Will Hillary persist in 2020? Her actions suggest ‘yes’

There’s been buzz circulating lately that Hillary Clinton may still have her eye on the Oval Office and is considering stepping back in the ring to take another shot at the 2020 Democrat presidential nomination. Because quitters never win, or something.

On its face, it sounds like pure insanity. However, she’s spent the last year and a half fixated on the 2016 election, traveling all over and telling anyone who will listen why it’s not her fault she lost.

She even went so far as to write a book, “What Happened.”  Her publisher could have saved a few trees and sent her a two-word email - you lost.
Perhaps the basket of excuses she’s been carrying around is really her misguided attempt at trying to rehab her image and set the stage for round three in 2020.  When you think about it that way, the idea she’d actually run again sounds less like pure insanity and starts to sound absurdly believable.
This week former adviser to Bill Clinton, Lanny Davis, publicly discouraged her from running, “for her sake and her family’s sake.” Reading between the lines, she’s either seriously considering another run or someone important in Clinton world wants her to go for it. It’s highly unlikely that a former senior adviser like Davis would come out and make such a statement otherwise.
The Democrats are in such disarray with no known message or direction, it’s almost as if they’re spinning around in a game of musical chairs and they have no clue where they’ll end up next.
President Trump is an anomaly to them, they can’t wrap their mind around his appeal. While on one hand they think he should be easily beatable, their dirty little secret is they don’t really have a good candidate like Barack Obama they can all rally around. The Democratic Party is already fractured, and a third run for Hillary would only further demonstrate the extent of just how fractured.

If she’s really interested in breaking glass ceilings she will get out of the way and let someone else take a crack at it.

The Democrat strategy moving forward seems to be disorganized chaos. Protesting by screaming in the streets, threatening reporters outside the Supreme Court, sending out press releases railing against “xx” for the Supreme Court before we even know who “xx” is.
They’ve jumped from DACA, to kids being separated from their parents at the border, to now Supreme Court justice nominations. Each one was the moral outrage of the moment for liberals, only to be left in the dust when the next political soundbite popped up for them.
Making sure the Clintons do their part to contribute to the moral outrage, and possibly positioning her for 2020, the Clinton-linked group Demand Justice was formed following the retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. Its purpose is to put pressure on senators to oppose President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee and is run by Hillary’s 2016 press secretary, Brian Fallon.
Of note, the group has no restrictions on lobbying, can back candidates, and isn’t required to disclose donors. Keep in mind, this initiative was underway before the president even picked a nominee, adding to the hysteria and scare tactics the far left has engaged from the time Justice Kennedy announced his retirement until President Trump nominated Judge Kavanaugh to replace him.
Politics has pervaded government to the point that Hillary and her friends on the left now believe they are one and the same. If you listen to the - sometimes incoherent - rants, protests, and opposition to President Trump’s judicial nominees, it’s never about the rule of law or the Constitution. It’s about their demands. They want their boxes checked by activists who dress up as judges.
Outside of politics Hillary is lost. Her actions post-election reveal it’s all she ever aspired to, and she doesn’t appear to be letting it go.
If she were really interested in making the world better and helping those less fortunate, she would have spent the last 17 months focusing her efforts elsewhere rather than being obsessed with an election she lost.
From a purely political perspective I don’t know a Trump supporter who wouldn’t welcome her running for a third time. It would almost ensure him another four years in office.
However, from a woman’s perspective, it’s like watching another woman chase after the guy who keeps telling her to go away.  It’s embarrassing. 
If she’s really interested in breaking glass ceilings she will get out of the way and let someone else take a crack at it. Truly being a champion of other women sometimes means enthusiastically and graciously standing behind other women, instead of flaunting your sense of entitlement and continually bulldozing your way in front of them.
Opinion

Lauren DeBellis Appell, a freelance writer in Fairfax, Virginia, was deputy press secretary for then-Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., in his successful 2000 re-election campaign, as well as assistant communications director for the Senate Republican Policy Committee (2001-2003).

Judge has second thoughts hours after praising Trump administration for family reunifications

In this June 28 photo, protesters chant, "Families belong together!" as they walk to the front doors of the federal courthouse in Brownsville, Texas.  (AP)

The same judge who praised the Trump administration for its “collaborative” effort to reunite families separated at the border is now saying he's having second thoughts about whether the government is acting in “good faith.”

