On Tuesday morning, President Donald Trump signaled a deal with congressional Democrats if the U.S. Supreme Court were to rule in his favor concerning the controversial Obama-era DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) immigration program.
&#8220;If Supreme Court remedies with overturn, a deal will be made with Dems for them to stay!” the president said via Twitter regarding DACA.
The Supreme Court will consider the Trump administration&#8217;s decision to end the DACA program, which has been argued to have been <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-rules-trump-must-reinstate-daca-ben-shapiro">unconstitutionally</a> enacted by the Obama administration via executive action.
The program defers deportations of immigrants brought over by their parents at a young age.
In the same tweet where Trump signaled a forthcoming deal, he ripped DACA. &#8220;Many of the people in DACA, no longer very young, are far from &#8216;angels,'&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;Some are very tough, hardened criminals.&#8221;
According to <a href="https://www.uscis.gov/news/new-data-shows-criminal-arrest-histories-daca-requestors">U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services</a>, about 8% of DACA recipients have criminal records:
<blockquote>8-percent of total DACA requestors (59,786 individuals) had arrest records as of the date the systems were queried, which included offenses such as assault and battery, rape, murder, and drunk driving, among others. &#8220;Requestors&#8221; includes individuals approved and denied DACA.</blockquote>
Trump added in the tweet: &#8220;President Obama said he had no legal right to sign order, but would anyway.&#8221;
This is also basically true. As noted by <a href="https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/daca-unconstitutional-obama-admitted">Heritage</a>, Obama repeatedly acknowledged that he could not take such action alone, but did so anyway:
<blockquote>Responding in October 2010 to demands that he implement immigration reforms unilaterally, Obama declared, &#8220;I am not king. I can&#8217;t do these things just by myself.&#8221; In March 2011, he said that with &#8220;respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that&#8217;s just not the case.&#8221; In May 2011, he acknowledged that he couldn&#8217;t &#8220;just bypass Congress and change the (immigration) law myself. &#8230; That&#8217;s not how a democracy works.&#8221;</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Many of the people in DACA, no longer very young, are far from “angels.” Some are very tough, hardened criminals. President Obama said he had no legal right to sign order, but would anyway. If Supreme Court remedies with overturn, a deal will be made with Dems for them to stay!
&mdash; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1194219655717642240?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 12, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;The Trump administration announced its plan to phase out the program in 2017, only for the federal courts to rule that it could not apply retroactively and that DACA should be restarted in full,&#8221; <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-daca-supreme-court">Fox News</a> reported.
In April 2018, U.S. District Judge John Bates <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/immigration/2018/04/24/cfb41578-4816-11e8-8b5a-3b1697adcc2a_story.html?noredirect=on&amp;utm_term=.a5adf4fd5206">ruled</a> that Trump could not legally end DACA, calling the decision to end the program &#8220;arbitrary and capricious because the [Trump administration] failed adequately to explain its conclusion that the program was unlawful.&#8221;
&#8220;So, in other words, if a president takes an executive action, then the subsequent president cannot undo that executive action — even if that original executive action has been declared unconstitutional, at least in part,&#8221; Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-judge-rules-trump-must-reinstate-daca-ben-shapiro">Ben Shapiro</a> explained at the time.
&#8220;This is insanity,&#8221; Shapiro continued, adding, &#8220;Here’s how leftist courts have now ruled: an action that is obviously unconstitutional is no longer unconstitutional when performed by President Obama; undoing that unconstitutional action is unconstitutional if performed by President Trump.&#8221;
A spokesperson for the Department of Justice said of the decision at the time: &#8220;Today’s order doesn’t change the Department of Justice’s position on the facts: DACA was implemented unilaterally after Congress declined to extend benefits to this same group of illegal aliens.&#8221;

Michelle Obama, Melania Trump, Donald Trump, Barack Obama

Trump Signals DACA &#8216;Deal&#8217; With Democrats

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)

Illegal Immigration

Immigration

Judicial Branch

Judiciary

Lawsuit

Obama Administration

Supreme Court

Trump Administration

Former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer will no longer be spicing it up on ABC&#8217;s &#8220;Dancing With the Stars&#8221; following his elimination at the judges&#8217; hands on Monday.
&#8220;Spicer, along with dance partner Jenna Johnson, was voted in the bottom two alongside country music star Lauren Alaina and her partner, Gleb Savchenko,&#8221; reported <a class="sc-145m8ut-0 hFUXcT js_link sc-1out364-0 fwjlmD" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/11/11/sean-spicer-voted-off-dancing-with-stars-after-weeks-controversy-with-low-scores-judge-frustration/" data-ga="[[&quot;Embedded Url&quot;,&quot;External link&quot;,&quot;https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/11/11/sean-spicer-voted-off-dancing-with-stars-after-weeks-controversy-with-low-scores-judge-frustration/&quot;,{&quot;metric25&quot;:1}]]">The Washinton Post</a>. &#8220;Thanks to new rules this season, the judges — Carrie Ann Inaba, Bruno Tonioli and Len Goodman — choose which couple survives for another week. Goodman only weighs in if there is a tie, but there was no need for that on Monday.&#8221;
Judge Ann Inaba commended both couples for giving it their best, but ultimately voted in favor of Lauren and Gleb.
&#8220;It’s never easy to send anyone home, because I know that both couples have given your heart and soul to every moment of this competition,&#8221; said Inaba. &#8220;But for me, there is one couple that stands out. The couple I want to save is Lauren and Gleb.&#8221;
Dancing to Destiny&#8217;s Child&#8217;s &#8220;Bills, Bills, Bills,&#8221; Spicer and his partner Jenna Johnson earned just 26 out of 40 possible points.
Speaking with <a href="https://people.com/tv/sean-spicer-admits-hes-somewhat-relieved-to-be-eliminated-from-dancing-with-the-stars/">People</a> shortly after his elimination, Spicer admitted to being somewhat relieved by the result.
&#8220;The judges made the right decision on a night where you had two dances,&#8221; he said. &#8220;The scores were going to be very difficult to overcome.&#8221;
During his time on the show, Spicer arguably lasted for as long as he did due to support from middle-America Trump supporters — not to mention President Trump himself, who tweeted in favor of his former press secretary several times throughout the show.
&#8220;Vote for good guy [Sean Spicer] tonight on Dancing With The Stars. He has always been there for us!&#8221; is just one tweet exemplifying Trump&#8217;s Spicer fandom.
Spicer told People he appreciated the outpouring of support he received.
&#8220;I appreciate his support and his continued friendship. It means a tremendous amount to me to know that he’s taking time to put his support out there. I thank him for that,&#8221; Spicer said.
&#8220;There’s been a tremendous amount of support that’s kept me out of the bottom two the last nine weeks and I’ve truly been humbled by how many people have taken time out of their Monday nights to keep me going,&#8221; he continued. &#8220;I will look back on this as an amazing experience.&#8221;
When <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/queer-eye-star-karamo-brown-cancels-twitter-after-paul-bois">news broke that Spicer would be appearing</a> on the hit ABC show, celebrities from Billy Eichner to Zach Braff to Kal Penn largely responded with outrage while demanding that the former press secretary be excluded from the upcoming season. The backlash became so intense that &#8220;Dancing with the Stars&#8221; host Tom Bergeron issued a statement in which he offered a veiled criticism of ABC for booking Spicer, asserting that he offered the suggestions to the network so that this season &#8220;would be a joyful respite from our exhausting political climate.&#8221;
Nevertheless, Sean Spicer went on to dance with the stars and remained on for several weeks despite his consistently low scores from the judges. As time went on, his critics became so incensed that Gia Kourlas, dance critic for The New York Times, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/cheryl-burke-of-dancing-with-the-stars-defends-sean-spicer-hes-so-endearing">argued in a lengthy op-ed</a> that Spicer&#8217;s dance routines reflect the emptiness of his soul.
&#8220;Spicer’s staying power has little to do with his performances. Over the past eight weeks, he has been the weakest dancer on the show. His low scores from the judges have borne that out,&#8221; wrote Kourlas. &#8220;He hides behind an egregious smile, parting his teeth to make it look as though he’s been caught mid-laugh. That smile seems meant to distract from his plan of attack: never actually performing a dance, but conquering it.&#8221;

&#8220;Dancing With The Stars&#8221; Season 28 Top 6 Finalists &#8211; November 4, 2019 &#8211; Arrivals

Sean Spicer Finally Eliminated From ‘Dancing With The Stars’

Donald Trump

Sean Spicer

Television

On Wednesday, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York imposed a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-pence-promises-challenge-nationwide-josh-hammer">lawless</a> &#8220;nationwide injunction&#8221; on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services&#8217; (HHS) so-called &#8220;Conscience Rule.&#8221; That administrative rule, promulgated under the guidance of HHS&#8217;s <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/leadership/roger-severino/index.html">Roger Severino</a>, attempted to ensure, in Judge Engelmayer&#8217;s <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/district-court-ruling-against-hhs-conscience-rule/">words</a>, that both HHS programs and those who receive HHS funds properly &#8220;address objections to abortion, sterilization, and assisted suicide, in addition to counseling and referrals related to these services.&#8221;
Judge Engelmayer&#8217;s gargantuan <a href="https://affordablecareactlitigation.files.wordpress.com/2019/11/file0.602539871159149.pdf">147-page opinion</a> deems the Conscience Rule to be an unconstitutional agency overreach, but is primarily concerned with HHS&#8217;s alleged statutory violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Careful readers will recall how the APA has frequently been <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-966_bq7c.pdf">weaponized</a> against President Donald Trump by a revanchist judicial &#8220;<a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/judicial-resistance">resistance</a>.&#8221;
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE), who was a high-ranking official in the Bush administration&#8217;s Office of Legal Policy and is no legal slouch, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/06/politics/judge-blocks-hhs-conscience-rule-health-care-workers/index.html">excoriated</a> the anti-conscience ruling: &#8220;This decision is absurd mush. The point of the First Amendment — especially the free exercise of religion — is to protect the conscience rights of Americans. In this country, government doesn&#8217;t get to tell you that your faith is fine on Sunday at church but not Monday at work.&#8221; Ed Whelan has a similarly critical post today at National Review&#8217;s &#8220;Bench Memos&#8221; blog, <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/district-court-ruling-against-hhs-conscience-rule/">arguing</a> that the rudimentary logic undergirding Judge Engelmayer&#8217;s administrative law analysis is non-sensical hogwash.
It is possible that this is not the most prudent hill to die on. But perhaps it is; after all, there is no issue more foundational to the American experiment than religious liberty and protection of individual conscience rights. But whether this particular lawless &#8220;nationwide injunction&#8221; represents the ideal time to push back once and for all against <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">judicial tyranny</a> run amok, it is surely as clear a reminder as ever that it is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-it-past-time-trump-openly-defy-court-order-josh-hammer">long past time for President Trump to openly defy</a> a truly lawless, debilitating district court ruling.
The notion of a &#8220;nationwide injunction&#8221; is axiomatically self-contradictory; by its plain meaning, &#8220;[t]he judicial power&#8221; of which the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii">Article III</a> of the Constitution speaks only extends to the individual litigants in a specific &#8220;case[]&#8221; or &#8220;controversial[y]&#8221; properly before a federal tribunal. Chief Justice John Marshall&#8217;s most famous passage in the judicial review-establishing 1803 case of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/5/137#writing-USSC_CR_0005_0137_ZO">Marbury v. Madison</a> makes this point extraordinarily clear: &#8220;It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret the rule.&#8221; (Emphasis added.) &#8220;The judicial power&#8221; thus only extends to &#8220;particular cases,&#8221; and it is in each &#8220;particular case[]&#8221; that a court must &#8220;expound and interpret&#8221; the relevant law as it applies to those particular litigants.
Abraham Lincoln was thus emphatically correct, in his <a href="http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/lincoln1.asp">First Inaugural Address</a>, to vow to only enforce the morally and legally abhorrent <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/60/393#writing-USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZO">Dred Scott</a> ruling as it pertained to Mr. Scott himself:
<blockquote>I do not forget the position assumed by some that constitutional questions are to be decided by the Supreme Court, nor do I deny that such decisions must be binding in any case upon the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit, while they are also entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases by all other departments of the Government. &#8230; At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.</blockquote>
As Lincoln observed, norms of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-stop-calling-everything-impeachable-offense-josh-hammer">prudence</a> and the inherent concept of the <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1073942">Article III judgment power</a> alike do caution the president to enforce a federal court ruling as it pertains to named litigants to a lawsuit. But in our constitutional order, the binding scope of judicial power goes no further than that. If President Trump were so inclined, he could therefore treat all parties not expressly named as litigants in the Conscience Rule lawsuit as not being bound by Judge Engelmayer&#8217;s diktat. Indeed, such an action would accord with the Madisonian conception of the separation of powers, as described in <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed51.asp">The Federalist No. 51</a>, that &#8220;[a]mbition must be made to counteract ambition.&#8221; It would be beneficial and positively healthy for our constitutional order to see such &#8220;[a]mbition &#8230; counteract[ing] ambition.&#8221;
Again, perhaps this case is not the ideal hill upon which Trump ought to launch such a constitutional broadside. But until the president of the United States begins to push back against the fallacious and unconstitutional notion that a single federal district court judge can bring the entirety of an executive branch program to a screeching halt, nothing else in our politics truly matters. What is the point of governing, after all, if the <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed78.asp">&#8220;least dangerous&#8221;</a> branch of the federal government is allowed to usurp powers it manifestly does not possess without any resistance whatsoever from the more powerful federal departments — Congress and the presidency?
I had a conversation a little over a year ago with a well-known lawyer who previously clerked on the U.S. Supreme Court for a conservative justice. I asked him/her what would be the single best action President Trump could take to help restore a more constitutionally principled separation of powers structural equilibrium. That former clerk responded to me: &#8220;Defy a lawless court order.&#8221; I hope you are listening, Mr. President.

