Mediaite
"Jim Jordan Says New Testimony Shows Blinken, Biden Camp Behind ‘Infamous’ Letter Smearing Hunter Biden Laptop Story as Disinfo"
Story by Isaac Schorr
21 APRIL 2023
New testimony released by House GOP leaders sheds light on the role that Joe Biden’s presidential campaign played in smearing the Hunter Biden laptop story as Russian disinformation.
In an interview with the committee, Michael Morell, the former deputy director of the CIA, testified that he signed onto a letter panning the story — which was published by the New York Post on October 14, 2020 — as likely part of a disinformation operation only after being reached out to by Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who was then serving as an advisor to the Biden campaign.
During the interview, Morell was asked if he intended on writing or signing onto any statement about the story prior to his call with Blinken.
When he was asked in a follow-up if the call “triggered” such an intention, Morell replied in the affirmative.
The letter in question was used by numerous media sources and cited by Biden himself during a presidential debate not only as evidence that the contents of the Post story were false, but as evidence that the Russian government was aiding Donald Trump in his reelection bid.
Further reporting has confirmed that the materials reported on by the Post were in fact genuine.
In a communique addressed to Blinken, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner (R-OH) also alleged that the Biden campaign “helped to strategize about the public release of the statement”:
Morrell testified that he sent an email telling Nick Shapiro, former Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor to the Director of the CIA John Brennan, that the Biden campaign wanted the statement to go to a particular reporter at the Washington Post first and that he should send the statement to the campaign when he sent the letter to the reporter.
Morell also testified that he had two intents in signing the letter, with one being “to share our concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this issue” and the other being to “help Vice President Biden.”
After being pressed about why he wanted to help Biden, Morell replied “Because I wanted him to win the election.”
Jordan and Turner are asking Blinken to:
• Identify all people with whom you communicated about the inception, drafting, editing, signing, publishing, or promotion of the “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” dated October 19, 2020, during the period October 14, 2020, to November 24, 2020; and
• Produce all documents and communications referring or relating to the “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” dated October 19, 2020, sent or received between October 14, 2020, and November 24, 2020.
“It is apparent that the Biden campaign played an active role in the origins of the public statement, which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election.” asserted the two chairmen.
“Based on the information we have obtained to date, we believe that you possess material that would advance our oversight and inform potential legislative reforms.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 1fc6&ei=19
THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
REUTERS
"Michael Cohen seeks damages from Trump, U.S. over prison return"
By Karen Freifeld
April 24, 2023
April 24 (Reuters) - Michael Cohen on Monday asked a U.S. appeals court to revive his lawsuit against Donald Trump and other government officials, seeking damages for sending him back to prison in retaliation for publishing a tell-all memoir criticizing the former U.S. president.
Lawyers for Cohen said in a filing with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan that the judiciary has a responsibility to remediate the harm done by Trump and his subordinates.
"The head of the executive branch wielded his power to have one of his critics silenced, thrown back into prison, and kept in conditions dangerous to his health," Cohen's lawyers wrote.
"Where such a grievous injury is done to a citizen's rights and to the nation's rule of law, there must be a remedy."
Cohen is appealing U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman's dismissal of his lawsuit in November.
Liman said that while his decision did "violence" to Cohen's constitutional rights, Cohen was not entitled to damages under U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
Alina Habba, a lawyer for Trump, said the lower court was correct when it dismissed Cohen's "meritless" case.
Cohen, Trump's former lawyer and fixer, was sentenced to three years in prison in 2018 after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations and other crimes.
He was released in May 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but thrown back in prison two months later after questioning an agreement that barred the book's publication, communicating with the media and social media.
Another judge ordered Cohen's release 16 days later, finding he had been targeted with retaliation.
The book, "Disloyal: A Memoir" topped the New York Times' hardcover nonfiction best-seller list in September 2020.
Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr and various prison officials are also defendants in Cohen's lawsuit.
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan, which represented the other defendants, declined to comment.
Cohen is a central witness in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's criminal case against Trump over a $130,000 hush money payment to silence porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump.
Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts, and said the encounter with Daniels never happened.
He is also suing Cohen for $500 million in damages in federal court in Miami, accusing him of "spreading falsehoods" and failing to keep attorney-client communications confidential.
Reporting by Karen Freifeld; Additional reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/michae ... 023-04-24/
"Michael Cohen seeks damages from Trump, U.S. over prison return"
By Karen Freifeld
April 24, 2023
April 24 (Reuters) - Michael Cohen on Monday asked a U.S. appeals court to revive his lawsuit against Donald Trump and other government officials, seeking damages for sending him back to prison in retaliation for publishing a tell-all memoir criticizing the former U.S. president.
Lawyers for Cohen said in a filing with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan that the judiciary has a responsibility to remediate the harm done by Trump and his subordinates.
"The head of the executive branch wielded his power to have one of his critics silenced, thrown back into prison, and kept in conditions dangerous to his health," Cohen's lawyers wrote.
"Where such a grievous injury is done to a citizen's rights and to the nation's rule of law, there must be a remedy."
Cohen is appealing U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman's dismissal of his lawsuit in November.
Liman said that while his decision did "violence" to Cohen's constitutional rights, Cohen was not entitled to damages under U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
Alina Habba, a lawyer for Trump, said the lower court was correct when it dismissed Cohen's "meritless" case.
Cohen, Trump's former lawyer and fixer, was sentenced to three years in prison in 2018 after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations and other crimes.
He was released in May 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but thrown back in prison two months later after questioning an agreement that barred the book's publication, communicating with the media and social media.
Another judge ordered Cohen's release 16 days later, finding he had been targeted with retaliation.
The book, "Disloyal: A Memoir" topped the New York Times' hardcover nonfiction best-seller list in September 2020.
Former U.S. Attorney General William Barr and various prison officials are also defendants in Cohen's lawsuit.
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan, which represented the other defendants, declined to comment.
Cohen is a central witness in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's criminal case against Trump over a $130,000 hush money payment to silence porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump.
Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts, and said the encounter with Daniels never happened.
He is also suing Cohen for $500 million in damages in federal court in Miami, accusing him of "spreading falsehoods" and failing to keep attorney-client communications confidential.
Reporting by Karen Freifeld; Additional reporting by Jonathan Stempel; Editing by Jonathan Oatis
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/michae ... 023-04-24/
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
The Daily Caller
"FBI Admits Durham Report Is Right"
Story by Brianna Lyman
15 MAY 2023
The FBI made a tacit admission Monday to the findings of the Durham Report showing the agency acted improperly when investigating former President Donald Trump and the alleged Russian collusion.
Special Counsel John Durham found the FBI used “uncorroborated intelligence” when it launched its investigation into Trump ahead of the 2016 election.
The report also found agents failed to maintain “strict fidelity to the law” throughout its investigation.
The FBI responded shortly after its release, acknowledging the errors made in 2016, which concedes the findings of the Durham report are accurate.
“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time."
"Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented,” the statement reads.
“This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”
Durham’s report also found that “neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement” of the investigation.
“Our investigation determined that the Crossfire Hurricane investigators did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations contained in the Steele reporting,” the report found.
Durham was appointed by then-Attorney General Bill Barr in 2020 to investigate the investigation of Crossfire Hurricane.
Crossfire Hurricane later determined there was no evidence of criminal conspiracy between any Trump campaign officials and operatives of the Russian government.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... eb86&ei=26
"FBI Admits Durham Report Is Right"
Story by Brianna Lyman
15 MAY 2023
The FBI made a tacit admission Monday to the findings of the Durham Report showing the agency acted improperly when investigating former President Donald Trump and the alleged Russian collusion.
Special Counsel John Durham found the FBI used “uncorroborated intelligence” when it launched its investigation into Trump ahead of the 2016 election.
The report also found agents failed to maintain “strict fidelity to the law” throughout its investigation.
The FBI responded shortly after its release, acknowledging the errors made in 2016, which concedes the findings of the Durham report are accurate.
“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time."
"Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented,” the statement reads.
“This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”
Durham’s report also found that “neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement” of the investigation.
“Our investigation determined that the Crossfire Hurricane investigators did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations contained in the Steele reporting,” the report found.
Durham was appointed by then-Attorney General Bill Barr in 2020 to investigate the investigation of Crossfire Hurricane.
Crossfire Hurricane later determined there was no evidence of criminal conspiracy between any Trump campaign officials and operatives of the Russian government.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... eb86&ei=26
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
The Daily Caller
"FBI Ignored Alleged Clinton Campaign Election Meddling Plan After CIA Briefed Obama And Biden, Durham Report Says"
Story by Diana Glebova
16 MAY 2023
The FBI didn’t open any inquiry into an alleged Hillary Clinton campaign election interference plan even after the CIA director briefed then-president Barack Obama and other senior administration officials, Special Counsel John Durham’s report noted.
The FBI received Russian intelligence analysis in July 2016 alleging that Clinton’s campaign cooked up a scheme to divert attention away from “her use of a private email server,” the Durham report stated.
The alleged scheme, dubbed the “Clinton Plan,” showed that the Clinton campaign “had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal” against Trump “by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee,” the Durham report reads.
The intelligence community didn’t know the accuracy of the Russian intelligence, but the findings were notable enough for then-CIA Director John Brennan to inform the Obama administration “within days” of learning about it.
Brennan briefed President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey about the Clinton campaign’s plan, the Durham report says.
The findings also prompted the CIA to send “a formal written referral memorandum” to Comey and “the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBl’s Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action.”
In contrast to the speed at which the FBI opened a full investigation into Trump “on raw, uncorroborated information,” the FBI “never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information,” Durham wrote.
Durham’s findings, published Monday, discredited the FBI’s approach to how it handled its investigation into Trump’s alleged contact with the Russian government during the 2016 election.
Attorney General Bill Barr appointed Durham in 2019 to investigate the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s investigation into Trump.
Durham concluded that Crossfire Hurricane “reflected a noticeable departure” for how the bureau handled cases to Clinton, and said the FBI began their investigation of Trump without appearing “to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement.”
He also found that the FBI had a “predisposition to investigate Trump,” and did not move with “considerable caution,” as it did with cases related to Clinton.
The FBI responded to the findings of the Durham report, saying the bureau underwent reforms after the launch of Crossfire Hurricane.
“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time,” the FBI said in a statement.
“Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented."
"This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 56d7&ei=32
"FBI Ignored Alleged Clinton Campaign Election Meddling Plan After CIA Briefed Obama And Biden, Durham Report Says"
Story by Diana Glebova
16 MAY 2023
The FBI didn’t open any inquiry into an alleged Hillary Clinton campaign election interference plan even after the CIA director briefed then-president Barack Obama and other senior administration officials, Special Counsel John Durham’s report noted.
The FBI received Russian intelligence analysis in July 2016 alleging that Clinton’s campaign cooked up a scheme to divert attention away from “her use of a private email server,” the Durham report stated.
The alleged scheme, dubbed the “Clinton Plan,” showed that the Clinton campaign “had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal” against Trump “by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee,” the Durham report reads.
The intelligence community didn’t know the accuracy of the Russian intelligence, but the findings were notable enough for then-CIA Director John Brennan to inform the Obama administration “within days” of learning about it.
Brennan briefed President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and FBI Director James Comey about the Clinton campaign’s plan, the Durham report says.
The findings also prompted the CIA to send “a formal written referral memorandum” to Comey and “the Deputy Assistant Director of the FBl’s Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action.”
In contrast to the speed at which the FBI opened a full investigation into Trump “on raw, uncorroborated information,” the FBI “never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information,” Durham wrote.
Durham’s findings, published Monday, discredited the FBI’s approach to how it handled its investigation into Trump’s alleged contact with the Russian government during the 2016 election.
Attorney General Bill Barr appointed Durham in 2019 to investigate the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s investigation into Trump.
