Friday Top News Executive Summary

Media Editors:  Above the Fold

DEMOCRAT MELEE: “Long-simmering policy disputes between loosew lips liar-Joe Biden, commie-Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth dinky-Warren and a slew of other candidates exploded into the open during Thursday night’s Democratic primary debate, as the candidates — often with raised voices — laid bare their fundamental disagreements on ‘Medicare-for-all,’ immigration and more,” Fox News reports. Anti-Second-Amendment crusader socialist-Beto O’Rourke even declared, “Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47.” Speaking of gun control, The Daily Wire reveals that “House Democrats passed a series of strict gun regulations this week, banning so-called ‘high capacity magazines’ and instituting a handful of ‘protections’ to keep guns out of the hands of undesirable potential owners, but behind the scenes, prominent Dems are backing away from proposals that would create a national ban on the sale and ownership of ‘assault’ weapons.” socialist-Beto, call your office!

MCCABE’S LEGAL JEOPARDY: “U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended moving forward with charges against Andrew McCabe … as the Justice Department rejects a last-ditch appeal from the former top FBI official and current CNN contributor. … The potential charges relate to DOJ inspector general findings against him regarding misleading statements concerning a scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton-related investigation.” (Fox News)

National Security, Government, & Politics

9/11 JUSTICE: “The U.S. said Thursday that it will disclose the name of a Saudi citizen sought by lawyers for victims of the Sept. 11 attacks who want to link the kingdom to the terrorist plot. … Justice Department lawyers said in a court filing that the FBI will make the name available to a limited circle of people that includes lawyers for survivors and victims’ relatives as well as to attorneys for the Saudi government. The decision is a big step forward for Sept. 11 victims, who allege in a long-running lawsuit that Saudi Arabia provided support for the attacks.” (Associated Press)

UKRAINE AID: “The Trump administration has released $250 million in military aid to Ukraine that had been held up despite criticism that the money was desperately needed to deter Russian aggression and territorial expansion. That move came before a Senate Appropriations panel debate Thursday, when lawmakers from both parties were set to rebuke the administration.” (Associated Press)

SPEED BUMP: According to Reuters: “The Trump administration is moving forward with a plan to revoke California’s authority to set its own vehicle greenhouse gas standards and declare that states are pre-empted from setting their own vehicle rules, three people briefed on the matter said on Thursday. … The EPA in August 2018 proposed revoking a waiver granted to California in 2013 under the Clean Air Act as part of the Trump administration’s plan to roll back scumbag/liar-nObama-era fuel economy standards.” California was endeavoring to set fuel-efficiency standards for the entire country.

Culture & Heartland

MAKING THE PROBLEM WORSE: “On Wednesday, California lawmakers approved AB 1482, which caps rent increases at 5 percent per year plus inflation, and prevents landlords from evicting tenants without citing a government-approved reason. … Economists and other policy experts have long criticized rent control for reducing the supply and quality of rental housing in the long-run.” (Reason)

DIABOLICAL: “During the preliminary hearing this week in the criminal case against undercover journalists David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt, a ‘semi-retired’ Planned Parenthood executive admitted that the abortion business had no ban on altering abortion procedures in order to better harvest baby body parts that would later be sold, allegedly for a profit.” (The Daily Wire)

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH: Christine Blasey Ford’s father supported Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation (The Federalist)

Closing Arguments

POLICY: Pension bailout bill would only worsen the underfunding crisis (The Daily Signal)

POLICY: Are we due for a global recession? (American Enterprise Institute)

HUMOR: commie-Ocasio-Cortez proposes tuition-free school for children who can’t read good and wanna learn to do other stuff good too (The Babylon Bee) 

 ~The Patriot Post     . 

GOP poised to ‘undermine 2nd Amendment more than scumbag/liar-nObama’

by ~ If Republicans support a federal “red flag” law and universal background checks they will have done more than President scumbag/liar-nObama to undermine Second Amendment rights… contends NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch. “Is that what they want their legacy to be?” she asked in an interview Tuesday night with Tucker Carlson on the Fox News Channel. The red flag laws, which already have been adopted in 17 states and the District of Columbia, allow police to seize guns from people who haven’t even been charged with a crime if they are deemed a danger to society. Carlson asked: “If government can simply take away your constitutional rights by deciding you are dangerous, and not proving it, then how are they constitutional rights in the first place?” He noted the San Francisco Board of Supervisors recently passed a unanimous resolution designating the NRA a domestic terror organization. And Loesch pointed out that some members of Congress — which is considering a federal red flag law — have referred to law-abiding gun owners as “domestic terrorists.” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., has expressed his support for red-flag laws, and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, has said he is open to considering them. Loesch said the laws are “an inversion of our due process,” in which a person is presumed guilty and must prove his innocence, often by paying thousands of dollars in court costs. In Indiana, it takes an average of nine months before a person has his day in court. “It’s an absolute removal of a cornerstone of our republic,” she said. In some states with red flag laws, anyone can report a person, and law enforcement officers are not required to give notice before they come to seize weapons. Loesch noted that many sheriffs have said they will not uphold the red flag laws, arguing they are a violation of due process and that implementing them is dangerous…