Close-Up Of Gavel On American Flag

HAMMER: When Will The Trump Administration Finally Defy A Lawless Federal Court?

Constitution

Last evening, The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/469133-graham-predicts-controversial-trump-court-picks-will-clear-panel">reported</a> that U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) plans to bring Halil Suleyman (&#8220;Sul&#8221;) Ozerden back up for a Committee-wide vote this Thursday. Ozerden, who (by pure happenstance!) <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/mulvaney-halil-suleyman-fifth-circuit-1362794">seems to have had</a> Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney as a groomsman at his 2003 wedding, was <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/president-donald-j-trump-announces-judicial-nominees-3/">announced</a> this past summer by the White House as its pick to fill a long-vacant Mississippi-based seat on the crucial U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In addition to Mulvaney, Ozerden has the backing of each of Mississippi&#8217;s two Republican senators.
Ozerden, who is only a recent convert to Federalist Society membership and whose judicial track record seems <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/conservatives-voice-concerns-over-potential-fifth-circuit-nominee/">scattershot</a> at best, has long faced <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/key-conservatives-double-down-opposition-trump-josh-hammer">fairly intensive</a> movement conservative opposition. As I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sul-ozerden-very-weak-fifth-circuit-pick-josh-hammer">noted</a> last summer in launching my own anti-Ozerden salvo, much of the opposition centers around the 2012 Southern District of Mississippi case of <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FA-MS-0001-0002.pdf">Catholic Diocese of Biloxi v. Sebelius</a>, wherein the eponymous diocese challenged the intrusive and conscience rights-undermining Obamacare contraceptive mandate promulgated by President Barack Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services. Ozerden, then the district court judge presiding over the case, went so far as to <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/chDocs/public/FA-MS-0001-0003.pdf">deny the diocese’s mere motion for oral argument</a> — thereby treating a Catholic diocese pleading a genuine infringement of its right to conscience in much the same manner as a judge swatting away a pro se prisoner&#8217;s filing of a risible habeas corpus petition.
At the time, I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-sul-ozerden-very-weak-fifth-circuit-pick-josh-hammer">urged</a> Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) to &#8220;lead this battle&#8221; and predicted that, &#8220;[w]ith Cruz’s leadership, it is hard to see how at least [Sen. Josh] Hawley [(R-MO)] does not follow.&#8221; Not to toot my own horn, but that is indeed precisely what happened. Cruz <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/ted-cruz-halil-sul-ozerden-nomination-1492305">came out in public opposition</a> to Ozerden in early September, and <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/josh-hawley-judicial-nominee-1513793">Hawley followed</a> two weeks later. Lacking the votes to pass Ozerden out of the Judiciary Committee with a favorable recommendation, then, Graham <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/26/josh-hawley-judicial-nominee-1513793">tabled a vote</a> on Ozerden&#8217;s nomination. And in the time since Graham tabled the Ozerden nomination, furthermore, Eliana Johnson of The Washington Free Beacon broke a <a href="https://freebeacon.com/issues/white-house-judicial-nom-violated-judicial-code-of-conduct-ex-wife-alleged/">scandalous story</a> about Ozerden allegedly once pressuring his wife to make an illegal campaign contribution to then-Senate Minority Whip Trent Lott&#8217;s (R-MS) political action committee.
Lacking the Republican votes on the Judiciary Committee and with a genuine scandal garnering headlines in conservative media, it seemed that the Ozerden nomination was heading for a slow but painful death. But rumors started circulating last week that Graham was actively courting Democratic votes on the Judiciary Committee to help favorably pass through Ozerden. Knowledgeable Senate sources confirmed to me this week that Graham planned to try to push through the Ozerden nomination with Democratic votes, and The Hill&#8217;s aforementioned <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/469133-graham-predicts-controversial-trump-court-picks-will-clear-panel">report</a> last evening followed. Sources tell me that the Committee Democrat most likely to cross the aisle to vote for Ozerden is either Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) or Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE).
If Graham follows this through to conclusion, let us call this spade a spade: It would be a betrayal of movement conservatism and the coronation of a thoroughly milquetoast, unfit nominee for the Anthony Kennedy-style swing seat on one of the nation&#8217;s most influential federal courts of appeal. The Fifth Circuit, which covers the red states of Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, represents the geographical and ideological heartland of post-Reagan conservatism in America. Mississippi, which has two Republican senators, could do a lot better than to nominate a scandal-tied non-movement conservative jurist with an inconsistent judicial track record and an expressed hostility to the foundational issue of religious liberty.
Lindsey Graham should stop what he is doing and not embark upon this path. There is no world in which Democratic votes should be relied upon to pass through a weak nominee who is opposed by large swaths of the conservative movement. Allowing Ozerden to move through would be a tremendous proverbial middle finger to the scores of conservative and religious liberty activists who have opposed his nomination from the get-go.
But if Graham does proceed, then the onus will fall on another courageous Judiciary Committee Republican to join forces with Cruz and Hawley in opposing Ozerden. Perhaps that courageous Judiciary Committee Republican is someone who is allegedly still on the fence, with respect to the Ozerden nomination, and who has a demonstrable <a href="https://www.sasse.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/1/sasse-op-ed-important-win-for-religious-liberty">track record</a> of defending the interests of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3VblIoWpDs">religious liberty</a>.
Are you listening, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE)?

Lindsey Graham

HAMMER: Lindsey Graham Would Betray Conservatives By Relying On Democrats To Pass Through Sul Ozerden

Ben Sasse

Conservatism

Josh Hawley

Mississippi

Ted Cruz

According to a new report, an integral factor in the successful elimination by U.S. special forces of the most wanted man in the world, mass murdering Islamic State leader Abu Baker al-Baghdadi, was &#8220;an extraordinarily well-placed informant.&#8221; The informant was reportedly a defector of the terrorist group who worked from inside the compound where Baghdadi was cornered and ultimately killed himself and some of his children by detonating a suicide vest.
<div class="teaser-content">
<section>
<div>
&#8220;U.S. commandos zeroed in on Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s final hideout with the help of an extraordinarily well-placed informant, an Islamic State operative who facilitated the terrorist leader’s movements around Syria and even helped oversee construction work on his Syrian safe house, according to U.S. and Middle East-based officials knowledgeable about the operation,&#8221; <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/islamic-state-turncoat-inside-baghdadis-hideout-critical-to-success-of-raid-officials-say/2019/10/29/e702c2fa-fa86-11e9-ac8c-8eced29ca6ef_story.html">The Washington Post</a> reported Tuesday.
</div>
</section>
</div>
<div class="remainder-content">
<section>
<div>
The defector reportedly provided the U.S. military a detailed, &#8220;room-by-room layout&#8221; of the compound where the terrorist&#8217;s reign finally came to an inglorious end on Oct. 26.
</div>
<div>
&#8220;The informant was present during the assault on Baghdadi’s compound in the Syrian province of Idlib, and he was exfiltrated from the region two days later with his family,&#8221; the Post reports. &#8220;The man, whose nationality had not been revealed, is expected to receive some or all of the $25 million U.S. bounty that had been placed on Baghdadi’s head, according to the officials.&#8221;
The Post notes that an unnamed official described the informant as a Sunni Arab who defected after the terrorist group killed one of his relatives.
In a nationally televised statement Sunday morning, President Trump announced the death of Baghdadi and made a point of underscoring his heinous actions as the leader of the barbaric group as well as his shameful death, which took the lives of three of his own children.
&#8220;Last night, the United States brought the world’s No. 1 terrorist leader to justice,&#8221; Trump told the nation Sunday. &#8220;Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead. He was the founder and leader of ISIS, the most ruthless and violent terror organization anywhere in the world. The United States has been searching for Baghdadi for many years. Capturing or killing Baghdadi has been the top national security priority of my administration. U.S. Special Operations forces executed a dangerous and daring nighttime raid in northwestern Syria and accomplished their mission in grand style.
&#8220;He died after running into a dead-end tunnel, whimpering and crying and screaming all the way,&#8221; said Trump. &#8220;The compound had been cleared by this time, with people either surrendering or being shot and killed. Eleven young children were moved out of the house uninjured. The only ones remaining were Baghdadi in the tunnel, and he had dragged three of his young children with him. They were led to certain death.&#8221;
&#8220;He reached the end of the tunnel, as our dogs chased him down,&#8221; Trump continued. &#8220;He ignited his vest, killing himself and the three children. His body was mutilated by the blast, the tunnel had caved in on it in addition, but test results gave certain, immediate and totally positive identification it was him.&#8221;
&#8220;The thug who tried so hard to intimidate others spent his last moments in utter fear, in total panic and dread — terrified of the American forces bearing down on him,&#8221; said the president. &#8220;We were in the compound for approximately two hours, and after the mission was accomplished, we took highly sensitive material and information from the raid, much having to do with ISIS, origins, future plans, things that we very much want. Baghdadi’s demise demonstrates America’s relentless pursuit of terrorist leaders, and our commitment to the enduring and total defeat of ISIS and other terrorist organizations.&#8221;
Below is the full <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/27/us/trump-transcript-isis-al-baghdadi.html">transcript</a> of Trump&#8217;s remarks
<div class="css-53u6y8">
Last night, the United States brought the world’s No. 1 terrorist leader to justice. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is dead. He was the founder and leader of ISIS, the most ruthless and violent terror organization anywhere in the world. The United States has been searching for Baghdadi for many years. Capturing or killing Baghdadi has been the top national security priority of my administration. U.S. Special Operations forces executed a dangerous and daring nighttime raid in northwestern Syria and accomplished their mission in grand style.
The U.S. personnel were incredible. I got to watch much of it. No personnel were lost in the operation, while a large number of Baghdadi’s fighters and companions were killed with him. He died after running into a dead-end tunnel, whimpering and crying and screaming all the way. The compound had been cleared by this time, with people either surrendering or being shot and killed.
Eleven young children were moved out of the house uninjured. The only ones remaining were Baghdadi in the tunnel, and he had dragged three of his young children with him. They were led to certain death. He reached the end of the tunnel, as our dogs chased him down. He ignited his vest, killing himself and the three children. His body was mutilated by the blast, the tunnel had caved in on it in addition, but test results gave certain, immediate and totally positive identification it was him.
The thug who tried so hard to intimidate others spent his last moments in utter fear, in total panic and dread — terrified of the American forces bearing down on him. We were in the compound for approximately two hours, and after the mission was accomplished, we took highly sensitive material and information from the raid, much having to do with ISIS, origins, future plans, things that we very much want.
</div>
<aside class="css-o6xoe7" aria-label="companion column" aria-hidden="false">
<div class="css-ke163a" data-testid="article-companion-wrapper">
<div id="newsletter-module" class="css-48vsi0">
<div class="css-1k9ek97">
<div class="css-tjpxhb">
<div class="css-sefkcv">
<div class="css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn">
<div class="css-53u6y8">
Baghdadi’s demise demonstrates America’s relentless pursuit of terrorist leaders, and our commitment to the enduring and total defeat of ISIS and other terrorist organizations. Our reach is very long. As you know, last month we announced that we recently killed Hamza bin Laden, the very violent son of Osama bin Laden, who was saying very bad things about people, about our country, about the world.
He was the heir apparent to Al Qaeda. Terrorists who oppress and murder innocent people should never sleep soundly, knowing that we will completely destroy them. These savage monsters will not escape their fate — and they will not escape the final judgment of God.
Baghdadi has been on the run for many years, long before I took office. But at my direction, as commander-in-chief of the United States, we obliterated his caliphate, 100 percent, in March of this year. Today’s events are another reminder that we will continue to pursue the remaining ISIS terrorists to their brutal end. That also goes for other terrorist organizations. They are likewise in our sights.
Baghdadi and the losers who worked with him — and losers they are — they had no idea what they were getting into. In some cases they were very frightened puppies, in other cases they were hard-core killers. But they killed many, many people. Their murder of innocent Americans James Foley, Steven Sotloff, Peter Kassig and Kayla Mueller were especially heinous. The shocking publicized murder of Jordanian pilot — a wonderful young man, spoke to the king of Jordan, they all knew him, they all loved him — who was burned alive in a cage for all to see, and the execution of Christians in Libya and Egypt, as well as the genocidal mass murder of Yazidis, rank ISIS among the most depraved organizations in the history of our world.
The forced religious conversions, the orange suits prior to so many beheadings, all of which were openly displayed for the world to see — this was all that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — this is what he wanted, this is what he was proud of. He was a sick and depraved man. And now he’s gone. Baghdadi was vicious and violent, and he died in a vicious and violent way, as a coward, running and crying. This raid was impeccable, and could only have taken place with the acknowledgment and help of certain other nations and people.
</div>
</div>
<div class="css-1fanzo5 StoryBodyCompanionColumn">
<div class="css-53u6y8">
I want to thank the nations of Russia, Turkey, Syria and Iraq, and I also want to thank the Syrian Kurds for certain support they were able to give us. This was a very, very dangerous mission. Thank you as well to the great intelligence professionals who helped make this very successful journey possible.
I want to thank the soldiers and sailors, airmen and Marines involved in last night’s operation. You are the very best there is anywhere in the world, no matter where you go there is nobody even close. I want to thank Gen. Mark Milley and our Joint Chiefs of Staff, and I also want to thank our professionals who work in other agencies of the United States government and were critical to the mission’s unbelievable success.
Last night was a great night for the United States and for the world. A brutal killer, one who has caused so much hardship and death, has violently been eliminated — he will never again harm another innocent man, woman or child. He died like a dog. He died like a coward. The world is now a much safer place.
God bless America, thank you.
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</aside>
</div>
</section>
</div>

