Politics

Virginia Kruta | Associate Editor

Democratic New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attacked the GOP Saturday — for calling a vote on the Green New Deal that she proposed.

Calling it a “bluff-vote” designed to help Republicans campaign, the freshman Democrat tweeted, “The GOP’s whole game of wasting votes in Congress to target others ‘on the record’, for leg they have no intent to pass, is a disgrace.”

Many were quick to respond, however, that it seemed odd for someone to propose legislation at all if she didn’t actually want people to vote on it.

And then a few noted that it was doubly odd that Ocasio-Cortez wouldn’t want the specific legislation voted on — especially since she has referred to the climate fight as her generation’s “World War II” and has claimed that there’s 12 years left to live. (RELATED: Ocasio-Cortez Sells Green New Deal To Democrats As WWII Scale Effort)

Follow Virginia on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Virginia Kruta | Associate Editor

Former Vice President Joe Biden and failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams have not hatched “a grand plan” to announce a joint ticket for 2020, according to their respective camps.

Rumors circulated earlier in the week that Biden, who has not officially declared a bid for the 2020 Democratic nomination, might come out of the gate with his running mate already chosen: Abrams.

But by Friday afternoon, both camps had responded to the reports — in the negative. (RELATED: Biden Says He’s Almost All In On 2020, But Worries About Trump’s Take No Prisoners Approach)

Bill Russo, Biden’s communications director, tweeted that the former VP certainly has great respect for the failed Georgia gubernatorial candidate — “but these rumors about discussions on a pre-cooked ticket are false, plain and simple.”

Abrams’ former campaign manager, Lauren Groh-Wargo, admitted that the Georgia Democrat had met with Biden but added quickly, “There was no grand plan hatched and no additional conversations between the two of them or our teams since.”

Follow Virginia on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Scott Morefield | Reporter

Calls to abolish the electoral college are all the rage these days, but they aren’t new. One such attempt in 1956 was thwarted with the help of a Democratic senator from Massachusetts — a young John F. Kennedy.

The Senate was debating Senate Joint Resolution 31 on March 20, 1956, a “follow-up to what was originally labeled the Lodge-Gossett proposal,” author and law professor Robert Hardaway told The Daily Caller.

The bill was a proposal for a Constitutional amendment that would have allocated electoral votes, as Tennessee Democratic Senator Estes Kefauver described it, “whereby the federal vote of a state would be divided in proportion to the popular vote,” or what would have essentially been a national popular vote.

Responding to a question from Texas Senator Price Daniel during floor debate, Kennedy issued a strong response against the proposal:

But in answer to the Senator’s question, I maintain that on practical grounds the people in the smaller States, would be deprived of their electoral vote on the basis put by the Senator.

Mr. President, Senate Joint Resolution 31, concerning which there has been little, if any, public interest or knowledge, constitutes one of the most far-reaching, and I believe mistaken-schemes ever proposed to alter the American constitutional system. No one knows with any certainty what will happen if our electoral system is totally revamped as proposed by Senate Joint Resolution 31 and the various amendments which will be offered to it. Today, we have a clearly Federal system of electing our President, under which the States act as units. Today, we have the two-party system, under which third parties and splinter parties are effectively discouraged from playing more than a negligible role. Today, we have a system which in all but one instance throughout our history has given us presidents elected by a plurality of the popular vote …

… And today we have an electoral vote system which gives both large States and small States certain advantages and disadvantages that offset each other.

Now it is proposed that we change all this. What the effects of these various changes will be on the Federal system, the two-party system, the popular plurality system, and the large-State-small-State checks and balances system, no one knows. Nevertheless, it is proposed to exchange this system-under which we have, on the whole, obtained able Presidents capable of meeting the increased demands upon our Executive-for an unknown, untried, but obviously precarious system which was abandoned in this country long ago, which previous Congresses have rejected, and which has been thoroughly discredited in Europe.

