Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor
Click here to download or read below: Democrats rebuttal memo
Doug Smith: Checks and Balances
24 Feb
Doug Smith: Free State Patriot history and society editor
2.23.2018
Civics has lost its way.
Once we taught our potential citizens, both immigrants, and high school students, who would, we hoped, one day be productive and functional citizens and part of our society. Today, however, we are an increasingly less civil society, and that we do not adequately teach what once was called “Civics”. Both are mistakes.
It is important to understand the rules and framework by which our society functions, so that we can be good and functional citizens of that society. Equally, it is important that we teach civil behavior and discourse. There were both norms of behavior that most of us would never dream of violating, and an understanding of the norms and conventions of how our society, and republic, operates.
This brings me to a part of high school civics that was once taught to every student, or potential citizen, the concept of checks and balances.
Thanks, “Sarge” Tom Gibbs, for teaching me these lessons.
The idea among our Framers was that for every seat of power, there was another to balance their authority, and, through accountability, to hold them in check. It is telling that they saw the need for these protections. They understood, as we must understand, that our government does not govern angels, and hence must have laws and power, but neither is it made of angels, and thus must have checks and balances. It is a difficult and intoxicating thing to wield power over others.
Our founders grew to adulthood under a system based on the rights of kings, delegated, and unchecked in Royal Governors, the nobility, and the gentry of England. Their “rights” were merely privileges, granted to them as subjects of the king. Or revoked, by his whim.
The lawmaker who spends, for the first time, more money than he has ever seen, will get a certain thrill from the experience. In time, he can become jaded, and far too ready to spend other people’s money. Then we have a problem.
The late Senator Everett Dirksen said, “A billion dollars here, a billion dollars there, and next thing you know you are talking about some real money.” I’m not sure how much humor was intended, but you see the problem? A billion dollars IS a lot of money. Unless you never have to pay for as much as a cup of coffee, then money loses its reality to you and becomes simply a way to exercise power.
Now when Congress, or a Governor, spends a billion dollars, they do not plan to write a check. They plan for you and I to write fewer checks: for food, for gas, for homes. We will be the ones to do without, so we are responsible when they exercise authority. Now, when one has authority without responsibility, that is a recipe for disaster. Without accountability.
And that is where the Checks and Balances come in.
Mark Caserta: Common sense approach needed on gun safety
23 Feb
Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor
2.23.2018
A parent’s love for his or her child is an indescribable emotion, one which transcends words.
How unfathomable it must be for a mother or father to have a child taken away in a senseless act of evil.
Horrific mass shootings, like the one at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High school last week, have become agonizingly common in recent years. Some of our deadliest shootings in the United States have occurred in the last 10 years.
I’ve no doubt those engaged are sincere about addressing the problem, but new laws simply aren’t the answer.
There are no new or proposed gun laws that would have prevented these shootings. Laws only work with law-abiding citizens. That’s a premise that can’t even be argued. Making guns 100 percent illegal would not keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
Yes, the purchase of a firearm is something we must take very seriously. Only individuals properly trained in the use of a firearm should own one. And only those individuals who’ve successfully passed a thorough background check should be able to purchase a gun.
The fact is, guns are readily available for anyone wishing to own one. Per the Pew Research Center, the United States has more guns than any other country with as many as 310 million firearms in circulation. So, while not much can be done to keep guns from criminals, I believe there are some common-sense steps we must take.
First, let’s spread the background check net wider. Currently, background checks are only required if you purchase a gun through a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL), which includes retailers ranging from gun shops to Walmart. While FFL laws vary per state, you don’t need to undergo a background check if you buy a gun online, through a gun show or a private sale. That needs to change. We must be more responsible given our present-day challenges.
Next, we must use some common sense in eliminating soft targets, or “gun-free” zones. It’s time we conduct security assessments in all schools, churches, movie theaters, etc., and take steps to provide trained, properly armed, adequately staffed security posted at key locations to protect the people. And the excuses about “cost” or “sending the wrong message” have been rendered mute by the expansive loss of life. I’m only concerned about sending a message to a would-be assailant.