Al-Baghdadi

Report: ISIS Defector Inside Baghdadi’s Compound Was Key To U.S. Getting Terrorist Leader

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

Islamic State (ISIS)

Washington Post

The New York Times, a former newspaper, is now openly extolling the Deep State, pushing the narrative that we should thank our lucky stars that a cabal of unelected bureaucrats and spies is working diligently to undermine the duly elected President of the United States.
Times columnist James B. Stewart has written a whole book on the subject: Deep State: Trump, the FBI and The Rule of Law.
“In a sense, [Trump] is right,” Stewart told a smiling Savannah Guthrie on the Today Show. “There is a Deep State, there is a bureaucracy in our country who has pledged to respect the Constitution, respect the rule of law. They do not work for the President, they work for the American people. And as [former FBI Director James] Comey told me&#8230; ‘Thank goodness for that.’”
Michelle Cottle, a member of the Times editorial board, echoed him with a column headlined, “They Are Not the Resistance. They Are Not a Cabal. They Are Public Servants.”
“President Trump is right,” she wrote. “The deep state is alive and well. But it is not the sinister, antidemocratic cabal of his fever dreams. It is, rather, a collection of patriotic public servants&#8230;”
Like so much in the Times these days, these lies aren’t even smart. If these spies and bureaucrats are protecting the Constitution, let me ask this: where are they mentioned in the Constitution? The Constitution provides for a president, a legislature, courts. But it nowhere establishes an unelected collection of conspirators to spy on, leak on and foil the intentions of our duly elected representatives. Officials who work for the American people are elected by the American people and can be unelected by them. What exactly is our recourse if we want these glorious Deep State Heroes to stop doing what they’re doing and allow our President to get on with what we elected him to do?
The Times is selling this intellectual trash hard in hopes of delegitimizing the soon-to-be-released findings of the Department of Justice Inspector General Report on the shenanigans committed by Comey, John Brennan and the rest of Barack Obama’s law and intelligence agencies as they apparently worked to destroy the campaign of the Republican out to defeat Obama’s chosen successor Hillary Clinton.
DOJ Prosecutor John Durham’s investigation into that apparent malfeasance has reportedly now become a criminal investigation, causing potential perps like Comey and Brennan to lawyer up. The Timesand the rest of the left are desperate to get their counter narrative out before an Obama scheme unravels for all to see.
The nonsense Deep State Heroes narrative is also being used to glamorize Congressman Adam Schiff’s so-called impeachment investigation during which behind-locked-doors testimony is selectively leaked to the mainstream media who then dutifully bring it to the public as “mounting evidence” of Trump’s impeachability.
“Trump’s War on the Deep State Turns Against Him,” is the way the Times is trying to sell us this McCarthyite coup attempt.
“The impeachment inquiry is in some ways the culmination of a battle between the president and the government institutions he distrusted and disparaged,” we’re told triumphantly.
But again, if you work out the underlying argument, you find it’s absurd. We’re supposed to think: Obama’s minions bugging phones on which candidate Trump may have spoken, inserting agents into Trump’s campaign, and leaking what we now know were false stories to the press about Trump’s non-existent collusion with Russia — all these things are wonderful patriotic actions. But Donald Trump asking Ukraine to investigate corruption that may have involved Joe Biden’s son — this, by all that’s holy, is an impeachable offense!
In other words, it’s good when we conspire to do it whole hog but it’s criminal when you sort of kind of do it, because shut up.
It’s no mystery why we’re supposed to root for the Shadow Men to undo our votes. It’s because the Democrats don’t think they can beat Trump in the next election.
You remember elections, don’t you, New York Times? They’re the way we choose who governs us, not through a cabal of invisible, unelected bureaucrats and spies.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-doj-administrative-review-into-russia-probe-takes-serious-turn">DOJ Administrative Review Into Russia Probe Takes Serious Turn</a>

The New York Times Headquarters

KLAVAN: The New York Times Loves The Deep State

Adam Schiff

Barack Obama

James Comey

John Brennan

New York Times

As The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/464961-planned-parenthood-announces-45-million-campaign-to-defeat-trump-flip">notes</a>, Planned Parenthood is planning to make a major investment in the 2020 election. The abortion conglomerate&#8217;s super PAC announced that it would be spending upwards of $45 million to unseat Republican politicians and replace them with Democrats.
More from The Hill:
<blockquote>The investment will fund a &#8220;large-scale&#8221; grassroots organization and canvass, digital, television, radio and mail programs.
&#8220;The stakes are higher than ever, and we&#8217;re coming out more powerfully than ever with the largest investment we&#8217;ve ever made,&#8221; said Kelley Robinson, executive director of Planned Parenthood Votes, in an interview with The Hill. &#8230;
&#8220;We know we&#8217;re going to have a critical role mobilizing those folks to win back the Senate and expand the path to 270 to win back the presidency,&#8221; Robinson said.</blockquote>
Notice the phrasing. &#8220;Win back the presidency.&#8221; Planned Parenthood is directly conflating its interest with the interests of elected Democrats, as if the two groups are joined at the hip. Of course, they are joined at the hip. The Democratic Party has long been a prostitute of the abortion industry — doing its bidding and dancing to its tune, as any informed person knows. None of this is news, although it is still notable.
Recall Planned Parenthood&#8217;s panicked reaction a few months ago, when the Trump administration threatened to cut off access to a portion of its tax funding. An executive <a href="https://q13fox.com/2019/08/22/planned-parenthood-feeling-the-lack-of-federal-funding/">fretted</a> that there would be a &#8220;public health crisis&#8221; spurred on by &#8220;this denial of care.&#8221; Indeed, any time Planned Parenthood funding is scrutinized, we are always assured that every dime of the $500 million it annually appropriates from taxpayers is necessary. One of its websites <a href="https://www.istandwithpp.org/defund-defined/impact-defunding-planned-parenthood">warns</a> of a &#8220;national health disaster&#8221; if Planned Parenthood&#8217;s pipeline to the public treasury is cut off or is obstructed in any way. But they&#8217;ve still got nearly $50 million to spend on politics, apparently.
You could argue that Planned Parenthood&#8217;s PAC is distinct from Planned Parenthood itself, which is technically true — just as it is technically true that the half a billion it receives from Uncle Sam doesn&#8217;t directly fund abortions. But these distinctions obscure the fact that money is fungible. By financially propping up one aspect of its business, we better enable it to fund the other parts. The taxpayer money keeps the whole ship afloat, and the PAC is certainly on the ship — or is at least attached to it.
But this is all besides the point. The real point is that Planned Parenthood — as Kelley Robinson in the above quote made perfectly clear — is an expressly ideological organization. It wouldn&#8217;t have a PAC trying to &#8220;win back the presidency&#8221; if that were not the case. It is outrageous that taxpayers are being forced to contribute billions to an organization with a clear political agenda. And we haven&#8217;t even mentioned the fact that this organization also happens to slaughter 300,000 children every year.
The Left insists that organizations like the NRA are corrupting our politics and buying off politicians. Whether this is true or not (and I don&#8217;t think it is), at least Republicans aren&#8217;t appropriating hundreds of millions of dollars from our paychecks every year to put it directly into the NRA&#8217;s coffers — so that the money can eventually end up in their own coffers. One can only imagine the reaction from the Left if such a system were ever instated. Well, they simply wouldn&#8217;t allow it. And yet Republicans have allowed the Democrats to launder campaign funds through Planned Parenthood for decades. That is maybe the biggest outrage of all.

