Rep Liz Cheney Discusses Primary Loss, Future Plans On ABC’s This Week Show

$upport via Cash App

Rep Liz Cheney(R-WY) sat down for an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, three days after her landslide primary loss to Trump-backed challenger Harriet Hageman, to discuss her future political plans. The interview aired on ABC’s This Week show (08/21/22) and as many expected, Cheney’s lopsided loss was in no way shape or form, an end to her political career, but rather, a beginning of a new political chapter.

Rep Cheney said this moments after her loss to Hagenan on 08/16/22: “We must be very clear-eyed about the threat we face, and about what is required to defeat it. I have said since January 6th, that I will do whatever it takes to ensure Donald Trump is never again anywhere near the Oval Office, and I mean that.”

Asked whether she regretted the fact that her staunch opposition to former President Trump had cost her a leadership position in the House and eventually her seat, Rep Cheney responded (2:51): “No regrets. You know, I feel sad about where my party is, I feel sad about the way that too many of my colleagues have responded to what I think is a great moral test and challenge of our time, a great moment to determine whether or not people are going to stand up on behalf of the democracy, and on behalf of our republic.” Rep Cheney added that she has heard from several prominent leaders after her primary loss, thanking her for putting the country over her party. One such call, she said, came from President Biden.

Asked what Trump’s continuing grip on the GOP says about the party, Rep Cheney said the party, both at the state and national level, “is very sick.” She specifically said(4:11):“I think one, it says that people continue to believe the lie, they continue to believe what he’s saying, which is very dangerous. I think it also tells you that large portions of our party, including the leadership of our party, both at the state level in Wyoming, as well as on a national level with RNC, is very sick, and that we really have got to decide whether or not we are going to be a party based on substance and policy, or whether we are going to remain as so many of our party are today, in the grips of a dangerous former president.”

Asked about the argument by former President Trump and others, that her landslide primary loss is proof that the principles she is fighting for are not shared by the GOP, Rep Cheney responded (5:03): “Well, doesn’t that tell you something? What I’m fighting for is the Constitution. What I’m fighting for is the perpetuation of the republic, what I’m fighting for is the fact that elections have to matter, and that when the election is over and the courts have ruled, and the electoral college has met, that the president of the United States has to respect the results of the election, and if Donald Trump’s spokesman says that those are principles that are inconsistent with Donald Trump’s views, and inconsistent with the Republican Party’s views, I think that ought to give every American pause about who Donald Trump is, and about what the Republican Party stands for today.”

Asked about what her new political organization is going to focus on, Rep Cheney said one of her primary objectives will be to campaign against “election deniers”.

Asked about her views on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and specifically, whether he should become Speaker if the GOP takes over the House, Rep Cheney said (6:22): “My views about Kevin McCarthy are very clear. The Speaker of the House is the second in line for the presidency. It requires somebody who understands and recognizes their duty, their oath, their obligation, and he’s been completely unfaithful to the constitution, and demonstrated a total lack of understanding of the significance and importance of the role of Speaker, so I don’t believe he should be Speaker of the House, and I think that’s been very clear.”

Asked whether she would support Trump’s acolytes like Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) or Josh Hawley(R-MO) if one of them secured the GOP presidential nomination in 2024, Rep Cheney responded (9:50): “It would be very difficult when you look at somebody like Josh Hawley, or somebody like Ted Cruz, both of whom know better, both of whom know exactly what the role of Congress is in terms of our constitutional obligations with respect to presidential elections, and yet both of whom took steps that fundamentally threatened the constitutional order and structure in the aftermath of the last election, so in my view, they both have made themselves unfit for future office.”

Asked about Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who many view as the number two contender for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination after Trump, Rep Cheney said(10:28): “DeSantis is somebody who is right now campaigning for election deniers, and I think that is something that people have to have real pause about. Either you fundamentally believe in and will support our constitutional structure, or you don’t.”

Asked whether if she runs for president in 2024, it will be out of a genuine desire to win, or simply sending a pro-democracy message, Rep Cheney responded in relevant part(10:59):“Any decision that I make about doing something that significant and that serious, would be with the intention of winning, and because I think I would be the best candidate.” She punted when asked whether running as an Independent remained an option for her saying(11:19), “I’m not going to go down that path anymore in terms of speculating.”

