Rep. Darrell Issa: FBI Wants to Indict Abedin Along With Clinton

d49e1cc6-a8ac-4cde-b1fb-e90f6cd8c160

By Bill Hoffmann   |   Friday, 29 Jan 2016 11:01 AM

The FBI wants both Hillary Clinton and her longtime aide Huma Abedin indicted for conducting confidential government business on the former secretary of state’s private email server, Rep. Darrell Issa tells The Washington Examiner.

“I think the FBI director would like to indict both Huma and Hillary as we speak. I think he’s in a position where he’s being forced to triple-time make a case of what would otherwise be, what they call, a slam dunk,” Issa said, referring to FBI Director James Comey.

Comey’s agency has been probing Clinton’s use of a private email server when she led the State Department.

“There’s no question, she knew she had a responsibility and she circumvented it. And she circumvented it a second time when she knowingly let highly-classified material get onto emails in an unclassified format,” Issa told The Times.

Earlier this week, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told Newsmax TV’s Steve Malzberg a prosecution of Clinton is imminent, saying his friends in the FBI told him “they’re ready to indict and they’re ready to recommend an indictment.”

He added: “They also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they’re going public.”

And political analyst Dick Morris, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton, said he wholeheartedly agrees with DeLay, telling Newsmax TV: “It either will be an indictment or a leaked FBI memo recommending an indictment. The indictment of course puts Hillary in the spot and may force her out of the race.”

Issa, a California Republican who led an investigation into the deadly Benghazi attacks as former chairman of the House Oversight Committee, doubts Clinton will face any criminal charges during this year’s presidential election, in which she remains the Democratic front-runner.

“I’ve worked with both the last attorney general . . . and this attorney general, and I really don’t believe they’ll do it. Doing it, by definition, would end her run for president,” Issa told the Examiner’s Gabby Morrongiello.

“So do I think the Democrats are in an odd situation where the only thing they can do is hold their nose and hold back on and indictment. Sadly, yes.”

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Darrell-Issa-FBI-Indict-Huma-Abedin/2016/01/29/id/711847/#ixzz3yfY3lweg

Advertisements

Fox News: Trump Demanded $5 Million to Debate

Fox News Channel says Donald Trump offered to reverse his plans to skip its GOP presidential debate Thursday if the network donated $5 million to his charity as a “quid pro quo.”

“Roger Ailes had three brief conversations with Donald Trump today [Thursday] about possibly appearing at the debate — there were not multiple calls placed by Ailes to Trump,” Fox News said in a statement,The Washington Post reports.

The network response came after the Republican front-runner told CNN that he had “many” conversations with Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes in the 48 hours leading up to the debate the The New York Times reports.

“In the course of those conversations,” the Fox statement continued, “we acknowledged his concerns about a satirical observation we made in order to quell the attacks on Megyn Kelly, and prevent her from being smeared any further. Furthermore, Trump offered to appear at the debate upon the condition that Fox News contribute $5 million to his charities.

“We explained that was not possible and we could not engage in a quid pro quo, nor could any money change hands for any reason. In the last 48 hours, we’ve kept two issues at the forefront — we would never compromise our journalistic standards and we would always stand by our journalist, Megyn Kelly. We have accomplished those two goals and we are pleased with the outcome. We’re very proud to have her on stage as a debate moderator alongside Bret Baier & Chris Wallace.”

In his CNN interview and later when he went ahead with his anti-debate event to raise funds for veterans, Trump said Fox News had “apologized” to him for the debate debacle.

“By the time they apologized I said, ‘Look, the problem is we now have a big event scheduled,'” Trump told Brianna Keilar on CNN in an interview aboard his private plane on the tarmac at Des Moines International Airport. “Fox could not have been nicer.”

He declined to say who from the cable network apologized.

“I don’t want to say,” Trump said, adding later that “I spoke to the top people there.”

Trump said the call occurred because “they very much want me” in the debate.

