    The moron has only has to ask one question to all of them and he still screws it up!

    Lindsey Graham, repeat after me – Did you check to see if Carter Page worked for both the CIA and FBI before signing the first FISA warrant on Carter Page?

    The answer from the start in October of 2016 was no, but Carter worked for them both (CIA and FBI). No personnel database at the FBI or CIA.. All bogus!

    Liked by 2 people

  16. jeans2nd says:

    Those watching the Yates dog-and-pony show – you all could run over to Stella’s and talk there for a while if you like, so as to not be interrupted..
    Stella usually always puts these hearings up.
    Just a suggestion.
    https://stellasplace1.com/2020/08/05/live-sally-yates-testifies-before-senate-judiciary-committee/

    Liked by 1 person

  17. ohnoyoudonot says:

    Flynn update –

    DC Court of Appeals requests the parties be prepared to address at oral argument:

    1) Whether Judge Sullivan should disqualify himself for perceived impartiality; and

    2) If Sullivan should disqualify himself as a party to the proceeding.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Mikgen says:

      Oh, oh….

      Like

    • cheering4america says:

      Sounds sort of good, but circular: How can one disqualify oneself as a party to the proceeding when he is actually … NOT A PARTY?

      Liked by 3 people

      • islandpalmtrees says:

        Can this get any more embarrassing for the court?

        John Roberts, are you there?

        Like

      • gda53 says:

        They have those in the wrong order, and wrongly worded.

        1) Should he BE disqualified since he is NOT a party
        2) Impartiality thing is irrelevant since we know the answer to 1) is obviously YES.

        Free Gen. Flynn forthwith.

        Liked by 1 person

        • hokkoda says:

          Yep, but I think if they’re unsure about whether Judge Sullivan is impartial, they need only look at the fact that he has inserted himself as a party in this case. The motion from Sullivan should be thrown out because he is not a party, and he should be removed from the case because his motion proves he is not impartial. Kind of a 1-2 punch.

          Liked by 1 person

      • hokkoda says:

        I actually think that’s the argument to make. “We’re not sure how to answer the question, your honor, because how can Judge Sullivan be disqualified as a party to a case that he is by-definition not a party to? We should not be here AT ALL because the Judge is not a party to this case, and we cannot find any precedent in the country or any rule in the DC Circuit Law which makes a District judge an interested party in a dispute between two parties. There’s no law here, and Judge Sullivan’s actions call attention to the fact that the 3-judge panel made LEGAL ERROR by not immediately removing Judge Sullivan from this case when they correctly granted the writ of mandamus.”

        Liked by 3 people

      • annieoakley says:

        Why is it that ONLY President Trump cannot issue a pardon (or whatever he issued is called). I don’t want to argue about words. Why is President Trump the only President ever who is not allowed to do what all of them have done for 244 years?

        Like

    • fred5678 says:

      SB disqualified for perceived PARTIALITY. not impartiality.

      Impartial is what a judge SHOULD be!!!

      Sheesh!! I’m just an engineer, not a lawyer, and these so-called legal eagles wrote this crap???

      Liked by 2 people

    • hokkoda says:

      Very interesting. The original motion for the writ of mandamus identified removing Sullivan as a course of action for the appeals court. However, this request was denied even as the writ of mandamus was approved. The en banc review seems to be reviewing the full motion, not just the part that was granted but also the part that was denied.

      Clearly, they got the message delivered by both the DOJ and Powell that Sullivan has wildly overstepped his authority and is now a biased, active, litigant in a case in which he is supposed to be impartial. I don’t see how they remove Sullivan without simultaneously ordering the new judge to dismiss the case.

      In fact, that’s probably how I’d argue it in orals. i.e. That Sullivan has made himself a biased participant in the case. Removing Sullivan and assigning a new judge to dismiss the case will affect neither of the two parties…because the only role the new judge would have is to dismiss the case with prejudice as motioned by the DOJ and ordered by the Appeals Court. I might even go further and ask the court when they remove Sullivan and issue the new order that the new judge be given instructions so unmistakable and clear that Flynn is punished no further by this (now 3-month) delay.

      Like

      • Wethal says:

        I look forward to listening to the audio of this argument to hear what Sullivan’s attorney has to say on this issue. The tone of her voice, the pauses or hesitations should be interesting.

