Note to Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer! Stop the impeachment insane waste of our time and money and energy. Read what POTUS Trump said. You have no case. Get on with the inauguration. Focus Nancy. Focus Chuck. Be a stateswoman Nancy. Be a statesman Chuck. Forget this impeachment drivel. Help us be free, safe, and prosperous. Make sure there is enough security and get Joe and Kamala sworn in a few days from now. And send out the $2000 checks.

A Note to Nancy Pelosi. A Note to Chuck Schumer.

  1. Nancy, stop the impeachment insanity now.
  2. Chuck, stop the impeachment insanity now.
  3. Be a stateswoman. Be a statesman.
  4. For 4 years you and half the nation have wasted the time and emotions of the whole nation beating up on POTUS Trump.
  5. Nancy and Chuck, stop wasting our time and money and energy.
  6. Do something positive to help us be free, safe, and prosperous.
  7. Stop blocking the COVID payments.
  8. President Trump addressed supporters near the White House on January 6th 2021.
  9. FACT CHECK, NANCY.
  10. FACT CHECK, CHUCK.
  11. Did POTUS Trump advocate or encourage violence?
  12. Did POTUS Trump encourage anyone to enter the Capitol building?
  13. No he did not Nancy.
  14. Not one whit.
  15. You can read.
  16. Have you taken the time to read what he said?
  17. You have no case.
  18. Those who entered the capitol deserve to be found and prosecuted, to be sure.
  19. Likewise, those who rioted and looted in the past deserve to be found and prosecuted as well.
  20. Violence and trespass are not to be condoned in any fashion.
  21. Our nation functions because we are a nation of LAW and ORDER.
  22. POTUS Trump is home free on this one.
  23. He told his supporters to go home.
  24. He stands firm and has always stood firm against violence.
  25. POTUS Trump’s speech includes no calls or encouragement whatsoever for anyone to trespass and enter the Capitol.
  26. POTUS Trump’s speech includes no calls or encouragement whatsoever for anyone to use violence.
  27. In fact, indication is that those who entered were coordinating with inside persons and already entering the Capitol during POTUS Trump’s speech.
  28. Read what he said.
  29. To the contrary, POTUS Trump says states want to revote now that they have seen the voter fraud.
  30. He contrasts his peaceful followers with those who were lawless and earlier rioted and burned and looted in our cities.
  31. He says there would be hell to pay if what happened to him happened to democrats.
  32. He asks those who support him to fight by using the primary and by voting those who did not help us be free, safe, and prosper out of office.
  33. Here are POTUS Trump’s words. Read them, Nancy. Read them Chuck.
  34. And then stop this impeachment insanity immediately.
  35. And FOCUS.
  36. Get enough security and get Joe and Kamala installed.
  37. The following are POTUS TRUMP’S WORDS:
  38. Media will not show the magnitude of this crowd.
  39. Even I, when I turned on today, I looked, and I saw thousands of people here, but you don’t see hundreds of thousands of people behind you because they don’t want to show that.
  40. We have hundreds of thousands of people here, and I just want them to be recognized by the fake news media. 
  41. Turn your cameras, please, and show what is really happening out here, because these people are not going to take it any longer, they’re not going to take it any longer.
  42. Go ahead, turn your cameras, please.
  43. Would you show they came from all over the world actually, but they came from all over our country.
  44. I just really want to see what they do.
  45. I just want to see how they cover it.
  46. I’ve never seen anything like it, but it would be really great if we could be covered fairly by the media.
  47. The media is the biggest problem we have as far as I’m concerned, single biggest problem.
  48. The fake news and the big tech, big tech, is now coming into their own.
  49. We beat them four years ago, we surprised them.
  50. We took him by surprise and this year they rigged an election, they rigged it like they have never rigged an election before, and by the way, last night, they didn’t do a bad job either, if you notice.
  51. I am honest, and I just again, I want to thank you.
  52. It’s just a great honor to have this kind of crowd and to be before you and hundreds of thousands of American patriots who are committed to the honesty of our elections and the integrity of our glorious Republic.
  53. All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by bold and radical left Democrats, which is what they are doing, and stolen by the fake news media.
  54. That is what they have done and what they are doing.
  55. We will never give up.
  56. We will never concede.
  57. It doesn’t happen.
  58. You don’t concede when there’s theft involved.
  59. Our country has had enough. 
  60. We will not take it anymore, and that is what this is all about.
  61. And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal.
  62. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide.
  63. This was not a close election.
  64. You know I say sometimes jokingly, but there’s no joke about it.
  65. I have been in two elections.
  66. I won them both and the second one I won much bigger than the first, okay?
  67. Almost 75 million people voted for our campaign, the most of any incumbent president by far in the history of our country; 12 million more than four years ago.
  68. And I was told by the real pollsters; we do have real pollsters.
  69. They know that we were going to do well and we were going to win.
  70. What I was told, if I went from 63 million, which we had four years ago, to 66 million, there was no chance of losing.
  71. Well, we didn’t go to 66, we went to 75 million, and they say we lost.
  72. We didn’t lose.
  73. And by the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes?
  74. Does anybody believe that?
  75. He had 80 million computer votes.
  76. It’s a disgrace.
  77. There’s never been anything like that.
  78. You can take Third World countries, just take a look, take Third World countries, their elections are more honest than what we have been going through in this country.
  79. It’s a disgrace.
  80. It’s a disgrace.
  81. Even when you look at last night, they were all running around like chickens with their heads cut off with boxes, and nobody knows what the hell is going on.
  82. There’s never been anything like this.
  83. We will not let them silence your voices.
  84. We’re not going to let it happen.
  85. Not going to let it happen.
  86. Thank you.
  87. And I would love to have, if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed, the military, the Secret Service and we want to thank you — and the police and law enforcement — great, you’re doing a great job.
  88. But I would love it if they could be allowed to come up with us. Is that possible?
  89. Can you just let them, please?
  90. And Rudy [Giuliani], you did a great job.
  91. He’s got guts.
  92. You know what?
  93. He’s got guts, unlike a lot of people in the Republican Party, he’s got guts, he fights, he fights.
  94. [How did Rudy fight? He filed lawsuits and addressed legislatures and the public.]
  95. And I will tell you thank you very much, John [Eastman], fantastic job. I watched — that’s a tough act to follow those two.
  96. John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country and he looked at this, and he said what an absolute disgrace that this could be happening to our Constitution, and he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing.
  97. I hope so.
  98. I hope so because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election.
  99. All he has to do — all — this is — this is from the number one or certainly one of the top constitutional lawyers in our country.
  100. He has the absolute right to do it.
  101. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution and protect our Constitution.
  102. States want to revote, the states got defrauded.
  103. They were given false information, they voted on it.
  104. Now they want to recertify; they want it back.
  105. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify, and we become president, and you are the happiest people.
  106. And I actually, I just spoke to Mike. 
  107. I said, Mike, that doesn’t take courage, what takes courage is to do nothing.
  108. That takes courage, and then we are stuck with a president who lost the election by a lot, and we have to live with that for four more years.
  109. We’re just not going to let that happen.
  110. Many of you have traveled from all across the nation to be here, and I want to thank you for the extraordinary love.
  111. That is what it is; there’s never been a movement like this ever, ever for the extraordinary love for this amazing country.
  112. And this amazing movement.
  113. Thank you.
  114. By the way, this goes all the way back past the Washington Monument.
  115. Do you believe this? Look at this.
  116. Unfortunately, they gave the press the prime seats.
  117. I can’t stand that.
  118. No, but you look at that behind.
  119. I wish they would flip those cameras and look behind you.
  120. That is the most amazing site.
  121. When they make a mistake, you get to see it on television, amazing. Amazing.
  122. All of the way back and don’t worry.
  123. We will not take the name off the Washington Monument.
  124. We will not.
  125. Cancel culture.
  126. They wanted to get rid of the Jefferson Memorial, either take it down or just put somebody else in there.
  127. I don’t think that’s going to happen.
  128. It damn well better not, even though with this administration if this happens, it could happen.
  129. You will see some really bad things happen.
  130. They will knock out Lincoln, too, by the way.
  131. They have been taking his statute down, but then we signed a little law, you hurt our monuments, you hurt our heroes, you go to jail for 10 years, and everything stopped.
  132. You notice that it stopped?
  133. It all stopped, and they could use Rudy back in New York City, Rudy.
  134. They could use you.
  135. Your city is going to hell.
  136. They want Rudy Giuliani back in New York.
  137. We will get a little younger version of Rudy.
  138. Is that okay, Rudy?
  139. We’re gathered together in the heart of our nation’s capital for one very, very basic and simple reason, to save our democracy.
  140. You know most candidates on election evening, and of course, this thing goes on so long they still don’t have any idea what the votes are.
  141. We still have congressional seats under review.
  142. They have no idea.
  143. They have totally lost control;
  144. they have used the pandemic as a way of defrauding the people in a proper election,
  145. but you know, you know when you see this and when you see what is happening, number one they all say, sir, we will never let it happen again. I said that’s good, but what about eight weeks ago?
  146. You know they try and get you to go, they say, sir, in four years you are guaranteed.
  147. I said, I’m not interested right now.
  148. Do me a favor. Go back eight weeks.
  149. I want to go back eight weeks.
  150. Let’s go back eight weeks.
  151. We want to go back, and we want to get this right, because we’re going to have somebody in there that should not be in there, and our country will be destroyed. And we’re not going to stand for that.
  152. For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans.
  153. And that’s what they are.
  154. There’s so many weak Republicans.
  155. And we have great ones.
  156. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they are out there fighting.
  157. The House guys are fighting, but it’s — it’s incredible.
  158. Many of the Republicans, I helped them get in.
  159. I helped them get elected.
  160. I helped Mitch get elected. I helped —
  161. I could name 24 of them, let’s say. I won’t bore you with it.
  162. And then all of a sudden, you have something like this.
  163. There is like oh, gee, maybe I’ll talk to the president sometime later.
  164. No, it’s amazing.
  165. The weak Republicans.
  166. They’re pathetic Republicans, and that’s what happens.
  167. If this happened to the Democrats, there’d be hell all over the country going on.
  168. There’d be hell all over the country. 
  169. But just remember this, you’re stronger, you’re smarter.
  170. You’ve got more going than anybody, and they try and demean everybody having to do with us, and you’re the real people.
  171. You’re the people that built this nation.
  172. You’re not the people that tore down our nation.
  173. The weak Republicans — and that’s it, I really believe it.
  174. I think I’m going to use the term.
  175. The weak Republicans.
  176. You’ve got a lot of them and you’ve got a lot of great ones.
  177. But you’ve got a lot of weak ones.
  178. They’ve turned a blind eye.
  179. Even as Democrats enacted policies that
  180. shipped away our jobs,
  181. weakened our military,
  182. threw open our borders,
  183. and put America last.
  184. Did you see the other day where Joe Biden said I want to get rid of the America-first policy.
  185.  What’s that all about?
  186. Get rid of — how do you say I want to get rid of America first?
  187. Even if you’re going to do it, don’t talk about it, right?
  188. Unbelievable, what we have to go through.
  189. What we have to go through — and you have to get your people to fight.
  190. And if they don’t fight, we have to primary the hell out of the ones that don’t fight. We primary them.
  191. We’re going to — we’re going to let you know who they are.
  192. I can already tell you, frankly.
  193. But this year, using the pretext of the China virus and the scam of mail-in ballots, Democrats attempted the most brazen and outrageous election theft.
  194. And there’s never been anything like this.
  195. It’s a pure theft in American history.
  196. Everybody knows it.
  197. That election, our election was over at 10 in the evening.
  198. We’re leading Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia.
  199. By hundreds of thousands of votes, and then late in the evening or early in the morning, boom. 
  200. These explosions of bullshit, and all of the sudden —all of a sudden, it started to happen.
  201. Don’t forget, when Romney got beat — Romney. Did you see his —
  202. I wonder if he enjoyed his flight in last night.
  203. But when Romney got beat, you know, he stands up like your more typical — well, I’d like to congratulate the victor.
  204. The victor.
  205. Who was the victor, Mitt?
  206. I’d like to congratulate.
  207. They don’t go in and look at the facts.
  208. Oh, I don’t know. You’ve got — he got slaughtered, probably.
  209. Maybe it was okay, maybe it was — that’s what happened.

Nancy and Chuck, stop the impeachment insane waste of our time and money and energy. You have no case. You are trying to manufacture a case when there isn’t one. Get on with the inauguration. Focus Nancy. Be a stateswoman. Focus Chuck. Be a statesman. Make sure there is enough security and get Joe and Kamala sworn in a few days from now.

Political Corruption Riddle? Why can the disgraced Joe Biden Crime Family “run and not hide” and hide and not run?” Because of Joe’s crisis of character. Joe and his Biden Crime Family sold and monetized Joe’s Vice Presidency and in the process sold out America and that is why Joe should withdraw quickly.

A hard ball political riddle? Why can the disgraced Joe Biden Crime Family “run and not hide” and “hide and not run?”

Answer? Because of Joe’s crisis of character. Joe and his Biden Crime Family sold and monetized Joe’s Vice Presidency and in the process sold out America, that is why Joe should withdraw quickly.

 Because the evidence is overwhelming.

1.    Because Joe and Barak gave $1.7 billion much in small bills, plus $50 to 150 billion to IRAN during Joe’s tenure as VP, the money used to foment terrorism and support IRAN’s military and nuclear efforts.

2.    (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/yes-obama-helped-fund-the-iranian-regime/;https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jan/07/facebook-posts/facebook-claim-wrongly-states-obama-gave-iran-150-/https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/477666-obama-[and Joe Biden] should-apologize-for-shameful-cash-payment-to-iranhttps://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-iran-payment-cash-20160907-snap-story.html)

3.    Because Joe’s Crime Family “bagged” $3.5 million from RUSSIA. “The GOP report … states that between May 6, 2015 and December 8, 2015, Baturina sent 11 wires in the amount of $391,968.21 to a bank account belonging to BAK USA LLC, a technology startup based in Buffalo, New York. The transactions all listed ‘Loan Agreement’ in the payment details section. Nine of the 11 transactions, totaling $241,797.14 were first sent from Baturina’s accounts to a [Hunter Biden] Rosemont Seneca Thornton bank account, which then transferred to the money to BAK USA, according to the report.”