We must also, immediately, increase our awareness of our surroundings. If you see or hear something that doesn’t seem right, say something. And make sure your words are heard! We’ve got to watch out for each other!
Finally, be personally prepared. I believe as more people are trained in the use of a firearm and carry responsibly, it will deter criminals and save lives, perhaps yours. Your local FFL retailer will have the information you need.
It’s true, we should live our lives. But we must live them intentionally and with forethought.
These are “last line of defense” measures we must take, immediately. We must never look back and “wish” we’d been prepared.
That’s how tragedies happen.
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
Mark Caserta: God’s plan is beyond our questioning
17 FebThe Bible is the inspired Word of God and the only infallible truth upon which we can live our lives. America has been abundantly blessed beyond anything we could ever imagine. And God’s fingerprint is on “every good and perfect gift” we’ve received as a nation.
Our founding fathers acknowledged God in every step they took in preparing our nation for greatness. They knew God’s promises were the only foundation for our country that would never falter beneath the weight of tyranny. He’s our strength, our refuge and His Word is powerful.
Yet, the God of the universe is being vehemently attacked by individuals, mostly of liberal persuasion, who understand progressivism doesn’t work in a society where people “cling” to God and the Bible.
We’re truly exposed by things that offend us, and it’s no different for liberals who are, frankly, easily identifiable.
A teacher having a bible on his or her desk offends liberals. An athlete giving God the glory for their success offends liberals. Displaying “The Ten Commandments” offends liberals. The sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman offends liberals. Gender identity based on the anatomy God gave us offends liberals. Protecting the life of an unborn baby offends a liberal.
So, what pleases a liberal?
Keeping every public venue free from any reference to our creator pleases liberals. Questioning the authority and accuracy of God’s Word pleases liberals. Prohibiting everyone from openly worshipping their God pleases liberals. Placing morality on a “sliding scale” commensurate to any given day’s carnal desire pleases liberals. Redefining the family structure heretofore governed by the union of a man and a woman pleases a liberal. And abortion on demand, no matter the reason, pleases a liberal.
It’s actually very sad. But beyond sad, it’s frightening for our society that so many individuals embrace this “absence” of God’s truth and reality.
Understand, while God allows each of us the right to choose, He is in control. Our country won’t be returned to greatness because of “a man.” It will return to greatness because of God.
Saul of Tarsus was literally a “religious terrorist.” The Bible tells us in Acts 8:3 he “ravaged” the church and those espousing Christianity. He entered house after house, dragging men and women off to prison, often killing them. Saul hated Christians and sought to eliminate them.
Yet on the road to Damascus, God changed Saul. After a miraculous transformation of his heart, Saul became Paul, who would eventually be known for great works of God and writing much of the New Testament. God’s choice of Saul to execute His Devine plan would have been man’s “last” choice.
1 Corinthians 3:19 says, “the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.”
God’s methods are beyond our questioning and his “gifts” and “calling” are irrevocable.
“Not” believing God’s Word doesn’t make it false. But, “believing” is prerequisite for it to work in our lives.
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
Mark Caserta: As president says, state of our union is strong…sorry liberals
9 Feb
Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor
2.9.2018
I sat before the television last Tuesday anxiously awaiting the 45th president of the United States’ first official State of the Union address.
“Mr. Speaker, the president of the United States!” announced the sergeant at arms, as President Donald Trump made his way to the podium, joining Vice President Mike Pence and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.
My heart swelled with pride in anticipation of the president’s speech to the American people. Sadly, some liberal Democrats chose to skip this momentous occasion, choosing instead to boycott President Trump’s efforts to unite our country in lieu of their progressive agenda.
Some predicted President Trump would use the address to build upon his “America first” policies, but his measured, presidential oratory focused on much more.
With members of the Cabinet looking on, the House speaker used his gavel to present the president of the United States to the House Gallery. After the thunderous applause settled, the president began recapping his year-long journey to making America great again.