        That “treason” screed of Sullivan’s may come back to haunt him, even though he came back out to the courtroom later and sort of retracted it.

        Liked by 1 person

        • hokkoda says:

          I don’t doubt that Powell will go for the throat next week. She has been very measured in her criticism of Sullivan because she still has business in his courtroom. What Sullivan is doing now – dragging out a simple procedure (dismissal) and saying he’s eventually going to get around to it – combined with his past statements, shows that he should be removed.

          Like

    • Wethal says:

      Sort of a roundabout way of addressing standing? The DOJ addressed it head on – onyly the DOJ can represent the United States in appellate proceedings, and Sullivan was presenting himself as a representative of the United States.

      By the way, standing is a great way for an appellate court to ditch a case in which it really would rather not address the substantive issues.

      Liked by 1 person

      • hokkoda says:

        The whole Sullivan thing is such a ridiculous perversion of the law that I almost wonder if they’re doing this as a warning to others.

        Liked by 1 person

        • berniekopell says:

          I tried posting on this when the news broke but the internet gods were not with me today. The En Banc panel is boxing Suspicious Sullivan in. If he is not a party then he has no standing to file the petition. If he is a party, then by rule he must be disqualified. Pick your poison please.

          Liked by 2 people

          • hokkoda says:

            I think you’re right. To be honest, I was pretty stunned to see this called out explicitly in the order. The 3-judge panel denied the motion to have Sullivan replaced. This en banc instruction sounds like they’re saying “oh no you don’t, we’re going to rule on the entire motion”. Partisanship aside, the Appeals Court is likely *not amused* by a lowly District judge both ignoring the order of the 3-judge panel and filing an appeal in a case in which the judge has no standing.

            The cynic in me is saying, “They could have denied Sullivan’s request and been done with it…so what’s the deal here?”

            Like

            • Wethal says:

              They not only want to discourage behavior like Sullivan’s, but they may also want to discourage defense attorneys from taking mandamus petitions to the circuit courts, so may also say Sidney’s petition was premature while directing the reassignment of the case. The circuit court probably has the inherent supervisory authority to direct the reassignment of a case without the need to formally grant the mandamus.

              A new judge would not even have to have a hearing – just grant the motion to withdraw the plea and motion to dismiss (which I assume will be a dismissal with prejudice) on the basis of the pleadings. Two entries in the dockets, and it’s over.

              Liked by 1 person

        • Beau Geste says:

          Perhaps this is a way for the crooked DC circuit to keep the Flynn persecution going.
          Reassign to another crooked DC trial judge, to review the entire case.

          Sullivan needs to be a witness. He threatened General Flynn with ‘treason’ based on no facts, in order to induce the guilty plea. Sullivan had a required judicial duty to confirm “materiality” of the 18 USC 1001 charge (which is not ‘perjury’ standard) which requires a finding of ‘materiality’ of any misstatement. It is not General Flynn who “lied” to sullivan. It is crooked biased deep-state sullivan who committed fraud on his own court. Sullivan admitted on the record that he did not confirm “materiality”, which General Flynn could not confirm. Only the DOG/FBI could confirm “materiality”, but sullivan admitted he filed his judicial duty to do so. There was no “materiality”, because the charge was fraudulent. Asking the DOJ/FBI for evidence of “materiality” would fail, and require production of the records which show fraud and entrapment.

          Like

          • hokkoda says:

            Maybe. But the acceleration of all these schedules (the original mandamus briefs and arguments happened within a couple of weeks and now the en banc in a month) suggests they want this done. It feels like they’re dragging this out, but the speed with which the DC Circuit has moved on this suggests they want this case tossed immediately. They might give Sullivan a face-saving out by saying he doesn’t have standing, so the original order must be implemented (i.e. they don’t yank him from the case). Otherwise, he basically gets fired by the DC Circuit and the new judge has a 5 min hearing to dismiss the case as ordered. I don’t see any way they bring in a new judge to review the case. DOJ moved to dismiss, as is their right under the Constitution. DC Circuit Law requires dismissal.