4.    (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8799121/Russian-paid-3-5M-Hunter-Biden-did-open-doors-business-enter-market.html)

5.    Because Joe’s Crime Family “bagged” $1.5 billion from IRAQ.

6.    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/15b-contract-in-iraq-for-bidens-little-brother-exposes-obama-ahead-of-debate

7.    Because they “bagged” as much as $80 thousand a month and $16.5 million from Ukraine.

8.    https://tass.com/world/1090971

9.    Because Joe “withheld” $1 billion from Ukraine until Ukraine fired a prosecutor looking into Burisma and Joe bragged about it on world television. https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2019/09/25/heres-what-happened-with-the-bidens-and-ukraine/#6741c1973938https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/09/27/flashback_2018_joe_biden_brags_at_cfr_meeting_about_withholding_aid_to_ukraine_to_force_firing_of_prosecutor.html

10.Because Joe’s Crime Family “bagged $1.5 billion from China communists and transferred military technology to the Chinese and Joe is forever soft on China and compromised in dealing with China which is the greatest  existential threat to the United States of America there is. https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-we-know-about-hunter-bidens-dealings-in-china-11570181403https://nypost.com/2019/05/11/the-troubling-reason-why-biden-is-so-soft-on-china/

11.Because out of greed Joe allowed his crack compromised son to serve as “bag man” for the Biden Crime Family and do so with some of the worst criminals on the planet. (See Hunter Biden’s laptop emails which are not Russian disinformation as Adam Schiff shrilling shouts. And see Peter Sweizer’s books and new video.)

12.Because Joe, “the big guy,” like the Sopranos, took 10% to 50% of the proceeds from his Crime Family members, and don’t even think to go there that Joe is some nice guy. Joe is definitely not a nice guy. Joe is only a nice guy like Tony Soprano is a nice guy. (Documented in Hunter’s laptop. Further documented by Rudy Giuliani’s Common Sense and Glenn Beck and Peter Sweizer and Tom Fitton. )

13.Because Joe, lied about his Crime Family’s activities during the earlier debate.

14.Because Joe and Barak were complicit with Hillary, Nancy, Chuck, Strok, Page, Schiff, Nadler, the Democratic National Committee and multiple democrats and even some republicans, and the fake news, in the fake surveillance of POTUS TRUMP and the TRUMP family and the Trump campaign and in “Hillary and John Podesta’s Russia collusion narrative” [Hillary paid for the fake dossier] and Nancy Pelosi’s and Adam Schiff’s fake “obstruction narrative” and bogus impeachment of POTUS Trump.

15.Because “Joe Biden’s character” makes the answer to this hard ball political riddle easy. Joe’s character is why Joe Biden and his Crime Family are disgraced before the nation and can “run and not hide” and “hide and not run” for the high office of President of the United States, why Joe needs to confess to his Crime Family activities and apologize to the nation, because all of their graft and corruption is there in living color for us to view.

16.To Joe we say, “Come on, man.” Joe you should withdraw today like you withdrew earlier after acknowledging your law school plagiarism. Just admit you are not well and let the nation move on with 4 more years of POTUS TRUMP. (Further documented by Rudy Giuliani’s Common Sense and Glenn Beck and Peter Sweizer and Tom Fitton.) 

BARREL & PORK. (c) 2020 We report. You decide.

DID HUNTER BIDEN STICK IT TO HIS ABUSIVE FATHER JOE BIDEN BY LEAVING HIS LAPTOP WITH THE TECH GUY? LOOKS LIKE IT. THIS WASN’T AN ACCIDENT ON THE PART OF HUNTER. BARREL & PORK. We report! You decide!

1.      BARREL, did Joe Biden lie to America and has he stolen money and is his family The Biden Crime Family and should Joe withdraw in disgrace? BARREL, IT SURE LOOKS LIKE HUNTER BIDEN STUCK IT TO HIS ABUSIVE FATHER SIMPLY BY LEAVING HIS LAPTOP AT THE TECH SHOP. THIS WAS NOT AN ACCIDENT. HUNTER, REGARDLESS OF HIS USE OF CRACK OR ALCOHOL, IS WAY TOO SMART LIKE A FOX.

2. Yes, PORK. Listen to Rudy Giuliani’s recent Common Sense podcast. See https://rudygiulianics.com/ of which following is a transcript.

2.     “Welcome to Rudy Giuliani’s Common Sense. This is another episode and this is a very important one. 

3.      “We’re going to summarize the state of the evidence against the Biden Crime Family.

4.      “It’s really mounted up since the disclosures of the emails and texts and photographs of Hunter Biden and now things that were proven by witnesses, documents, and video tapes, that were ignored and lied about by the press, are now proven by Hunter Biden’s own words.

5.      “Let me assure you that this is his hard drive.

6.      “It was given to my lawyer by the gentleman who had repaired it.

7.      “It had been left behind by, he says, a drunken Hunter Biden who came in and had a very hard time even signing and did describe what he wanted.

8.      “He came back one time to supply a keyboard and then after it was repaired he never returned even though there was substantial notices to return.

9.      “After a while when the gentleman heard things on the news suggesting that the Bidens may or may not have been involved in criminal activity he became very concerned that possibly he was holding some kind of illegal material.

10.   “So it was now his property according to the contract signed by Hunter Biden which we have right here.

11.   “The property was abandoned and property that is abandoned under the law becomes the property of the person that is in possession of it.

12.   “So he had every right to listen to what was there and look at what was there and he was shocked .

13.   “What he saw he said was clear evidence of a crime, clear evidence that the Bidens were lying over and over again .

14.   “And then on the photographs clear evidence of criminal activity and some activity I would have a hard time describing and really should be left to more private discussion.

15.   “In short, what these photographs display is a Hunter Biden who is a very serious I would say degenerate crack addict.

16.   “What that means is he doesn’t get rehabilitated.

17.   “When he goes into rehabilitation there is even picture of him going out at night smoking crack.

18.   “So what it looks like is all during the period of time when he was taking millions and millions and millions of dollars there would be pictures of him sitting in a closet smoking dope or engaged in sex while smoking crack with the woman, sometimes on his own.  

19.   “It proves without any doubt that none of this money was intended for Hunter Biden because nobody would pay this guy ten dollars.

20.   “You couldn’t be sure if you gave him ten dollars to go get a bottle of milk for you that he’d come back.

21.   “So there’s no way that some of the biggest criminals in the world are going to be paying him $10,000,000 to $14,000,000 or $30,000,000 or investing in a $1,500,000,000 (one point five billion dollar) completely ridiculous private equity fund.

22.   “So what commodity did Hunter have to sell?

23.   “That’s pretty easy isn’t it?

24.   “The Vice Presidency of the United States.

25.   “Which … his uncle and Joes younger brother had been doing for the prior twenty years.

26.   “And that’s why this is a crime family.

27.   “I know their name is not Italian.

28.   “But you know, this RICO statute applies to political corruption. It applies to white collar crime.

29.   “I am the first one to really use it to effectively bring down the Mafia, the Mafia drug dealers, the Teamsters Union, the Fulton Fish Market, the private carding industry, and then Wall Street, and then after that United States Congressmen, and a substantial number of New York City officials, New York State officials, Republican and Democrat, probably that’s what got me elected mayor.

30.   “Didn’t do it for that reason but that’s what made me well known in New York and taught me what was wrong with New York.

31.   “So I know this statute backwards and forwards and this is a perfect case for it because this Biden Family was engaging in the business of crime.

32.   “And their commodity? Joe’s public office.

33.   “And Joe, you will see, shared in the proceeds which is clearly admitted by his co-conspirators.

34.   “So let me outline it for you so that you will be able to follow all of this.

35.   “And there will be more than what I am just saying but I am taking four that will get the most prominence.  

36.   “Now we’re going to focus on when he was Vice President of the United States because that’s where the big money was made.

37.   “Before he was Vice President of the United States he made substantial amounts of money through the lobbying of his brothers, the fact that his son had a no show job with a major bank in Delaware. Joe Biden was the only Democratic Senator that lobbied in favor of banks, against using the bankruptcy laws, because all democrats were in favor of that.

38.   “Theoretically, they like to say they represent poor people.

39.   “Joe was representing the rich bank that was employing his son in a no show job which is how his drug addict son began his career.

40.   “But nobody else would employ him because he’d be out two three days a week.

41.   “You know. Looking for crack.

42.    “It’s a terrible problem.

43.   “And I don’t mean to pick on Hunter for being an addict.

44.   “That’s a terrible affliction.

45.   “As a father, I blame Joe Biden. I say to myself.

46.   “I don’t know if I had a child afflicted by that wouldn’t I take care of them and keep them in rehabilitation.

47.   “Would I expose them to the most crooked man in Ukraine, one of the most crooked people in China, to probably the most crooked woman in Russia?

48.   “Would I do that to a drug addict son? Just because of greed?

49.   “I don’t know. I think this is Joe Biden’s fault.

50.   “But in any event I have outlined four transactions here. [TWO SET FORTH IN THIS POST.]

51.   “And these are the principle players that we can identify from the analysis we have done so far of the texts and the emails and the photographs.

52.   “And I have to say we have analyzed about a quarter of it. For it is very, very extensive.

53.   “So what you have, and I will summarize them really quickly is let’s call this JOE THE POINT MAN.

54.   “Obama was very, very comfortable with that designation POINT MAN.

55.   “So when IRAQ, when we were negotiating to end our role in IRAQ it was really, really critical for the national security interests of the United States that we retain troops there so that we could keep IRAN from basically creating an extension of the Islamic Republic of IRAN empire.

56.   “And Joe Biden was sent to do that.

57.   “Now that was probably a very foolish decision by President Obama because Joe Biden honestly had never succeeded at any negotiation ever.

58.   “Robert Gates, his co-cabinet member in the Obama administration, probably commenting on this and any number of other things including his opposition to killing Bin Laden said that Joe Biden had never been correct on any matter of foreign policy in his entire life.

59.   “That’s a quote from his fellow cabinet member.

60.   “Well, he [Joe] went to IRAQ.

61.   “He was supposed to negotiate this agreement that the IRAQIS would allow ten to twenty thousand American troops to stay behind and have immunity from prosecution so  they couldn’t get caught in the cross fire between the Sunis, the Shias, and the other elements there.

62.   “Of course, he failed.

63.   “But the Biden Crime Family came out of it really good. Really, really good.

64.   “James, his brother, who had no experience in housing was all of a sudden miraculously made part of a one point five billion dollar ($1,500,000,000), seems like a convenient number for them, one point five billion dollar housing deal in IRAQ.

65.   “And like Hunter, James had no experience – in building houses.

66.   “He [James] was a sleezy lobbyest on K street.

67.   “And I say sleezy advisedly because it was all over the newspapers if you care to ask and every time it would come up Joe would say I don’t know my family’s business.

68.   “After a while, that becomes kind of an incredible answer, doesn’t it.

69.   “[THE IRAQ DEAL] Then of course we have the Russian situation, that’s the IRAQ situation [pointing to descriptive diagram], the money goes to his brother and as you will see about half that money will end up in the pocket of Joe Biden.

70.   “As well, James will be responsible for some of the Biden family expenses.

71.   “‘Cause Joe didn’t pay for much. [Ad]

72.   “Thank you for returning to the discussion of the Biden Crime Family.

73.   “[THE RUSSIAN DEAL] The second one we have is Russia. Russia is a little cloudy. Don’t know it as well. We’re just digging it out but it is quite clear that Hunter Biden received $3.5 million dollars ($3,500,000) from the wife of the mayor of Moscow, the former mayor of Moscow, since deceased. Catarina Batarina.

74.   “Catarina is quite a character.

75.   “I mean she’s now considered the wealthiest woman in Russia.

76.   “Probably the most dangerous woman in Russia.

77.   “She more or less double crossed her husband to get him out of office and placate Putin.

78.   “Putin might have actually had a good reason to get rid of her husband.

79.   “Because her husband whom I knew because he was the mayor of Moscow when I was mayor of New York.

80.   “Her husband was really an out of control crook.

81.   “He was taking money from Putin’s friends.

82.   “Not a good idea.

83.   “So they got him out and she became even closer to Putin as a result of that.

84.   “So when you think of that $3.5 million dollars, I want you to remember that it is coming from one of Putin’s allies.

85.   “Remember, Russian collusion that the democrats charged the president with.

86.   “There was no Russian collusion.

87.   “We now know from the Brennan notes that Hillary made that up.

88.   “But even more galling than that no Republican got any money from Russia.

89.   “These characters got $3.5 million dollars ($3,500,000) from Putin’s best friend.

90.   “And the press doesn’t care.

91.   “The press doesn’t care.

92.   “Actually, it’s a little bit more than $3.5 million.

93.   “It’s closer to $3.8 because there were two laundered payments that I think can be easily proven.

94.   “And we still don’t know why.

95.   “Because Biden lied about it during the debate when he said there was no such transaction.

96.   “I don’t know that if Joe just thinks he can say this and because the press is like sickeningly on his side, as the moderator was.

97.   “Nobody is going to really pay attention to the documents that show the money.

98.   “But we got ‘em Joe.

99.   “Anybody interested in truth and fairness is going to want to see them.

100.          “So now let’s get to Ukraine [IN THE NEXT POST] which we have heard a lot about.

BARREL, IT SURE LOOKS LIKE HUNTER STUCK IT TO HIS ABUSIVE FATHER SIMPLY BY LEAVING HIS LAPTOP AT THE TECH SHOP.

BARREL & PORK. © 2020. We report! You decide!       

HAVE WE BEEN CONNED BY THE DEMOCRATS ALL THESE YEARS? THOUGHT FOR SEAN HANNITY, RUSH LIMBAUGH, ALL MEDIA, AND POTUS TRUMP, AND THE NATION. BARREL & PORK. We report! You decide!

Sean and Rush and POTUS TRUMP and all media and the nation, 

Have we BLACKS AND HISPANICS AND NATIVE AMERICANS AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND CAUCASIAN AMERICANS HAVE BEEN CONNED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALL THESE YEARS?

