bonginoreport--2020-01-25--Vermont Bill Would Allow Emojis On License Plates

Hey , Vermonters : Get ready to plaster a smiley face on your license plate .
State Rep. Rebecca White @ @ @ @ @ their emotions , and has introduced a bill to allow emojis on vanity license plates @ @ @ @ @ NBC station .
The bill states that symbols could be added “ in addition to @ @ @ @ @ number and would not replace any letters or numbers assigned by the Commissioner of Motor @ @ @ @ @ the vehicle ’ s owner.
” The bill does not state which emojis of the @ @ @ @ @ offered .
Presumably , not the poop emoji .
“ I guess it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ wouldn ’ t say it ’ s good .
I wouldn ’ t say it @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not hurting anybody , ” Pam Buck , of Weathersfield , told NBC @ @ @ @ @ , Vermont would become the first state to enact emoji-plate legislation .

Hey, Vermonters: Get ready to plaster a smiley face on your license plate.
State Rep. Rebecca White wants to let drivers express their emotions, and has introduced a bill to allow emojis on vanity license plates, according to the local NBC station.
The bill states that symbols could be added “in addition to the plate’s registration number and would not replace any letters or numbers assigned by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles nor those selected by the vehicle’s owner.”
The bill does not state which emojis of the over 3,000 available will be offered. Presumably, not the poop emoji.
“I guess it’s an OK idea. I wouldn’t say it’s good. I wouldn’t say it’s bad. It’s not hurting anybody,” Pam Buck, of Weathersfield, told NBC.
If the bill passes, Vermont would become the first state to enact emoji-plate legislation.


bonginoreport--2020-01-25--Bernie Sanders Isn’t a “Democratic Socialist”

If recent polls are any indication , Sen. Bernie Sanders is surging in the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination .
According to a CNN poll out this week , the Vermont independent has reached a statistical tie with Joe Biden for first place nationally .
In New Hampshire , meanwhile , a WBUR survey shows the self-described democratic socialist with a 12-point lead .
Polls vary , but Sanders is clearly winning over many Democratic primary voters .
The senator ’ s growing appeal ought to be disconcerting to us all , because Sanders is not the nice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be .
At his core , Sanders is almost certainly an all-out Marxist .
His rise clearly troubles establishment Democrats who are uneasy with his far-left agenda .
Among Sanders ’ s most notable detractors are mainstream Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton .
The former president , for instance , is reported to be so “ anxious ” about Sanders ’ s standing that he ’ s contemplating publicly repudiating him ( although some Obama allies deny this account ) .
Obama and Clinton may have unwittingly contributed to Sanders ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be concerned .
The man has no business being anywhere near the Oval Office — not even on a guided tour .
The fact that the socialist senator is considered a national leader is a disgraceful blemish on the Democratic Party , a party once comprised by men such as John F. Kennedy , who fought communists , while Sanders defended them .
At every stage in his adult life , Sanders has been an unabashed apologist for communism , an evil ideology with a body count of 100 million people dead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this record should disqualify Sanders from public office : • While people such as my grandfather were languishing as political prisoners in Cuba , Sanders said that he was so “ excited ” about the island ’ s communist revolution that watching JFK get tough on Fidel Castro made him want to “ puke.
” • In 1980 , as most prominent democratic socialists criticized Iran ’ s taking of American hostages , Sanders joined a Trotskyist revolutionary party that defended the Islamic regime ’ s actions .
• When the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Sanders flew to Nicaragua to lend credibility to the Sandinistas .
• The 78-year-old presidential candidate even honeymooned in the Soviet Union and came back full of praise for it .
Some may not grasp how bizarre this was during the Cold War , but , at the time , it was almost unheard of to do such a thing .
• Despite his lifelong fascination with communism , not once did Sanders have the decency to meet Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn , a renowned Soviet dissident who lived in Vermont .
Some have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the American version of Nordic-style socialist democrats .
This isn ’ t true .
The Nordics actually enjoy somewhat free-market economies .
Conversely , Sanders ’ s platform , which openly calls for nationalizing major industries such as higher education , healthcare , and even the internet , falls well outside the mainstream of U.S. politics and more closely resembles the central planning committees in Cuba and Venezuela .
Rather than drawing philosophical distinctions without practical differences , Democrats need to accept the fact that Sanders is an unrepentant Marxist .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that enabled his ascent , such as unchecked liberalism .
Conservatives , meanwhile , should follow President Trump ’ s lead and denounce Sanders and his ideology in striking moral terms .
As for voters , well , throughout his life , Sanders has made it clear who he really is , so they should take him at his word .
Giancarlo Sopo ( @ GiancarloSopo ) is a writer at TheBlaze and was a 2019 regional fellow at the National Review Institute .
He is a contributor to the Washington Examiner ’ @ @ @ @ @

If recent polls are any indication, Sen. Bernie Sanders is surging in the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination. According to a CNN poll out this week, the Vermont independent has reached a statistical tie with Joe Biden for first place nationally. In New Hampshire, meanwhile, a WBUR survey shows the self-described democratic socialist with a 12-point lead. Polls vary, but Sanders is clearly winning over many Democratic primary voters.
The senator’s growing appeal ought to be disconcerting to us all, because Sanders is not the nice, Nordic-style “democratic socialist” he claims to be. At his core, Sanders is almost certainly an all-out Marxist.
His rise clearly troubles establishment Democrats who are uneasy with his far-left agenda. Among Sanders’s most notable detractors are mainstream Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The former president, for instance, is reported to be so “anxious” about Sanders’s standing that he’s contemplating publicly repudiating him (although some Obama allies deny this account).
Obama and Clinton may have unwittingly contributed to Sanders’s rise, but they are right to be concerned. The man has no business being anywhere near the Oval Office — not even on a guided tour. The fact that the socialist senator is considered a national leader is a disgraceful blemish on the Democratic Party, a party once comprised by men such as John F. Kennedy, who fought communists, while Sanders defended them.
At every stage in his adult life, Sanders has been an unabashed apologist for communism, an evil ideology with a body count of 100 million people dead in its wake. A cursory examination of this record should disqualify Sanders from public office:
While people such as my grandfather were languishing as political prisoners in Cuba, Sanders said that he was so “excited” about the island’s communist revolution that watching JFK get tough on Fidel Castro made him want to “puke.”
In 1980, as most prominent democratic socialists criticized Iran’s taking of American hostages, Sanders joined a Trotskyist revolutionary party that defended the Islamic regime’s actions.
When the United States was containing communism in Central America, Sanders flew to Nicaragua to lend credibility to the Sandinistas.
The 78-year-old presidential candidate even honeymooned in the Soviet Union and came back full of praise for it. Some may not grasp how bizarre this was during the Cold War, but, at the time, it was almost unheard of to do such a thing.
Despite his lifelong fascination with communism, not once did Sanders have the decency to meet Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, a renowned Soviet dissident who lived in Vermont.
Some have tried tricking voters into believing that Sanders is the American version of Nordic-style socialist democrats. This isn’t true.
The Nordics actually enjoy somewhat free-market economies. Conversely, Sanders’s platform, which openly calls for nationalizing major industries such as higher education, healthcare, and even the internet, falls well outside the mainstream of U.S. politics and more closely resembles the central planning committees in Cuba and Venezuela.
Rather than drawing philosophical distinctions without practical differences, Democrats need to accept the fact that Sanders is an unrepentant Marxist. They must confront the forces within their party that enabled his ascent, such as unchecked liberalism.
Conservatives, meanwhile, should follow President Trump’s lead and denounce Sanders and his ideology in striking moral terms. As for voters, well, throughout his life, Sanders has made it clear who he really is, so they should take him at his word.
Giancarlo Sopo (@GiancarloSopo) is a writer at TheBlaze and was a 2019 regional fellow at the National Review Institute. He is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog.


