Tuesday, December 10, 2019

A Trail of FBI Abuse

By The Editorial Board | The Wall Street Journal

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz in June 2018. PHOTO: MANUEL BALCE CENETA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

The Horowitz report confirms that the bureau deceived FISA judges with the Steele dossier.

The press corps is portraying Monday’s report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz as absolution for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but don’t believe it. The report relates a trail of terrible judgment and violations of process that should shock Americans who thought better of their premier law-enforcement agency.

Readers can look at the detailed executive summary and decide for themselves. But our own initial reading confirms the worst of what we feared about the bureau when it was run by James Comey. The FBI corrupted the secret court process for obtaining warrants to spy on former Trump aide Carter Page. And it did so by supplying the court with false information produced by Christopher Steele, an agent of the Hillary Clinton campaign.


What the Inspector General Report Says:

  • The report confirms Obama officials abused their FISA power to trigger an investigation into Trump campaign officials.
  • There was serious bias against Donald Trump inside the FBI/DOJ and many were willing to take action to impact Donald Trump’s electoral process.
  • The IG report finds the Obama FBI made numerous “serious factual inaccuracies and omissions” in the FISA warrant application that authorized spying on former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page. 
  • The serious omissions undercut certain allegations in the applications.
  • The relevant information about Carter Page was not shared with the appropriate officials prior to the application for the FISA warrant being submitted.
  • Horowitz calls the FISA warrant, “Inaccurate, incomplete, and unsupported.”
  • The report makes it clear that Obama’s FBI failed to meet the basic obligation to ensure the applications were “scrupulously accurate.”
  • Horowitz called the errors “serious performance failures” by the agents working on the investigation and top officials at the FBI.
  • The report confirms the Steele dossier – paid for by the Clinton campaign and the DNC - is a work of fantasy and was relied upon to apply for the FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page.
  • Everyone can agree the FISA application was not handled well and that is indefensible.
  • The IG is opening an addition investigation into how the FBI uses FISA warrants, how they apply and whether more protocol should be put in place to protect American citizens. 
  • Obama’s FBI and Intelligence Community had evidence of no collusion between President Trump and Russia in the fall of 2016 yet pursued spying warrants against the Trump campaign and perpetuated the collusion narrative anyway to undermine President Trump’s administration.


How can anyone, most of all civil libertarians, pass this off as no big deal? The absolution is supposedly that Mr. Horowitz concludes that the FBI decision to open a counter-intelligence probe against the Trump campaign in July 2016 “was sufficient to predicate the investigation” under current FBI rules.

Yet Mr. Horowitz also notes that these rules amount to a “low threshold for predication.” John Durham, the U.S. Attorney investigating these matters for Attorney General William Barr, said Monday he disagrees with Mr. Horowitz’s conclusions on predication, albeit without elaboration for now.

Mr. Horowitz confirms what the FBI had already leaked to friendly reporters, which is that the bureau’s alarm in July 2016 was triggered by a conversation that former Trump aide George Papadopoulos had with Australian Alexander Downer. But we learn for the first time that the FBI immediately ramped up its counter-intelligence probe to include four Trump campaign officials: Messrs. Page and Papadopoulos, then Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort, and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn.

The bureau quickly moved to a full-scale investigation it called Crossfire Hurricane. The FBI’s justification, as related to Mr. Horowitz, is that the risk of Russian disruption of the 2016 election was too great to ignore.

Yet the bureau never told anyone in the Trump campaign, or even Donald Trump, whom or what it was investigating so he could reduce the danger or distance himself from those advisers. The FBI was investigating the campaign but wouldn’t tell the candidate who would soon be elected.


The FBI abuses escalated when it was presented with the now infamous Steele dossier. Mr. Steele was hired by Glenn Simpson and Fusion GPS, the oppo-research outfit hired by a law firm for the Clinton campaign. Mr. Horowitz confirms that the FBI then used the Steele dossier to trigger its application to the FISA court to spy on Mr. Page.

“We determined that the Crossfire Hurricane team’s receipt of Steele’s election reporting on September 19, 2016 played a central and essential role in the FBI’s and Department’s decision to seek the FISA order,” Mr. Horowitz says. 

This confirms what Rep. Devin Nunes and House Republicans first disclosed in February 2018, which was denied by Rep. Adam Schiff and sneered at by the press at the time.

