CartoonDems

 

DOJ Issues New Subpoenas in Russian Election Interference Response

The Justice Department has issued new subpoenas in a Florida-based investigation targeting individuals who pursued actions against President Donald Trump, as well as examining the U.S. government’s response to Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.

An initial wave of subpoenas in November asked recipients for documents related to the preparation of a U.S. intelligence community assessment that detailed a sweeping, multiprong effort by Moscow to help Trump defeat Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election.

Though the first subpoenas requested documents from the months surrounding the January 2017 publication of the Obama administration intelligence assessment, the latest subpoenas seek any records from the years since then, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to The Associated Press to discuss a nonpublic demand from investigators.

The Justice Department declined to comment Tuesday.

The subpoenas represent continued investigative activity in one of several criminal inquiries the Justice Department has undertaken into Trump's political opponents.

An array of former intelligence and law enforcement officials have received subpoenas and lawyers for former CIA Director John Brennan, who helped oversee the drafting of the assessment, have said they have been informed he is a target but have not been told of any “legally justifiable basis for undertaking this investigation.”

The intelligence community assessment, published in the final days of the Obama administration, found that Russia had developed a “clear preference” for Trump in the 2016 election and that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered an influence campaign with goals of undermining confidence in American democracy and harming Clinton's chance for victory.

That conclusion — and a related investigation into whether the 2016 Trump campaign colluded with Russia to sway the outcome of the election — have long been among the Republican president's chief grievances, and he has vowed retribution against the government officials involved in the inquiries.

Former FBI Director James Comey was indicted by the Trump administration Justice Department last year on false statement and obstruction charges, but the case was later dismissed.

Multiple government reports, including bipartisan congressional reviews and a criminal investigation by former special counsel Robert Mueller, have found that Russia interfered in Trump’s favor through a hack-and-leak operation of Democrat emails as well as a covert social media campaign aimed at sowing discord and swaying American public opinion.

Mueller’s report found that the Trump campaign actively welcomed the Russian help, but it did not establish that Russian operatives and Trump or his associates conspired to tip the election in his favor.

The Trump administration has freshly scrutinized the intelligence community assessment in part because a classified version of it incorporated in its annex a summary of the “Steele dossier,” a compilation of Democratic-funded opposition research that was assembled by former British spy Christopher Steele and was provided to the FBI.

That research into Trump’s potential links to Russia included uncorroborated rumors and salacious gossip, and Trump has long held up its weaknesses in an effort to discredit the entire Russia investigation.

The investigation in Florida appears to be part of a broader administration effort to revisit years-old findings and decisions from the Russia investigation.

A declassified CIA tradecraft review released last July by current Director John Ratcliffe did not refute the conclusion of Russian election interference but found “multiple procedural anomalies” in the intelligence community assessment and chided Brennan for the fact that the classified version referenced the Steele dossier.

Brennan testified to Congress, and also wrote in his memoir, that he was opposed to including information from the dossier in the intelligence assessment since neither its substance nor sources had been validated, and he has said the dossier did not inform the judgments of the assessment. He maintains the FBI pushed for its inclusion.

The new CIA review sought to cast Brennan’s views in a different light, asserting that he “showed a preference for narrative consistency over analytical soundness” and brushed aside concerns over the dossier because he believed it conformed “with existing theories.” It quotes him, without context, as having stated in writing that “my bottomline is that I believe that the information warrants inclusion in the report.”

It is unclear whether the investigation in Florida will result in any criminal charges.

In a letter last December addressed to the chief judge of the Southern District of Florida, Brennan's lawyers challenged the underpinnings of the investigation, questioning what basis prosecutors had for opening the inquiry in the state and saying they had received no clarity from prosecutors about what potential crimes were even being investigated.

“While it is mystifying how the prosecutors could possibly believe there is any legally justifiable basis for undertaking this investigation, they have done nothing to explain that mystery,” the lawyers wrote, describing the investigation as “manufactured.”

Obama Center Gets Even Uglier As Massive Mind-Numbing Text Display Goes Up

The Obama Presidential Center has taken plenty of heat, mostly because it’s one of the ugliest buildings humanity has ever produced. Soviet architects would be in awe of the brutalist, menacing design of the $850 million ode to the 44^th president.