bonginoreport--2020-01-25--Five Highlights From Trump’s Defense Team

President Donald Trump ’ s lawyers took the Senate floor Saturday morning to open their defense in his impeachment trial , wrapping up their initial arguments within two hours .
The defense ’ s opening presentation was unusually brief after House Democrats ’ impeachment managers stretched their arguments for about eight hours on each of three days .
Trump ’ s lawyers have Monday and Tuesday to finish their defense , as each side gets three days and up to 24 hours to make their cases to senators .
The House ’ s seven impeachment managers , urging the Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all but about three hours of their allotted time .
Trump weighed in on Twitter well after the Senate adjourned shortly after noon .
Here are five highlights from the opening arguments of the president ’ s lawyers .
The Democrat-controlled House voted Dec. 18 to impeach Trump , alleging he abused his power and obstructed Congress in connection with his July 25 phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy .
In the call , the two men briefly discussed Trump ’ s interest in Zelenskyy ’ s investigating possible Ukrainian interference in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as Ukrainian-related actions taken by former Vice President Joe Biden and his son , Hunter Biden .
House Democrats allege that Trump used the power of his office to solicit Ukraine to interfere in the U.S. presidential election in 2020 .
White House counsel Pat Cipollone countered that it is Democrats ’ impeachment effort that seeks to “ perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American history.
” “ They ’ re asking you to remove President Trump from the ballot , ” Cipollone said .
If two-thirds of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to remove a president from office , they also may disqualify him from holding another federal office .
“ They ’ re asking you to do something that no Senate has ever done , and they ’ re asking you to do that with no evidence , and that ’ s wrong , ” Cipollone said .
Cipollone said Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California , Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York , and the other five House impeachment managers “ hid evidence ” from the Senate .
The White House counsel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump-Zelenskyy call , ordered released by the president , which shows that both leaders talked about “ burden-sharing ” in support of Ukraine by other European countries .
Cipollone said of the House managers : In 2016 , Biden , as vice president , threatened to withhold $ 1 billion in U.S. aid from Ukraine unless the Eastern European nation fired Viktor Shokin , the state prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings .
Hunter Biden , the vice president ’ s son , held a high-paying job on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his father was the Obama administration ’ s point man for Ukraine policy .
In his July 25 phone call with Zelenskyy , Trump said he would appreciate Ukraine ’ s investigating the matter along with Ukraine ’ s possible meddling in the 2016 U.S. election .
At the time , unknown to Zelenskyy , Trump had put a hold on $ 391 million in congressionally approved military aid to the former Soviet republic to counter Russian aggression , which he would lift in September .
Deputy White House counsel Mike Purpura said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impeachment managers melts under what he said were “ six key facts ” : On the last point , numerous witnesses who testified at the House impeachment hearings made clear that they supported the Trump administration ’ s policy of providing lethal weapons to Ukraine to defend itself from Russia .
President Barack Obama ’ s administration had refused to provide such weaponry .
Zelenskyy and his aides in Ukraine have said on several occasions that they did not believe the U.S. was pressuring them to begin investigations of Burisma and possible Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the president ’ s lawyers were eager to note .
“ Of course , the best evidence that there was no pressure or quid pro quo is the statements of Ukrainians themselves , ” Purpura told senators .
“ The fact that President Zelenskyy himself felt no pressure on the call and did not perceive there to be any connection between security assistance and investigations would , in any ordinary case in any court , be totally fatal to the prosecution.
” “ The judge would throw it out , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over .
What more do you need to know ?
” During their arguments , House members had told senators that , because of a power disparity , it was highly unlikely that Zelensky would challenge an assertion by Trump .
“ How do they try to overcome the direct words from President Zelenskyy and his administration that they felt no pressure ?
They tell you that the Ukrainians must have felt pressure , regardless of what they said , ” Purpura argued , adding : Jay Sekulow , one of Trump ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a similar point about witnesses in the House impeachment hearings , most of whom declined to say , when asked , that they saw in the call a quid pro quo or a bribe .
“ This entire impeachment process is about the House managers ’ insistence that they are able to read everybody ’ s thoughts ; they can read everybody ’ s intentions , even when the principal speakers , the witnesses themselves , insist that those interpretations are wrong , ” Sekulow said .
He said it is well known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , noting that the president also reviewed or held up aid to Afghanistan , South Korea , and Pakistan , among other nations .
The president ’ s lawyers also asserted that Ukraine wasn ’ t aware that Trump had put a hold on the $ 391 million in military aid , and never broached the topic with U.S. officials until an Aug. 28 story appeared in Politico .
The article ran more than a month after the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy .
“ We know there was no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we know that from the transcript , ” Purpura said .
“ There couldn ’ t possibly have been a quid pro quo because the Ukrainians didn ’ t know the security assistance was on hold .
… There can ’ t be a threat without the person knowing he ’ s being threatened.
” Purpura played video of Democrat-called witnesses telling House members that they did not believe the Ukrainian government was aware that the U.S. aid was being held up until the news story appeared in late August .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ lack of knowledge on the hold is fatal to their case , so they desperately tried to muddy the water , ” Purpura said .
During their presentation to the Senate , House Democrats pointed to an October press conference in which acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said the administration held up the money in part because it wanted Ukraine to investigate interference in the 2016 election .
Mulvaney said this concern didn ’ t include an investigation of the Bidens .
Responding to Democrats ’ repeated assertion that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favor , and pointing again to the official transcript of the call , Purpura said : During his closing argument late Friday , Schiff asserted that Trump thinks that “ he is the state.
” Sekulow , who also representedTrump in the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign , addressed another Schiff comment from Friday .
Schiff asked senators to put themselves in the shoes of Joe Biden , and imagine that Trump had asked for Ukraine to investigate any one of them .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can not simply decide this case in a vacuum , ” Sekulow told senators .
“ Mr .
Schiff said yesterday , I believe it was his father who [ told him ] , you should put yourself in someone else ’ s shoes .
Let ’ s for a moment put ourselves in the shoes of the president of the United States right now.
” An FBI investigation of Trump for alleged conspiracy with Russia was underway before he was even elected , Sekulow said .
Then , a few months into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ special counsel and investigated the Russian matter for about two years .
Sekulow read a portion of the Mueller report clearing Trump and his campaign of any conspiracy or coordination with Russia to influence the 2016 election .
“ In their opening statement , several of the House managers tried once again to relitigate the Mueller case , ” he said .
Sekulow pointed out that the Mueller probe cost $ 32 million in taxpayers ’ money and included 2,800 subpoenas , 500 search warrants , and 500 witness interviews .
That investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on what the Justice Department ’ s inspector general later determined to be a faulty FBI process of seeking a warrant to surveil a Trump campaign adviser , Carter Page .
“ The president had reason to be concerned about the information he was being provided , ” Sekulow said , referring to the FBI and other intelligence agencies .
“ Now we can ignore this .
We can make believe this did not happen .
But it did .
”

President Donald Trump’s lawyers took the Senate floor Saturday morning to open their defense in his impeachment trial, wrapping up their initial arguments within two hours.
The defense’s opening presentation was unusually brief after House Democrats’ impeachment managers stretched their arguments for about eight hours on each of three days.
Trump’s lawyers have Monday and Tuesday to finish their defense, as each side gets three days and up to 24 hours to make their cases to senators. The House’s seven impeachment managers, urging the Senate to remove Trump from office, used all but about three hours of their allotted time.
Trump weighed in on Twitter well after the Senate adjourned shortly after noon.
Any fair minded person watching the Senate trial today would be able to see how unfairly I have been treated and that this is indeed the totally partisan Impeachment Hoax that EVERYBODY, including the Democrats, truly knows it is. This should never be allowed to happen again! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 25, 2020
Here are five highlights from the opening arguments of the president’s lawyers.
1. ‘Massive Interference in an Election’
The Democrat-controlled House voted Dec. 18 to impeach Trump, alleging he abused his power and obstructed Congress in connection with his July 25 phone call to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
In the call, the two men briefly discussed Trump’s interest in Zelenskyy’s investigating possible Ukrainian interference in the U.S. presidential election in 2016 as well as Ukrainian-related actions taken by former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
House Democrats allege that Trump used the power of his office to solicit Ukraine to interfere in the U.S. presidential election in 2020.
White House counsel Pat Cipollone countered that it is Democrats’ impeachment effort that seeks to “perpetrate the most massive interference in an election in American history.”
“They’re asking you to remove President Trump from the ballot,” Cipollone said.
If two-thirds of the Senate, or 67 senators, vote to remove a president from office, they also may disqualify him from holding another federal office.
“They’re asking you to do something that no Senate has ever done, and they’re asking you to do that with no evidence, and that’s wrong,” Cipollone said.
Cipollone said Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California, Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler of New York, and the other five House impeachment managers “hid evidence” from the Senate.
The White House counsel pointed to the official transcript of the Trump-Zelenskyy call, ordered released by the president, which shows that both leaders talked about “burden-sharing” in support of Ukraine by other European countries.
Cipollone said of the House managers:
They come here to the Senate and they ask you [to] remove a president, tear up the ballots in all of your states, and they don’t bother to read the key evidence of the discussion of burden-sharing that’s in the call itself. Now, that’s emblematic of their entire presentation. They have the burden of proof. And they have not come close to meeting it.
2. Focus on ‘6 Key Facts’
In 2016, Biden, as vice president, threatened to withhold $1 billion in U.S. aid from Ukraine unless the Eastern European nation fired Viktor Shokin, the state prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.
Hunter Biden, the vice president’s son, held a high-paying job on the board of Burisma at the same time his father was the Obama administration’s point man for Ukraine policy.
In his July 25 phone call with Zelenskyy, Trump said he would appreciate Ukraine’s investigating the matter along with Ukraine’s possible meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.
At the time, unknown to Zelenskyy, Trump had put a hold on $391 million in congressionally approved military aid to the former Soviet republic to counter Russian aggression, which he would lift in September.
Deputy White House counsel Mike Purpura said the entire case put forward by House impeachment managers melts under what he said were “six key facts”:
First, the transcript shows that the president did not condition either security assistance or a meeting on anything. Second, President Zelenskyy and other Ukrainian officials repeatedly have said there was no quid pro quo and no pressure on them to review anything. Third, President Zelenskyy and high-ranking Ukrainian officials did not even know the security assistance was paused until the end of August, over a month after the July 25 call. Fourth, not a single witness testified that the president himself [Trump] said that there was any connection between any investigations in security assistance, a presidential meeting, or anything else. Fifth, the security assistance flowed on Sept. 11 and a presidential meeting took place on Sept. 25 [at the United Nations] without the Ukrainian government announcing any investigations. Finally, the Democrats’ blind drive to impeach the president does not and cannot change the fact, as attested to by the Democrats’ own witnesses, that President Trump has been a better friend and stronger supporter of Ukraine than his predecessor.
On the last point, numerous witnesses who testified at the House impeachment hearings made clear that they supported the Trump administration’s policy of providing lethal weapons to Ukraine to defend itself from Russia.
President Barack Obama’s administration had refused to provide such weaponry.
3. ‘Claiming to Be Mind Readers’
Zelenskyy and his aides in Ukraine have said on several occasions that they did not believe the U.S. was pressuring them to begin investigations of Burisma and possible Ukrainian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, which the president’s lawyers were eager to note.
“Of course, the best evidence that there was no pressure or quid pro quo is the statements of Ukrainians themselves,” Purpura told senators. “The fact that President Zelenskyy himself felt no pressure on the call and did not perceive there to be any connection between security assistance and investigations would, in any ordinary case in any court, be totally fatal to the prosecution.”
“The judge would throw it out,” he said. “The case would be over. What more do you need to know?”
During their arguments, House members had told senators that, because of a power disparity, it was highly unlikely that Zelensky would challenge an assertion by Trump.
Purpura dismissed this idea Saturday.
“How do they try to overcome the direct words from President Zelenskyy and his administration that they felt no pressure? They tell you that the Ukrainians must have felt pressure, regardless of what they said,” Purpura argued, adding:
They try to overcome the devastating evidence against them by apparently claiming to be mind readers. They know what’s in President Zelenskyy’s mind better than President Zelenskyy does. President Zelenskyy said he felt no pressure. The House managers tell you they know better.
This is really a theme of the House case. Every time the Democrats say that President Trump made demands or issued a quid pro quo to Zelenskyy on the July 25 call, they are saying that President Zelenskyy and his top advisers are being untruthful.
Jay Sekulow, one of Trump’s personal lawyers, later followed with a similar point about witnesses in the House impeachment hearings, most of whom declined to say, when asked, that they saw in the call a quid pro quo or a bribe.
“This entire impeachment process is about the House managers’ insistence that they are able to read everybody’s thoughts; they can read everybody’s intentions, even when the principal speakers, the witnesses themselves, insist that those interpretations are wrong,” Sekulow said.
He said it is well known that Trump is suspicious of foreign aid, noting that the president also reviewed or held up aid to Afghanistan, South Korea, and Pakistan, among other nations.
4. Ukraine Unaware of Hold on Aid
The president’s lawyers also asserted that Ukraine wasn’t aware that Trump had put a hold on the $391 million in military aid, and never broached the topic with U.S. officials until an Aug. 28 story appeared in Politico.
The article ran more than a month after the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy.
“We know there was no quid pro quo on the call; we know that from the transcript,” Purpura said. “There couldn’t possibly have been a quid pro quo because the Ukrainians didn’t know the security assistance was on hold. … There can’t be a threat without the person knowing he’s being threatened.”
Purpura played video of Democrat-called witnesses telling House members that they did not believe the Ukrainian government was aware that the U.S. aid was being held up until the news story appeared in late August.
“The House managers are aware that the Ukrainians’ lack of knowledge on the hold is fatal to their case, so they desperately tried to muddy the water,” Purpura said.
During their presentation to the Senate, House Democrats pointed to an October press conference in which acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney said the administration held up the money in part because it wanted Ukraine to investigate interference in the 2016 election. Mulvaney said this concern didn’t include an investigation of the Bidens.
Responding to Democrats’ repeated assertion that Trump wanted Zelenskyy to do him a favor, and pointing again to the official transcript of the call, Purpura said:
As everyone knows by now, President Trump asked President Zelenskyy to do ‘us’ a favor. And he made clear that ‘us’ referred to our country, and not himself. … There was no mention of the paused security assistance on the call, and certainly not from President Trump.
During his closing argument late Friday, Schiff asserted that Trump thinks that “he is the state.”
5. ‘Relitigate the Mueller Case’
Sekulow, who also represented Trump in the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign, addressed another Schiff comment from Friday.
Schiff asked senators to put themselves in the shoes of Joe Biden, and imagine that Trump had asked for Ukraine to investigate any one of them.
“Let me begin by saying that you cannot simply decide this case in a vacuum,” Sekulow told senators. “Mr. Schiff said yesterday, I believe it was his father who [told him], you should put yourself in someone else’s shoes. Let’s for a moment put ourselves in the shoes of the president of the United States right now.”
An FBI investigation of Trump for alleged conspiracy with Russia was underway before he was even elected, Sekulow said. Then, a few months into his presidency, Mueller was named as special counsel and investigated the Russian matter for about two years.
Sekulow read a portion of the Mueller report clearing Trump and his campaign of any conspiracy or coordination with Russia to influence the 2016 election.
“In their opening statement, several of the House managers tried once again to relitigate the Mueller case,” he said.
Sekulow pointed out that the Mueller probe cost $32 million in taxpayers’ money and included 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, and 500 witness interviews.
That investigation, he said, was predicated largely on what the Justice Department’s inspector general later determined to be a faulty FBI process of seeking a warrant to surveil a Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page.
“The president had reason to be concerned about the information he was being provided,” Sekulow said, referring to the FBI and other intelligence agencies. “Now we can ignore this. We can make believe this did not happen. But it did.”
Democrats were making a “straw man argument,” he said:
The House managers over a 23-hour period kept pushing this false dichotomy that it was either Russia or Ukraine [that interfered in the 2016 election], but not both. They kept telling you the conclusion of the intelligence community and Mr. Mueller was Russia alone [meddled], with regard to the 2016 elections. The report Bob Mueller wrote was on Russia interference, although there is some information [there] in letters regarding Ukraine.
Ken McIntyre contributed to this report.