Mr. Horowitz also finds that the FBI told the FISA court that Mr. Steele was credible without having tried to confirm the details or verify his sources. Mr. Horowitz found no fewer than seven key “errors or omissions” in the FBI’s original FISA application, and 10 more in the three subsequent applications. The latter were especially egregious because they ignored information that the FBI’s own Crossfire Hurricane team had later gathered that cast doubt on the Steele claims.

The omissions include the stunner that Mr. Page had been working as an “operational contact” for what Mr. Horowitz calls another U.S. agency from 2008-2013. Mr. Page has said this is the CIA, which Mr. Horowitz doesn’t confirm, though he does say that Mr. Page was reporting on his Russian contacts, which the agency deemed credible.

In other words, the FBI was using Mr. Page’s Russian contacts as evidence against him to the FISA court even as the other agency considered his reports on those Russians to be helpful to the U.S. Mr. Horowitz says the FBI never disclosed this information to the FISA judges.

“Much of that information was inconsistent with, or undercut, the assertions contained in the FISA applications that were used to support probable cause and, in some instances, resulted in inaccurate information being included in the [FISA] applications,” the report says. This is the Inspector General’s bland way of saying that the FBI deceived four FISA judges.


Democrats and the press are making much of Mr. Horowitz’s conclusion that he “did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation” influenced FBI decisions. But his report does show that political bias was conveyed to the FISA court from the Clinton campaign via the Steele dossier through the FBI.

It was conveyed by Bruce Ohr, a senior Justice Department official whose wife, Nellie Ohr, worked for Fusion GPS. Mr. Horowitz may not have found a memo with the words “let’s get Trump,” but his evidence shows that getting Mr. Trump was the goal of Mr. Steele and Fusion GPS. Mr. Ohr met 13 times with the FBI to discuss the Steele findings.

Even if you buy the “no bias” line, all of this had major political consequences. Fusion GPS used its media contacts to spread word of the Steele dossier’s accusations, and news of the FBI’s use of that dossier became a media hook to suggest the accusations were credible. This became another part of the false Russia collusion narrative played up by the press and the likes of former CIA director John Brennan.

Mr. Horowitz says Crossfire Hurricane investigators never verified any of the Steele dossier allegations against Mr. Page. Even a year after the first FISA warrant, in September 2017, the report says the FBI had only “corroborated limited information in the Steele election reporting.” Robert Mueller later spent two years looking for proof of collusion and found nothing, while the Trump Presidency was besieged.

The Horowitz report should not be the end of this tawdry tale. Whether or not there are prosecutions, Messrs. Barr and Durham should release the entire FISA record to the public. The GOP Senate also needs to call the FISA judges to tell their story under oath.

The FISA process was established in the 1970s as a check on FBI abuse, though we and others warned that it would hurt accountability instead. So it has played out in this case. The U.S. doesn’t need a process that uses Article III judges as political cover to justify abusive wiretaps on innocent Americans, much less on presidential campaigns.



Horowitz report is damning for the FBI and unsettling for the rest of us


The analysis of the report by Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz greatly depends, as is often the case, on which cable news channel you watch. Indeed, many people might be excused for concluding that Horowitz spent 476 pages to primarily conclude one thing, which is that the Justice Department acted within its guidelines in starting its investigation into the 2016 campaign of President Trump.

Horowitz did say that the original decision to investigate was within the discretionary standard of the Justice Department. That standard for the predication of an investigation is low, simply requiring “articulable facts.” He said that, since this is a low discretionary standard, he cannot say it was inappropriate to start. United States Attorney John Durham, who is heading the parallel investigation at the Justice Department, took the unusual step to issue a statement that he did not believe the evidence supported that conclusion at the very beginning of the investigation.

Attorney General William Barr also issued a statement disagreeing with the threshold statement. In fact, the Justice Department has a standard that requires the least intrusive means of investigating such entities as presidential campaigns, particularly when it comes to campaigns of the opposing party. That threshold finding is then followed by the remainder of the report, which is highly damaging and unsettling. Horowitz finds a litany of false and even falsified representations used to continue the secret investigation targeting the Trump campaign and its associates.

