^^^

is he still on PMSNBC?

I thought Ralph had a new gig at The Enquirer

AG Barr testified to congress today

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...t-my-letter-n2544479

Republican Congressman Tom Graves: "Is there anything new you've seen since the review of the entirety of the report that would change your conclusions?"

AG Barr: "No Congressman. As I've explained, my March 24 letter was meant to state the bottom line conclusions of the report not summarize the report and I tried to use as much of the Special Counsel's own language as I could. But they were just stating the bottom line conclusions and there's nothing to suggest to me that those weren't the conclusions,"

Graves: "So, it's over. It's done,"

AG Barr: "[Laughing] The letter speaks for itself,"

Barr also revealed the report will be released to the public "within the next week."

Barr's testimony was supposed to be about Department of Justice budget requests for Congress, but immediately Democrats focused their questions on the Mueller report.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

adding:

Attorney General William Barr says he "offered" special counsel Robert Mueller a chance to "review" his 4-page letter summarizing the Mueller report to Congress and Mueller "declined that"

https://hotair.com/archives/20...rt-advance-declined/

Presidential approval at 53%.

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...ion/prez_track_apr09

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
AG Barr testified to congress today



Barr also revealed the report will be released to the public "within the next week."

And it STILL won't be enough for the Democrats who will shriek and moan that there's too much redaction when they know goddamn well they are LEGALLY not allowed to EVER see an un-redacted report.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politi...ller-summary-n992286

Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday that he is "reviewing the conduct" of the FBI's Russia probe during the summer of 2016, and that the Department of Justice inspector general will release a report on the FBI's use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process and other matters in the Russia case in May or June.

"I am reviewing the conduct of the investigation and trying to get my arms around all the aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016," Barr said in public testimony before a House Appropriations subcommittee, his first since last month's release of his four-page summary of special counsel Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Barr listed several areas of the Mueller report that should be redacted:

- grand jury information

- information that the intelligence community believes would reveal sources and methods

- information in the report that could interfere with ongoing prosecutions

- and information that “implicates the privacy or reputational interests of peripheral players where there’s a decision not to charge them.”

quote:

...aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that was conducted during the summer of 2016

I'll bold this part, just because.

The White House is planning on targeting remittance payments made by illegal immigrants in the wake of an ongoing migrant flood at the U.S. southern border, a senior administration official told reporters Tuesday.

The plans to target remittance payments come amid a broader shakeup at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and future executive actions designed to curb illegal immigration. The situation at the southern border has escalated in recent weeks, with thousands of migrants arriving daily to claim asylum.

The White House plan to go after remittance payments falls in line with a proposal from former Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who is being considered to replace outgoing DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

Kobach told Breitbart News on Tuesday that this will be an effective way for President Donald Trump to compel the Mexican government to take more enforcement action against Central Americans trafficking through their country.


Kobach told Breitbart, “The threat I propose is one that actually helps us if we follow through on it. That is the threat of ending remittances from the majority of people in the United States from Mexico who are here illegally,” adding “they don’t want to risk losing that massive flow of foreign capital. In most years, it’s their second biggest source of foreign capital.”


https://dailycaller.com/2019/0...remittance-payments/

So my question is, how do THOUSANDS of "immigrants" afford to trek HUNDREDS of miles? Who is funding this? Who feeds them? Where do they get something as simple as water? Mexico ain't exactly a haven of Eden. Those that have been in the military know what it takes to move several hundred personnel across rugged terrain, not to mention a thousand or more. So how in the name of Zeus' butthole is this happening?? Soros? Someone else?

My strategery would be to find the head of the snake and cut the MFer off with extreme prejudice.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: erj_pilot,

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
So my question is, how do THOUSANDS of "immigrants" afford to trek HUNDREDS of miles? Who is funding this? Who feeds them? Where do they get something as simple as water? Mexico ain't exactly a haven of Eden. Those that have been in the military knows what it takes to move several hundred personnel across rugged terrain, not to mention a thousand or more. So how in the name of Zeus' butthole is this happening?? Soros? Someone else?

My strategery would be to find the head of the snake and cut the MFer off with extreme prejudice.

Totally organic, no outside help, and these people are the salt of the earth. They also do the jobs Americans don't like to do, so we desperately need them.

Fuck, sorry had CNN on.....

Either government or billionaire SJWs are funding them. It's a logistical nightmare to more that many people. This is organized.

Dr. Sebastian Gorka on Kirstjen Nielsen's Departure. This video provides insight as to the what/why on the homeland change up.



Link to original video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFMnO2mkilk

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:

End birthright citizenship

Easier said than done.

quote:

First section of the 14th Amendment:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof , are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Not really. If you are here legally, your kid is a citizen, if you are not, they are not.

That amendment was for the most part how to deal with former slaves which were previously not citizens. Take the recent jehadi bride that we are not letting back in. Born to a diplomat and not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States therefore, not a citizen.

https://www.heritage.org/immig...g-the-14th-amendment

Either way birthright citizenship is not the main thing preventing her or anyone else in her role from being successful. I should have put at the bottom of the list.