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--LOL: Major Iowa Newspaper Endorses “Truth Teller” Elizabeth Warren

Major Iowa newspaper endorses Warren , says she will 'treat truth as something that matters' Trump campaign : 'Are they @ @ @ @ @ us ? '

The Des Moines Register announced its 2020 Democratic Party primary endorsement on Saturday, and the honor went to Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
"Who would make the best president at this point in the country's history?" the newspaper asked. "At a time when the economic deck has become so stacked against working Americans that the gap between rich and poor is the highest in more than 50 years? At a time when a generation of war has stressed military families and sapped the treasury?"
The newspaper responded, "The Des Moines Register editorial board endorses Elizabeth Warren in the 2020 Iowa Democratic caucuses as the best leader for these times."
The Register went on to assure readers that Warren — who has pledged to dismantle the private insurance industry and impose an unconstitutional wealth tax — "is not the radical some perceive her to be."
A champion of truth?
The endorsement stated that Warren and all the other Democratic candidates could "make a fine president" and that each one, including the Massachusetts senator who's notorious for fibbing, would "treat the truth as something that matters."
Yes, the Des Moines Register's editorial board argued that the same Elizabeth Warren who spent decades falsifying her ethnic heritage would champion facts and truth if she were elected president.
The Register's lavish praise of Warren raised eyebrows among political commentators, including from the Trump campaign's Matt Wolking, who tweeted: "Are they idiots or just messing with us?"
Warren's greatest hits
As TheBlaze has pointed out, Warren has an extensive history of fudging facts to suit her convenience. Below are some examples where the presidential hopeful has not "treated truth as something that matters":
Perhaps most famously, Warren claimed for years that she was a Native American, but a DNA test show that she was almost entirely of white European ancestry. "According to Carlos D. Bustamante, a Stanford University professor and expert in the field of population genetics, Warren's possible Native American ancestry traces back six to 10 generations. The results of her DNA test suggest that Warren is between 1/64th and 1/1024th Native American," reported TheBlaze.
In November 2019, Warren falsely claimed that her children only attended public schools. However, a yearbook obtained by the Washington Free Beacon clearly showed that her son, Alex Warren, attended Kirby Hall School, an elite private K-12 school in Austin, Texas, in the mid-1980s.
In February 2019, TheBlaze reported that Warren falsely claimed having American Indian heritage on her Texas State Bar registration card. Through a public records request, the Washington Post obtained a copy of her 1986 registration card on which Warren hand-wrote "American Indian" in the field for "race.
As Michael Brendan Dougherty notes in National Review, "Warren plagiarized her contribution to a book of Native American home recipes, Pow Wow Chow, from a French cookbook." Not to be outdone, "Harvard bragged about its hiring of Warren and advertised her as an addition to its diversity, though reporting in recent years has attempted to obscure whether this was a help to her," wrote Dougherty.
Warren may be "a policy wonk," as the Register declared, but a defender of truth she most certainly is not.
A caveat in the endorsement
Interestingly, the Des Moines Register's editorial board included a caveat in its endorsement of Warren, warning that some of her agenda might "go too far."
A qualification: Some of her ideas for "big, structural change" go too far. This board could not endorse the wholesale overhaul of corporate governance or cumulative levels of taxation she proposes. While the board has long supported single-payer health insurance, it believes a gradual transition is the more realistic approach. But Warren is pushing in the right direction.
Still, despite its concerns with the extremism of some of Warren's policies, the Register's editors concluded "Elizabeth Warren is the president this nation needs."


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--FBI Reviewing Allegations That Ilhan Omar Married Her Brother in Alleged Marriage Fraud Scheme

WASHINGTON , DC — The Federal Bureau of Investigation is reviewing claims Rep. Ilhan Omar married her brother , The Post has learned .
Two FBI agents held an hours-long meeting in Minnesota in mid-October with a concerned party who handed over a trove of documents regarding Omar ’ s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi , a source with knowledge of the event said .
At the meeting , first reported by website The Blaze , the agents discussed concerns the Somali-born Democrat married Elmi , a British citizen rumored to be her brother , so he could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America , the source said .
The two agents said they would share the information with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the US Department of Education , but did not commit to opening an investigation into the firebrand lawmaker , the source said .
If Omar did marry her brother , she could be found guilty of committing marriage fraud — a felony offense punishable with a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to $ 250,000 .
The three government agencies said they would not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential investigation .
Congresswoman Omar ’ s office did not respond to request for comment but she has repeatedly denied the allegations — calling them “ disgusting lies.
” The 38-year-old ’ s complicated personal life has been the subject of enduring scrutiny since she was sent to Congress at the 2018 midterm elections .
In October , the mom-of-three filed for divorce from husband Ahmed Hirsi after The Post exclusively revealed allegations she was having an affair with DC political consultant Tim Mynett .
Omar initially denied the split , but one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pair broke up months before and claimed Omar was privately lobbying Hirsi to divorce her .
Hirsi , the father of her three children , remarried just 37 days after the divorce was finalized in November and Omar has been repeatedly photographed leaving the same Washington , DC , apartment as Mynett .
However , it ’ s Omar ’ s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi which has raised eyebrows and now prompted the involvement of the FBI , with records indicating she lived with both men at the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2002 but never legally married , having a Muslim ceremony instead , Omar said .
They had two children before splitting in 2008 .
The next year , the congresswoman married Elmi , who she described as a “ British citizen ” on their marriage license .
Allegations that Elmi is Omar ’ s brother first emerged in a since-deleted post to the Somali Spot message board by a user named AbdiJohnson in 2016 .
Conservative blogger Scott Johnson picked up the claims on his Power Line blog , and they were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Somali-community source personally observed Omar , Elmi and Hirsi all living together in the same family home in Cedar-Riverside with the couple ’ s two children .
The trio then decamped to North Dakota where Omar began studying political science at North Dakota State University in August 2009 , the source said .
Elmi also studied there for a period but dropped out , records show .
Omar and Elmi split two years later in 2011 and the freshman lawmaker got back together with Hirsi and they had a third child in 2012 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t until 2017 that Omar finally got around to divorcing Elmi .
She legally wed Hirsi just months later — right in time before she was sworn into office in 2018 .
When Omar and Elmi separated in 2011 , the congresswoman claimed she couldn ’ t get in touch with him because he ’ d moved to the UK and she didn ’ t know where he was .
In divorce papers asking to dissolve their marriage by alternate means in 2017 , Omar swore under penalty of perjury that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and said his last known location was London in June 2011 .
But lease and eviction records and traffic violations reviewed by The Post suggest Elmi was in the US the whole time — living just 2.6 miles away from her at an apartment in downtown Minneapolis .
Omar launched her re-election bid on Thursday after a turbulent term where she was criticized for her anti-Semitic remarks , showed reluctance to sanction Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan and was slapped with multiple campaign finance complaints after her alleged lover received more than $ @ @ @ @ @