Durham concluded that Crossfire Hurricane “reflected a noticeable departure” for how the bureau handled cases to Clinton, and said the FBI began their investigation of Trump without appearing “to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement.”
He also found that the FBI had a “predisposition to investigate Trump,” and did not move with “considerable caution,” as it did with cases related to Clinton.
The FBI responded to the findings of the Durham report, saying the bureau underwent reforms after the launch of Crossfire Hurricane.
“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time,” the FBI said in a statement.
“Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented."
"This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 56d7&ei=32
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
Knewz
"FBI Sabotaged THREE Investigations into Clinton Foundation, According to Conservative Investigator"
Story by Dave Malyon
18 MAY 2023
John Durham's recent report is making waves as it reveals evidence that the FBI stopped investigations into the Clinton Foundation three times during the election year of 2016.
Furthermore, it has been alleged that the FBI provided the Clinton campaign favorable treatment, while rapidly advancing investigations into Donald Trump's campaign.
One of these investigations revolved around a $2,700 contribution from a Confidential Human Source (CHS) to the Clinton campaign, which came from a foreign source and was in violation of federal law.
When tipped off the FBI instructed the CHS to “NOT attend any more campaign events, set up meetings, or anything else relating to [Clinton’s] campaign."
"We need to keep you completely away from that situation."
"I don’t know all the details, but it’s for your own protection.”
This was allegedly in fear of how Hillary Clinton would react should she become elected president.
The third case uncovered by Durham concerned large monetary contributions made to a non-profit, controlled by a federal public official, in exchange for government action and/or influence.
Two days ago Patrick Byrne, an American businessman and founder of Overstock.com, posted a Self implicating Tweet saying: “Yep."
"This is the $18 million bribe to Hillary.”
This was in response to FOOL NELSON’s accusation: “I might've mixed up the countries, but pretty sure Byrne is CHS-A, nice bribe Patrick, allegedly!”
Reacting to the revelations, lawyer and political commentator Techno Fog commented: "Durham's scope included the FBI investigations 'directed' at the Hillary Clinton campaign."
"It seems the purpose of that review was to assess and compare the favorable treatment received by Clinton to the targeting of Trump."
These findings have raised serious questions as to the impartiality of the FBI and the true motives of their investigations and it plays into the ongoing allegations of the FBI becoming a weaponized state mechanism, per ZeroHedge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 64a62&ei=9
"FBI Sabotaged THREE Investigations into Clinton Foundation, According to Conservative Investigator"
Story by Dave Malyon
18 MAY 2023
John Durham's recent report is making waves as it reveals evidence that the FBI stopped investigations into the Clinton Foundation three times during the election year of 2016.
Furthermore, it has been alleged that the FBI provided the Clinton campaign favorable treatment, while rapidly advancing investigations into Donald Trump's campaign.
One of these investigations revolved around a $2,700 contribution from a Confidential Human Source (CHS) to the Clinton campaign, which came from a foreign source and was in violation of federal law.
When tipped off the FBI instructed the CHS to “NOT attend any more campaign events, set up meetings, or anything else relating to [Clinton’s] campaign."
"We need to keep you completely away from that situation."
"I don’t know all the details, but it’s for your own protection.”
This was allegedly in fear of how Hillary Clinton would react should she become elected president.
The third case uncovered by Durham concerned large monetary contributions made to a non-profit, controlled by a federal public official, in exchange for government action and/or influence.
Two days ago Patrick Byrne, an American businessman and founder of Overstock.com, posted a Self implicating Tweet saying: “Yep."
"This is the $18 million bribe to Hillary.”
This was in response to FOOL NELSON’s accusation: “I might've mixed up the countries, but pretty sure Byrne is CHS-A, nice bribe Patrick, allegedly!”
Reacting to the revelations, lawyer and political commentator Techno Fog commented: "Durham's scope included the FBI investigations 'directed' at the Hillary Clinton campaign."
"It seems the purpose of that review was to assess and compare the favorable treatment received by Clinton to the targeting of Trump."
These findings have raised serious questions as to the impartiality of the FBI and the true motives of their investigations and it plays into the ongoing allegations of the FBI becoming a weaponized state mechanism, per ZeroHedge.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 64a62&ei=9
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
FOX NEWS
"Obama, Clapper were briefed on reports of Clinton campaign's Russia collusion narrative, Durham report shows"
Story by Aaron Kliegman
19 MAY 2023
Former President Barack Obama and his director of national intelligence, James Clapper, were both briefed in 2016 on reports that then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton planned to vilify Donald Trump by claiming he was colluding with Russia to win the election, according to the final report from Special Counsel John Durham's investigation into the original Trump-Russia probe.
This week, Durham released a lengthy report detailing the findings of his years-long investigation into the origins of the FBI's probe, known as "Crossfire Hurricane," which looked into whether former President Donald Trump and his campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Durham found that there was never any information to justify opening the FBI's original investigation and that the bureau and the Department of Justice "failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law."
The conclusions in the report undermine opponents of Trump who have claimed for years that he colluded with Russia, although some Democrats in Congress and critics in the media have dismissed or downplayed the findings.
As part of its probe, the special counsel's office considered the government's handling of intelligence that it received during the summer of 2016 concerning alleged efforts by Clinton to link Trump to Russian interference in the election — information described in the report as the "Clinton Plan intelligence."
In a 2020 letter to lawmakers cited in Durham's report, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe described the purported "approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services."
Ratcliffe added that Clinton's alleged plot would hurt Trump by "tying him to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee," thereby distracting the public from the investigation into her use of a private email server.
Ratcliffe's letter and Durham's report both note that the information came from insight that "U.S. intelligence agencies obtained into Russian intelligence analysis," adding that the intelligence community can't for sure know the full accuracy of the allegation.
Nonetheless, the intelligence on Clinton's plan was shared with Obama, Clapper and other top national security officials right after U.S. officials became aware of it in 2016, according to the report, which outlined what followed.
