A quick search on YouTube pulled up a presser that was over a hour long. But thanks for making it easier to find it.

This sounds like a good idea to me.

Conservatives Urge Sessions to Clean Out Obama’s Civil Rights Division.

A group of attorneys, scholars, and advocates put their names to a letter sent to Attorney General Jeff Sessions Tuesday, urging him to take a serious look at reform as he works with the President to select a new Assistant Attorney General for his Civil Rights Division.
“During the Obama administration, the Division served purely ideological ends with rigidity unmatched in other federal offices. Entrenched federal bureaucrats jettisoned precepts like equal enforcement in favor of political and racialized dogmas with a zeal that risks litigation failure and invites court sanctions,” the letter states.

Signed by such conservative heavyweights as Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, the letter paints a picture of a Division ripe for sweeping reform after eight years under Obama during which “The Civil Rights Division has relegated its leadership role to political activists.”

Hiring practices for the career staff of the Division is one of the letter’s chief concerns. While Tom Perez, now head of the Democratic National Committee, was the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, the Division was the subject of an Inspector General’s review that found the Obama Justice Department’s insistence that job-seekers have a “demonstrated commitment to civil rights” led to a perception only left-wing activists need apply. “In this case, perception and reality were synonymous,” the letter insists, noting instances in which Division employees leaked confidential information to civil rights groups, and Perez’s subsequent refusal to implement any of the report’s hiring recommendations.

Also among the letter’s complaints is the alleged culture of politically motivated bullying that was fostered during the Obama years. The same Inspector General’s Report found a pattern of personal attacks against, for example, employees who were “openly Christian.”

J. Christian Adams, President of the Public Interest Legal Foundation and a signatory of the letter, added, “For years, a radicalized Civil Rights Division heavy-handedly advanced leftists causes with respect to voting, law enforcement, immigration, and others while constitutional Rule of Law was considered a nuisance. General Sessions has an opportunity to begin the course correction necessary to protect all Americans from civil rights abuses.”

In picking a new head for the Civil Rights Division, the letter’s signatories hope Attorney General Sessions will look for a reformer prepared to return to race-neutral civil rights enforcement and tackle the Division’s entrenched cultural problems. “The next AAG certainly cannot be a proponent of the status quo by any means,” they say.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...vil-rights-division/

Executive Order signed today

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the...ndence-and-economi-1

Presidential Executive Order on Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth

Section 1. Policy. (a) It is in the national interest to promote clean and safe development of our Nation's vast energy resources, while at the same time avoiding regulatory burdens that unnecessarily encumber energy production, constrain economic growth, and prevent job creation. Moreover, the prudent development of these natural resources is essential to ensuring the Nation's geopolitical security.

(b) It is further in the national interest to ensure that the Nation's electricity is affordable, reliable, safe, secure, and clean, and that it can be produced from coal, natural gas, nuclear material, flowing water, and other domestic sources, including renewable sources.

(c) Accordingly, it is the policy of the United States that executive departments and agencies (agencies) immediately review existing regulations that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources and appropriately suspend, revise, or rescind those that unduly burden the development of domestic energy resources beyond the degree necessary to protect the public interest or otherwise comply with the law.

(d) It further is the policy of the United States that, to the extent permitted by law, all agencies should take appropriate actions to promote clean air and clean water for the American people, while also respecting the proper roles of the Congress and the States concerning these matters in our constitutional republic.

Seen this link site somewhere before & don't believe it is mere click bait....it's getting harder to tell; this is direct video feed of the woman speaking live, not just someone posting their interpretation:

didn't notice whether this confession from o.team Defense Deputy was posted for comment:

https://theconservativetreehou...t-trump/#more-130586

UPDATE: President Obama’s Own Defense Deputy Admits Obama White House Spied on Candidate/President-Elect Trump…
Posted on March 28, 2017 by sundance

This is stunningly interesting and hopefully will be picked up by MSM and congressional investigators.

Sometimes when a person is deep inside an echo-chamber of like-minded ideologues, they might not realize what they’re saying is rather revealing to those on the outside. That’s the set up for former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas (Deputy Asst. Secretary of Defense) appearing on MSNBC and admitting first hand knowledge the Obama administration spied on candidate and president-elect Donald Trump’s transition team to gather “intelligence” for political use.

It would appear Ms. Farkas was so caught up in the discussion, she didn’t quite realize the significant admissions she was making about the Obama administration spying on Donald Trump’s team and generating classified intelligence for Ms. Farkas (and others) to spread to Capitol Hill politicians. MSNBC’s Mika Brzezinski recognized the ‘oh-snap’ admission and tried to play it off,… but by then it was too late.