WASHINGTON, DC — The Federal Bureau of Investigation is reviewing claims Rep. Ilhan Omar married her brother, The Post has learned.
Two FBI agents held an hours-long meeting in Minnesota in mid-October with a concerned party who handed over a trove of documents regarding Omar’s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, a source with knowledge of the event said.
At the meeting, first reported by website The Blaze, the agents discussed concerns the Somali-born Democrat married Elmi, a British citizen rumored to be her brother, so he could obtain a green card and study in America, the source said.
The two agents said they would share the information with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the US Department of Education, but did not commit to opening an investigation into the firebrand lawmaker, the source said.
If Omar did marry her brother, she could be found guilty of committing marriage fraud — a felony offense punishable with a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to $250,000.
The three government agencies said they would not confirm the existence of any ongoing or potential investigation.
Congresswoman Omar’s office did not respond to request for comment but she has repeatedly denied the allegations — calling them “disgusting lies.”
The 38-year-old’s complicated personal life has been the subject of enduring scrutiny since she was sent to Congress at the 2018 midterm elections.
In October, the mom-of-three filed for divorce from husband Ahmed Hirsi after The Post exclusively revealed allegations she was having an affair with DC political consultant Tim Mynett.
Omar initially denied the split, but one source in the Minneapolis Somali community said the pair broke up months before and claimed Omar was privately lobbying Hirsi to divorce her.
Hirsi, the father of her three children, remarried just 37 days after the divorce was finalized in November and Omar has been repeatedly photographed leaving the same Washington, DC, apartment as Mynett.
However, it’s Omar’s 2009 marriage to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi which has raised eyebrows and now prompted the involvement of the FBI, with records indicating she lived with both men at the same time.
Omar and Hirsi were engaged in 2002 but never legally married, having a Muslim ceremony instead, Omar said. They had two children before splitting in 2008.
The next year, the congresswoman married Elmi, who she described as a “British citizen” on their marriage license.
Allegations that Elmi is Omar’s brother first emerged in a since-deleted post to the Somali Spot message board by a user named AbdiJohnson in 2016. Conservative blogger Scott Johnson picked up the claims on his Power Line blog, and they were later repeated by President Trump.
The Somali-community source personally observed Omar, Elmi and Hirsi all living together in the same family home in Cedar-Riverside with the couple’s two children.
The trio then decamped to North Dakota where Omar began studying political science at North Dakota State University in August 2009, the source said. Elmi also studied there for a period but dropped out, records show.
Omar and Elmi split two years later in 2011 and the freshman lawmaker got back together with Hirsi and they had a third child in 2012, records show.
However, it wasn’t until 2017 that Omar finally got around to divorcing Elmi. She legally wed Hirsi just months later — right in time before she was sworn into office in 2018.
When Omar and Elmi separated in 2011, the congresswoman claimed she couldn’t get in touch with him because he’d moved to the UK and she didn’t know where he was.
In divorce papers asking to dissolve their marriage by alternate means in 2017, Omar swore under penalty of perjury that she had no way of contacting Elmi and said his last known location was London in June 2011.
But lease and eviction records and traffic violations reviewed by The Post suggest Elmi was in the US the whole time — living just 2.6 miles away from her at an apartment in downtown Minneapolis.
Omar launched her re-election bid on Thursday after a turbulent term where she was criticized for her anti-Semitic remarks, showed reluctance to sanction Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan and was slapped with multiple campaign finance complaints after her alleged lover received more than $370,000 from her campaign.


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--Media Blames Republicans for Their Poor Ratings on Impeachment Coverage

Here 's another bad sign that the impeachment trial is flopping for Democrats in public opinion .
Axios social-media guru Neal Rothschild worried out loud in an item headlined `` Impeachment trial draws shrugs -- by design . ''
That 's not exactly by the Democratic design .
It 's a GOP conspiracy !
Interest in the Senate impeachment trial over its first three days was barely half as strong as the first three days of the House impeachment hearings , according to data from NewsWhip exclusively provided to Axios .
The big picture : That was by design .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ documents , the Republican-controlled Senate made sure no dramatic new information would surface during the first few days of the trial — and made it easier for Americans to tune out .
How can you tune out if you have n't tuned in ?
Ratings have been lower than the soap operas get on the Big Three networks .
Axios reported stories about impeachment during the first three days of House impeachment hearings resulted in 32.5 million interactions ( likes , comments , shares ) on social media , compared to only 17.8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday , Wednesday and Thursday of the Senate trial .
Is n't it obvious that viewers might see the trial as a repeat ?
The House managers literally played a pile of clips from the House hearings .
And who builds TV ratings when everyone knows this show will be canceled -- by an acquittal ?
Rothschild complained : `` do n't forget that we already know the ending of this trial , thanks to Trump 's red wall in the Republican-controlled Senate that makes his conviction and removal virtually impossible . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 25 biggest stories about Trump during these three days , only three were related to impeachment . ''
Liberal Democrats just keep hoping , time after time , that something , anything new is going to `` change the dynamic '' so Trump can be ruined .
Rothschild could only conclude : The bottom line : The gravity of the charges against Trump is serious , but without something to change the dynamic — like witnesses who could provide new information , or suspense over the outcome — it has n't been enough @ @ @ @ @ @

Here's another bad sign that the impeachment trial is flopping for Democrats in public opinion. Axios social-media guru Neal Rothschild worried out loud in an item headlined "Impeachment trial draws shrugs -- by design." That's not exactly by the Democratic design. It's a GOP conspiracy!
Interest in the Senate impeachment trial over its first three days was barely half as strong as the first three days of the House impeachment hearings, according to data from NewsWhip exclusively provided to Axios. The big picture: That was by design. By blocking Democratic attempts to subpoena new documents, the Republican-controlled Senate made sure no dramatic new information would surface during the first few days of the trial — and made it easier for Americans to tune out.
How can you tune out if you haven't tuned in? Ratings have been lower than the soap operas get on the Big Three networks.
Axios reported stories about impeachment during the first three days of House impeachment hearings resulted in 32.5 million interactions (likes, comments, shares) on social media, compared to only 17.8 million interactions on impeachment stories during the Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday of the Senate trial.
Isn't it obvious that viewers might see the trial as a repeat? The House managers literally played a pile of clips from the House hearings. And who builds TV ratings when everyone knows this show will be canceled -- by an acquittal?
Rothschild complained: "don't forget that we already know the ending of this trial, thanks to Trump's red wall in the Republican-controlled Senate that makes his conviction and removal virtually impossible."
It gets worse. "Of the 25 biggest stories about Trump during these three days, only three were related to impeachment."
Liberal Democrats just keep hoping, time after time, that something, anything new is going to "change the dynamic" so Trump can be ruined. Rothschild could only conclude:


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--Kobe Bryant and 13-Year-Old Daughter Killed in Helicopter Crash

Lias Andersson is getting back on the ice , but not ...

Legendary NBA player Kobe Bryant has died in a California helicopter crash, reports said Sunday.
He was 41.
The retired Los Angeles Lakers star was traveling in his private helicopter over Calabasas when a fire broke out, sending the chopper spiraling from the sky, according to TMZ Sports.
The crash occurred around 10 a.m. local time amid foggy conditions in the hills overlooking Calabasas, with the Sikorsky S-76 chopper sparking a brush fire on impact that hampered initial rescue efforts, according to the Los Angeles Times, which confirmed the deaths of Bryant and four others aboard the craft.
Authorities later revealed that nine people are believed to have died in the crash. There were no survivors, and the cause of the crash is under investigation, according to TMZ.
Previous 1 of 9 Next Advertisement The scene of the helicopter crash. Frederick M. Brown The scene of the helicopter crash. IXOLA / BACKGRID Advertisement The scene of the helicopter crash. LA County Sheriff's Department The scene of the helicopter crash. LA County Sheriff's Department The scene of the crash in Calabasas IXOLA / BACKGRID Advertisement The scene of the crash in Calabasas. IXOLA / BACKGRID Advertisement
Bryant’s wife, Vanessa, was not among those aboard the chopper, but his 13-year-old daughter, Gianna, was, according to reports.
In addition to his wife, he is survived by the couple’s other three daughters: Natalia, 17, Bianka, 3, and Capri Kobe Bryant, born just last June.
Bryant, a Philadelphia native, starred for two decades with the Lakers, winning five championships and making 18 All-Star Games before hanging up his basketball shoes following the 2016 season.
The stunning death of the sweet-shooting guard came just hours after he toasted fellow NBA icon and current Laker LeBron James for passing him for third place on the league’s all-time scoring list.
“Continuing to move the game forward @KingJames,” wrote Bryant on Saturday night in what would prove to be his final tweet. “Much respect my brother.”
Bryant concluded the message with an emoji of a bicep flexing, and the hashtag “#33644,” one point more than he scored in his illustrious career.
Bryant was considered a lock to be among the next class inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame, set to be announced next month.