Yes, Border Patrol Arrests Are Down, but Our Immigration Policies Still Need Work

by David Inserra

{ } ~ The last few months have seen a significant decline in Border Patrol arrests thanks in part to attempts by the Trump administration to deter and discourage illegal immigration… But serious problems remain unsolved and more remains to be done. Following the inauguration of President Trump, illegal entries into the U.S. fell sharply, partially as a result of new policies to combat illegal immigration, but also because there was a widespread perception that Trump would be able to completely stop illegal immigration. However, loopholes and weaknesses in U.S. immigration laws remained. For example, a 2016 decision by the 9th Circuit court reinterpreted a 1997 court settlement to rule that when adults enter the country illegally, any child accompanying them must be released from immigration agencies’ custody within 20 days. The U.S. asylum system is also easy to game. Many who enter illegally are able to pass the initial “credible fear” hearing and get released into the U.S. – but very few end up being granted asylum. With an easy-to-game asylum process and loopholes for bringing children to the border, the U.S.’s ability to manage its border and adjudicate claims was being overwhelmed. The Trump administration tried to plug these weaknesses through policies such as zero tolerance also known as family separation, but these solutions were far from ideal and received widespread pushback. The administration ended them and began releasing anyone caught with a child. And so it became clear that because of the loopholes, bringing a child to the southern border was the golden ticket into the U.S. for illegal immigrants… 

Air Force F-15s, F-35s dump 80,000 pounds of bombs on Iraqi island

By Diana Stancy Correll

{ } ~ The U.S.-led coalition countering ISIS in Iraq and Syria dumped 80,000 pounds of bombs on Qanus Island in Iraq on Tuesday… to prevent the Islamic State from using the island as a refuge. According to Operation Inherent Resolve spokesperson Col. Myles Caggins III, U.S. Air Force F-15 Strike Eagles and F-35 Lightning II aircraft  conducted the strike. Caggins also shared a video on social media showing the strike against the “Daesh infested island.” The F-35A Lightning IIs from the 388th Fighter Wing and the 419th Fighter Wing, both at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, arrived at Al Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates April 15, the first time the Air Force’s most advanced fighter jet has been deployed to the Middle East. They are assigned to the 4th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron. According to CENTCOM, the operation was designed to halt ISIS insurgents from going undetected in the island’s thick vegetation. “We’re denying Daesh the ability to hide on Qanus Island,” Maj. Gen. Eric T. Hill, commander of Special Operations Joint Task Force, said in a CENTCOM statement. “We’re setting the conditions for our partner forces to continue bringing stability to the region.”Deputy Combined Air Component Commander Maj. Gen. Chance Saltzman said the strike was the culmination of months of research and intelligence collection. “Our intelligence professionals always work diligently to maximize the effectiveness of air strikes while at the same time taking care to avoid civilian casualties and unnecessary damage to civilian infrastructure,” Saltzman said in a statement to the Air Force Times. “This massive strike exhibits that expertise and careful application of airpower.” Iraqi special operations forces also conducted ground clearance operations to stop ISIS members from using the island as a “major transit hub” as they travel from Syria into Mosul, Makhmour and the Kirkuk regions in Iraq, according to CENTCOM…  