The Democratic Party was the party of slavery, Jim Crow, Ku Klux Klan, Lynching, Poll Taxes, Segregation, and Japanese-American Internment. 

It is the party of BLACK abortion, HISPANIC abortion, Native American abortion, Caucasian abortion, Asian American abortion? Yes it is responsible for surgically and chemically killing 300,000,000+ unborn babies since Roe v Wade if you simply add up the surgical killing numbers and chemical killing footnote numbers taken from the abortion counter online put forth by Planned Parenthood itself.  50,000,000+ of those babies were BLACK babies. 50,000,000+ were Hispanic babies.

And Joe Biden and the Democratic Party are now the party of socialism trending communism and riots, looting, inner city murders, and anarchy? Yes they are.

SO HAVE THE DEMOCRATS CONNED AND PULLED THE WOOL OVER THE BLACKS AND HISPANICS AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND THE REST OF AMERICA ALL THESE YEARS? YES THEY HAVE.

THEY HAVE CONNED AMERICA, AND THEY ARE STILL CONNING AMERICA.

THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND US VOTERS. 

ALL WE WANT FROM EACH PARTY AND THEIR POLITICIANS IS SIMPLE. WE DON’T WANT ATTEMPTED COUPS AND MULTI-MILLION DOLLAR INVESTIGATIONS AND IMPEACHMENTS AND CAREER POLITICIANS LIKE JOE BIDEN WHO USE THEIR OFFICE UNETHICALLY TO ENRICH THEMSELVES AND THEIR SON AND OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS. 

ALL WE WANT IS TO BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS.  That is why no one in his or her right mind will vote for Joe and any other democrat and everyone will vote for POTUS TRUMP and VP PENCE and the Republicans in November.

Have the BLACKS AND HISPANICS AND NATIVE AMERICANS AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND CAUCASIAN AMERICANS BEEN CONNED BY THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALL THESE YEARS? Well, think about it. Was the Democratic Party the party of slavery, Jim Crow, Ku Klux Klan, Lynching, Poll Taxes, Segregation, Japanese-American Internment? Yes. And is it the party of BLACK abortion, HISPANIC abortion, Native American abortion, Caucasian abortion, Asian American abortion? Yes – responsible for killing 300,000,000+ babies. And is it the party of socialism and anarchy? Sure looks like it. SO HAVE THE DEMOCRATS PULLED THE WOOL OVER THE BLACKS AND HISPANICS AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND THE REST OF AMERICA FOR ALL THESE YEARS? HAVE THEY CONNED AMERICA? YES THEY HAVE. THEY SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND US. ALL WE WANT FROM EACH PARTY AND THEIR POLITICIANS IS SIMPLE. WE WANT TO BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS. That is why no one in his or her right mind will vote for Joe and everyone will vote for Donald in a heartbeat.

1. PORK, is it true about the Democrats?

2. Is what true, BARREL?


3. That the Democrat Party was 

4. THE PARTY OF SLAVERY?

5. THE PARTY OF JIM CROW? 

6. THE Ku Klux Klan PARTY?

7. THE PARTY OF LYNCHING?

8. THE PARTY OF POLL TAXES?

9. THE PARTY OF SEGREGATION?

10. THE PARTY OF JAPANESE-AMERICAN INTERNMENT?

11. YES, it is true, BARREL.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/democrat-party-may-be-due-for-a-date-with-cancel-culture-princeton-professors-argue


12. PORK, is it also true about the Democrats?

13. Is what also true, BARREL?


11.  THAT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS THE PARTY OF ABORTION?

12.  YES, BARREL, it is true. Just since Roe v Wade more than 300,000,000 American babies have been murdered, killed, destroyed, sent to land fills, torn apart, flushed, chemically wiped out.


12.  THAT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS THE PARTY OF ABORTION OF THE BLACKS.

13.   YES, BARREL, it is true. Just since Roe v Wade more than 50,000,000 BLACK babies have been murdered, killed, destroyed, sent to land fills, torn apart, flushed, chemically wiped out.


14.  THAT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS THE PARTY OF ABORTION OF HISPANIC AMERICANS?

15.   YES, BARREL, it is true. Just since Roe v Wade more than 50,000,000 HISPANIC/LATINO babies have been murdered, killed, destroyed, sent to land fills, torn apart, flushed, chemically wiped out.


14.  THAT THE DEMOCRAT PARTY IS THE PARTY OF  ABORTION OF ASIAN AMERICANS, NATIVE AMERICANS, CAUCASIAN AMERICANS?

15.   YES, BARREL, it is true. Just since Roe v Wade more than 200,000,000 Asian American plus Native American plus Caucasian American babies have been murdered, killed, destroyed, sent to land fills, torn apart, flushed, chemically wiped out.

16. And BARREL, it looks like it is also true that the Democratic Party is the party of socialism and communism and anarchy as well? It sure looks like it.


http://www.numberofabortions.com/ See the footnote about  250,000,000 chemically induced abortions.


SO HAVE THE DEMOCRATS PULLED THE WOOL OVER THE BLACKS AND HISPANICS AND ASIAN AMERICANS AND THE REST OF AMERICA FOR ALL THESE YEARS? HAVE THEY CONNED AMERICA? YES THEY HAVE. THEY SIMPLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND US. ALL WE WANT FROM EACH PARTY AND ITS POLITICIANS IS SIMPLE. WE WANT TO BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS.
That is why no one in his or her right mind will vote for Joe and everyone will vote for Donald.

BARREL & PORK. We report! You decide!

ObamaBidenFakeNews and others Gate? What is it? BARREL & PORK. WE REPORT! YOU DECIDE!

1. BARREL, what is 

2. Obama

3. Biden

4. Comey

5. Clinton

6. Brennan and Clapper

7. McDonough

8. Power

9. Rice

10. Yates

11. Strok

12. Paige

13. Pelosi and Podesta

14. Schumer

15. Nadler

16. Schiff 

17. and Fake News Media and Others 

18. Gate and how does such relate to General Flynn and POTUS TRUMP? 


19. PORK, ObamaBiden and Fake News Media and Others Gate is the accusation 

20. and what more and more with passage of time and release of once classified documents appears to be the confirmed truth that 

21. Obama, 

22. Biden, 

23. Clinton, 

24. Comey, 

25. Brennan, 

26. Clapper, 

27. McDonough, 

28. Power, 

29. Rice, 

30. Yates, 

31. Strok, 

32. Paige, 

33. Pelosi and Podesta, 

34. Schumer, 

35. Nadler, 

36. Schiff, 

37. and others including Steele and Fusion GPS and the Ohrs and others including certain FBI and State Department and DNC actors and other “whistleblowers” and Fake News Media


38. wrongfully 

39. and seditiously 

40. and even for some traitorously

41. conspired 


42. either as principals

43. or as accessories


44. to criminally harm and steal the 2012 election from Mitt Romney and the 2016 election from Bernie Sanders


45. and to remove General Flynn from office because he knew too much about ObamaBidenDNC activities,


46. and to criminally harm POTUS TRUMP and steal the 2016 election from POTUS TRUMP and after his election marginalize and remove from office 

47. the sitting President of the United States DONALD TRUMP 

48. and his family

49. and in the process marginalize the Republican party

50. and prevent POTUS TRUMP’s reelection in 2020 by means of

51. a partisan 

52. impeachment

53. using lies about “Russian Collusian” and a fake Russian dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton

54. using lies about POTUS TRUMP obstructing Justice re Ukraine when in fact there was a transcript of his discussions with the Ukrainian president,

55. using fake FISA warrants to surveil POTUS TRUMP and his campaign and others, including using FBI entrapment of General Flynn in order to “cause him to lie,”

56. using lies about POTUS TRUMP’s dealings with the Ukrainian president 


while glossing over Joe Biden’s admitted nefarious quid pro quo dealings with Ukraine and Joe’s son sudden billion dollar windfall from China [incidentally where did the billion dollars from China go?], 


57. framing General Flynn, 

58. framing Carter Page, 


repeatedly framing POTUS TRUMP, [now lying about the COVID 19 response of POTUS TRUMP and VP Mike Pence],


59. including numerous other falsehoods, unmaskings, and clandestine initiatives, 


including Adam Schiff lying about POTUS TRUMP multiple times while at the same time it was Adam Schiff who was obstructing justice, 


60. while at the same time many if not all of these same people were in fact colluding with the Russians and obstructing justice – 


using the age old tactic of Saul Alinsky to accuse your opponent of what you are doing.


61. As corollary, ObamaBiden and others Gate also includes 


the accusation documented as true by Peter Sweizer investigative journalist that Joe  


enriched his family and himself using his office as vice president 


via China (billion dollars to his inexperienced son and start-up hedge fund) 


and the sweetheart contracting Iraq building deal for his brother, 


and Ukraine/Russia Burisma million dollar board connection for his son, 


with the real deal behind the Ukraine deal being the Biden’s involvement in funding  a proxy war against Russia according to Glenn Beck, 


and of course there was the fact as Joe admitted on camera that Joe was guilty of compelling Ukrainian officials quid pro quo to fire a person investigating Burisma which included Joe’s son before Joe would release U.S. money to Ukraine.


62. In American politics, this is a definition of what ObamaBidenFakeNews and others Gate is. 


BARREL, given Joe’s 


ObamaBidenFakeNews and others Gate and


his repeated gaffes 


and mental lapses and senility


and the misuse of his office to enrich himself and his family 


and his misuse of China and Ukraine relationships


and the many accusations of misconduct with women and girls now including Tara Reade, 


Joe’s wife Jill and the DNC


will be smart to accept the handwriting on the wall


and pull the plug on Joe’s now disastrous third candidacy 


and gracefully withdraw while Joe can still come up out of his basement with Jill’s help. 


There is no way Joe can debate POTUS TRUMP 


let alone carry on a successful campaign. 


On the debate stage, Joe is and will be a deer in the headlights. 


The longer his campaign continues, the clearer it is that he is a third time try fatally flawed candidate who is incompetent to serve as POTUS.


The DNC needs to jettison Joe gracefully and look to Bernie and Governor Cuomo.

WE REPORT! YOU DECIDE!

Tara Reade burns up Joe’s political career. BARREL & PORK. We report. You decide!

(c) 2019, 2020

              1. PORK, should Joe Biden withdraw?


2. Yes, BARREL, he should withdraw. Whether innocent or guilty, Joe should cut his losses and withdraw. His political career has run its course and now is burned toast and a lost cause. Tara Reade has burned Joe Biden. Joe’s political career is burned toast. POTUS TRUMP’S poll numbers eclipse Joe’s. Yes, BARREL, Joe should withdraw if he is smart.


3. Joe will never make it now. In 2016, 

POTUS TRUMP’s real poll numbers eclipsed Hillary’s. Now in 2020, POTUS TRUMP’s real poll numbers eclipse Joe’s. We have said it before and say it again, the polls do not determine who wins the presidential office. The media coverage does. And the sheer overwhelming media coverage of POTUS TRUMP eclipses the media coverage of all politicians in the U.S. combined.


4. If Joe stays in the race, all he will do is gaffe and take the democratic party down with him. His presence will take governors down and Senators and House congress men and women. His presence will take Nancy Pelosi down and Schiff and Nadler and many others. 


5. Why? Because there are now multiple credible witnesses supporting Tara Reade – no matter how shrill Nancy Pelosi and several others are in support of Joe. Regarding poll numbers BARREL, don’t you for one minute believe that Joe leads POTUS TRUMP. Joe has little or no media coverage compared to POTUS TRUMP. POTUS TRUMP has done a major great job dealing with COVID 19 despite democrat naysayers and the whole nation recognizes this. The few who trash him no matter what he does  keep the myth alive that he is behind. Truth is, there is no way the negative media groups can make Tara Reade go away or block POTUS TRUMP’S reelection.


6. Regarding the Tara Reade disclosure, her mother is a witness even though she is now deceased. This witness detail was found on a Larry King program. And others have come forward who confirm Tara’s story. Joe’s “DEER IN THE HEADLIGHTS” response, to quote Geraldo, says it all.


7. So Tara has taken away Joe’s woman vote and the men vote as well. She put a nail in his political coffin.


8. And this puts Bernie back front and center.


9. Maybe Governor Cuomo. 


10. No question POTUS TRUMP is now guaranteed a second term.


11.  BARREL, John Nolte wrote and Breitbart just published: 16 Reasons Why I Believe Joe Biden Sexually Assaulted Tara Reade, published in Breitbart at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

2.     Read JOHN NOLTE 26 Apr 202068:40 for a better discussion than I can muster.

3.     “When Reade originally came forward in April of 2019, she joined about a half-dozen women who have credibly accused Biden of unwanted touching. And I say “credibly” because Biden has serially committed acts of unwanted touching in public. [As an aside, Joe also committed Ukraine Quid Pro Quo and boasted about it in public.] We have countless videos of Biden making women and children uncomfortable with inappropriate hair-sniffing, nuzzling, kissing, and getting handsy.” [Jeff Sessions slapped Joe’s hand when Joe tried to get friendly with Jeff’s granddaughter.]

4.     “Now, however, Reade tells a much more lurid and disturbing story of being sexually assaulted by Biden. While working for the then-Delaware Senator while in her mid-20s, she says he cornered her in a hallway, thrust his hands up her skirt, penetrated her vagina, and when she objected, he said something to the effect of, “Come on, I heard you like me.”

5.    “Reade further alleges that after she complained, there was retaliation. She lost her job.”

6.     “So here are the reasons why I now believe Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade…

7.     “Reade Did Not Change Her Story [Has not to-date.]

8.     “Experts Say Assault Victims Frequently Don’t Tell the Full Story All at Once

9.     “Reade is a Lifelong Democrat

10.  “Reade Worked in Biden’s Senate Office in 1993

11.  “Witness Number One. Reade told her brother about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s brother and says the details of their stories are the same.

12.  “Witness Number Two. Reade told a friend about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s friend and says the details of their stories are the same.

13.  “Witness Number Three Reade told a friend about the alleged assault about 15 years after it happened, so sometime around 2008. McHugh has talked to this woman and this woman confirms Reade told her a “horrific” story about Biden.

