Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Politics

Congressional Report Says Obama Broke The Law With Bergdahl Taliban Prisoner Swap

Published

on

From US Chronicle

The House Armed Services Committee released a report stating that the Obama administration broke the law when they traded five of the most violent Taliban prisoners for Bowe Bergdahl, a sergeant in the US Army.  Bergdahl deserted his post and was then captured by the Taliban who held him prisoner for five years.  Six of his fellow soldiers were killed during the initial search for him.

While many voiced opposition to the trade itself, the Obama administration broke the law when they did not consult Congress first. Does this surprise anyone?

Rep. Thornberry who is Chairman of the Armed Services Committee stated that Pentagon officials would have been the best to consult on the dangers of releasing five very dangerous prisoners who subsequently went back into battle.

The Obama administration stands by their actions which is typical of past behavior.  Obama has signed numerous executive orders when consulting Congress did not give him the desired results.  In other words, this is not the first time Obama has broke the law.  Being President does not give one the right to do as they please.  But for the last seven years Obama’s behavior reflects exactly that.  Many in the conservative journalism world have written about Obama’s illegal actions as President but not a peep from the liberal side.  To go into Obama’s past would take more space than this article allows.  Let’s just say, it explains his present behavior.  But it sets a bad precedent as others who serve will think they can do as they please as well.

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Crime

BOMBSHELL! Congress ‘ROCKED’ By MAJOR Scandal Announcement- Next 72 Hours Will Be CRAZY!

Published

on

Now this is what we can call “Draining the Swamp”

An investigative reporter, Luke Rosiak, who works at The Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF) has now announced that Congress’ human resources scandal is about to break wide-open and had made the prediction that over a dozen members of the House of Representatives will be forced to resign in the coming days.

He followed his initial tweet with this new one:

In addition to this breaking news early last week Rosiak also broke the story that Democrat Congressman from New York Gregory Meeks was part of a settlement deal with one of his former congressional aides which he had fired after she reported being sexually assaulted at the business of a major campaign donor.

The first congressmen to go down in this #metoo movement for sexual misconduct was Michigan Democrat Congressman John Conyers, Conyers resigned after accusations against him started to gain momentum and multiple women came forward. Senator Al Franken was also accused of sexual assault by multiple women to which there is even a picture of him groping a sleeping model on a plane. Has said he would resign but has given no timeframe as to when this will be happening.

The Hill Reports:

Congress owes taxpayers answers about its harassment ‘shush’ fund

Since when are members of Congress and their staffs accused of sexual harassment allowed to hush up and pay off their accusers from a secret “shush” fund full of taxpayer dollars? Since 1995, it turns out.

Congress, we all know, chooses to exempt itself from many of the same laws it foists on the rest of us. It’s a grievance I hear regularly during my travels around the country, as grassroots activists complain about this law or that regulation. “If only Congress had to live under the same laws we do, they’d get it, and they’d change it” is a common refrain.

For years, for instance, I’ve been speaking out about the illegal special exemption of Congress from ObamaCare, which allows members and staff to avoid the financial burdens they imposed on us when they passed that terrible law. If only they had to live under the law the same way the rest of us do, without benefit of taxpayer dollars to subsidize their premiums purchased fraudulently on the D.C. small business exchange, they might be more incentivized to repeal that law.
But until recently, I did not know about the “shush fund” of Congress, a fund managed by the “Office of Compliance,” which itself was created following the 1995 enactment of the Congressional Accountability Act (CAA), the first law enacted by the first Republican House in four decades.

Ironically, the CAA was a serious attempt to bring Congress under many labor laws from which it had previously exempted itself. In fact, under the CAA, Congress applied 12 different labor laws to itself for the first time, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Federal Service Labor Management Relations Statute, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, among others.

The CAA sought to make changes in how Congress dealt with charges of sexual harassment against its members and staff, too. Prior to enactment of the law, a victim of sexual harassment by a member of Congress had virtually no legal recourse at all. With whom would such a victim lodge a complaint or seek redress?

