About time!

"The United States launched nearly five dozen cruise missiles at a Syrian airfield early Friday in response to a chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians, the first direct assault on the Damascus government since the beginning of that country's bloody civil war in 2011. 
"It is in the vital national security interest of the United States to prevent and deter the spread and use of deadly chemical weapons," President Donald Trump said in a statement. "Tonight I call on all civilized nations to join us in seeking to end the slaughter and bloodshed in Syria, and also to end terrorism of all kinds and all types."
Fifty-nine Tomahawk missiles targeted an airbase at Shayrat, located outside Homs. The missiles targeted the base's airstrips, hangars, control tower and ammunition areas, officials said. 
Pentagon spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis said initial indications were that the strike had "severely damaged or destroyed Syrian aircraft and support infrastructure and equipment ... reducing the Syrian Government's ability to deliver chemical weapons." There was no immediate word about any casualties. 
Trump said the base was used as the staging point for Tuesday's chemical weapons attack on rebel-held territory, which killed as many as 72 civilians, including women and children. 
"Assad choked out the lives of helpless men, women and children," Trump said from Mar-a-Lago, Fla. "Even beautiful babies were cruelly murdered in this very barbaric attack. No child of God should ever suffer such horror."
National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster said the strike should cause a "big shift in Assad's calculus."

Why about time?  First, since the WMD's were moved from Iraq to Syria in 2002, there has been a wonder what Syria did with them since Iraq's fall.  That question has been answered over and over again by Assad.  The attack targeted the airfield that reportedly were used to launch the aircraft.

According to Fox News, Trump didn't call Putin to announce this move, (so much for the Trump/Putin bro-mance the media's been slobbering about), so it will be interesting to see what Putin's response will be, more important Assad's.  Does he throw up a "screw you" followup attack, or lay low.

Will this bolster anti Assad forces?  We'll have to see, but remember how Reagan did precisely the same thing with Libya in the 80s, continued bombing forced Qaddafi to conform, at least for a while.

By the way, what to make of Hillary Clinton's response to the gas attacks today prior to the missile launch.

“I really believe that we should’ve and still should take out his airfields and prevent him from being able to use them to bomb innocent people and drop sarin gas on them.” - Hillary Clinton
 

Talk about Fake News...


"The call to Preet Bharara’s office from President Trump’s assistant came on Thursday. Would Mr. Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, please call back? The following day, Mr. Bharara was one of 46 United States attorneys appointed by President Barack Obama asked to resign — and to immediately clean out their offices. The request took many in his office by surprise because, in a meeting in November, Mr. Bharara was asked by the then-president-elect to stay on.
Mr. Bharara refused to resign. On Saturday, he announced on Twitter that he had been fired.
It was unclear whether the president’s call on Thursday was an effort to explain his change of heart about keeping Mr. Bharara or to discuss another matter. The White House would not comment on Saturday.
However, there are protocols governing a president’s direct contact with federal prosecutors. According to two people with knowledge of the events who were not authorized to discuss delicate conversations publicly, Mr. Bharara notified an adviser to the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, that the president had tried to contact him and that he would not respond because of those protocols. Mr. Bharara then called Mr. Trump’s assistant back to say he could not speak with the president, citing the protocols.
Mr. Bharara was a highly public prosecutor who relished the spotlight throughout more than seven years in office. He pursued several high-profile cases involving Wall Street, and he was in the midst of investigating fund-raising by Bill de Blasio, the mayor of New York, and preparing to try former top aides to the governor of New York, Andrew M. Cuomo, who are both Democrats. It was not immediately clear how his departure would affect those cases and others that were pending.
Mr. Bharara stayed quiet until Saturday afternoon. Then, on his personal Twitter account, which he set up eight days ago, he wrote: “I did not resign. Moments ago I was fired.” Referring to the Southern District of New York, he continued, “Being the US Attorney in SDNY will forever be the greatest honor of my professional life.”

Awww, get out the hankies....*sniff*

Bozo knows you work at the Pleasure of the President, and when you draw a line in the sand with your boss - you lose.

