Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss Pres. Trump’s removal of 46 Obama-era U.S. attorneys and how many critics fail to mention this happens with every modern administration. They also shake their heads as scores of high-level government appointments have yet to be filled and no nominations have been made. And they wince as Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King says, “We can’t restore our civilization with someone else’s babies.”
A former Justice Department official with experience before Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, or FISA, courts says there are simple ways to determine whether President Trump is right about the government spying on him during the 2016 campaign, and she says President Obama would certainly have known about such actions by the Justice Department.
And she says it’s entirely plausible that Democratic political appointees who were later shifted to career positions in the intelligence community are working to undermine the Trump presidency.
Victoria Toensing served as deputy assistant attorney general and was also a federal prosecutor. In addition, she served as chief counsel for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence while Sen. Barry Goldwater, R-Ariz., was leading the committee.
The debate over whether the government conducted surveillance on the Trump campaign instantly caught fire Saturday after a series of early-morning tweets from Trump. The president ultimately compared Obama’s alleged actions to Watergate.
Later on Saturday, a spokesman for former President Obama issued a statement denying any involvement by Obama in any surveillance on Trump and his team.
“A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice. As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false,” the statement read.
Like other experts, Toensing noted the very careful language in the Obama statement that doesn’t appear to rule out other in the government from authorizing such activity, namely the Justice Department.
“Sounds like a non sequitur, doesn’t it?” said Toensing. “OK, you’ve never interfered, so if the attorney general said she was going to do this and gave you notice, you just said, ‘Go ahead.’ That’s not interfering. It’s a really carefully parsed statement. He’s gotten as good as Bill Clinton,” said Toensing.
Is it certain then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch would have informed Obama when taking such action?
“Oh yeah. I can’t imagine ordering surveillance of a political opponent in a political campaign (without informing the president). Loretta Lynch has shown that she’s been incompetent in many ways, but I don’t think communicating with the president is where’s she’s incompetent,” said Toensing.
Throughout the weekend, very different narratives were presented as fact, from former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper insisting that the no FISA warrant was ever issued in connection to Trump to conservatives highlighting a litany of liberal media outlets reporting on intercepts of key Trump officials for the past several weeks.
The New York Times has reported that the FISA court denied a request for a warrant back in June 2016 but approved one with a much narrower scope in October.
“What is this thing, ‘If it happened?’ There’s been reporting in the New York Times that the second time there was some computer in Trump Tower. Then, indeed, Trump was being electronically surveilled or wiretapped, depending on the technique that was used,” she said.
And Toensing says it is vital for lawmakers and reporters to consistently and repeatedly ask if wiretapping or electronic surveillance was used, since referring to one specific method could give witnesses unintended wiggle room.
Toensing fully supports the matter now going to the House and Senate intelligence committees. She says those panels, particularly on the Senate side, still enjoy a great deal of bipartisan cooperation and adds the key questions range from the existence of the FISA warrants to their scope and the length of time they were valid. She says FISA warrants are normally active for 90 days but can be extended to six months in some cases.
While FISA courts approve warrant requests in nearly all cases, Toensing says the rate is a bit misleading because the court does deny some efforts but then approves them after the government narrows the focus of the warrants.
Nonetheless, she says another good question for lawmakers to pursue is why the June request before the FISA court was rejected. And if reports of the second warrant request being granted is true, why Obama would allow such a thing to take place during the heat of a campaign.
“If it did involve Trump Tower or Trump people, I say what is a Democratic president of the United States doing even having anything to do with tapping Republican opposition during a political year? That just amazes me right there,” said Toensing.
The allegation from Trump and his allies is that partisan intelligence operatives sought to undermine his campaign and are now looking to bring down his presidency. Toensing says that argument is plausible, and point to recent events as evidence of a deep rift in intelligence circles.
“Do you remember when the Yemen raid took place and the [Navy SEAL] was killed? All of a sudden, a few days later, you saw headlines (reporting that) nothing came out of the Yemen raid. It was a loss. Then, about a week ago, I see hundreds of names were acquired during that Yemen raid,” said Toensing.
She says there are a lot of entrenched Democrats now serving in non-political positions.
“Democrats like to stay in government more than Republicans do. So Democrats tend to stay around after the political process goes. They’re given a job in what called a career position,” said Toensing.
She says one of the most controversial figures from the Obama administration is a good example of that transition.
“Lois Lerner, no better example than that,” said Toensing, referring to the former IRS official at the center of government harassment of conservative groups applying for non-profit status.
“She’s a political appointee and then they put her in career positions, where she could sit there and do all kinds of evil to opponents of President Obama,” said Toensing.
So while Toensing is unaware of any specific rogue elements of the intelligence community, she says the idea that some are working against their own president is not far-fetched.
