Are there people running for the White House in 2020 who are too old? Someone seems to thinks so. Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates thinks that some, including President Trump, may be too old for the job.
At seventy-five, Gates is currently the chancellor of the College of William & Mary. He appeared on CBS’ “Face The Nation” and the interview proved to reveal his thoughts on age and the presidency.
Gates said that the ages of presidential candidates like former Vice President Joe Biden and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders could be a “problematic” issue for the two.
The aging white males have been in politics for nearly their whole lives and Biden is currently 76 and Sanders is 77. They will be older in 2020.
Gates, in a pre-taped interview, said, “I’m not sure you have the intellectual acuity that you might have had in your 60’s. The thought of taking on those responsibilities at this point in my life would be pretty daunting.”
Gates served as defense secretary for both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
He also said that he thinks that President Trump may be too old to be in office. Trump is now 72 and he was the oldest person to be sworn in as president at age 70.
Gates said, “When you’re talking about being the president of the United States, the ability to do the job in every respect has always got to be a consideration.”
Gates is a Republican and remembers Ronald Reagan who was 72 when he was elected to his second term in office. Gates spoke of Reagan and said that he was “a pretty great president.”
I agree. I believe that Reagan was a great president.
Besides the diversity that White House hopefuls on the Democratic side have in their group, they have the oldest candidates, as well. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is the youngest white male at thirty-seven and Sanders is the eldest at age seventy-seven.
In my opinion, which is the same as other Republicans, I do not feel that Trump is too old. He has a lot of energy and he is doing a great job for America.
Personally, I’ll be voting for Trump and not any of the Democratic runners have my attention in a positive way. All I see is Socialism and Creepiness coming from the left.
On Wednesday House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., led his pack of Democrats to hold Attorney General Barr in contempt of Congress.
The contempt charge has been led by Nadler and has Barr allegedly accused for not handing over documents related to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe ˗˗ declaring the move necessary as the country enters a “constitutional crisis.”
Nadler also alleged that Barr acted as President Trump’s personal attorney.
Watch this video put out by MSNBC:
Oh my, things have certainly changed since 2012. In that year the shoe was on the other foot. House Republicans took the same step against then-AG Eric Holder for refusing to hand over documents related to the Fast and Furious gun-running scandal.
Remember Fast and Furious? Of course you do. All of us have recollections of where DOJ officials tracked thousands of guns smuggled across the border and then did nothing to stop them.
Well, Nadler was so against Holder being held in contempt that he tweeted this:
Just joined the #walkout of the House chamber to protest the shameful, politically-motivated GOP vote holding AG Holder in contempt
The House Minority Leader, at that time in 2012, Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., argued House Republicans were more politically motivated in attacking Holder than driven to get to the bottom of the failed operation.
Pelosi said, “What is happening here is shameful.”
You can’t make this stuff up. In the year 2012 Pelosi was so against Holder being held in contempt and she made sure she put her two cents in. Watch these video clips and how Pelosi felt about Holder being held in contempt of Congress:
Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, wrote an op-ed for FOX News and said that the White House ‘stonewalling’ Congress represents an attack on ‘the essence of our democracy’ – as though stonewalling were some new phenomena. Where was Nadler’s righteous indignation when the stonewalling came from a Democratic White House?”
In an article by Politico, it was written that Fast and Furious has finally come to a conclusion and both sides said they maintained their disagreements but were dropping their appeals and the underlying lawsuit.
A settlement in a seven-year legal battle between the House and the Justice Department over records related to a gun-running investigation known as Operation Fast and Furious was publicly announced Wednesday just as similar clashes continue to intensify between the House and Trump administration.
The deal ends a lawsuit the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee filed in 2012 after the House voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for refusing to release some records the panel demanded about the probe, during which law enforcement officials watched but did not intervene as up to 2,000 weapons were illegally sold.
The fight over the records ended more than a year ago, but a proposed settlement ran aground last fall after U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson signaled that she would refuse to wipe out her rulings in the case.
Both the Obama administration and the House objected to aspects of her decisions, but the executive branch had the larger grievance, as Jackson rejected the Justice Department’s longstanding position that courts have no proper role in resolving battles between Congress and federal agencies over access to records.
In the settlement filed Wednesday, both sides said they maintained their disagreements with Jackson’s decisions but were dropping their appeals and the underlying lawsuit.