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--Former Hewlett Packard CEO Apologizes for Comparing Journalists to Sexual Predators

Billionaire Quibi CEO Meg Whitman apologized Friday for remarks during a recent all-hands meeting in which she likened journalists to sexual predators .
Whitman compared journalists who cultivate sources within companies to sexual predators who “ groom underage ” victims during a tense meeting last week with Quibi staffers , The Information reported .
The former Hewlett-Packard CEO and California gubernatorial candidate made the analogy while addressing a leaked memo that contained internal financial information about Quibi .
“ I used an analogy that was inappropriate and just plain wrong , ” Whitman told Variety at the Sundance Film Festival @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its content lineup .
“ None of us are ever perfect .
I didn ’ t intend it , and it ’ s not at all how I think , how I feel.
” Whitman ’ s remarks “ upset some Quibi employees who described them as strange and off-putting , ” according to The Information ’ s report .
Quibi initially disputed the report , which it described as “ materially inaccurate.
” Whitman acknowledged to Variety that her comments were “ mostly accurately portrayed.
” “ I ’ ve had a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and I completely respect what you all do and the important role that you play , ” she added .
“ So I ’ m super sorry about it.
” Quibi did not immediately respond to a request for further comment .
NETFLIX 'S FIRST CEO SAYS ‘ AMAZING ’ SUCCESS CAME AS A SURPRISE The analogy drew a rebuke earlier this week from the News Media Alliance , a journalism industry trade group that represents nearly 2,000 media organizations .
“ It ’ s not the job of journalism to be compliant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find good sources of information and ask hard questions , ” NMA president and CEO David Chavern told FOX Business .
“ Comparing the normal processes of reporting to the grooming of sexual victims is simply horrific.
” GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE Whitman also served a stint as CEO of eBay .
She sits on the board of directors for several institutions , including consumer goods firm Proctor & Gamble , cloud storage firm DropBox and nonprofit Teach for America , and owns a stake in Major @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The institutions have yet to comment on her remarks Whitman was the first employee hired at Quibi , a mobile-only streaming service founded by Hollywood executive Jeffrey Katzenberg .
The company will offer a tiered subscription service with a variety of short-form content , including movies , documentaries and sports highlights .
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

Billionaire Quibi CEO Meg Whitman apologized Friday for remarks during a recent all-hands meeting in which she likened journalists to sexual predators.
Whitman compared journalists who cultivate sources within companies to sexual predators who “groom underage” victims during a tense meeting last week with Quibi staffers, The Information reported. The former Hewlett-Packard CEO and California gubernatorial candidate made the analogy while addressing a leaked memo that contained internal financial information about Quibi.
“I used an analogy that was inappropriate and just plain wrong,” Whitman told Variety at the Sundance Film Festival, where Quibi was set to unveil its content lineup. “None of us are ever perfect. I didn’t intend it, and it’s not at all how I think, how I feel.”
MEG WHITMAN RIPPED FOR REPORTED SEXUAL PREDATOR COMMENTS
Whitman’s remarks “upset some Quibi employees who described them as strange and off-putting,” according to The Information’s report. Quibi initially disputed the report, which it described as “materially inaccurate.”
Whitman acknowledged to Variety that her comments were “mostly accurately portrayed.”
“I’ve had a long, long history with journalists, and I completely respect what you all do and the important role that you play,” she added. “So I’m super sorry about it.”
Quibi did not immediately respond to a request for further comment.
NETFLIX'S FIRST CEO SAYS ‘AMAZING’ SUCCESS CAME AS A SURPRISE
The analogy drew a rebuke earlier this week from the News Media Alliance, a journalism industry trade group that represents nearly 2,000 media organizations.
“It’s not the job of journalism to be compliant to the powerful. It’s to find good sources of information and ask hard questions,” NMA president and CEO David Chavern told FOX Business. “Comparing the normal processes of reporting to the grooming of sexual victims is simply horrific.”
GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE
Whitman also served a stint as CEO of eBay. She sits on the board of directors for several institutions, including consumer goods firm Proctor & Gamble, cloud storage firm DropBox and nonprofit Teach for America, and owns a stake in Major League Soccer’s FC Cincinnati.
The institutions have yet to comment on her remarks
Whitman was the first employee hired at Quibi, a mobile-only streaming service founded by Hollywood executive Jeffrey Katzenberg. The company will offer a tiered subscription service with a variety of short-form content, including movies, documentaries and sports highlights.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--Video Shows Adam Schiff Heckled While Leaving Senate Chamber – “Move to Venezuela Comrade”

Not everyone is impressed or even `` dazzled '' by Adam Schiff 's impeachment performance .
In December , a @ @ @ @ @ was shut down by protesters angry with his impeachment crusade and now , it 's @ @ @ @ @ reported that Schiff was confronted by angry citizens while leaving the Senate chamber after arguing @ @ @ @ @ They mocked and heckled him , calling him a `` liar '' and urging him @ @ @ @ @ While the talking heads and political pundits on the left continue to insist that Schiff @ @ @ @ @ , most amazing , dazzling , patriotic spectacle they ever saw , the American people @ @ @ @ @ do n't appreciate Democrats trying to nullify their votes , have a different view .
@ @ @ @ @ Trump is growing and is at a record 91 % , according to a new @ @ @ @ @ Megan Fox is the author of “ Believe Evidence ; The Death of Due Process @ @ @ @ @ , ” and host of The Fringe podcast .
Follow on Twitter @ MeganFoxWriter

Not everyone is impressed or even “dazzled” by Adam Schiff’s impeachment performance. In December, a town hall event of his was shut down by protesters angry with his impeachment crusade and now, it’s happened again. Fox News reported that Schiff was confronted by angry citizens while leaving the Senate chamber after arguing for impeaching President Trump. They mocked and heckled him, calling him a “liar” and urging him to move to Venezuela.
Uh Oh!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Adam Schiff was bombarded with a small crowd calling him a liar and they demanded he move to Venezuela! pic.twitter.com/XSI8ORyeYk — Go Trump 🇺🇸 (@GKeile) January 26, 2020
While the talking heads and political pundits on the left continue to insist that Schiff’s performance was the best, most amazing, dazzling, patriotic spectacle they ever saw, the American people who voted for Trump and don’t appreciate Democrats trying to nullify their votes, have a different view. Among Republicans, support for Trump is growing and is at a record 91%, according to a new poll reported on Sunday.
Megan Fox is the author of “Believe Evidence; The Death of Due Process from Salome to #MeToo,” and host of The Fringe podcast. Follow on Twitter @MeganFoxWriter


bonginoreport--2020-01-26--Bernie Sanders: Impeachment Trial is Giving Joe Biden an Advantage

During a portion of an interview with “ CBS Evening News ” released on Friday , 2020 Democratic presidential candidate @ @ @ @ @ ) said that the Senate ’ s impeachment trial gives fellow 2020 Democratic presidential candidate @ @ @ @ @ and other 2020 Democratic candidates a political advantage in the race , but Sanders is @ @ @ @ @ ” Sanders said it is “ disappointing to me not to be in Iowa , @ @ @ @ @ ” He added that the impeachment trial is an important matter , and “ I @ @ @ @ @ responsibility .
But what I ’ m saying , obviously , is , at a @ @ @ @ @ ’ Donnell then asked , “ Do you think it places Biden at an advantage @ @ @ @ @ answered , “ Politically , in the last week or so of the campaign , @ @ @ @ @ does .
I mean , he and others , not just Biden , are able @ @ @ @ @ to people .
And that ’ s really important .
”

During a portion of an interview with “CBS Evening News” released on Friday, 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) said that the Senate’s impeachment trial gives fellow 2020 Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden and other 2020 Democratic candidates a political advantage in the race, but Sanders is upholding his “constitutional responsibility.”
Sanders said it is “disappointing to me not to be in Iowa, talking to the people there.”
He added that the impeachment trial is an important matter, and “I’m accepting my constitutional responsibility. But what I’m saying, obviously, is, at a disadvantage.”
Host Norah O’Donnell then asked, “Do you think it places Biden at an advantage over you?”
Sanders answered, “Politically, in the last week or so of the campaign, yeah, I think it does. I mean, he and others, not just Biden, are able to go out, talk to people. And that’s really important.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--Joy Behar Attempts to Goad Holocaust Survivor Into Comparing Treatment to Detainment at U.S.-Mexico

Joy Behar Attempts to Goad Holocaust Survivor Into Comparing Treatment to Detainment at U.S.-Mexico Border, Fails

Joy Behar asks Holocaust survivor thoughts about kids separated from their families at the border .
The conversation did not @ @ @ @ @ wanted .