“They called me just before you walked on the plane,” he said. “In all fairness, very nicely. But they want me there.”

Trump said that he did not ask Fox to remove Megyn Kelly as one of the debate’s co-moderators in the call and pointed to the taunting statement that Fox released Tuesday in response to tweets objecting to Kelly’s presence.

“I never once asked that she be removed,” he said. “What I didn’t like is their public relations statement where they were sort of taunting.

“I didn’t think it was appropriate or nice.”

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/trump-apologize-debate-flap/2016/01/28/id/711762/#ixzz3ydl87LNX

ISIS and Nusra go to war in east Lebanon

download
The former Jihadist allies from the so-called “Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham” (ISIS) and Jabhat Al-Nusra (Syrian Al-Qaeda group) are now at odds with one another in eastern Lebanon after spending nearly 2 years without confronting each other inside the ‘Arsal Barrens of the Beqa’a Governorate. On Wednesday afternoon, several firefights were reported between Jabhat Al-Nusra and ISIS at the villages of Wadi Hamid, Al-Zimrani, Wadi Mira, and Al-Khayl in the ‘Arsal Barrens; these clashes lasted well into the evening and forced both the Lebanese Army and Hezbollah to concentrate their forces to this mountainous region in order to make sure the fighting was not going to spread. ISIS captured several checkpoints and military posts from their former allies in the ‘Arsal Barrens, resulting in the expansion of their front-line positions to the Lebanese Army’s territory in the region. The ISIS terrorists did not care much for civilian casualties, as they began to fire dozens of rockets into the Lebanese Army’s territory in Jaroud ‘Arsal, wounding a number of soldiers and civilians in the process. Following the exchange of rockets and mortar shells, sporadic clashes were reported between the Lebanese Army and the ISIS terrorists in Jaroud ‘Arsal, marking the first time in several months that the aforementioned terrorist group has attacked the pro-government forces.

Source: http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/isis-and-nusra-go-to-war-in-east-lebanon/ | Al-Masdar News

Trump: I’ve Always Had a Good Relationship With Pelosi, Reid, Schumer

2016-01-26T12-25-30-533Z--1280x720.nbcnews-video-reststate-640

By Sandy Fitzgerald   |   Tuesday, 26 Jan 2016 10:13 AM

Donald Trump Tuesday morning said he believes he’ll be able to cut deals in the House and Senate, as he’s always had a good relationship with key Democratic lawmakers like California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, and outgoing Nevada Sen. Harry Reid.

“It’s wonderful to say you’re a maverick, and you’re going to stand up and close up the country, but you have to get somebody to go along with you,” the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination told MSNBC’s“Morning Joe” program, taking a dig at his nearest rival, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz.

“You have a lot of people,” Trump continued. “We have a system. The Founders created the system that actually is a very good system. It does work, but it can’t work if you can’t get nobody to go along with you,” continuing that the inability for Cruz to get along with them is a problem.

Trump said he’s always had a “great relationship” with Pelosi, and with Reid as well.

“If I weren’t running for office I would be able to deal with her or anybody,” said Trump of Pelosi. “I think I could get along very well with Nancy Pelosi and just about everybody. I think I’ll get along well with Chuck Schumer. I was close to Schumer in many ways.”

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Trump-Relationship-Nancy-Pelosi-Harry-Reid/2016/01/26/id/710910/#ixzz3yO230P91
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance. Vote Here Now!

Cruz Is a True Conservative

fb26e4b5-9167-49cb-b006-cd903c185b04
By David Limbaugh   |   Friday, 22 Jan 2016 03:11 PM

Some time ago I said that many establishment Republicans dislike Ted Cruz so much that they would even back their nemesis, Donald Trump, if necessary to keep Cruz from winning.

This is one time I wish I had been wrong.

The establishment has long held Cruz in contempt but didn’t believe he had any realistic chance of securing the GOP nomination. Now, with his campaign success, he’s scaring their pants off. Former Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole has issued apocalyptic warnings against nominating Cruz, and I’ve just received an email that Sen. Orrin Hatch prefers Trump over Cruz as well.