“The Parties agree that because subsequent developments have obviated the need to resolve those issues in an appeal in this case, the District Court’s holdings should not in any way control the resolution of the same or similar issues should they arise in other litigation between the Committee and the Executive Branch, and hereby waive any right to argue that the judgment of the District Court or any of the District Court’s orders or opinions in this case have any preclusive effect in any other litigation,” the agreement says.
Is this a big coincidence that Nadler is being held in contempt of Congress but “Fast and Furious” just finally got an agreement worked out on both sides agreeing not to use an appeal?
If we don’t pay attention and we are not “a fly on the wall in Congress” who knows what we’d miss.
In my humble opinion, I don’t see Barr being hurt by any of these allegations by the Democratic side of Congress. He has only gone by the rule of law and has not broken it.
On Tuesday FBI Director Christopher Wray testified to Congress. Wray disagreed with Attorney General William Barr and applied a different term than Barr who used the word “spying.”
When asked if FBI agents engage in “spying” when they follow FBI policies and procedures, Wray told lawmakers on the Senate Appropriations Committee “That’s not the term I would use. Lots of people have different colloquial phrases. I believe that the FBI is engaged in investigative activity, and part of investigative activity includes surveillance activity of different shapes and sizes, and to me the key question is making sure that it’s done by the book, consistent with our lawful authorities.”
In a hearing last month Barr stated, “I think spying did occur. The question is whether it was adequately predicated. …Spying on a political campaign is a big deal.”
The statement was later clarified during the hearing by Barr when he said, “I am not saying that improper surveillance occurred; I’m saying that I am concerned about it and looking into it, that’s all.”
Even President Trump has alleged that the bureau engaged in spying against Trump associates during the 2016 presidential campaign.
Barr’s remarks were broadly criticized by Democrats. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., accused Barr of “peddling conspiracy theories.”
Trump allies have noted that there is documented evidence that the FBI obtained surveillance warrants to monitor Trump adviser Carter Page. There have been numerous reports disclosed that reveal the use of an informant and others to gather information during the early days of the probe.
A source has brought to light that in his remarks, Barr was not trying to fuel conspiracy theories or play to the conservative base.
The source said, “When he used the word spying, he means intelligence collecting.” He also noted Barr’s history as a CIA analyst in the 1970s. “He wasn’t using it in a pejorative sense, he was using it in the classic sense.”
On Tuesday when he was asked directly by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., whether he believes the FBI spied on the 2016 Trump campaign, Wray deferred his response to the ongoing investigation by Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
Wray said, “I want to be careful about how I answer this question here because there is an ongoing inspector general investigation. I have my own thoughts based on the limited information I’ve seen so far but I don’t think it would be right or appropriate to share those at this stage because I really do think it is important for everybody to respect the independent inspector general’s investigation, which I think this line of questioning starts to implicate, and I think it’s very important for everybody to be able to have full confidence in his review.”
Later on he added, “I don’t think I personally have any evidence” of illegal surveillance into the Trump campaign in the 2016 election, but he said that he has been in “close contact” with Barr about helping him get to bottom of how the Russia investigation began.
You can see/hear Wray speak here:
In my humble opinion, the investigation should lead right to the Democrats and Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Campaign via the Steele Dossier.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are still relevant to some of the American people but apparently people don’t want to spend a whole lot of money to see the couple speak on their political views.
The Clintons are on a speaking tour of thirteen cities but they don’t seem to be drawing in crowds who want to spend big bucks to see the couple.
When the tour was announced in November, the best tickets were going for the hefty price of $1,785, which was a far cry from the 54% drop in price of $829.
On Friday the cheaper seats could be had for as little as $20 at Seattle’s WaMu Theater where the Clintons were speaking.
Organizers had to slash listed prices and even offer discounts through Groupon to boost sales. The Seattle Times reported that the official prices for the former first couple’s appearance ranged from $66.50 to $519.
The performance by the Clintons lasted about ninety minutes and was presented as an interview of Hillary and Bill by actor Bradley Whitford.
The former First Lady and former Secretary of State said, “I really believe that we are in a crisis, a constitutional crisis. This is a test for our country.”
She also said to the crowd in Seattle that Barr “would rather be the president’s defense lawyer than the chief law enforcement officer of our country.”
She wasn’t done yet. Hillary continued by saying that the Mueller’s report “not only decisively proves, but goes chapter and verse about how the Russians — in the words of the report ˗˗ conducted ‘a sweeping and systemic interference in our election.”