Planned Parenthood

WALSH:   Planned Parenthood Is A Money Laundering Operation For The Democratic Party, And Republicans Refuse To Do Anything About It

Abortion

Democratic Party

Republican Party

The Trump administration, which has been branded as &#8220;anti-Muslim&#8221; by critics from the first few days of Donald Trump&#8217;s presidency, took a significant step this week in defense of Muslims in China.
On Monday, the U.S. Commerce Department announced that it has imposed a trade blacklist on 20 Chinese public security bureaus and eight surveillance-related tech companies for their role in &#8220;human rights violations and abuses in the implementation of China’s campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, and high-technology surveillance against Uighurs, Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups.&#8221;
In a <a href="https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2019/10/us-department-commerce-adds-28-chinese-organizations-its-entity-list">press release</a> Monday, the Commerce Department announced that the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce is adding 28 Chinese governmental and commercial organizations to its blacklist &#8220;for engaging in or enabling activities contrary to the foreign policy interests of the United States.&#8221;
&#8220;This action constricts the export of items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to entities that have been implicated in human rights violations and abuses in China’s campaign targeting Uighurs and other predominantly Muslim ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR),&#8221; the release explains.
&#8220;The U.S. Government and Department of Commerce cannot and will not tolerate the brutal suppression of ethnic minorities within China,” Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said in a statement. “This action will ensure that our technologies, fostered in an environment of individual liberty and free enterprise, are not used to repress defenseless minority populations.”
As reported by <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/07/trump-china-uighur-surveillance-038309">Politico</a> Monday, the United Nations says that the Chinese Communist Party has &#8220;placed more than 1 million Uighur Muslims in internment camps.&#8221;
&#8220;The additions include the XUAR People’s Government Public Security Bureau, 19 subordinate elements, and eight commercial entities,&#8221; the release details. &#8220;Located in XUAR and throughout China, these entities have all been implicated in the implementation of China’s campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, and high-technology surveillance.&#8221;
Citing Section 744.11(b) of the EAR, the press release notes that the Entity List &#8220;identifies persons or organizations reasonably believed to be involved, or to pose a significant risk of being or becoming involved, in activities contrary to the national security or foreign policy interests of the United States.&#8221;
In response to the administration&#8217;s actions, China blasted the U.S. for meddling in its affairs and vowed to continue to defend its sovereignty.
<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trade-china-exclusive/us-puts-hikvision-chinese-security-bureaus-on-economic-blacklist-idUSKBN1WM25M">Reuters</a> provides a brief profile of a few of the companies included in the &#8220;potentially crippling&#8221; blacklist:
<blockquote>Hikvision, with a market value of about $42 billion, calls itself the world’s largest maker of video surveillance gear.
SenseTime, valued at around $4.5 billion in a May 2018 fundraising, is one of the world’s most valuable AI unicorns while Megvii, backed by e-commerce giant Alibaba, is valued at around $4 billion and is preparing an IPO to raise at least $500 million in Hong Kong.
The other companies on the list are speech recognition firm iFlytek Co, surveillance equipment maker Zhejiang Dahua Technology, data recovery firm Xiamen Meiya Pico Information Co, facial recognition firm Yitu Technology and Yixin Science and Technology Co.</blockquote>
The administration&#8217;s action was reportedly months in the making and comes amid continued trade talks between Trump and the Chinese government, with the U.S. planning to impose hundred of billions in tariffs on Chinese imports this month.
The Trump administration was almost immediately branded as &#8220;anti-Muslim&#8221; as a result of the so-called &#8220;Muslim travel ban,&#8221; <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states-2/">Executive Order 13769</a> (&#8220;Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States&#8221;), issued on January 27, 2017, just days after Trump&#8217;s inauguration.
The so-called &#8220;Muslim ban&#8221; lowered the cap on the number of refugees to be admitted for the year to 50,000, suspended the refugee program for four months for review, and blocked admission of refugees from seven terror-risk countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen (countries likewise listed as high-risk by the Obama administration). After severe backlash for supposedly &#8220;targeting Muslims,&#8221; the short-lived order was superseded two months later by Executive Order 13780.

President Trump

Trump Bans Chinese Companies For Abuse Against Muslims

China

Islam

A statement <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/06/world/europe/ahmet-davutoglu-turkey-prime-minister.html">attributed</a> to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan goes like this: “Democracy is like a bus, when you arrive at your destination, you step off.” We know that Erdogan long ago stepped away from democratic norms, particularly after the failed coup of July 2016, which accelerated domestic repression and Ankara’s pivot to the East. Instead of increasing the pressure to shift Erdogan off this path, successive U.S. administrations have presented, at best, lukewarm responses that have only enabled the authoritarian and anti-American behavior of the Turkish government.
Turkey has been given repeated off-ramps which could be beneficial to Ankara, only to continue with activities that directly endanger the national security interests of the United States and our allies.
Regionally, Erdogan continues to take destabilizing actions against U.S. allies and interests. After renewed threats and talks between President Trump and Erdogan, Turkey is on the precipice of taking further military action into Syria. Greenlighting Turkey’s invasion not only endangers the Kurds, but also endangers a Christian minority that has for years <a href="https://www.kurdistan24.net/en/news/deeea6a9-a23a-40bf-95ab-4094a1d924f7">feared</a> a Turkish invasion that would “cleanse” its presence in northern Syria.
The administration’s abandonment of our Kurdish allies only invites further destabilization and once again sends a message to allies in the Middle East that America is not a reliable partner — a message that our adversaries in Moscow and Tehran will further amplify to our detriment.
In the eastern Mediterranean, Turkey continues to take <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/cyprus-condemns-new-turkey-energy-drill-as-severe-escalation/ar-AAIgFuL">provocative</a> actions by sending drilling ships inside Cyprus’ exclusive economic zone. During Secretary Pompeo’s recent trip to Greece, he rightfully <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-warns-turkey-over-offshore-drilling-near-cyprus/ar-AAIjoWN">warned </a>Turkey that “no country can hold Europe hostage.” Here, the Trump administration and Congress can and should work together to advance the bipartisan Eastern Mediterranean Security and Energy Partnership Act. Beyond words, this legislation solidifies the importance of the strategic relationship between Greece, Israel, Cyprus, and the United States in the eastern Mediterranean — a key partnership at a time when nations such as Turkey and Russia attempt to exert their influence in the same area.
The ongoing saga of Turkey’s acquisition of the S-400 missile system is another area of friction. October 12th will mark exactly three months since the first components of the Russian missile system arrived at Murted Air Base outside of Ankara. Since then, we have seen Turkey tentatively kicked out of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, a ban that will become statutory under the forthcoming National Defense Authorization Act. In the meantime, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-security-usa-graham-idUSKBN1W70TQ">some</a> have attempted to send mixed messages to the Turks about their ability to still acquire the F-35 if they don’t turn on the S-400 — a laughable proposal that should be squashed.
This wavering, coupled with the administration’s passive “<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-turkey-sanctions-idUSKCN1VU1DF">looking at it</a>” approach to issuing sanctions under <a href="https://www.state.gov/countering-americas-adversaries-through-sanctions-act-of-2017/sections-231-and-235/">Section 231</a> of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) has sent signals of weakness to not only Ankara, but to numerous nations considering undertaking significant investments in Russian armaments. To maintain the efficacy of these sanctions, the administration needs to move forward into the implementation stage.
Erdogan has also become a key <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/09/23/turkey-is-now-a-haven-for-terrorists-and-an-enabler-of-terrorism/">enabler</a> of terror groups such as Hamas, both through financing and allowing the terror group to operate freely out of Turkey. As a recent U.S. <a href="https://freebeacon.com/national-security/u-s-banks-embroiled-in-lawsuit-over-funding-of-hamas-terrorists/">lawsuit</a> by a family whose loved one was killed in a Hamas attack charges that Turkish banks are complicit in financing Hamas terror attacks. Turkey’s support for Hamas is not new. In fact, in 2015 the U.S. Treasury Department <a href="https://twitter.com/rolltidebmz/status/871727707129872385/photo/1">sanctioned</a> the then-Turkey based Salih al-Aruri for directing and financing Hamas’ operations in Judea and Samaria. It was al-Aruri who was behind the killing of three Israeli teenagers in 2014.
The Treasury Department has continued to highlight these <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/09/23/turkey-is-now-a-haven-for-terrorists-and-an-enabler-of-terrorism/">concerns</a> with 11 recent designations of entities believed to be supporting Hamas and other terror groups. While these designations are positive steps, Erdogan’s affinity for groups with American and Israeli blood on their hands should become a central issue in the bilateral relationship — with serious consequences for Erdogan’s continued Hamas support.
Beyond all of this, however, is yet another flashing red light in the U.S.-Turkish relationship. Erdogan recently made troubling pronouncements about his interest in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-nuclear-erdogan-idUSKCN1VP2QN">acquiring</a> nuclear weapons. Turkey, a signatory to both the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test Ban Treaty, would cross over into rogue nuclear state territory if it continues down such a path.
Congress has a key role to play in the U.S.-Turkey relationship. That can come through positive actions, such as shoring up the pro-American alliance in the eastern Mediterranean, or through punitive measures, such as continuing to push for CAATSA sanctions or the downgrading of military cooperation. And as far as Erdogan’s latest foray into Syria, some in the U.S. Senate are <a href="https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1181219542778953728">proposing</a> further sanctions on Turkey and a suspension from NATO if Turkey moves forward and attacks U.S. allies.
Erdogan’s repeated actions attacking U.S. interests show that he is no friend nor NATO partner in good standing — but rather an adversarial power seeking to undermine U.S. power and values. America enables Erdogan when we back off sanctions or acquiesce to military action against our allies. The U.S. should push back, increase the pressure, and keep Ankara accountable until it changes course. If not, we have seen that Erdogan will keep pushing his agenda to the detriment of the United States and our allies.
&nbsp;
Boris Zilberman is Director of Public Policy and Strategy at the Christians United for Israel Action Fund.