"The View" co-host Joy Behar seemed to compare a portion of the Holocaust experience with caged children at the U.S. southern border on Monday, but it didn't go quite as she may have planned.
What are the details?
On Monday, the ABC show welcomed Holocaust survivor Millie Baran to honor Holocaust Memorial Day.
Millie appeared on the hit daytime TV show with her husband Miklh and their two adult daughters. During a discussion, Millie shared her personal story of surviving the Holocaust, which included an immigration to America after nearly a five-year wait.
Behar, of course, decided to ask Millie a very pointed question as to whether the Holocaust survivor believed that separating children from their parents at the border was the right thing to do.
"Millie," she began, "we just heard in the video that you had to wait over four years before you could come into this country. ... You know, some people are experiencing that right now in our country. They're not letting people in [at the U.S.-Mexico border] and it's just tragic to me and to you, I'm sure. Would you like to speak to that at all?"
Millie responded by saying that she empathized with the women and children at the border, and said that she couldn't imagine being separated from her own family even for a short period of time.
"I realized," she continued, "who doesn't want to come to America? The best land in the world. The lucky ones who can come here, a land of opportunity, of freedom. To us, it was a dream to get here. Naturally, it was worth it to wait, because when we came here, I practically kissed the earth."
What else?
Millie continued, however, pointing out the importance of immigrants to follow the United States' immigration policy.
"[Immigration] was for us, a miracle, a miracle what happened," she said. "And when we saw what happened with the people who wanted to come to America, naturally — it's a land of laws. You cannot just come and want to come in, but I'm sure that the United States will find a way how to accommodate people who want freedom — who want a good life."
www.youtube.com
(H/T: The Daily Caller)


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--Timelapse Shows Just How Massive the 2020 March for Life Was

Time-lapse video shows massive crowd of pro-lifers at the 2020 March for Life

A massive crowd of people poured into the nation's capital to support life and protest abortion at the 2020 March for Life on Friday, and an amazing time-lapse video shows it all.
The 58-second video captures the scale of the enormous crowd, showing a continuous stream of protesters marching down Constitution Avenue toward the Supreme Court.
youtu.be
In 2019, a time-lapse video of similar length was recorded and released following the 2019 March for Life, which was estimated to have a turnout of between 100,000 and 200,000.
In the lead-up to the national march, pro-lifers across the country rallied to protest abortion laws in their cities and states. In Denver and Chicago, thousands gathered to call for an end to abortion and raise awareness about the issue.
The national march in Washington, D.C., featured a speech from President Donald Trump, who became the first sitting president to ever speak at the March for Life in its 47-year history since the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling in 1973.
Following the announcement that Trump would speak at the march, the March for Life website crashed and had to be brought back online.


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--Rand Paul Blasts Bolton

Rand Paul Blasts Bolton

Republican Sen. Rand Paul dismissed claims that former Trump national security adviser John Bolton ’ s testimony would add anything new to the impeachment case and charged that parts of Bolton 's book critical of the president were leaked so he could make more money .
“ He ’ s a disgruntled , angry man who was fired .
So you ’ d have to take him with a grain of salt .
He wants to sell a book , ” the Kentucky senator told Secrets Monday in comments that echoed those of President Trump .
Paul suggested that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times were part of a scheme to rally calls that the Senate call witnesses , especially Bolton , which would help the former aide cash in even more on his book , The Room Where It Happened .
Mocking Democrats for calling Trump corrupt , Paul told Secrets : “ It 's corrupt to use your government testimony to make money , don ’ t you think ?
So I think he ’ s doing this for mercantile reasons .
I think you can make a strong argument that he ’ s ginning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his right , but he ’ s ginning up his book with the hopes of bringing it in for testimony .
He ’ ll make more money if he testifies .
He ’ ll make a lot more money ... if he gets it out pretty soon.
” Like some other GOP senators , Paul said that Bolton was unlikely to add anything to the impeachment case against Trump over a phone call in which he appeared to delay aid to Ukraine until it investigated corruption at a company former Vice President Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ I know what he ’ s going to say .
He ’ s going to say the president wanted to hold up aid for an investigation into the Bidens , ” Paul said .
“ What ’ s he going to tell you that you don ’ t already know ?
” he added .
And , Paul said , even if the Senate does not vote to hear Bolton , he will probably get a hearing in the House and , “ He ’ ll be happy to come in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s going to sell [ lots ] of books by coming in to testify.
” Paul also warned that Republicans considering voting with Democrats for witnesses are jeopardizing the political future , noting that they could lose their own GOP voting base .
“ They would be better off to have it over politically too because what they don ’ t understand and what I ’ ve tried to say through the media is that , if you live in a purple state , sure you need independent voters , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ base .
So I really think that if anybody votes for impeachment [ conviction ] they won ’ t get their Republican base , ” Paul said .
“ The question is , will voting for witnesses , which looks like a vote that ’ s sympathetic to [ Rep. ] Adam Schiff , [ the lead House impeachment manager ] , is that going to be a vote that the base abandons you over ?
” Paul asked .

Republican Sen. Rand Paul dismissed claims that former Trump national security adviser John Bolton’s testimony would add anything new to the impeachment case and charged that parts of Bolton's book critical of the president were leaked so he could make more money.
“He’s a disgruntled, angry man who was fired. So you’d have to take him with a grain of salt. He wants to sell a book,” the Kentucky senator told Secrets Monday in comments that echoed those of President Trump.
Paul suggested that the book excerpts leaked to the New York Times were part of a scheme to rally calls that the Senate call witnesses, especially Bolton, which would help the former aide cash in even more on his book, The Room Where It Happened.
I NEVER told John Bolton that the aid to Ukraine was tied to investigations into Democrats, including the Bidens. In fact, he never complained about this at the time of his very public termination. If John Bolton said this, it was only to sell a book. With that being said, the... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2020
Mocking Democrats for calling Trump corrupt, Paul told Secrets: “It's corrupt to use your government testimony to make money, don’t you think? So I think he’s doing this for mercantile reasons. I think you can make a strong argument that he’s ginning up his book. That’s his right, but he’s ginning up his book with the hopes of bringing it in for testimony. He’ll make more money if he testifies. He’ll make a lot more money ... if he gets it out pretty soon.”
Like some other GOP senators, Paul said that Bolton was unlikely to add anything to the impeachment case against Trump over a phone call in which he appeared to delay aid to Ukraine until it investigated corruption at a company former Vice President Joe Biden’s son Hunter consulted for.
“I know what he’s going to say. He’s going to say the president wanted to hold up aid for an investigation into the Bidens,” Paul said. “What’s he going to tell you that you don’t already know?” he added.
And, Paul said, even if the Senate does not vote to hear Bolton, he will probably get a hearing in the House and, “He’ll be happy to come in because he’s just decided that he’s going to sell [lots] of books by coming in to testify.”
Paul also warned that Republicans considering voting with Democrats for witnesses are jeopardizing the political future, noting that they could lose their own GOP voting base.
“They would be better off to have it over politically too because what they don’t understand and what I’ve tried to say through the media is that, if you live in a purple state, sure you need independent voters, but you cannot win without your Republican base. So I really think that if anybody votes for impeachment [conviction] they won’t get their Republican base,” Paul said.
“The question is, will voting for witnesses, which looks like a vote that’s sympathetic to [Rep.] Adam Schiff, [the lead House impeachment manager], is that going to be a vote that the base abandons you over?” Paul asked.


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--Six New Gun Control Measures Set to Pass in VA

After Democrats initially took full control over VA ’ s government this month they first passed three gun control bills , while the mostly controversial bill that would redefine and ban assault weapons was shot down ( but a nearly identical bill still exists ) .
Then the day after over 20,000 people showed up to Richmond to protest gun control , Virginia passed a “ red flag ” law .
And now six more or are on the way .
As Bearings Arms ’ Cam Edwards documented and reported on , here ’ s the list : • House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both “ universal background check ” bills that criminalize private transfers of firearms , with only a few exceptions .
Most common transfers between friends and neighbors are not exempted .
• House Bill 9 is a “ lost or stolen ” bill that turns gun owners into criminals if they don ’ t report a lost or stolen firearm within 24 hours of discovering them missing by fining them .
Supposedly this is supposed to cut down on “ straw purchases , ” but lawmakers who support the measure haven ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the bill would work in practice .
• House Bill 421 allows local governments to enact their own gun control ordinances , which would likely result in restrictive and unconstitutional policies being adopted in northern Virginia and other Democrat strongholds of the state .
• House Bill 72 , House Bill 463 , and House Bill 1083 , according to NRA , “ severely restrict parental decisions about firearms in the home while attaching excessive penalties for violations.
” Under these bills , it would be a crime for a parent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the family ’ s property without direct adult supervision , or for parents to allow their 17-year old daughter access to a firearm for self-defense while she was home along , no matter how much training the teens might have .
• House Bill 674 is [ another piece of ] “ red flag ” legislation allowing the seizure of an individual ’ s firearms based on a low standard of review and without any opportunity for the subject of the Extreme Risk Protection Order to be present at the hearing or to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the temporary order is issued .
• House Bill 812 and House Bill 1502 are gun rationing bills that limit an individual ’ s ability to purchase a handgun to one every 30 days .
For Virginia Democrats , passing gun control is the easy part .
Enforcing it is a whole other story .
In less than six weeks after Virginia Democrats initially began discussing gun control , 90 % + of the state ’ s countries ( containing 40 % of the population but the majority of the gun owners @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that refused to enforce any new gun laws .
Further complicating hopes for more extreme measures , cash purchases of the exact firearms Virginia Democrats want to eventually ban outright began to surge .
Virginia ’ s Democrats are claiming gun control victories – but they may just be symbolic .

