Arrested ex-CIA officer suspected of compromising US informants in China: report

The former CIA officer arrested Monday for unlawfully retaining classified information may have helped China execute or imprison several U.S. informants, according to The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Jerry Chun Shing Lee, 53, unlawfully possessed top secret information whose disclosure could cause “exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States,” the FBI wrote in the affidavit supporting his arrest.

Lee, whose security clearance was terminated when he left the CIA in 2007, improperly retained books containing “true names and phone numbers of assets and covert CIA employees,” the affidavit read.
The New York Times was the first to report that U.S. officials believe that Lee may have played a key role in outing US informants working in China, who started to go dark in 2010.
One of those officials was shot to death in front of coworkers in the courtyard of a Chinese government building, as a clear warning to other potential traitors, according to sources cited by The Times.
The paper cited sources who said Lee, who began working for the CIA in 1994, left because he was unhappy at his career progression there.
Between 18 and 20 key CIA sources in China were systematically jailed or killed from 2010 to 2012, in what US officials described as one of the worst intelligence failures in decades, according to the Times.
The losses were reportedly reminiscent of the significant damage caused by rogue agents Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, who became Russian spies.
The FBI said that its inquiry, which began in 2012, involved luring Lee back to the U.S. and searching his hotel rooms in Hawaii and Virginia.
As evidence mounted, the FBI interviewed Lee several times in 2013.
Lee never mentioned possessing classified information during those interviews, according to the arrest affidavit.
It is unclear whether Lee will be charged in the informants' deaths.

Fake News Cartoons

French Pres. Calls for Law Against Fake News, Spurs Free Speech Fears

France’s President Emmanuel Macron is ordering a law to foil efforts to disseminate false information during electoral campaigns.
In a New Years speech to journalists, Macron said he is ordering a new “legal arsenal” whereby news outlets must reveal their owners and where their money comes from.
The new law could see a cap on money to produce content, and allow emergency actions to block websites.
French regulators could suspend media controlled or influenced by foreign powers.
Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik, whose coverage was seen as favoring Conservative candidate Marine Le Pen, could be censored.
Media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders is also watching.

Secretary General of Reporters without Borders Christophe Deloire talks to the Associated Press in Paris, Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2018. French President Emmanuel Macron’s plan for a law against false information around election campaigns is drawing criticism from media advocates, tech experts and others. They say it’s impossible to enforce and smacks of methods used by authoritarians, not democracies. (AP Photo/Francois Mori)

“We are not opposed to the principle of a law against fake news, but the point is to be able to write a law without endangering the freedom to reveal things about political, social, and economical life,” said Christophe Deloire, Secretary General for Reporters Without Borders.
Some fear banning fake news will backfire on human rights grounds, because there is no legal definition on the term.
Government shutdowns of websites may also have unintended effects, such as satirists and journalists being accidentally targeted.

North Korea Fires Back After South Korean President Thanks U.S.

North Korea suggested it may not be sending athletes to compete in the Winter Olympics after all.
Last week, there was a sign of optimism amid the North Korean nuclear crisis after much anticipated talks between the north and south.

In this photo provided by South Korea Unification Ministry, the head of South Korean delegation Lee Woo-sung, right, and the head of North Korean delegation Kwon Hyok Bong, left, exchange documents at the North side of Panmunjom in North Korea, Monday, Jan. 15, 2018. North Korea’s delegation to the Winter Olympics in South Korea will include a 140-member orchestra, the two sides agreed Monday, while discussions continue over fielding a joint women’s hockey team. (South Korea Unification Ministry via AP)

“I think President Trump deserves big credit for bringing the inter-Korean talks,” stated South Korea President Moon Jae-in.
However, following the comments thanking President Trump for bringing the north to the negotiating table, the rogue regime is now back on the attack.
Through its state-run news outlet, North Korea called Moon’s ‘thank you’ a sordid act, adding it casts doubt on the future relationship between the two countries.
The broadcaster went on to threaten the regime’s exit from the Olympics, saying the train destined to carry the country’s delegation to the games hasn’t yet departed.
The two sides had earlier released a joint statement promising to hold a new round of talks, and officials were hopeful on the progress being made.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in answers reporters’ question during his New Year news conference at the Presidential Blue House in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2018. Moon said Wednesday he’s open to meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un if certain conditions are met, as he vowed to push for more talks with the North to resolve the nuclear standoff. (Kim Hong-Ji/Pool Photo via AP)

President Trump was also optimistic after speaking on the phone with President Moon last week.
North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un has yet to speak out on the latest controversy surrounding his regime.

Bannon faces grilling on Russia

Former White House chief strategist and ex-Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon will testify before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday as part of its Russia probe, in what will be his first appearance on Capitol Hill since the Michael Wolff book firestorm.

Bannon, who stepped down as executive chairman of Breitbart News last week following a dramatic falling out with the president over Wolff’s anti-Trump book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” will be interviewed behind closed doors by congressional investigators probing Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 presidential election.