Picture taken 10 December 1960 showing John F. Kennedy and his wife Jacqueline holding their son John during the christening ceremony at the chapel of Georgetown university. Researchers found John F. Kennedy Jr body 21 July 1999 and wreckage from the plane he was piloting when it crashed in the Atlantic Ocean. / AFP PHOTO / SAM SCHULMAN (Photo credit should read SAM SCHULMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Picture taken 10 December 1960 showing John F. Kennedy and his wife Jacqueline holding their son John during the christening ceremony at the chapel of Georgetown university. Researchers found John F. Kennedy Jr body 21 July 1999 and wreckage from the plane he was piloting when it crashed in the Atlantic Ocean. (SAM SCHULMAN/AFP/Getty Images)

Hardaway, a law professor at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and the author of the soon-to-be-released book “Saving the Electoral College: Why the National Popular Vote Would Undermine Democracy,” compared the French elections in 2017, when the French “were given the choice between two candidates opposed by the vast majority of French voters,” to what Democrats are proposing for the United States. Hardaway argued that Ross Perot could have conceivably won the 1992 election were it based on popular vote alone. (RELATED: Presidential Historian Doug Wead Explains Why The Founders Set Up The Electoral College)

“Consider what would have occurred had the U.S. presidential election been held in May of 1992,” Hardaway wrote in a paper submitted to The Daily Caller. “Polls showed that Perot would win 33 percent of a hypothetical ‘popular vote,’ Bush 28 percent, and Clinton 24 percent, with the rest undecided or for fringe  candidates. Under NPVIC, Perot would have been elected outright since it doesn’t even provide for a ‘run-off.’”

“In the end, the attempts to abolish the Electoral College failed once the wisdom of John Kennedy’s words were heeded,” Hardaway continued. “Had it not been for the ‘Grand Compromise’ which induced the smaller states to join the union with the Article V guarantee that they could not be deprived their equal suffrage in the Senate upon which their presidential voting power was based, the United States would never have been formed. Indeed, until that guarantee was included in the Constitution, the thirteen colonies were already breaking up into several different nation ‘states,’ leading the advisors to King George to gloat that America was falling apart and would soon ‘openly concert measures for entering into something like their former connections to Great Britain.’”

Follow Scott on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

David Krayden | Ottawa Bureau Chief

OTTAWA, CANADA — Karl Rove said Friday he’s not surprised that the Mueller report has apparently found no evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia.

The former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush was speaking to 2,000 people at the Manning Networking Conference that brings together Canada’s conservative politicians, political action committees and opinion leaders every year.

Karl Rove answers questions from the crowd at the Manning Networking Conference in Ottawa, Canada on March 22, 2019. Dailiy Caller photo by Janet Krayden

Karl Rove answers questions from the crowd at the Manning Networking Conference in Ottawa, Canada on March 22, 2019. The Daily Caller photo by Janet Krayden

Rove said if there had been any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, we would have known about it long before Robert Mueller, whom Rove described as being a “straight arrow.” (RELATED: White House Reacts To Mueller Report Release)

“Every campaign leaks … no campaign in my experience has leaked worse than the Donald Trump campaign: 2016 was like if you wanted to know who had gone to the restroom at 11 o’clock in the morning, somebody would tell you,” Rove quipped.

Rove, who is known as “The Architect” for having masterminded Bush’s election victories, reserved his harshest words for former FBI Director James Comey.

Former FBI director James Comey arrives at the Irish Film Institute for for a public interview in Dublin, Ireland June 22, 2018. REUTERS/Clodagh Kilcoyne

Former FBI director James Comey arrives at the Irish Film Institute for for a public interview in Dublin, Ireland June 22, 2018. REUTERS/Clodagh Kilcoyne

“Under U.S. law, [Comey] had no authority whatsoever to make the decision not to indict Hillary Clinton … He’s the head of the FBI. His job is to investigate and to make what’s called ‘a referral’ to the main Justice Department. He decided not to. Why? Because the attorney general of the United States was compromised by having met with William Jefferson Clinton on the tarmac in Phoenix. Well, fine. He should have referred it to the Justice Department. She should have said ‘I recuse myself.’”