On Aug. 3, 2016, within days of receiving the Clinton plan in late July, then-CIA Director John Brennan met with Obama, Joe Biden (who was vice president at the time) and other senior officials to discuss Russian efforts to interfere in the election.
According to Brennan's handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed those present on the Clinton plan.
His declassified handwritten notes, the report says, "reflect that he briefed the meeting's participants regarding the 'alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.'"
FBI personnel beyond then-Director James Comey, who was present at Brennan's briefing, became increasingly aware of the intelligence at some point later that month.
Durham's report goes on to say that Clapper, who had been present at previous high-level discussions about Russian election meddling, along with other high-ranking officials "received an intelligence product on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election that included the Clinton Plan intelligence."
However, Durham "did not identify any further actions that the CIA or FBI took in response to this intelligence product as it related to the Clinton Plan intelligence."
Indeed, the report describes how the special counsel's probe found no evidence of the FBI considering whether and how Clinton's alleged plot might impact the Crossfire Hurricane investigation into potential Trump-Russia collusion.
"No FBI personnel who were interviewed by the [special counsel's] office recalled Crossfire Hurricane personnel taking any action to vet the Clinton Plan intelligence," the report states.
"This stands in sharp contrast to its substantial reliance on the uncorroborated Steele Reports, which at least some FBI personnel appeared to know was likely being funded or promoted by the Clinton campaign."
Marc Elias, general counsel for Clinton's 2016 campaign, testified both during a House Intelligence Committee investigation in 2017 and more recently during Durham's ongoing probe that he hired the opposition research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
Fusion GPS went on to commission former MI6 agent Christopher Steele to create the infamous "Steele dossier," which purported to show collusion between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin.
It contained several salacious and since-debunked claims about Trump and his alleged ties to Russia.
The FBI used the now-discredited dossier to obtain a warrant to surveil former Trump 2016 campaign aide Carter Page.
The Department of Justice later admitted that the warrant application was full of misinformation and that the surveillance warrant should've never been approved.
"Unlike the FBI's opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw, uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan, the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information," Durham's report states.
"This lack of action was despite the fact that the significance of the Clinton plan intelligence was such as to have prompted the director of the CIA to brief the president, vice president, attorney general, director of the FBI, and other senior government officials about its content within days of its receipt."
"It was also of enough importance for the CIA to send a formal written referral memorandum to Director Corney and the deputy assistant director of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action."
The report notes that Clapper told Durham's investigators, as well as lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee, that he saw no evidence of Trump's team colluding with Russia and knew of no direct evidence that would meet the legal standard of conspiracy or collusion on Trump's part.
Clapper, an outspoken Trump critic and CNN analyst who has said that Russian meddling likely influenced the 2016 election, has also said in publicly aired interviews that he never saw evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f867&ei=12
"Obama, Clapper were briefed on reports of Clinton campaign's Russia collusion narrative, Durham report shows"
Story by Aaron Kliegman
19 MAY 2023
Former President Barack Obama and his director of national intelligence, James Clapper, were both briefed in 2016 on reports that then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton planned to vilify Donald Trump by claiming he was colluding with Russia to win the election, according to the final report from Special Counsel John Durham's investigation into the original Trump-Russia probe.
This week, Durham released a lengthy report detailing the findings of his years-long investigation into the origins of the FBI's probe, known as "Crossfire Hurricane," which looked into whether former President Donald Trump and his campaign colluded with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Durham found that there was never any information to justify opening the FBI's original investigation and that the bureau and the Department of Justice "failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law."
The conclusions in the report undermine opponents of Trump who have claimed for years that he colluded with Russia, although some Democrats in Congress and critics in the media have dismissed or downplayed the findings.
As part of its probe, the special counsel's office considered the government's handling of intelligence that it received during the summer of 2016 concerning alleged efforts by Clinton to link Trump to Russian interference in the election — information described in the report as the "Clinton Plan intelligence."
In a 2020 letter to lawmakers cited in Durham's report, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe described the purported "approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services."
Ratcliffe added that Clinton's alleged plot would hurt Trump by "tying him to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee," thereby distracting the public from the investigation into her use of a private email server.
Ratcliffe's letter and Durham's report both note that the information came from insight that "U.S. intelligence agencies obtained into Russian intelligence analysis," adding that the intelligence community can't for sure know the full accuracy of the allegation.
Nonetheless, the intelligence on Clinton's plan was shared with Obama, Clapper and other top national security officials right after U.S. officials became aware of it in 2016, according to the report, which outlined what followed.
On Aug. 3, 2016, within days of receiving the Clinton plan in late July, then-CIA Director John Brennan met with Obama, Joe Biden (who was vice president at the time) and other senior officials to discuss Russian efforts to interfere in the election.
According to Brennan's handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed those present on the Clinton plan.
His declassified handwritten notes, the report says, "reflect that he briefed the meeting's participants regarding the 'alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.'"
FBI personnel beyond then-Director James Comey, who was present at Brennan's briefing, became increasingly aware of the intelligence at some point later that month.
Durham's report goes on to say that Clapper, who had been present at previous high-level discussions about Russian election meddling, along with other high-ranking officials "received an intelligence product on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election that included the Clinton Plan intelligence."
However, Durham "did not identify any further actions that the CIA or FBI took in response to this intelligence product as it related to the Clinton Plan intelligence."
Indeed, the report describes how the special counsel's probe found no evidence of the FBI considering whether and how Clinton's alleged plot might impact the Crossfire Hurricane investigation into potential Trump-Russia collusion.
"No FBI personnel who were interviewed by the [special counsel's] office recalled Crossfire Hurricane personnel taking any action to vet the Clinton Plan intelligence," the report states.
"This stands in sharp contrast to its substantial reliance on the uncorroborated Steele Reports, which at least some FBI personnel appeared to know was likely being funded or promoted by the Clinton campaign."
