By Mollie Hemingway • The Federalist
On Saturday night, heavily redacted copies of the FBI’s application to wiretap Trump campaign affiliate Carter Page were released. The portion of the 412-page document that was not redacted supported the claims of Sens. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), as well as those made by the majority of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
The senators and the representatives had issued reports alleging that the FBI used an unverified Clinton campaign document to secure a wiretap against an American citizen, that the application for the wiretap used circular reporting and lacked verification for its central claims, and that it made materially false claims related to the source’s credibility.
President Trump tweeted triumphantly and hyperbolically about what the documents showed regarding the FBI’s behavior toward his campaign. Whatever you think about Trump’s reaction to the release of the FISA application, the media reaction to the story was disingenuous and even more hyperbolic than the president’s tweets. After a year of continuous and alarming revelations, the media are still more interested in proving the Trump campaign treasonously colluded with Russia than wrestling with the fact that the FBI spied on a presidential campaign, and used dubious partisan political research to justify their surveillance. Continue reading
New York Post
When it comes to terrorists and videos, you’d think Hillary Clinton would have learned her lesson.
But her claim during Saturday’s Democratic debate that ISIS is “showing videos of Donald Trump insulting Islam and Muslims” in order to recruit jihadists is about as accurate as her claim an online anti-Muslim video sparked the 2012 Benghazi attack.
And a number of usually pro-Hillary fact-checkers agree: The Washington Post, the Associated Press and Politifact all branded her debate claim false. Continue reading
Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz slammed the Washington Post Tuesday for publishing a cartoon appearing to depict his children as monkeys.
Plurality would be ‘embarrassed’ if she won 2016 election
by Morgan Chalfant • Washington Free Beacon
Fifty-nine percent of U.S. voters rate Clinton as not honest and trustworthy, compared with 35 percent who believe the opposite, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday.
Clinton is not trusted by nearly one-fifth of likely Democratic primary voters and 72 percent of independent voters.
The same survey also found that a plurality of American voters would be embarrassed if Hillary Clinton were elected president in 2016. Specifically, 35 percent would be embarrassed by her election, while a slightly smaller share of 33 percent would be proud. Twenty-nine percent would feel neither way if Clinton prevailed in the presidential election. Continue reading
by Morgan Chalfant • Washington Free Beacon
A watchdog group that has asked the federal government to investigate a number of possible ethics violations involving Hillary Clinton has named the presidential candidate the worst ethics violator of 2015.
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT) released its list of worst ethics violators Tuesday, placing Clinton in a “league of her own” due to ongoing ethics scandals involving the former secretary of state.
The watchdog cited a number of examples as evidence Clinton abused her government position and violated ethics rules, including a recent report that then-secretary of state Clinton gave preferential treatment to a business associate of her son-in-law in 2012. Continue reading
By Shawn Macomber • Lawfare Tyranny
Over at The Washington Times today Center for Freedom and Prosperity President Andrew F. Quinlan presents the International Criminal Court as Exhibit A in his case for why, despite the fact that Americans “spare little mind for the goings-on of international organizations,” the activities of these aspiring transnational behemoths nonetheless will “not only have significant impact around the world, but could also play a role in the upcoming electoral contest.”
The United States chooses not to participate in the ICC, but that doesn’t mean its actions have no bearing on U.S. interests. Given the history of the Court’s involvement in ongoing conflicts and the negative results it can produce, the next president will have to keep a close eye on the current investigation and any potential proceedings that emerge from it.
He goes on to righteously excoriate the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), before tying the whole room together with this final warning:
The President of the United States is often called the leader of the free world. Increasingly, however, U.S. Presidents are watching from the outside as major world events are decided by unelected global bureaucrats. Whether they want to address the undertakings of these international organizations or not, the candidates vying to be the next president may similarly find that the decision is out of their hands.
Read the whole damning piece here.