 But what some have termed a “Klingon prison” just got weirder and, if possible, less attractive with the addition of a colossal display on its sides with words from the former president’s 2015 speech in Selma, Alabama. It might be inspiring — if you could actually read it:

“Not the ideal design.” Well, that’s certainly a contestant for understatement of the year. “I gave up after developing a headache three lines from the top,” one commenter noted.

 It’s not a traditional presidential library — the physical archives won’t even be stored there, as is usually the case. Instead, the National Archives will manage them off-site and make digital versions available to the public. Its real purpose is to act as some sort of monumental community organizing project.

The Obama Foundation, whose CEO is the infamous Valerie Jarrett, funds and will run the campus, which will sport a regulation basketball court, a museum, a life-size replica of the Oval Office, podcast/recording studios, a “Democracy in Action Lab,” and more. 

There will be an actual library on site, a 5,000-square-foot branch of the Chicago Public Library, which will be topped by the Eleanor Roosevelt Fruit and Vegetable Garden.

Their website bills the place as “A Global Center for Change.”

Why? I like America the way it is. What exactly do you want to change? It’s a rhetorical question; we all know that he wants to change into a woke bastion of liberalism.

---

MORE: The Obama Library Is Ugly for a Reason

The Reactions to Obama's Post About His Presidential Center Are Hilarious

---

Commenters let their feelings be known on social media, as one wrote:

what don’t you understand about

YOU ARE AMERICA

ED BY HABILAND

UNENCUMBERED

ADY TO SEIZE WE

There was more:

"The dyslexic in me is not amused," journalist and columnist Salena Zito posted. 

"He put his own speech on the outside of his library?" one user posted. "Find yourself someone who loves you like Obama loves himself." 

"It looks like a WW2-era German anti-aircraft tower," another posted. 

This post is pretty epic:

The Center is slated to open in June. In the meantime, every time you look at it, it gets uglier. Khrushchev would be proud.

Editor’s Note: The Democrat Party has never been less popular as voters reject its globalist agenda.

 

California Gas Prices Jump 40 Cents to $4.58, Now $1.66 Above National Average

California gas prices are climbing again, and the latest reporting shows the spike is accelerating.

 New reporting this week put the headline number plainly:

"California drivers are reeling as average gas prices surged 40 cents per gallon in just two weeks to $4.58, far outpacing the national average of $2.92, driven by shrinking refining capacity from the Valero Benicia refinery wind-down and prior Phillips 66 closure in Los Angeles."

The average California gas price is $4.58 per gallon, up from $4.46 last week and $4.18 two weeks ago. The national average, by contrast, sits at $2.92. That places California roughly $1.66 above the rest of the country.

Here is what makes this different from routine volatility. Nationally, gas prices have trended down over the past year. California is diverging sharply. This is not seasonal fluctuation. It is a structural supply squeeze.

Fresh reporting on the refinery closures driving the increase confirms the speed of the jump:

"The price of gas rose 40 cents in about two weeks, with the average price of gas across the state of California at $4.58 a gallon."

With Valero’s Benicia refinery winding down and Phillips 66’s Los Angeles facility already closed, the state is now down to just six operating refineries.

For the largest fuel-consuming state outside Texas, that reduction in in-state refining capacity materially tightens supply. And California’s regulatory structure compounds the pressure. The state requires a specific boutique gasoline blend and has limited interstate pipeline connections, making replacement supply more expensive and slower to secure. When a refinery goes offline, the impact shows up quickly at the pump.

---

Read More: Frantic California Trying to Stop Oil, Gas Companies From Fleeing

Tank Full? CA Gas Prices May Hit A Devastating $10 - Thanks, Gavin Newsom!

---

Earlier RedState reporting adds context to what happens when in-state production falls:

"California imported more gasoline in November than ever before, with more than 40% coming from the Bahamas."

Those imports are not incidental. They are the downstream effects of constrained refining capacity. Fuel routed through distant maritime channels adds transport and compliance costs before it reaches California drivers.

Analysts have also warned that refinery closures alone could raise prices further:

"On average, the closures could raise the cost of gasoline for consumers by between 5 and 15 cents a gallon, said Patrick De Haan, GasBuddy’s head of petroleum analysis."

Put together, the picture is straightforward. California gas prices are at $4.58 per gallon. The national average is $2.92. Refinery closures have reduced the state to six operating facilities. Imports are rising to fill the gap. Experts warn additional increases are possible if supply remains tight or if unexpected maintenance disrupts output during peak demand months.