U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw criticized the administration late Friday evening, calling into question the safety of a new plan filed by the Department of Justice to reunite more than 2,500 children over the age of 5 by the July 26 deadline.

After Friday’s hearing, the DOJ filed a reunification plan that would meet the July 26 deadline via "truncated" procedures to verify parentage and perform background checks, which exclude DNA testing and other steps to reunify families of children under 5.
The administration said the abbreviated vetting puts children at significant safety risk but is needed to meet the deadline.
Chris Meekins, the deputy assistant health and human services secretary for preparedness and response, said that while he is committed to meeting the deadline, he does not believe "placing of children into such situations is consistent with the mission of HHS or my core values."
Sabraw fired back, second-guessing remarks he'd made hours earlier.
"It is clear from Mr. Meekins' declaration that HHS either does not understand the court's orders or is acting in defiance of them. … At a minimum, it appears he is attempting to provide cover to defendants for their own conduct in the practice of family separation, and the lack of foresight and infrastructure necessary to remedy the harms caused by that practice.”
He said that the official’s statement “calls into question” his earlier comment that the government was acting in “good faith.” Sabraw said that safe reunification could and will occur by July 26.

Pentagon: China Spying On Major U.S.-led Military Exercises After Being Disinvited

FILE – The Pentagon is seen in this aerial view in Washington, in this March 27, 2008 file photo. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)

OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 6:26 PM PT – Sat. July 14, 2018

The Pentagon is accusing China of spying on U.S.-led military exercises near Hawaii.
Navy officials confirmed the U.S. Pacific Fleet is monitoring a Chinese surveillance ship, in a statement to CNN.
It’s located just outside of U.S. territorial seas.
This comes after Beijing was disinvited from the exercises back in May, over its aggression in the South China Sea.
U.S. officials say they expect the Chinese vessel to stay put and don’t anticipate any disruption to the on-going exercises.
The exercises are held every two years and feature around 25 thousand personnel from over 20 countries.

HHS departures signal new secretary's 'no-nonsense' approach: report

Two U.S. Health and Human Services appointees left the agency this week after months of igniting controversy on social media, according to a report.
The departures signaled what one HHS source described as a "no-nonsense" and "highly professional" management approach being taken by HHS Secretary Alex Azar, Politico reported.
“There could be more changes to come as the secretary gets fully on board and staffed up,” the source told the news outlet.

“There could be more changes to come as the secretary gets fully on board and staffed up.”
- HHS source

Azar has been leading the agency since January, when the Senate confirmed his appointment by President Donald Trump.
The Politico report identified the two HHS staffers who've left the agency as Gavin Smith, a policy adviser who resigned Friday, and Tim Clark, the agency’s White House liaison, who is expected to depart in the coming weeks.
Prior to his HHS appointment, Clark was the Trump campaign’s California chairman. On more than one occasion, Clark punctuated tweets with the hastag "#SpiritCooking," in reference to a debunked conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta engaged in Satanic ritual, the report said.
Smith gained a reputation for routinely mocking critics of the president, for example referring to U.S. senators as "crazy" or "clueless."
The appointees’ incendiary posts had long been a headache for HHS, which received heightened attention after a Politico report. 
Azar’s predecessor Tom Price resigned after reports of his use of “costly” private jets and fractious leadership.
Azar, 51, is married with two children. Prior to joining HHS, he lived in Indiana with his family for about a decade, according to his Health and Human Services Department biography.
The Yale-educated lawyer also attended Dartmouth College, where he graduated summa cum laude, according to the biography.
Azar, who once clerked for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, has spent a large chunk of his career in the healthcare industry.
He previously served as general counsel of HHS and later as deputy secretary of HHS under former President George W. Bush.
Fox News' Madeline Farber contrinbuted to this story.
Editor's Note: After this story was published, Fox News received an email from Riley N. Althouse, press assistant in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at HHS. The message, attributed to Peter Urbanowitz, chief of staff, said the following:
“Mr. Clark has long planned this position change and delayed that move for several months to assure a smooth transition for the new Secretary. He has been a huge help and strong partner in our success.”
Bradford Betz is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bradford_betz.