Bottom line folks, Rep Liz Cheney is not going anywhere. Her primary loss will free her from the bondage that is Trump’s GOP, and allow her to pursue loftier goals–the fight for democracy. She said one of her primary goals will be to defeat “election deniers”, which Yours Truly hopes includes one Senator Ted Cruz, who is up for reelection in 2024. We’re going to need you Liz, in the Lone Star state.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Trump’s Attorney Christina Bobb Addresses Bombshell News Of Nuclear Documents At Maralago

$upport via Cash App

Former President Trump’s Attorney Christina Bobb appeared on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (08/11/22) to address the bombshell revelation by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, that among the documents sought by the FBI at Trump’s Maralago residence, were classified documents related to our nuclear capabilities, which of course have serious national security implications.

Asked to confirm whether there were classified nuclear documents at Maralago, Christina Bobb said she didn’t think so, but wasn’t sure because she had not spoken to former President Trump about the issue–a strange answer indeed.

Host Ingraham(1:18): “Okay Christina, just so I’m clear about this, I want to be really clear. Is it your understanding that there were not documents related to our nuclear capabilities, or nuclear issues that had national security implications in the president’s possession when the agents showed up at Maralago?”

Christina Bobb:“That’s correct, I don’t believe they were…”

Ingraham: “Well, do you know for a fact? Do you know for a fact they weren’t? Have you spoken to the president about it?”

Bobb: “I have not specifically spoken to the president about what nuclear materials may or may not have been in there. I do not believe there were any in there. The legal team had done a very thorough search, and had turned over…everything that we found, that we had, so it’s my understanding on very good belief, based on a thorough investigation, that there was nothing there.”

Any reasonable person presented with Attorney Christina Bobb’s remarks on the Ingraham Angle show, would find it very strange that she went on the show to discuss the bombshell news of possible nuclear documents at Maralago without first discussing the matter with her client(Trump). That just doesn’t add up, and to her credit, host Laura Ingraham’s tone suggested that she wasn’t buying it either.

The interview then moved on to the other big topic as to whether the feds provided Trump’s attorneys with a copy of the items taken from Maralago, the so-called “inventory list”. This is important because another Trump attorney, Lindsey Halligan, had stated on Fox News’ Hannity show the day before, that the feds never provided the inventory list. Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara, had also said on various TV shows that Trump’s attorneys told her, they were not shown the warrant during the FBI raid.

Asked about her on-scene interaction with the feds, Christina Bobb responded(8:17): “Well, initially, it started out a little heated. I was upset and they were not excited to see me, so we had a little bit of an incident initially, just me wanting access to the warrant. They didn’t believe they needed to even show me the warrant so we fought about that, not for very long, maybe a minute, not more than two, and I did have an opportunity to see it. They didn’t give it to me…”

So she clearly admits that she was shown the warrant(read it), something the other lawyer and Lara Trump say never happened. Also, crucially, the fact that she was shown the warrant means that she knows exactly what criminal statute is at play here.

Then this interesting exchange took place. Host Ingraham(9:13): “Did they give you the inventory list before they left, or while they were doing the raid that they don’t want to call a raid?”

Christina Bobb:“Yes…we do have the inventory list as you can expect, it’s not particularly helpful so, yes, I kind of have the inventory list, they gave me the official receipt…”

So Christina Bobb clearly admits that she was shown the warrant, which means she knows exactly what the applicable criminal statutes are, plus she admits to having a copy of the inventory list, something Lara Trump and the other attorney(Lindsey Halligan) maintain they were not given. Folks, a total mess.

Bottom line folks, there’s a lot of confusion coming from Team Trump regarding the Maralago raid. First they said they were not shown the warrant, which apparently they were, then they said they were not given the inventory list, which apparently they were, and now they are denying that the search had anything to do with nuclear-related documents, something that must have been very clear to Attorney Christina Bobb from the warrant she was shown. Is this a case of innocent incompetence, or willful lying to the public? Hmm, as Trump famously used to say, “We’ll see what happens.”

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Trump’s Attorney Says FBI Never Provided Copy Of Search Warrant For Maralago Raid

$upport via Cash App

Former President Trump’s Attorney, Lindsey Halligan, appeared on Fox News’ Hannity show (08/10/22) to discuss the recent FBI raid of his Maralago residence in Palm Beach, Florida. Halligan, who called the FBI raid “an appalling display of abuse of power”, further accused the feds of using a sealed warrant for the express purpose of concealing what it is they were taking from Maralago, or the specific criminal statute(s) Trump is suspected to have violated.

Hannity (video at 0:56): “Did you ever get a chance to read the warrant. Did you ever get a copy of it, did you ever get any other information, do you know, are you aware of what they took out of Maralago?”