This is not a one-week anomaly. It is a supply system under measurable strain, with limited flexibility built into it. Unless refining capacity expands or demand softens meaningfully, volatility is likely to remain the norm. Based on the current data, there is no clear indication that California gas prices have stabilized, much less peaked.

Editor’s Note: The Democrat Party has never been less popular as voters reject its globalist agenda.

CBS Exposes James Talarico's Lie Just As Early Voting Begins

Texas Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico appeared on Stephen Colbert’s YouTube channel last night, with Talarico uploading the hit to his social media accounts all while claiming that President Trump’s FCC “refused to air my interview” because “Trump is worried we’re about to flip Texas.” The media hit comes just as early voting kicks off in the Texas primaries.

 Of course, the leftist spin apparatus quickly jumped into action, falsely claiming that Trump and FCC Chair Brendan Carr “threatened” CBS if they chose to air the segment. They also completely made up a story about CBS claiming “financial reasons” to cover for these supposed threats, in a post that got tens of thousands of likes and over a million views.

In reality, the network themselves decided to not move forward with the segment on their live show, and instead just encouraged viewers to watch the interview online as a workaround to the equal-time rule that would’ve required Colbert to allow Jasmine Crockett have airtime as well. Even slimy Brian Stelter admitted that this was the case.

If they wanted to, they simply could have given Crockett airtime as well, but hilariously, they’d rather move the entire interview off their main airwave than give Crockett a few minutes to speak.

It was clearly an attempt at electioneering in favor of Talarico, the guy routinely accepted as far more electable than Crockett, and it definitely worked. Search trends for Talarico skyrocketed following the interview and their ruse.

Crockett and Talarico are still engaged in a contentious primary which will be decided on Mar. 3.

Here's Another Lib Female Meltdown...and It's a Dooz

I’m sorry, but who can be friends with, let alone reason with, this woman? It’s insane. It’s 20 seconds of pure unadulterated insanity, and we don’t even know what she’s talking about. It’s obviously about Donald Trump, his agenda, and the administration writ large. But this woman is so unhinged that she just yells into the void while driving, mind you.  

 It’s also a call for mass executions, saying that impeachment isn’t enough. She wants to see these people, presumably Trump officials or ICE agents, hanged by the ankles and cut from “groin to chain.” 

Of course, she’s a white leftist, and she’s all alone in that car, screaming at the top of her lungs. These are the folks we’re supposed to share a country with—I’ll take a hard pass on that one.  

It’s always the same cast of characters: lonely, insane, lefty white women screaming into their phones, alone, in their living rooms, cars, and parking lots. That’s not activism; that’s mental illness. What would you think if you came upon these antics in public?

Since the 2016 election, the lurch toward insanity in public policy has been well documented. The enabling, defense, and lust for political violence, however, have been even more rapid on the Left. 

Jimmy Kimmel to headline fundraiser for House Democrats

Late night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel is set to headline a fundraiser for House Democrats’ campaign efforts.

The fundraiser, where tickets start at $25,000, is scheduled to take place in Los Angeles on March 10^th in support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

 Others expected to attend include House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Kimmel’s advocacy for Democrat lawmakers comes as he has frequently taken aim at President Donald Trump while drawing scrutiny from his administration.

His show, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was notably taken off the air for a few days last year over comments he made about Charlie Kirk’s assassination.

During his monologues in the days following Kirk’s murder, Kimmel criticized conservatives’ response to Kirk’s death, accusing MAGA supporters of politicizing the tragedy and “attempting to deflect blame.” He also mocked President Donald Trump’s and Vice President JD Vance’s responses, comparing Trump’s grief to that of a child while questioning the FBI’s investigation.

“We had some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and with everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel stated. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

 

Gavin Newsom Shamed: Out-of-Touch Elitism Exposes Hypocrisy

There’s a new clip circulating that captures the frustration millions of Americans feel about elite California governance—an unmistakable blast at Gov. Gavin Newsom’s arrogance and his habit of lecturing the rest of the country while Golden State residents suffer the consequences. Conservative voices from talk radio to the TV punditry have called out Newsom for lecturing on national issues he clearly hasn’t mastered at home, and that anger is what drives the latest online uproar.

 Sen. Ted Cruz bluntly labeled Newsom “historically illiterate” after a public spat, and conservatives piled on to expose how out-of-touch the governor sounds when he lectures others about law, order, or federal authority. That short, sharp rebuke mattered because it cut through the usual polite press framing and reminded people that competence — not virtue signaling — keeps a state running.