But let's fast-backward to 1993, and the NY Times coverage of Janet Reno's firing of all 93 US Attorneys, including Jay B. Stephens who was about to charge Clinton crony Representative Dan Rostenkowski. Convenient no?

"Attorney General Janet Reno today demanded the prompt resignation of all United States Attorneys, leading the Federal prosecutor in the District of Columbia to suggest that the order could be tied to his long-running investigation of Representative Dan Rostenkowski, a crucial ally of President Clinton.
Jay B. Stephens, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, who is a Bush Administration holdover, said he had advised the Justice Department that he was within 30 days of making a "critical decision" in the Rostenkowski case when Ms. Reno directed him and other United States Attorneys to submit their resignations, effective in a matter of days.
While prosecutors are routinely replaced after a change in Administration, Ms. Reno's order accelerated what had been expected to be a leisurely changeover. Says He Won't Resist.
At a news conference today only hours after one by Ms. Reno, Mr. Stephens said he would not resist the Attorney General's move to force him from office, and he held back from directly accusing her of interfering with the Rostenkowski inquiry.
But Mr. Stephens left the strong impression that Ms. Reno's actions might disrupt the investigation as he moved toward a decision on whether to seek charges against the Illinois Democrat, who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
"This case has been conducted with integrity," Mr. Stephens said, "and I trust the decisions in this case will not be made based on political considerations."


What's the difference?  Stephens says, "Ok, I work for you, I'll go."  Bharara "Wa-Wa", "No, I won't go, fire me bitch".  


Yet the media in it's true fake news fashion,  is twisting this latest news into some kind of sinister motivation by Trump or Sessions, but it's simply not going to fly.  Cripes do these guys have Google?

After getting shellacked in the 2016 race, progressives still don't get it. Currently they are mounting a "comeback" for 2018, which means to do that they have to go after their own, conservative Democrats. This won't work out well, as the 2016 wasn't just a win for the GOP, it was a complete repudiation of the progressive agenda which ran amok over the last eight years. Again the platform was completely rejected in 2016, and the 2018 races don't look much better. But it will be fun to see them "eat their own". "Where Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) failed in the 2016 presidential election and DNC election chair respectively, the far left is eyeing red state Democrats, specifically Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), if they don’t start fighting back against Trump. Similar to the Tea Party, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party feels that only their agenda is the one that can usher the Democrats back into power, noting that Sanders scored just as good with Rust Belt voters as Trump did during the primary season. Yet, facing a rather dismal 2018 Senate map Democrats have to decide whether mounting primary challenges against their red state brethren (who have proven they can win statewide) with hyper-left primary candidates is a step towards rebranding and rebuilding the party, or just making it easier for Republicans to pick up seats. Given the GOP’s strength with white working class voters, the Republicans who can pick off Manchin in West Virginia, Donnelly in Indiana, Heitkamp in North Dakota, and McCaskill in Missouri are probably going to stay there for a while." 2016 was a blowout for Republicans, and 2018 looks even better. Progressives are fighting tooth and nail to stop the collapse, of not only their control of congress, the Presidency, but the message, the media, the crappy way this country has been heading for the last 40 years.


Gateway Pundit has more on this, but in the field of intelligence, if a well stinks, it always stinks. In 2013 Obama used his power to go after journalist who he thought threatened his agenda. If he did it then, then odds on he could do it now.

In 1974 Nixon resigned for for just a small part of what Obama is being accused of, which is why Congress is involved, and why after the investigation a Special Prosecutor should be appointed.

From GP:

"In addition to the coming investigation by congress, we also know now that Obama in the past also wire tapped various individuals in the US media that were reporting information not flattering to the Obama Administration. It is widely known, and proven that Obama’s Justice Department targeted journalists with wiretaps in 2013:

* In 2013 the liberal Washington Post expressed outrage after the revelation that the Justice Department had investigated the newsgathering activities of a Fox News reporter as a potential crime in a probe of classified leaks. The reporter, Fox News’ James Rosen and his family, were part of an investigation into government officials anonymously leaking information to journalists. Rosen was not charged but his movements and actions were tracked.