She topped that up with a dig at President Trump by saying, “And then you wake up and your president is spending an hour on the phone with Vladimir Putin, who was the mastermind of the interference and attack on our election.”
In my humble opinion, the tickets could have been free and I don’t believe that many people would have gone to sit through what the Clintons have to say about anything.
I venture to say that the only way to get a large crowd to view the couple would have to guarantee that at least Hillary would be carried away in chains and shackles at the end of the performance. Now, that would call for a standing ovation.
On Friday President Trump had a conversation with none other than Russian President Vladimir Putin. The two leaders discussed the crisis in Venezuela, nuclear agreements, North Korean denuclearization, Ukraine and trade.
The call between Trump and Putin spoke for a little over an hour. Besides the other important world issues, they discussed special counsel’s Russia investigation.
The president spoke to reporters from the Oval Office about some of the details of the call.
Trump said that the U.S. would “probably start something up shortly between Russia and ourselves,” and that “China would be added down the road.”
The Russian state news agency Tass reported that Trump and Putin spoke about the New START treaty which is the last major arms-control treaty remaining between the U.S. and Russia.
The treaty that was signed in 2010 expires in 2021. That treaty restricts both the U.S. and Russia to 1,550 deployed strategic nuclear warheads on a maximum of 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles and strategic bombers.
WASHINGTON, May 3. /TASS/. The US aims to improve relations with Russia and expand bilateral trade, US President Donald Trump said on the outcomes of the phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“We also discussed trade. We intend to do a lot of trade with Russia, we do some right now, and it’s up a little bit,” Trump said. “And getting along with Russia and China is a good thing.”
Earlier on Friday, Trump and Putin have held a phone call, during which they discussed “the current state and prospects of bilateral relations with a focus on economic cooperation”, the Kremlin press service informed. The presidents also discussed North Korea, Venezuela, Ukraine, and nuclear disarmament.
Trump said China “very much” wants to be a part of that potential nuclear deal.
Trump took to Twitter to give his thoughts on the phone call:
Had a long and very good conversation with President Putin of Russia. As I have always said, long before the Witch Hunt started, getting along with Russia, China, and everyone is a good thing, not a bad thing….
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un traveled to Russia last week to meet with Putin and the two spoke about the importance for Russia to continue to help put pressure on North Korea to denuclearize.
In a statement released by the Kremlin after Friday’s call said Putin stressed that “Pyongyang’s conscientious fulfillment of its obligations should be accompanied by reciprocal steps to reduce sanctions pressure on North Korea.”
Trump and Putin also spoke about Venezuela. Trump said Putin said he was “not looking to get involved,” but would “like to see something positive happen.” Trump said the U.S. wanted to offer “some humanitarian aid.”
Trump said, “We want to help on a humanitarian basis.”
The two also spoke about the Russia investigation. Trump said, “We discussed it and he actually sort of smiled when he said something to the effect that it started off as a mountain and it ended up as a mouse. But he knew that because he knew there was no collusion.”
You can see and hear Trump speaking about his talk with Putin here:
Late Thursday morning, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi D-Calif., went on the record during a public press conference and said that Attorney General William Barr “lied to Congress.”
In a closed-door meeting Pelosi also allegedly told her colleagues that Barr committed a crime. She allegedly told Rep. Charlie Crist, D-Fla., “We saw [Barr] commit a crime when he answered your question.”
Pelosi was referring to a hearing on April 9. Crist had asked whether Barr knew what prompted reports that prosecutors on the special counsel team were frustrated with his initial summary.
Barr denied the allegation by saying that he did not.
This week “The Washington Post” reported that Special Counsel Robert Mueller contacted Barr, both in a letter and in a phone call, to express concerns. This came after Barr released his four-page summary of Mueller’s findings in March.
Mueller wanted Barr to release the executive summaries written by the special counsel’s office which stated that a four-page memo to Congress that described the principal conclusions of the investigation into President Trump “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work.
Mueller made it clear that he did not feel that Barr’s summary was inaccurate. Instead, Mueller told Barr that media coverage of the letter had “misinterpreted” the results of the probe concerning obstruction of justice.
Pelosi, said publicly, “He lied to Congress. And if anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime,” she told reporters. “Nobody is above the law. Not the president of the United States. Not the attorney general.”