Rod Rosenstein Cartoons

Mueller's indictments of 12 Russians could have waited, former US diplomat says

John Negroponte served in several high-level positions under five presidents.  (Fox Business)

A former high-level diplomat from President George W. Bush’s administration said Friday that Special Counsel Robert Mueller could have waited until after next week’s Trump-Putin summit before announcing indictments against 12 Russian military intelligence officers.
“It could have just as well waited until the president had left Europe,” John Negroponte, a former deputy secretary of state, told journalist Krystal Ball in an interview that will appear online Monday. Ball co-hosts the program “Rising,” on Hill.TV.
Negroponte, who also served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and is a former director of national intelligence, added that he believes the Trump-Putin summit should proceed, regardless of the indictments.
"If it's been scheduled, it's important that these two heads of state meet,” Negroponte told Ball, according to the Hill. “Russia is a permanent member of the [U.N.] Security Council, it's a nuclear weapons state, it has global reach -- whether it's in the Middle East, or in the Korean Peninsula, or elsewhere -- and I think it behooves us to have that kind of dialogue.”

"If it's been scheduled, it's important that these two heads of state meet. Russia is a permanent member of the [U.N.] Security Council, it's a nuclear weapons state, it has global reach ... and I think it behooves us to have that kind of dialogue.”
- John Negroponte, former U.S. diplomat

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced Friday that Mueller had charged 12 Russian intelligence officers with crimes related to the 2016 hacking of the Democratic National Committee.
Rosenstein said Trump was briefed about the indictments earlier in the week and was “fully aware” of them before the announcement, Business Insider reported.
The presidents of the U.S. and Russia are scheduled to meet Monday in Helsinki, Finland. Trump has faced pressure from lawmakers in both parties to raise the issue of Russian meddling in the 2016 election during the meeting with Putin.
Others, in wake of the indictments, have urged Trump to simply cancel the meeting.
“Cancel the Putin meeting. Now,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tweeted Friday.
Trump told reporters Friday morning that he planned to address election meddling with Putin, but he believed the Mueller investigation was a “witch hunt.”
“I think that we're being hurt very badly by the — I would call it the witch hunt,” Trump said during a news conference with British Prime Minister Theresa May, the Washington Post reported.
Trump then addressed the meddling issue.
“I know you'll ask, 'Will we be talking about meddling?’ And I will absolutely bring that up,” the president said, according to the Post. “There won't be a Perry Mason here, I don't think, but you never know what happens, right? But I will absolutely, firmly ask the question.”

Democrat's 'Purple Heart' remark at Strzok hearing spurs veterans to plan protest march

SMIRKY

 

 

 

 

Democratic U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (IDIOT)

Some veterans in Tennessee say they're planning a protest march following a congressman's comment this week that embattled FBI official Peter Strzok deserved a Purple Heart for enduring a House panel's grilling over allegations of bias against President Donald Trump.
Sean Higgins, an Air Force veteran from Memphis, is leading the upcoming march, the Tennessean reported. Higgins told the paper that many constituents of Democratic U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen are “pissed as hell” after Cohen said Strzok deserved the military award.
“How do you compare someone getting wounded in combat to someone getting in trouble for message he sent? How can Cohen claim (Strzok) get a Purple Heart for that?” Higgins said.
The Purple Heart typically is awarded to members of the U.S. military who are wounded in combat or given posthumously to those killed in combat.

“How do you compare someone getting wounded in combat to someone getting in trouble for message he sent?"
- Sean Higgins, U.S. Air Force veteran

Cohen, 69, defended Strzok, who was being questioned Thursday on Capitol Hill over a series of anti-Trump text messages he sent to his former co-worker and lover, Lisa Page, while investigating Russian election meddling and Hillary Clinton’s email server.
"If I could give you a Purple Heart, I would," Cohen told Strzok, accusing his GOP counterparts of attempting to undermine Strzok and Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.
Higgins said that 30 veterans have so far committed to marching, including Army veteran Darien Price of Memphis, who told the paper he was “blown away” by Cohen’s statement.