            If I was a lawyer in that courtroom, I’d be answering the en banc questioning with words to the effect of, “Your honor, there is no procedure in the DC Circuit for what we are discussing today. There is no DC Circuit Law which defines the legal adventure Judge Sullivan is pursuing. We literally have no idea how to even approach this situation because there is no precedent, there is no court procedure defined by DC Circuit, there is no governing Law for a Judge to hold his own private trial for perjury, and the only governing Law requires Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. What procedure, exactly, are we following now? Because we cannot find it anywhere in 229 years of US history.

            Like

            • Beau Geste says:

              Hokkoda, if the crooked, political, biased DC Circuit wanted it over, all they had to do was refuse en banc review. Such review was unnecessary, except to stop the previous appappate opinion.
              They are up to no good.
              However, they are afraid of possible Durham, Bash, or other evidence that makes sullivan and contreras look even worse for their 2-tiered, biased ‘justice’ .
              So they are stalling it out, while refusing to let go.

              Like

              • hokkoda says:

                Might be another comment, but the cynic in me thinks the same thing. They could simply have denied Sullivan had standing and ignored it.

                I’m not convinced on the stalling by the appellate court. Sullivan clearly stalled as long as he thought he could get away with (3 weeks to file his en banc)…but in both the original writ hearings and now the en banc the court has moved very swiftly (days and weeks as opposed to the usual months and years).

                I’m probably wrong to be optimistic about this, but I get the sense that the full court is going to smack this down. They didn’t have to ask for oral arguments about removing Sullivan.

                Like

    • auscitizenmom says:

      “perceived impartiality”? Am I reading it wrong or should it be perceived partiality?

      Like

    • Wethal says:

      There’s another take on it, courtesy of shipwrekcedcrew at Redstate. If Sullivan is a party, he cannot be the presiding judge. If he is the presiding judge, he cannot be a party.
      The en banc court may use this issue to get rid of the case.

      SWC theorizes that the court imay be hesitant to affirm the mandamus petition as it could open the floodgates to all sorts of mid-case mandamus petitions. Mandamus is supposed to be very rare. So it could dismiss the mandamus petition as untimely, yet order the case reassigned to another judge because Sullivan is clearly not impartial.

      The assignment would likely be up to Obama judge Beryl Howell, the chief judge, but at this point, she’d probably just give it to anyone who would get rid of the case because the circuit court will likely make it clear that if the DOJ wants to dismiss the case, that is within the executive branch’s authority.

      Like

  18. Rikster says:

    I tuned in and the first thing I heard was Lindsey say “It’s my opinion that Rod Rosenstein knowingly did nothing wrong.” /click off

    Liked by 2 people

  19. Scarlet says:

    Hooooo Boy. She is really on the run. What a liar!

    Like

  20. Patience says:

    GO, Cruz !!!!!

    Like

  21. Mikgen says:

    Due diligence…..ha, ha, ha!

    Like

  22. MVW says:

    In a nutshell:
    Time to end $BigPharma, $BigTech, $BigBanks, & $BigGlobalCorp’s evil, they have been selling us out to the Chinese Communist Party for the promise of $BigChina Market access.

    Step into my parlor said the Marxist spider to the greedy fly.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. Patience says:

    Oh man ! Cruz has been laying out the facts; getting ’em in the record.

    Like

    • beach lover says:

      He had her backed into a tight place, then she squirmed out of it. Hopefully someone on our side will recognize that major point and pick up on it.

      Like

    • gda53 says:

      Cruz has been nailing it the last couple days. Look forward to seeing his questioning.

      Just can’t bring myself to watch live.

      Like

  24. Donna In Oregon says:

    Statute of limitations.

    For the vast majority of federal crimes, the charge has to be brought within five years of when the crime was committed. The grand jury indictment is the official charging document, so what that means is that the indictment has to be returned by the grand jury within the five-year period.

    So how long ago was the unmasking of General Flynn?

    Like

  25. gsonFIT says:

    Obama did not Sanction the Russians. He expelled 35 spies and took 2 properties. He also added an addendum to a prior EO identifying some hackers (probably Ukraine hackers BTW) Actually the state department did the expulsions

    Like

  26. Henry says:

    Coincidence? or is Israel unleashing hell?