I was urging my former colleagues, and, and frankly speaking the people on the Hill [Democrat politicians], it was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people, get as much information as you can – get as much intelligence as you can – before President Obama leaves the administration.

Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior [Obama] people who left; so it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy, um, that the Trump folks – if they found out HOW we knew what we knew about their, the Trump staff, dealing with Russians – that they would try to compromise those sources and methods; meaning we no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia; so then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were also trying to help get information to [Democrat politicians].

But wait, it didn’t just stop there. It gets worse – or better, depending on your position.

With the help of MSNBC, simultaneous to her admission of first-hand specific knowledge of the administration spying on Mr. Trump, Ms. Evelyn Farkas outs herself as the key source for a New York Times report which discussed President Obama officials leaking classified information to media.

Considerable irony jumps to the forefront when you recognize, the New York Times tried to protect Evelyn Farkas as the source of their reporting by stating:

“More than a half-dozen current and former officials described various aspects of the effort to preserve and distribute the intelligence, and some said they were speaking to draw attention to the material and ensure proper investigation by Congress. All spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified information, nearly all of which remains secret.” (link)

D’oh.

Whoopsie.

Looks like Devin Nunes and the House Intelligence Committee has a new person to bring in for testimony. A positive development because at this rate the media leakers will out themselves without much need for investigation.

I wonder what the criminal penalties are for having access to intelligence and sharing it with Democrat politicians [“The Hill People”].

Question #1:

Who, specifically, are these “Hill People” you speak of Mrs. Farkas?

too long to post here but recording is 4:50

Evelyn Farkas is indeed making some very bold statements.

Note though that Farkas resigned from DoD about November / December 2015.

That is a year before the election.

From this interview:

http://www.vox.com/conversatio...s-trump-russia-flynn

Farkas said "The reason I was so upset last summer was that I was getting winks and hints from inside that there was something really wrong here. I was agitated because I knew the Clinton campaign and the world didn’t know"

"since the summer, when I was first made aware of all this stuff. I’m like, finally, everybody else sees it!"

She doesn't appear to be talking about info she actually knew, she is talking "winks and hints" from people in DoD that she knew previously.

While hoping its true, I cant take anyone possibly related to Skut Farkas with any seriousness.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://apnews.com/82a8c0ba374...witter&utm_medium=AP

Fox News Channel has pulled legal analyst Andrew Napolitano from the air after disavowing his on-air claim that British intelligence officials had helped former President Barack Obama spy on Donald Trump.

A person with knowledge of the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because it was a personnel matter said Napolitano has been benched and won't be appearing on the air in the near future. Fox had no immediate comment Monday.

Andrew Napolitano back on Fox. He just appeared on a different subject, but indicated he's stands by his previous statements and conclusions regarding the surveillance of Trump at the direction of the Obama Administration!

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://apnews.com/82a8c0ba374...witter&utm_medium=AP

Fox News Channel has pulled legal analyst Andrew Napolitano from the air after disavowing his on-air claim that British intelligence officials had helped former President Barack Obama spy on Donald Trump.

A person with knowledge of the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because it was a personnel matter said Napolitano has been benched and won't be appearing on the air in the near future. Fox had no immediate comment Monday.

Andrew Napolitano back on Fox. He just appeared on a different subject, but indicated he's stands by his previous statements and conclusions regarding the surveillance of Trump at the direction of the Obama Administration!

Glad to hear this. Napolitano is the cats ass! I say that in a positive way. I'm guessing someone at Fox realized not having him on would do more harm then good.

so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

quote:

Originally posted by Cliff:

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
https://apnews.com/82a8c0ba374...witter&utm_medium=AP

Fox News Channel has pulled legal analyst Andrew Napolitano from the air after disavowing his on-air claim that British intelligence officials had helped former President Barack Obama spy on Donald Trump.

A person with knowledge of the situation who spoke on condition of anonymity because it was a personnel matter said Napolitano has been benched and won't be appearing on the air in the near future. Fox had no immediate comment Monday.

Andrew Napolitano back on Fox. He just appeared on a different subject, but indicated he's stands by his previous statements and conclusions regarding the surveillance of Trump at the direction of the Obama Administration!

Glad to hear this. Napolitano is the cats ass! I say that in a positive way. I'm guessing someone at Fox realized not having him on would do more harm then good.