The Terrorist as Litigant


{ } ~ We have read the stories. A burglar breaks into someone’s property, injures himself in the process, and so sues the people he was trying to rip off. Something similar happened after 9/11… America was attacked. In response, the U.S., UK, and coalition forces detained and questioned terror suspects. The United States sent 779 to Guantanamo Bay. But it was the U.S. and UK who ended up in the dock, with the terror suspects as the accusers. Most of those detained at Guantanamo were captured in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But, as is the case with today’s ISIS fighters none of whom are at Gitmo, they had been recruited from all over the world. Take the example of the UK, where a small number of British terror suspects ended up in Guantanamo Bay. Considering Britain’s previous historic links to Islamist ideology — exporting fighters to Bosnia, Kashmir, and Afghanistan — there was nothing too unusual in that. But then something strange did happen. The explanations these men offered for their capture — just being in the wrong place at the wrong time — garnered significant levels of domestic sympathy. Their increasingly lurid accusations of sadistic American torture — such as having their genitalia sliced open with knives — were credulously regurgitated by the press. Soon enough, these men became causes célèbres for the media, human rights groups, and politicians mainly on the political left, but sometimes also the right.The British government — nervous about Guantanamo’s existence in the first place — spent several years lobbying to get these detainees released. Eventually, Whitehall succeeded in gaining their release, only to see the former detainees sue it for being complicit in their detention in the first place. Wary of being bogged down in years of litigation and having to disclose sensitive intelligence in court, the government settled. The terror suspects earned an approximately $20 million payoff. Today, some of these men are part of polite society as pundits, authors, or staples of the university speaking tour. Consider Moazzam Begg. He claims he went to do charity work in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan in the summer of 2001. In January 2002, he was captured in Pakistan and transferred to Guantanamo Bay a year later. The U.S. government assessed Begg as a possible al-Qaeda-affiliated facilitator, fundraiser, and fighter. In the UK, he had run a bookshop that, according to a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report, was a “known jihadist gathering place.” After 9/11, the U.S. believed he joined al-Qaeda and Taliban forces making their last stand against the U.S. in the caves of Tora Bora. Begg says that if he was at Tora Bora, it was only because he was “totally lost.” He retreated to Pakistan, where, the committee report states, he was captured at an al-Qaeda safe house…   . 

Ex-ICE director rebukes Dem in hearing clash: ‘I’ve forgotten more about this issue than you’ll ever know’

By Ronn Blitzer 

{ } ~ Former ICE director Tom Homan appeared before a House subcommittee Wednesday ready for a fight – and he got one… During a hearing held by the House Oversight Civil Rights and Civil Liberties subcommittee, Homan insisted that Democrats were pushing a false narrative that the Trump administration was ending deferred action — a type of deportation reprieve — for illegal immigrants with medical issues. The hearing room erupted when Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., challenged his account, in starkly personal terms. “I think it’s important to really make sure that the jingoistic, bigoted testimony of Mr. Homan is called out as nearly completely untrue, as being an outrage, and as a former official directing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, he should know better,” she said. “What did I say was inaccurate?” Homan shot back, as Chairman Jamie Raskin, D-Md., intervened to restore order. “I just think it’s important that it’s not accepted as accurate testimony.” She went on to question other witnesses on the panel, but did not ask anything of Homan. Homan, who is a Fox News contributor, finally responded to Wasserman-Schultz when Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, had his turn. After responding to one of Jordan’s questions, Homan turned his attention to the Florida Democrat, who used to lead the Democratic National Committee. “If I can respond to the earlier remark from Wasserman Schultz, I’ve forgotten more about this issue than you’ll ever know,” he said. “So if you say my testimony is inaccurate, it’s wrong. Everything I said here is accurate. Bottom line. If you want to go toe to toe, I’m here. I’m here on my own time to speak to the American people about what’s false and what’s fact.”…  


The Expanding Antitrust Probe of Big Tech

Business Review Board:  In July, the Justice Department announced an antitrust probe into America’s biggest tech companies. Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim, who heads the DOJ’s Antitrust Division, explained that the broad and sweeping investigation would seek to determine whether tech giants have engaged in monopolistic practices that have “reduced competition, stifled innovation, or otherwise harmed consumers.” That probe is now growing to include attorneys general across the nation.

Variety reported last week, “Facebook faces another antitrust investigation, with the New York State Attorney General announcing Friday that a coalition of nine AGs has launched an investigation into the social-media giant for potential antitrust violations.”And The Washington Post reports this week, “Attorneys general for 50 U.S. states and territories on Monday officially announced an antitrust investigation of Google, embarking on a wide-ranging review of a tech giant that Democrats and Republicans said may threaten competition, consumers and the continued growth of the web.” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton explained that Google “dominates all aspects of advertising on the Internet and searching on the Internet.”Back in January, Attorney General William Barr expressed concerns over Big Tech’s rapid growth when he told lawmakers, “I don’t think big is necessarily bad, but I think a lot of people wonder how such huge behemoths that now exist in Silicon Valley have taken shape under the nose of the antitrust enforcers. You can win that place in the marketplace without violating the antitrust laws, but I want to find out more about that dynamic.” Barr and state attorneys general are seeking to answer these questions.Criticism of Big Tech has become a uniquely bipartisan issue in this era of heightened partisanship. However, the reasoning behind that criticism is not uniform. Conservatives accuse Big Tech of free-speech infringement specifically related to the censorship practices against conservative social-media figures. Leftists like anti-corporate socialist Sen. Elizabeth dinky-Warren (D-MA), on the other hand, call for tech giants like Facebook, Amazon, and Google to be broken up simply for being too big.  ~The Patriot Post  


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