This is akin to reviewing the Titanic and saying that the captain was not unreasonable in starting the voyage. The question is what occurred when the icebergs began appearing. Horowitz says that investigative icebergs appeared rather early on, and the Justice Department not only failed to report that to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court but removed evidence that its investigation was on a collision course with the facts.

The investigation was largely based on a May 2016 conversation between Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos and Australian diplomat Alexander Downer in London. Papadopolous reportedly said he heard that Russia had thousands of emails from Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. That was viewed as revealing possible prior knowledge of the WikiLeaks release two months later, which was then used to open four investigations targeting the campaign and Trump associates. 

Notably, Democrats and the media lambasted Trump for saying the Justice Department had been “spying” on his campaign, and many said it was just an investigation into figures like Carter Page. Horowitz describes poorly founded investigations that included undercover FBI agents and a variety of different sources. What they really discovered is the main point of the Horowitz report.

From the outset, the Justice Department failed to interview several key individuals or vet critical information and sources in the Steele dossier. Justice Department officials insisted to Horowitz that they choose not to interview campaign officials because they were unsure if the campaign was compromised and did not want to tip off the Russians. 

However, the inspector general report says the Russians were directly told about the allegations repeatedly by then CIA Director John Brennan and, ultimately, President Obama. So the Russians were informed, but no one contacted the Trump campaign so as not to inform the Russians? Meanwhile, the allegations quickly fell apart. Horowitz details how all of the evidence proved exculpatory of any collusion or conspiracy with the Russians.

Even worse, another agency that appears to be the CIA told the FBI that Page was actually working for the agency in Russia as an “operational contact” gathering intelligence. The FBI was told this repeatedly, yet it never reported it to the FISA court approving the secret investigation of Page. His claim to have worked with the federal government was widely dismissed. 

Worse yet, Horowitz found that investigators and the Justice Department concluded there was no probable cause on Page to support its FISA investigation. That is when there was an intervention from the top of the FBI, ordering investigators to look at the Steele dossier funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign instead.

Who told investigators to turn to the dossier? Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. He was fired over his conduct in the investigation after earlier internal investigations. Horowitz contradicts the media claim that the dossier was just a small part of the case presented to the FISA court. He finds that it was essential to seeking FISA warrants. Horowitz also finds no sharing of information with FISA judges that undermined the credibility of the dossier or Christopher Steele himself. 

Surprisingly little effort was made to fully investigate the dossier when McCabe directed investigators to it, yet investigators soon learned that critical facts reported to the FISA court were false. FISA judges were told that a Yahoo News article was an independent corroboration of the Steele dossier, but Horowitz confirms that Steele was the source of that article. Therefore, Steele was used to corroborate Steele on allegations that were later deemed unfounded.

The report also said that Steele was viewed as reliable and was used as a source in prior cases, yet Horowitz found no support for that and, in fact, found that the past representations of Steele were flagged as unreliable. His veracity was not the only questionable thing unveiled in the report. Steele relied on a character who, Horowitz determined, had a dubious reputation and may have been under investigation as a possible double agent for Russia. Other instances were also clearly misrepresented.

The source relied on by Steele was presented as conveying damaging information on Trump. When this source was interviewed, he said he had no direct information and was conveying bar talk. He denied telling other details to Steele. This was all known to the Justice Department, but it still asked for warrant renewals from the FISA court without correcting the record or revealing exculpatory information discovered by investigators. That included the failure to tell the court that Page was working with the CIA. 

Finally, Horowitz found that an FBI lawyer doctored a critical email to hide the fact that Page was really working for us and not the Russians.

Despite this shockingly damning report, much of the media is reporting only that Horowitz did not find it unreasonable to start the investigation, and ignoring a litany of false representations and falsifications of evidence to keep the secret investigation going. Nothing was found to support any of those allegations, and special counsel Robert Mueller also confirmed there was no support for collusion and conspiracy allegations repeated continuously for two years by many experts and members of Congress.

In other words, when the Titanic set sail, there was no reason for it not to. Then there was that fateful iceberg. Like the crew of the Titanic, the FBI knew investigative icebergs floated around its Russia investigation, but not only did it not reduce speed, it actively suppressed the countervailing reports. Despite the many conflicts to its FISA application and renewals, the FBI leadership, including McCabe, plowed ahead into the darkness.