So the CAA created the “Office of Compliance” to deal with such issues. Complainants begin the dispute resolution process with a mandatory (yes, really) course of counseling that can last up to 30 days. Only after completing the compulsory counseling may a complainant pursue mediation. That, too, can last up to 30 days. If mediation fails to resolve the issue to the complainant’s satisfaction, she or he can then go to an administrative hearing, or file a federal lawsuit.

Here’s the kicker: If the dispute is resolved in favor of the complainant (read: victim), funds for the settlement don’t come out of the offender’s personal bank account, or his or her campaign account. Instead, they come out of a secret account maintained by the Office of Compliance. It is so secret, in fact, that taxpayers don’t even know they are funding it.

According to the Washington Post, there were 235 complainants received compensation totaling $15.2 million between 1997 and 2014. That’s more than one settlement per month for 17 years and nearly $1 million per year. We, the taxpayers, have no idea on whose behalf we’ve been paying to settle these sexual harassment claims. That’s wrong.

Now, in defense of Congress, the reasoning behind this rather convoluted dispute resolution process was that there could be scurrilous political operatives trying to game the system to target political opponents with potentially career-ending sexual harassment claims. That is a reasonable concern. But in the process of establishing protections for its members, Congress inadvertently institutionalized a cover-up culture, in which the supreme end goal is to get the alleged victims to go away quietly.

The “resolution” system is unfairly rigged to protect the careers of politicians, not to protect vulnerable staffers. That the counseling sessions are mandatory reveals that the objective has little to do with helping the alleged victim, but is instead simply aimed at dissuading the alleged victim from proceeding with a complaint. Leave it to Congress to find a way to insert layers of bureaucracy and paperwork into this “resolution” process.

Various proposals are floating around the Congress now that would require mandatory sexual harassment training for members of Congress and their staffs. That’s a fine idea, and I’m all for it. But those legislative proposals should make another change to the sexual harassment dispute resolution mechanism, too.

We, the taxpayers who have been paying for more than two decades to quietly settle literally hundreds of sexual harassment claims against members of Congress and their staffs, have a right to know which members and staffers have made use of the hush money over the years. Going forward, taxpayers should have knowledge about how that fund is used.

If Congress wants to get serious about its apparent culture of abuse, it will need to address its cover-up culture. Shush funds may serve the immediate purpose of getting alleged victims to go away, but they do little to stem the tide of sexual harassment. What Congress needs — and American taxpayers deserve — is more transparency.

How dare the United States Congress use our hard earned money to shut up their own indiscretions? We as a people, especially those in the middle class, struggle enough to keep our heads above water to have politicians stealing from us to pay off women they have sexually assaulted because they are a bunch of elitist unevolved cave dwellers who can’t seem to keep it in their pants. In any other society, citizens would be gathering with pitchforks outside of the capitol building by now.

We need government accountability and we need it fast. Congressmen are there to serve us, not the other way around.

Please share if you agree we need to hold corrupt politicians accountable for their actions….

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Politics

SHOCKING NEWS! They Are PAYING Women To Accuse Trump! LOCK HER UP NOW!

She Didn’t Think Anyone Would Find Out But She Was Wrong!

Published

on

The liberal attacks on President Trump are never-ending. Some believe that Democrats paid off some of the women who accused President Trump of sexual assault in order to tarnish his reputation. While others believe the accusations are valid. However, a recent development on that front has brought into question it all.

Turns out that high profile Hollywood attorney Lisa Bloom was working with alleged victims of the President to try and get them paydays associated with their sexual assault accusations. This all took place during the final months of the election last year. Something that many Trump voters and citizens found suspicious.

On Friday, reporters with the Hill reported that Bloom had been working with campaign donors and media outlets that were tabloids to try and get compensation for the alleged victims as well as a little commission of her own. Her commission was based on her legal services and selling the stories of the alleged victims.

In one case she tried negotiating a six-figure payout for one alleged victim and a mortgage payoff for another. However, after being offered close to $750,000, the alleged victims all backed away and refused to take any more public action.

The reporter who leaked the story had evidence based on emails and text messages they obtained. One of those exchanges were texts between an alleged victim and Bloom where they were referring to a pro-Hillary Clinton political action committee that was involved in what they were doing.