“Over the last year, we have made incredible progress and achieved extraordinary success,” the president said. “We have faced challenges we expected, and others we could never have imagined. We have shared in the heights of victory and the pains of hardship. We endured floods and fires and storms. But through it all, we have seen the beauty of America’s soul, and the steel in America’s spine.
“So, let’s begin tonight by recognizing the state of the union is strong, because our people are strong.”
The president proceeded to eloquently make his case for a stronger America. He noted that since his election, 2.4 million new jobs, including 200,000 new jobs in manufacturing alone, have been created and that after years of “wage stagnation” Americans are finally seeing rising wages.
He boasted unemployment claims hitting a 45-year low with African-American and Hispanic American unemployment hitting the lowest rates ever recorded.
President Trump noted small-business confidence is at an all-time high and the stock market keeps smashing one record after another, gaining more than $8 trillion in value since his election. Americans are reaping the dividends in skyrocketing 401(k)s, retirement plans, pensions and college savings.
The president heralded the promise he kept to the American people by enacting the “biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history,” nearly doubling the average standard deduction. The elimination of the Obamacare individual mandate, which forced individuals to purchase a government-ordered health plan or pay a penalty, was a huge win for Americans and our economy.
The president spoke of “faith and family,” not “government and bureaucracy,” as the center of American life and reminded us our motto is “in God we trust.”
Frankly, it was embarrassing to see most liberal Democrats sitting and scowling even as President Trump extolled these wins for America.
But despite liberal rancor, the state of the union is becoming much stronger. America is, once again, beginning to feel like the “land of the free and the home of the brave.”
Thank you, Mr. President, for putting America and our people first!
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
Breaking! Read the full Nunes memo exposing bias toward the Trump campaign here.
2 Feb
The full Nunes memo, annotated
By Aaron Blake February 2 at 12:49 PM Email the author
0:51
Trump: ‘It’s a disgrace what’s happening in our country’
After releasing the Nunes memo on Feb. 2, President Trump said that “A lot of people should be ashamed of themselves and much worse than that.” (Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
After plenty of consternation — including a public rebuke from the FBI and cries of foul from Democrats — the GOP memo on the Russia investigation has been released.
The full memo was crafted by Republican staffers to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and alleges surveillance abuses by law enforcement against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page. GOP members of the committee voted to release it on a party-line vote, and the White House signed off on that decision.
Law enforcement argued that its release jeopardizes classified information, on which the memo is based, and sets a dangerous precedent. They also contend it omits key information. Other opponents allege the memo is a thinly veiled political attempt to undermine the Russia investigation, special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing Mueller’s probe.
Below is the memo in full, along with our annotations. To see an annotation, click on the yellow, highlighted text.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
February 2, 2018
The Honorable Devin Nunes
Chairman, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
United States Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
On January 29, 2018, the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter “the Committee”) voted to disclose publicly a memorandum containing classified information provided to the Committee in connection with its oversight activities (the “Memorandum,” which is attached to this letter). As provided by clause 11(g) of Rule of the House of Representatives, the Committee has forwarded this Memorandum to the President based on its determination that the release of the Memorandum would serve the public interest.
The Constitution vests the President with the authority to protect national security secrets from it disclosure. As the Supreme Court has recognized, it is the President’s responsibility to classify, declassify, and control access to information bearing on our intelligence sources and methods and national defense. See, Dep of Navy v. Egan, 484 US. 518, 527 (1988). In order to facilitate appropriate congressional oversight, the Executive Branch may entrust classified information to the appropriate committees of Congress, as it has done in connection with the Committee’s oversight activities here. The Executive Branch does so on the assumption that the Committee will responsibly protect such classified information, consistent with the laws of the United States.
The Committee has now determined that the release of the Memorandum would be appropriate. The Executive Branch, across Administrations of both parties, has worked to accommodate congressional requests to declassify specific materials in the public interest. However, public release of classified information by unilateral action of the Legislative Branch is extremely rare and raises significant separation of powers concerns. Accordingly, the Committee’s request to release the Memorandum is interpreted as a request for declassification pursuant to the President’s authority.