14.  “Witness Number Four McHugh spoke with an intern who worked under Reade in Biden’s Senate office at the time. The intern knew nothing about the alleged assault, but McHugh says, “she said … in mid-April of 1993, Tara was abruptly no longer her supervisor. So the timing matches exactly with what Tara was saying.”

15.  “And what Reade is saying is that she was fired for filing a complaint.

16.  “Reade Invites Scrutiny. Unlike Blasey Ford, who hid behind her lawyers and little girl voice, Reade is inviting scrutiny, has asked investigative reporters like McHugh to dig into the details of her allegation.

17.  “Liars never invite scrutiny. They dodge it and look for excuses to avoid it.

18.  “Scrutiny Has Only Bolstered Reade’s Claim Since Reade invited this scrutiny, details have only bolstered her claim, not contradicted it. Most notably…

19.  “Mom’s Anguished Call to Larry King Live. Reade has been telling interviewers she told her mother, Jeanette Altimus, at the time about the alleged assault. Unfortunately, Altimus passed in 2016, so there is no way to verify this… Except there is… Reade’s been telling journalists that sometime in 1993 her mother called into CNN’s Larry King Live asking for advice about her daughter’s problems with a “prominent senator.” That video clip has now been found, and is a crucial and damning piece of evidence in support of Reade’s allegation.

20.  “The University of Delaware Refuses to Open Biden’s Senate Papers

21.  “Biden Is Not Demanding the University of Delaware Open His Papers

22.  “Look at the difference between Kavanaugh and Biden…

23.  Kavanaugh could not wait to defend himself in public, to put forth all the documentation asked for, to do whatever he could to invite whatever scrutiny was required to prove his innocence.

24.  “Biden, on the other hand, is [was] in hiding. He has not even said a word about the allegation (it helps that in a series of interviews with friendly fake reporters like Jake Tapper, Anderson Cooper, and George Stephanopoulos, he wasn’t asked). [The claim that the NY Times exonerates him is bogus. The endorsements by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama don’t help and are borderline if not completely bogus.]

25.  “Further, Biden is not asking the University of Delaware to throw open his senate papers while begging reporters to dig through them knowing this will prove no one filed a sexual harassment complaint against him.

26.  “Biden is acting like a guilty man. The guilty have everything to hide.

27.  Innocent men, like Kavanaugh, have nothing to hide.

28.  “The Media are Terrified of This Story. Within a few weeks, on top of countless hours of broadcast time, CNN published nearly 700 stories in support of Blasey Ford’s ridiculous lies. As of this writing, CNN has published only two [a few] stories about Reade, both of them [originally] favorable to Biden. [Now the media outlets including NY Times are turning against Joe.]

29.  “No one [few] in the media has [have] dared ask Biden about the allegation, and when the media do bring it up, they try to write Reade off as a crank, as an unstable Putin supporter (an allegation McHugh says is false).

30.  This “… is exactly what the media [and Hillary] did to Bill Clinton’s victims. Paula Jones was smeared as trailer trash. Monica Lewinsky was defamed as a crazed stalker. Kathleen Willey was slandered as an unstable gold digger. Juanita Broaddrick was swept under the rug. …

31.  “If the media believed they could debunk and discard Reade’s allegation with facts, they would be all over this story. They know they can’t, so they are treating it like its radioactive — because it is.

32.  “Biden Has a Long Pattern of Inappropriate Touching. Biden’s sense of entitlement when it comes to inappropriately touching women and CHILDREN, is well-established. If he behaves this way in public, imagine his behavior in private.

33.  “Reade Faces Prison If She’s Lying. Last month, Reade filed a formal criminal complaint against Biden, and one of the penalties for filing a false complaint is prison. 

34. “So while Reade is inviting investigative reporters to dig into and possibly debunk her allegation, she is also risking prison if that debunking occurs.

35.  “Bottom line…

36.  Reade is behaving like someone desperate to expose a terrible truth, while Biden is behaving like someone with something terrible to hide.

37.  “Additional evidence could certainly change my mind. But right now the only people who do not want this investigated are Joe Biden and his media allies.

38.  “Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

39.  “2020 ElectionMediaPolitics#MeTooCNNJake TapperJoe BidenJohn Noltesexual assaultTara Reade

40.  https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

41.  Yes, PORK, Biden enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via China.


42. He enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via Ukraine – and Joe’s bragging about his Ukraine Quid Pro Quo in public is his political legacy killer.


43. Now Tara Reade is front and center and will not go away.


44. And Joe has nowhere to go. 


45. No wonder he has been sleepy and holed up hiding in his basement. No wonder his wife speaks for him.


46. No wonder it took POTUS Obama so long to endorse. POTUS Obama knew all about this.

47. BARREL, Joe [has been] in hiding. 


48. His wife is speaking for him. 


49. For the good of the Democrat party and to save face, Joe is well advised to use health and cognitive decline as his excuse for dropping out. 


50. With Tara Reade and China and Ukraine facts on the table, with the fact that he owns all of POTUS Obama’s negative policies and actions that made us less free, safe, and prosperous, there is no way Joe can win an election even if the media does not have the fortitude to tell the honest truth about Joe’s failings or POTUS TRUMP’S amazing successes to-date, keeping more than 300 of his political promises. 


51. It will be POTUS TRUMP in a massive landslide and there is nothing the Democrats can do about it given their current situation with Joe. Couple this with the fact that the Democrats under Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and others have done nothing to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS – spending our precious time and millions of our dollars in a fruitless, foolish “the Russians did it” impeachment.]

52. “MORE WITNESSES – unlike the Kavanaugh situation. “Two more people who knew Tara Reade in the ’90s reportedly came forward on Monday to back the former Senate staffer’s claims of sexual misconduct against Joe Biden.

53. “Lynda LaCasse, a former next-door neighbor of Reade’s and a self-described supporter of Biden spoke on the record with Rich McHugh of Business Insider about past conversations they had with Reade about the allegations.

54. ““This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it,” LaCasse told Business Insider, recalling a conversation with Reade that occurred in either 1995 or 1996.

55. “Another past acquaintance, Lorraine Sanchez, a former colleague, also recalled past conversations with Reade, though she said did not recall Reade referring to Biden by name.

56. ““[Reade said] she had been sexually harassed by her former boss while she was in DC,” Sanchez told the publication, “and as a result of her voicing her concerns to her supervisors, she was let go, fired.”

57. “Biden himself has not addressed the claims from Reade — but his campaign has vehemently denied the allegations.

58. “Reade on Monday confirmed to Fox News the accuracy of how her conversations with LaCasse and Sanchez were described and expressed her deep gratitude towards them for coming forward.

59. ““I am touched that they would step forward knowing the targeted harassment I have received since I made my history with Joe Biden public. I appreciate their candor and bravery,” Reade said in a statement.

60. “LaCasse and Sanchez could be cited as more evidence supporting Reade’s allegation.

61. “They join Reade’s friend, who says they were told about the alleged assault at the time it happened but has chosen to remain anonymous, and her brother Collin Moulton, who recalled Reade describing an incident with Biden involving a “gym bag” as others who have backed her claims. The friend and Moulton both gave interviews to the Intercept.

62. “LaCasse told Business Insider: “I remember her saying, here was this person that she was working for and she idolized him. And he kind of put her up against a wall. And he put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside her. She felt like she was assaulted, and she really didn’t feel there was anything she could do.”

63. “LaCasse said that Reade was “upset” when she told her about the allegation and “the more she talked about it, the more she started crying.” She said she remembered urging Reade to file a police report but did not recall specific details from the alleged incident, like the location or remarks Biden had allegedly made to Reade.

64. ““I don’t remember all the details,” LaCasse told Business Insider. “I remember the skirt. I remember the fingers. I remember she was devastated.”

65. “LaCasse, a retired staffer of San Luis Obispo General Hospital, said she lived in the same apartment complex as Reade in Morro Bay, Calif. She recalled how the two of them had talked about “violent stories” they’ve experienced, which was when Reade told her “about the senator that she had worked for and he put his hand up her skirt.”

“Nolte: Fact Checking 3 Falsehoods in Biden Campaign’s Tara Reade Talking Points

“Joe Biden’s presidential campaign is reportedly sharing talking points trying to discredit his sexual assault accuser, Tara Reade. The problem is, this script makes not one, not two, but three false claims.

“Here is the full text of the talking points, per the far-left BuzzFeed:

“Biden believes that all women have the right to be heard and to have their claims thoroughly reviewed,” the talking points read, according to a copy sent to two Democratic operatives. “In this case, a thorough review by the New York Times has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

“Here’s the bottom line,” they read. “Vice President Joe Biden has spent over 40 years in public life: 36 years in the Senate; 7 Senate campaigns, 2 previous presidential runs, two vice presidential campaigns, and 8 years in the White House. There has never been a complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

“CLAIM #1: The New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of Reade’s allegations.

VERDICT: False.

Lie number one is the claim the New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of the Tara Reade’s increasingly-credible sexual assault allegation against Biden. We now know the Times did no such thing. A ton of corroborating evidence has been exposed since the Times released its sloppy “investigation,” which proves the Times was nothing close to thorough.

“CLAIM #2: The Times’ reporting “has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

VERDICT: False.

The second lie is that the New York Times concluded Joe Biden did not sexually assault Tara Reade. Even the far-left Times felt the need to debunk that straight-up falsehood — humiliating would-be VP Stacey Abrams, who already spread that fake news all over CNN primetime.

“Our investigation made no conclusion either way,” a Times spokesperson told BuzzFeed Wednesday morning.

“CLAIM #3: There has never even been a “hint” or “rumor” of similar behavior from Biden “ever” in history.

VERDICT: False.

The third lie is this nonsense about no “complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

To begin with, while Reade’s allegation — that Biden shoved his hand up her skirt in 1993, penetrated her vagina with his fingers, and then fired her after she complained — is by far the most serious, Tara Reade is the eighth woman — number eight! — to accuse Biden of misconduct.

“What’s more, there is also this 2008 report in a left-wing publication that definitively proves rumors and hints about Biden’s sexual misconduct have been around for more than a decade:

Biden is a notorious flapjaw. His vanity deludes him into believing that every word that drops from his mouth is minted in the golden currency of Pericles. Vanity is the most conspicuous characteristic of US Senators en bloc, nourished by deferential acolytes and often expressed in loutish sexual advances to staffers, interns and the like. On more than one occasion CounterPunch’s editors have listened to vivid accounts by the recipient of just such advances, this staffer of another senator being accosted by Biden in the well of the senate in the weeks immediately following his first wife’s fatal car accident. [emphasis added]

“So not only is [was] Joe Biden refusing to address Reade’s credible allegations directly (he has yet to comment on them and the fake news media have not asked him to comment), not only has he so far refused to call on the University of Delaware to release the Senate papers that might hold Reade’s alleged harassment complaint against him, he is also issuing talking points that are so flagrantly untrue the New York Times felt the need to speak up.

“With her desire to have investigative reporters check out the details of her story and her call for Biden to release his Senate papers, Reade continues to act like a woman with nothing to hide.

“With his refusal to protest his own innocence, to open up his papers, and the issuing of at least three lies in his talking points, Joe Biden continues to act like a man with everything to hide.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.


Joe and his campaign are burnt toast. BARREL & PORK. WE REPORT. YOU DECIDE.

                    1. PORK, should Joe Biden withdraw?

2. Yes, BARREL, he should withdraw. 

3. He will never make it now. POTUS TRUMP’s poll numbers eclipse Joe’s. 

4. If he stays, all he will do is take the democratic party down with him. His presence will take governors down and Senators and House congress men and women. His presence will take Pelosi down and Schiff and Nadler and many others. 

5. Why? Because there are now multiple credible witnesses supporting Tara Reade no matter how shrill Nancy Pelosi and several others are. Regarding poll numbers, don’t believe that Joe leads POTUS TRUMP. Joe has little or no media coverage compared to POTUS TRUMP. POTUS TRUMP has done a major good job dealing with COVID 19 and the whole nation recognizes this with the exception of a few who would trash him no matter what he does. There is no way the negative media groups can whitewash Tara Reade and make her go away.

6. Regarding the Tara Reade disclosue, her mother is a witness even though she is now deceased. The detail was found on a Larry King program. And others have come forward.

7. So there goes the complete woman vote and the men as well.

8. Puts Bernie back front and center.

9. Maybe Governor Cuomo. 

10. No question POTUS TRUMP is now guaranteed a second term.

11.  BARREL, John Nolte wrote and Breitbart just published: 16 Reasons Why I Believe Joe Biden Sexually Assaulted Tara Reade, published in Breitbart at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

2.     Read JOHN NOLTE 26 Apr 202068:40

3.     “When Reade originally came forward in April of 2019, she joined about a half-dozen women who have credibly accused Biden of unwanted touching. And I say “credibly” because Biden has serially committed acts of unwanted touching in public. We have countless videos of Biden making women and children uncomfortable with inappropriate hair-sniffing, nuzzling, kissing, and getting handsy.”

4.     “Now, however, Reade tells a much more lurid and disturbing story of being sexually assaulted by Biden. While working for the then-Delaware Senator while in her mid-20s, she says he cornered her in a hallway, thrust his hands up her skirt, penetrated her vagina, and when she objected, he said something to the effect of, “Come on, I heard you like me.”

5.     “Reade further alleges that after she complained, there was retaliation. She lost her job.”

6.     “So here are the reasons why I now believe Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade…

7.     “Reade Did Not Change Her Story

8.     “Experts Say Assault Victims Frequently Don’t Tell the Full Story All at Once

9.     “Reade is a Lifelong Democrat

10.  “Reade Worked in Biden’s Senate Office in 1993

11.  “Witness Number One. Reade told her brother about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s brother and says the details of their stories are the same.

12.  “Witness Number Two. Reade told a friend about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s friend and says the details of their stories are the same.

13.  “Witness Number Three Reade told a friend about the alleged assault about 15 years after it happened, so sometime around 2008. McHugh has talked to this woman and this woman confirms Reade told her a “horrific” story about Biden.