Jonathan Turley is the chair of public interest law at George Washington University and served as the last lead counsel in a Senate impeachment trial. He testified as a Republican witness in House Judiciary Committee hearing in the Trump impeachment inquiry. Follow him @JonathanTurley.

Monday, December 09, 2019

AG Bill Barr Just Issued a Translation of the DOJ IG Report & It’s a Red-Hot Rebuke of ‘Intrusive’ Spying on Trump


Attorney General William Barr arrives for a ceremony in the East Room of the White House, Monday, Sept. 16, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

“I do not think it means what you think it means.” – Inigo Montoya

The Department of Justice Inspector General’s (IG) report into the FBI lying to the FISA Court to get warrants to spy on the Trump campaign is 433 pages. It took AG Bill Barr one paragraph to translate what all of it means in the real world. Oh, and don’t pick it up because you might burn yourself.

The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken. 

It is also clear that, from its inception, the evidence produced by the investigation was consistently exculpatory. 

Nevertheless, the investigation and surveillance was pushed forward for the duration of the campaign and deep into President Trump’s administration. 

In the rush to obtain and maintain FISA surveillance of Trump campaign associates, FBI officials misled the FISA court, omitted critical exculpatory facts from their filings, and suppressed or ignored information negating the reliability of their principal source. …[T]he malfeasance and misfeasance detailed in the Inspector General’s report reflects a clear abuse of the FISA process.

Because the IG has no right to subpoena and can’t lock anyone up, he can only refer people for prosecution. Currently, most of the people who conducted the abuse have been fired and were out of the purview of the IG.

The IG report, however, found that officials lied and omitted helpful information to Trump campaign officials who were being spied on, but couldn’t determine if the malfeasance was politically motivated.

U.S. Attorney John Durham is looking into why the Trump spying case was hatched by people clearly pulling for Hillary Clinton to win the election.

Durham also issued an extraordinary statement today, saying:

Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.

The Durham investigation may be the final word on the Obama administration spying scandal into the campaign of a political rival.

The Durham investigation and IG report releases are the chief reasons why the Democrats have rushed the impeachment hearings to get ahead of the damning news of Democrat political chicanery and potential lawbreaking in the 2016 election.

Impeachment Is Destroying CNN


This is CNN. Source: Josh Hallett / Flickr (CC BY 2.0)

If Democrats and their media allies thought that the impeachment of President Trump would be his undoing, I've got bad news for them: it's actually undoing them. The Democrats' favorite (fake) news channel CNN is suffering from a three-year low in ratings.

According to Disrn, CNN "reached a three-year low in ratings over the Thanksgiving holidays, averaging 643,000 primetime viewers. The news outlet also saw its worst week for viewers among the 25-43 demographic." In that group, CNN only pulled 138,000 viewers. That's pathetic.

Fox News, on the other hand, "posted higher ratings than CNN and MSNBC combined, averaging nearly 2.2 million viewers during primetime last week. The network also pulled in 303,000 viewers ages 25 to 54," which is the most important target group for advertisers.

In other words, Fox News is utterly and completely destroying the competition. Now, there's nothing new about that in itself, but what is new is CNN's complete and utter irrelevance in the news world. If you're thinking to yourself, "CNN? I never watch it!", you're not only talking for yourself but for just about every single American. There's literally just about nobody watching any of its programs -- let alone those scheduled outside of primetime.

How deep the once mighty have fallen. It's unbelievable. CNN was once an example to be followed. And now? Not one self-respecting real journalist, with ambition, would want to work for them.

There's just one way for CNN to turn this around. They've got to do something that hasn't been tried in decades. We have Fox News which is pro-Republican. We have MSNBC which is pro-Democrats. CNN's attempt to imitate MSNBC is destroying the channel. The way forward is for CNN to actually hire real journalists to -- and this is going to shock a lot of people -- do real journalism

Be proudly neutral. Don't air any shows by "commentators." Don't mix opinion with news. You bring the news, and that's it. When you have talk shows, you can invite guests who are not objective, but the presenter has to be absolutely, 100 percent neutral.

This is the only way for CNN to save themselves. If they don't choose this path going forward, they're doomed.