An important variable to mention is that Bloom is the daughter of another famous attorney Gloria Allred who is known for high profile cases many of which include sexual harassment cases perpetrated against women. Four of her clients were women accusing President Trump of sexual harassment. While two went public with the accusations and two declined to do so. Not to mention she represented Kathy Griffith during the faux presidential beheading scandal. Perhaps it’s President Trump she has a problem with.

Fox News reported,

Bloom did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Fox News.
In a statement to The Hill, Bloom acknowledged trying to get her clients paid, but said the payments were to help the women stay safe, and in some cases relocate.

“Donors reached out to my firm directly to help some of the women I represented,” Bloom said. Bloom, who has also represented accused sexual harasser Harvey Weinstein, in addition to women who’ve accusing Bill Cosby and Bill O’Reilly, acknowledged her standard terms require clients to pay her commissions, which may be as high as 33 percent if she sells their stories to media outlets. Bloom told The Hill she had no contact with Clinton or her campaign.

The Hill spoke to makeup artist Jill Harth, who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Trump in 1997, accusing him of pushing her up against a wall at his Mar-a-Lago estate and groping her. Although she withdrew the suit, nearly 20 years later, the litigation resurfaced during the presidential campaign and Harth was thrust into the spotlight. She asked Bloom to represent her after Trump denied her accusations.
“I consider myself lucky to have had Lisa Bloom by my side after my old lawsuit resurfaced. She advised me with great competence and compassion,” Harth told The Hill.

Bloom arranged payment from the licensing of some photos Harth had to the news media, and then helped set up a GoFundMe.com account to raise money for Harth, The Hill reported. “Jill put herself out there, facing off with Donald Trump,” Bloom’s husband wrote in a fund-raising appeal, according to The Hill. “Let’s show her some love”

The effort raised a little over $2,300, according to The Hill. Bloom also reportedly arranged for a Clinton donor to help Harth pay off the mortgage on her Queens apartment. The amount was less than $30,000, according to a source directly familiar with Harth’s situation. Public records show Harth’s mortgage was recorded as extinguished on Dec. 19, 2016, public records show. Trump denies assaulting or harassing women, although an “Access Hollywood” tape surfaced during the campaign in which he boasted he could grab women by their privates and get away with it. Trump dismissed the comments as “locker room talk.””

While it has been over a year since President Trump won his election and the conversation about sexual assault has continued because of the recent accusations against dozens of men and women both in Hollywood and Washington, D.C., the Harvey Weinstein sexual assault scandal created a snowball affect and now so much more has been revealed.

It doesn’t appear to be stopping anytime soon as more and more allegations continue to be made against Congressmen and Senators. The conversation is also changing. People are contemplating this culture of guilty until proven innocent when in reality it should be innocent until proven guilty. And whether or not we all believe these allegations to be true.

Share if you believe people should be innocent until proven guilty!

Comment below on what you think about this conversation surrounding sexual assault and harassment.

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Crime

BOMBSHELL! Hillary Tarmac SECRET Revealed! This is HUGE!!! LOCK THEM UP NOW!!!

They Tried To Hide It But It’s Out Now!

Published

on

New information is continuing to come out regarding the now infamous Tarmac Meeting between the serial rapist and former President Bill Clinton and the Barack Hussein Obama administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

But what is indeed the most alarming part of this whole ordeal is the FBI’s reaction to the leaking of this clandestine meeting to the public. Agency leadership wasn’t even a tab bit concerned about how they should respond the meeting between Lynch and Clinton or how it would look considering Crooked Hillary was at that time under a full investigation by the FBI?

You would think the FBI would be concerned about the optics of this matter, but It will come as a surprise to some, not many at this point after everything we’ve learned in the past few months, that the FBI was actually more concerned about where the leak came from than about what actually went down on that tarmac. All they were concerned about is finding who within the FBI leaked the information about the meeting to the press and making that person pay.

As Katie Pavlich reported at Townhall, the FBI released a series of emails yesterday afternoon where we learn more details about the Department of Justice’s response to the information leak of the now infamous secret meeting between Lynch and Clinton.

The dates on the emails range from July 1-3, 2016. On July 5, 2016, FBI Director James Comey announced former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would not face criminal charges for mishandling classified information. Interesting dates, don’t you think?