14.  “Witness Number Four McHugh spoke with an intern who worked under Reade in Biden’s Senate office at the time. The intern knew nothing about the alleged assault, but McHugh says, “she said … in mid-April of 1993, Tara was abruptly no longer her supervisor. So the timing matches exactly with what Tara was saying.”

15.  “And what Reade is saying is that she was fired for filing a complaint.

16.  “Reade Invites Scrutiny. Unlike Blasey Ford, who hid behind her lawyers and little girl voice, Reade is inviting scrutiny, has asked investigative reporters like McHugh to dig into the details of her allegation.

17.  “Liars never invite scrutiny. They dodge it and look for excuses to avoid it.

18.  “Scrutiny Has Only Bolstered Reade’s Claim Since Reade invited this scrutiny, details have only bolstered her claim, not contradicted it. Most notably…

19.  “Mom’s Anguished Call to Larry King Live. Reade has been telling interviewers she told her mother, Jeanette Altimus, at the time about the alleged assault. Unfortunately, Altimus passed in 2016, so there is no way to verify this… Except there is… Reade’s been telling journalists that sometime in 1993 her mother called into CNN’s Larry King Live asking for advice about her daughter’s problems with a “prominent senator.” That video clip has now been found, and is a crucial and damning piece of evidence in support of Reade’s allegation.

20.  “The University of Delaware Refuses to Open Biden’s Senate Papers

21.  “Biden Is Not Demanding the University of Delaware Open His Papers

22.  “Look at the difference between Kavanaugh and Biden…

23.  “Kavanaugh could not wait to defend himself in public, to put forth all the documentation asked for, to do whatever he could to invite whatever scrutiny was required to prove his innocence.

24.  “Biden, on the other hand, is in hiding. He has not even said a word about the allegation (it helps that in a series of interviews with friendly fake reporters like Jake Tapper, Anderson Cooper, and George Stephanopoulos, he wasn’t asked). [The claim that the NY Times exonerates him is bogus. The endorsement by HC is bogus.]

25.  “Further, Biden is not asking the University of Delaware to throw open his senate papers while begging reporters to dig through them knowing this will prove no one filed a sexual harassment complaint against him.

26.  “Biden is acting like a guilty man. The guilty have everything to hide.

27.  “Innocent men, like Kavanaugh, have nothing to hide.

28.  “The Media are Terrified of This Story. Within a few weeks, on top of countless hours of broadcast time, CNN published nearly 700 stories in support of Blasey Ford’s ridiculous lies. As of this writing, CNN has published only two stories about Reade, both of them favorable to Biden.

29.  “No one in the media has dared ask Biden about the allegation, and when the media do bring it up, they try to write Reade off as a crank, as an unstable Putin supporter (an allegation McHugh says is false).

30.  This “… is exactly what the media [and Hillary] did to Bill Clinton’s victims. Paula Jones was smeared as trailer trash. Monica Lewinsky was defamed as a crazed stalker. Kathleen Willey was slandered as an unstable gold digger. Juanita Broaddrick was swept under the rug. …

31.  “If the media believed they could debunk and discard Reade’s allegation with facts, they would be all over this story. They know they can’t, so they are treating it like its radioactive — because it is.

32.  “Biden Has a Long Pattern of Inappropriate Touching. Biden’s sense of entitlement when it comes to inappropriately touching women and CHILDREN, is well-established. If he behaves this way in public, imagine his behavior in private.

33.  “Reade Faces Prison If She’s Lying. Last month, Reade filed a formal criminal complaint against Biden, and one of the penalties for filing a false complaint is prison. 

34. “So while Reade is inviting investigative reporters to dig into and possibly debunk her allegation, she is also risking prison if that debunking occurs.

35.  “Bottom line…

36.  “Reade is behaving like someone desperate to expose a terrible truth, while Biden is behaving like someone with something terrible to hide.

37.  “Additional evidence could certainly change my mind. But right now the only people who do not want this investigated are Joe Biden and his media allies.

38.  “Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

39.  “2020 ElectionMediaPolitics#MeTooCNNJake TapperJoe BidenJohn Noltesexual assaultTara Reade

40.  https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

41.  Yes, PORK, Biden enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via China.


42. He enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via Ukraine.


43. Tara Reade is front and center.


44. Joe has nowhere to go. 


45. No wonder he is sleepy and holed up hiding in his basement. 


46. No wonder it took POTUS Obama so long to endorse. POTUS Obama knew all about this.

47.  BARREL, Joe is in hiding. 


48. His wife is speaking for him. 


49. He is well advised to use health and cognitive decline as his excuse for dropping out. 


50. With Tara Reade and China and Ukraine facts on the table, with the fact that he owns all of POTUS Obama’s negative policies that made us less free, safe, and prosperous, there is no way Joe can win an election. 


51. It will be POTUS TRUMP in a massive landslide.

52. MORE WITNESSES – unlike the Kavanaugh situation. “Two more people who knew Tara Reade in the ’90s reportedly came forward on Monday to back the former Senate staffer’s claims of sexual misconduct against Joe Biden.

53. “Lynda LaCasse, a former next-door neighbor of Reade’s and a self-described supporter of Biden spoke on the record with Rich McHugh of Business Insider about past conversations they had with Reade about the allegations.

54. ““This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it,” LaCasse told Business Insider, recalling a conversation with Reade that occurred in either 1995 or 1996.

55. “Another past acquaintance, Lorraine Sanchez, a former colleague, also recalled past conversations with Reade, though she said did not recall Reade referring to Biden by name.

56. ““[Reade said] she had been sexually harassed by her former boss while she was in DC,” Sanchez told the publication, “and as a result of her voicing her concerns to her supervisors, she was let go, fired.”

57. “Biden himself has not addressed the claims from Reade — but his campaign has vehemently denied the allegations.

58. “Reade on Monday confirmed to Fox News the accuracy of how her conversations with LaCasse and Sanchez were described and expressed her deep gratitude towards them for coming forward.

59. ““I am touched that they would step forward knowing the targeted harassment I have received since I made my history with Joe Biden public. I appreciate their candor and bravery,” Reade said in a statement.

60. “LaCasse and Sanchez could be cited as more evidence supporting Reade’s allegation.

61. “They join Reade’s friend, who says they were told about the alleged assault at the time it happened but has chosen to remain anonymous, and her brother Collin Moulton, who recalled Reade describing an incident with Biden involving a “gym bag” as others who have backed her claims. The friend and Moulton both gave interviews to the Intercept.

62. “LaCasse told Business Insider: “I remember her saying, here was this person that she was working for and she idolized him. And he kind of put her up against a wall. And he put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside her. She felt like she was assaulted, and she really didn’t feel there was anything she could do.”

63. “LaCasse said that Reade was “upset” when she told her about the allegation and “the more she talked about it, the more she started crying.” She said she remembered urging Reade to file a police report but did not recall specific details from the alleged incident, like the location or remarks Biden had allegedly made to Reade.

64. ““I don’t remember all the details,” LaCasse told Business Insider. “I remember the skirt. I remember the fingers. I remember she was devastated.”

65. “LaCasse, a retired staffer of San Luis Obispo General Hospital, said she lived in the same apartment complex as Reade in Morro Bay, Calif. She recalled how the two of them had talked about “violent stories” they’ve experienced, which was when Reade told her “about the senator that she had worked for and he put his hand up her skirt.”

https://thebeardedpatriot.com/biden-struggles-to-bury-sexual-assault-allegation-as-new-evidence-comes-to-light/

Nolte: Fact Checking 3 Falsehoods in Biden Campaign’s Tara Reade Talking Points

Joe Biden’s presidential campaign is reportedly sharing talking points trying to discredit his sexual assault accuser, Tara Reade. The problem is, this script makes not one, not two, but three false claims.

Here is the full text of the talking points, per the far-left BuzzFeed:

“Biden believes that all women have the right to be heard and to have their claims thoroughly reviewed,” the talking points read, according to a copy sent to two Democratic operatives. “In this case, a thorough review by the New York Times has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

“Here’s the bottom line,” they read. “Vice President Joe Biden has spent over 40 years in public life: 36 years in the Senate; 7 Senate campaigns, 2 previous presidential runs, two vice presidential campaigns, and 8 years in the White House. There has never been a complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

CLAIM #1: The New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of Reade’s allegations.

VERDICT: False.

Lie number one is the claim the New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of the Tara Reade’s increasingly-credible sexual assault allegation against Biden. We now know the Times did no such thing. A ton of corroborating evidence has been exposed since the Times released its sloppy “investigation,” which proves the Times was nothing close to thorough.

CLAIM #2: The Times’ reporting “has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

VERDICT: False.

The second lie is that the New York Times concluded Joe Biden did not sexually assault Tara Reade. Even the far-left Times felt the need to debunk that straight-up falsehood — humiliating would-be VP Stacey Abrams, who already spread that fake news all over CNN primetime.

“Our investigation made no conclusion either way,” a Times spokesperson told BuzzFeed Wednesday morning.

CLAIM #3: There has never even been a “hint” or “rumor” of similar behavior from Biden “ever” in history.

VERDICT: False.

The third lie is this nonsense about no “complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

To begin with, while Reade’s allegation — that Biden shoved his hand up her skirt in 1993, penetrated her vagina with his fingers, and then fired her after she complained — is by far the most serious, Tara Reade is the eighth woman — number eight! — to accuse Biden of misconduct.

What’s more, there is also this 2008 report in a left-wing publication that definitively proves rumors and hints about Biden’s sexual misconduct have been around for more than a decade:

Biden is a notorious flapjaw. His vanity deludes him into believing that every word that drops from his mouth is minted in the golden currency of Pericles. Vanity is the most conspicuous characteristic of US Senators en bloc, nourished by deferential acolytes and often expressed in loutish sexual advances to staffers, interns and the like. On more than one occasion CounterPunch’s editors have listened to vivid accounts by the recipient of just such advances, this staffer of another senator being accosted by Biden in the well of the senate in the weeks immediately following his first wife’s fatal car accident. [emphasis added]

So not only is Joe Biden refusing to address Reade’s credible allegations directly (he has yet to comment on them and the fake news media have not asked him to comment), not only has he so far refused to call on the University of Delaware to release the Senate papers that might hold Reade’s alleged harassment complaint against him, he is also issuing talking points that are so flagrantly untrue the New York Times felt the need to speak up.

With her desire to have investigative reporters check out the details of her story and her call for Biden to release his Senate papers, Reade continues to act like a woman with nothing to hide.

With his refusal to protest his own innocence, to open up his papers, and the issuing of at least three lies in his talking points, Joe Biden continues to act like a man with everything to hide.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/29/nolte-fact-checking-3-falsehoods-in-biden-campaigns-tara-reade-talking-points/

Joe has been knocked out. Joe’s Tara Reade and Joe’s Enrichment of Family and Self via China and Ukraine and Joe’s secret funding of proxy war against Russia and Joe’s sleepy cognitive decline responses remove Joe Biden from the race. Joe needs to withdraw quickly so he doesn’t take the Democrat party down with him. Three of his campaign talking points about Tara Reade are false. Hillary and Nancy of all people can’t save you, Joe. BARREL & PORK. WE REPORT! YOU DECIDE!

 

1. PORK, should Joe Biden withdraw?

2. Yes, BARREL, he should withdraw. 

3. He will never make it now.

4. If he stays, all he will do is take the democratic party down with him. His presence will take governors down and Senators and House congress men and women. His presence will take Pelosi down and Schiff and Nadler and many others. 

5. Why? Because there are now multiple Tara Reade credible witnesses against him no matter how shrill Nancy Pelosi is or how much Hillary professes to endorse him. 

6. There is a witness in the mother even though she is now deceased. The detail was found on a Larry King program. And there are a number of others who have now come forth. See below.

7. So there goes the complete woman vote and the men as well.

8. Puts Bernie back front and center.

9. Maybe Governor Cuomo. 

10. No question POTUS TRUMP is now guaranteed a second term.

11.  BARREL, John Nolte wrote and Breitbart just published: 16 Reasons Why I Believe Joe Biden Sexually Assaulted Tara Reade, published in Breitbart at https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

2.     Read JOHN NOLTE 26 Apr 202068:40

3.     “When Reade originally came forward in April of 2019, she joined about a half-dozen women who have credibly accused Biden of unwanted touching. And I say “credibly” because Biden has serially committed acts of unwanted touching in public. We have countless videos of Biden making women and children uncomfortable with inappropriate hair-sniffing, nuzzling, kissing, and getting handsy.”

4.     “Now, however, Reade tells a much more lurid and disturbing story of being sexually assaulted by Biden. While working for the then-Delaware Senator while in her mid-20s, she says he cornered her in a hallway, thrust his hands up her skirt, penetrated her vagina, and when she objected, he said something to the effect of, “Come on, I heard you like me.”

5.     “Reade further alleges that after she complained, there was retaliation. She lost her job.”

6.     “So here are the reasons why I now believe Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade…

7.     “Reade Did Not Change Her Story

8.     “Experts Say Assault Victims Frequently Don’t Tell the Full Story All at Once

9.     “Reade is a Lifelong Democrat

10.  “Reade Worked in Biden’s Senate Office in 1993

11.  “Witness Number One. Reade told her brother about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s brother and says the details of their stories are the same.

12.  “Witness Number Two. Reade told a friend about the alleged sexual assault at the time it happened. McHugh has talked to Reade’s friend and says the details of their stories are the same.

13.  “Witness Number Three Reade told a friend about the alleged assault about 15 years after it happened, so sometime around 2008. McHugh has talked to this woman and this woman confirms Reade told her a “horrific” story about Biden.

14.  “Witness Number Four McHugh spoke with an intern who worked under Reade in Biden’s Senate office at the time. The intern knew nothing about the alleged assault, but McHugh says, “she said … in mid-April of 1993, Tara was abruptly no longer her supervisor. So the timing matches exactly with what Tara was saying.”

15.  “And what Reade is saying is that she was fired for filing a complaint.

16.  “Reade Invites Scrutiny. Unlike Blasey Ford, who hid behind her lawyers and little girl voice, Reade is inviting scrutiny, has asked investigative reporters like McHugh to dig into the details of her allegation.