A source close to the committee told Fox News that Bannon would likely be questioned over information in Wolff’s book.
In the book, Bannon slams the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law Jared Kushner and campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Bannon called their infamous June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya during the campaign “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.”

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon will testify behind closed doors Tuesday as part of the House Intelligence Committee's Russia probe.  (AP)

RUSSIAN LOBBYIST, UNNAMED TRANSLATOR ATTENDED TRUMP TOWER MEETING WITH RUSSIAN LAWYER
“Even if you thought that was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad s**t, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately,” Bannon said in the book.
Bannon also said Trump Jr. would “crack like an egg” in any possible public testimony about the situation.
RUSSIAN LAWYER WHO MET TRUMP JR.: 'I WOULD HAVE' CONTACTED CLINTON, TOO, IF SHE COULD HELP 
Trump Jr. fired back on Twitter, calling Bannon an “opportunist” who brought “a nightmare of backstabbing, harassing, leaking [and] lying” to the White House.
Bannon, who left his post at the White House in August, was a dominant figure in the novel -- which enraged the president enough to have his personal attorneys demand the publisher halt the book’s publication -- a request that was ultimately rejected. The lawyers also sent a “cease and desist” notice to Bannon, arguing he violated a non-disclosure agreement signed during the campaign by disclosing confidential information in speaking to the media about the campaign, and disparaging members of the Trump family.
The president issued a multi-paragraph blistering takedown of “sloppy Steve” Bannon, after excerpts released early revealed the information in the Wolff book.
“Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency,” Trump said in the statement. “When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.”
STEVE BANNON STEPS DOWN AS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN OF BREITBART NEWS 
Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski also is expected to testify this week before the House Intelligence Committee.

Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski is expected to testify before the House Intelligence Committee mid-week.  (Reuters)

“I have nothing to hide. I didn’t collude or cooperate or coordinate with any Russian, Russian agency, Russian government or anybody else, to try and impact this election,” Lewandowski said on WABC’s “The Rita Cosby Show.” “I’ll be happy to come out and set the record straight about my lack of involvement with any type of foreign entity.”
Lewandowski was replaced by Manafort in June 2016 ahead of the Republican National Convention. Manafort has been indicted on money laundering charges as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
The former top Trump campaign officials are testifying before the committee, as Democrats, like committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., claimed that Republicans would prematurely “shut down” the investigation.
“It appears Republicans want to conduct just enough interviews to give the impression of a serious investigation,” Schiff said last month.
A source close to the committee’s majority told Fox News that it was “funny” that Schiff has accused Republicans of “prematurely ending the investigation at the behest of Trump and Bannon.”
“New witnesses are still being interviewed,” the source told Fox News Monday. “It’s almost as if Schiff prematurely launched this critique, whose purpose is to provide an excuse for why Democrats, after a full year of investigating, can’t prove any of the collusion allegations they’ve been making.”
Schiff has called for at least a dozen more witnesses to testify before the committee, including Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.

Is DACA deal headed for disaster?

Will there be a DACA deal?

My sense is that both sides want one—but the chances are increasingly slim.

The Democrats may be less inclined to cooperate now that President Trump is on the defensive after global media criticism that he assailed "s---hole countries"—although the Washington Post, National Review’s Rich Lowry and others say aides are now insisting that the president said "s---house countries." Hole or house is a distinction without a difference, in my view.
The uproar prompted the president to tell reporters Sunday that "nah, I'm not a racist. I'm the least racist person you have ever interviewed, that I can tell you."
Trump also played down the notion of a DACA compromise, saying, "Honestly, I don't think the Democrats want to make a deal."
Democratic lawmakers want to save nearly 800,000 dreamers from deportation, but they’re not wild about pouring billions into Trump's border wall and taking other steps he's demanding on immigration.
Given the rhetoric from Dick Durbin and others that Trump was espousing racist views when he said he didn't want more immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and Africa as opposed to Norway, the Democrats are less inclined to give ground. (Yes, this has gotten tied up with Friday’s government-shutdown deadline, but nobody thinks that will actually happen.)
And Trump got strong blowback from his base, before the "s" hit the fan, for his willingness to cut a deal on the dreamers. Conservative commentators, led by Ann Coulter, called his stance a betrayal and complained about "amnesty."
The White House initially chose not to deny the Washington Post report that Trump had said "s---hole." The president later said he had used "tough" language but not that exact word, and now the administration has moved to a more forceful denial. Durbin says Trump used the word several times, Republican lawmakers either dispute it or say they didn't hear it, but Lindsey Graham did admonish the president for his wording during the White House meeting.
Trump yesterday tweeted a whack at the Senate Democratic whip, who earned a dimunitive nickname:
"Senator Dicky Durbin totally misrepresented what was said at the DACA meeting. Deals can't get made when there is no trust! Durbin blew DACA and is hurting our Military."
Any immigration compromise was always going to be tough, given the raw emotions surrounding the issue. That's why both George W. Bush and Barack Obama failed to pass immigration reform, leading to Obama's executive order shielding the dreamers.
As Rand Paul said on "Meet the Press": "Both sides now are destroying the setting in which anything meaningful can happen."
We seem to be back at Washington's default setting, where gridlock rules and compromise is eternally elusive. The essence of a political deal is that each side accepts something it doesn't want—tougher border security and immigration limits versus leniency for those brought here illegally as kids—to obtain important benefits.
But emotions are running so high—against Trump, against Democratic leaders, about immigration itself—that the good will needed to do such deals seems to be evaporating.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz. 