Marc Elias, general counsel for Clinton's 2016 campaign, testified both during a House Intelligence Committee investigation in 2017 and more recently during Durham's ongoing probe that he hired the opposition research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
Fusion GPS went on to commission former MI6 agent Christopher Steele to create the infamous "Steele dossier," which purported to show collusion between Trump's campaign and the Kremlin.
It contained several salacious and since-debunked claims about Trump and his alleged ties to Russia.
The FBI used the now-discredited dossier to obtain a warrant to surveil former Trump 2016 campaign aide Carter Page.
The Department of Justice later admitted that the warrant application was full of misinformation and that the surveillance warrant should've never been approved.
"Unlike the FBI's opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw, uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan, the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information," Durham's report states.
"This lack of action was despite the fact that the significance of the Clinton plan intelligence was such as to have prompted the director of the CIA to brief the president, vice president, attorney general, director of the FBI, and other senior government officials about its content within days of its receipt."
"It was also of enough importance for the CIA to send a formal written referral memorandum to Director Corney and the deputy assistant director of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Peter Strzok, for their consideration and action."
The report notes that Clapper told Durham's investigators, as well as lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee, that he saw no evidence of Trump's team colluding with Russia and knew of no direct evidence that would meet the legal standard of conspiracy or collusion on Trump's part.
Clapper, an outspoken Trump critic and CNN analyst who has said that Russian meddling likely influenced the 2016 election, has also said in publicly aired interviews that he never saw evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... f867&ei=12
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
The Daily Caller
"ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The DOJ Just Opened Pandora’s Box"
Opinion by Alan M. Dershowitz
9 JUNE 2023
For the first time in American history, the leading candidate to defeat the incumbent president has been indicted by the incumbent’s Justice Department.
Former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a federal grand jury for illegally retaining classified government documents and obstructing justice.
This is a momentous occasion, and not only for President Trump.
This moment portends a massive change in the norms of this nation that all Americans who care about the neutral rule of law should pay close attention to, for it raises the specter of the partisan weaponization of the criminal justice system — not just by the Democrats targeting Trump but by Republicans who will certainly retaliate when they regain control of the criminal charging process.
How do we know this is about political retribution, not the rule of law?
Look at the case.
One would expect that such an unprecedented criminal prosecution would be the strongest one in political history.
And yet, what information we do have suggests a weak case that would never have been brought if it wasn’t being brought against Donald Trump.
Indeed, in my book Get Trump, I predicted that Trump would be indicted.
But even writing a book about the massive attacks President Trump sustained from his political adversaries, I could not have imagined that the DOJ would suffice with a charge as meager as the mere possession of classified documents.
I thought they would go after Trump over some process crime growing out of the investigation.
I assumed that before proceeding, they would develop a far stronger case — certainly stronger than the extraordinarily weak case put forward by District Attorney Alvin Bragg in Manhattan.
It appears that I was wrong.
I gave them too much credit.
The indictment has yet to be unsealed, and there is still a slim possibility that there is a smoking gun, as there was in the obstruction cases against Richard Nixon that led his Republican colleagues to demand his resignation.
We will know better when the seven-count indictment is made public, presumably on Tuesday.
But based on what we know now, this does not seem like a strong case, especially if it is based on the Espionage Act of 1917, as a charge of illegally retaining documents is.
Ironically, the Espionage Act has been condemned by liberals, progressives, and Democrats since it became the open-ended weapon of choice aimed at political dissidents such as Eugene V. Debbs and other anti-war icons.
It is vague and capable of being stretched to cover political enemies.
So are the other two charges that have been referenced: conspiracy to obstruct Justice and lying to law enforcement officials.
Contrast these flimsy accusations with those made against Richard Nixon, which included bribing witnesses, destroying evidence, and other concrete crimes.
At the moment, there is no suggestion of such open and shut accusations.
Instead, they seem closer to the accusations made against presidential candidate Hilary Clinton, which never resulted in an indictment.
In order for the public to believe that the soon to be disclosed indictment is not politically motivated, it must be far stronger than the cases that were not brought against other political figures and at least as strong as that against Nixon.
That is a high bar, but it must be reached if our Justice Department is to maintain any semblance of impartiality.
It will not be enough to show technical violations that are sometimes prosecuted but often not.
It is unlikely that the recording of Trump showing classified material to a writer will suffice, unless prosecutors can establish the contents of these documents and that they were actually read by an unauthorized person.
There must be evidence of willful conduct that violates clear and unambiguous laws and that gives honest prosecutors no choice but to indict.
I doubt that these rigorous but necessary criteria have been met in the current indictment against Trump, but I have an open if skeptical mind.
As matters stand now, this “momentous” political case threatens to be a momentous challenge to our system of impartial justice.
Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of The Price of Principle: Why Integrity Is Worth The Consequences. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of “The Dershow” podcast. This is republished from the Alan Dershowitz Newsletter.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... f158&ei=12
"ALAN DERSHOWITZ: The DOJ Just Opened Pandora’s Box"
Opinion by Alan M. Dershowitz
9 JUNE 2023
For the first time in American history, the leading candidate to defeat the incumbent president has been indicted by the incumbent’s Justice Department.
Former President Donald Trump has been indicted by a federal grand jury for illegally retaining classified government documents and obstructing justice.
This is a momentous occasion, and not only for President Trump.
This moment portends a massive change in the norms of this nation that all Americans who care about the neutral rule of law should pay close attention to, for it raises the specter of the partisan weaponization of the criminal justice system — not just by the Democrats targeting Trump but by Republicans who will certainly retaliate when they regain control of the criminal charging process.
How do we know this is about political retribution, not the rule of law?
Look at the case.
One would expect that such an unprecedented criminal prosecution would be the strongest one in political history.
And yet, what information we do have suggests a weak case that would never have been brought if it wasn’t being brought against Donald Trump.
Indeed, in my book Get Trump, I predicted that Trump would be indicted.
But even writing a book about the massive attacks President Trump sustained from his political adversaries, I could not have imagined that the DOJ would suffice with a charge as meager as the mere possession of classified documents.
I thought they would go after Trump over some process crime growing out of the investigation.