17.  “Liars never invite scrutiny. They dodge it and look for excuses to avoid it.

18.  “Scrutiny Has Only Bolstered Reade’s Claim Since Reade invited this scrutiny, details have only bolstered her claim, not contradicted it. Most notably…

19.  “Mom’s Anguished Call to Larry King Live. Reade has been telling interviewers she told her mother, Jeanette Altimus, at the time about the alleged assault. Unfortunately, Altimus passed in 2016, so there is no way to verify this… Except there is… Reade’s been telling journalists that sometime in 1993 her mother called into CNN’s Larry King Live asking for advice about her daughter’s problems with a “prominent senator.” That video clip has now been found, and is a crucial and damning piece of evidence in support of Reade’s allegation.

20.  “The University of Delaware Refuses to Open Biden’s Senate Papers

21.  “Biden Is Not Demanding the University of Delaware Open His Papers

22.  “Look at the difference between Kavanaugh and Biden…

23.  “Kavanaugh could not wait to defend himself in public, to put forth all the documentation asked for, to do whatever he could to invite whatever scrutiny was required to prove his innocence.

24.  “Biden, on the other hand, is in hiding. He has not even said a word about the allegation (it helps that in a series of interviews with friendly fake reporters like Jake Tapper, Anderson Cooper, and George Stephanopoulos, he wasn’t asked). [The claim that the NY Times exonerates him is bogus. The endorsement by HC is bogus.]

25.  “Further, Biden is not asking the University of Delaware to throw open his senate papers while begging reporters to dig through them knowing this will prove no one filed a sexual harassment complaint against him.

26.  “Biden is acting like a guilty man. The guilty have everything to hide.

27.  “Innocent men, like Kavanaugh, have nothing to hide.

28.  “The Media are Terrified of This Story. Within a few weeks, on top of countless hours of broadcast time, CNN published nearly 700 stories in support of Blasey Ford’s ridiculous lies. As of this writing, CNN has published only two stories about Reade, both of them favorable to Biden.

29.  “No one in the media has dared ask Biden about the allegation, and when the media do bring it up, they try to write Reade off as a crank, as an unstable Putin supporter (an allegation McHugh says is false).

30.  This “… is exactly what the media [and Hillary] did to Bill Clinton’s victims. Paula Jones was smeared as trailer trash. Monica Lewinsky was defamed as a crazed stalker. Kathleen Willey was slandered as an unstable gold digger. Juanita Broaddrick was swept under the rug. …

31.  “If the media believed they could debunk and discard Reade’s allegation with facts, they would be all over this story. They know they can’t, so they are treating it like its radioactive — because it is.

32.  “Biden Has a Long Pattern of Inappropriate Touching. Biden’s sense of entitlement when it comes to inappropriately touching women and CHILDREN, is well-established. If he behaves this way in public, imagine his behavior in private.

33.  “Reade Faces Prison If She’s Lying. Last month, Reade filed a formal criminal complaint against Biden, and one of the penalties for filing a false complaint is prison. 

34. “So while Reade is inviting investigative reporters to dig into and possibly debunk her allegation, she is also risking prison if that debunking occurs.

35.  “Bottom line…

36.  “Reade is behaving like someone desperate to expose a terrible truth, while Biden is behaving like someone with something terrible to hide.

37.  “Additional evidence could certainly change my mind. But right now the only people who do not want this investigated are Joe Biden and his media allies.

38.  “Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

39.  “2020 ElectionMediaPolitics#MeTooCNNJake TapperJoe BidenJohn Noltesexual assaultTara Reade

40.  https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/26/nolte-16-reasons-why-i-believe-joe-biden-sexually-assaulted-tara-reade/

41.  Yes, PORK, Biden enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via China.


42. He enriched himself and his family with multi-millions if not billions of dollars via Ukraine.


43. Tara Reade is front and center.


44. Joe has nowhere to go. 


45. No wonder he is sleepy and holed up hiding in his basement. 


46. No wonder it took POTUS Obama so long to endorse. POTUS Obama knew all about this.

47.  BARREL, Joe is in hiding. 


48. His wife is speaking for him. 


49. He is well advised to use health and cognitive decline as his excuse for dropping out. 


50. With Tara Reade and China and Ukraine facts on the table, with the fact that he owns all of POTUS Obama’s negative policies that made us less free, safe, and prosperous, there is no way Joe can win an election. 


51. It will be POTUS TRUMP in a massive landslide.

52. MORE WITNESSES – unlike the Kavanaugh situation. “Two more people who knew Tara Reade in the ’90s reportedly came forward on Monday to back the former Senate staffer’s claims of sexual misconduct against Joe Biden.

53. “Lynda LaCasse, a former next-door neighbor of Reade’s and a self-described supporter of Biden spoke on the record with Rich McHugh of Business Insider about past conversations they had with Reade about the allegations.

54. ““This happened, and I know it did because I remember talking about it,” LaCasse told Business Insider, recalling a conversation with Reade that occurred in either 1995 or 1996.

55. “Another past acquaintance, Lorraine Sanchez, a former colleague, also recalled past conversations with Reade, though she said did not recall Reade referring to Biden by name.

56. ““[Reade said] she had been sexually harassed by her former boss while she was in DC,” Sanchez told the publication, “and as a result of her voicing her concerns to her supervisors, she was let go, fired.”

57. “Biden himself has not addressed the claims from Reade — but his campaign has vehemently denied the allegations.

58. “Reade on Monday confirmed to Fox News the accuracy of how her conversations with LaCasse and Sanchez were described and expressed her deep gratitude towards them for coming forward.

59. ““I am touched that they would step forward knowing the targeted harassment I have received since I made my history with Joe Biden public. I appreciate their candor and bravery,” Reade said in a statement.

60. “LaCasse and Sanchez could be cited as more evidence supporting Reade’s allegation.

61. “They join Reade’s friend, who says they were told about the alleged assault at the time it happened but has chosen to remain anonymous, and her brother Collin Moulton, who recalled Reade describing an incident with Biden involving a “gym bag” as others who have backed her claims. The friend and Moulton both gave interviews to the Intercept.

62. “LaCasse told Business Insider: “I remember her saying, here was this person that she was working for and she idolized him. And he kind of put her up against a wall. And he put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside her. She felt like she was assaulted, and she really didn’t feel there was anything she could do.”

63. “LaCasse said that Reade was “upset” when she told her about the allegation and “the more she talked about it, the more she started crying.” She said she remembered urging Reade to file a police report but did not recall specific details from the alleged incident, like the location or remarks Biden had allegedly made to Reade.

64. ““I don’t remember all the details,” LaCasse told Business Insider. “I remember the skirt. I remember the fingers. I remember she was devastated.”

65. “LaCasse, a retired staffer of San Luis Obispo General Hospital, said she lived in the same apartment complex as Reade in Morro Bay, Calif. She recalled how the two of them had talked about “violent stories” they’ve experienced, which was when Reade told her “about the senator that she had worked for and he put his hand up her skirt.”

https://thebeardedpatriot.com/biden-struggles-to-bury-sexual-assault-allegation-as-new-evidence-comes-to-light/

Nolte: Fact Checking 3 Falsehoods in Biden Campaign’s Tara Reade Talking Points QUOTE:

Joe Biden’s presidential campaign is reportedly sharing talking points trying to discredit his sexual assault accuser, Tara Reade. The problem is, this script makes not one, not two, but three false claims.

Here is the full text of the talking points, per the far-left BuzzFeed:

“Biden believes that all women have the right to be heard and to have their claims thoroughly reviewed,” the talking points read, according to a copy sent to two Democratic operatives. “In this case, a thorough review by the New York Times has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

“Here’s the bottom line,” they read. “Vice President Joe Biden has spent over 40 years in public life: 36 years in the Senate; 7 Senate campaigns, 2 previous presidential runs, two vice presidential campaigns, and 8 years in the White House. There has never been a complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

CLAIM #1: The New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of Reade’s allegations.

VERDICT: False.

Lie number one is the claim the New York Times conducted a “thorough review” of the Tara Reade’s increasingly-credible sexual assault allegation against Biden. We now know the Times did no such thing. A ton of corroborating evidence has been exposed since the Times released its sloppy “investigation,” which proves the Times was nothing close to thorough.

CLAIM #2: The Times’ reporting “has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

VERDICT: False.

The second lie is that the New York Times concluded Joe Biden did not sexually assault Tara Reade. Even the far-left Times felt the need to debunk that straight-up falsehood — humiliating would-be VP Stacey Abrams, who already spread that fake news all over CNN primetime.

“Our investigation made no conclusion either way,” a Times spokesperson told BuzzFeed Wednesday morning.

CLAIM #3: There has never even been a “hint” or “rumor” of similar behavior from Biden “ever” in history.

VERDICT: False.

The third lie is this nonsense about no “complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

To begin with, while Reade’s allegation — that Biden shoved his hand up her skirt in 1993, penetrated her vagina with his fingers, and then fired her after she complained — is by far the most serious, Tara Reade is the eighth woman — number eight! — to accuse Biden of misconduct.

What’s more, there is also this 2008 report in a left-wing publication that definitively proves rumors and hints about Biden’s sexual misconduct have been around for more than a decade:

Biden is a notorious flapjaw. His vanity deludes him into believing that every word that drops from his mouth is minted in the golden currency of Pericles. Vanity is the most conspicuous characteristic of US Senators en bloc, nourished by deferential acolytes and often expressed in loutish sexual advances to staffers, interns and the like. On more than one occasion CounterPunch’s editors have listened to vivid accounts by the recipient of just such advances, this staffer of another senator being accosted by Biden in the well of the senate in the weeks immediately following his first wife’s fatal car accident. [emphasis added]

So not only is Joe Biden refusing to address Reade’s credible allegations directly (he has yet to comment on them and the fake news media have not asked him to comment), not only has he so far refused to call on the University of Delaware to release the Senate papers that might hold Reade’s alleged harassment complaint against him, he is also issuing talking points that are so flagrantly untrue the New York Times felt the need to speak up.

With her desire to have investigative reporters check out the details of her story and her call for Biden to release his Senate papers, Reade continues to act like a woman with nothing to hide.

With his refusal to protest his own innocence, to open up his papers, and the issuing of at least three lies in his talking points, Joe Biden continues to act like a man with everything to hide.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNCFollow his Facebook Page here.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/29/nolte-fact-checking-3-falsehoods-in-biden-campaigns-tara-reade-talking-points/

Did COMPLICIT Joe Biden and POTUS OBAMA give Iran billions or is this fake news? Looks like it is not fake news, folks. BARREL & PORK.

1. BARREL, there is a commonly used euphemism which needs to be exploded.

2. A euphemism is the substitution of an agreeable term for a term that might offend or be unpleasant or challenge the integrity of a person or persons or an organization.

3. What is that euphemism, PORK?

4. That euphemism, BARREL, is this phrase “The Obama Administration” which is used so cavalierly and dismissively by the press.

5. How so, PORK?

6. Well, BARREL, the truth is “The Obama Administration” is simply an obfuscatory way and even a deceitful way of saying “POTUS OBAMA and JOE BIDEN and the democrats.”

7. POTUS OBAMA and JOE BIDEN and the democrats” were and they still are “the Obama Administration.”

8. You are right, PORK.

9. Didn’t Joe Biden and POTUS OBAMA and the democrats give Iran billions of dollars used by Soleimani and Iran leadership to foment terrorism in the Middle East and elsewhere and thereby harm our military personnel and further the Iranian nuclear ambitions?

10. Or is this fake news?

11. Doesn’t look like fake news, BARREL.

12. And Yes, POTUS OBAMA and I am going to call him COMPLICIT JOE BIDEN and the democrats did give Iran billions of dollars – a billion in cash – which was used  to a serious degree to foster terrorism in the Middle East and to harm Israel and our military and civilians.

13. There is even indication that they did so because they hated Israel.

14. See Investors.com and Washington Times and CNBC and The Wall Street Journal regarding how the Obama administration – which is POTUS OBAMA and COMPLICIT Joe Biden — secretly gave Iran billions of dollars.

15. INVESTORS.COM. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/obama-iran-terrorism/;

16. WASHINGTON TIMES. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/7/inside-the-ring-obama-era-cash-traced-to-iran-back/;

17. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/06/the-obama-administration-secretly-sought-to-give-iran-access-to-the-us-financial-system.html;

18. WALL STREET JOURNAL. https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sent-two-more-planeloads-of-cash-to-iran-after-initial-payment-1473208256

19. But PORK, can’t Joe Biden and the democrats wiggle out of this one by saying, “But I was only the Vice President. Or, they are no longer in power. I was not responsible. We were not responsible.”

20. Nope.

21. Much of the anti-POTUS Trump democrat liberal press may want to give Joe and the democrats a pass but the truth is “The Obama Administration” was and still is “then POTUS OBAMA and COMPLICIT JOE BIDEN and THE DEMOCRATS.”

22. All three are responsible for the many initiatives they took during the Obama time in office – initiatives which have harmed us and our FREEDOMS, SAFETY, and PROSPERITY.

23. They are signally responsible for giving Iran billions which Iran used for terrorism to the harm of all countries in the Middle East including Israel and to the U.S. and if we do a little research I suspect to the harm of England, Australia, Germany, France, Russia, China and other countries as well.

Sue/Impeach/Indict Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Nadler for POTUS ABUSE and COUP. BARREL & PORK.

1. PORK, I think there is more that enough evidence to sue/impeach/indict Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, and Nadler.

2. For what, BARREL?

3. For POTUS ABUSE, PORK.

4. For their coup attempt on a sitting president.

5. There is enough evidence to sue/impeach/indict the four for POTUS ABUSE — for engineering a coup on POTUS TRUMP including their effort to annul the 2016 election.

6. Think of it, PORK.

7. These four people have held the nation hostage with their failed now proven fake partisan impeachment hoax and coup attempt ever since POTUS Trump was elected.

8. They have misspent millions of dollars of our money. (This alone warrants firing them.)

9. Pushing a socialist agenda, over and over again they have diverted attention of our lawmakers away from efforts to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS.