The President understands that the protection of our national security represents his highest obligation. Accordingly, he has directed lawyers and national security staff to assess the declassification request, consistent with established standards governing the handling of classified information, including those under Section 3.1(d) of Executive Order 13526. Those standards permit declassification when the public interest in disclosure outweighs any need to protect the information. The White House review process also included input from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Justice. Consistent with this review and these standards, the President has determined that declassification of the Memorandum is appropriate.
Based on this assessment and in light of the significant public interest in the memorandum, the President has authorized the declassification of the Memorandum. To be clear, the Memorandum reflects the judgments of its congressional authors. The President understands that oversight concerning matters related to the Memorandum may be continuing. Though the circumstances leading to the declassification through this process are extraordinary, the Executive Branch stands ready to work with Congress to accommodate oversight requests consistent with applicable standards and processes, including the need to protect intelligence sources and methods.
Sincerely,
Donald F. McGahn II
Counsel to the President
cc: The Honorable Paul Ryan
Speaker of the House of Representatives
The Honorable Adam Schiff
Ranking Member, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
Declassified by order of the President
February 2, 2018
January 18, 2018
To: HPSCI Majority Members
From: HPSCI Majority Staff
Subject: Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Abuses at the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Purpose
This memorandum provides Members an update on significant facts relating to the Committee’s ongoing investigation into the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and their use of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) during the 2016 presidential election cycle. Our findings, which are detailed below, 1) raise concerns with the legitimacy and legality of certain DOJ and FBI interactions with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), and 2) represent a troubling breakdown of legal processes established to protect the American people from abuses related to the FISA process.
Investigation Update
On October 21, 2016, DOJ and FBI sought and received a FISA probable cause order (not under Title VII) authorizing electronic surveillance on Carter Page from the FISC. Page is a US citizen who served as a volunteer advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Consistent with requirements under FISA, the application had to be first certified by the Director or Deputy Director of the FBI. It then required the approval of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General (DAG), or the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division.
The FBI and DOJ obtained one initial FISA warrant targeting Carter Page and three FISA renewals from the FISC. As required by statute (50 U.S.C. 1805(d)(1)), a FISA order on an American citizen must be renewed by the ISC every 90 days and each renewal requires a separate finding of probable cause. Then-Director James Comey signed three FISA applications in question on behalf of the FBI, and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe signed one. Sally Yates, then-Acting DAG Dana Boente, and DAG Rod Rosenstein each signed one or more FISA applications on behalf of DOJ.
Due to the sensitive nature of foreign intelligence activity, FISA submissions (including renewals) before the ISC are classified. As such, the public’s confidence in the integrity of the FISA process depends on the court’s ability to hold the government to the highest standard — particularly as it relates to surveillance of American citizens. However, the rigor in protecting the rights of Americans, which is reinforced by 90-day renewals of surveillance orders, is necessarily dependent on the government’s production to the court of all material and relevant facts. This should include information potentially favorable to the target of the FISA application that is known by the government. In the case of Carter Page, the government had at least four independent opportunities before the FISC to accurately provide an accounting of the relevant facts. However, our findings indicate that, as described below, material and relevant information was omitted.
1) The “dossier” compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application. Steele was a longtime FBI source who was paid over $160,000 by the DNC and Clinton campaign, via the law firm Perkins Coie and research firm Fusion GPS, to obtain derogatory information on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.
- a) Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials.
- b) The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named U.S. person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a U.S. Law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC (even though it was known by DOJ at the time that political actors were involved with the Steele dossier). The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of — and paid by — the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.
2) The Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016, Yahoo Newsarticle by Michael Isikoff, which focuses on Page’s July 2016 trip to Moscow. This article does not corroborate the Steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by Steele himself to Yahoo News. The Page FISA application incorrectly assesses that Steele did not directly provide information to Yahoo News. Steele has admitted in British court filings that he met with Yahoo News — and several other outlets – in September 2016 at the direction of Fusion GPS. Perkins Coie was aware of Steele’s initial media contacts because they hosted at least one meeting in Washington DC. in 2016 with Steele and Fusion GPS where this matter was discussed.”