I assumed that before proceeding, they would develop a far stronger case — certainly stronger than the extraordinarily weak case put forward by District Attorney Alvin Bragg in Manhattan.
It appears that I was wrong.
I gave them too much credit.
The indictment has yet to be unsealed, and there is still a slim possibility that there is a smoking gun, as there was in the obstruction cases against Richard Nixon that led his Republican colleagues to demand his resignation.
We will know better when the seven-count indictment is made public, presumably on Tuesday.
But based on what we know now, this does not seem like a strong case, especially if it is based on the Espionage Act of 1917, as a charge of illegally retaining documents is.
Ironically, the Espionage Act has been condemned by liberals, progressives, and Democrats since it became the open-ended weapon of choice aimed at political dissidents such as Eugene V. Debbs and other anti-war icons.
It is vague and capable of being stretched to cover political enemies.
So are the other two charges that have been referenced: conspiracy to obstruct Justice and lying to law enforcement officials.
Contrast these flimsy accusations with those made against Richard Nixon, which included bribing witnesses, destroying evidence, and other concrete crimes.
At the moment, there is no suggestion of such open and shut accusations.
Instead, they seem closer to the accusations made against presidential candidate Hilary Clinton, which never resulted in an indictment.
In order for the public to believe that the soon to be disclosed indictment is not politically motivated, it must be far stronger than the cases that were not brought against other political figures and at least as strong as that against Nixon.
That is a high bar, but it must be reached if our Justice Department is to maintain any semblance of impartiality.
It will not be enough to show technical violations that are sometimes prosecuted but often not.
It is unlikely that the recording of Trump showing classified material to a writer will suffice, unless prosecutors can establish the contents of these documents and that they were actually read by an unauthorized person.
There must be evidence of willful conduct that violates clear and unambiguous laws and that gives honest prosecutors no choice but to indict.
I doubt that these rigorous but necessary criteria have been met in the current indictment against Trump, but I have an open if skeptical mind.
As matters stand now, this “momentous” political case threatens to be a momentous challenge to our system of impartial justice.
Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School, and the author most recently of The Price of Principle: Why Integrity Is Worth The Consequences. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute, and is also the host of “The Dershow” podcast. This is republished from the Alan Dershowitz Newsletter.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... f158&ei=12
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
Mediaite.
"Post-Indictment ABC News Poll Puts Both Trump AND Biden’s Favorability at a Dreadful 31%"
Story by Joe DePaolo
11 JUNE 2023
President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are in a flat-footed tie on favorability rating, according to a brand-new poll taken after the former president’s indictment.
According to a new poll from ABC News and Ipsos, which was conducted after the indictment against the former president was announced, Trump’s favorability rating stands at 31 percent.
That’s actually up 6 points from the last time the survey was conducted in early April.
Trump’s unfavorable rating comes in at 56 percent, which is down 5 points from where it was in April.
The news is arguably worse for President Biden — as he stands dead even with his predecessor, despite the fact that Trump has been slapped with two indictments in the last 10 weeks.
The ABC/Ipsos poll likewise pegged Biden’s favorability at just 31 percent, with 52 percent finding him unfavorable.
The favorable number represents an all-time low for Biden in the survey.
In an additional finding that bodes well for Trump, 47 percent of Americans believe the charges against him are politically motivated, compared to 37 percent who think politics did not play into the decision to indict.
However, 48 percent of respondents think Trump should be charged in the case, with 35 percent believing he should not be.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... c1f4&ei=43
"Post-Indictment ABC News Poll Puts Both Trump AND Biden’s Favorability at a Dreadful 31%"
Story by Joe DePaolo
11 JUNE 2023
President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump are in a flat-footed tie on favorability rating, according to a brand-new poll taken after the former president’s indictment.
According to a new poll from ABC News and Ipsos, which was conducted after the indictment against the former president was announced, Trump’s favorability rating stands at 31 percent.
That’s actually up 6 points from the last time the survey was conducted in early April.
Trump’s unfavorable rating comes in at 56 percent, which is down 5 points from where it was in April.
The news is arguably worse for President Biden — as he stands dead even with his predecessor, despite the fact that Trump has been slapped with two indictments in the last 10 weeks.
The ABC/Ipsos poll likewise pegged Biden’s favorability at just 31 percent, with 52 percent finding him unfavorable.
The favorable number represents an all-time low for Biden in the survey.
In an additional finding that bodes well for Trump, 47 percent of Americans believe the charges against him are politically motivated, compared to 37 percent who think politics did not play into the decision to indict.
However, 48 percent of respondents think Trump should be charged in the case, with 35 percent believing he should not be.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... c1f4&ei=43
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
Mediaite
"Reporters Fire At Biden and Jean-Pierre Over Jill Biden Comment As Trump Is Arrested and Arraigned: ‘Was She Mistaken?’"
Story by Tommy Christopher
14 JUNE 2023
White House reporters fired questions at President Joe Biden and Karine Jean-Pierre over a comment First Lady Dr. Jill Biden made hours before ex-President Donald Trump was arrested and arraigned in Florida.
At issue is a comment FLOTUS made at a fundraiser Monday night at a private Manhattan residence that was covered by a small editorial press pool.
During a chunk about “MAGA Republicans,” the First Lady remarked “They don’t care about the indictment."
"So that’s a little shocking, I think.”
As news networks were reporting live from Florida on Trump’s first appearance in court on 37 counts related to violations of the Espionage Act Tuesday afternoon, President Biden was hosting NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the Oval Office.
When the president wrapped up his remarks, reporters shouted several questions, including one about the First Lady:
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, in no small part because of your leadership, we’ve got — beyond NATO, we’ve gotten another 30-something — well, a total of 40 nations that are committed to — to the independence of Ukraine.
And I think it’s a real clear message.
So, God willing, we’re going to be able to keep this unity up.
And thank you for your leadership.
Q President, have you discussed —
Q Mr. President, have your read the Trump indictment, sir?
Do you agree with Dr. Biden that she was surprised Republicans —
(Cross-talk.)