10. Had they wished to help us voters they would have focused their energies on improving our infrastructure and we would have been well on our way toward accomplishing the same. This impeachment lite coup attempt is a hoax of the highest order and especially Nancy Pelosi gets the negative credit. All four need to stop this nonsense and focus on their own constituencies and help them and the nation be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS.

POTUS TRUMP REAL APPROVAL PROBABLY AT 80% TO 90%. BARREL & PORK. (Also FREE GIFT OF RICHARD LINFORD’S EBOOK ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD? Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.)


PORK, while the Rasmussen daily tracking 
poll 
(https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/prez_track_dec23
shows POTUS Trump’s approval rating at 
48% today on December 23, 2019, my marketing
and advertising observation is still this: 
POTUS Trump’s actual POSITIVE approval rating 
is 80% plus and probably 90% plus.

POTUS Trump has had and continues to have 80 – 90% of 
all political media coverage [which 
equates to multi-millions if not billions of dollars in free 
advertising]. 

All other politicians or celebrities are eclipsed. 

POTUS TRUMP has always been on top despite the 

impeachment nonsense. He has always 

been going in the right direction. His actions show he has done 

and he is doing all he can to help us be FREE, SAFE, AND 

PROSPEROUS while the do nothing democrats Nancy and 

Chuck and Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler have done 

nothing to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS since 

POTUS Trump was elected.

At one point back in September of 2017, there appeared to be a 


“turning point” when 

Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi feigned working with 

POTUS Trump regarding a natural disaster.

Such working together may have been true for a couple of 


days, and not for any fault of Chuck and Nancy; the fact is  

Chuck and Nancy haven’t continued to work with him as they 

promised.

Their actions for the moment looked cooperative.

In hindsight, now that we all have suffered through their 


impeachment debacle, it is clear to the whole world that their then 


few days cooperation was grand standing and a sham.

And this applies to the other do nothing democrats.

So I withdraw any compliments for Chuck and Nancy.  

The democrats continued 

and still continue their do nothing Russia collusion 

and Ukraine fault-finding and their impeach Trump narrative and 


their “open “unvetted borders” and “abolish ice” narratives and 


“late term abortion” narratives.

There is now no hope Chuck or Nancy will rise to the level of 


statesman and stateswoman. 

I quote Michael Goodwin of the New York Post who wrote back in 


September 2017


1.    “Yet beyond the professional activists, ideologues and consultants, much [I add 80%-90%] of America yearns for more government cooperation and less combat.

2.     “Like children watching their parents fight, most voters [democrat or republican or independent] just want a productive peace, not an endless battle for ­total victory that yields nothing of common value.

3.     “Above all, they want a government that works for them, not one fixated on partisan score keeping and ideological litmus tests.

My conclusion, and notwithstanding the left and mainstream 


media meltdown over impeachment, the POTUS Trump brand is 


still at 80% to 90% POSITIVE approval not 48% or 46%. 


POTUS Trump has delivered on more than 300 campaign promises


and POTUS Trump continues to deliver on his campaign promises, 


one after another.

    Addendum:

For a patriotic American, patriotism is to champion our Constitutional rights of life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and the freedoms promised to ALL – BLACKS, HISPANICS, NATIVE AMERICANS, ASIAN AMERICANS, WHITES, ETC., ALL, including BOTH the right of women to choose and the right to life of the unborn.

    Our needs and wants aren’t hard to figure out. 

    We all simply want for ourselves and our unborn to

    be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS.


SO to congress — the simple request is rise to the level of statesmen and stateswomen and stop this impeachment nonsense and help us be free, safe, and prosperous or resign and get out of the way.

1. We simply want FREEDOM. *Freedom of Religion; *Freedom of Speech; *Freedom of Assembly; *Right to bear arms; *Eliminate political correctness. *Cut government bureaucracy and regulations! *Regarding Freedom of Religion, let Christian, Jew, Muslim, Atheist worship how, where, or what they may so long as they respect the rights of others. *Work together across the aisle. This is what a POTUS and the congress should stand for.

2. We simply want SAFETY. *Support Law and Order [Indict the leakers and FBI disaffected leadership and the Clintons and any others if they deserve it]; *Support police officers and our military and border patrol; *Uphold our Right to bear arms; *Protect our borders; *Build the wall NOW [HURRICANE AND THE LIKE DISASTERS ARE NO EXCUSE NOT TO BUILD THE WALL NOW]; *Vet immigrants and visitors stringently; *Eliminate ISIS/al Qaeda; *Get rid of MS 13 and other gangs; identify and prosecute criminal syndicates; *Ensure no NK/Iran nukes; *TEAR DOWN THE KOREAN DMZ; *Care for our Vets; *Strengthen our military; *Work with Russia and China, Great Britain, the EU, and Canada and Central and South America. *Stop the murders in Chicago and Baltimore and other cities; *Get rid of sanctuary cities and support ICE. This is what a POTUS and the congress should stand for.

3. We simply want PROSPERITY. *Several hundred million new jobs; *Enhance U.S. manufacturing; *Establish Energy independence; *Foster Technology advances; *Push Space exploration; *Work with other countries so long as the deal is fair; *Eliminate the national debt; Ensure clean air and water and care for our environment. *Take the lead in Artificial Intelligence. This is what a POTUS and the congress should stand for.

4. We simply want you to STOP DUMPING OUR TREASURE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND IMPROVE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. *Better roads; *Better pipe system; *Better airports; *Better ports; *Better bridges; *Better secure free enhanced internet. Including the INFRASTRUCTURE in our Inner Cities. Stop sending out military and treasure to the Middle East. This is what a POTUS and the congress should stand for.


SO to congress – Chuck and Nancy in particular — the simple request is rise to the level of statesmen and stateswomen and stop this impeachment nonsense and help us be free, safe, and prosperous or resign and get out of the way.


MY FREE GIFT EBOOK FOR YOU – MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR.


A+A+A+A+A+

FREE SOURDOUGH BREAD EBOOK.

AS A KINDNESS, SCROLL DOWN FOR A

FREE COMPLETE NO CHARGE COPY 

of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, through amazon.com, 

to do so click on this amazon.com link

My ebook is only $3.99. 

My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

E

 Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed when I baked my first loaf.

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is

© Copyright Linford Corporation 2019

All international and domestic rights reserved

Linford Corporation

r.linford@comcast.net

1.      foreword

2.      My daughter visited me and while she was with me she taught me how to make sourdough bread; and she gave me some starter she was given at a Bausch mixer cooking class.

3.      Since that day, and acknowledging her kindness, I’ve taken up sourdough bread making; and to-date, I’ve found a great deal of enjoyment baking and giving away my bread. By now I have given away many more loaves than I have eaten. I’ve also learned a few things about bread making and have thrown away a couple of beginner loaves as well simply because they were not up to my standards.

4.      With these checklists, sourdough bread is not hard to make. It is tasty, healthy, filling, and the loaves make great gifts. With this little intro, keep in mind that well made artisan sourdough bread is to cry for if not to die for. Sourdough bread when well made can be the best.

5.      I hope you find these checklists not only interesting, but also sufficiently motivating so you think seriously about taking up your own Artisan Sourdough Bread making avocation or for that matter vocation.

6.      And while you are at it, think about giving away some if not much of your bread to your family, neighbors, and friends.

7.      I don’t like the traditional recipe format. For ease of use, for avoiding cooking mistakes, I like my recipe checklists better. So here goes.

8.       SOURDOUGH BREAD — BASIC

9.       NEEDED (pun intended):

10.   Quality all-purpose fresh flour, salt, water, starter, non-stick cooking spray, butter or olive oil.

11.   Large non-metal mixing bowl, spatula (I use a rubber one), heavy ceramic* pot with lid, cooking parchment paper, cutting board, plastic wrap or dish towel.

12.   *Purists say do not use metal. Purists say do not use stainless steel. Purists say the acids make sourdough sour and acids react to any metals.

13.   I use a large metal mixing bowl and a rubber spatula and to-date have not noticed any problem with quality.

HOW TO Make Sourdough Bread:

14.   To the large mixing bowl:

15.   Add 3 and ½ cups FLOUR.

16.   Add 2 tsp SALT.

17.   STIR UNTIL MIXED.

18.   Add 2 cups WATER.

19.   Add 1/3 cup STARTER.

20.   STIR UNTIL MIXED.

21.   COVER FOR 12 to 24 HOURS.

22.   SPREAD FLOUR on cutting board.

23.   DUMP DOUGH ON cutting board.

24.   KNEAD DOUGH 15 to 20 times by hand or with spatula.

SPRAY INSIDE OF POT WITH NON-STICK COOKING SPRAY.

25.   PLACE PARCHMENT PAPER IN POT.

26.   PLACE KNEADED DOUGH IN POT.

27.   COVER WITH LID OR PLASTIC WRAP OR DISH TOWEL

28.   LET DOUGH RISE 2 to 3 HOURS UNTIL DOUBLE IN SIZE.

29.   I set my pot in the cold oven while my dough rises.

30.   TURN OVEN ON AT 425 DEGREES AND BAKE FOR 30 MINUTES.

31.   TAKE LID OFF.

32.   BASTE TOP OF BREAD WITH BUTTER OR OLIVE OIL.

33.   BAKE WITHOUT LID FOR ANOTHER 30 MINUTES.

34.   LET COOL.

35.   EAT.

36.   ENJOY.

37.   DOUBLE THE RECIPE?

38.   DOUBLE THE INGREDIENTS.

39.   Feel free to be creative.

40.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – BENEFITS – SAID BY SOME TO BE THE HEALTHIEST BREAD.

41.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – BENEFITS – TAKING UP BAKING HELPED ONE PERSON I KNOW OF STOP DRINKING ALCOHOL

42.   SOURDOUGH BREAD — HISTORY

43.   An oldest form of leavened bread, dating back to Egypt.

44.   Sourdough was carried in back packs and covered wagons by explorers and pioneers – was used by California and Klondike gold rush miners, and was used to leaven bread before commercial baking yeast was available.

45.   Sourdough starter may have been discovered by accident when wild yeast found its way into dough.

46.   Alaskan miners allegedly slept with their starter to keep it from freezing.

47.   I don’t recommend sleeping with your starter.

48.   See Sharon Vail, Sourdough: More than a Bread. September 12, 2006. NPR. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6061648

49.   National Sourdough Bread Day is April 1.

50.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – JOBS.

51.   There are artisan bread making jobs available. Check Google.

52.   SOURDOUGH BREAD VARIATIONS

53.   ADD CHOCOLATE CHIPS DURING KNEADING OR

54.   ADD A PACKAGE OF TRAIL MIX OR

55.   ADD A CUP OF RAISONS OR

56.   THE BEST MOST TASTY VARIATION I’VE FOUND TO-DATE?

57.   ADD A CUP OF CRANBERRY CRAZENS

58.   I don’t recommend adding chocolate chips. The chips melt and the chocolate taste is lost in the sourdough taste.

59.   Trail mix is ok.

60.   Again, if you are going to try adding components, the cranberry crazens work best for me.

61.   There are a number of Artisan Bread making recipe variations.

SOURDOUGH BREAD AND STARTER TIPS

62.   Again, some say don’t use metal or stainless steel.

63.   Use ceramic bowls and wooden spoons

64.   Take good care of your starter, some say out of respect for its long history, out of respect for the many individuals and families fed over the years because of sourdough starter.

65.   There are stories of starter kept alive for ten years or more.

66.   So keep your starter alive.

67.   Add equal parts of warm water and flour to your starter every few weeks.

68.   Store your starter in your refrigerator.

69.   It can last for a long, long time.

70.   It will improve with age.

71.   Stir it periodically.

72.   If you have a sourdough junkie in your family, your sourdough starter may be one of the very best legacies you can pass on from generation to generation.

73.   Again, toss the starter if it shows any pink or orange or other odd color or carries a strange odor.

74.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – SAN FRANCISCO

75.   NEEDED:

76.   4 ¾ cups all-purpose flour

77.   3 tablespoons white sugar

78.   2 ½ teaspoons salt

79.   1 package active dry yeast (.25 ounce)

80.   1 cup warm milk

81.   2 tablespoons softened margarine or butter

82.   1 ½ cups sourdough starter

83.   1 extra large egg

84.   1 tablespoon water

85.   ¼ cup chopped onion

86.   Large non-metal mixing bowl

87.   Non-metal mixing utensil

88.   HOW TO Make San Francisco Sourdough Bread:

89.   To large bowl,

90.   ADD/STIR/MIX –

91.   4 ¾ cups all-purpose flour

92.   3 tablespoons white sugar

93.   2 ½ teaspoons salt

94.   1 package active dry yeast (.25 ounce)

95.   ADD/STIR/MIX.

96.   1 cup warm milk or as much as needed

97.   2 tablespoons softened margarine or butter

98.   1 ½ cups sourdough starter

99.   Flour surface of non-metal cutting board or surface

100.           DROP Dough onto floured surface

101.           Knead for 10 minutes

102.           Drop dough into greased bowl and turn once to oil surface

103.           COVER

104.           LET RISE for 1 hour or until volume doubles

105.           PUNCH DOWN

106.           Let it rest for 15 minutes

107.           Shape loaves

108.           Place loaves on greased baking pan

109.           Let it rise for 1 hour or until doubles

110.           MAKE egg wash – 1 egg mixed with 1 tablespoon water

111.           BRUSH egg wash on tops of loaves

112.           You may want to sprinkle with chopped onion (you may not)

113.           With lid on, BAKE at 425 degrees F  for 30 minutes

114.           With lid off, BAKE at 425 degrees F for another 30 minutes or until fully cooked

115.           Cool

116.           Eat

117.           HOW TO MAKE ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD. CHECK OUT THESE VIDEOS:

118.           Artisan Sourdough Bread – Breadworld by Fleischmann’s Bread World. http://www.breadworld.com/recipe/Artisan-Sourdough-Bread

119.           ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD MADE WITH A STIFF STARTER. https://www.kingarthurflour.com/recipes/artisan-sourdough-bread-made-with-a-stiff-starter-recipe

120.           Artisan Sourdough Bread from Amazon. Free 2-day Shipping with Prime Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=artisan+sourdough+bread&gclid=CjwKCAjwlPTmBRBoEiwAHqpvhSDbbd03Uf4B3w17iFD2SlKdzHJCQw20Xos5OsumGnY8TgaHyMTwohoCY48QAvD_BwE&hvadid=242090241053&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9051875&hvnetw=g&hvpos=1o1&hvqmt=e&hvrand=1713447390197666619&hvtargid=kwd-320083297189&hydadcr=16183_9800755&tag=googhydr-20&ref=pd_sl_8zgx0th4a5_e

121.           Artisan Sourdough Made Simple. How to Make Simple Sourdough Bread: A Step-By-Step Guide. https://alexandracooks.com/2017/10/24/artisan-sourdough-made-simple-sourdough-bread-demystified-a-beginners-guide-to-sourdough-baking/

122.           Beginner Artisan Sourdough Bread Recipe. Homemade. https://www.homemadefoodjunkie.com/tartine-style-sourdough-bread-recipe/

123.           Easy Sourdough Artisan Bread Recipe. An Oregon Cottage. https://anoregoncottage.com/easy-sourdough-artisan-bread/

124.           How to Make Artisan Sourdough Bread. The Pioneer Woman. https://thepioneerwoman.com/food-and-friends/how-to-make-artisan-sourdough-bread/

125.           Mastering the Art of Artisan Sourdough Bread. Foodal. https://foodal.com/knowledge/baking/artisan-sourdough-bread/

126.           My Best Sourdough Recipe. The Perfect Loaf. https://www.theperfectloaf.com/best-sourdough-recipe/

127.           Rosemary Artisan Sourdough Bread. Aroma Tools Blog. http://blog.aromatools.com/2017/01/26/rosemary-artisan-sourdough-bread/?gclid=CjwKCAjwlPTmBRBoEiwAHqpvhRW7MM0VCpJm_QsZfKILMxumEVoH7k-7gTM4S3uy0rlqAO61cjTN-hoCoPkQAvD_BwE

Here is a free complete copy of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, click on the amazon.com link

to do so. My ebook is only $3.99. My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

·      

 Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.