Saturday, December 07, 2019

WSJ Columnist: Adam Schiff’s Secret Subpoena Adventure Could End with Legal Buckshot in His Face

By Matt Vespa | Toenhall.Com

Source: AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), high Chancellor of the Trump impeachment effort, might be getting away with murder. The impeachment circus that has engulfed D.C. has overshadowed the House Intelligence Committee chair’s egregious abuse of power. 

He executed a secret subpoenas adventure of phone records of prominent Republicans. He got their phone records and published them in the committee’s 300-page impeachment report. 

Now, the report is a work of fiction. Schiff is a liar, and nothing from House Democrats on this whole fiasco should be believed. 

This isn’t about the Constitution, or the framers, or the rule of law. It’s not about upholding the integrity of our institutions; Democrats have already perverted those with their deep state antics against this administration. 

It’s about the Democratic Party’s inability to grasp that it lost the 2016 election. Democrats wanted to boot Trump since day one of his presidency. The ironic twist is that their impeachment fetish could very well be what secures him a second term. This is not popular in swing states. No one cares. And the liberal media has been so wrong, so stupid, and so corrupt in their coverage of this White House, even Democrats in these states cannot believe what they hear

But let’s get back to that pencil head, Schiff.

He may have opened himself up to oodles of lawsuits by those he decided to go after with these secret subpoenas. Rudy Giuliani, the president’s attorney, was included in this hit list, and we now have to factor in attorney-client privilege into this whole mess. 

Seldom is this cast aside concerning an investigation unless the evidence of wrongdoing is overwhelming. 

Schiff decided to ignore those protocols because he wants to boot Trump before the 2020 election, or at least severely damage his re-election chances. It’s funny. The man who says he’s doing this for the country and the rule of law thinks he can break the rules…because he feels he’s right. 

What an arrogant, self-righteous little snake, huh? 

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel has a good column about how Schiff engaged in gross congressional overreach:


Also from my column: Constitutional lawyer David Rivkin makes the case that Schiff has opened himself up lawsuits from targets of these subpoenas.


Fanatics can justify any action, and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff this week demonstrated where that mindset leads. In his rush to paint Donald Trump as a lawbreaker, Mr. Schiff has himself trampled law and responsibility.

That’s the bottom line in Mr. Schiff’s stunning decision to subpoena the phone records of Rudy Giuliani and others. Mr. Schiff divulged the phone logs this week in his Ukraine report, thereby revealing details about the communications of Trump attorneys Jay Sekulow and Mr. Giuliani, ranking Intelligence Committee member Devin Nunes, reporter John Solomon and others. The media is treating this as a victory, when it is a disgraceful breach of ethical and legal propriety.

If nothing else, Mr. Schiff claims the ignominious distinction of being the first congressman to use his official powers to spy on a fellow member and publish the details. His report also means open season on members of the press. Mr. Giuliani over months has likely spoken to dozens of political figures and reporters—and the numbers, dates and length of those calls are now in Democrats’ hot little hands. Who gets the Schiff treatment next?


Whatever his role in the Ukraine affair, Mr. Giuliani remains the president’s personal lawyer. Law enforcement must present a judge with powerful evidence to get permission to vitiate attorney-client privilege. Mr. Schiff ignored all that, and made himself privy to data that could expose the legal strategies of the man he is investigating.

Mr. Giuliani did have notice that Democrats wanted some of his phone records. The Intelligence Committee sent a subpoena on Sept. 30, and gave him until Oct. 15 to comply. Yet before Mr. Giuliani even had an opportunity to respond, Mr. Schiff separately moved to seize his records from a phone carrier, sending his subpoena to AT&T on Sept. 30 as well.

Mr. Schiff purposely kept that action secret. This guaranteed that the only entity involved with a decision over whether to release the records was AT&T. And that gave Mr. Schiff all the cards, since companies fear political retribution far more than violating their customers’ privacy.

Well, when it comes to “powerful evidence” to wipe away an attorney-client privilege, this Trump-Ukraine fiasco has none of that. There is no compelling evidence that the president was asking for the Ukrainians to investigate the Bidens' ties to some of its energy companies or risk having military aid withheld. Ukraine got aid. And all the witnesses who testified before the House Intelligence Committee were career bureaucrats that disagreed with Trump on policy. That’s not impeachable.

 Also, this whole circus is grounded in hearsay. Pretty much Democrats didn’t like how Trump spoke to the Ukrainians on a phone call. Also, its star witness, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, admitted that the president could legally withhold aid temporarily. 