“It would seem to me that the mechanism is there for the people to undermine President Trump. It would appear that that’s what’s happening,” said Toensing.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos break down the political surveillance debate in three different martinis. They wonder why Pres. Trump decided a late night series of tweets was the best way to lodge serious allegations against his predecessor. We also note Pres. Obama’s carefully worded statement denying any involvement in spying on Trump, the conflicting narratives on what actually happened – all leading to the dizzying Washington conjecture that Trump might not be correct but he’s probably right. And we unload on Delaware Sen. Chris Coons for claiming transcripts of Russians interacting with the Trump team would tell us once and for all if there was any collusion during the 2016 campaign – only to later admit he has no idea what’s in the transcripts.
Social conservatives and proponents of federalism are cheering the Trump administration’s decision to rescind the Obama policy requiring public schools to accommodate transgender students and personnel according to their gender identity, but the fight is far from over.
The battle now shifts to the a Supreme Court case, state supreme courts and countless school districts around the country, but Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver says this week’s Justice Department ruling is critical.
“Removing this lawless directive from the Obama administration will do a lot to get the federal government off the backs of these local schools,” said Staver, who says the Obama order put girls at great risk by placing them in vulnerable situations with biological males.
He says the backlash by liberals and the media is
“There’s such a big backlash about this in the liberal media, like there’s something horrible that he did. Frankly, he’s just following the law. The law does not include gender identity, or sexual orientation, or gender expression – or whatever you want to say – to the non-discrimination categories,” said Staver.
Staver notes that Congress has rejected such efforts to amend Title IX to expand the application of non-discrimination policies. He further states that the authors of Title IX and the 1964 Civil Rights Act had no intention of extending such protections.
Despite the Trump administration’s move, the Supreme Court may soon weigh in the issue. On March 28, the eight justices will hear arguments in in a high profile case out of Virginia. Gavin Grimm, a biological male who identifies as male, is in a legal battle with the Gloucester County Schools.
However, Staver now believes the high court may defer on the issue as a result of Trump’s actions.
“It’s possible that the court may simply punt on this and dismiss the case because of this new development. One of the questions before the Supreme Court is should they give deference to the administrative agencies for interpreting the statute. That administrative agency has gone back to the original intent of the statute,” said Staver.
The Trump administration’s decision also impacts Staver directly.
“This comes at a good time for a case that I’m arguing next week before the Virginia Supreme Court. In the next few days, I’ll argue before the Virginia Supreme Court on the Fairfax County case,” said Staver.
“That’s a school board in northern Virginia that, on its own, included gender identity, sexual orientation and gender expression to its policies. Virginia doesn’t allow that. It has to be set at the state level,” said Staver.
“Our case deals with something that many states have and that is that these non-discrimination categories have to be set at the state level, not at the local level. You don’t want to have different policies at the state, county, and local level all conflicting with one another,” said Staver.
He says this battle is playing out around the United States.
“Just a few days ago, the Arkansas Supreme Court came down with the same thing. Fayettevile added gender identity to its non-discrimination policy. The Arkansas Supreme Court said no, you can’t do that. It has to be set at the state level. That’s exactly what I’m arguing at the Virginia Supreme Court,” said Staver.
Even more battles on this and other key issues will play out at school board meetings around the country. Staver urges people to get active at the local level.
“It’s very important to get involved with the local school board because you can stop these policies before they occur. That’s the first line of defense. You need good people at the school board, not just for these policies but for other things as well. We need good Christians and people of moral values to be on these school boards all across the country,” said Staver.
Social conservatives are thrilled with President Trump for his pro-life actions and his choice for the Supreme Court, but he is taking heat from the right for extending an Obama-era executive order which places LGBT agenda mandates on federal contractors.
Liberty Counsel Chairman Mathew Staver says it all started under the Obama administration three years ago.
“In 2014, President Obama, contrary to any federal law, issued an executive order saying any contractor who does business with the federal government has to have this so-called LGBT and even Q (for) questioning, which is part of that alphabet soup, and they had to put this into their employment systems,” said Staver.
“They were imposing on employers the LGBTQ agenda when they didn’t have any federal law as authority,” said Staver.
Staver says Trump made a big mistake in continuing the policy.
“We were hoping that would be one of those executive orders that would go by the wayside, but when President Trump came into office, sadly he continued that executive order in 2017,” said Staver.
“That is going way beyond the federal law. Federal law does not have sexual orientation or gender identity in the employment context or in any other context with regard to employment or public accommodation,” said Staver.
He says Congress has repeatedly stiff-armed the LGBT agenda on this front, which is why Obama resorted to an executive order.
“Congress has been asked several times to include sexual orientation and gender identity into the federal employment law and they have rejected that urging. Consequently, not only does the law not have it but we see from Congress they don’t want it in there. So why would the president go over and above them and impose this on employers anyway?” said Staver.