World Leaders Address United Nations General Assembly

ZILBERMAN: The U.S. Is Enabling Turkey’s Adversarial Behavior

Foreign Policy

Kurds

Middle East

Turkey

The 2019-2020 U.S. Supreme Court term officially kicked off today with oral argument in the case of <a href="https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1181192452331511810">Kahler v. Kansas</a>. This is the first full term with Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and many conservatives — especially those of a perhaps more sanguine judicial disposition than <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">yours truly</a> — eagerly anticipate what they hope will be important rulings in disparate hot-button legal areas such as abortion, gun rights, transgenderism and homosexuality, and immigration. Here are some key cases (with predictions!) and key broader themes to watch for, from a conservative perspective.
Cases
<ol>
<li><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/gee-v-june-medical-services-llc/">June Medical Services, LLC v. Gee</a>: This is the most important abortion case since 2016&#8217;s disappointing result in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-274_new_e18f.pdf">Whole Women&#8217;s Health v. Hellerstedt</a>, which nullified the underlying Texas pro-life statute at issue. In Gee, the justices will grapple with two important questions: (1) Whether Louisiana&#8217;s hospital admitting privileges law for abortionists complies with the &#8220;undue burden&#8221; constitutional standard first promulgated in 1992&#8217;s infamous Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and (2) whether so-called <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/legal-argument-louisiana-could-have-huge-josh-hammer">&#8220;third-party standing&#8221; doctrine for abortionists</a> should be doctrinally revisited. PREDICTION: Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts write a plurality opinion that upholds Louisiana&#8217;s law while very narrowly paring back Casey&#8216;s &#8220;undue burden&#8221; standard. But the chief justice joins liberals to secure continued <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-pence-promises-challenge-nationwide-josh-hammer">liberal standing</a> requirements for abortionists.</li>
<li><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-inc-v-city-of-new-york-new-york/">New York State Rifle &amp; Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, New York</a>: This is the first Second Amendment case that the justices have taken since 2010&#8217;s landmark City of Chicago v. McDonald, which incorporated the individual right to keep and bear arms — as articulated by the Court two years prior in District of Columbia v. Heller — against state governments. In the comparably minor case of City of New York, the nine robed oracles will assess whether New York City&#8217;s <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/new-york-state-rifle-pistol-association-inc-v-city-of-new-york-new-york/">&#8220;ban on transporting a licensed, locked and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits&#8221;</a> is reconcilable with the Second Amendment&#8217;s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-must-not-go-soft-assault-josh-hammer">individual right</a> established in Heller and McDonald. PREDICTION: New York City&#8217;s ban will be overturned on a standard 5-4 ideological judicial split.</li>
<li><a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/altitude-express-inc-v-zarda/">Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda </a>(consolidated with <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/bostock-v-clayton-county-georgia/">Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia</a>): In what is perhaps my personally most anticipated consolidated case of the term, the justices will adjudicate whether Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans employment discrimination because of &#8220;sex,&#8221; necessarily also bans employment discrimination because of sexual orientation. The obvious and common sensical answer, using standard tools of statutory interpretation, is a resounding <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/judge-hos-excellent-opinion-on-title-vii-sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity-part-1/">&#8220;no.&#8221;</a> But the Court oftentimes does not supply the correct answer in these seemingly straightforward legal questions, especially where cultural currents strongly point in the sexual liberationist direction. PREDICTION: Kavanaugh defects to join the liberals in a 5-4 judicial re-writing of Title VII to accommodate sexual orientation. Thomas and Alito write scathing dissents, as Kavanaugh&#8217;s <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-draw-right-lessons-kavanaughs-bad-start-no-josh-hammer">reputation as moderate</a> is solidified early in his tenure.</li>
<li> <a href="https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/trump-v-naacp/">Trump v. NAACP</a> (consolidated with two other cases): At long last, the black-robed oracles of the Court will finally deign to decide for us flyover state plebeians whether then-President Barack Obama&#8217;s unconstitutional DACA executive amnesty may be rescinded by President Trump. The very fact that this is a viable legal issue — let alone a high-profile one — is, of course, dispiriting. But much like the so-called &#8220;travel ban&#8221; case of <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-965_h315.pdf">Trump v. Hawaii</a>, the presence of the &#8220;orange man&#8221; as a named party to a lawsuit tends to enflame the passions of the judicial <a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/judicial-resistance">#resistance</a>. PREDICTION: Trump&#8217;s executive rescinding of Obama&#8217;s unconstitutional amnesty is upheld, but only after the chief justice and Kavanaugh first both side with the liberals in erroneously finding that Trump&#8217;s rescinding of the policy is judicially reviewable, in the first instance.</li>
</ol>
Themes
<ol>
<li>Will Kavanaugh move to the right or solidify his centrist bona fides as the chief justice&#8217;s <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/07/supreme-court-bromance-john-roberts-brett-kavanaugh-tie-up-court/3342377002/">wingman</a>? Kavanaugh had a complicated initial partial term on the Court. He found himself in the majority more than any other justice, and emerged as the closest ally on the Court to new, post-Anthony Kennedy &#8220;swing vote&#8221; Chief Justice Roberts. Kavanaugh generally finished the term in strong fashion, although there were a number of hiccups along the way on issues as wide-ranging as the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-roberts-and-kavanaughs-death-penalty-josh-hammer">death penalty</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-blown-opportunity-justice-kavanaugh-quickly-josh-hammer">antitrust</a>. I tend toward pessimism when it comes to Kavanaugh — he is, at his core, a Beltway Republican establishmentarian and not a man of Thomas/Scalia-esque originalist juridical convictions. I unfortunately predict more disappointment from Kavanaugh this term, with the consolidated Title VII cases being my best guess for a high-profile case where Kavanaugh will disappoint conservatives.</li>
<li>Will Justice Neil Gorsuch&#8217;s libertarianism — especially on criminal law — continue unabated? While of a decidedly stronger originalist hue than Kavanaugh, Gorsuch&#8217;s second full term on the Court solidified jurisprudential traces that we first saw emerge in his <a href="https://www.conservativereview.com/news/gorsuch-dead-wrong-immigration/">disastrous</a> 2018 concurrence in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/15-1498_1b8e.pdf">Sessions v. Dimaya</a> — namely, that of pro-criminal libertarianism. Toward the end of last term, Gorsuch ruled in disappointing fashion in the &#8220;unconstitutionally void for vagueness&#8221; case of <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/18-431_7758.pdf">U.S. v. Davis</a> and the mens rea requirement case of <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9560_e2p3.pdf">U.S. v. Rehaif</a>. In Rehaif, Gorsuch was joined in the majority by Roberts and Kavanaugh, but in Davis — likely the more pernicious of the two, from the perspective of opening the litigation floodgates to habeas corpus challenges — he joined the liberal bloc alone. Criminal law comprises a plurality of the Supreme Court docket, and it is deeply dispiriting for law-and-order conservatives to see Gorsuch emerge as an ally of the Left in judicially imposing de facto jailbreak initiatives. It is easy for a conservative to be tough on Kavanaugh, but Gorsuch&#8217;s mishaps also demand scrutinizing eyes.</li>
<li>How, if at all, will the chief justice respond to bipartisan attacks on the Court? The chief justice, ever concerned with non-legal, extraneous concerns such as the Court&#8217;s &#8220;institutional integrity,&#8221; is <a href="https://theresurgent.com/2019/10/07/because-they-work-get-ready-for-more-attacks-on-john-roberts/">uniquely susceptible</a> to well-orchestrated P.R./media campaigns against him. The chief should expect much more of that this term, as it seems that the current Court pleases no one in particular — be they on the Left or the Right. Roberts has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-kavanaugh-and-gorsuch-have-issues-john-josh-hammer">long been a disappointment</a> to conservatives, and there is little reason to expect him to change course at this stage of his career on the Court. But it will nonetheless be interesting to monitor whether Roberts will feel compelled to speak up in similar fashion to how he did last term, when he <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/21/john-roberts-trump-statement/2080266002/">condemned Trump&#8217;s comments</a> about overtly partisan federal judges.</li>
<li>Will conservatives finally resign themselves to ending this <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">judicial supremacist charade</a>, once and for all? This is, of course, the most important question of all. In a judicial supremacist world — that is, the anti-constitutional legal hellscape wrought by 1958&#8217;s power grab case of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-it-past-time-trump-openly-defy-court-order-josh-hammer">Cooper v. Aaron</a> — the so-called <a href="https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed78.asp">&#8220;least dangerous&#8221;</a> branch has transmogrified into something much more insidious. Under this faux-legal framework, arguably nothing is more important in the world of federal politics than judicial nominations. But playing the judicial supremacist game is <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/hammer-conservatives-how-much-longer-are-you-josh-hammer">systemically rigged</a> against conservatives and, ultimately, is un-winnable. Will conservatives ever wake up?</li>
</ol>

U.S. Supreme Court

HAMMER: The Supreme Court Term Begins Today. Here Is What Conservatives Should Look For.

First Amendment

LGBT

Second Amendment

A media-hyped &#8220;urgent&#8221; meeting between Democratic-led House committees and the State Department Inspector General on Wednesday turned out to be a big disappointment for those hoping it would offer incriminating documents related to the Democrats&#8217; impeachment effort.
Instead of evidence of &#8220;retaliation&#8221; against State Department officials cooperating with House Democrats, as <a href="https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1179495528222089216">Reuters</a> and others reported ahead of the meeting, Inspector General Steve Linick ended up presenting the Democrats with months-old reports about Democrats&#8217; alleged &#8220;collusion&#8221; with Ukraine, which Democrats are decrying as &#8220;hallucinatory&#8221; and &#8220;propagandistic.&#8221; The information presented at the meeting, Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin told reporters Wednesday, &#8220;feels like a completely irrelevant distraction from the work at hand.&#8221;
In a brief report posted at just after 5 p.m. on Wednesday on the highly anticipated &#8220;urgent&#8221; meeting with multiple House committees requested by Linick, <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/trump-impeachment-inquiry-latest-updates-today-2019-10-02/">CBS News</a>, provided a rather deflated update.
&#8220;In a briefing on Capitol Hill, the State Department inspector general gave attendees a packet of &#8216;hallucinatory, propagandistic&#8217; materials and articles about Ukraine, Biden, Giuliani, Trump hotels and other matters that were sent to the secretary of state several months ago, according to Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin and congressional aides,&#8221; CBS reported.
The cover sheet of the documents, which was written in calligraphy, claims to have been sent from the White House, CBS reports, &#8220;but no one really knows who sent the materials.&#8221; The State Department has also confirmed that the documents were received back on May 3, leaving some lawmakers to question the &#8220;urgency&#8221; of the matter.
The information presented in the meeting was &#8220;nothing relating to the president’s impeachable conduct,&#8221; said Raskin and had nothing to do with &#8220;retaliation,&#8221; Politico&#8217;s Andrew Desiderio <a href="https://twitter.com/AndrewDesiderio/status/1179497123500511233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1179497123500511233&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fdailycaller.com%2F2019%2F10%2F02%2Fstate-department-inspector-general-urgent-meeting-old-news%2F">reports</a>. &#8220;Instead, he says, it was about a packet of misinformation apparently meant to smear the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine,&#8221; Desiderio notes.
In the meeting, which one Senate aide described as &#8220;weird,&#8221; Linick shared materials committee chairs said &#8220;raise troubling questions about apparent efforts inside and outside the Trump Administration to target specific officials.&#8221; The most notable potential &#8220;target&#8221; was the former ambassador to Ukraine, who the Trump administration removed from her position prematurely this year.
<a href="https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/02/state-department-inspector-general-urgent-meeting-old-news/">The Daily Caller</a> reports that sources familiar with the meeting said that among the documents were &#8220;news articles written this past spring by The Hill’s John Solomon about Democratic ties to Ukraine.&#8221; In late April, Solomon <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/440730-how-the-obama-white-house-engaged-ukraine-to-give-russia-collusion">reported</a> that &#8220;the Obama White House engaged Ukraine to give Russia collusion narrative an early boost.&#8221;
&#8220;The matter is from four months ago,&#8221; an official told the Daily Caller. &#8220;They’ve been sitting on it for four months. The urgent-ness of this seems a little contrived. This was handled the exact way it should have been. The information was turned over by a senior official to a career lawyer who then gave it to the IG. That was four months ago.&#8221;
A State Department official has since confirmed that the materials presented at the meeting &#8220;were provided by the Department to the Inspector General on May 3, 2019 for his review and for such action as the Inspector General deemed appropriate.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sec-pompeo-yes-i-was-on-trumps-ukraine-call">Sec. Pompeo Reveals He Was On Trump’s Ukraine Call, Warns Dems Over ‘Intimidating’ Staff</a>

Jamie Raskin

‘WEIRD’: Dems Went Into ‘Urgent’ Meeting Expecting Impeachment Evidence, Left With ‘Propaganda’ About Dems’ Collusion With Ukraine