* Also in 2013, members of the Associated Press were also a target of the surveillance. The ultra liberal New Yorker even noted that “In moderate and liberal circles, at least, the phone-records scandal, partly because it involves the dear old A.P. and partly because it raises anew the specter of Big Brother, may well present the most serious threat to Obama’s reputation.”

* Reporter Sharyl Attkisson said in 2014 that her personal computer and CBS laptop were hacked after she began filing stories about Benghazi that were unflattering to the Obama administration. A source who checked her laptop said the hacker used spyware “proprietary to a government agency,” according to an article in the New York Post."

If it walks like a duck....

Like what the? ....Does Comey work for CNN?  Of course is one of the Times "confidential American senior officials, and the FBI hasn't confirmed it yet, so..thus...made up?

WASHINGTON — The F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, asked the Justice Department this weekend to publicly reject President Trump’s assertion that President Barack Obama ordered the tapping of Mr. Trump’s phones, senior American officials said on Sunday. Mr. Comey has argued that the highly charged claim is false and must be corrected, they said, but the department has not released any such statement.

Mr. Comey, who made the request on Saturday after Mr. Trump leveled his allegation on Twitter, has been working to get the Justice Department to knock down the claim because it falsely insinuates that the F.B.I. broke the law, the officials said.

A spokesman for the F.B.I. declined to comment. Sarah Isgur Flores, the spokeswoman for the Justice Department, also declined to comment.

Mr. Comey’s request is a remarkable rebuke of a sitting president, putting the nation’s top law enforcement official in the position of questioning Mr. Trump’s truthfulness. The confrontation between the two is the most serious consequence of Mr. Trump’s weekend Twitter outburst, and it underscores the dangers of what the president and his aides have unleashed by accusing the former president of a conspiracy to undermine Mr. Trump’s young administration.

Ok, let's play the game.  So since then when does an FBI director ask the DOJ to squash an now what will be an investigation? Note that Comey asked this of the DOJ, AFTER Congress said it would look into it.  If Comey proved anything over last years election season is that he's a political animal, and so knows how to muck things up.  How does he know it's false without investigating.

But I think there is more to this then meets the eye. If this move is "unprecedented" as the Times says, meaning it's never been done before, you have to ask, what is Comey's involvement - if any - in the wiretapping, from the "what does he know that may implicate him?" department.

Whether or not the DOJ rejects the claim, an congressional investigation will move forward, so sooner or later we find out.




Democrats sense blood in the water, but there is nothing to see here.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions had two conversations with Russia's ambassador to the U.S. during last year's presidential campaign, while Sessions was still a senator. 
News of the conversations was first reported by The Washington Post. The Wall Street Journal separately reported that U.S. investigators had examined contacts between Sessions and Russian officials and that the Justice Department was "wringing its hands" about how to proceed in the matter.
The Journal also reported that Sessions did not know that his communications were under investigation. 
Reports about the meetings appeared to contradict a statement Sessions made during his confirmation hearing to become attorney general. Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., how he would respond "if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign."
“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” answered Sessions, one of Trump’s earliest and most prominent supporters during the campaign. “I have been called a surrogate a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.”
When contacted by Fox News late Wednesday, Sessions said, "I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. I have no idea what this allegation is about. It is false."
Sessions as member of the Armed Services Committee was free to meet with any heads of state he felt a need to.  Whether he talked about the campaign is absent is absent any evidence.  Session denies that happened, so unless someone has a tape (John McCain), this is a non-story.

Franken's question to Session is key, Session was NOT a member of the Campaign, and to my knowledge there is no law preventing a Republican - who would naturally be for the Republican candidate for president executing his duties as a member of the ASC from doing his job.  Thus, false story, based on parsing of words.  

Er...money quote: "The irony? Bernie Sanders himself doesn’t meet this standard, having voted to confirm three of Trump’s Cabinet picks so far. If Sanders doesn’t pass a progressive purity standard, it’s probably not worth imposing."