“It’s understandable for Obama, but it’s just not acceptable for President Trump,” he said.
The order requires any firm bidding for a federal contract to adopt policies protecting employees who wish to identify as a different gender than their biological sex would indicate. It also requires businesses to accommodate such personnel by allowing them to using restrooms and other intimate facilities according to their gender identity.
And those companies refusing to comply will be left out in the cold on federal contracts.
“Any company that doesn’t want to have this absurd policy in place or a policy that violates their sincerely-held religious beliefs, they’re going to have to sit on the sideline. They won’t be able to do business with the federal government,” said Staver.
Staver also asserts that the protections offered through this executive order are not the equivalent of other anti-discrimination protections enshrined in law.
“Gender identity is completely in a different category than discrimination on the basis of race or religion, which is protected by the first amendment,” said Staver.
He also argues the policy flies in the face of Trump’s top goal of jump-starting the economy.
“If we want to have America first and we want to create jobs? Don’t put this absurd policy on them when the federal law does not impose it,” said Staver.
While Staver lauds Trump for his pro-life actions and for selecting Judge Neil Gorsuch for the Supreme Court, he says this is an area where Trump has always disappointed traditional marriage advocates.
“He never was on our side it looked like on the so-called LGBT agenda. Certainly, he’s not on the level of President Obama, who was radical in that respect,” said Staver. “Unfortunately, in the first two weeks of office, he does this executive order and that’s disturbing.”
Staver says conservatives need to make a compelling case to Trump to change course.
“I think he needs to be educated on this issue and he needs to reverse this policy that Obama ultimately instituted,” said Staver.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss President Trump’s firing of acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to defend his executive order. They also groan as former President Obama injects himself into politics just 10 days after leaving office. And they defend Tom Brady against the SJW sports media demanding Brady explain where he supports and opposes Trump.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud the vast majority of President Trump’s executive orders. They also groan at the news President Obama defied Congress to send $221 million to the Palestinian Authority on his final morning as president. And they shake their heads as two-thirds of Senate Democrats even oppose Mike Pompeo to lead the CIA.
President Obama’s thawing of relations with Cuba has already drawn plenty of criticism, but a prominent Castro critic says Obama’s actions in his final week will only serve to increase repression in Cuba while enriching the coffers of the Castro regime.
On Friday, the Obama administration announced it would no longer accept Cubans into the country if they arrive in the U.S. without a visa. For years, the American policy had been to accept refugees who reached our shores but turn back those encountered off the Florida coast.
For critics of Obama’s earlier overtures, this latest move is another major slap in the face.
“It is very significant. It is another cave-in by Obama to Castro,” said Humberto Fontova, a prominent author and journalist who fled Cuba as a boy while his father was imprisoned.
However, he says it’s not the so-called “wet foot, dry foot” policy shift that enrages him the most.
“Folks, this is a smokescreen. This is cover. This is camouflage for the real issue here,” said Fontova. “What Obama did along with this is he abrogated the doctor asylum program. Read the fine print, folks.”
At issue is the Cuban policy of “Doctor Diplomacy,” which Fontova describes as Cuba sending doctors to many friendly or third-world nations in exchange for large sums of money pumped into the Cuban treasury. He says the doctors get less than 10 percent of the money and their families are “held hostage” while they’re abroad.
In 2006, President George W. Bush instituted the aforementioned asylum program, allowing those Cuban doctors to defect to the U.S. by strolling into any one of our embassies around the world.
“That was costing the Castro regime dearly because what the host country would have paid for these quack doctors was being lost. It’s estimated this was bringing in about eight billion to the Castro regime,” said Fontova.
He says that money will flow more freely again now that Obama has reversed the Bush policy.
Fontova also points out that Obama is not clamping down on all Cuban entering the U.S. Those with visas are welcome, and he says how those visas are distributed is a scandal in itself.
“Here’s the kicker. The issuance of those visas is outsourced by Obama to the Castro regime. The U.S. embassy in Havana leaves it up to Castro to decide who is going to get these visas,” said Fontova.
He says the visa recipients are chosen specifically to fleece the American welfare system for the benefit of Cuba, a strategy that Obama helped make easier by easing the U.S. remittance policy toward Cuba early in his administration.
“They sprint off the plane, run straight to the welfare offices, apply for the U.S. welfare benefits, which can total $1,200 a month, and almost immediately start wiring that money back to Cuba,” said Fontova.
“It’s estimated that last year four billion dollars flowed from the U.S. to Cuba, thanks to Obama opening that lifeline and thanks to those so-called refugees that the Castro regime chooses,” said Fontova.
In his farewell address, President Obama took credit for opening “a new chapter with the Cuban people.” Fontova says that new chapter means even more suffering for the Cuban people.
