Drew Nickell was back on the Radio Thursday, March 28th at 1:00 PM, EDT
Drew Nickell was back on the Radio Thursday, March 28th at 1:00 PM, EDT
On Thursday, the 28th of March at 1:00, EDT, I was sitting in for Nora on the Nora Firestone
Show, on WKQA-AM Freedom 1110 in Hampton Roads, when we took a look
back at Trump’s State of the Union Speech and his subsequent meeting
with Kim Jong Un. We also discussed an attempted coup d’état’, the
release of the Mueller report, the mad-cap messaging of the Democrat
Party and then looked ahead to the 2020 election.
This show appeared as a “Facebook live” broadcast, so here is the link to the replay of that show:
After 675 days (that’s one year, 11 months and 17 days) and spending some $26 million of taxpayers’ money, Special Counsel and former FBI Director Robert Mueller, III has submitted his long-awaited report to Attorney General William Barr.
Mueller, who
was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate
allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to rig
the 2016 Presidential Election, and allegations that President Trump obstructed
justice by firing FBI Director James Comey in May of 2017, submitted his
lengthy report to the Attorney General on Friday, March 22nd. Attorney General
Barr, who in turn has promised to make public his findings to the extent that
he can without compromising national security, is expected to deliver his
summary report of the investigations to Congress early this week.
Even before it was announced that Mueller had submitted the report to the AG, Democrats and their cohorts in the mainstream media were already spinning the results of a report that was for them at once both disappointing and, then retrospectively, inconclusive. Weeks prior to the release of the report, House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) issued subpoenas to eighty-one individuals who have been associated with the President going back to the 1970s in an all-out effort to do what the Mueller report evidently did not do- produce evidence worthy of indictment as a means to impeach the President.
For almost
two years, Americans have been hammered by Democrats and the media with the mantra
that impeachment would soon follow as a result of Mueller’s thorough investigation.
Yet, in the weeks preceding the release of Mueller’s report, it became apparent
that the resulting indictments would go no further than Michael Cohen, Michael
Flynn, Rick Gates, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone, all of
whom were either indicted on “process” crimes as a result of the investigation
itself, or for crimes preceding their involvement with the Trump campaign. Others
who also faced Mueller’s indictments were primarily Russians and other foreign
nationals who will never respond to the indictments. More importantly, the fact
that it was announced than no further indictments would proceed from the
Mueller report essentially vindicates what President Trump and his supporters
have long insisted upon- that there was no collusion with the Russians and no
obstruction of justice, period.
That Trump
did not collude with the Russians or attempt to obstruct justice in his firing
of Comey comes as no surprise to anyone familiar with the origin of the Mueller
investigation, the details of which are still emerging in the drip-drip-drip of
evidence that the investigation was actually the result of high level
corruption in multiple departments of the Obama administration and in
coordination with the 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
It was the
Clinton campaign who bought and paid for a false dossier from Fusion GPS,
authored by Christopher Steele, filled with undocumented and unreliable information
on Trump and Russia, all in an effort to excavate dirt on Trump. Steele had
already denied the veracity of the dossier even before FBI Director James Comey,
former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, former acting Attorney General Sally
Yates and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein used it to sign off on FISA
warrants to surveil members of the Trump campaign. All four did this with the
full knowledge that the information in the dossier was unreliable, and all the
while concealing the origin of the report- that it was paid for by the Clinton
campaign- from the FISA court.
It has now
been revealed that prior to his infamous televised exoneration of Hillary
Clinton in July of 2016, FBI Director James Comey was in fact acting under the
orders of Attorney General Loretta Lynch that Hillary Clinton would face no prosecution
for espionage and mishandling of 33,000 emails illegally stored on her own
private server, despite very real and substantial evidence of criminal behavior
on the part of Ms. Clinton and her associates. Instead, a bogus inquiry into
alleged Russian collusion on the part of the Trump campaign was initiated at about
the same time to further deflect attention from Clinton, whose husband met with
Lynch on an Arizona tarmac just prior to the Comey announcement.
It has further been revealed that Comey illegally released classified information on his meetings with President Trump, through a Columbia University professor, to the New York Times, with the intention of prompting the appointment of an independent counsel, who turned out to be his longtime friend and mentor, Robert Mueller. It was in these January and February 2017 meetings with President Trump that Comey concealed the fact he had used the dossier to obtain FISA surveillance warrants to spy on members of the Trump campaign in the fall of 2016, insisting instead to the President that the dossier had no merit and was without substance- an obvious subterfuge and infamous double-dealing with a duly-elected President.
