Texas U.S. Representative Jeb Hensarling announced he’s retiring at the end of his term.
Here’s his retirement statement in full.
Hensarling, head of the House Financial Services Committee, is a solid conservative, earning a 96% rating from the American Conservative Union, and a 93% rating from the NRA.
No sooner do I post the Tony Podesta resignation story than I read everybody talking about this Tucker Carlson video, in which he reveals that a lawyer working for Podesta tried to silence him:
“If you’re looking for a summary of all of this, here’s the one sentence cliff note of the whole affair: the chairman of one major presidential campaign colluded with the brother of the chairman of the other major presidential campaign to enrich themselves by secretly advancing the interests of a foreign adversary. That happened. That’s the swamp they told you needed to be drained.”
Six days ago Carlson said that the Podesta brothers and Paul Manafort were the targets of the Mueller investigation, not Trump. So far, his sources seem a lot better than those of the Washington Post or the New York Times.
Happy Halloween!
Things that make you go “Hmmmm“:
Democratic power lobbyist Tony Podesta, founder of the Podesta Group, is stepping down from the firm that bears his name after coming under investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller.
Podesta announced his decision during a firm-wide meeting Monday morning and is alerting clients of his impending departure.
The investigation into Podesta and his firm grew out of investigators’ examination of Manafort’s finances. Manafort organized a PR campaign on behalf of a nonprofit called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. Podesta Group was one of several firms that were paid to do work on the PR campaign to promote Ukraine in the U.S.
Podesta Group filed paperwork with the Justice Department in April stating that it had done work for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine that also benefited the same Ukrainian political party that Manafort once advised. Podesta Group said at the time it believed its client was a European think tank untethered to a political party.
Podesta is handing over full operational and financial control of the firm to longtime firm CEO Kimberley Fritts, according to multiple sources with knowledge of Monday’s meeting. Fritts and a senior group of the Podesta team will be launching a new firm in the next one or two days. Sources said the transition has been in the works for the past several months.
Sort of like Harvey Weinstein stepping down from The Weinstein Corporation, only presumably less rapey.
I’ve long reported on Podesta’s documented ties to Putin’s Russia. Remember than John and Tony Podesta formed The Podesta Group way back in 1988, even before John became Bill Clinton’s Chief of Staff.
[Tony] Podesta has long been a larger than life figure on K Street, growing his business from a boutique firm into a massive lobbying and public relations operation. He is well known for his flashy dressing, vast art collection, generous campaign donations across all levels of Democratic politics and, of course, for his brother John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.
Podesta Group has struggled in the wake of the Mueller investigation. More than a dozen of its lobbying clients have cut ties with the firm this year, according to lobbying filings. Revenues have also declined: The firm brought in an estimated $4.8 million in the third quarter of 2017, down from $5.2 million in the second quarter of 2017 and from $6.1 million in the third quarter of 2016.
I would caution those who believe “Indictments for Hillary are just around the corner!” to temper their expectations. These things take time, and the Podestas are so deeply enmeshed in Democratic Party politics I would expect them to take the fall rather than flip on either Clinton or Obama.
My primary computer is in the shop, so between that and Halloween, expect some lazy blogging this week. For starters: A collection of Tweets about Hillary Clinton.
Enjoy!
A Year in the Life pic.twitter.com/8Bf6n9dRi1
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) October 25, 2017
One year anniversary of Hillary "Happy Birthday To This Future President" tweet; #HappyBirthdayToThisFutureInmate #ThursdayThoughts pic.twitter.com/Rrk0BCWYCK
— 🇺🇸 Cris 🇺🇸 (@ThePatriot143) October 26, 2017
Best costumes ever! 😂😊👍🎃 @HillaryClinton @realDonaldTrump #LockHerUp #Halloween2017 pic.twitter.com/MdDoeEcqrf
— Serena S. American (@hredriders) October 29, 2017
On Tucker Carlson, Mark Steyn summarizes this week’s Big Bowl O’Hot Irony:
“Travis County prosecutors dropped all of the remaining charges against longtime state Rep. Dawnna Dukes on Monday, bringing an end to a legal soap opera that could have put the lawmaker behind bars.”
Snip.
“Moore pinned the case’s collapse on conflicting statements given by Steve Adrian, a top official in the Texas House, who had told prosecutors that travel to the Capitol was required to earn the per-diem payments but later recanted in a statement to Dukes’ lawyers.”
This is odd, as a most of the charges against Dukes had nothing to do with the per diem abuse issue.
(Hat tip: Dwight.)