While they’re saving the most radical legislation for last, Virginia is on track to pass six more gun control measures soon.
After Democrats initially took full control over VA’s government this month they first passed three gun control bills, while the mostly controversial bill that would redefine and ban assault weapons was shot down (but a nearly identical bill still exists). Then the day after over 20,000 people showed up to Richmond to protest gun control, Virginia passed a “red flag” law.
And now six more or are on the way. As Bearings Arms’ Cam Edwards documented and reported on, here’s the list:
House Bill 2 and House Bill 335 are both “universal background check” bills that criminalize private transfers of firearms, with only a few exceptions. Most common transfers between friends and neighbors are not exempted.
House Bill 9 is a “lost or stolen” bill that turns gun owners into criminals if they don’t report a lost or stolen firearm within 24 hours of discovering them missing by fining them. Supposedly this is supposed to cut down on “straw purchases,” but lawmakers who support the measure haven’t been able to explain how, exactly, the bill would work in practice.
House Bill 421 allows local governments to enact their own gun control ordinances, which would likely result in restrictive and unconstitutional policies being adopted in northern Virginia and other Democrat strongholds of the state.
House Bill 72, House Bill 463, and House Bill 1083, according to NRA, “severely restrict parental decisions about firearms in the home while attaching excessive penalties for violations.” Under these bills, it would be a crime for a parent to allow their 16-year old to hunt on the family’s property without direct adult supervision, or for parents to allow their 17-year old daughter access to a firearm for self-defense while she was home along, no matter how much training the teens might have.
House Bill 674 is [another piece of] “red flag” legislation allowing the seizure of an individual’s firearms based on a low standard of review and without any opportunity for the subject of the Extreme Risk Protection Order to be present at the hearing or to offer their own side of the story before the temporary order is issued.
House Bill 812 and House Bill 1502 are gun rationing bills that limit an individual’s ability to purchase a handgun to one every 30 days.
For Virginia Democrats, passing gun control is the easy part. Enforcing it is a whole other story.
In less than six weeks after Virginia Democrats initially began discussing gun control, 90%+ of the state’s countries (containing 40% of the population but the majority of the gun owners) became “Second Amendment sanctuaries” that refused to enforce any new gun laws. Further complicating hopes for more extreme measures, cash purchases of the exact firearms Virginia Democrats want to eventually ban outright began to surge.
Virginia’s Democrats are claiming gun control victories – but they may just be symbolic.


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--Investors Pulled Nearly $100 Billion From Hedge Funds in 2019

Investors withdrew a net $ 98 billion from hedge funds in 2019 , the largest outflows in three years , @ @ @ @ @ that this does not indicate waning popularity .
Data from U.S. research platform eVestment revealed @ @ @ @ @ hit $ 16 billion , while Bloomberg reported that investors last year directed 25 % @ @ @ @ @ those outside of traditional areas such as cash , bonds and stocks , into private @ @ @ @ @ % in 2018 .
However , in a note Monday , UBS Global Chief Investment @ @ @ @ @ outflows from hedge funds only tell half of the story , as total assets under @ @ @ @ @ `` While some investors may have reduced allocations to the asset class overall , hedge @ @ @ @ @ amid strong returns , hitting a record high at $ 3.3 trillion according to the @ @ @ @ @ HFR ) , '' he said , adding that hedge funds in 2019 returned on @ @ @ @ @ best year for a decade .

Investors withdrew a net $98 billion from hedge funds in 2019, the largest outflows in three years, but UBS analysts have argued that this does not indicate waning popularity.
Data from U.S. research platform eVestment revealed that outflows in December alone hit $16 billion, while Bloomberg reported that investors last year directed 25% of their alternative investments, those outside of traditional areas such as cash, bonds and stocks, into private equity, up from 18% in 2018.
However, in a note Monday, UBS Global Chief Investment Officer Mark Haefele suggested that outflows from hedge funds only tell half of the story, as total assets under management are actually rising.
"While some investors may have reduced allocations to the asset class overall, hedge fund assets continued to rise amid strong returns, hitting a record high at $3.3 trillion according to the Hedge Fund Research database (HFR)," he said, adding that hedge funds in 2019 returned on average 10.4%, their best year for a decade.


bonginoreport--2020-01-27--John Bolton’s Book Leak Happened on the Same Day It Became Available for Pre-Order

The New York Times published new impeachment claims by former National Security Advisor John Bolton from Bolton ’ s new book due in March on Sunday , the same day that Bolton ’ s book became available for pre-order .
The revelations from Bolton ’ s book , according to unpublished manuscripts reviewed by the New York Times , are Bolton accusing President Donald Trump of tying Ukraine military aid to political motivated investigations .
The Times reports that in the book , Bolton ’ s timeline of events last year show Trump wanting to continue withholding nearly $ 400 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nation until Ukrainian officials pledged to investigate corruption related to the Biden family .
Bolton ’ s book reveals what the former national security advisor would have likely told Congress over the course of the impeachment proceedings and comes as the question over whether the Senate will call witnesses to offer new trial testimony remains open .
Bolton has said he would comply with a Senate subpoena to testify in the impeachment trial if requested .
House Democrats rushed the impeachment investigations in the House last fall in an effort to force a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , arguing that Trump was an urgent danger to the survival of American democracy .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then undercut the Democrats ’ case for urgency by withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate for a trial to begin by more than four weeks .
Bolton ’ s new claims contradict testimony from multiple witnesses who appeared before the House arguing that the president wanted no quid pro quo with Ukraine over the military aid , which was ultimately released by congressional deadline .
A copy of Bolton ’ s book @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vet the manuscript for classified information in a standard process by former government officials who write books .
The timing of the manuscript ’ s leaked details to the New York Times to coincide with the book ’ s availability for pre-order online raises questions about the allegations ’ credibility .
Bolton ’ s team has denied being behind the leak , blaming the New York Times ’ scoop on those working on the review process in the White House under the National Security Council ’ s Records Management Division .
“ It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those involved in reviewing the manuscript , ” Bolton attorney Charles Cooper said in a statement to the Associated Press .

The New York Times published new impeachment claims by former National Security Advisor John Bolton from Bolton’s new book due in March on Sunday, the same day that Bolton’s book became available for pre-order.
The revelations from Bolton’s book, according to unpublished manuscripts reviewed by the New York Times, are Bolton accusing President Donald Trump of tying Ukraine military aid to political motivated investigations.
BREAKING: John Bolton's book, "The Room Where it Happened," is tentatively slated for release on March 17. The Amazon page just went live https://t.co/dZ1AkZDQ7x — Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) January 27, 2020
This is obviously book promo coordinated with compliant media, yes. But an additional word of skepticism: these *particular* folks have a pattern of overpromising and underachieving with their "bombshell" anti-Trump book roll outs. https://t.co/xid14bUvmG — Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 27, 2020
The Times reports that in the book, Bolton’s timeline of events last year show Trump wanting to continue withholding nearly $400 million in military aid to the European nation until Ukrainian officials pledged to investigate corruption related to the Biden family.
Bolton’s book reveals what the former national security advisor would have likely told Congress over the course of the impeachment proceedings and comes as the question over whether the Senate will call witnesses to offer new trial testimony remains open. Bolton has said he would comply with a Senate subpoena to testify in the impeachment trial if requested.
House Democrats rushed the impeachment investigations in the House last fall in an effort to force a full-chamber vote on the articles by Christmas, arguing that Trump was an urgent danger to the survival of American democracy. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then undercut the Democrats’ case for urgency by withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate for a trial to begin by more than four weeks.
Bolton’s new claims contradict testimony from multiple witnesses who appeared before the House arguing that the president wanted no quid pro quo with Ukraine over the military aid, which was ultimately released by congressional deadline.
A copy of Bolton’s book was provided to White House officials to vet the manuscript for classified information in a standard process by former government officials who write books. The timing of the manuscript’s leaked details to the New York Times to coincide with the book’s availability for pre-order online raises questions about the allegations’ credibility. Bolton’s team has denied being behind the leak, blaming the New York Times’ scoop on those working on the review process in the White House under the National Security Council’s Records Management Division.
“It is clear, regrettably, from The New York Times article published today that the prepublication review process has been corrupted and that information has been disclosed by persons other than those involved in reviewing the manuscript,” Bolton attorney Charles Cooper said in a statement to the Associated Press.


bonginoreport--2020-01-29--Long Island Judge Ignores State’s Bail Reform – Keeps “Menace to Society” in Jail

A sharp rise in citywide crime since 2020 began was ...

A Long Island judge intentionally ignored the state’s controversial bail-reform law and refused to release a defendant he deemed a “menace to society,” The Post has learned.
Nassau County District Judge David McAndrews admitted in court that accused two-time bank robber Romell Nellis wasn’t charged with a “bondable or bail offense” — but still ordered him held on $10,000 cash or $20,000 bond.
“I don’t want you walking around my neighborhood,” McAndrews told Nellis, according to a transcript of the Jan. 9 hearing in Hempstead.
But McAndrew’s principled stand was short-lived, as a higher-level judge promptly reversed his order and released Nellis with an ankle monitor — only to have him cut it off and disappear.
The situation has local law-enforcement officials outraged, with Nassau Police Commissioner Patrick Ryder saying of Nellis, “He’s out there, somewhere, able to commit another crime.”
“It’s insane, when you think who we’re letting out of jail. It has nothing to do with justice reform,” Ryder said. “We’re not protecting the victims, and we’ve swung the pendulum way too far.”
Nellis, 40, was busted Jan. 8 over two bank heists in which he allegedly handed tellers notes that said, “I have a gun!” and demanded “$100s, 50s & 20s.”
The homeless ex-con made off with a total haul of nearly $9,500 from the Dec. 17 caper in West Hempstead and a Dec. 30 heist in Valley Stream, court papers allege.
At the time of the robberies, Nellis was facing sentencing in Central Islip federal court after admitting he violated his supervised release in a 2012 crack-trafficking case for which he served a seven-year prison term.
He was initially scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 16, but his court-appointed lawyer got the proceeding postponed until March 24 because Nellis was “scheduled to enter into an in-patient drug-treatment program,” court records show.
When Nellis was hauled in front of McAndrews a day after his arrest in the bank jobs, the judge acknowledged the third-degree robbery charges were covered by the law that went into effect Jan. 1.
It mandates that defendants charged with most misdemeanors or nonviolent felonies be released without bail.
“Although under [Section] 510.10, this does not qualify as a bondable or bail offense, I find this defendant to be a menace to society,” Andrews said as he ordered Nellis held on bail or bond.
McAndrews — a Republican who’s served on the bench since 2010 — also rejected arguments from Nellis’ Legal Aid lawyer, Diane Clarke, who said that “there are no allegations there was an actual gun used.”
Clarke appealed McAndrews’ move to Nassau County Judge Christopher Quinn, who followed the law and issued an order that released Nellis without bail pending his fitting with a GPS tracking device and another court appearance on Jan. 13, the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office said.
But Nellis failed to show up in court or at a follow-up hearing Jan. 15, when prosecutor Jed Painter said “we received a strap notification that he cut off his bracelet two days ago,” according to a transcript.
He’s still on the lam, according to cops.
McAndrews wouldn’t discuss Nellis’ case, but smiled before telling The Post, “You know I can’t comment.”
Neither Clarke nor Nellis’ federal defense lawyer, Jeffrey Pittell, would comment.