Pelosi was then asked if Barr should go to jail for the alleged crime.
Pelosi replied, “There is a process involved here and as I said, I’ll say it again, the committee will have to come to how we will proceed.”
You can see and hear the comments by Pelosi here:
The Justice Department did not take the comments by Pelosi lightly.
Justice Department spokeswoman Kerri Kupec said, “Speaker Pelosi’s baseless attacks on the Attorney General is reckless, irresponsible and false.”
We’ve been told, just recently, that our planet has twelve more years to exist. This news came to us from no other than the infamous Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).
It appears that the media darling isn’t the only person who is putting fear in the hearts of earthlings. A 2020 runner for the presidency has said that the earth has only ten years to exist. What? Yes, if “Beto” Robert Francis O’Rourke is correct, no one is going to be around on this planet if we don’t address climate change.
Ocasio-Cortez made a statement at a Martin Luther King Jr. Day event with Ta-Nahesi Coates, who is an American author, journalist and comic book writer.
Ocasio-Cortez told Coates, “Millennials and people, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that will come after us are looking up and we’re like: The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change and your biggest issue is how are we gonna pay for it? This is the war — this is our World War II.”
Check out this tweet:
.@AOC on millennials and social media: “We’re, like, the world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change” pic.twitter.com/HjhbVyfFN4
On Monday Beto, the Democratic presidential candidate, warned that civilization could have only “ten years” left on Earth if nothing is done to combat climate change.
Beto has hopes of reaching zero carbon emissions by 2050 but at a rather high cost. The former Texas congressman laid out his first major policy proposal of his candidacy.
Beto’s policy for his climate change proposal would cost $5 trillion in over ten years.
O’Rourke appeared on MSNBC and was asked about his prior support from the oil and gas industry and whether the relationship would be a problem going forward.
MSNBC host Chris Hayes asked Beto, “Do you see the oil and gas industry as an opponent in that? Won’t you have to declare yourself in opposition to their interests?”
O’Rourke’s response was “yes,” but said he is optimistic that the industry will take part in his initiative.
O’Rourke told Hayes, “We know that certain oil and gas corporations have been fighting public policy on this issue, have been hiding their own science and research at the expense of our climate and human life. So whenever those two things come in contrast or in opposition, I’m always going to choose the people of this country.”
Beto continued, “Having said that, I want to make sure those who work in the oil and gas industry, those who work in the fossil fuel industry are brought along as partners to make sure that we make this transition in the ten years we have left to us as the science and scientists tell us to make the kind of bold change that we need.”
O’Rourke also said, “We cannot afford to alienate a significant part of this country and we cannot do this by half measure or by only half of us. It can’t be Democrats versus Republicans, bit cities versus small towns, we all have a shared interest in a cleaner future for this country. So I’m going to work with, listen to everyone anytime, anywhere to make sure that we advance this agenda and get to net zero green house gas emissions by 2050.”
Whether we have ten or twelve years left on the planet isn’t the biggest issue but certain gloom and doom seems to be a major talking point for most Democrats running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.
When 7:00 PM rolls around, do you watch “Jeopardy”? Many Americans do and enjoy seeing their favorite players win.
The new star on Jeopardy, James Holzhauer, has shown that he is well versed on many subjects and has broken records on the show. In fact, record-breaking scores in the past fourteen days have made some fans of the show happy and others downright bored.
Holzhauer is a 34 year old man who appears to be able to continue through many more wins on the popular show. From the state of Nevada, Holshauer has shattered several records previously held by other “Jeopardy!” champions.
The Las Vegas resident has earned more than $1 million in the shortest time ever on the show. He even told host Alex Trebek he’d like to donate some of his money to children’s charities in the Las Vegas area.
His total winnings are now at more than a million dollars and can grow. He has previously won a game with a total of $131,127, topping the one-day record he set earlier in his winning of $110,914.
Before Holzhauer came along, the one-day record was held by Roger Craig on Sept. 19, 2010, when he took home $77,000 in a single game. That was a big win but Holzhauer was out to beat it.
The winning player has become popular but there are some “Jeopardy” fans who have become bored with his winnings. He is winning each game by a very wide margin and putting other contestants in a precarious position.
Jeopardy is not the first show that Holzhauer has won at. Previously, he was on “The Chase” in 2014. He answered 12 questions correctly and won $60,000. He did break the show’s past record.