Rove added that having decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, there was no point in then describing her email habits as “extremely careless.” (RELATED: New Emails Revealed By Judicial Watch Seem To Show More Classified Documents On Clinton’s Private Server)

When asked if he thinks the Mueller report will still hurt Trump’s chances for re-election, Rove said the ball is in the president’s court.

“I think it all depends upon how Trump reacts,” he said, suggesting that the chief executive should focus on his successful fiscal policies.

”Our economy is going to beat the band. We’ve got low unemployment, we’ve got wages growing faster than the economy, we’ve got more job openings than we’ve got job seekers, we’ve got the lowest unemployment rates for African-Americans since we began keeping the records by race in 1948 … ”

Rove said Trump has proven his economic critics wrong. “I love all these idiots who served in the previous administration who said, ‘Oh no, conservative economics will never achieve growth of three percent’… all these smart people who said, ‘That’s a fairy tale; it’s not going to happen.’”

“Well, welcome to fairytale land.”

Follow David on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Virginia Kruta | Associate Editor

Special counsel Robert Mueller handed his report off to Attorney General William Barr on Friday, just over four months after President Donald Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

When Sessions was fired, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was quick to claim that the president’s underlying motive was to get to Mueller — possibly even to prematurely terminate the investigation.

And Pelosi was far from alone in her claim. (RELATED: Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez Join Forces To Threaten Dems Who Dare To Vote With GOP)

Some also argued that it was an intentional move to appoint Barr, who they also feared would put a stop to the investigation.

After all that, it appears that despite the warnings that came raining down, Mueller was allowed to complete his investigation on his own terms and in his own time.

Barr has suggested that preliminary conclusions could be announced publicly as early as the weekend.

Follow Virginia on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Scott Morefield | Reporter

Rep. Eric Swalwell reacted on Friday to news of the end of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation minus any additional indictments of President Donald Trump or anyone else connected to the Trump administration, campaign, or transition team.

Appearing on CNN’s “The Situation Room With Wolf Blitzer,” the California Democrat expressed his desire to “hear from Bob Mueller” himself, as well as the belief that the president will still have “indictments waiting for him” when he leaves office.

WATCH:

“It’s my personal view that the report will not be fully accepted by the American people until we hear from Bob Mueller,” Swalwell said.

After noting the “dozens of indictments” produced already and the work that has been “farmed off to other offices like the Southern District of New York,” Swalwell stated he would “accept the Mueller report if I hear it from Mr. Mueller, because I have respect for the rule as I know my colleagues do.”

“Do you accept the current Justice Department guideline that a sitting president of the United States cannot be indicted?” Blitzer asked. (RELATED: Dana Loesch Question On Gun Control Stops Eric Swalwell In His Tracks)

That’s their guidelines. I don’t accept that a president should escape criminal liability by being re-elected or running out the statute of limitations. What we will do, and we are working on this, we will put in place a law in Congress, and hopefully the Senate passes it too, which would say that the statute would not run if a president is not indicted because of DOJ policy. I don’t see how he does not have indictments waiting for him considering that he is individual one and considering the conduct that Michael Cohen talked about when he came to Congress and testified.

Follow Scott on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Democratic California Rep. Ted Lieu said during a Friday night appearance on “Hardball with Chris Matthews” that he doesn’t think there is currently enough evidence to impeach President Donald Trump.

Lieu’s comments came hours after special counsel Robert Mueller signaled the end of his investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.

WATCH:

“What’s the next step? I mean you’ve got the Congress decides on impeachment. The Speaker said it’s off the table. Is it back on the table or still off the table? Where’s impeachment? It’s now March, late March. Is it something that’s going to come up in the next couple months or not?” Matthews asked.

“The mission of special counsel Mueller is fairly narrow, right? He’s looking at whether he can get enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed a federal crime,” Lieu answered. “The committees in Congress have a much broader mission. We want to know, ‘Did Donald Trump, his family or associates commit any crime, whether or not it was related to Russia? Second, did they engage in any ethical misconduct whether or not it rose to the level of a crime?’”