- a) Steele was suspended and then terminated as an FBI source for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations — an unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI in an October 30, 2016, Mother Jonesarticle by David Corn. Steele should have been terminated for his previous undisclosed contacts with Yahoo and other outlets in September— before the Page application was submitted to the FISC in October — but Steele improperly concealed from and lied to the FBI about those contacts.
- b) Steele’s numerous encounters with the media violated the cardinal rule of source handling — maintaining confidentiality — and demonstrated that Steele had become a less than reliable source for the FBI.
3) Before and after Steele was terminated as a source, he maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr, a senior DOJ official who worked closely with Deputy Attorneys General Yates and later Rosenstein. Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files – but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.
- a) During this same time period, Ohr’s wife was employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research on Trump. Ohr later provided the FBI with all of his wife’s opposition research, paid for by the DNC and Clinton campaign via Fusion GPS. The Ohrs’ relationship with Steele and Fusion GPS was inexplicably concealed from the FISC.
4) According to the head of the counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its “infancy” at the time of the initial Page FISA application. After Steele was terminated, a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within FBI assessed Steele’s reporting as only minimally corroborated. Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was — according to his June 2017 testimony – “salacious and unverified.” While the FISA application relied on Steele’s past record of credible reporting on other unrelated matters, it ignored or concealed his anti-Trump financial and ideological motivations. Furthermore, Deputy Director McCabe testified before the Committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information.
5) The Page FISA application also mentions information regarding fellow Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos, but there is no evidence of any cooperation or conspiracy between Page and Papadopoulos. The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Pete Strzok. Strzok was reassigned by the Special Counsel’s Office to FBI Human Resources for improper text messages with his mistress, FBI Attorney Lisa Page (no known relation to Carter Page), where they both demonstrated a clear bias against Trump and in favor of Clinton, Whom Strzok had also investigated. The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an “insurance” policy against President Trump’s election.
3165
Comments
Mark Caserta: Liberals should refocus and put America first
2 Feb
Mark Caserta: Free State Patriot editor
Liberals always seem to be fighting against America. Their conduct since the election of President Trump has some challenging their allegiance to our great nation.
A couple of questions for liberal Democrats: Do you really hate Donald Trump more than you love your country? What would you be willing to allow our nation to endure to derail his presidency? It seems, even in the face of Trump’s successes, you’re willing to compromise just about anything to see him fail.
Here are a few examples.
Given the drug epidemic sweeping our nation, wouldn’t it be prudent to strengthen border security to prevent a significant number of illegal drugs from entering our country?
Last Saturday, National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd told Fox News that Trump’s “business acumen” is leading him to an “impending success” on immigration reform. Yet liberal Democrats are fighting more for illegal aliens and keeping the border open than they are for the safety of Americans. Does that make sense to you?
Anyone who’s been around for a few decades realizes manufacturing has been fleeing our country at a phenomenal rate. We’ve seen once prosperous cities like Pittsburgh, Detroit and even our own city of Huntington severely impacted by the loss of manufacturing jobs. Yet liberal Democrats fight constantly against lowering taxes to make our nation more “business friendly” and bringing back good-paying jobs to the U.S.
Again, liberal Democrats seem more willing to fight to keep more of your hard-earned money to waste than for improving your future and quality of life.
During the Obama presidency, ISIS became the most powerful jihadist organization in the world, controlling vast areas in three countries. Americans were inundated with horrific stories of death and torture nearly every day, yet all we saw from the Obama administration was apology and appeasement.
But during President Trump’s initial days in office, he began changing our military rules of engagement and providing our commanders the tools and resources they needed to defeat ISIS. But despite the fact ISIS has been severely crippled under President Trump, liberals refuse to give him credit or support a continued approach to strengthening our military and empowering our troops.