“The real horror of this is that repression in Cuba is at a 20-year high. The last two years, in other words coinciding exactly with Obama’s opening, have coincided with a wave of terror against Cuban dissidents,” said Fontova, who says the Cuban government feels emboldened to persecute dissenters since it know there will be no negative reactions from the U.S.
And thanks to Obama refusing to accept refugees who make it to U.S. shores, those dissidents have no way of escape.
“The Cubans who Castro didn’t want to come to the U.S., genuine refugees, folks who jump on two pieces of styrofoam tied together. Those people will be prevented from coming, but the Cubans who Castro wants to come over here because they’re a cash cow for him will continue coming,” said Fontova.
He says the Cuban dissidents point the finger of blame at Obama.
“Do you know that Cuban dissidents have been protesting in Cuba wearing Obama masks? They’re saying it’s his fault. Naturally, that hasn’t been reported in the mainstream media, but it is all Obama’s fault, Cuban dissidents keep telling us,” said Fontova.
A former Clinton administration official is blasting President Obama for his treatment of Israel over the past eight years and strongly encourages President-Elect Trump to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.
Lawrence J. Haas served as communications director for Vice President Al Gore and is now a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council . His book “Harry and Arthur” was named one of the top ten non-fiction books of 2016 by the Wall Street Journal.
In a recent column for U.S. News & World Report, Haas makes the case for moving the embassy. In a subsequent interview, Haas told us the move comes down to one simple and clear message.
“Israel is here to stay,” said Haas, who says that message would drive a stake through the Arab and Palestinian fantasy that Israel can be wiped off the map.
“You hear [the] expression all the time, ‘Palestine: From the River to the Sea.’ Well, Palestine from the (Jordan) river to the (Mediterranean) sea means no Israel. I think it’s time for the United States to send a very clear message to the world that Israel is here to stay, that Jerusalem is the historic homeland and capital of the Jewish people. That’s a reality,” said Haas.
“We are not doing anyone any good by ignoring the reality that Jerusalem is always going to be the capital of Israel. We might as well come to that recognition,” said Haas.
Haas believes the move would also be an important signal to Israel and the world that the Trump administration will approach the Middle East much differently than Obama has, particularly after the December United Nations vote in which the U.S. refused to veto a resolution condemning Israel for its settlements and other disputed lands.
Haas says the non-veto was bad enough, but the Obama administration’s actions behind the scenes was especially galling.
“They not only allowed it to go through but frankly they worked behind the scenes to ensure that there was enough support for it, so that while they were abstaining from it, everybody else was voting yes. It was beyond the benign action of a simple abstention,” said Haas.
Those actions left Haas livid.
“I reacted very furiously to it. It seemed to be the final nail in a sense that the administration had nailed into Israel’s coffin over the last eight years. The theory being that if they were tough on Israel, Israel would make very painful concessions and we would get peace,” said Haas.
He says the Obama strategy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was a flop.
“In the process, they were very tough on our closest ally in the region. They didn’t really demand anything from the Palestinian side. As a result, the Palestinians dug in even harder. We didn’t see negotiations. The Israelis felt that they couldn’t compromise because they were being pressured so much and the Palestinians didn’t think they needed to compromise,” said Haas.
“It was a formula for disaster and that’s what we’ve had over the past eight years,” Haas added.
Haas rejects the notion that moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem would serve as a spark for even greater tension and instability in the region. He says that argument is based on two faulty assumptions.
“The Palestinians have never needed a reason to be violent against Israel, whether it is stabbing Jews in Jerusalem or it is shooting them in the West Bank or is ramming soldiers at checkpoints, the Palestinians always find an excuse to try to kill Jews,” said Haas.
He says Israel’s Arab neighbors will only be bothered by an embassy move from a public relations standpoint.
“The so-called Arab Street frankly I don’t think cares very much about the Palestinians. The Arab governments clearly don’t care about the Palestinians because they don’t do a thing to help them. They don’t provide any money to the Palestinians . They use this issue to divert attention from problems within their own countries,” said Haas.
“The reality is that to the extent countries will recognize Israel and work with Israel behind the scenes has to do with their own self-interests. Do they feel that they get more out of working with Israel or not working with Israel? This fear of being provocative I just don’t buy. I think there are larger forces at work that will determine Israeli relations with different Arab countries,” said Haas.
Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are pleased to see the Democrats’ strategy against Jeff Sessions accomplish nothing – and they point out why the strategy was so stupid. They also groan as the Obama administration’s self-congratulations tour continues with Obama giving Joe Biden the Presidential Medal of Freedom. And they react to Sen. Kamala Harris grilling CIA director nominee Mike Pompeo about climate change, while Jim explains the “sure, whatever” strategy he would employ at a confirmation hearing.