Unfortunately, the current opinion is that just by being within our borders puts a person "subject to the jurisdiction"--it does not matter if that person is here legally or illegally. It will take a ruling by SCOTUS to reverse that opinion, to state that those here illegally are not subject to our jurisdiction, but I don't see that happening. (I've no doubt that the Framers would agree with such a view, but they didn't have a big problem with illegal immigration back then and just didn't think much about it, I suspect.) A new Amendment to clarify what the 14th Amendment says would do the job, but I don't see Congress passing one (although I think 3/4 of the state legislatures would ratify it if they did).

flashguy

Flashguy, did you read the link I posted? Do you disagree with the premise of the article? Do you think that due to language and word usage changing since 1860 that the original intent of the amendment has changed?

I really don't think that is the number one concern either, just one of the many problems with our immigration system. Stopping the people from coming here in the first place and how to quickly and judiciously get rid of the ones the swim or climb over without letting them go free within the country should be the top priorities.

My point being, with current law, anyone Trump puts in place is undercut and unable to do their job. I don't see the dems acting to change the rules anytime soon, so whoever he appoints will be treading water with lead weights around their waist, impossible to stay afloat for long.

Shapiro does good explanation of the border situation, Trump v Courts, impossible and conflicting rulings, etc. Worth watching first 25 min.




Link to original video: https://youtu.be/L32m5VVuqnQ

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politi...ller-summary-n992286

Attorney General William Barr said Tuesday that he is "reviewing the conduct" of the FBI's Russia probe during the summer of 2016, and that the Department of Justice inspector general will release a report on the FBI's use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process and other matters in the Russia case in May or June.
<snip>

VERY glad to see this. Hopefully, Barr is applying the whip to the IG.

quote:

VERY glad to see this. Hopefully, Barr is applying the whip to the IG.

We have seen several investigations by the IG over the last several months that have turned up wrongdoing by those at the FBI. Those reports were turned over to the FBI themselves which declined prosecution of the offenders.

So far I am really liking how AG Barr is doing his job.

What an incredible breath of fresh air.

In testimony to congress, when asked about the Mueller report, he said:

"From a prosecutor's standpoint, the bottom line is binary. Which is, charges or no charges."

When asked why he didn't have Mueller's team help him write the "bottom line" letter, he said:

"Because it was my letter"

RE: This border issue after listening to a little bit of Shapiro...

So Federal "judges" (and I use that term EXTREMELY loosely) who have sworn to uphold The Constitution, block President Trump's idea to hold these invaders on the MEXICO side of the border until they can be processed. WTF IS SO WRONG WITH THAT other than demoshits and libtards just say NO to ANYTHING President Trump comes up with?!?!?! Bunch of infantile ego-maniacs, every last damned one of them...

quote:

Originally posted by Skins2881:
Flashguy, did you read the link I posted? Do you disagree with the premise of the article? Do you think that due to language and word usage changing since 1860 that the original intent of the amendment has changed?

I really don't think that is the number one concern either, just one of the many problems with our immigration system. Stopping the people from coming here in the first place and how to quickly and judiciously get rid of the ones the swim or climb over without letting them go free within the country should be the top priorities.

My point being, with current law, anyone Trump puts in place is undercut and unable to do their job. I don't see the dems acting to change the rules anytime soon, so whoever he appoints will be treading water with lead weights around their waist, impossible to stay afloat for long.

Howz about Sherriff Joe Arpio? Spell check that..

AG Barr in testimony today:

" I think spying did occur " on the Trump campaign

"The question is whether it was . . . adequately predicated."

video at link

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/10...bi-russia/index.html


"For the same reason we're worried about foreign influence in elections, I think spying on a political campaign is a big deal," Barr said. I'm not suggesting those rules were violated but I think it's important to look at. . . . I think it's my obligation."

He added that he's not launching a full blown investigation to the FBI, and does not view it as a problem that is "endemic" to the FBI, but has in mind some colleagues to help him "pull all this information together, and letting me know if there are some areas that should be looked at."


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


DEMs getting nervous

Sen Mark Warner:

“Absolutely not,” Sen. Mark Warner tells me about whether he’s ever been told that there was spying on the Trump campaign. Barr “almost seems to be endorsing one of these theories that has been debunked time and time again,” Warner said, calling it “disrespectul” to DOJ employees

Warner is up for reelection in 2020. This could all turn out real bad for him

Eric Holder:

When there is a predicate, a legitimate basis, it’s called “investigating” not “spying”. I am confident that the people at DOJ/FBI conducted themselves in an appropriate way. No evidence to suggest otherwise.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

quote:

Sen Mark Warner:

“Absolutely not,” Sen. Mark Warner tells me about whether he’s ever been told that there was spying on the Trump campaign. Barr “almost seems to be endorsing one of these theories that has been debunked time and time again,” Warner said, calling it “disrespectul” to DOJ employees

From your keyboard to the electorate of Virginia's ears, one hopes.

Warner is up for reelection in 2020. This could all turn out real bad for him

From your keyboard to the electorate of Virginia's ears, one hopes.