Let’s take a break from talking about Hillary Clinton’s scandals so we can talk about Barack Obama’s scandals. At the end of the day, though, there’s a significant chance they all tie up together in one giant knotted scandal tangle…
While Eric Holder was U.S. attorney general, the Justice Department allowed prosecutors to strike agreements compelling big companies to give money to outside groups not connected to their cases to meet settlement burdens. Republican lawmakers long have decried those payments as a “slush fund” that boosted liberal groups, and the Trump DOJ ended the practice earlier this year.
But internal Justice Department emails released Tuesday by Goodlatte indicated that not only were officials involved in determining what organizations would get the money, but also Justice Department officials may have intervened to make sure the settlements didn’t go to conservative groups.
In one such email in July 2014, a senior Justice Department official expressed “concerns” about what groups would receive settlement money from Citigroup — saying they didn’t want money going to a group that does “conservative property-rights legal services.”
In an unprecedented victorious conclusion to our years-long legal battle against the IRS, the bureaucratic agency has just admitted in federal court that it wrongfully targeted Tea Party and conservative groups during the Obama Administration and issued an apology to our clients for doing so. In addition, the IRS is consenting to a court order that would prohibit it from ever engaging in this form of unconstitutional discrimination in the future.
In a proposed Consent Order filed with the Court yesterday, the IRS has apologized for its treatment of our clients (36 Tea Party and other conservative organizations from 20 states that applied for 501(c)(3) and (c)(4) tax-exempt status with the IRS between 2009 and 2012) during the tax-exempt determinations process. Crucially, following years of denial by the IRS and blame-shifting by IRS officials, the agency now expressly admits that its treatment of our clients was wrong.
“So mostly everybody is like jumping for joy. And I’m walking around like a zombie. But nobody really gave a damn what my feelings were. So I went back to the office and I got a call from Congressman [Jack] Brooks who is the congressman from Texas and Chairman of [the Judiciary] committee and he said, ‘Well you just lost me my seat.’ And he and I had a good relationship. I said, ‘Well, you voted against it. The president doesn’t want you to do anything going forward that would jeopardize you. And if we come back from the conference and all that stuff…’ And he was just really down, down, down… He said, ‘my seat is done.’”
Snip.
In all, eight Democratic Senators lost their races and 54 Democratic House members too. The list included those who opposed the assault weapons ban but reluctantly voted for it (like Speaker Tom Foley) and those who had tried to strip the crime bill of the assault weapons ban, like Brooks.
Harvey Weinstein seemed to fit right in. This is a form of liberalism that routinely blends self-righteousness with upper-class entitlement. That makes its great pronouncements from Martha’s Vineyard and the Hamptons. That routinely understands the relationship between the common people and showbiz celebrities to be one of trust and intimacy.
Countless people who should have known better are proclaiming their surprise at Harvey Weinstein’s alleged abuses. But in truth, their blindness is even more sweeping than that. They are lost these days in a hall of moral mirrors, weeping tears of admiration for their own virtue and good taste.
You know what’s really shocking? That piece is from liberal commentator Thomas What’s the Matter With Kansas Frank…
One of the cruelest things we do to prisoners is pump them up with the idea that, if they educate themselves in prison and learn a trade, they will be able to work when they get out. This is a lie. They probably won’t be able to work, because, aside from typical job-interview demerits like too many nasty facial tattoos, that felony conviction automatically eliminates them on most application forms. As late as the ’70s, in Arkansas, it was considered a badge of civic pride if you hired a couple of convicts and a couple of blind, deaf, or wheelchair-bound citizens at your business—which is why we didn’t use the term “hardcore” for any of the unemployed.
Would it be a stretch to say all these convicts have been replaced by young able-bodied illegals? I don’t think so.
Snip.
“Get rid of the illegal Mexicans and see how fast that wage goes up to $15 on its own, no government intervention needed.”
The political reverberations from Texas House Speaker Joe Straus’ announcement that he’s retiring are still sounding throughout the state.
Hot on the heels of that announcement, Straus crony Byron Cook also announced he’s stepping down.
Another Straus crony, Rep. John Zerwas of Richmond, announced he was running for Speaker, though with both Straus and Cook leaving, reassembling Straus’ “Democrats and RINOs coalition” is going to be difficult (and hopefully impossible). Phil King of Weatherford, had previously announced he was running for Speaker.
Ross Ramsey provides some insight on the race (some of it even accurate) and discusses the unusual nature of Straus stepping down.