So, what the hell are we doing here, besides being witness to a quasi-coup that’s being pushed by Democrats and members of the anti-Trump deep state? 

In the crusade to impeach Trump, Schiff also appears to have abused his power—and it’s all in plain sight. It’s meant to be that way. It’s to show off that he can get away with it.

Friday, December 06, 2019

158,593,000 Employed in November: 24th Record Breaker for Trump

By Susan Jones |CNS News

(Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)

 President Donald Trump frequently points to the strong economy as one of his major accomplishments, and today's employment summary gives him more bragging rights:

The Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics says the economy added a whopping 266,000 jobs in November; and for the sixth month in a row, a record number of Americans were counted as employed.

158,593,000 Americans were working in November, the 24th record of Trump's presidency.

The unemployment rate dropped a tenth of a point to 3.5 percent, a 50-year low.

"GREAT JOBS REPORT!" Trump tweeted Friday morning.

In November, the civilian non-institutional population in the United States was 260,020,000. That included all people 16 and older who did not live in an institution (such as a prison, nursing home or long-term care facility).

Of that civilian non-institutional population, 164,404,000 were participating in the labor force, meaning that they either had a job or were actively seeking one during the last month. This resulted in a labor force participation rate of 63.2 percent.

The labor force participation rate has never been higher than 67.3 percent, a level achieved in the early months of 2000. The Trump-era high was set last month at 63.3 percent. Economists say retiring baby boomers account for some of the decline since the turn of the century.

Among the major worker groups, the November unemployment rates for adult men (3.2 percent), adult women (3.2 percent), teenagers (12.0 percent), Whites (3.2 percent), Blacks (5.5 percent), Asians (2.6 percent), and Hispanics (4.2 percent) showed little or no change in November.

In November, notable job gains occurred in health care and in professional and technical services. Employment also increased in manufacturing, reflecting the return of workers from a strike. Employment continued to trend up in leisure and hospitality, transportation and warehousing, and financial activities, while mining lost jobs.

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for September was revised up by 13,000  to +193,000, and the change for October was revised up by 28,000 to +156,000. With these revisions, employment gains in September and October combined were 41,000 more than previously reported, another indication of a strong job market.

In November, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 7 cents to $28.29. Over the last 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased 3.1 percent. 

President Trump tweeted on Friday morning: "Stock Markets Up Record Numbers. For this year alone, Dow up 18.65%, S&P up 24.36%, Nasdaq Composite up 29.17%. 'It’s the economy, stupid.'”

2018 Employment Highlights

In a report released three days ago, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said a total of 166.4 million people, or 64.4 percent of the civilian noninstitutional population, age 16 and over, worked at some point during 2018.

The number of people who experienced some unemployment during 2018 declined by 1.3 million to 13.2 million.

The data derives from information collected in the Annual Social and Economic Supplement to the Current Population Survey, which is conducted monthly by the U.S. Census Bureau.

BLS notes the following highlights from the 2018 data:

-- The proportion of workers who worked full time, year-round in 2018 was 70.4 percent, up 0.9 percentage point from the prior year.

-- About 2.2 million individuals looked for a job but did not work at all in 2018, compared with 2.4 million in 2017. (Of the 11.0 million individuals who both worked and experienced unemployment in 2018, 21.7 percent had two or more spells of unemployment, up 1.5 percentage points from 2017.)

-- The proportion of men who worked at some time during 2018 was 69.7 percent, little changed from 2017. The proportion of women, however, increased by 0.6 percentage point to 59.4 percent in 2018.

-- Among the major demographic groups, the proportions of Whites (64.7 percent), Blacks (62.4 percent), Asians (64.5 percent), and Hispanics (66.6 percent) who worked at some time during 2018 showed little change from 2017.

-- Among those with work experience in 2018, 80.8 percent usually worked full time, up 0.4 percentage point from a year earlier. The proportion of women who usually worked full time increased 0.9 percentage point over the year to 74.4 percent in 2018. The share of men who usually worked full time was little changed at 86.7 percent. Among those who worked at some point in 2018, Asians (84.7 percent) were more likely to work full time, followed by Blacks (82.4 percent), and Hispanics (81.2 percent), and Whites (80.4 percent).