Let’s be honest: Gavin Newsom’s Ivy-league style and Hollywood backdrops don’t hide the fact that California is a mess on real-world problems — homelessness, business flight, and public safety are the bills his policies keep presenting to taxpayers. While he jets to international summits and postures about progressive virtue, hardworking Californians pay the price with higher taxes and lower quality of life, and conservatives are right to call that hypocrisy out in plain language.

Actors and commentators who have watched the decay of civic institutions for years aren’t engaging in sour grape politics when they call out leadership failures; they’re sounding an alarm. When a public figure talks down to the rest of the country while presiding over a state in decline, conservatives see it as entitlement, not leadership — and Americans deserve leaders who fix problems, not lecture voters.

Gavin Newsom’s rhetorical theatrics — whether on immigration, federal authority, or culture-war flashpoints — often substitute moral preening for policy skill, and that’s why critics like Dean Cain and others are resonating with so many citizens. People who build things, run small businesses, and raise families want practical answers, not lectures, and they see Newsom’s performative stunts as part of a broader elite disconnect.

I attempted to verify the specific Newsmax segment cited in the circulating YouTube description and found that Ed Henry’s new program The Big Take is indeed a platform where conservative guests and high-profile commentators air these exact grievances, but I could not locate a transcript or an independently archived posting of the exact Dean Cain clip referenced online. The broader exchanges criticizing Newsom — including Sen. Cruz’s “historically illiterate” jab and the active conservative commentary on Newsmax — are documented on public news pages, but the particular YouTube segment that launched this viral line of attack was not available in the searches I conducted, so readers should know the larger criticisms are verifiable even if that single clip could not be found.

 

Mayor's Anti-Police Stance Sparks Outrage as Violence Escalates in NYC

New Yorkers woke up to a story that should worry every law-abiding citizen: 22-year-old Jabez Chakraborty allegedly charged at NYPD officers with a large kitchen knife inside his Queens apartment and was shot by an officer after officers say he ignored repeated commands to drop the weapon. The encounter, which the NYPD says culminated when Chakraborty forced through a glass door and advanced on officers, left him hospitalized in critical condition and the city debating who bears responsibility for the chaos.

 Instead of standing firmly with the men and women who run toward danger, Mayor Zohran Mamdani publicly urged the Queens district attorney not to prosecute the suspect and insisted the young man needs mental-health treatment rather than criminal charges. Mamdani said he reviewed body-worn camera footage and met with the family, using the tragedy as a platform to call for alternatives to police-led responses during crises. That stance has outraged many who believe law enforcement must be supported when they face life-threatening situations.

Concerned residents and critics across the city rightly asked whether the mayor’s political instincts are blinding him to the basic need for accountability. With the Queens DA’s office investigating and reportedly considering attempted-murder charges, it is not for a politician—who did not have to make a split-second life-or-death decision—to preempt the legal process or tell prosecutors how to do their jobs. New Yorkers want both justice and safety, and handing political cover to violent behavior risks neither.

There is no question mental illness demands compassion and real treatment, but compassion should not become a get-out-of-jail-free card for violent acts. When an individual advances on officers with a 13- or 14-inch blade, the primary obligation of government is to protect law-abiding citizens and the police who put themselves between danger and our families. Using mental-health advocacy as a shield for violent behavior undermines public safety and insults the men and women who answer calls at all hours.

Yes, our city needs better crisis-response systems so social workers and clinicians can intervene before situations turn deadly, and Mamdani’s talk of a new Department of Community Safety is a reminder that reform is possible. But reforms must be practical, adequately funded, and implemented without diminishing the tools officers need to respond to violence. Any plan that prioritizes ideology over practicality will leave neighborhoods less safe and embolden bad actors.

Patriotic New Yorkers should demand clarity: support for mental-health treatment, yes; but not at the expense of accountability, rule of law, and the safety of our streets. Elected officials who rush to shield suspects from prosecution while criticizing police deserve to be held to account by voters who pay taxes and expect government to keep them safe. If the mayor truly cares about preventing tragedies, he should lead on building better systems—not undermine prosecutions before the facts and justice systems have run their course.

This moment is a test of priorities for every New Yorker who values safety, fairness, and common sense. Stand with officers who face danger on our behalf, insist on real mental-health solutions that work, and reject political posturing that excuses violent behavior under the guise of compassion. Our families and neighborhoods depend on it.

 

CartoonDems