It’s an unusual move for a speaker: Straus unseated Craddick, who had beaten Democrat Pete Laney of Hale Center when the House flipped from Democratic to Republican. Laney had succeeded Gib Lewis of Fort Worth, who decided to quit after an ethics scandal. Lewis came after Billy Clayton, who had been acquitted after a federal bribery sting operation caught him in its net.
Snip.
This will be the first open race since the lead-up to the 1993 legislative session when Lewis was ending his fifth and last term, freeing anyone who wanted to throw their hat in the ring. Pete Laney had been chairman of the powerful State Affairs Committee. Other candidates for speaker included other Lewis lieutenants — the heads of committees on Appropriations, Ways and Means, Transportation and so on. They battled right up to the beginning of the 1993 session, when Laney announced he had put together the 76 votes it takes to win.
Rather than take a victory lap, Empower Texans announced they were going harder than ever after Republican Representatives who supported Straus:
Taxpayers must be vigilant to ensure that Straus is not able to install a hand-picked successor who will continue to be controlled by Democratic lobbyist Gordon Johnson and liberal special interests. That means being more engaged than ever in the upcoming elections to ensure that those Republican sycophants who have propped up Straus will be removed from power as well.
Earlier this year Straus earned a spot on the Citizens’ Choice Ten Worst List wherein he was labeled “The Puppet” for serving as a public face for Johnson, the Democratic Caucus, and a group of liberal Republicans. Whether his retirement will mean the ouster of his puppet-masters remains to be seen.
During the regular and special session this year, Straus went to war with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Gov. Greg Abbott, and the Republican Party of Texas, obstructing each of their conservative agendas on property tax reform, privacy, ethics, gun rights, and others issues. Straus appears to now be paying the price for aligning himself against voters and the leaders they have popularly elected.
According to Capitol sources, Straus’ decision took some of his allies by surprise, with many having no knowledge the announcement would be coming this week, if at all. Those representatives who have backed Straus in the past and are still running for reelection will have a particularly tough road ahead as they are forced to defend Straus’ record of obstruction in the March primary without his backing.
Not all of Straus’ lieutenants were out of the loop however. At the same time that Straus announced his retirement, State Rep. Byron Cook (R–Corsicana), the speaker’s top hatchet-man, also announced he is not running for reelection. That announcement comes on the tail end of several other retirements and others are likely forthcoming.
For example, according to sources, State Rep. Dan Huberty (R–Houston), who killed all school choice proposals this session as Straus’ Public Education chairman, has cancelled his fundraising events and may be headed for the door as well.
With Straus out of the way, conservative Texans need to be on high alert. There will certainly be an attempt to install a replacement for Straus who continues to empower lobbyists like Johnson and the Democratic caucus. It is essential that taxpayers ensure the Republican caucus unite around a candidate, and that those candidates commit to advancing the Republican platform and working with statewide Republican leaders.
In recent years, Straus supporters have promoted State Rep. Four Price (R–Amarillo) as a possible 2019 successor. With a liberal record and alleged ties between his and the Straus family, Price would certainly be a continuation of the current regime. Other possible candidates, such as former Democrat State Rep. Todd Hunter (R–Corpus Christi), who served over the past several sessions as Straus’ gatekeeper on the Calendars Committee, would also likely continue to maintain a power coalition with the Democrats.
Straus managed to stay Speaker by ruthless threats of killing legislation and bad committee assignments for Representatives who refused to toe the line. With that power gone, expect Straus’ Dem/RINO coalition to give way to actual conservative governance in the 86th Texas legislative session in 2019.
With increasing hostility coming from his own caucus for his RINO ways, Texas Speaker Joe Straus has announced that he’s retiring at the end of his current term.
Conservatives will find this very welcome news, and it shakes up the state’s political status quo quite a bit.
Probably more later tonight.
After so much time accusing President Donald Trump of being a stooge of Russia, it appears that Hillary Clinton is caught in her own Russian pincer movement.
First off, we now have confirmation that that fake Russian dossier on Trump was jointly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee:
The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.
Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.
After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the firm in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by a still unknown Republican client during the GOP primary.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.
Snip.
The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in “legal and compliance consulting’’ since Nov. 2015 — though it’s impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.
(Hat tip: Stephen Green at Instapundit.)
Second, there’s still more information leaking out about the Uranium One deal and Hillary Clinton’s role in it:
Let’s put the Uranium One scandal in perspective: The cool half-million bucks the Putin regime funneled to Bill Clinton was five times the amount it spent on those Facebook ads — the ones the media-Democrat complex ludicrously suggests swung the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump.