NFL Kneeling Cartoons

What if NBC and the NFL had the guts to be honest about anthem protests at the Super Bowl?

NBC Sports executive producer Fred Gaudelli says NBC’s cameras will show any players who chose to kneel during the “The Star-Spangled Banner” when the network airs Super Bowl LII on Feb. 4.

“The Super Bowl is a live event, just like ‘Sunday Night Football.’ When you’re covering a live event, you’re covering what’s happening,” said Gaudelli. “So if there are players that choose to kneel, they will be shown live.”

That at first feels like a defendable point of view. They are taking the journalist’s free pass as observers, not participants. The problem is that stance is a lie.
The Super Bowl is American theatre. It is perhaps the most orchestrated live event that takes place in the U.S. today. It is designed, carefully framed, its halftime show meticulously planned and the placement of its ads, which have become key accouterments to the show, are choreographed down to the second. All that surrounds the game is such a pre-written play that even the “fans” who cheer the bands on the field at halftime all have the same wave, the same color clothes or whatever fits the performance.
The Super Bowl is not just some live event journalists are watching. It is a composed affair designed to make us feel a certain way, even to buy certain products—the central product being the NFL.
And that brand has been tarnished. Not simply harmed by the protest Colin Kaepernick began and the NFL players after him who’ve kneeled during our national anthem have continued, but fundamentally damaged by a lack of honesty from the NFL and from many of the networks that broadcast NFL games.

With no check on the players who disrespect the flag, the players who kneel are treated as civil-rights activists—heroes in our culture. Meanwhile, the point of view that the good, ol’ red, white and blue is a symbol of what is best in America, not something to protest, isn’t given a voice.

If NBC focuses a camera in on players who choose not to respect the flag and all it stands for before the big game then they aren’t just showing what happens at a live event, but are making the protest a part of their choreographed show. Might they also, during the anthem, show a group of fans holding signs saying “God Bless America”?
This is at the heart of why fans are turning away from the NFL. It isn’t really because a few players are making this game political. It is rather because in today’s political climate the NFL nor the broadcasters have the guts to challenge these players and to ask them to explain what they are protesting. The NFL and NBC refuse to publicly question if this is really the proper way to protest.
With no check on the players who disrespect the flag, and all it stands for, the players who opt to kneel are instead treated as civil-rights activists—heroes in our culture. Meanwhile, the point of view that the good, ol’ red, white and blue is a symbol of what is best in America, not something to protest, isn’t given a voice.
This is what sportscaster Al Michaels did during a panel at the Television Critics Association winter press tour when he addressed the point that attendance at games has suffered as a result when he said, “There are a lot of empty seats, especially in the beginning of the second half. Most of the seats in most of the stadiums have been sold, but you go to Atlanta, where they just opened up a new stadium. They have behind the lower bowl a 100 yard almost mall. You’ve got stores, you’ve got bars, you’ve got restaurants, you’ve got games for the kids.”
The NFL also attempted to avoid an honest debate when they tried to crassly buy off the controversy by saying they would donate millions of dollars to the United Negro College Fund and Dream Corps.
The NFL is a private organization that can put its money where it wants, but donations aren’t a real answer.
Gaudelli said that if some players kneel during the anthem that the commentators Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth would probably identify the players, say a little about the protests “and then get on with the game.”
That would be a whitewash, which isn’t fair to the players kneeling or standing or the millions and millions of fans. This discussion should honestly take place on news broadcasts where the players and others can talk openly about this as they have their opinions challenged. Trying to do this with a few sentences before the big game is out of Michaels’ and Collinsworth’s expertise and has no place in what is supposed to be a nonpartisan event designed to bring us all together.
The game should be above politics.
Frank Miniter is author of "The Future of the Gun" & "The Ultimate Man’s Survival Guide". His latest book is, is "Kill Big Brother", a cyber-thriller that shows how to balance freedom with security without diminishing the U.S. Bill of Rights.

Pelosi slams company bonuses as 'crumbs' despite once praising $40 tax cut

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday slammed President Trump’s tax reform that led to companies giving as large as $2,000 bonuses as “crumbs,” despite praising Obama-era $40 tax cut to workers as a “victory for America” in 2011.

Following the passage of sweeping tax cuts, including lowering the corporate tax from 35 percent to 21 percent, multiple companies have given out bonuses and pay rises for its workers amid anticipating tax savings.

Companies such as AT&T have given $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 employees while at least 60,000 workers at Fiat/ Chrysler received bonuses worth up to $2,000.
“In terms of the bonus that corporate America received versus the crumbs that they are giving to workers to kind of put the schmooze on — it’s so pathetic,” she told reporters Thursday. “I think it’s insignificant.”
Back in 2011, however, Pelosi was singing a different tune – praising a $40 payroll tax cut passed by President Obama as “a victory for all Americans” that will “make a difference.”
“The American people spoke out clearly and, thanks to President Obama’s leadership, 160 million Americans will continue to receive their payroll tax cut – nearly $40 per paycheck in the pockets of the average family,” she said at the time. “I salute the work of the unified House Democratic caucus on behalf of the American people.”
According to Saving.org’s inflation calculator, $40 in 2011 is equal to $44.06 in today’s dollars.
At least two million U.S. workers received bonuses, pay rises and other perks from at least 130 companies, The Washington Times reported. Most of these companies point to the Trump tax plan as the impetus.

Judge's DACA ruling seen by some legal scholars as problematic, report says

The judge who barred the Trump administration from turning back the Obama-era DACA program last week has some legal scholars concerned that the ruling could damage the notion of an impartial bench.

The New York Times reported Sunday that Judge William Alsup, the federal judge from the Northern District of California, used a local case before issuing the nationwide stop.

“How can a single judge decide a question for the whole country?” Samuel Bray, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, asked the paper.
Bray wrote a recent article where he spoke out against federal judges issuing nationwide injunctions, the paper reported.
“Increasingly, legal scholars are concerned about the way national injunctions are transforming the relationship between the courts and the political branches,” he said.
Alsup wrote that it is “plausible” that President Trump ended the program for racial reasons, Politico reported.
"Circumstantial evidence of intent, including statements by a decisionmaker, may be considered in evaluating whether government action was motivated by a discriminatory purpose," Alsup wrote on Friday. "These statements were not about the rescission (which came later) but they still have relevance to show racial animus against people south of our border."
DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement Wednesday that the ruling was “outrageous, especially in light of the president’s successful bipartisan meeting with House and Senate members at the White House on the same day.”
The Times' report said the U.S. Supreme Court might address the issue of these injunctions.
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston, told the paper, “The justices don’t like the district courts changing national policy overnight.”

Flake's upcoming speech compares Trump's criticism of media to Stalin, report says

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., will make a speech scheduled for Wednesday where he will compare President Trump’s concerns of media objectivity to similar comments made by communist dictator Joseph Stalin.

Flake, a fervent critic of the Trump administration, is set to give the speech the same day Trump is expected to announce the winners of the so-called “fake news” awards.

The senator will use his speech to condemn Trump’s attacks on the press and for calling it “the enemy of the American people.”
In the draft of the speech, obtained by The Washington Post, Flake will then compare Trump’s comments to statements made by Stalin, who is responsible for the murder of millions.
“It is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own president uses words infamously spoken by Josef Stalin to describe his enemies,” the senator is expected to say, according to the excerpts published by the Post.
“It bears noting that so fraught with malice was the phrase ‘enemy of the people,’ that even Nikita Khrushchev forbade its use, telling the Soviet Communist Party that the phrase had been introduced by Stalin for the purpose of ‘annihilating such individuals’ who disagreed with the supreme leader.”
According to the outgoing senator’s speech excerpts, Trump “has it precisely backward — despotism is the enemy of the people,” adding that “When a figure in power reflexively calls any press that doesn’t suit him ‘fake news,’ it is that person who should be the figure of suspicion, not the press.”
The relationship between Flake and Trump has been soured from the start. During the 2016 presidential election, Trump said Flake is “a very weak and ineffective Senator.” Last summer, the commander-in-chief praised his Republican challenger Kelli Ward, adding that the Arizona senator “is weak on borders, crime and a non-factor in Senate. He's toxic!”
Flake announced his resignation in October with a scathing attack on the president, calling his behavior “reckless, outrageous, and undignified."
He also criticized the Republican Party that, in his view, had “given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfying anger and resentment,” adding that “anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy."

Federal Communication Commission Cartoons

Hawaii false alarm prompts plans for FCC investigation

Saturday's errant ballistic-missile alert to cellphones, televisions and radio stations in Hawaii has officials in Washington planning to find out what went wrong.

Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai announced plans for a probe via Twitter.

“The @FCC is launching a full investigation into the false emergency alert that was sent to residents of Hawaii,” Pai tweeted later Saturday.

The @FCC is launching a full investigation into the false emergency alert that was sent to residents of Hawaii.

— Ajit Pai (@AjitPaiFCC) January 13, 2018

U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, praised Pai's decision to address an error that sent many Hawaii residents into a panic for about 40 minutes.
"This system failed miserably and we need to start over," Schatz tweeted.

Just got off the phone w @AjitPaiFCC and glad they are going to work with us on developing best practices on the communications side for states and municipalities to make sure this never happens again. This system failed miserably and we need to start over.

— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) January 13, 2018

Local officials and the U.S. Pacific Command quickly recognized that the alert was a false alarm, but the system took about 40 minutes to send a corrective message to Hawaii residents, the Washington Examiner reported.
The FCC has regulated the nation's wireless emergency alert system since 2012. But critics have pointed out a number of perceived flaws, such as messages being delivered to too wide a swath rather than the people most affected by an emergency, Reuters reported.
In December, officials from Harris County, Texas, told members of the FCC about problems they experienced in directing alerts to people most affected by Hurricane Harvey, the New York Times reported.
In October, U.S. Sens. Kamala Harris and Dianne Feinstein, both D-Calif., wrote to Pai, saying that inefficient location-targeting had deprived some residents of receiving alerts, as wildfires raged across Northern California, the Times reported.
“These emergency services are caught in a bind between notifying individuals in imminent danger and risking mass panic,” the senators wrote.
Just last week Pai proposed that service providers “deliver these alerts to match the geographic area specified by the officials sending the alert with no more overshoot than one-tenth of a mile.”
The FCC plans to vote this month on a plan to improve the emergency alert system so it better targets the people most affected by a given situation.
Under such a proposed sytem, Pai said, Americans will “take more seriously the alerts they receive on their mobile devices.”

Who is Sean Penn to lecture Trump about compassion?

Piece of S**t Actor Sean Penn.

It is utterly astounding that Time magazine published an op-ed by clueless actor Sean Penn, lecturing President Trump on compassion and justice in Latin America and the Caribbean. Who is Sean Penn to lecture anyone about compassion?

After all, it is Sean Penn who enabled and befriended the repressive and ruthless Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, using his Hollywood clout to lend credibility to Chavez and to spread lies about the “successes” of Chavez’s disastrous socialist revolution.

Of course, Penn was not alone. Actor Danny Glover and filmmaker Michael Moore also lavished Chavez and his successor, Nicholas Maduro, with praise and support as Venezuela spiraled into chaos and poverty.
So did Democratic Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sanders’ website once stated  that the American Dream was dead and more likely to be found in Venezuela than the U.S. He has since quietly removed this passage from the site.

What has Sean Penn said about the horrible indignities and abuses suffered by the Venezuelan people? Nothing. Where is his “compassionate” op-ed to show concern for the victims of Venezuelan socialism and repression?

Under Chavez and Maduro, Venezuela went from being the economic envy of Latin America – rich in oil and with a vibrant economy – to being one of its poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.
Today, thanks to the nationalization of oil production and government-imposed price controls, Venezuela is a country of hunger, deprivation, food shortages and humiliations that proud Venezuelans never thought they would be forced to endure. As a result of terrible food shortages, 75 percent of Venezuelans lost an average of 19 pounds last year.
The Miami Herald, in one of the saddest articles I have ever read, chronicled the plight of Venezuelan mothers with degrees in medicine and engineering prostituting themselves in neighboring Columbia to afford groceries for their families. Others are eating their pets or have to give away children they can no longer feed.
The political repression in Venezuela is equally alarming. Hundreds of dissidents have been imprisoned, including Maduro’s most threatening competitor – the handsome, young and courageous former mayor of Caracas, Leopoldo Lopez. Lopez was sentenced to 14 years in prison on trumped up charges, though he is currently under house arrest due to health concerns.
On top of all this, Venezuela’s brave citizens risk being attacked or killed by their own government when they protest against elections and institutions rigged by the regime.
So what has Sean Penn said about these horrible indignities and abuses suffered by the Venezuelan people? Nothing. Where is his “compassionate” op-ed to show concern for the victims of Venezuelan socialism and repression? Silence.
Meanwhile, President Trump – whom Penn calls “an enemy of compassion” over his reported use of vulgar language to describe some parts of the world in a closed-door Oval Office meeting – has been unequivocal in voicing his support for the Venezuelan people.
President Trump has condemned Venezuela’s socialist oppressors and made the quest of the Venezuelan people for freedom and prosperity one of his top three international concerns, behind North Korea and Iran.
I do agree with Penn on one thing. Immigrants and refugees who have escaped the corrupt, dysfunctional, crime-ridden, socialist and communist regimes of Latin America are precisely the kind of hard-working and grateful people we should be welcoming to the U.S. They truly appreciate the blessings that Penn takes for granted.
Unlike Penn, these immigrants understand that it is democracy and American free-enterprise that have made our country the best and most prosperous in the history of the world. They know that nothing has lifted more people out of poverty than entrepreneurial capitalism. And they resent the ignorant complicity of members of the Hollywood elite, like Sean Penn, in the destruction of their country and the misery and poverty it has wrought.
A few months ago I attended the graduation ceremony of a group of Latin Americans who had attended an English language course sponsored by the LIBRE Initiative, a nonprofit that educates Hispanics about how to achieve the American Dream.
A Venezuelan man stood up. He told us he was one of the lucky ones who was able to leave that nation. He expressed deep gratitude to America and to the LIBRE Initiative, which was empowering him with language skills to succeed in his new home.
Holding a small American flag in one hand and a Venezuelan flag in the other, he addressed this small group of immigrants gathered inside of a cramped Honduran restaurant. He didn’t mince words.
“We need to educate our children to be wary of those who promise us ‘free’ things,” the man said. “I don’t care if it’s a bag of rice or a washing machine. Nothing is worth your freedom. It’s priceless.”
This new immigrant knows more about America, freedom, and the fruits of free enterprise than Sean Penn and socialist Hollywood pals will ever know.
Rachel Campos-Duffy is a FOX News Contributor and a mother of eight. Her debut children’s book – inspired by real life events - is a story about a little girl’s adventure inside the US Capitol where she learns lessons about patriotism, courage and her immigrant father’s journey to citizenship. It will be released by Regnery Kids in Spring 2018.

What's really behind the furious efforts by Democrats' to spin the Trump dossier

kimberley strassel wall street journal

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel says Mueller, the Justice Department and the FBI aren't helping the lawmakers' probe of Fusion GPS and the infamous Trump dossier. #Tucker
There’s no such thing as a coincidence in Washington, so why the sudden, furious effort by Democrats and the media to give cover to the Steele dossier? As in, the sudden, furious effort that happens to coincide with congressional investigators’ finally being given access to FBI records about the Trump-Russia probe.
This scandal’s pivotal day was Jan. 3. That’s the deadline House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation to turn over documents it had been holding for months. Speaker Paul Ryan backed Mr. Nunes’s threat to cite officials for contempt of Congress. Everyone who played a part in encouraging the FBI’s colonoscopy of the Trump campaign—congressional Democrats, FBI and Justice Department senior career staff, the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama political mobs, dossier commissioner Fusion GPS, the press corps—knew about the deadline and clearly had been tipped to the likelihood that the FBI would have to comply. Thus the dossier rehabilitation campaign.
Weeks before, the same crew had taken a desperate shot at running away from the dossier, with a New York Times special that attempted to play down its significance in the FBI probe. You can see why. In the year since BuzzFeed published the salacious dossier, we’ve discovered it was a work product of the Clinton campaign, commissioned by an oppo-research firm (Fusion), compiled by a British ex-spook on the basis of anonymous sources, and rolled out to the media in the runup to the election. Oh, and it appears to continue to be almost entirely false. When the best you’ve got is that a campaign orbiter made a public trip to Russia, you haven’t got much.
But with Congress about to obtain documents that show the dossier did matter, it was time for a new line. And so the day before the Nunes deadline, Fusion co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch broke their public silence to explain in a New York Times op-ed that what really matters was their noble intention—to highlight Donald Trump’s misdeeds. The duo took credit for alerting the “national security community” to a Russian “attack.”
Keep reading Kimberley Strassel's column in the Wall Street Journal.
Kimberley Strassel writes the Potomac Watch column for the Wall Street Journal where she is a member of the editorial board. Her latest book is "The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech" (Twelve, 2016).  Follow her on Twitter @KimStrassel.

Nancy Pelosi's elitist Democrats -- America, this is the party of the rich, sneering at the poor

There was a time when the Democrats were the party of working Americans. They seemed to understand and fight for the interests of the working class and people living in poverty. Republicans, by contrast, struggled for decades with the perception that they were “for the rich.”

Well, how things have turned around. Just look at the latest economic pronouncements of leading establishment Democrats.

Here in my home state of California, in response to President Trump signing the GOP tax reform bill into law, state Senate Democratic leader Kevin de Leon has taken up a new cause: fighting for the right of the richest Californians to evade their taxes.
It’s almost unbelievable – but true. De Leon (who is also the leading challenger to Sen. Dianne Feinstein in her primary battle as she seeks re-election this year) has proposed setting up a new so-called charity that would enable the Silicon Valley and Hollywood elite to claw back their losses from the Trump administration’s new tax reform law.

If you’re a member of a working family struggling to make ends meet (as pretty much half of American families are after the economic disaster of the Bush and Obama years), then $1,000 makes a real difference.

That tax reform law, let’s remind ourselves, actually means that some of the richest people in the richest parts of America will pay more in taxes, thanks to drastic cuts in deductions for state and local taxes they pay.
To fight off President Trump’s vicious attack on their rich friends (read: donors), California Democrats want to set up a “California Excellence Fund.” Donations to the fund would be matched dollar-for-dollar by tax credits, which can then be subtracted from tax bills as “charity.” It’s a classic liberal version of charity, mind you: all the money would go straight into the coffers of the state government’s general fund.
Who would benefit from this bit of creative accounting? Californians earning over $1 million a year, mainly.
“‘Kevin de Leon: the last best hope for California millionaires.” Not sure he wants that as the bumper sticker for his campaign against Feinstein, but as they say: when someone tells you who they are, believe them.
Another prominent California Democrat also revealed her true colors this past week over taxes: our old friend, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. She dismissed $1,000 worker bonuses given in response to the GOP tax cuts as “crumbs.”
Well yes, that’s what $1,000 may mean to you if you’re married to a wealthy real estate tycoon and live in splendor in San Francisco. But if you’re a member of a working family struggling to make ends meet (as pretty much half of American families are after the economic disaster of the Bush and Obama years), then $1,000 makes a real difference.
You can see the new left elitism in their attitude to immigration too. Their total rejection of any effort to clamp down on the out-of-control low-wage immigration that harms American workers shows that establishment Democrats’ sympathies now lie with big business, not working people.
That’s not true of the Democrats’ populist wing, of course. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont quite rightly points out that it’s corporate America that wants mass immigration.
In a 2105 interview Sanders said: “Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don't believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country, I think we have to do everything we can to create millions of jobs. You know what youth unemployment is in the United States of America today? If you're a white high school graduate, it's 33 percent, Hispanic 36 percent, African American 51 percent. You think we should open the borders and bring in a lot of low-wage workers, or do you think maybe we should try to get jobs for those kids?”
That’s Donald Trump’s position too: and rightly so. But establishment Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Kevin de Leon and all the rest who are busy attacking the president’s pro-worker economic agenda have totally lost touch with the needs and aspirations of working Americans. They demean and dismiss them, preferring the company – and the interests – of their wealthy friends and donors.
That’s today’s elitist Democrats: they’ve become the party of the rich, sneering at the poor.

Trump Jerusalem Cartoons

From Oprah to Trump’s tough talk, media attack the president; and other journalistic disasters of the week

Trump touts economic progress in first year

President talks GDP growth, stock market gains and immigration in wide-ranging interview with the Wall Street Journal; reaction and analysis from Glenn Hall, chief editor for the Dow Jones Newswires.

It was a week that blew through controversies faster than our winter bomb cyclone. Oprah Winfrey’s Golden Globes speech and speculation that she will run for president, the Michael Wolff book even journalists dispute, DACA and, finally, the storm following President Donald Trump’s purported use of the word “s---hole” to describe Africa, Haiti and El Salvador during a discussion on immigration with a bipartisan group of senators.

The president tweeted Friday morning saying the reports about his meeting with the senators were inaccurate. His tweet stated: “The language used by me at the DACA meeting was tough, but this was not the language used. What was really tough was the outlandish proposal made – a big setback for DACA!”