Article 1 of the Constitution speaks to a primary role of U.S. federal government – defending the homeland and our citizens. Yet its clarity continues to be clouded by liberal Democrats desiring to remove boundaries from their progressive movement as they fight to preserve sanctuary cities and the illegals they protect from the very federal law designed to protect U.S. citizens. And, as they do so, innocent people are dying.
Finally, my friends, Democrats and liberal factions of the party are not the party of compassion as they would have you believe. They are singularly minded in that they are determined to destroy and delegitimize President Trump and regain control of Congress.
Donald Trump is a political anomaly. His supporters hired him to clean up Washington. But he could achieve world peace and liberals would still despise him. That isn’t right.
Liberals should re-examine their priorities and put America first.
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
Fox News: House Intel votes to release controversial surveillance memo to the public
29 JanThe House Intelligence Committee on Monday evening voted to release a classified memo circulating in Congress that purportedly reveals government surveillance abuses.
The vote was announced to reporters by California Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the committee, who called it a “very sad day, I think, in the history of this committee.” The motion passed on a party-line basis, he said.
President Trump now has five days to decide whether he has any objections before the memo can be publicly released.
GOP LAWMAKERS DEMAND THAT ‘ALARMING’ MEMO ON FISA ABUSES BE MADE PUBLIC
Last week, a top Justice Department official urged House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes not to release the memo, saying it would be “extraordinarily reckless” and could harm national security and ongoing investigations.
The four-page memo has being described by GOP lawmakers as “shocking,” “troubling” and “alarming,” with one congressman likening the details to KGB activity in Russia.
Those who have seen the document suggest it reveals what role the unverified anti-Trump “dossier” played in the application for a surveillance warrant on at least one Trump associate.
Schiff said the GOP-majority committee also voted against releasing a counter memo written by Democrats.
“Today this committee voted to put the president’s personal interests, perhaps their own political interests, above the national interests,” the Democrat said.
Another Democratic member, Mike Quiqley of Illinois, described the GOP memo as “a book report by a high school kid at 1 a.m. on two Red Bulls who hasn’t read the book.”
“It’s a contravention of the facts,” he added. “Today was a demonstration that there are no more rules.”
The vote came the same day that it was reported that FBI official Andrew McCabe has left his post as deputy director.
The White House seems to favor the memo’s release, but wouldn’t explicitly say whether the president will back the effort.
“We want full transparency,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Monday. “That’s what we have said all along.”
Department of Justice: Let us see ‘the memo’ first
Sanders said they were letting the process play out before officially weighing in.
FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR ANDREW MCCABE ‘REMOVED’ FROM THE BUREAU
On Sunday, FBI Director Christopher Wray went to the Capitol on Sunday to view the four-page memo, sources told Fox News.
According to one source, Wray was asked to point out inaccuracies or other issues with the wording — and said he would need “his people to take a look at it.” The source said the review is ongoing.
South Carolina GOP Rep. Trey Gowdy, who helped write the four-page memo, said Sunday he wants it made public.
He also suggested the memo indeed addresses whether the FBI relied at least in part on the dossier — paid for partially by Democrats and the Clinton campaign during the 2016 presidential election — to apply to a secret federal court to get a surveillance warrant, purportedly on then-Trump adviser Carter Page.
“If you … want to know whether or not the dossier was used in court proceedings, whether or not it was vetted before it was used. … If you are interested in who paid for the dossier … then, yes, you’ll want the memo to come out,” Gowdy told “Fox News Sunday.”
The dossier was compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele and contained opposition research on Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. Steele was hired by the U.S. firm Fusion GPS, which commissioned the research with funding from the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. At the same time, the firm was allegedly doing work to help the Russian government fight sanctions.
Requests for surveillance warrants are made through the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, also known as the FISA court, and target suspected foreign spies inside the United States.
Responding to reports the U.S. extended surveillance on him last spring, Carter Page told Fox News that U.S.-Russia relations have been “dominated by misunderstandings throughout much of the past 70 years, since the original McCarthy era. I harbor no ill will towards anyone for past xenophobic biases and only hope that justice is eventually served.”