The Facebook-ad buy, which started in June 2015 — before Donald Trump entered the race — was more left-wing agitprop (ads pushing hysteria on racism, immigration, guns, etc.) than electioneering. The Clintons’ own long-time political strategist Mark Penn estimates that just $6,500 went to actual electioneering. (You read that right: 65 hundred dollars.) By contrast, the staggering $500,000 payday from a Kremlin-tied Russian bank for a single speech was part of a multi-million-dollar influence-peddling scheme to enrich the former president and his wife, then–secretary of state Hillary Clinton. At the time, Russia was plotting — successfully — to secure U.S. government approval for its acquisition of Uranium One, and with it, tens of billions of dollars in U.S. uranium reserves.
Here’s the kicker: The Uranium One scandal is not only, or even principally, a Clinton scandal. It is an Obama-administration scandal.
The Clintons were just doing what the Clintons do: cashing in on their “public service.” The Obama administration, with Secretary Clinton at the forefront but hardly alone, was knowingly compromising American national-security interests. The administration green-lighted the transfer of control over one-fifth of American uranium-mining capacity to Russia, a hostile regime — and specifically to Russia’s state-controlled nuclear-energy conglomerate, Rosatom. Worse, at the time the administration approved the transfer, it knew that Rosatom’s American subsidiary was engaged in a lucrative racketeering enterprise that had already committed felony extortion, fraud, and money-laundering offenses.
Indeed, the Obama Administration knew that Russia was trying to bribe the Clintons, yet they supressed the information and approved the Uranium One deal anyway:
Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.
Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.
They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow.
It appears that Russia targeted Hillary Clinton from the very beginning of her term as Secretary of State:
Russian intelligence targeted Hillary Clinton before she became secretary of state in 2009, FBI documents show.
New FBI information about corruption in a Clinton-approved uranium deal with Russia raises questions about Clinton’s actions after the FBI broke up a deep-cover Russian spy ring in 2010.
For a decade, the FBI ran an operation called Ghost Stories to monitor and rip apart a deep-cover Russian agent network. Ghost Stories tracked a ring Russian spies who lived between Boston and Washington, D.C., under false identities. It was one of the FBI’s most elaborate and successful counterintelligence operations in history.
After the FBI arrested 10 of the spies in June, 2010, Secretary of State Clinton worked feverishly to return the Russian agents to Moscow in a hastily arranged, lopsided deal with Putin.
It all happened as the uranium deal was in play: An arrangement to provide Moscow’s state Rosatom nuclear agency with 20 percent of American uranium capacity, with $145,000,000 to pour into the Clinton Family Foundation and its projects.
For the Clintons, the FBI’s biggest counterintelligence bust in history couldn’t have come at a worse time.
The day the FBI arrested the Russian agents, on June 28, 2010, the day before the secretary of state’s husband, Bill Clinton, was to give a speech in Moscow. A Kremlin-connected investment bank, Renaissance Capital, paid the former president $500,000 for the hour-long appearance.
An unnamed Hillary Clinton spokesman told ABC News that there was “no reason to think the Secretary was a target of this spy ring.”
That was a lie.
State Department spokesman Phil Gordon brushed off the spy ring as old news: “I don’t think anyone was hugely shocked to know that some vestiges of old attempts to use intelligence are still there.” Breaking the spy network, he said, was “a law enforcement action.” Gordon’s implication was that it had nothing to do with the department Clinton headed.
That didn’t explain why Clinton stayed silent and worked hard to return the 10 spies back to Moscow, before any could be put on trial or turned by the FBI. Or why Clinton settled for a very poor bargain in a one-sided spy swap. But other evidence does.
The source of that $145,000,00 number is evidently from Clinton Cash.
Check @peterschweizer, #ClintonCash (2015), Chapter 3, "Hillary's Reset." The $145,000,000 figure is on page 55 of the hardcover edition.
— J Michael Waller (@JMichaelWaller) October 25, 2017
And speaking of Clinton Cash, here’s “7 Uranium One Facts Every American Should Know.” Including this one:
Senate Republicans Want an FBI Gag Order Lifted
Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has called for the Justice Department to lift the gag order on the FBI’s whistleblower, indicating that he may have more explosive revelations related to the case and on what the Clintons and the Obama administration knew about the case and when they knew it.
Here’s a timeline of the Uranium One scandal. Including the tidbit that Bill Clinton met personally with Vladimir Putin in Russia in 2010, while his wife was Secretary of State and while the Uranium One deal was still under considerations by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States. (Hat tip: Director Blue.)
In other Clinton Corruption news:
