David French of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America celebrate the Supreme Court decision that upheld a portion of President Trump’s travel ban, overturning lower court rulings. They also applaud the SCOTUS decision in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church against the State of Missouri in a religious liberty case. And they question Pride Month’s “inclusivity” as LGBT members of the Jewish community are ejected from a Chicago pride march for having the Star of David on a rainbow flag.
North Korea murdered Otto Warmbier and a fierce response is needed, says a prominent expert on China and North Korea, but he warns the increasingly belligerent actions of the communist regime are a result of the U.S. failing to hold it accountable for more than two decades.
Earlier this month, North Korea released Warmbier after imprisoning him for 16 months. He spent the vast majority of that time in a coma and died just days after returning to Ohio. North Korea claimed Warmbier’s coma stemmed from a bout of botulism and that he was released on humanitarian grounds. U.S. doctors found no evidence of botulism.
“At this point, we have to go with the overwhelming evidence and that is indeed an issue of murder,” said Gordon Chang, a leading scholar on China and North Korea and the author of “Nuclear Showdown: North Korea Takes on the World.”
“There is just no other explanation for a healthy 22-year-old – then a 21-year-old – would end up in a permanent coma and then death. We have to just follow the evidence and just realize that the North Korean explanation is not accurate,” said Chang.
“It may have been guards who got overzealous, but it probably was an order from the top of the regime to send a message to the United States,” said Chang. “It was as horrific as we can think. This is a good reminder when we start to talk about negotiating with the North Koreans of who we are actually dealing with.”
On Friday, the North Korean regime vigorously denied torturing Warmbier, insisting it provided him medical care and then released him on humanitarian grounds.
“Although we had no reason at all to show mercy to such a criminal of the enemy state, we provided him with medical treatments and care with all sincerity on humanitarian basis until his return to the U.S.,” the foreign ministry said, according to state-run Korean Central News Agency.
The North Korean government also claimed it was the biggest victim in this story due to an alleged smear campaign by the U.S. and South Korea to accuse it of torture.
“It’s a typical North Korean response that it’s all the Americans’ response. Any problem in the world can be traced to Washington. This is just the way that they operate. They’re certainly not going to accept any responsibility for the treatment of Otto Warmbier, although they had total custody of him since January 2, 2016,” said Chang.
While the actions of Kim Jong-Un’s regime infuriate the Trump administration, Chang says increased North Korean aggression is simply a result of the U.S. doing virtually nothing in response to provocations for decades.
“We have not imposed costs on North Korea for their brutalized treatment of Americans: the seizure of the (USS) Pueblo in 1968, the shoot down of the Air Force EC-121 with the loss of 31 lives. Again, no penalty was imposed. We never do so, so of course the North Koreans think they can kill us,” said Chang.
“Yes, the North Koreans are villains, but this has become an issue not of North Korea. It’s become an issue of the American response to North Korea, he views of the American policy establishment, the views of American administrations – Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives,” said Chang.
“The north Koreans will continue to act in this way until the United States imposes some costs. So this has become a question of us, not them,” he added.
And what is an effective response?
“Regardless of what they think about North Korea, the Trump administration needs to impose costs on Pyongyang. We need to do that because we cannot allow anyone to kill anyone with impunity,” said Chang.
He believes going after North Korean money would send a crystal clear message.
“I think the most important thing would be to cut North Korea off from the global financial system by cutting North Korea off from Chinese banks, which are participating in illicit North Korean commerce and North Korean crimes,” said Chang.
In addition to providing an appropriate wake-up call to North Korea, Chang believes China would also receive the message loud and clear.
“If were to start to do that, I think that we would start to see a new Chinese attitude, much more positive and much more cooperative. But until we are willing to take political risk and show political will, they’re going to continue with their support of North Korea. They’ve weaponized North Korea against us. We have not responded,” said Chang.
He says demonstrating diplomatic backbone is vital for U.S. national security.
“It’s becoming essential for the United States to show the rest of the world that, first of all, we’re going to enforce our own laws regardless of what we think about China or North Korea policy,” said Chang.
“Second, we need to send a message to the Chinese that for the first time since 1994 that we are serious about protecting the American homeland. We haven’t done that, and because of that Beijing and Pyongyang haven’t taken us seriously,” he said.
President Trump has said the approach of previous administrations toward North Korea does not work, but he has yet to lay out a new policy. In the meantime, Chang says we’re still getting pushed around.