-- Overall, 168.6 million persons worked or looked for work at some time in 2018, up 1.1 million from the prior year. Of those, 13.2 million experienced some unemployment during 2018, down by 1.3 million from 2017.

The business and economic reporting of CNSNews.com is funded in part with a gift made in memory of Dr. Keith C. Wold.

Thursday, December 05, 2019

Pelosi Makes Dishonest Comments on Articles of Impeachment

Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement to proceed with articles of impeachment directly contradicts the will of the American people and has consequently put Republicans in the strongest possible position to take back the House in 2020.

Today’s comments cement the fact that impeaching President Donald Trump has been the goal of Speaker Pelosi, as well as Representatives Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, and House Democrats since the 2016 election.

This impeachment sham is purely political which is why Democrats are rushing the process and putting key legislative items like the USMCA and lowering prescription drug pricing on the back burner.

Democrats are moving forward with articles of impeachment despite having any impeachable evidence.

The facts remain:

·       The July 25th call transcript – released to the public – shows no evidence of pressure, no quid pro quo.

·        Both President Zelensky and President Trump have said there was no pressure on the call.

·        At the time of the July 25th call, the Ukrainian government did not know aid was withheld.

·       Aid was received with no conditions.

Democrats know the hearings were a total bust which is why Steny Hoyer - Pelosi’s number 2 – said the Russia investigation was basis for impeaching President Trump.

President Trump was fully exonerated in the Mueller Report.

Democrats keep moving the goal post because they have nothing.

As the President said, let’s quickly move forward with impeachment in the House so there can be a fair trial in the Senate and Congress can get back to the business of the American people.

House Democrats have denied President Trump basic due process rights throughout this entire process.

The abuse of power by Nancy Pelosi and her House Democrat colleagues to pursue this sham impeachment is even more reason why Republicans must take back the House and re-elect President Trump in 2020.

House Judiciary Hearing

Another sham hearing and still no evidence that merits an impeachable offense.

As Professor Jonathan Turley said, this would be the first impeachment in history with no established crime. Democrats have failed to prove this impeachment is not just based on politics.

Three of the witnesses have anti-Trump bias and have long supported impeachment.

·        Noah Feldman is an anti-Trump Democrat and a Harvard Law professor who has been pushing for President Trump’s impeachment since 2017.

·        Pamela S. Karlan is a “stridently liberal” Stanford Law professor and registered Democrat.

·        Michael Gerhardt is a registered Democrat and a University of North Carolina School of Law professor.

None of the witnesses were present on the July 25th call.

One unhinged “witness” – Pamela Karlan - delivered an obviously rehearsed line where she invoked a 13-year old kid’s name in a vile attempt to score political points against President Trump.

It’s clear that Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, and House Democrats refuse to accept the results of the 2016 election. Since the President was elected, they have been focused on overturning the votes of 63 million Americans.

Jerry Nadler has long called for impeachment and has called the President “illegitimate.”

Even many in the mainstream media realized that the hearing did not go well for Democrats and will do little to sway public opinion.

The Facts

·        The July 25th call transcript – released to the public – shows no evidence of pressure, no quid pro quo.

·        Both President Zelensky and President Trump have said there was no pressure on the call.

·        At the time of the July 25th call, the Ukrainian government did not know aid was withheld.

·        Aid was received with no conditions.

The Democrats’ process remains tainted, unfair, and unprecedented.

Democrats have already made up their minds and support impeachment regardless of the facts.

The only bipartisan support is in opposition to the impeachment inquiry.
Democrats know they cannot beat President Trump in 2016 so are turning to this sham partisan impeachment inquiry.

Polls are continuing to show Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is losing steam.
Many House Democrats in Trump won Congressional Districts came to Washington pledging to work with President Trump and Republicans. They will have to answer to their constituents in November 2020.

The RNC is continuing to hold these Democrats accountable. Visit: www.stopthemadness.com

Democrats need to get back to the issues that matter most to the American people including ratifying the USMCA.

It’s been one year since the USMCA was signed by President Trump. Now, it sits on Nancy Pelosi’s desk collecting dust.

If ratified by Congress, the USMCA would boost the economy, create 176,000 jobs, and add $68.2 billion to the U.S. economy.

Information complied by the RNC.