bonginoreport--2020-01-29--Adam Schiff Has Almost Talked More Than The Entire Trump Team Combined

House Democrats leading the impeachment trial in the Senate against President Trump talked for more than twice as long as his legal defense team , with the top critic , Rep. Adam Schiff , speaking 454 % longer than the top White House lawyer .
A quickie breakdown compiled by C-SPAN digital producer Courtney Beesch found that House Democrats used virtually all of the 24 hours they were allotted , while the Trump team used less than half of their time .
“ WH Counsel @ JaySekulow spoke for a total of 91 minutes , with 8 appearances at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RepAdamSchiff spoke for 505 minutes , with 9 appearances at the podium , ” she tweeted .
In fact , Schiff spoke almost as long as the whole Trump team , 505 minutes versus 586 minutes .
The differences were stark and were welcomed by some senators who tried not to nod off during the presentation of the Democrats ' partisan impeachment case .
While the Democrats went long , the Trump team went short , cutting off their final day of defense in part , said one official , because they didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to making their case for conviction .
In the end , the Trump team had 14 hours left over and the Democrats less than two hours , said the C-SPAN review .
Schiff , who led the House Intelligence Committee proceedings of Trump and the allegations around aid to Ukraine and the alleged call for an investigation of the Bidens , ate up about half of the Democratic time .

House Democrats leading the impeachment trial in the Senate against President Trump talked for more than twice as long as his legal defense team, with the top critic, Rep. Adam Schiff, speaking 454% longer than the top White House lawyer.
A quickie breakdown compiled by C-SPAN digital producer Courtney Beesch found that House Democrats used virtually all of the 24 hours they were allotted, while the Trump team used less than half of their time.
“WH Counsel @JaySekulow spoke for a total of 91 minutes, with 8 appearances at the podium. Lead House Impeachment Manager @RepAdamSchiff spoke for 505 minutes, with 9 appearances at the podium,” she tweeted.
In fact, Schiff spoke almost as long as the whole Trump team, 505 minutes versus 586 minutes.
The differences were stark and were welcomed by some senators who tried not to nod off during the presentation of the Democrats' partisan impeachment case.
While the Democrats went long, the Trump team went short, cutting off their final day of defense in part, said one official, because they didn’t think the Democrats came close to making their case for conviction.
In the end, the Trump team had 14 hours left over and the Democrats less than two hours, said the C-SPAN review.
Updated| ICYMI, or didn't have time to watch @cspan, here's a look at the past 6 days in the Senate Impeachment Trial:
- The House Impeachment Managers used nearly all their avail. 24-hours
- The WH Counsel used approx. half their avail 24-hours
- @RepAdamSchiff spoke the most pic.twitter.com/I27SfrsXdc — courtney beesch (@courtneybeesch) January 28, 2020
Schiff, who led the House Intelligence Committee proceedings of Trump and the allegations around aid to Ukraine and the alleged call for an investigation of the Bidens, ate up about half of the Democratic time.


bonginoreport--2020-01-29--MSNBC: Hey, Aren’t Joe Biden’s Crowds Kinda Small?

MSNBC anchor Katy Tur on Monday said former vice president Joe Biden 's lackluster campaign events in Iowa do not bode well for his chances in next week 's caucus .
`` Biden and [ former South Bend mayor Pete ] Buttigieg have basically had this state to themselves along with Yang and a couple others , '' Tur said , noting that the senators in the race are in Washington , D.C. , for the impeachment trial .
`` Why is Buttigieg starting to surge and Biden not surging ?
What is going on with his support ? ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ compared with other contenders in Iowa , such as Sens .
Elizabeth Warren ( D. , Mass . )
and Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) .
`` Over the weekend Warren , Sanders , Buttigieg all got over a thousand people at rallies , Biden got a couple hundred , '' Tur said .
`` What does that mean for his support going forward ? ''
Tur argued that even Sen. Amy Klobuchar ( D. , Minn. ) , who is far behind Biden and others in the polls , drew @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice president .
`` You can hear the excitement from the crowds from Warren , from Sanders , from Klobuchar , and from Buttigieg .
And then you hear Biden 's crowd and it 's just him , it 's just his voice . ''
Tur also compared the size of President Donald Trump ’ s campaign rallies in Iowa to that of Biden 's , saying turnout for Trump 's events should be a concern for Democrats in general .
`` As these candidates are getting a couple hundred , sometimes a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gon na fly in here , and if past is precedent , get 5,000 , 10,000 people here in Des Moines , '' Tur said .
`` What does that say about the Democrats ' chances in November when Donald Trump is drawing crowds that are that big and the Democrats are not ? ''

MSNBC anchor Katy Tur on Monday said former vice president Joe Biden's lackluster campaign events in Iowa do not bode well for his chances in next week's caucus.
"Biden and [former South Bend mayor Pete] Buttigieg have basically had this state to themselves along with Yang and a couple others," Tur said, noting that the senators in the race are in Washington, D.C., for the impeachment trial. "Why is Buttigieg starting to surge and Biden not surging? What is going on with his support?"
Tur said Biden's numbers were paltry compared with other contenders in Iowa, such as Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.).
"Over the weekend Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg all got over a thousand people at rallies, Biden got a couple hundred," Tur said. "What does that mean for his support going forward?"
Tur argued that even Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.), who is far behind Biden and others in the polls, drew more enthusiasm at rallies than the former vice president.
"You can hear the excitement from the crowds from Warren, from Sanders, from Klobuchar, and from Buttigieg. And then you hear Biden's crowd and it's just him, it's just his voice."
Tur also compared the size of President Donald Trump’s campaign rallies in Iowa to that of Biden's, saying turnout for Trump's events should be a concern for Democrats in general.
"As these candidates are getting a couple hundred, sometimes a thousand people, [Trump] is gonna fly in here, and if past is precedent, get 5,000, 10,000 people here in Des Moines," Tur said. "What does that say about the Democrats' chances in November when Donald Trump is drawing crowds that are that big and the Democrats are not?"


bonginoreport--2020-01-28--John Durham Appoints New Chief to U.S. Attorney’s Office Criminal Division

Top prosecutor John H. Durham , the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut charged with leading the investigation into the origins of the FBI probe into President Donald Trump ’ s campaign , announced Monday that he has appointed a new Chief to serve in the U.S. Attorney ’ s Office Criminal Division .
Sarah P. Karwan will succeed William J. Nardini , who is currently serving as a U.S .
Circuit Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit , the DOJ press release stated .
“ I am thrilled that Sarah Karwan will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Durham .
“ During her more than 12 years as an AUSA , Sarah has done it all , prosecuting violent criminals , drug traffickers , financial fraudsters , corrupt public officials , and a wide variety of other wrongdoers .
Given the breadth of her experience and her exceptional lawyering skills , she certainly will be a standout as our new Criminal Chief.
” Durham ’ s team is reported to be small and very little has surfaced regarding what evidence has been collected in his probe , which was upgraded to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a criminal investigation Durham has the ability to impanel a grand jury and serve indictments .
His probe is focused on senior FBI officials and in October , 2019 the Department of Justice announced the expansive nature of Durham ’ s investigation , stating that the investigation had expanded to overseas intelligence agencies , as well as the CIA .
Attorney General William Barr , who appointed Durham , said in an interview with NBC in December , that Durham “ should spend just as much attention on the post-election period ” noting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the origins of the investigation .
Barr said he asked Durham to look at the post Trump election because “ of some of the stuff that Horowitz has uncovered which to me is inexplicable.
” Last month , after DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz released his report on the FBI ’ s handling of the Trump probe and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants issued on short term campaign volunteer Carter Page , Durham issued a rare statement .
“ Based on the evidence collected to date , and while our investigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report ’ s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened , ” said Durham , hinting that his team may have uncovered evidence that differentiated with some of Horowitz ’ s findings .
Horowitz revealed in his lengthy report that FBI officials involved in the warrant , to include FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith , omitted critical information on Page and altered emails used to obtain the warrant to spy on the campaign volunteer .
The omission was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FBI that Page was a CIA asset and had cooperated with the agency .
SaraACarter.com first reported that Durham ’ s investigation had also expanded to the Department of Defense ’ s Office of Net Assessment , according to sources with knowledge of the investigation .
More importantly , Durham is looking at multiple contracts that were given to FBI informant Stefan Halper , the Cambridge professor who had contact with three Trump campaign officials in 2016 .
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley sent a letter last week to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James Baker , requesting detailed information on contracts provided Halper .
The expansive nature of Grassley ’ s investigation is significant and coincides – but is separate – with Durham ’ s criminal probe into the matter .
Durham , who has made few comments during his investigation , however , touted Karwan ’ s appointment .
He described her as a prosecutor who has “ done it all.
” Karwan joined the attorney ’ s Office in 2007 and , “ during her time as an Assistant U.S. Attorney , has prosecuted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” stated the press release .
She “ recently has served as Chief of the District ’ s Major Crimes Unit , supervising the prosecution of cases involving immigration , human trafficking and child exploitation , civil rights and hate crimes , government program fraud , and environmental crimes.
” Further , she served as Deputy Chief of the District ’ s Financial Fraud and Public Corruption Unit , and as an Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Force ( “ OCDETF ” ) attorney .

War on drugs: agents seized enough to kill U.S. population 19 times
The war on drugs being fought on a daily basis at our borders has been able to be quantified with...