Earlier this week, it was New York Times pretend-conservative columnist David Brooks who suggested a Republican conspiracy against Cruz and Trump in favor of any other GOP candidate. “Very few presidents are so terrible,” he wrote, “that they genuinely endanger their own nation, but Trump and Cruz would go there and beyond.”

Setting aside this mindless conflation of Cruz and Trump, do you believe we should be taking advice about potentially bad presidents from a guy who drooled over candidate Barack Obama because of his trousers?

More and more insiders fear Cruz far more than Trump. Trump drives the establishment batty by ginning up his supporters against them and for his current hardline stance on immigration; but they have to know it hasn’t been that long since Trump espoused a number of liberal positions and financially supported establishment figureheads in each party. As hard-nosed and independent as he seems, his track record reveals he is much more malleable and they’d have a better chance to influence him than Cruz.

Ted Cruz, on the other hand, has been a thorn in the establishment’s side since he came on the scene. Insiders are astounded that he has actually refused to abandon his campaign promises and his commitment to Reagan conservatism, despite overwhelming pressure and derision from the party and its power brokers.

They have concluded that Cruz must be driven by egomania and not principle. Who but a stubborn, opportunistic loner could resist the temptation to rub elbows with the power brokers once elected?

Only oddballs honor their constituents and grassroots conservative causes above those of the ruling class. Only charlatans continue to articulate conservative ideas with passionate optimism and idealism once in office.

Only zealots evince an abiding dedication to Reagan conservative principles beyond what’s necessary to get them elected. Only grandstanders would truly stand up to President Obama’s reckless budget demands instead of throwing in the towel of surrender before the fight has even begun.

Why is it automatically presumed that Obama will win every game of chicken he insists on playing with Republicans? Why can’t our side ever be confident enough in its own ideas and of the American people — as Ted Cruz is — to believe the people will back us if we call Obama’s bluff and articulate our case to them?

The establishment’s rationale for caving has always been that Republicans, being the party of less government, can never win over the public in a shutdown showdown.

They think that Cruz knows this too, but puts on a grandiose but futile show to play to the base and advance his political ambitions. Oh ye of little faith — little faith, that is, in the conservative ideas you maintain you embrace.

If only the establishment would join Cruz in promoting the principles they say they share, just as Democrats always support an uncompromising and extremist Obama, there’s no telling what progress we could have made in thwarting some of Obama’s agenda.

As I see it, there are two major differences between Republican supporters and opponents of Cruz. One is that his supporters are more consistently conservative on every category of issues. The fight, in other words, is not just about strategy, as the establishment insists, but also involves policy.

The second is that Cruz’s supporters believe he is a man of integrity. Many of his detractors contend he is a phony, but I think their real fear is that he is not. He will not change his positions for expedience — though many are working overtime to convince us otherwise.

The establishment, then, either believes or wants to fool us into believing that it opposes Cruz because he is a poseur, a saboteur of good government — a man who impedes the cause of conservatism by his unwavering commitment to it.

Only by compromise and pragmatism, they argue, can we really advance conservative principles.

The truth, however, is that they are not as committed to conservative principles as they say they are and don’t regard the current problems confronting our nation with the same degree of urgency as mainstream conservatives.

They also place a high value on process — on bipartisanship and collegiality for their own sake — even over advancing a conservative agenda.

Not long ago I read that one establishment icon said he didn’t think a Hillary presidency would be that bad. Seriously?

We finally have a candidate who is committed to conservative principles across the board, a man who reveres the Constitution and America, as founded, who acutely understands the destruction President Obama has wrought, and who we can rely on to fulfill his promise to do everything in his power, if elected, to reverse this disastrous course and restore us on a path to recovery.

If the establishment would quit hyperventilating over Ted Cruz and get behind him they could do more than anything else to advance the cause they profess to believe in.