Lindsey Halligan: “That’s the thing, they had unfettered access to the property. They looked at God knows what in there, and did God knows what in there. We have no idea. What the FBI did was an appalling display of abuse of power. All documents requested were previously handed over. President Trump and his team painstakingly reviewed every single document at Maralago, and gave the government what they requested. If they needed any other documents they could have just asked. The warrant was secured under seal, so they tried to get away with concealing this overreach by obtaining a warrant under seal. Nobody knew about it, they knew that President Trump was in Bedminster, hasn’t been at Maralago for some time. They thought they could sneak in, snoop around without attorneys present in case they walked out with nothing so that nobody would know they snooped to this degree, and it’s unprecedented in United States history. The government seems to be out of control. It’s plagued with manipulation, corruption, greed, deceit and fraud.”

There’s no other way to interpret Attorney Halligan’s remarks on Hannity other than, (I’ll be happy to stand corrected of course) because the feds got the warrant under seal, neither Trump nor his attorneys, know what documents were taken from Maralago, or what criminal statute formed the basis for the search warrant. As a matter of fact, Halligan accuses the feds of seeking a sealed warrant for the express purpose of keeping Trump and his attorneys in the dark as to what was being taken from Maralago, or the criminal statute he is alleged to have violated, conduct she describes as “an appalling display of abuse of power.”

Bottom line folks, the FBI’s raid on Maralago has created a firestorm among conservatives, who have always characterized former President Trump as a victim of the “deep state”— a supposed bipartisan cabal of establishment elites (both elected and unelected) who are terrified he is out to shake up the status quo in Washington, and dislodge them from their entrenched positions of power.

The counter narrative proffered by liberals for the FBI raid, has been that Trump and his attorneys know exactly what was taken from Maralago because he had to have been given a copy of exactly what the feds took from his residence–the so-called “inventory list”.

Where, as here, Trump’s attorney claims she has no idea what was removed from his residence, or the criminal statute he is suspected of having violated, reasonable people will agree that given the fact that the subject of the raid is the immediate former President of the United States, some kind of explanation of the raid by the Department of Justice, is in order.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Former Assistant AG Jeffrey Clark Discusses FBI Raid On His Home On Tucker Carlson Show

$upport via Cash App

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, who’s currently a Senior Fellow at the Center For Renewing America, appeared on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson show(06/23/22) to discuss the FBI’s predawn raid on his home, which presumably, is related to his role in the fake electors scheme that was meant to thwart the certification of President Biden’s electoral college win.

Clark did not directly address the fake elector scheme during his interview on Tucker Carlson show and instead, attacked the time and manner of the FBI raid, which he shockingly referred to as “Stasi-like”. Stasi is of course the term that was used to refer to Adolf Hitler’s ruthless Ministry of State Security. He also characterized the raid as part of a coordinated nationwide political attack on him and other backers of former President Trump.

Clark told host Tucker Carlson(video at 1:38):“Yeah, I think this is highly politicized and it’s also part, Tucker, if you didn’t know it, of a nationwide effort yesterday. There were multiple states where multiple people were roughly simultaneously raided for their electronic devices, and that obviously requires a high level of coordination, and look, with the hearing[January 6th Committee]that was pointed at me, and targeting me today, with the special audience member of Sean Penn–so you know this is Hollywood– the very next day, you know, it looks highly coincidental. I just don’t believe in coincidences.”

There’s no other way to interpret Clark’s rambling and rather incoherent response other than, he is framing this as some sort of made-for-television political attack against him(the Senn Penn reference). This displays a shocking level of tone-deafness on his part, given the volume of evidence adduced so far, regarding the fake elector scheme. Clark may not realize this, but many consider him very lucky to have gone this far without any criminal prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He is the last person who should be surprised about a search warrant being executed at their home, given the volume of evidence already out there regarding the fake elector scheme.

It also bears pointing out that at his testimony before the January 6th Committee, Clark responded to virtually every question by pleading the 5th(right against self-incrimination), which every reasonable person would agree, demonstrates at the very least, some consciousness of guilt on his part.

Interestingly, he never mentioned the fake elector scheme during his interview on the Tucker Carlson show. Most innocent people would use such venues to reiterate the fact that they did nothing wrong. Clark appeared only bothered by the fact that the FBI showed up at his house very early in the morning, before he could put on his favorite pants, and that they showed up with “electronic sniffing dogs”, which he claimed he has “never seen before, or heard of.”

Bottom line folks, reasonable people will agree that the January 6th Committee has provided enough evidence so far regarding Clark’s role in the fake elector scheme, to justify his criminal prosecution. As I stated earlier, Clark should consider himself lucky that he has not been criminally charged yet, and should be the last person surprised, or upset, by an FBI raid on his home.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com