Ukraine

As the firestorm over President Trump&#8217;s July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky continues to consume the news cycle, the Trump administration has taken new action into a controversy that played a central role in the 2016 election: the Hillary Clinton private email server scandal.
<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/state-dept-intensifies-email-probe-of-hillary-clintons-former-aides/2019/09/28/9f15497e-e1f2-11e9-8dc8-498eabc129a0_story.html">The Washington Post</a> reported Saturday that State Department investigators are &#8220;investigating the email records of dozens of current and former senior State Department officials who sent messages to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email.&#8221;
&#8220;As many as 130 officials have been contacted in recent weeks by State Department investigators — a list that includes senior officials who reported directly to Clinton as well as others in lower-level jobs whose emails were at some point relayed to her inbox, said current and former State Department officials,&#8221; the Post reports. &#8220;Those targeted were notified that emails they sent years ago have been retroactively classified and now constitute potential security violations, according to letters reviewed by The Washington Post.&#8221;
The Post&#8217;s sources say investigators began contacting former officials 18 months ago, &#8220;then seemed to drop the effort before picking it up again in August.&#8221; In &#8220;virtually all&#8221; of the cases, potentially sensitive information was sent to Clinton&#8217;s private, unauthorized server, the outlet notes.
A State Department official stressed to the Post that the renewed investigation &#8220;has nothing to do with who is in the White House.&#8221; The official, who asked to remained anonymous, told the paper, &#8220;This is about the time it took to go through millions of emails, which is about 3½ years.&#8221;
<div class="remainder-content">
<section>In its report on the State Department&#8217;s investigation into Clinton&#8217;s use of an unsecured private server, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-email-server-state-department.html">The New York Times</a> claims that the FBI&#8217;s investigation into the issue concluded &#8220;without finding wrongdoing by Mrs. Clinton.&#8221;But that&#8217;s not what the FBI said at all. In his much-critiqued announcement of the bureau&#8217;s findings just a few months before the 2016 election, former FBI Director James Comey condemned Clinton and her colleagues&#8217; &#8220;extremely careless&#8221; handling of &#8220;very sensitive, highly classified information.&#8221;&#8221;Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,&#8221; <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/05/politics/fbi-clinton-email-server-comey-damning-lines/index.html">said</a> Comey.&#8221;There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton&#8217;s position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,&#8221; Comey asserted.
&#8220;None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government &#8212; or even with a commercial email service like Gmail,&#8221; he said later.
The &#8220;security culture&#8221; of Clinton&#8217;s State Department, said Comey, was &#8220;generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information that is found elsewhere in the government.&#8221;
<div>Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/senate-judiciary-letter-to-doj-ukraine-helped-clinton-campaign-dnc">Senate Judiciary Letter To DOJ: Ukraine Helped Clinton Campaign, DNC</a> 
</div>
</section>
</div>

Hillary Clinton

State Department Takes New Action On Hillary Investigation

State Department

With the Democrats marching steadily toward impeaching President Trump over the &#8220;<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-call-from-hell-trump-taunts-media-over-released-transcript-room-explodes">call from hell</a>,&#8221; some amped-up Trump critics are already moving on to the next target: the leftist-loathed Vice President of the United States, Mike Pence.
What has the folks over at HuffPost spinning up spirited headlines about &#8220;President Pelosi&#8221; is Trump&#8217;s comments about Ukraine. He made the comment shortly after his administration released the transcript, in which he &#8220;dragged Vice President Mike Pence’s name into his growing Ukraine scandal,&#8221; as the left-leaning outlet put it.
On Wednesday, the Trump administration released a summary memo containing a transcript from his much-analyzed July 25 call with Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky. The administration followed that on Thursday by releasing the complaint filed by the thus-far unnamed whistleblower (who, according to the New York Times, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-report-whistleblower-worked-for-the-c-i-a">worked for the CIA</a>) alleging that Trump attempted to &#8220;to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election&#8221; by &#8220;pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.&#8221;
In a press conference in which he addressed the Ukraine accusations on Wednesday, Trump pointed out that Pence also had &#8220;a couple of conversations&#8221; with Ukraine.
&#8220;I think you should ask for Vice President Pence&#8217;s conversation, because he had a couple of conversations also,&#8221; Trump said, as reported by <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/25/trump-pence-ukraine-phone-calls-1512771">Politico</a>. &#8220;I could save you a lot of time,&#8221; he added. &#8220;They were all perfect. Nothing was mentioned of any import other than congratulations.&#8221;
Trump noted that the July 25 call was actually the second time he spoke with Zelensky, and that he&#8217;d gladly hand over a transcripts of Pence&#8217;s call and his first call with the Ukrainian leader if prompted.
&#8220;The word is they’re going to ask for the first phone conversation,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;You can have it anytime you need it. And also Mike Pence&#8217;s conversations, which were, I think, one or two of them. They were perfect. They were all perfect.&#8221;
The comments, HuffPost notes, sparked a new resistance hashtag campaign — <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/PresidentPelosi?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1177055159559409664&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffpost.com%2Fentry%2Ftrump-pence-president-pelosi_n_5d8c49c6e4b0e9e760472a5b">#PresidentPelosi</a> — with anti-Trumpers hoping aloud that Pence will now join Trump in impeachment purgatory.
&#8220;Critics of the administration are now envisioning a scenario in which both Trump and Pence end up impeached,&#8221; <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-pence-president-pelosi_n_5d8c49c6e4b0e9e760472a5b">HuffPost</a> reports, before lightly raining on the Impeach Pence parade. &#8220;While it would take an unlikely sequence of events for that to happen, the reaction caused #PresidentPelosi to trend Wednesday night and Thursday morning, given that the speaker of the House would be next in the line of succession.&#8221;
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="3" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
In the transcript released by the Trump administration Wednesday, Trump did ask Zelensky to “look into” Biden and his son but, as team Trump maintains, never offered any direct quid pro quo for investigating his political rival.
&#8220;There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great,&#8221; Trump told Zelesky on the call that sparked the Democrats&#8217; latest impeachment push. &#8220;Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.&#8221;
Prior to bringing up Biden, Trump mentioned cybersecurity company Crowdstrike, which was contracted by the Democratic National Committee to look into the potential hacking of its emails. The company concluded that two Russia-based hacking groups were the culprits, though the DNC would not allow further confirmation of its findings.
“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it,&#8221; said Trump. &#8220;I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it.&#8221; Trump then specified that his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and Attorney General William Barr would be in contact with the Ukraine to help &#8220;get to the bottom of it.&#8221;
</div>
<div class="content-list-component yr-content-list-text text" data-rapid-cpos="5" data-rapid-subsec="paragraph" data-rapid-parsed="subsec">
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-the-whistleblower-complaint-that-sparked-the-trump-impeachment-inquiry">Here’s The Whistleblower Complaint That Sparked The Trump Impeachment Inquiry</a>
</div>

Vice President Pence

Trump Brings Up Pence In Ukraine Comments, Now Critics Declaring Pence Will Be Impeached Too

Mike Pence

While many Democrats have been calling for Donald Trump&#8217;s impeachment since before he even took office, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), after struggling for months to rein in the more radical members of her party, initiated a formal impeachment inquiry into the president this week. The document ultimately responsible for pushing the Democrats&#8217; impeachment campaign to the next level was a complaint filed by a whistleblower about a July 25 phone call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky in which Trump encouraged his Ukrainian counterpart to &#8220;look into&#8221; corruption allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
With the firestorm over the call raging, President Trump agreed to release both the partial <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-releases-transcript-of-phone-call-with-ukraine-president-justice-department-responds">transcript</a> of the call (released Wednesday) and the full complaint (released Thursday), allowing the public to read for themselves what was alleged and what had actually taken place. After the administration announced that it would release the complaint, an administration official told reporters that the intelligence community inspector general found the whistleblower had &#8220;political bias&#8221; in favor of &#8220;a rival candidate&#8221; of the president, Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry-whistleblower-complaint-release-congress-white-house">reported</a>.
As documented in the transcript, Trump did ask Zelensky to &#8220;look into&#8221; Biden and his son, though the administration underscores that no direct quid pro quo was offered by the president, as initially alleged by critics. Trump continues to maintain that he handled the call &#8220;perfectly&#8221; and that the media has over-hyped the claims.
&#8220;There&#8217;s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great,&#8221; Trump told Zelesky on the July 25 call. &#8220;Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.&#8221;
Before mentioning the Bidens, Trump brought up the cybersecurity company Crowdstrike, which was contacted by the Democratic National Committee after it noticed activity it suspected to be hacking. The company concluded that two hacking groups connected to Russia had infiltrated the DNC&#8217;s network.
&#8220;I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike &#8230; I guess you have one of your wealthy people&#8230; The server, they say Ukraine has it,&#8221; said Trump. Trump then said his personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and Attorney General William Barr would contact the Ukraine to &#8220;get to the bottom of it.&#8221;
In the complaint that prompted the flood of reports and impeachment inquiry, the whistleblower describes the call as the president &#8220;using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.&#8221; The Department of Justice said in a statement Tuesday that after reviewing the complaint, the Department’s Criminal Division &#8220;reviewed the official record of the call and determined, based on the facts and applicable law, that there was no campaign finance violation and that no further action was warranted.&#8221;
Below is the full text of the introduction to the released <a href="https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190812_-_whistleblower_complaint_unclass.pdf">whistleblower complaint</a> and the first two sections of allegations related to the content of the call and alleged attempts to &#8220;restrict access&#8221; to it (formatting adjusted):
<blockquote>Dear Chairman Burr and Chairman Schiff:
I am reporting an “urgent concern” in accordance with the procedures outlined in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(A). This letter is UNCLASSIFIED when separated from the attachment.
In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals. The President’s personal lawyer, Mr. Rudolph Giuliani, is a central figure in this effort. Attorney General Barr appears to be involved as well.
• Over the past four months, more than half a dozen U.S. officials have informed me of various facts related to this effort. The information provided herein was relayed to me in the course of official interagency business. It is routine for U.S. officials with responsibility for a particular regional or functional portfolio to share such information with one another in order to inform policymaking and analysis.
• I was not a direct witness to most of the events described. However, I found my colleagues’ accounts of these events to be credible because, in almost all cases, multiple officials recounted fact patterns that were consistent with one another. In addition, a variety of information consistent with these private accounts has been reported publicly.
I am deeply concerned that the actions described below constitute “a serious or flagrant problem, abuse, or violation of law or Executive Order” that “does not include differences of opinions concerning public policy matters,” consistent with the definition of an “urgent concern” in 50 U.S.C. §3033(k)(5)(G). I am therefore fulfilling my duty to report this information through proper legal channels, to the relevant authorities.
• I am also concerned that these actions pose risks to U.S. national security and undermine the U.S. Government’s efforts to deter and counter foreign interference in U.S. elections.
To the best of my knowledge, the entirety of this statement is unclassified when separated from the classified enclosure. I have endeavored to apply the classification standards outlined in Executive Order (EO) 13526 and to separate out information that I know or have reason to believe is classified for national security purposes. (1)
• If a classification is applied retroactively, I believe it is incumbent upon the classifying authority to explain why such a marking was applied, and to which specific information it pertains.
I. The 25 July Presidential phone call
Early in the morning of 25 July, the President spoke by telephone with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. I do not know which side initiated the call. This was the first publicly acknowledged call between the two leaders since a brief congratulatory call after Mr. Zelenskyy won the presidency on 21 April.
Multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call informed me that, after an initial exchange of pleasantries, the President used the remainder of the call to advance his personal interests. Namely, he sought to pressure the Ukrainian leader to take actions to help the President’s 2020 reelection bid. According to the White House officials who had direct knowledge of the call, the President pressured Mr. Zelenskyy to, inter alia:
• initiate or continue an investigation(2) into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden;
• assist in purportedly uncovering that allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election originated in Ukraine, with a specific request that the Ukrainan leader locate and turn over servers used by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and examined by the U.S. cyber security firm Crowdstrike(3), which initially reported that Russian hackers had penetrated the DNC’s networks in 2016; and
• meet or speak with two people the President named explicitly as his personal envoys on these matter, Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Barr, to whom the President referred multiple times in tandem.
The President also praised Ukraine’s Prosecutor General, Mr. Yuriy Lutsenko, and suggested that Mr. Zelenksyy might want to keep him in his position. (Note: Starting in March 2019, Mr. Lutsenko made a series of public allegations—many of which he later walked back—about the Biden family’s activities in Ukraine, Ukrainian officials’ purported involvement in the 2016 U.S. election, and the activities of the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv. See Part IV for additional context.)
The White House officials who told me this information were deeply disturbed by what had transpired in the phone call. They told me that there was already a “discussion ongoing” with White House lawyers about how to treat the call because of the likelihood, in the officials’ retelling, that they had witnessed the President abuse his office for personal gain.
The Ukrainian side was the first to publicly acknowledge the phone call. On the evening of 25 July, a readout was posted on the website of the Ukrainian President that contained the following line (translation from original Russian-language readout):
• “Donald Trump expressed his conviction that the new Ukrainian government will be able to quickly improve Ukraine’s image and complete the investigation of corruption cases that have held back cooperation between Ukraine and the United States.”
Aside from the above-mentioned “cases” purportedly dealing with the Biden family and the 2016 U.S. election, I was told by White House officials that no other “cases” were discussed.
Based on my understanding, there were approximately a dozen White House officials who listened to the call—a mixture of policy officials and duty officers in the White House Situation Room, as is customary. The officials I spoke with told me that participation in the call had not been restricted in advance because everyone expected it would be a “routine” call with a foreign leader. I do not know whether anyone was physically present with the President during the call.
• In addition to White House personnel, I was told that a State Department official, Mr. T. Ulrich Brechbuhl, also listened in on the call.
• I was not the only non-White House officials to receive a readout of the call. Based on my understanding, multiple State Department and Intelligence Community officials were also briefed on the contents of the call as outlined above.
II. Efforts to restrict access to records related to the call
In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced—as is customary—by the White House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.
• White House officials told me that they were “directed” by White House lawyers to remove the electronic transcript from the computer system in which such transcripts are typically stored for coordination, finalization, and distribution to Cabinet-level officials.
• Instead, the transcript was loaded into a separate electronic system that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature. One White House official described this act as an abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.
I do not know whether similar measures were taken to restrict access to other records of the call, such as contemporaneous handwritten notes taken by those who listened in.</blockquote>
The whistleblower goes on to outline “ongoing concerns” about what allegedly took place over the next few weeks regarding the call, including U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations Kurt Volker and Giuliani reaching out to Ukrainian officials about how to “navigate” Trump’s “demands.” <a href="https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/20190812_-_whistleblower_complaint_unclass.pdf">Read the full complaint here</a>.