Fox News’ Pamela K. Browne, Joseph Weber and Catherine Herridge contributed to this report.
Alex Pappas is a politics reporter at FoxNews.com. Follow him on Twitter at @AlexPappas.
Mark Caserta: Trump effect moving the US ‘great-o-meter’
27 Jan
Jan 26, 2018
In what some are calling “The Trump Effect,” our president is rapidly moving the needle on America’s “great-o-meter”! This past weekend marked “a day which will live in infamy” for liberals – the anniversary of the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump.
In honor of this day, I’d like to share a few “victorious headlines” from the domestic front in 2017.
Our U.S. “jobless rate is at a 10-year low as hiring grows and wages rise,” per a May 2017 column by Patricia Cohen in The New York Times.
A January 2018 column by Dom Caliccio of Fox News reads, “Food stamp recipients down 2M under Trump, USDA figures show.”
“Border crossing hits 45-year low” was a portion of a headline for a December 2017 column by S.A. Miller of The Washington Times.
The successes of 2017 were delivered by Donald Trump and the American people. Despite ravenous hatred by liberals, Trump’s mystique and total disregard for political correctness resonate with most Americans. Donald Trump is doing exactly what voters hired him to do – “drain the Washington swamp” and “make America great again!”
President Trump also promised Americans he would improve the U.S. business climate and persuade American companies that outsource jobs or manufacture products abroad to bring their manufacturing, jobs and money back home.
Last Wednesday, Apple CEO Tim Cook announced his company would repatriate some $250 billion back to the U.S. As part of their five-year, $30 billion reinvestment plan, Apple will open a new campus and pay $38 million in taxes on its overseas cash.
Per a column by Stephen Nellis of Reuters, Apple’s spending plan includes hiring 20,000 people, broadening their business with U.S.-based suppliers and spend $350 billion in the U.S. over the next five years.
When asked in an interview if President Trump’s tax reform bill prompted Apple’s repatriation of funds and business to the U.S., Tim Cook shared his reasoning.
“Let me be clear: There are large parts of this that are a result of tax reform, and there’s large parts of this we would have done in any situation,” Cook said in the interview with ABC News.
But while this is the largest single return of business to the U.S., Apple is simply joining the ranks of others announcing similar moves in 2017, as detailed in a Fox News Insider column.
General Motors announced a $1 billion investment in U.S. factories, moving some production from Mexico to Michigan. Hyundai announced its subsidiaries, including Hyundai and Kia, have allocated more than $3 billion for supporting their factories in Georgia and Alabama. German chemical giant Bayer AG promised billions of dollars in research and development in the U.S., creating 3,000 new jobs.
And don’t forget Carrier and Ford reversing plans earlier to move some manufacturing overseas.
The political theater has changed. The days of electing a president based on an ability to eloquently pander to Americans and leverage victimization, polarization and division to garner power and influence are forever gone.
And Americans are, once again, winning.
Mark Caserta is a conservative blogger, a Cabell County resident and a regular contributor to The Herald-Dispatch editorial page.
CNBC.com: House-passed bill to avoid a government shutdown sinks in the Senate as funding deadline passes
20 Jan
- A House-passed stopgap bill that would avoid a government shutdown fizzled out in the Senate late Friday night.
- The White House blamed Democrats for the measure’s failure, even as four Republican senators opposed it.
- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he will offer an amendment to extend government funding until Feb. 8.
Published 12 Hours Ago Updated 5 Hours AgoCNBC.com
A House-passed stopgap bill that would avoid a government shutdown fizzled out in the Senate late Friday night, leaving Congress negotiating frantically as the midnight deadline to fund the government passed.
The measure failed in a procedural vote by a 50 to 49 margin. Five Democrats — Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Doug Jones of Alabama and Claire McCaskill of Missouri — had backed it. Four Republicans — Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Mike Lee of Utah — opposed it. So did Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for procedural reasons.