He continued, “Third, how to keep this from happening again and how to explain it to the American people? So our investigations are going to continue. Based on what we find, we’ll have a conversation with the American people and decide should we go forward or not with impeachment but we don’t have enough of a record to decide that question yet.”

Matthews followed up, “What’s winning right now? The case for impeachment or the case against it? What’s winning as of tonight?”

“I don’t think we have enough facts to go forward with impeachment,” Lieu concluded.

The special counsel submitted the report to Attorney General William Barr on Friday evening. It is now up to Barr to determine what lawmakers will see and when. He said he could share the report with lawmakers as soon as this weekend. (RELATED: Mueller Expected To Make Moves After The Midterms — Here’s What He Could Do)

The special counsel’s office indicted or obtained guilty pleas from 34 individuals throughout the course of the investigation, which began in May of 2017. Six Trump associates were either indicted or pleaded guilty in the probe; however, none faced charges related to conspiracy with Russia. Mueller reportedly did not recommend any additional amendments prior to the conclusion of the investigation.

Follow Mike on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Amber Athey | White House Correspondent

  • Jess Ravich, a senior employee at major investment firm TCW Group, resigned from his position on TCW’s board after his “unprofessional communications” with a subordinate were uncovered. 
  • Ravich has donated tens of thousands of dollars to Democrats, including $10,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and $50,000 to the Democratic National Committee. 
  • Democrats who received money from Ravich did not respond when asked if they would consider returning the money or donating it to women’s groups. 

Democrats declined to say Thursday if they would return contributions from a wealthy donor who recently resigned from the board of an asset management firm amid allegations of sexual misconduct.

Jess Ravich, a former board member of Los Angeles-based TCW Group, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to Democratic campaigns and committees over the years.

A January 2018 lawsuit against Ravich and TCW alleges that Ravich repeatedly coerced his employee, Sara Tirschwell, into sex in exchange for support of her investment fund. Tirschwell says that when she complained about the behavior, TCW fired her in retaliation.

“[Ravich] repeatedly coerced [Tirschwell] into sex, implicitly threatening that if she rejected his advances, TCW would deprive her of resources and investor access that were essential to her successfully building out the Distressed Fund,” the suit claims.

Ravich resigned from his position on TCW’s board in October 2018 after the company learned of “unprofessional communications” he had with Tirschwell, but he remains a senior-level employee.

Since 1998, Ravich has contributed to the following Democratic campaigns and committees:

  • Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR): $6300 (1998-2015)
  • Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA): $1000 (2012)
  • Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee: $10,000 (2008)
  • Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE): $2000 (2006)
  • Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee: $25,000 (2000)
  • Democratic National Committee: $50,000 (2000)

The Daily Caller reached out to the offices for Sens. Wyden, Casey, and Carper, as well as the DSCC, DCCC, and DNC to inquire if they would return the donations from Ravich. None of them responded.

In October 2018, around the same time Ravich stepped down from the TCW board, Sen. Wyden spoke of the “enormous pain” inflicted on sexual assault and harassment survivors by the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

“I believe Dr. Ford when she says she was assaulted in that room in 1982,” Wyden said of the uncorroborated allegation of sexual assault against Kavanaugh. “I believe Dr. Ford when she says her attackers locked the door, a hand was pressed over her mouth, and she feared she might die. I believe her when she says she remembers them laughing.” (RELATED: Senate Judiciary Finds ‘No Evidence’ To Support Blasey Ford Allegation)

Sen. Casey similarly said, “I believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.”

Democrats slammed Republicans in the aftermath of Kavanaugh’s confirmation, citing Ford’s allegation of sexual assault.

The DCCC bragged about the money they were able to raise off of the accusations against Kavanaugh, but members of the party have refused to answer questions about the money they’ve received from Ravich — even as TCW admits Ravich had “unprofessional communications” with his accuser and removed him from its board.