Here’s The Whistleblower Complaint That Sparked The Trump Impeachment Inquiry

Nancy Pelosi

After months of trying to keep the more radical members of her party from beating the drum too loudly for the politically risky action, Democratic leader House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (CA) finally made a decision to formally move forward with an impeachment inquiry on Tuesday. Will the move backfire, as many analysts have warned, or will it pay off for Pelosi and company? Amid a series of posts slamming the Democrats for moving forward with an impeachment inquiry over the latest &#8220;witch hunt&#8221;-spawned scandal, President Trump revealed that his campaign believes impeachment will pay off — for him, literally.
&#8220;Democrats have one sole focus,&#8221; Trump&#8217;s new impeachment-themed fundraising video states before presenting a series of Democratic lawmakers — including presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA) and &#8220;Squad&#8221; members Rep. Rashida Tlaib (MI) and Ilhan Omar (MN) — repeatedly calling for Trump&#8217;s impeachment. &#8220;If we don&#8217;t impeach this president, he will get re-elected,&#8221; says Rep. Al Green (D-TX).
&#8220;It&#8217;s time to stop this nonsense,&#8221; Trump says at a rally. &#8220;They think they&#8217;re going to win. Did you see the one man? He says, it&#8217;s the only way we&#8217;re going to beat him in 2020 &#8230; Well that&#8217;s a compliment, I guess. But think of what he said. It&#8217;s the only way they&#8217;re going to beat me. And actually it&#8217;s working the other way, because now we have our best poll numbers that we&#8217;ve ever had.&#8221;
The video ends with Trump supporters chanting &#8220;Four more years!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://t.co/1KOSnHguW2">pic.twitter.com/1KOSnHguW2</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176610391058722816?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
While the Democrats geared up for the impeachment inquiry decision, Trump was particularly busy on social media Tuesday, posting a series of statements and videos addressing the latest scandal: his alleged attempt to &#8220;pressure&#8221; the Ukrainian president to reopen an investigation into Hunter Biden and Joe Biden&#8217;s role in forcing Ukraine to remove its top prosecutor who had investigating Hunter and his company over corruption.
In a pair of tweets, Trump announced that he had &#8220;authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine,&#8221; promising, &#8220;You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!&#8221;
In a follow-up tweet, Trump announced that &#8220;Secretary of State Pompeo recieved permission from Ukraine Government to release the transcript of the telephone call I had with their President.&#8221;
&#8220;[The Ukrainian officials] don&#8217;t know either what the big deal is,&#8221; he added. &#8220;A total Witch Hunt Scam by the Democrats!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Secretary of State Pompeo recieved permission from Ukraine Government to release the transcript of the telephone call I had with their President. They don’t know either what the big deal is. A total Witch Hunt Scam by the Democrats!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176623010230525953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
Trump also noted that the Democrats backing impeachment &#8220;never even saw the transcript of the call.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
They never even saw the transcript of the call. A total Witch Hunt!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176605750657003520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
The president later highlighted a new report noting that the attorney working for the &#8220;whistleblower&#8221; who sparked the Ukraine firestorm allegedly worked for Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
“Attorney For Anti-Trump ‘Whistleblower’ Worked For Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer” <a href="https://t.co/yxQ5obwB6K">https://t.co/yxQ5obwB6K</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176684407677210624?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
&#8220;There has been no President in the history of our Country who has been treated so badly as I have,&#8221; he tweeted later. &#8220;The Democrats are frozen with hatred and fear. They get nothing done. This should never be allowed to happen to another President. Witch Hunt!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
There has been no President in the history of our Country who has been treated so badly as I have. The Democrats are frozen with hatred and fear. They get nothing done. This should never be allowed to happen to another President. Witch Hunt!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176819645699043328?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
As he did in the campaign video, Trump also took a moment to highlight his improving approval numbers, which hit 53% Tuesday according to Rasmussen&#8217;s daily tracking poll.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
THANK YOU! <a href="https://t.co/Ne2LOSAWpX">pic.twitter.com/Ne2LOSAWpX</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176569846684766208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async="" charset="utf-8" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script>
</div>
&nbsp;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">&nbsp;</blockquote>
</div>

donald_trump_gi.jpg

WATCH: How Worried Is Trump About Impeachment? His New Fundraising Video Thanks Dems For Pushing It

The Ukraine controversy has dramatically impacted the gambling world&#8217;s perspective on the potential for President Trump&#8217;s impeachment. Over the last week, as more details have emerged about Trump allegedly &#8220;pressuring&#8221; Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to open an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, bettors are increasingly convinced that House Democrats will move forward with impeachment.
According to <a href="https://www.politico.com/interactives/2019/house-reps-who-would-vote-for-trump-impeachment-our-latest-list/">Politico</a>, as of Tuesday, 173 House Democrats currently agree with moving forward on impeachment while 62 are not on board, at least yet. <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/growing-list-150-house-members-backing-some-action-trump-impeachment-n1057986">NBC News</a>, which reports the same numbers, notes that some Democrats on their list &#8220;have called for an impeachment inquiry or hearings, some believe the House Judiciary Committee is already undertaking an inquiry and are supportive of that investigation, while others have gone further and called for drafting articles of impeachment.&#8221;
With the momentum building on Capitol Hill, it&#8217;s unsurprising that bettors are increasingly willing to put their money on impeachment. Online prediction site <a href="https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3537/Will-Donald-Trump-be-impeached-in-his-first-term">PredictIt</a> shows a significant spike over the last week in the potential value of bets that Democrats will pass at least one article of impeachment. Here&#8217;s how the site presents the question of Trump&#8217;s impeachment:
<blockquote>During Donald Trump&#8217;s first term as president of the United States, the full U.S. House of Representatives shall, by simple majority vote, approve or pass one or more articles of impeachment of President Trump. Neither trial nor conviction by the U.S. Senate, nor removal from office, is necessary to cause this market to resolve as Yes.
PredictIt’s decisions and determinations under this rule shall be at PredictIt’s sole discretion and shall be final.</blockquote>
In one week, the value of the bet on the site more than doubled, spiking from 24 cents (which equates to a 24% chance it will happen) on September 17 to 61 cents (or 61% chance) on September 24. Prior to the significant upswing in value, the bet hovered between just 21 to 27 cents. The highest the value reached in the preceding three months was 33 cents on June 26.
Another bet offered on the site is how many impeachment articles will be submitted by March 31, 2021. Currently, the &#8220;zero&#8221; option is worth 39 cents, while the &#8220;5 or more&#8221; is worth 38 cents.
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/52174/biden-call-trump-impeachment-congress-has-no-joseph-curl">The Daily Wire</a> reported, Democratic presidential candidates are getting fully on board the impeachment train, including the current frontrunner, who happens to be at the center of the Ukraine scandal, Joe Biden.
&#8220;He’s going to make the point that Trump’s latest abuses are on top of all of his prior abuses,&#8221; a Biden campaign spokesman told the Washington Examiner. &#8220;He’s going to call on Trump to comply with all of Congress’ outstanding, lawful requests for information — in the Ukraine matter, and in the other investigations — and if Trump does not comply, Congress has no choice but to impeach.&#8221;
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is even more anxious for impeachment to move forward. &#8220;The House must impeach. It must start today,&#8221; she tweeted. &#8220;By failing to act, Congress is complicit in Trump&#8217;s latest attempt to solicit foreign interference to aid him in U.S. elections. Do your constitutional duty and impeach the president.&#8221;
Trump, who has maintained his innocence, shook things up even more Tuesday by announcing that he&#8217;s authorized the release of the full transcript of the June 25 call with Zelensky that started it all.
&#8220;I am currently at the United Nations representing our Country, but have authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine,&#8221; Trump tweeted Tuesday. &#8220;You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">I am currently at the United Nations representing our Country, but have authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine&#8230;.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176559966024556544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">&#8230;.You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176559970390806530?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
UPDATE: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/52188/pelosi-announce-democrats-are-impeaching-trump-ryan-saavedra">Pelosi To Announce Democrats Are Impeaching Trump: ‘Can&#8217;t’ Let Him ‘Win’ Reelection</a>

nancy_pelosi_gi.jpg

Will Trump Be Impeached? Here’s What Oddsmakers Are Saying.

Elizabeth Warren

Joe Biden

The Trump administration responded to Democrats&#8217; push for impeachment over a phone call that President Donald Trump had with Ukraine by announcing that the administration will be releasing the whistleblower complaint and the Inspector General report to Congress and will let the whistleblower testify in front of Congress.
&#8220;The White House is preparing to release to Congress by the end of the week both the whistleblower complaint and the Inspector General report that are at the center of House Democrats’ impeachment inquiry,&#8221; Politico <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/24/white-house-whistleblower-complaint-release-1510341">reported</a>. &#8220;The move shows the level of seriousness with which the administration is now approaching the House&#8217;s new impeachment proceedings.&#8221;
The Washington Times <a href="https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/24/white-house-let-trump-whistleblower-testify-report/">reported</a> that the administration &#8220;reportedly has dropped its objection to Congressional Democrats getting testimony from the whistleblower whose leak started the Ukraine phone-call issue.&#8221;
The move comes after Trump announced on Tuesday that he is going to release on Wednesday the full unredacted transcript of his phone call with Ukraine.
&#8220;I am currently at the United Nations representing our Country, but have authorized the release tomorrow of the complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript of my phone conversation with President Zelensky of Ukraine,&#8221; Trump tweeted. &#8220;You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">&#8230;.You will see it was a very friendly and totally appropriate call. No pressure and, unlike Joe Biden and his son, NO quid pro quo! This is nothing more than a continuation of the Greatest and most Destructive Witch Hunt of all time!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176559970390806530?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Trump responded to the developments from Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that the Democrats plan to push ahead with impeachment in a series of tweets noting that Democrats have not even seen the transcript of the call.
&#8220;Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage,&#8221; Trump tweeted. &#8220;So bad for our Country!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Such an important day at the United Nations, so much work and so much success, and the Democrats purposely had to ruin and demean it with more breaking news Witch Hunt garbage. So bad for our Country!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176604222709751809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
&#8220;They never even saw the transcript of the call,&#8221; Trump added. &#8220;A total Witch Hunt!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">They never even saw the transcript of the call. A total Witch Hunt!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176605750657003520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
&#8220;Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff and, of course, Maxine Waters!&#8221; Trump continued. &#8220;Can you believe this?&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff and, of course, Maxine Waters! Can you believe this?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176605037700759558?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Trump added: &#8220;Secretary of State Pompeo recieved permission from Ukraine Government to release the transcript of the telephone call I had with their President. They don’t know either what the big deal is. A total Witch Hunt Scam by the Democrats!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Secretary of State Pompeo recieved permission from Ukraine Government to release the transcript of the telephone call I had with their President. They don’t know either what the big deal is. A total Witch Hunt Scam by the Democrats!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176623010230525953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Trump also tweeted out a campaign video highlighting the Democrats&#8217; repeated push for impeachment over the last 2-plus years.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><a href="https://t.co/1KOSnHguW2">pic.twitter.com/1KOSnHguW2</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1176610391058722816?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
The tweets from Trump come after Pelosi said: &#8220;For the past several months, we have been investigating in our committees and litigating in the courts so the House can gather all the relevant facts and consider whether to exercise its full article one powers, including a constitutional power of the utmost gravity approval of articles of impeachment. And this week, the President has admitted to asking the president of Ukraine to take actions which would benefit him politically. The actions of the Trump presidency revealed dishonorable fact of the President’s betrayal of his oath of office, betrayal of our national security, and betrayal of the integrity of our elections.&#8221;
&#8220;Therefore today, I’m announcing the House of Representatives moving forward with an official impeachment inquiry,&#8221; Pelosi continued. &#8220;I’m directing our six committees to proceed with their investigations under that umbrella of impeachment inquiry. The President must be held accountable. No one is above the law.&#8221;
This report has been updated to include additional information.