As nearly all Democrats and some Republicans opposed the measure that failed to work its way through Congress on Friday, lawmakers saw government funding lapse, at least temporarily. The proposal that failed in the Senate would have funded the government through Feb. 16 and reauthorized the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program for six years.
As the vote remained open into early Saturday morning, several bipartisan senators appeared to confer about a way forward. McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer then walked off the Senate floor together, only to return and continue talks with other senators. Numerous senators crowded around Schumer as the clock hit midnight.
Negotiations and potentially votes are expected to continue over the weekend and into next week. McConnell said he will offer an amendment to extend government funding until Feb. 8, which Sen. Lindsey Graham championed on Friday.
Many Democrats and some Republicans announced they would vote against a short-term deal, criticizing the continued use of stopgap bills rather than funding the government through more long-term, stable mechanisms. The minority party has also shown frustration about progress on talks toward a bipartisan immigration bill, which Democrats wanted to pass this week to protect hundreds of thousands of young undocumented immigrants from deportation.
The parties also remain divided over long-term defense and non-defense spending levels
“We’re going to continue to do all we can,” McConnell said on the Senate floor after the shutdown started. “We’ll vote again so the American people know who stands for them. And when our friends across the aisle remember who it is they actually represent, we’ll be ready to come together in a bipartisan discussion that will be necessary to clean up all of this mess.”
The Senate needs to garner 60 votes for a spending bill. With 50 Republicans present, the majority GOP needed to win support from 10 or more Democrats, many of whom had threatened to oppose a short-term spending plan if they could not also pass a bill shielding young undocumented immigrants from deportation. (Sen. John McCain is away from Washington, receiving treatment for cancer.)
The bill’s apparent failure in the Senate was the last step toward the first government shutdown since 2013.
In remarks following McConnell’s comments, Schumer said he was “willing to compromise” with Trump on an immigration agreement and said he thought he had a deal with the president during a White House meeting Friday. The senator contended that Trump backed off of a possible immigration solution when he faced pressure from conservatives.
“Now all of this problem is because Republican leadership can’t get to yes, because President Trump refuses to. Mr. President, President Trump, if you are listening, I am urging you: please take yes for an answer,” he said, adding that the “blame should crash entirely” on the president’s shoulders.
As funding looked set to lapse at midnight, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders released a scathing statement blaming Democrats for the shutdown.
“We will not negotiate the status of unlawful immigrants while Democrats hold our lawful citizens hostage over their reckless demands. This is the behavior of obstructionist losers, not legislators. When Democrats start paying our armed forces and first responders we will reopen negotiations on immigration reform,” she said.
Schumer has argued for a bill that extended funding only for a few days, rather than a month, to give lawmakers more time to hash out a long-term plan. He met with President Donald Trump on Friday afternoon, and though he said their talks yielded “some progress,” they did not reach a deal to keep the government open.
On Thursday night, majority House Republican leaders had to keep nearly all of their members in line in order to approve the short-term spending legislation by a 230 to 197 margin. With Democrats putting up a nearly unified front against the measure, GOP lawmakers cleared a bill that would fund the government for about a month.
Eleven Republicans opposed the legislation, while six Democrats supported it.
Trump had backed the short-term funding plan. Republicans this week put the burden on Senate Democrats to avoid a government shutdown.
“Now Democrats are needed if it is to pass in the Senate – but they want illegal immigration and weak borders,” Trump contended in a tweet Friday morning. “Shutdown coming? We need more Republican victories in 2018!”
House Speaker Paul Ryan used the line of attack after the House passed the bill on Thursday night.
“Senator Schumer, do not shut down the federal government,” the Wisconsin Republican said at a news conference.
The Democrats facing the most political peril in the vote are those who face re-election this year in states Trump won, including McCaskill, Heitkamp, Manchin and Donnelly.
If a shutdown occurs, McConnell intends to keep the Senate in session over the weekend and force those Democrats to face a series of difficult votes, according to Politico and NBC News.