Since the Clintons have always treated the American people like idiots Bill said at the time that he, and Lynch, only spoke only about their grandchildren, but since we know perfectly well the former Attorney General isn’t Bill Clinton’s type, the only possible answer to this tarmac meeting is Bill was trying to get Hillary off the hook.

Via Newsweek:

AFTER CLINTON-LYNCH TARMAC MEETING, FBI SCRAMBLED TO FIND AND PUNISH SOURCE, NEWLY RELEASED EMAILS SHOW

After news broke about an airport meeting between former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton in the midst of last year’s presidential campaign, the FBI scrambled to identify the source who leaked details about the encounter and discipline him or her, according to emails released on the FBI website on Friday.

The meeting between Lynch and Clinton took place in June 2016, while the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Bill Clinton boarded Lynch’s plane while it was on the tarmac at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor International Airport. The following month, then-FBI Director James Comey announced the bureau would not recommend that the Department of Justice pursue charges in the email probe. Comey has testified before Congress that Lynch asked him to refer to the probe as a “matter,” a request that made him feel “queasy.”

Related: What will Loretta Lynch tell Russia investigators?

Keep Up With This Story And More By Subscribing Now

The internal emails show that on June 29, 2016, a senior spokeswoman for the Justice Department emailed her counterparts at the FBI to flag articles that were starting to appear about the meeting. In the email, the spokeswoman, Melanie Newman, described the encounter as “a casual, unscheduled meeting.” She provided talking points, which are redacted in the released version.

That same day, multiple FBI officials sent links about the story to Comey, who responded to one email, “Got it, thanks sir.” Also on those email chains were FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, whom President Donald Trump and others have accused of a pro-Clinton bias because his wife received money for a political campaign from entities associated with Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a Clinton ally; and Peter Strzok, who was removed from special counsel Robert Mueller’s team because of text messages critical of Trump. Strzok oversaw the Clinton email investigation.

But after Observer published an article containing additional details about the encounter, citing an anonymous “security source” who had been present, the FBI and Justice Department moved from damage control to discussions about identifying the source and punishing that person, the emails show. At the time, the publisher of Observer was Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of his senior advisers.

On December 15, the FBI released documents related to the so-called tarmac meeting in Phoenix between former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, pictured here on June 20, and former President Bill Clinton.
SPENCER PLATT/GETTY

On July 2, a person whose name is redacted in the FBI release wrote to a bureau employee about the Observer article. The employee, whose name is also redacted, responded, “I agree with your assessment about the source, which in reading the article, I believe was one of the local PD officer [sic] assisting with one of the two motorcade [sic] there on the Tarmac. Either way, they should have never offered any type of opinion or details of what did or didn’t happen, as this is the most principle and basic tenant of executive protection.”

The FBI employee added, “Unfortunately, this article is a breach in security protocol and I am addressing it with the Phoenix division to make certain that they pursuit [sic] this and identify the source of the breach.”

The next day, an undisclosed FBI employee, presumably the same person from the earlier email, wrote to several colleagues, “I believe that the source quoted in this article is one of the local Phoenix LEO’s. Needless to say that I have contacted the Phoenix office and will contact the local’s [sic] who assisted in an attempt to stem further damage.”

An FBI employee responded, “This article is infuriating.” Another FBI person wrote in response, “You think there will be a need for non-disclosure agreements in the future?” A colleague wrote back, “That might not be a bad idea, given the circumstances.” All of their names are redacted.

Another FBI employee whose name is redacted responded to the email about the article, “We need to find that guy and bring him or her before a supervisor.” A colleague responded, “I’m trying to find out thru [sic] the PX STL. Hopefully, we will find out and at the very minimum, make sure he never works on any detail.”

Republican lawmakers and at least two of Trump’s lawyers have called for a special counsel to investigate the handling of the Clinton emails probe. Several congressional committees are also looking into that subject, as is the Justice Department inspector general.

Both Lynch and Clinton still maintain the chance meeting, which Clinton waited for 30 minutes on that tarmac to have, was only by chance.

Please share if you want to get to the bottom of this mess….

FOLLOW us on Facebook at Freedom Daily!

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Trending