The Bernie supporters got "burned" badly when Hillary kneecapped them in the primaries, and now they're out for blood.  Problem is that like the quote, their standard bearer isn't even with the program.



More




Not going to go over well with Americans at all. Democrats are voicing the same opinion as well, which proves they are just descending into insanity over their hate of Trump. Carryn's emotion was real. She's the wife of a slain Navy Seal, and Maher sexist comment that she allowed herself to be used is simply idiotic. But then Maher is the king of misogynist, and has a long history of sexist statements towards women, so what would you expect. Lefies welcome this kind of crap while going after anybody on the right who would dare say the same thing. I would like to see him say the same thing to Carryn's face, but he's too much a coward for that.




Oprah for president? I guess, but I doubt she actually could win. Her reason is Trump did it, so...

However the problem is that she thinks Trump won based on celebrity, but that's not the case..He won on message, which resonated with voters. Issues that Americans found important which they have been against for some time now.

The voters who voted for Trump did so because they're tired of the way the country was heading after four years of a far left wing President, who at the the time of his departure had a 29% disapproval rating on most polls when it came to "direction of country". No matter what Obama's popularity was, it was based more on celebrity than anything else (and some polling juice), and when Trump came along he pushed back at Obama's agenda, thus Trump won the election. Oprah's agenda would nothing more than a flashback to those unpopular left wing agendas that Obama shoved down the throats of American and would likely be rejected outright.

Right now the Democratic Party is in a shambles. After the election they added to that destruction by descending into chaos, and children's games which have only infuriated most Americans, instead of just moving on with the loss. Polls have shown that Americans have grown weary from the "lost the game so I'm taking the ball and going home" approach they've had to the election and a recent poll showed they just want them to stop it and begin cooperating Republicans to get things done. They won't, this is guaranteed by their leadership constantly playing games and acting foolish, and the Democrat Party will continue to head down the crapper.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4269856/Oprah-says-age-Trump-run-president.html

Perhaps Bezos should spend more time maintaining his cloud infrastructure than getting into politics....Bashing the President, just saying....


Note: I know, but suspiciously enough the nets aren't doing many online polls, which makes me think - and know - he hit it out of the park. God, they wouldn't want that to show on a poll?
Wait, CNN? ...Well, Still some twisting (direction of country was high before before the speech (higher than Obama's 26% at end of office), nevertheless...High marks, 70% approval of speech.
Obama likely shrieking at his 90" Flat-screen at his mansion in Hawaii, in his best Cpt. Kirk impression, "KHAAAAAAANNNNNN!" "Michele, saddle up my jet!!".
Still, pre-speech, Trump promises kept so far 8-1, this is the President America has been waiting for. Hell, new tie and all!




Trump approval, 52%. As opposed to NBC news using unscientific Survey Monkey polling. For reference, FiveThiryEight gives SurveyMonkey a rating of C-. While SurveyMonkey doesn’t release margins of error with their polling because of the methodology, FiveThirtyEight gives them an average error of 11.2 points. This was determined by analyzing eleven of their polls to final results. - In other words they're crap.

Rasmussen Poll.

Image may contain: 1 person, closeup and textFor years the tiring line of the left when it comes to leaders from the right is to compare them to Hitler, whether it's Nixon, Reagan,Bush,and now Trump, the historically incorrect comparison is laughable.

But the facts of History don't hold that up. Actually Hitler was a socialist, and by his own definition. Modern day liberals, or more accurately "progressives" are simply hybrids of Hitler's platform, especially hate for the Jews, socialization of society, calling capitalism the "enemy", are in direct "lock step" with Hitler's dream.

In fact it's one of the progressive wing's platform in 1963, to cloak their agenda in order to pull it off. Much of what you see in America now, is simply because of how far they've gotten in their agenda over the last 40 years. So the next time you hear some liberal call you a Hitler, tell them to go read some actual history, and look in the mirror.

More of the myth busting here.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/myth-busted-actually-yes-hitler-was-a-socialist-liberal/

Support our Vets!



Macsmind - Official Blog of The MacRanger Show on Blog Talk Radio