David Limbaugh is a writer, author, and attorney. His latest book is, “The Emmaus Code: Finding Jesus in the Old Testament.” Read more reports from David Limbaugh — Click Here Now.

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Limbaugh/Hillary-Clinton-Orrin-Hatch-New-York-Times/2016/01/22/id/710487/#ixzz3yHDbb54r

National Review Urges ‘Say No’ to Trump

32d18aa5-5dcd-4306-9418-c4d5d1d55eca
By Todd Beamon   |  
Thursday, 21 Jan 2016 10:33 PM

Donald Trump is “a menace to conservatism” who should not be elected president of the United States, 22 conservative leaders argue in the new issue of National Review.

Essays by the conservative thinkers were posted online Thursday nightand will be included in the conservative journal’s Feb. 15 print edition, which goes to press Jan. 27.

cover_021516.jpg
The magazine also includes an editorial, titled “Against Trump,” that concludes: “Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as The Donald himself.”

The leaders who contributed essays represent “various institutions, traditions, and positions on the conservative spectrum,” said Rich Lowry, the magazine’s editor.

“This issue of National Review will bring together voices from across the right to warn against the siren song of Donald Trump,” he added.

“These contributors have many differences of opinion among themselves, but all agree that Trump is not a conservative, he is a mistake for the Republican Party, and he is the wrong man to pick up the pieces after the wreckage of the Obama years.”

The conservative contributors d essays are:

  • Thomas Sowell, economist.
  • Brent Bozell, president of the Media Research Center.
  • Glenn Beck, founder of The Blaze.
  • Edwin Meese and Michael Mukasey, former U.S. attorney generals.
  • Dana Loesch and Michael Medved, syndicated radio hosts.
  • Cal Thomas and Mona Charen, syndicated columnists.
  • William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard.
  • R. R. Reno, editor of First Things.
  • John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary.
  • Yuval Levin, editor of National Affairs.
  • Mark Helprin, novelist.
  • Andrew C. McCarthy, contributing editor, National Review.
  • Erick Erickson, founder of The Resurgent.
  • David McIntosh, president of the Club for Growth.
  • Steven F. Hayward, author and presidential scholar.
  • Ben Domenech, publisher of The Federalist.
  • David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute.
  • Katie Pavlich, editor of Townhall.com editor.
  • Russell Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.
  • Beck: “Sure, Trump’s potential primary victory would provide Hillary Clinton with the easiest imaginable path to the White House. But it’s far worse than that. If Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination, there will once again be no opposition to an ever-expanding government. This is a crisis for conservatism.”
  • Bozell: “The GOP base is clearly disgusted and looking for new leadership. Enter Donald Trump, not just with policy prescriptions that challenge the cynical GOP leadership but with an attitude of disdain for that leadership—precisely in line with the sentiment of the base. Many conservatives are relishing this, but ah, the rub. Trump might be the greatest charlatan of them all.”
  • Kristol: “Isn’t Trumpism a two-bit Caesarism of a kind that American conservatives have always disdained? Isn’t the task of conservatives today to stand athwart Trumpism, yelling ‘Stop’?”
  • Loesch: “Just a few years ago, I and many others were receiving threats for promoting conservative policies and conservative principles—neither of which Donald Trump seems to care about. Yet he’s leading.”
  • McIntosh: “These are not the ideas of a small-government conservative who understands markets. They are, instead, the ramblings of a liberal wannabe strongman who will use and abuse the power of the federal government to impose his ideas on the country.”
  • Moore: “Trump can win only in the sort of celebrity-focused mobocracy that Neil Postman warned us about years ago, in which sound moral judgments are displaced by a narcissistic pursuit of power combined with promises of ‘winning’ for the masses.”
  • Pavlich: “In short, do our principles still matter? A vote for Trump indicates the answer is ‘no.'”

© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Source: http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/national-review-no-trump-symposium/2016/01/21/id/710381/#ixzz3xzXLs9pv