“So far they’ve adopted the policy of their predecessors and they’re, again, getting no results from the Chinese. I don’t know if the president has genuinely been taken in by Beijing or whether he’s just giving them enough rope and he’s decided he’s eventually going to do something on his own,” said Chang.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Rich McFadden of Radio America discuss the legitimacy of Russia’s claims that they killed top ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in late May. They also express frustration over more heated tweets from President Donald Trump today in which he angrily states that he is being investigated for obstruction of justice. And they have a field day with the news that Alex Jones of Infowars released secret recordings from behind the scenes of his interview with Megyn Kelly, an interview which sparked major controversy and outrage across the nation.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America react to North Korea’s release of an American hostage, express concern over troubling reports of his health condition, and marvel at how former NBA star Dennis Rodman seems to provide intelligence on North Korea that our own spies can’t uncover. They also discuss the rumors NewsMax CEO Chris Ruddy stirred up during a PBS interview about President Trump possbily firing special procecutor Robert Mueller. And they question Megyn Kelly’s decision to host conspiracy theorist Alex Jones of Infowars on her new Sunday night show on NBC.
Thursday’s highly anticipated testimony of former FBI Director James Comey delivered devastating blows to the legal accusations against President Trump, but a former federal prosecutor says the political damage inflicted by Comey and the overall investigation could end up being a major wound.
In the hearings before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Comey confirmed that Trump is not and never was personally under investigation by the FBI as part of the probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 elections and, critically, that there is no evidence of collusion between Trump and his team and Russia.
He also said Trump never directly ordered him to cease any probe and that media reports suggesting extensive communications between the Trump campaign and the Russian government were almost entirely false.
However, Comey also said he took Trump’s overtures on behalf of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn as a directive. He also indicated that he started keeping memos only when Trump was elected to protect himself if there were any future dust-ups.
In his opening statement, Comey also slammed Trump for changing his public explanation for firing him, initially indicating that it was about the handling of the Hillary Clinton case before admitting it was about the Russia probe. Comey then called Trump a liar for publicly suggesting that FBI personnel had lost confidence in him.
Between the media hype and the Democratic talking points leading into Thursday, Trump critics were preparing for an event that would be the tipping point towards his legal or political downfall. They didn’t get it.
“If you just look clinically at the legal facts that came out, Trump had a good day as far as the allegations we’ve been looking at over the last six months,” said former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy, who led the prosecution of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and others for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and planning to attack other landmarks.
“The testimony undermines the case for obstruction of justice, which I’ve been trying to argue was not strong at all to begin with. There’s still no evidence of collusion and they acknowledged Trump was not the subject of an investigation,” said McCarthy.
He says the definitive remarks on collusion may well be the biggest stories of the day.
“Today probably puts to bed the notion that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Putin regime. So Comey, who would have had every motivation to suggest such collusion if there had been any, really was very clear on the fact there was no evidence of that,” said McCarthy.
McCarthy says the intense politicization of Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 elections has distracted officials from focusing on the actual, ongoing threat.
“What I’ve been concerned about is that our consideration of Russia has become so hyper-politicized that a lot people have a motivation to downplay it. To me it’s very serious, so I hope we can put the politics part of that aside and start to focus on the Putin regime, which is a real problem for the United States,” said McCarthy.
But while Trump’s legal concerns ought to be greatly eased, McCarthy warns Comey’s blistering attack on Trump’s character may do lasting damage.
“Even in not formally or informally accusing Trump of not committing a crime, Comey paints a very unflattering portrait of the president as somebody who is conniving, dishonest, and a real operator in a sense,” said McCarthy.
“I’m not smart enough to know how this is going to play itself out, but I wonder if people will care more about the fact that there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of criminal wrongdoing or even deeply inappropriate behavior that straddles the line of the law versus how unflattering the portrait of the president painted by Comey is,” said McCarthy.
McCarthy notes Hillary Clinton never faced any charges over her private server or for mishandling top secret classified information, but the revelation of her conduct ended up carrying immense political consequences.
Shortly after Comey finished his public testimony, Trump’s personal attorney Marc Kasowitz, publicly highlighted what he sees as Comey’s exoneration of Trump while simultaneously disputing Comey’s assertion that Trump demanded a loyalty pledge or asked for the Flynn probe to be dropped.
McCarthy says it makes sense for Kasowitz to point out the testimony that boosts Trump’s legal standing, but he says accusing Comey of not telling the truth in other areas was not smart.
“I wouldn’t be asking for a credibility contest between Trump and Comey. Trump has a long, long history of not having at 7 p.m. the position he took at 7 a.m. and he may have changed it two or three times in between. Whereas, Comey has contemporaneous notes and is pretty solid as he moves from event to event to event even when he tells the same story multiple times,” said McCarthy.