The coordinated attempt to first sabotage President Trump’s campaign, then reverse the results of a free and fair election and subsequently throw a wrecking ball into Trump’s presidency, crossed many departments and involved several senior members of the Obama administration- Comey, Lynch, McCabe, Yates, Former CIA Director John Brennan, Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper, Former U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, Former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok, Former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, Former Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr and others. The fact that the coordinated effort crossed several departments and bureaus within the Obama administration can definitively and only mean that it was perpetrated by former President Barack Obama, himself. Remember that it was a September 2nd, 2016 text message from Lisa Page to Peter Strzok that “POTUS wants to know everything we’re doing,” thus confirming Obama’s involvement.
There is a word for this type of behavior- it’s called an attempted coup d’état, and nothing like this has ever before occurred in the history of the United States.
Not that any
of this matters to House and Senate Democrats, who will still insist that Trump
obstructed justice and colluded with the Russians to deny Hillary Clinton the
presidency- the Mueller report be damned. The fact is that the election of 2016
is something with which they cannot and will not come to grips, and it is their
sacrosanct mission to destroy a duly-elected President of the United States and
impugn anyone and everyone who supported his candidacy and subsequent
presidency. In the coming days and
weeks, the media itself will go out of its way to diminish the findings
contained within the Mueller report, which did not in the end deliver the goods
that they promised would terminate Trump’s presidency.
675 days,
and $26 million dollars later, the president’s supporters can smile at the fact
that Donald J. Trump is still
President of the United States, and laugh at the fact that, thus far, there
hasn’t been anything his political
opponents in both parties and across the mainstream media can do about it…though
surely not for lack of trying. The problem for them is, as the late and former
President John Adams once said,
“Facts are
stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the
dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
Thank God we
have a President who doesn’t allow these distractions to interfere with the job
he was elected to do…and from where things now stand, it appears that he will
be doing this job for another six years.
Any thought
that Democrats regaining majority status in the U.S. House of Representatives, would
lead us towards a new era of balanced government has evaporated in the wake of House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s loss of control over her own caucus. Increasingly, the
radical fringes of the Democrat Party have taken over the messaging and the
platform of that party and, in so doing, transformed the party into a socialist
movement incompatible with the majority of the American electorate. The examples
are many, some of which are as follows:
Abortion-
What used to be an issue regarding access and availability, especially during
the third trimester of pregnancy, has now become an issue of post-birth
infanticide, with Democrats advocating abortion rights up to, during and after
the birth of a child at full term. Only eight countries in the entire world
allow this gruesome procedure, and the United States is now one of them.
Healthcare
– What was once a movement to expand the availability of healthcare insurance
coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) has now become an effort
to completely eliminate private health care insurance coverage for millions who
currently have this coverage through their employers. Democrats are seeking a
single-payer healthcare model where all Americans would be forced into
government-run healthcare…essentially besetting all of us with the same questionable
quality of healthcare that has beset our veterans who have not been properly
served by the Veterans Administration.
Education-
The effort to make four-year tuition-free college education available to anyone
who wants it is now the drumbeat of liberal politicians and academics, alike.
What neither realizes is that by placing higher education on the same level as primary
and secondary public school education, this will eventually result in
professors being paid at the same wage levels as public school teachers. Moreover,
the quality of higher education will continue its downward spiral away from
true education and towards institutional indoctrination. Hence, the effort to
expand voting rights down to individuals who are sixteen years of age in the
knowledge that sixteen-year-olds, having lacked an education into the reality
of socialism and its history, will vote overwhelmingly to acquire what they
have been told is “free” stuff.
Immigration-
Say what they will but the bottom line is that Democrats, in their refusal to acknowledge
the very real crisis at our southern border, have essentially espoused open
borders with unfettered flow of illegal aliens, who enter this country and avail
themselves of American largesse. The increased illegal entry of illegal aliens
has been well documented, and is expected to approach one million in 2019,
alone. As unsustainable as that clearly is, Democrats like the idea of such
unfettered immigration, in the hopes that amnesty leading to citizenship will
swell the ranks of Democrat voters and ensure their political power, in
perpetuity.
Impeachment.
With the impending release of Robert Mueller’s report on his investigations
into alleged collusion between Donald Trump and the Russians during the 2016
campaign and obstruction of justice, and anticipating that the long-awaited
report will show no crimes on the part of the President, the Democrats are
already pursuing a “Plan B” of going back through four decades of Trump’s business
dealings to find something, anything that they can use to remove Trump from
office. In casting such a wide net of inquiry into all things Trump, Democrats
have shown that the President’s claim of a “witch hunt” in search of a crime is
just that…a “witch hunt” perpetrated by those who remain irate over his
election, and nothing more.