    Liked by 1 person

  27. Mikgen says:

    Russia, Russia, Russia. Again, could someone, please, bring up Bill Binney!

    Like

  28. Buddy Smot says:

    Here is a question for Sally Yates:

    Ms. Yates, you said that General Flynn lied about the sanctions. Where in the phone transcript do you see that?

    The reason I ask is because I do not see sanctions discussed. They discussed the Russian expulsions, but not the sanctions.

    General Flynn: “hey are going to dismiss some number of Russians out of the country”

    Liked by 1 person

    • tpwbama says:

      Yates is twisting Flynns request to Russia….. to hold off on any escalation of their response to what Obama did. Yates infers that Flynn was indirectly telling Russia that Trump would remove sanctions. What a STREEEEEECH

      Like

  29. stella says:

    A REMINDER RE PROBLEMS WITH POSTING:

    1. DO NOT make the same or similar comment multiple times because the first one doesn’t appear as quickly as you think it should. I try to delete multiples when I see them.

    2. DO NOT change your name or your email address unless it is absolutely necessary. Doesn’t help you to get your comments approved (in fact, it hinders it.)

    3. DO NOT post about not being able to post or not being able to “like”. I can’t speak for every admin, but I am deleting those without comment.
    4. Think before you post whether that comment is really necessary. Just commenting “like” or “I agree” is just clogging up the works for no particular purpose. These may also be deleted without comment.

    When you do these things you make our moderating job so much more difficult. Thanks in advance for your cooperation.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. WeThePeople2016 says:

    Like

  31. oldguy05 says:

    Today Sally Yates is providing testimony to the Senate Judicial Committee.
    Yates just tried to use the reasoning of the FISA Court…that they expect the information in the FISA warrants to be factual, complete, vetted and true. SHE does not have that liberty! SHE was the last of those that are REQUIRED to insure the statements and evidence used to acquire a warrant are all the things I mentioned that the FISA Court expects. SHE is complicit and lying and since the beginning of this entire charade I have felt she is as guilty as Comey!

    Like

  32. rixsix says:

    I just took an anecdotal poll. I went to amazon and looked up Trump 2020 Flags and Biden 2020 Flags.

    Many of Trump 2020 Flags had positives reviews in the many hundreds and some over a thousand with most being 4 star or better.

    Biden 2020 Flags, only one of the flags had over 100 reviews, most were less than 30 reviews.
    There was one flag that had over a thousand reviews and it said “Any Functioning Adult -2020-” so it wasn’t quite a Biden Flag.

    Like

  33. sunnyflower5 says:

    Like

  34. Perot Conservative says:

    In Contra Costa County, NorCal, of their 131 Covid deaths, 2/3 were in long term care facilities.

    https://news24-680.com/2020/08/04/covid-19-test-results-delayed-total-deaths-in-county-at-131/

    Like

  35. cheering4america says:

    So Yates is there as a fact witness on her own behavior, and they now have her sanctimoniously pontificating on the activities of AG Barr, whose tenure did not overlap hers at all, in an effort to minimize his credibility? That sounds like someone is desperately afraid of the coming justice and hopes to avert it by impugning the current Justice Department.

    That had to have been worked out ahead of time with Booker.

    Like

  36. MACAULAY says:

    Did anyone ask Sallie Yates why, if they suspected that the dossier was being paid for by “opposition research,” —why they didn’t ask Steele who he was working for?

    If Yates had that “suspicion” she then had a duty to resolve that suspicion, and all she had to do was ask Steele. He testified that he told the FBI way back in July of 2016 that he was being paid by the DNC.

    Did anyone ask. I didn’t hear it. Cruz got close—then wandered off onto something else.
    ____

    Obviously the fix is in for the DOJ, but the FBI appears to be in the cross hairs.

    Like

  37. California Joe says:

    China virus is in decline! Over the hump on the second wave now…finally!

    https://vdare.com/posts/looks-like-us-is-over-second-coronavirus-hump

    Like

  38. msidaho says:

    Take a break from the depressing headlines
    Good article that won’t get much publicity –
    Psychiatric journal made a big mistake about transgender surgery -https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/08/a_psychiatric_journal_made_a_big_mistake_about_transgender_surgery.html

    The author could have expanded his info by discussing the ‘soy boy’ phenomenon – estrogenic soy is in nearly all canned and packaged grocery items.