Will he win tonight? Your guess is as good as mine but chances are that he will continue to win until someone who has the intelligence and knowledge to beat the board on “Jeopardy” takes the win from him.
In the wake of the terror attacks in Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, while most people in the free world mourned over the loss of human lives, New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was silent on social media.
The horrific attack on Christians had the Islamic State group taking credit for the bloodshed. The government also confirmed that the attacks came from Islamic fundamentalists. The gruesome explosions left 359 people dead to date.
In all, three churches and three hotels, were targeted by seven men who posed for a picture before committing the deadly deed.
In March, Ocasio-Cortez was quick to comment on the Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand but stayed unusually silent on the Sri Lanka terrorist attack.
Following the attack in New Zeland, Ocasio-Cortez took to Twitter and tweeted several times on the terror attack to criticize the Trump administration while proposing tougher gun control measures in the U.S.
At the time, Ocasio-Cortez tweeted this:
At 1st I thought of saying, “Imagine being told your house of faith isn’t safe anymore.”
But I couldn’t say “imagine.”
Because of Charleston.
Pittsburgh.
Sutherland Springs.
What good are your thoughts & prayers when they don’t even keep the pews safe?pic.twitter.com/2mSw0azDN8
I wasn’t making up anything. I wrote the truth. Ocasio-Cortez tweeted 14 times about the terror attack on Muslims in New Zealand, but has posted nothing about the terror attack on Christians by Muslim extremists in Sri Lanka.
I guess Ocasio-Cortez has different standards for Christians and Muslims. It appears that AOC believes that Muslims being attacked deserve her attention but Christians being attacked by Islamic terrorists doesn’t.
If you are planning a trip to a California city, you may want to use a specialized map or reconsider. When travelling please watch where you step! As a matter of fact, you really should avoid certain areas if your nose is sensitive to strong odors.
When the need for a map of San Francisco’s most pooped in neighborhoods becomes a necessity for a guide of where not to go, you may want to pick another destination.
This, in itself, could cause a decline in the tourist trade.
There is a new map that pinpoints locations where human feces are reported to have been found. Hold your nose this story may get stinky. Since 2011 the California city has had poop sightings and the information is overwhelming.
Many people just can’t afford to live in the once beautiful clean city. A family of four living on earnings of $117,400 a year is considered low-income. The sale price of a two-bedroom is $1.3 million. When night, falls on the city of 885,000 has about 4,400 people sleeping unsheltered, in alleys and doorways and tucked away in Golden Gate Park.
With the homeless population growing every year, nearly every block has had poop sightings that have been assembled for us to see by Open The Books.
Not only people living in San Francisco are affected by the filthy problem. Sea lions and aquatic life that live in the Bay Area have become victims of human waste. Seal Rocks, which is a jagged formation surrounded by the ocean, has been listed in the sightings. Also, a popular tourist area, Fisherman’s Wharf, had waste floating in the water.
Not even workers in the headquarters of companies such as Twitter and Uber are spared. Market Street, where they located, has had the largest concentration of complaints.
The block that surrounds city hall has nearly a hundred markers to show its poop sightings.
The San Francisco Department of Public Works has received complaints and data shows the increase of the poop sightings since 2011. That year, 5,547 human feces incidents were reported. The number has risen to 28,084 in 2018.
Now, that’s a lot of poop!
A Leader Not A Politician
FROM AN EARLY AGE FALCON SANE WANTED TO BE PRESIDENT.
When asked why, he answered, “So I can help people.”
During a period of political and social unrest in the U.S., tender-hearted Falcon travels through youth into adulthood crossing the paths of love, corruption, and power, in search of the American dream—freedom. Despite incredible odds, he never gives up, never gives in, and never loses sight of who he is.
His quests carry him to the wilderness of the Idaho mountains, into the belly of a foul profiteering county jail, clamped in the jaws of an unethical corporation, and ultimately to a long-desired romance. As a successful businessman, and with an incredible woman at his side, Falcon turns his passion toward fixing the corruption of his beloved America and runs for president.
His message is clear: United, we can make a difference.
Listen To FREE AMERICA
Interview with Jason Kraus, hosted by Michael Higgins/Dianne Lynn Savage
Interview with Jason Kraus, hosted by Michael Higgins/Dianne Lynn Savage, talking specifics of his Personal Responsibility Act of 2017