Ravich has also thrown a significant amount of cash to the Clinton Foundation; he is listed on the organization’s website as a donor in the $50,001 to $100,000 contribution range. Last March, the Clinton Foundation told the Caller that they would not return the donations and refused to say if the nonprofit condemned Ravich’s alleged misconduct. (EXCLUSIVE: Clinton Foundation Won’t Return Donations From Accused Sexual Harasser)

“Donations, these included, have been spent helping people by fighting childhood obesity and HIV/AIDS, combating climate change and empowering girls and women,” the Clinton Foundation said at the time.

 Follow Amber on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

President Donald Trump never sat down for a formal interview with special counsel Robert Mueller prior to the Friday conclusion of the investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, according to reports.

Trump never sat down with the special counsel because his lawyers prevented it and Mueller never subpoenaed the president, The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman reported.

This investigation was closed without Trump ever sitting for a formal interview. His lawyers did not want him to and Mueller never sought a fight over subpoenaing the president. Written answers was what the Mueller team got.

“The President today answered written questions submitted by the special counsel’s office,” Trump attorney Jay Sekulow said in a statement to reporters in November. “The questions presented dealt with issues regarding the Russia-related topics of the inquiry. The President responded in writing.”

Mueller submitted his report of the Russia investigation to Attorney General William Barr on Friday. It is now up to Barr to determine what lawmakers will see and when. He has said that he should share the report with lawmakers as soon as this weekend. (RELATED: Mueller Expected To Make Moves After The Midterms — Here’s What He Could Do)

“The next steps are up to Attorney General Barr, and we look forward to the process taking its course. The White House has not received or been briefed on the Special Counsel’s report,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said minutes after Barr revealed that he had received the report. (RELATED: The Mueller Investigation Is Over)

The special counsel’s office indicted or obtained guilty pleas from 34 individuals during the investigation, which began in May of 2017. Six Trump associates were either indicted or pleaded guilty in the probe, though none faced charges related to conspiracy with Russia. Mueller reportedly did not recommend any additional amendments prior to the conclusion of the investigation.

Follow Mike on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

Leaders on Capitol Hill responded Friday to special counsel Robert Mueller’s delivery of his report related to Russia’s interference in the 2016 election to Attorney General Bill Barr.

Barr sent a letter to Capitol Hill committee chairmen in both chambers, informing them that the report was submitted to the Justice Department. (RELATED: Breaking: Mueller Submits Report To Justice Department)

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement he welcomed that the announcement from the special counsel has finally completed his investigation into Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 elections.”

He continued, “Many Republicans have long believed that Russia poses a significant threat to American interests. I hope the special counsel’s report will help inform and improve our efforts to protect our democracy.”

McConnell said Barr will now need time to review the report, adding, “The attorney general has said he intends to provide as much information as possible. As I have said previously, I sincerely hope he will do so as soon as he can, and with as much openness and transparency as possible.”

Little is known about the contents of the report that was two years in the making and led to the indictment or guilty plea of six Trump associates. However, not one indictment was related to conspiracy or collusion with Russians.

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump meets with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (L), U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (2nd R), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (R) and other congressional leaders in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, U.S., September 6, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

A senior Justice Department official told Fox News that the special counsel has not recommended any further indictments.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called for the complete public release of the report in a joint statement:

Now that special counsel Mueller has submitted his report to the Attorney General, it is imperative for Mr. Barr to make the full report public and provide its underlying documentation and findings to Congress.

Attorney General Barr must not give President Trump, his lawyers or his staff any ‘sneak preview’ of Special Counsel Mueller’s findings or evidence, and the White House must not be allowed to interfere in decisions about what parts of those findings or evidence are made public.

The Special Counsel’s investigation focused on questions that go to the integrity of our democracy itself: whether foreign powers corruptly interfered in our elections, and whether unlawful means were used to hinder that investigation. The American people have a right to the truth. The watchword is transparency.

Although the Mueller investigation has ended, Democrats have vowed to continue their own investigations of Trump from the Judiciary Committee and Oversight Committee in the lower chamber. Additionally, Democrats are counting on investigations of the president and his allies from the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York.

Follow Kerry on Twitter

Kerry Picket is a host on SiriusXM Patriot 125

Source: The Daily Caller


Current track

Title

Artist