Q Sir, how’s that offensive going, do you think?
How’s the offensive going, do you think?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: I’ll let Ukraine think for themselves.
And as Trump was entering a “not guilty” plea in court in Florida, Jean-Pierre was briefing reporters at the White House — where several reporters had questions about Dr. Biden’s remark:
Q And then, on the big news of this afternoon, First Lady Jill Biden said it’s a little shocking that many Republicans support Donald Trump after his indictment.
What has President Biden said?
Was he also shocked?
Does he agree with his wife?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m just not going to comment on anything that’s related to the — to the indictment.
We’re just going to be very mindful here and respect the Department of Justice, let them do their job.
…
Q Thank you, Karine.
Was the First Lady mistaken in discussing the Trump indictment at a fundraiser?
And has anyone at the White House, perhaps in the Counsel’s Office, talked to her about the propriety of such statements?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I don’t have anything to add to what I just shared with your colleague.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 7942&ei=24
"Reporters Fire At Biden and Jean-Pierre Over Jill Biden Comment As Trump Is Arrested and Arraigned: ‘Was She Mistaken?’"
Story by Tommy Christopher
14 JUNE 2023
White House reporters fired questions at President Joe Biden and Karine Jean-Pierre over a comment First Lady Dr. Jill Biden made hours before ex-President Donald Trump was arrested and arraigned in Florida.
At issue is a comment FLOTUS made at a fundraiser Monday night at a private Manhattan residence that was covered by a small editorial press pool.
During a chunk about “MAGA Republicans,” the First Lady remarked “They don’t care about the indictment."
"So that’s a little shocking, I think.”
As news networks were reporting live from Florida on Trump’s first appearance in court on 37 counts related to violations of the Espionage Act Tuesday afternoon, President Biden was hosting NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in the Oval Office.
When the president wrapped up his remarks, reporters shouted several questions, including one about the First Lady:
PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, in no small part because of your leadership, we’ve got — beyond NATO, we’ve gotten another 30-something — well, a total of 40 nations that are committed to — to the independence of Ukraine.
And I think it’s a real clear message.
So, God willing, we’re going to be able to keep this unity up.
And thank you for your leadership.
Q President, have you discussed —
Q Mr. President, have your read the Trump indictment, sir?
Do you agree with Dr. Biden that she was surprised Republicans —
(Cross-talk.)
Q Sir, how’s that offensive going, do you think?
How’s the offensive going, do you think?
PRESIDENT BIDEN: I’ll let Ukraine think for themselves.
And as Trump was entering a “not guilty” plea in court in Florida, Jean-Pierre was briefing reporters at the White House — where several reporters had questions about Dr. Biden’s remark:
Q And then, on the big news of this afternoon, First Lady Jill Biden said it’s a little shocking that many Republicans support Donald Trump after his indictment.
What has President Biden said?
Was he also shocked?
Does he agree with his wife?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m just not going to comment on anything that’s related to the — to the indictment.
We’re just going to be very mindful here and respect the Department of Justice, let them do their job.
…
Q Thank you, Karine.
Was the First Lady mistaken in discussing the Trump indictment at a fundraiser?
And has anyone at the White House, perhaps in the Counsel’s Office, talked to her about the propriety of such statements?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I don’t have anything to add to what I just shared with your colleague.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... 7942&ei=24
Re: THE MAGA-MAN DONALD TRUMP
1945
"America Hates Joe Biden"
Story by Brent M. Eastwood
15 JUNE 2023
You Mean Joe Biden Is Even More Disliked Than Trump? - You may think that Donald Trump was an unpopular president.
Many voters hated the ground he walked on.
He was impeached twice and endured a steady drumbeat of daily attacks in the media.
Some of his biggest fans were afraid to even wear a MAGA hat expecting an admonishment from half the people they ran into in public.
Trump stirred up passions in virtually the entire electorate.
Biden Is Doing Worse Than Trump, Says Pollster
But you may be surprised to know that President Joe Biden may be even more unpopular.
This determination has been set forth by a poll aggregation research firm called FiveThirtyEight.
This analytics company takes a daily average of presidential approval polls and weighs them for their reliability and sample size.
They then determine a mean of the numbers and report whether presidents are likable or not.
Biden is performing worse than Trump in these calculations by FiveThirtyEight.
“Biden has a net approval rating of -14.6 percent on June 11, notably lower than the -10.9 percent Trump recorded the same number of days into his administration,” Newsweek said.
Voters Will Hold Their Nose If There Is a Trump - Joe Biden Re-match
It looks like there is going to be a re-match between the two and both politicians stir up negative ratings even though Biden’s appear to be worse.
It remains to be seen if turnout, should there be another election involving the pair, will be the same or better than 2020, when it was at record highs.
Some people, disliking both men, may stay home in 2024.
The Trump campaign should be satisfied with these numbers in what will assuredly be an election that will be dominated by vitriolic attacks.
Both candidates will charge each other with corruption and Trump could be a convicted felon when voting starts.
Biden has his own problems with bribery allegations that are dominating the headlines in conservative media outlets.
Plus, Biden is performing dismally in the FiveThirtyEight comparisons to other presidents at this point in his tenure.
Worse Than George W. Bush?
We are 874 days into his presidency, and Joe Biden has worse approval ratings than Trump, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush.
Biden is currently registering a 41 percent likability rating from FiveThirtyEight.
At this time in their tenure, Trump was at 42.3 percent, Obama at 47.4 percent, and Bush was polling at 61.5 percent.
This is not the only bad polling results for Biden.
A Washington Post/ ABC News survey last month found Biden approval fell six points between February and March and worse, that Trump is leading Biden.
May approval numbers were not much better for the president.
Democrats Are Clutching Worry Beads
This has veteran pollsters and consultants waving the red flag.
Democrat political analyst Donna Brazile said liberals need to “wake up.”
She observed that the coalition that elected Biden is a mess.
Pollster Mark Penn said that the Democrats are riding on the Titanic if these numbers do not get better.