trump.jpg

BREAKING: Trump Responds To Democrats’ Push For Impeachment

The United States is calling on fellow United Nations member states to join them in fighting &#8220;to protect the unborn.&#8221;
In a letter reported by the left-leaning <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2019/sep/23/leaked-letter-suggests-us-is-rallying-un-member-states-to-oppose-abortion">Guardian</a> – which framed the message from the U.S. as an attempt to &#8220;rollback women’s rights&#8221; – was signed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Health and Human Services Sec. Alex Azar with the intent to deliver it to participants of a &#8220;high-level&#8221; meeting on universal health coverage Monday.
In the letter, which has been published on the department&#8217;s <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/agencies/oga/global-health-diplomacy/joint-letter-july-2019/index.html">website</a>, Pompeo and Azar urge fellow U.N. members to oppose the international organization&#8217;s healthcare policies which the Trump administration says have been falsely &#8220;reinterpreted&#8221; to promote abortion and &#8220;weaken the family.&#8221;
&#8220;As a key priority in global health promotion, we respectfully request that your government join the United States in ensuring that every sovereign state has the ability to determine the best way to protect the unborn and defend the family as the foundational unity of society vital to children thriving and leading healthy lives,&#8221; the joint letter reads. &#8220;We remain gravely concerned that aggressive efforts to reinterpret international instruments to create a new international right to abortion and to promote international policies that weaken the family have advanced through some United Nations fora.&#8221;
&#8220;Evidence of this is found in references throughout many multilateral global health policy documents to interpret &#8216;comprehensive sexuality education&#8217; and &#8216;sexual and reproductive health&#8217; and &#8216;sexual and reproductive health and rights&#8217; to diminish the role of parents in the most sensitive and personal family-oriented issues,&#8221; the letter continues. &#8220;The latter has been asserted to mean promotion of abortion, including pressuring countries to abandon religious principles and cultural norms enshrined in law that protect unborn life.&#8221;
The resultant promotion of abortion and pressuring of countries to abandon their cultural values regarding human life, the Trump administration maintains, &#8220;undermine[s] our shared commitment to sustainable development and to achieving health for all, leaving no one behind.&#8221;
With the 2020 election looming, Trump has been deliberately contrasting his pro-life presidency with the Democrats&#8217; increasingly radical positions on abortion, particularly late-term abortion. In his massive <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/48617/trump-blasts-abortion-every-life-sacred-gift-god-paul-bois">rally</a> kicking off his campaign in Orlando in June, Trump made sure to bring up the issue. &#8220;Virtually every top Democrat also now supports taxpayer-funded abortion right up to the moment of birth – ripping babies straight from the mothers’ womb,&#8221; said Trump in comments that quickly made headlines. &#8220;Leading Democrats have even opposed measures to prevent the execution of children after birth. You saw that in Virginia. Republicans believe that every life is a sacred gift from God. That is why I have asked Congress to prohibit extreme late-term abortions.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s mention of Virginia was a reference to Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam&#8217;s infamous defense of letting a child die after a botched abortion. Trump also drew attention to New York Democrats&#8217; recently passing extreme pro-abortion laws. &#8220;There could be no greater contrast to the beautiful image of a mother holding her infant child than the chilling displays our nation saw in recent days,&#8221; said Trump. &#8220;Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother&#8217;s womb moments from birth. These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get the chance to share their love and dreams with the world.&#8221;
UPDATE: Secretaries Azar and Pompeo have issued the following joint statement in response to reports on the letter:
<blockquote>&#8220;Secretary Azar and Secretary Pompeo jointly signed a letter to the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Ministers of Health in seventy-two countries voicing U.S. concern about an aggressive effort in international settings that could decrease life-saving healthcare for millions of women. This troubling effort seeks to reinterpret international UN documents to wrongfully assert that they create a new international ‘right to abortion’ and promote international policies weakening the family, a vital link to improved health outcomes.
&#8220;The letter asks countries to partner with the United States to promote women’s health and to collaborate with the United States at the upcoming UN General Assembly High Level Meeting on a joint statement supporting health for all people, born and unborn, and on an outcome document from the High Level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage this fall that reflects shared values and to encourage a partnership among other countries both at the UN General Assembly and beyond focused on improved health outcomes at country and community level. Working with other nations on these shared health priorities will increase access to vital healthcare and advance optimal health outcomes for women, children, and adolescents &#8211; often the most vulnerable groups.&#8221;</blockquote>
This article has been revised for clarity and updated to include the statement from Azar and Pompeo.

fetus_3rd_month_gi

Trump Admin Working To Build Coalition In U.N. To ‘Protect The Unborn’ [Updates]

Mike Pompeo

California Rep. Devin Nunes predicts that Joe Biden&#8217;s campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination is coming to an end after reports emerged that as vice president he had sought to shield his son from an investigation by a Ukrainian prosecutor.
Nunes, the ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, also said an attempt by Democrats to portray President Trump&#8217;s alleged actions in Ukraine as a scandal has backfired.
&#8220;These stories [about Biden] first originated back when Hillary Clinton was trying to make sure Biden didn&#8217;t get in the race&#8221; for the nomination in 2016, Nunes said. &#8220;Whoever came up with this scheme — it looks like somebody was trying to deflect what Biden did back in 2015. This scheme seems to have backfired on Biden. I mean, Biden&#8217;s already dropping in the polls.
&#8220;And, like I said, it looks like this is the end of Biden&#8217;s campaign. I really do&#8230; his lead is basically down to zero.&#8221;
The latest Des Moines Register/CNN poll shows Sen. Elizabeth Warren pulling ahead of Biden, leading 22% to 20%. Just weeks ago, Biden held a 9-point lead.
The Wall Street Journal reported last week that in a July 25 phone call, Trump allegedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky &#8220;about eight times&#8221; to cooperate with his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani on an investigation into Biden&#8217;s son, Hunter, who worked with a natural gas company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch.
Biden in 2016, meanwhile, reportedly called for the dismissal of a Ukrainian prosecutor who had been investigating allegations about Hunter. At the time, Hunter Biden held a directorship with the company, earning $50,000 a month. There are also allegations that as vice president Biden threatened to withhold U.S. aid unless the prosecutor was fired.
A whistleblower last week called into question Trump&#8217;s interaction with Zelensky, but Trump said that unnamed official has caused a &#8220;false alarm.&#8221;
&#8220;This whistleblower or whoever it was — because it sounds like it&#8217;s not a whistleblower — you can&#8217;t have that happen to a president of the United States,&#8221; Trump said in comments Sunday before his departure for campaign stops in Texas and Ohio. &#8220;The conversation, by the way, was absolutely perfect. It was a beautiful, warm, nice conversation.&#8221;
Later in the day, Trump wrote on Twitter: &#8220;Breaking News: The Ukrainian Government just said they weren&#8217;t pressured at all during the &#8216;nice&#8217; call. Sleepy Joe Biden, on the other hand, forced a tough prosecutor out from investigating his son’s company by threat of not giving big dollars to Ukraine. That’s the real story!​&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">..Breaking News: The Ukrainian Government just said they weren’t pressured at all during the “nice” call. Sleepy Joe Biden, on the other hand, forced a tough prosecutor out from investigating his son’s company by threat of not giving big dollars to Ukraine. That’s the real story!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1175923717534150656?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Nunes, speaking to <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-campaign-coming-to-an-end-thanks-to-ukraine-story-linked-to-hillary-clinton-nunes-says">Fox Business</a> anchor Maria Bartiromo, said the whistleblower scandal has all the same elements as the so-called Russia collusion story, which evaporated after a two-year, $40 million investigation.
&#8220;This has all the hallmarks of the Russia hoax,&#8221; Nunes said. &#8220;Something leaks out. &#8230; and then it&#8217;s the same reporters that report on it, the same reporters that reported on the Russia hoax. Then you move forward, and what happens? Then supposedly they come and testify — and the night before they testify, the whistleblower who supposedly doesn&#8217;t want anybody to know who this person is, or what information they have, well, it&#8217;s spilled all over the pages of the Washington Post&#8221; the day before Congress was briefed on the matter.

tb_2

California Congressman: Biden Campaign Likely Over After Ukraine Scandal

The following is satirical.
Democrat congressman Wile E. Coyote has announced a new plan to impeach the president. According to Congressman Coyote, the plan arrived yesterday from the Acme Impeachment Company, and this one, he says, is guaranteed to work, unlike the last twenty impeachment plans which, the congressman admits, could be said to have backfired, leaving his face blackened and his smoking hair standing on end.
As the congressman told CNN Reporter Porky Acosta, &#8220;I know I said the same thing about Russian collusion, and when that ended up doing nothing more than exposing the corrupt Obama officials who cynically misused the nation&#8217;s intelligence resources for the most partisan political purposes, I felt as if I was looking down to find I had run off the edge of a cliff and that I then plunged suddenly through endless nothingness until my body disappeared from view, and there was nothing left of me but the small puff of dust that represented my smashing into the earth at terminal velocity while the president escaped my clutches yet again.&#8221;
&#8220;And yes, it&#8217;s also true, that the Stormy Daniels controversy ended in embarrassment when the lawyer we had lifted up as a hero was indicted for corruption, and James Comey&#8217;s firing turned out to be nothing but the fair and legal removal of a sanctimonious power-mad loon and in fact every time we&#8217;ve tried to drop some scandal on this president, it winds up plummeting down on my own head while I try uselessly to protect myself with nothing but a parasol.&#8221;
&#8220;But believe you me, there is no possible way this Acme Ukraine Scandal could end up exposing the corruption of Joe Biden in abusing the power of the vice presidency to protect his son from prosecution because that would be as if I had planted a bomb that didn&#8217;t go off and when I went to check it, it suddenly blew up in my face.&#8221;
The president responded to the congressman&#8217;s statement with a tweet saying only, &#8220;Meep meep.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/52105/trump-here-are-some-big-updates-my-latest-fake-james-barrett">Trump: Here Are Some Big Updates On My Latest Fake Scandal</a>

wile_e_coyote_gi

Congressman Coyote Announces Surefire Acme Impeachment Plan [Satire]

Russia

Satire

Menu