Anti-Semitism-
The growing tendency of Democrats to invoke long-held prejudices against the
Jewish people, due to their opposition to the Israeli state, is not only an American
problem but is increasingly a problem in many western democracies, as well. In
Great Britain, anti-Semitic words and actions among members of Britain’s Labour
Party have reincarnated such sentiments for the first time since prior to the
Second World War. Similar instances of anti-Semitic rhetoric have been heard in
many European capitals, and violence against Jews is increasing all over
Europe. The failure of Democrats to censure
the pro-Islamic, anti-Semitic freshman congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN), and
replace this effort to target her repeated anti-Semitic rhetoric with a generic
call for non-specific tolerance does nothing to curtail this woman’s hateful
speech.
What do such
divergent, seemingly unrelated issues all have in common? More specifically,
what is the raving lunacy behind such messaging on the part of Democrats?
That’s
simple- President Donald Trump.
By opposing
the President at every turn, Democrats who have been trying to de-legitimize
his election and call into question the millions of American voters who
supported his candidacy, have essentially ensured that their return to control
of the House of Representatives will represent nothing more than a continuation
of enhanced efforts to impeach a President that they just don’t like.
The very
fact that there are just enough gutless Republicans who refuse to back their President
and stand firm against the efforts to undo the election results of 2016, will
mean that President Trump will have to continue the pursuit of his presidency
without the help of his own party- and that cowardice on their part is the most
reprehensible of all.
Given the
fact that the leftward leap of Democrats to the fringes of political discourse
has all but ensured the re-election of President Donald Trump in 2020, we can
all anticipate six more years of pettiness on the part of his opponents from
both parties, who would rather serve their own interests than those of the
nation they were elected to serve.
“Sometimes You Have to Walk” Trump returns from the Hanoi Summit Without a Deal
On the final
day of February 2019, President Donald Trump returned to the United States
without having secured a commitment from North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un to
denuclearize the Korean Peninsula. A scheduled luncheon, along with a
subsequent signing ceremony, was abruptly scuttled when the President decided
that Kim’s offer to close the country’s largest nuclear enrichment facility, located
in Yongbyon, North Korea, was not sufficiently commensurate with the lifting of
all sanctions that the North Korean leader had also requested.
“Sometimes, you
have to walk,” said the President during a brief press conference prior to his
departure from Hanoi, Viet Nam, where the summit between the two leaders had previously
been scheduled to take place, earlier in February.
According to
various reports, the North Korean leader was stunned to learn that the United States
had far more knowledge of several supposedly “secret” enrichment facilities
than previously thought.
The President told reporters that he was looking for Kim “…to do more regarding his commitment to denuclearize, but he was unprepared to do that.”
President
Trump, who has had considerable experience over many decades in brokering large
financial deals, and who authored a best-seller The Art of the Deal in the 1980s, knew what Ronald Reagan knew when
the former President walked away from an arms treaty with then-Soviet Leader Mikhail
Gorbachev in Reykjavik, Iceland. Reagan’s insistence that such an arms treaty
was not worth the price of scuttling the Strategic Defense Initiative,
derisively nicknamed “Star Wars,” and that standing strong and refusing a quick
deal would lead to a better deal down the road.
It was a
lesson that was evidently lost on President Barack Obama, who infamously signed
onto a one-sided deal with Iran, handing over billions in cash in exchange for
no substantial commitment from the Iranians to halt missile production and
uranium enrichment. Obama thought, erroneously, that it was better to have a
bad deal than no deal at all.
Thank
goodness that it was not Obama in Hanoi trying to leverage an agreement with
the North Koreans. Then again, Obama refused to even confront the growing
threat of North Korea’s nuclear arms buildup, by instead emphasizing “strategic
patience” (a euphemism for doing nothing) when dealing with the North Korean
push towards deliverable nuclear weaponry.
Practically
everyone, including Democrats, anti-Trump/Never Trump Republicans, the national
news media and so-called “experts” from previous administrations were
predicting, and in some cases hoping for, failure on the part of Trump, in his
second sit-down with Kim Jong Un. Many were saying that the North Korean Leader
would “flatter” the President into signing a deal without any substantial
commitment by the North Koreans to give up their nuclear weapons program. Once
again, the President overcame the low expectations of his political opponents
by standing strong in the face of opposition, and rejecting a bad deal based
solely on its own merits- or rather, lack thereof.
While vehement
Trump-haters rejoiced in the fact that no deal came of the Hanoi Summit, wiser
and more informed heads from both political parties agreed that the President
was right to walk away from the summit without an agreement. The fact that the
President refused to sign an agreement, merely for the sake of signing an
agreement, also showed the watching world once again, including most
importantly China, that the days of the United States being “rolled” into
pursuing bad treaties has ended. As the United States is trying to use its economic
muscle to forge a better, more mutually-beneficial trade agreement with China, the
lack of an agreement with North Korea may bode well for negotiations between the
world’s two largest economies.
The question
is whether or not Trump’s political adversaries, who tend to prefer national
failure to the possibility of Trump’s successes, will continue to root against
the President and by extension, America itself.