“Trump’s going to lose a credibility contest with Comey and there’s no reason for his lawyer to get him into one,” said McCarthy.
Another key revelation from Comey centers on former Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Comey confirmed he went public with his summary on the Clinton case and his recommendation not to prosecute because of Lynch’s clandestine meeting with Bill Clinton on an Arizona tarmac. He also revealed that Lynch pressured him not to publicly describe the Clinton probe as an “investigation” but rather as a “matter.”
Nonetheless, McCarthy says Lynch is not in any legal danger.
“I don’t think she’s in any legal trouble. I think Comey’s point, and it was a good one, is that it’s not one side that tries to massage and politicize law enforcement,” said McCarthy.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America dive into all things Comey as the former FBI Director gives his much awaited testimony. They point out that Comey confirmed President Trump’s contention that he was told three times that he was not under FBI investigation. They also highlight Trump’s inappropriate demands for Comey’s loyalty and the inconsistent reasons given for Comey’s firing. And they have some fun as Washington loses its mind with excitement over a congressional hearing.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America start the day reacting to reports that former FBI director James Comey will not accuse President Trump of trying to obstruct justice. They also sigh as tensions mount between President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions after Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation. And they are a bit surprised to see ISIS attacking Iran, but also see some benefit in two detestable entities focused on each other rather than targets in the West.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America have a field day as government contractor Reality Winner is arrested for leaking classified information to the media. They also unload on Virginia Senator Tim Kaine, who tries to leave the impression that Russia manipulated the actual vote tallies in 2016 while also admitting that there is no evidence for it. And they discuss the Trump administration’s failed attempts to assemble a war room to push back against former FBI Director James Comey’s upcoming testimony.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud British Prime Minister Theresa May for a much tougher statement following the London Bridge terrorism attack, while acknowledging the difficult free speech debate that is sure to follow. They also contemplate terror suspect profiling after one attacker appeared in the documentary “The Jihadis Next Door” and attempted to radicalize children in a local park, yet police let him go after questioning. And they express frustration over President’s Trump’s latest Twitter tirade over his travel ban.
President Trump officially withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accords, and one of the leading climate experts disputing the purported consensus on climate science is praising Trump for making the right decision for the American economy and for sound science.
“I’m glad that Trump had the fortitude to stick it out despite all the attempts to waylay him,” said Dr. Tim Ball, a retired climatologist at the University of Winnipeg and author of “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science.”
“He didn’t have to rely on the false science. He relied strictly on the economics of it, that it’s a very very bad deal for the United States. In fact, it’s deliberately designed to punish the United States,” said Ball.
Ball says the Paris Climate Accords were simply the latest incarnation of the old Kyoto Protocol from the 1990’s which sought to redistribute wealth from the industrial nations. He contends the Green Climate Fund, which is part of the Paris agreement, is latest effort in that regard.
Ball points out the non-binding nature of the agreement – which is the only way the deal could be struck – means most nations have not contributed what they’ve pledged to the Green Climate Fund.
Nonetheless, Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the non-binding deal resulted in howls of protest from critics, with environmental activist Tom Steyer claiming the action was treasonous and CNN’s Fareed Zakaria insisting the move means the U.S. is surrendering its role as leader of the free world.
Ball says none of the criticism is based in actual science.
“They use the environment and they use the climate as a vehicle for a political agenda. All they can do when you say I’m not going along with the political agenda is invoke that the sky is falling,” said Ball.
Ball says many of the political opponents of Trump are simply led to their position by perpetrators of bad science. He says Pope Francis is the perfect example.
“One of the most egregious ones was the pope. The pope got co-opted by (Hans Joachim) Schellnhuber at the Potsdam Institute in Germany. He was the key author for the pope’s encyclical against global warming,” said Ball.
He says the notion that humans can dictate radical changes to the earth’s climate are the height of arrogance.
“The reality is that the levels of energy involved and the amount of energy that humans put in are so miniscule that it is actually laughable to think that we can control the climate in any way,” said Ball.
Trump did say he was open to renegotiating the Paris agreement or forging new deals with other nations that would be more beneficial to the United States. Ball says those talks should be done only after Trump gets a better handle on genuine climate science.
“What I hope will happen is that this will now allow a focus more on the science that is purportedly behind the claims that CO2 is a problem,” said Ball, noting every United National climate change prediction has been badly incorrect.
“It’s got to be real science, proven science. Their science has failed. We know that because their forecasts have failed. If your forecasts are wrong, your science is wrong,” said Ball.