“It is disrespectful to those alive who wear the Purple Heart but especially to families who lost loved ones to who fought for this country."
- Darien Price, Army veteran

“It is disrespectful to those alive who wear the Purple Heart but especially to families who lost loved ones to who fought for this country," said Price, who was denied his Purple Heart until Cohen's office stepped in. "Truly saddening.”
Retired Staff Sgt. Johnny "Joey" Jones, a Marine Corps veteran who received a Purple Heart after losing both of his legs and suffering other permanent injuries in an improvised explosive device (IED) blast in Afghanistan, told “Fox & Friends” on Friday that Cohen's remarks were "disgraceful."
Following public outcry, Cohen backpedaled on his remarks during a joint hearing Friday.
“I regret mentioning the Purple Heart medal at yesterday’s hearing,” Cohen said. “My intent was to speak metaphorically to make a broader point about attacks against the FBI and Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation into a Russian attack on our country.
“I have nothing but the highest respect for members of the armed forces, especially those who have been awarded Purple Hearts, as well as the hard working men and women at the FBI. We are safe because of their service and sacrifice," he said.
Higgins, a former VA hospital employee in Memphis, told the Tennessean he had previously tried working with Cohen for years in attempts to improve the hospital’s conditions before publicly blowing the whistle.
Higgins, who had been reporting problems in the VA since he was hired in 2007, was fired from his position for the third time in June 2017, and is appealing the firing, WREG-TV in Memphis reported. He appealed his first two firings and was hired back each time.
The march, which is also in protest of the VA hospital's treatment of veterans, has not been given a date.

'Cal 3' backer urges court to dismiss lawsuit opposing California break-up plan

The sponsor of the "Cal 3" initiative to split California into three states asked the state's Supreme Court on Friday to dismiss a lawsuit calling for the proposal to be pulled from the November ballot.
Tim Draper, a venture capitalist who spent more than $1.7 million supporting the initiative, told the court in a letter that there’s not enough time to properly consider the legal challenge to his effort.

Venture capitalist Tim Draper is the sponsor of the "Cal 3" initiative.  (Fox Business)

He said he wasn't properly served with the lawsuit, giving him less time to respond.
"I have been given just a day or two to respond to a complex, multi-faceted attack on my Constitutional right to initiative," Draper wrote. "This Court's long history of jealously guarding the exercise of initiative power should not be cavalierly disregarded now, especially on such a truncated timetable."
OPPONENTS OF PROPOSED CALIFORNIA BREAKUP SUE TO PULL IT OFF BALLOT 
The Planning and Conservation League, an environmental group, filed the lawsuit Monday, arguing that Draper's plan exceeds the scope of an initiative because it would drastically alter California's government and constitutional framework.
“The dislocation and the disruption that would be caused by something as great as this just can’t be understated,” said Carlyle Hall, a lawyer working on the lawsuit. “This will not make things better.”

“The dislocation and the disruption that would be caused by something as great as this just can’t be understated. This will not make things better.”
- Carlyle Hall, lawyer, Planning and Conservation League

The initiative could harm the environment if California’s strong environmental protections are scrapped and replaced with something weaker, which could happen if the state were split, Hall said.
Draper argued the "Cal 3" measure doesn't go beyond what can be accomplished in an initiative. If passed by voters, it would be only the first step toward dividing the state, he said.
The Cal 3 initiative would break the state into Northern California, California and Southern California.
Passing at the ballot box is just the first hurdle.
The measure then directs the governor to ask the U.S. Congress for the ultimate approval — likely a tall order.
If Congress were to give a green light, it would then be up the state's Legislature to determine exactly how the split would happen, including how the state's debts would be divided.
Each of the three states would determine their own governance structure.
Supporters of dividing California argue the nation's most populous state has become ungovernable because of its size, wealth disparities and geographic diversity.
CALIFORNIA 'THREE STATES' PLAN OK'D FOR NOVEMBER BALLOT
Meanwhile, Michael Salerno, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, described the proposal as having profound ramifications if approved.
“It would not surprise me if the court took this off the ballot,” he said.
Although California as it exists today is heavily Democratic, the newly proposed Southern California might not be. Democrats have only a slim registration advantage over Republicans in that region.