    Not to mention the estrogen and progesterone that get into our water from birth control pills.

    IMHO transgenders are not the only folks with body dysphoria – is there a hollywood star who is no longer young in years who insists on looking 25?

    Like

  39. Kaco says:

    Are there any Kansas Treepers here to explain what is going on with Kris Kobach and why he can’t get elected? I see there were a total of 10 candidates for the Senate primary. But is Kobach like Moore and Arpaio where the constituents do not like him there? Or was it just too much of a splitter? If it’s one thing we know, it’s that Kobach was tough on immigration and voter fraud, how’s come the rest of the GOP voters know this but not Kansas? Is Kansas not very conservative to begin with? I am just trying to understand what is going on in Kansas because we can’t seem to either pick the right one or primary anybody. Someone may say McConnell’s pac threw money at Marshall but no amount of money would sway me from voting for someone I know would be America First. I feel like not many people are awake as we thought.

    Like

  40. WhiteBoard says:

    Yates testified that the NSA and FBI misled her on the Carter Page Fisa

    She also testified that the dossier was immaterial to Mueller investigation.

    She also testified that the dossier was material to the FISA of Carter Page.

    Graham – brought up the Papdopulous audio tape of him talking with someone – that was used as evidence to support the Carter Page Fisa.

    The recording was in May of 2016. The carter page fisa was in October 2016.

    Like

  41. FPCHmom says:

    watch –

    Like

  42. km says:

    Think the mail in ballots well back fire on the dems. I know if I get 5 of them sent to me. All 5 are going back voting for Trump. We can play the same game too.
    Plus the dem are so sure all the dems homes are going to vote for them even after they have turned there back on them n the horror every one is going through living in the lib states. Bet have of the dems vote for Trump.

    Like

    • Free Speech says:

      I won’t tell nobody 😉

      Liked by 1 person

    • Debra says:

      That is not how they cheat. There are two sets of ballots; one set is mailed out, the other set is retained (to fraudulently fill out) until it is determined they are needed to supplement the vote to get in who is slated to win, OR there is a need to substitute YOUR ballots with the ‘correctly done’ ones . . .

      Liked by 1 person

  43. FPCHmom says:

    They can protest teaching – they just can’t teach.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Debra says:

      Saw a clip where the teachers are writing on their cars, and then holding a driving parade, to protest that schools should not open until it is ‘safe’ . . .

      Duh. Have any of these people ever looked at the statistics as to how many deaths result from ‘safe’ vehicle mishaps?

      Like

  44. FPCHmom says:

    Liked by 1 person

  45. Donna in Oregon says:

    I have watched President Trump TRY to navigate all of these crooked politicians, bureaucrats.ABC agencies, world leaders, WHO/CDC, Big Pharma, China, Russia, EU, NATO, the whole rotten cabal.

    He knows that we know. He must wonder sometimes if we really care.

    President Trump cannot fix this mess. Why does Sidney Powell’s voice shake? She likely realizes that the risk she took is probably end of days. It is shocking. President Trump kept almost all of his promises and it is obvious that he cannot fix it. The Swamp/Deep State corruption is uncontrollable.

    I came to CTH– IDK around 2012 I think. Maybe earlier. Life was so much easier when I didn’t know. I really don’t. want this duty, I would rather blog, enjoy whatever years of life I have left. I’m just guessing but I think that no one else really wants to clean up this sh*t either. What a pain in the arse.

    I am so ticked. I don’t want to have to fix the big mess that these criminals have created. Now that I see what they have done, the Trillions they have stolen. The lives they have destroyed. The murders. The lies, manipulation, hubris and evil. The destruction of the Republic, the Constitution, and the soul of America. It blows my mind.

    Washington DC is like a giant dirty diaper that the American people are going to have to change. It’s going to stink, and it is going to be filthy, most Americans will want to throw-up. I do…, these horrible filthy criminals make me sick.

    But I cannot ‘unsee’ it.