I wanted to post earlier that I saw the Judge back on Fox but was too busy with work to get online. I too am glad he's back on air. And I hope he is eventually vindicated for his previous conclusions.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

Filthy democrats

also just read that Napolitano is back - knew that was going to happen

as far as a trustworthy democrat who can be bargained with and will keep his word - no such animal exists

glad DJT didn't waste his energy on that piece of shit from MA

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

Filthy democrats

The Democrats do not have the equivalent of John McCain or Lindsay Graham or Rand Paul among others in their party. They always put forth a united front even when it's the wrong front and some of their members know it they never stray from the cause.

Republicans have never shown the desire to fully unite on anything.

Trump did a really good job picking Sean Spicer. That man has the perfect balance of attitude and patience when it comes to dealing with the criminally corrupt media.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

Filthy democrats

Well he tried.... Guess he'll have to broker deal between conservatives and moderates instead of moderates and left. I am not seeing a problem here.

Not what I was hoping to hear from Trump.

free image uploading

quote:

Not what I was hoping to hear from Trump.

I know...
The circular firing squad continues, but doesn't help anyone....

Verified account @realDonaldTrump

The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don't get on the team, & fast. We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!

****

After Trump drew 'first blood' this morning with a tweet threatening to fight Freedom Caucus members in the 2018 mid-term elections, a pair of House representatives have fired back with aggressive tweets of their own implying that Trump's healthcare plan was evidence that he had "succumb to the D.C. Establishment."

"It didn't take long for the swamp to drain @realDonaldTrump. No shame, Mr. President. Almost everyone succumbs to the D.C. Establishment."

".@realDonaldTrump it's a swamp not a hot tub. We both came here to drain it. #SwampCare polls 17%. Sad!"

Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, the former chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, also defended conservative lawmakers earlier today on Fox News. Per The Hill:

"The Freedom Caucus is trying to change Washington, this bill keeps Washington the same, plain and simple," Jordan said Thursday on Fox News' "America's Newsroom."

"We appreciate the president, we are trying to help the president. But the fact is, you have to look at the legislation. It doesn't do what we told the voters we were going to do, and the American people understand that. That's why only 17 percent of the population supports this legislation."

Jordan wouldn't comment on the threat regarding the 2018 midterms, instead characterizing the scuttled healthcare vote as just a "postponement" and arguing that Republicans will succeed if they deliver on their promises to voters.

"Lets forget the blame and what may happen in the future, lets just do what we said. That's what the Freedom Caucus and what Republicans are committed to," he said.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/...ampcare-polls-17-sad

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

Filthy democrats

Let's see if I understand this correctly. An elected official gets an invitation to visit the president and essentially tells the president to pound sand. Is that correct?

Don't give a shit who you are, you get invited by the president you should show up with your spit shined sneakers.

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
so who is not interested in bipartisan efforts ?

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...ses-to-meet-n2305957

President Trump indicated last week, soon after Republicans failed to take up the American Health Care Act, that he'd be reaching out to Democrats to pursue health care reform, etc. He got the ball rolling on Wednesday, inviting moderate Democrat Stephen F. Lynch (MA) to the White House.

Yet, the congressman did not accept, offering this blunt explanation to the Boston Globe.:

“I was asked if I would be interested in going over to the White House for a meeting,” Lynch said in a statement to the Globe. “They said they were looking for ‘moderate’ Democrats – which I am. But under the circumstances I felt like they were trying to divide our party so I declined the invitation.”

“My feeling is that the Trump White House has taken a ‘scorched earth’ approach so far,” he added. “I am usually someone who looks for middle ground, but Mr. Trump’s opening position, especially as reflected in his budget, has been so extreme that there is no middle ground. It’s a non-starter for me.”

Lynch was one of several Democrats who received a formal invitation to meet with Trump

Filthy democrats

Let's see if I understand this correctly. An elected official gets an invitation to visit the president and essentially tells the president to pound sand. Is that correct?

Don't give a shit who you are, you get invited by the president you should show up with your spit shined sneakers.

I have to disagree with you....respectfully. I would have passed if I would have been invited by O'bummer!!! No way did/do I want to meet this person, or shake his hand.

quote:

Originally posted by GT-40DOC:
I have to disagree with you....respectfully. I would have passed if I would have been invited by O'bummer!!! No way did/do I want to meet this person, or shake his hand.

Awww, you gave up the chance to tie his shoelaces together while he was reading from the teleprompter.