Another observer, Matt Robison, acknowledged that Biden is “overpromising and underdelivering.”
However, Biden’s numbers can rebound.
Inflation has slowed down and the stock market is doing much better.
The S&P 500 is up around 15 percent this year.
He could have a foreign policy win in Ukraine should Russia lose the war.
Meanwhile, Trump has his legal problems with two separate indictments for allegedly falsifying business records in a hush money scheme with an adult video actress and the classified document scandal.
This could take a bite out of Trump’s approval ratings.
Plus, the former president could lose his nomination battle to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis or another Republican White House hopeful.
But this is not good news for Biden.
He can’t seem to shake his low approval ratings.
Many voters, even Democrats, think he is too old, and that other Democrats should replace him.
His challengers, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson, are polling better than expected and the country is still divided with many voters believing the justice system is corrupt as it unfairly prosecutes Trump.
Biden also doesn’t get much credit for past legislative triumphs such as the bipartisan infrastructure bill and leading the way toward a measure that avoided a default on the nation’s debt.
The election is over a year away, and Biden has plenty of time to make his case.
But if you asked many Democrats if the president would be less popular than Trump or George W. Bush, they would not have believed it.
Joe Biden is thus under the gun, and Democrats are worried and going public with their concerns.
They may be wondering if the Republicans will unite, turn out the base, attract Independents, and overcome Biden in 2024.
Author Expertise and Experience
Serving as 19FortyFive’s Defense and National Security Editor, Dr. Brent M. Eastwood is the author of Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare. He is an Emerging Threats expert and former U.S. Army Infantry officer. You can follow him on Twitter @BMEastwood. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and Foreign Policy/ International Relations.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ba67&ei=19
"America Hates Joe Biden"
Story by Brent M. Eastwood
15 JUNE 2023
You Mean Joe Biden Is Even More Disliked Than Trump? - You may think that Donald Trump was an unpopular president.
Many voters hated the ground he walked on.
He was impeached twice and endured a steady drumbeat of daily attacks in the media.
Some of his biggest fans were afraid to even wear a MAGA hat expecting an admonishment from half the people they ran into in public.
Trump stirred up passions in virtually the entire electorate.
Biden Is Doing Worse Than Trump, Says Pollster
But you may be surprised to know that President Joe Biden may be even more unpopular.
This determination has been set forth by a poll aggregation research firm called FiveThirtyEight.
This analytics company takes a daily average of presidential approval polls and weighs them for their reliability and sample size.
They then determine a mean of the numbers and report whether presidents are likable or not.
Biden is performing worse than Trump in these calculations by FiveThirtyEight.
“Biden has a net approval rating of -14.6 percent on June 11, notably lower than the -10.9 percent Trump recorded the same number of days into his administration,” Newsweek said.
Voters Will Hold Their Nose If There Is a Trump - Joe Biden Re-match
It looks like there is going to be a re-match between the two and both politicians stir up negative ratings even though Biden’s appear to be worse.
It remains to be seen if turnout, should there be another election involving the pair, will be the same or better than 2020, when it was at record highs.
Some people, disliking both men, may stay home in 2024.
The Trump campaign should be satisfied with these numbers in what will assuredly be an election that will be dominated by vitriolic attacks.
Both candidates will charge each other with corruption and Trump could be a convicted felon when voting starts.
Biden has his own problems with bribery allegations that are dominating the headlines in conservative media outlets.
Plus, Biden is performing dismally in the FiveThirtyEight comparisons to other presidents at this point in his tenure.
Worse Than George W. Bush?
We are 874 days into his presidency, and Joe Biden has worse approval ratings than Trump, Barack Obama, and George W. Bush.
Biden is currently registering a 41 percent likability rating from FiveThirtyEight.
At this time in their tenure, Trump was at 42.3 percent, Obama at 47.4 percent, and Bush was polling at 61.5 percent.
This is not the only bad polling results for Biden.
A Washington Post/ ABC News survey last month found Biden approval fell six points between February and March and worse, that Trump is leading Biden.
May approval numbers were not much better for the president.
Democrats Are Clutching Worry Beads
This has veteran pollsters and consultants waving the red flag.
Democrat political analyst Donna Brazile said liberals need to “wake up.”
She observed that the coalition that elected Biden is a mess.
Pollster Mark Penn said that the Democrats are riding on the Titanic if these numbers do not get better.
Another observer, Matt Robison, acknowledged that Biden is “overpromising and underdelivering.”
However, Biden’s numbers can rebound.
Inflation has slowed down and the stock market is doing much better.
The S&P 500 is up around 15 percent this year.
He could have a foreign policy win in Ukraine should Russia lose the war.
Meanwhile, Trump has his legal problems with two separate indictments for allegedly falsifying business records in a hush money scheme with an adult video actress and the classified document scandal.
This could take a bite out of Trump’s approval ratings.
Plus, the former president could lose his nomination battle to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis or another Republican White House hopeful.
But this is not good news for Biden.
He can’t seem to shake his low approval ratings.
Many voters, even Democrats, think he is too old, and that other Democrats should replace him.
His challengers, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson, are polling better than expected and the country is still divided with many voters believing the justice system is corrupt as it unfairly prosecutes Trump.
Biden also doesn’t get much credit for past legislative triumphs such as the bipartisan infrastructure bill and leading the way toward a measure that avoided a default on the nation’s debt.
The election is over a year away, and Biden has plenty of time to make his case.
But if you asked many Democrats if the president would be less popular than Trump or George W. Bush, they would not have believed it.
Joe Biden is thus under the gun, and Democrats are worried and going public with their concerns.
They may be wondering if the Republicans will unite, turn out the base, attract Independents, and overcome Biden in 2024.
Author Expertise and Experience
Serving as 19FortyFive’s Defense and National Security Editor, Dr. Brent M. Eastwood is the author of Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare. He is an Emerging Threats expert and former U.S. Army Infantry officer. You can follow him on Twitter @BMEastwood. He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and Foreign Policy/ International Relations.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ba67&ei=19