    Liked by 4 people

    • petszmom says:

      Very thoughtful post. I recite the serenity prayer almost daily. I used to care, I fought 365/24/7. Then I realized that it was all wishful thinking, this trying to save our republic. I stood up ready to engage in civil disobedience and when I looked behind me I was alone. Just talk from everyone. There is a question to answer and then ACCEPT…HOW soon will our country be destroyed, this year, next year, 4 years from now? Austin TX is already being transformed and that is less than an hour away. It is inevitable. I feel much calmer now, peaceful. I get bashed but no matter, JMHO.

      Like

      • I am with you 100%! Not only were you alone, but I would guess that many, if not most, of the people you thought were with you actually attacked you loudly…. because that is what the right does.

        I hope for something that is sufficiently catastrophic to get the right to fight, otherwise we are boiling frogs. The GOP was involved in the loss of Kobach last night. Our perpetually continuing to do the same thing and expect things to change is absurd. What is even more absurd is thinking the President can do everything for us. There are simply some things in life that are worth fighting for. I sure would love to know where that line is for most people that say they are on the right.

        We attend some local Heather Scott events and from talking to people there, I know we are not entirely alone but it simply does not matter if we do not have the support of people that supposedly believe the same thing.

        Enjoy the peace and calm. Accepting it is tough but it is cathartic.

        Liked by 1 person

        • petszmom says:

          Good to hear an understanding voice. You are correct, most if not all the bashing came from right here at CTH. There is almost no room for opposing ideas or opinions. I cannot think of anything worse that this Covid nonsense that has brought us to our knees. Trump cannot do it alone and we have to acknowledge we let him down. I understand that viscious Tlaib also won!
          Locally, nothing but ‘Conservative’ cowards and the cognitive i.q. is about 6 out of almost 90K population.

          Like

      • Kaco says:

        The results of the primaries have been very discouraging to me. That includes how many of the radical left were chosen for the Dems. That Tlaib won her primary again, I think. Some radical in St. Louis ousted a long time incumbent who apparently wasn’t looking. There was some discussion on Gateway Pundit re: Kris Kobach race that Kansas may be turning purple. This is all the result of our educational system and the propaganda beating at us daily, especially ramped up the last 3 years. How do we get the commies out of our educational system, let alone our government?

        What’s especially disturbing is the utter silence of the GOP, like above, saying only Ted Cruz was at the Antifa hearing, and Lee and Graham showed up for half. WTH?

        I believe this is a demoralization of the GOP voters, we must stay strong, but they are letting it happen as they pretended to care during Obama, and then were aghast when we put them in charge of both houses of Congress. Then many quit, and they let the Dems take the House. I feel their puling back is to allow us to be beat upon.

        I wonder how John James’ race is going in Michigan and if he will be supported this time. I’m sure all the GOP establishment will win their races, apparently McSally did very well.

        Liked by 1 person

    • WhiteBoard says:

      stop all that talk.

      by 8/15 we will get more restless – and it will amount to a massive stopping of participation in the system.

      Like

    • 100% YOOPER says:

      This is why the coup players MUST be prosecuted.

      Like

  46. JCM800 says:

    Reasoning is Usually Evidenced Based
    Asymptomatic Risk = Scared of something near you that may not exist.
    Wearing a Mask because you may catch the Mystery Flu is the same as wearing a Plaster Cast to prevent breaking your leg.
    Have some guts, 100 Nationwide will die in car accidents today, and everyday.
    Lose the Masks.
    Tomorrow is not Promised.

    Liked by 1 person

  47. sunnyflower5 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  48. sunnyflower5 says:

    Liked by 1 person

  49. QCM says:

    So basically, if Sullivan is a party, meaning he is able to appeal for an en banc hearing, then the US Code REQUIRES Sullivan to recuse himself.

    On the other hand, if Sullivan does NOT have to recuse himself because he is NOT a party, then he has no standing to request and en banc hearing.

    Either way, Sullivan is done here.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tseg says:

      If Sullivan has to recuse himself, will this then be held up again to reassign to a new judge? ie, it doesn’t matter how to delay an outcome, just as long as it is delayed.

      Like

      • bshaw7369610 says:

        I don’t think you can assign a new judge to a case where the Fed Prosecutor has requested all charges be dropped. Of course I didn’t think a judge could turn down the prosecutions filing to dismiss before all this started so what do I know!

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s