DACA stands for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. President Trump has said the program, which allows about 700,000 immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally by their parents when they were children to remain in the U.S. temporarily, will end in March unless Congress passes new legislation that he signs into law. The program was created by an executive order signed by President Obama.
Two Republican senators at the meeting where Trump supposedly used the offensive language – David Perdue of Georgia and Tom Cotton of Arkansas – issued a statement Friday saying that “we do not recall the President saying these comments specifically.” However, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said the president referred to some nations as “s---hole” countries at the meeting and said the president made some comments that were “hate-filled, vile and racist.”
It was the kind of week where the media overreacted to almost everything. So much so that their Public Enemy No. 2 – Steve Bannon – was barely an afterthought as he left his job heading up Breitbart News following a falling out with President Trump.
Journalists don’t seem to grasp that if everything is an apocalypse then nothing is. That includes everything from the new tax cuts for 80 percent of taxpayers to the latest Trump tweet to the president getting two scoops of ice cream.
Many journalists had taken time off during the holidays and were clearly trying to make up for lost time – especially at CNN. It was hard to tell which topic they embraced with more zeal, but the “s---hole” comment was the perfect capstone to a biased week.
CNN anchors battled to see who could use the offensive word the most aggressively the night the story broke. Chris Cuomo outdid other anchors on his network. CNN used it in a chyron on his new show and elsewhere. He even wrote it on a whiteboard beneath the words: “THIS IS WHO HE IS.” It was like he was channeling a potty-mouth liberal version of Glenn Beck.
Cuomo moved into full lecture mode, telling the resistance: “It’s not OK. It is who he is.” Somewhere he lost the difference between words said in private versus ones broadcast repeatedly on TV.
NBC Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell tweeted her unsubtle view: “It's been a tough day for intelligence experts, foreign policy advocates, and basic human beings.”
The New York Times published a story devoted to the media coverage, under the headline: “After Donald Trump Said It, How News Outlets Handled It.” The paper led with NBC’s Lester Holt, acting like journalists had never heard rough words before. “Holt opened the ‘NBC Nightly News’ on Thursday with a parental warning: ‘This may not be appropriate for some of our younger viewers.’”
The Washington Post led its website with: “Trump attacks protections for immigrants from ‘shithole’ countries.”
The story was omnipresent. The only issue was how many of the eight letters of the vulgar word news organizations actually used. NPR White House Correspondent Scott Horsley tweeted the deadpan NPR position: “We are using s***hole online. Note the third asterisk in keeping with NPR style. – NPR editors.”
The whole episode was a reminder how much journalists edit when they want. During President Obama’s exit interview with Vanity Fair, he admitted: “I curse more than I should, and I find myself cursing more in this office than I had in my previous life.” Then added: “And fortunately both my chief of staff and my national-security adviser have even bigger potty mouths than me, so it’s O.K.” Other than Biden’s famous F-bomb, this is a side to the Team Obama we never saw.
2. Let’s Elect Oprah: When journalists weren’t freaking out about President Trump doing almost anything, they were celebrating a potential opponent. The Sunday night Golden Globes featured longtime TV and movie star Oprah Winfrey winning the Cecil B. DeMille award. Her speech celebrated the press, so journalists loved it. She noted journalists’ “insatiable dedication to uncovering the absolute truth.” Her speech turned to the #MeToo campaign and told about the “ability to maintain hope for a brighter morning, even during our darkest nights.”
The speech was almost universally seen as a pre-announcement announcement of her campaign to become the next president of the United States. Oprah is a self-made billionaire (who I watched making her name on the Baltimore show “People Are Talking”) and left-wing journalists and activists acted like they had found their populist counterpoint to Trump.
The race was on to see which outlet would celebrate Oprah more. NBC even tweeted out backing for her presidency. “Nothing but respect for OUR future president,” the official account stated, above a gif of a smiling Oprah. It was later taken down and blamed on “a third party.”
CNN was all in. Political Analyst April Ryan described Oprah as an “outstanding” candidate who could “definitely win.” Political Commentator Van Jones envisioned her as “probably the most beloved human being on Earth” and the “queen of the universe.” Senior Media Correspondent Brian Stelter said “her hopeful message – ‘A new day is on the horizon’ – could have doubled as a campaign rallying cry.”
CBS was nearly as bad, leading its nightly newscast with Oprahmania. Chief Congressional Correspondent Nancy Cordes described it as “vintage Winfrey.” “But fans thought they heard something more, the crescendo of a campaign address,” she added. One wonders how many of those fans were outside the nation’s newsrooms.
Entertainment media piled on. Ellen DeGeneres called the speech “a barn burner.” Actress Meryl Streep was awed: “Wow! … where do I send that check, you know?” “The View” Co-host Joy Behar called Oprah “Donald Trump’s worst nightmare.”
3. The Wolff in The White House: By week’s end, it was almost impossible to recall that journalists had spent hours promoting the Michael Wolff book that even they didn’t believe. (Two hours to be exact on ABC, CBS and NBC.)
CNN Host Jake Tapper had a telling Twitter exchange with Washington Post media reporter Paul Farhi going over what they considered flawed about the book. Tapper asked: “Do you believe Wolff’s assertion that 100% of the president’s senior advisers and family members questions his intelligence and fitness for office? That’s the main argument of the book.” Farhi’s response showed the problem of the book: “100 percent? No.”
Tapper responded: “He asserts that it’s 100%. So how one then is supposed to regard his credibility?”
Despite that skepticism, Wolff was everywhere. He declared his book “will finally end ... this presidency,” but claimed to “have no political agenda.” MSNBC Host Chris Matthews celebrated the book’s facts. He said he “love[s] the facts in your book because it is a non-fiction book with a lot of facts.”
Those “facts” were certainly … something. MSNBC hyped the “speculation” that Trump is “dyslexic.”  Even lefty provocateur Stephen Colbert was skeptical, asking Wolff: “So how much of it should I believe?” CNBC’s Sara Fagen told ABC perpetual lefty Anchor George Stephanopoulos that the total was only “50 percent.”
Luckily for Wolff, the media didn’t let those “facts” get in the way of them promoting his book off the shelves.
4. Trump Is _____: The rest of the week was filled with invective – journalists and celebrities bashing President Trump any way they could.

• New York Times Columnist Nicholas Kristof accused Trump of “authoritarian tendencies.”

• CNN Host Anderson Cooper compared Trump to “Wile E. Coyote and Kelly from ‘The Office’” because all pretended to be smart.

• “Morning Joe” Host Joe Scarborough claimed Trump proved he “wasn’t” “in complete control of his mental facilities.” (Yes, Joe said “facilities,” not faculties.) He also pretended Trump listens to the “voices in his head.”

• Actor Robert De Niro complained: “the world is suffering from the real Donald Trump.”

• And TBS’s “Full Frontal” Host Samantha Bee, D-Only Theoretically Funny, announced plans for “The Apology Race,” where her “correspondents will travel the globe to apologize for every garbage thing Donald Trump does.” Reminiscent of the last apology tour we saw that was done by President Barack Obama.