·      

128.           CHECK OUT THESE TITLES ON THE INTERNET.

129.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – 10+ BEST RECIPES

130.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – AMAZONFRESH GROCERY DELIVERY

131.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – AMISH FRIENDSHIP RUSTIC

132.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ARTISAN

133.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BBC FOOD

134.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BEGINNER’S PERFECT LOAF

135.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — BERKELEY

136.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BEST IN THE WORLD

137.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BOB’S RED MILL

138.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — CHOCOLATE

139.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CHOCOLATE-CHERRY

140.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CLASSES, CLUBS, COURSES

141.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CLASSIC – BETTER HOMES & GARDENS

142.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – COCO BAKES

143.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — COUNTRY

144.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – COUNTRY CRUST

145.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CRUSTY

146.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – DukeWorthy™ SEATTLE DOUBLE

147.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – EASY

148.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – EBAY DELIVERY

149.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – Em’s BREAD – PEACE, LOVE, BREAD

150.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FARM-BRED WITH BACON

151.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FARMHOUSE™ PEPPERIDGE FARM

152.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FINNISH RYE

153.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FIVE REASONS YOU WON’T FIND SOURDOUGH BREAD AT THE SUPERMARKET

154.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FOCACCIA – SIMPLE

155.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GARLIC AND VINEGAR

156.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GENIUS KITCHEN

157.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN AND CARBON DIOXIDE, YEAST

158.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN FREE

159.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN FREE KEFIR

160.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GRAIN FREE CASHEW – THE URBAN POSER

161.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HOMEMADE

162.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HONEY WITH ROASTED WALNUTS

163.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HOW TO MAKE ARTISON SOURDOUGH BREAD

164.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – IKARIAN-STYLE

165.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – KING ARTHUR

166.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – KOMBUCHA – AND PANCAKE RECIPES ALSO

167.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MADE FROM WHEAT AND NONTOXIC FLOURS

168.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MASTERCLASS

169.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MIXES

170.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MORE RECIPES

171.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NO KNEAD (CHEATERS?)

172.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NO YEAST

173.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NON-BAKER’S GUIDE

174.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NORTHWEST

175.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – OPRAH

176.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — OR LEVAIN

177.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — ORDER

178.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ORWASHERS – NYC ORIGINAL ARTISAN BAKERY

179.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — OUTLET

180.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – QUICK

181.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RECIPE FOR RAVE REVIEWS

182.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RECIPES WE LOVE

183.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RESTLESS CHIPOTLE

184.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ROASTED GARLIC AND ROSEMARY

185.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RUSTIC

186.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SAN FRANCISCO – WHY IT TASTES SO GOOD

187.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SCHLOTZSKY’S — COPYCAT

188.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SCIENCE

189.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — SECRETS

190.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SIMPLIFIED

191.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SPROUTED WHEAT – TRADER JOE’S

192.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — STARTER

193.           NEEDED:

194.           All-purpose white flour, 1 package of active dry yeast (.24 ounce), sugar, salt, warm water (NOT HOT. IT WILL KILL YOUR YEAST).

195.           Glass jar with lid or you can cover it with a plastic sandwich bag, wood or plastic spoon, plastic mixing bowl.

196.           HOW TO MAKE STARTER:

197.           Mix –

198.           2 cups flour

199.           2 cups warm water

200.           3 tablespoons sugar

201.           1 teaspoon salt

202.           1 package active dry yeast (.24 ounce)

203.           Place mixed starter in glass quart jar.

204.           Place lid on jar LOOSLY.

205.           Let it sit in your kitchen or pantry for 2-4 days so it ferments.

206.           You may want to place a rubber band at top of starter so you can track increase.

207.           Stir your starter at least once each week.

208.           Watch it periodically to see it doesn’t overflow.

209.           Place it in a bowl or on a cookie sheet or cutting board to catch any overflow.

210.           Refrigerate your starter after it ferments – bubbles and has sour smell.

211.           When you use starter, add equal amounts of flour and water to maintain your starter.

212.           Take your starter out of your refrigerator 12-24 hours before you bake.

213.           Stir it and see if it bubbles.

214.           Where liquid is clear or light brown, that’s ok.

215.           Starters improve with age and as I said can be passed down to family or friends.

216.           If your starter has any odd color, throw it out and try again.

217.           Note that a little sugar helps because wild yeasts add to the mix and augment the fermentation.

218.           One approach to adding to your starter: Day before using your starter, take a cup of starter and mix it in a bowl with equal parts flour and water.

219.           Next day, take half cup of the new mixed starter and return it to your glass jar in your refrigerator and use the rest for cooking.

220.           MORE ON THE INTERNET. CHECK OUT:

221.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — STARTER – WILD YEAST

222.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – S. ROSEN’S CHICAGO

223.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE ART AND THE SCIENCE

224.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE BEST

225.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE RISE AND RISE OF SOURDOUGH BREAD

226.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — TRADITIONAL

227.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — VEGAN

228.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – VANILLA AND BEAN

229.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — WHITE

230.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – WHOLE GRAIN

231.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – WILLIAMS SONOMA

232.           SOURDOUGH – OTHER — ON THE INTERNET CHECK OUT:

233.           SOURDOUGH BAGUETTES

234.           SOURDOUGH BISCUITS AND ROLLS

235.           SOURDOUGH BLONDIES

236.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES (The sourdough makes the brownies extra chewy.)

237.           NEEDED:

238.           4 oz baking chocolate,

239.           ½ cup hot water,

240.           1 tsp. baking soda,

241.           1 cup butter or coconut oil,

242.           2 cups sugar,

243.           2 eggs,

244.           2 tsp. vanilla extract,

245.           1 cup chopped walnuts or pecans,

246.           1 ½ cups sifted flour,

247.           ½ tsp salt,

248.           1 ½ cups sourdough starter.

249.           Double boiler or pan;

250.           greased 9 x 13 inch pan.

251.           HOW TO MAKE SOURDOUGH BROWNIES:

252.           Melt 4 oz chocolate in double boiler using medium heat

253.           Pour in ½ cup hot water

254.           Combine the two thoroughly

255.           Stir in 1 tsp baking soda until mix is foamy

256.           Set aside and cool until lukewarm

257.           Cream together 1 cup butter or coconut oil and 2 cups sugar until fluffy

258.           Add eggs.

259.           Mix well.

260.           Add 2 tsp vanilla extract

261.           Add chocolate mixture (steps 4 thru 8)

262.           Add nuts

263.           Add 1 ½ cups flour

264.           Add ½ tsp salt

265.           Add and combine 1 ½ cups sourdough starter (Don’t over mix)

266.           Pour into greased 9 x 13 inch pan

267.           Let rise in warm spot (70 to 85 degrees)

268.           Preheat oven to 35 degrees F

269.           Bake brownies 35-40 minutes

270.           Cool

271.           Serve

272.           See https://www.culturesforhealth.com/learn/recipe/sourdough-recipes/sourdough-brownies/SOURDOUGH COOKIES

273.           ON THE INTERNET CHECK OUT:

274.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES NORTHWEST STYLE

275.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES –RYE – DAIRY FREE ALSO

276.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES — VEGAN

277.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES WITH CHOCOLATE CHIPS

278.           SOURDOUGH FLATBREAD

279.           SOURDOUGH PANCAKES/FLAPJACKS

280.           SOURDOUGH PASTA

281.           SOURDOUGH PIE CRUST

282.           SOURDOUGH CHOCOLATE CAKE

283.           CHECK OUT THESE VIDEOS FOR ADDED DETAILS:

284.           All-Purpose Gluten-Free Flour Blend – Gluten Free with Alex T. TheOfficialHungry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA-cfnZq35Y

285.           Chemistry of Bread Making: An Introduction to the Science of Baking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-H9pyNHxIO8

286.           Fast Sourdough Recipe by ‘No-Knead Bread’ Maker Jim Lahey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=drCg9IQSGRo

287.           Feeding Sourdough Starter – What to do with your new sourdough … Hobbs House Bakery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3LXDo9WSlg

288.           Foolproof Sourdough Bread Recipe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxPTdIrsxOw

289.           Gluten-Free Flour Recipe. Our Little Homestead! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWLfkcBWXCw

290.           How to Develop Dough Strength. Full Proof Baking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bncopq4aH1Y&t=1s

291.           How to extract separate gluten from wheat four. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBJ61G4jgNU

292.           How to Get Open Crumb from Stiff Dough. Trevor J. Wilson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxfbiGto4R8

293.           How to Make a Foolproof Sourdough Starter. Mary’s Nest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae15FVHTIZE

294.           How to make a Sourdough Starter, Amy Duska. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHIOmtuB2oc

295.           How to Make Sourdough Bread by Feel (No Recipe). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg5nLQVg4VY

296.           How to Make Sourdough Bread Masterclass. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FVfJTGpXnU

297.           How to Make Sourdough Starter. Scandinavian Today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWp_PED6hw8

298.           How To Make The World’s Tastiest Sourdough bread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be57uXRf5xo

299.           How to Make Your Own Gluten Free Flour Blend. Ariyele Ressler. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n3ENlEiedI

300.           Science: What is Gluten? Here’s How to See and Feel Gluten. America’s Test Kitchen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDEcvSc2UKA

301.           Secrets of Sourdough: Science on the SPOT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5xOpss4j5E

302.           Sourdough Battle – King Arthur vs. San Francisco – Part 1. Vino Farm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBiw3wm6Lys

303.           Sourdough Bread – Part 1: The Starter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FkGX3xGlog

304.           Sourdough Bread – Part 2: The Loaf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WytffmZQGwA

305.           Sourdough Bread for Backcountry Skiers. Andrew Drummond. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkGjSGtEoNY

306.           Sourdough Demystified: Bulk Fermentation. Ryan Lowe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72CeGonstRs

307.           Sourdough Starter Management. Breadtopia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpxFkUYz8LY

308.           Sourdough Starter tips, part 1. Wellness Made Simple. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axKt60ua8ys

309.           Step By Step No Knead Sourdough // Easy Sourdough // Coil Folding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwsTxK1Xmqk

310.           Tartine Sourdough Bread Recipe – Full Tutorial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HIUYCDUCdk

311.           The Perfect Sourdough Artisan Bread – A Step-By-Step Guide. Chef Rachida. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAH28Hm81FQ

312.           When is Dough Fully Fermented? Is Bulk Proof Over? – San Francisco … Northwest Sourdough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nrASfyphpU

313.           White Sourdough Bread_Wild Yeast Starter Leaven. Mukgling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCb4UVTJcSQ

435.           His book written before ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

436.           GROW GOURMET GARLIC – CHECKLISTS AND BUSINESS PLAN

437.           How to Grow, Eat, Use, and Sell GARLIC for fun, food or serious money

438.           © Copyright 22018 Linford Corporation

439.           All international and domestic rights reserved.

440.           r.linford@comcast.net 

441.           ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

442.           They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

443.           Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

444.           Richard W. Linford

445.           © Copyright 2019

446.           Linford Corporation

447.           All international and domestic rights reserved

448.           r.linford@comcast.net

As a kindness, here is a free complete copy of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, click on this amazon.com link

to do so. My ebook is only $3.99. My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.


No impeachment happened. Barrel & Pork.

So, Barrel, it looks to me like no impeachment happened.

Right on, Pork. The math equation is simple. Partisan all democrat votes + No articles delivered to the Senate = NO IMPEACHMENT.

You are only half right, Barrel. Your equation should read:

Schiff star chamber SECRET hearings showing NO HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR OR OTHER INFRACTION BY POTUS TRUMP + the Partisan all democrat vote + No articles delivered to the Senate = WASTE OF MILLIONS OF OUR DOLLARS AND OUR TIME BY THE DEMOCRATS = DEMOCRATS HAVE DONE NOTHING TO HELP US BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS = BOOMERANG DEBACLE = NO IMPEACHMENT.

Supreme Court Injunction and Sanctions against partisan democrats Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, Schumer, for impeachment. Barrel & Pork.

1. BARREL, So you think POTUS Trump should ask the Supreme Court for an injunction and sanctions?


2. Yes, PORK. And this despite Justice Ginsberg’s comment that POTUS Trump is not a lawyer which comment comes out of left field.


3. Otherwise, based on no evidence, the House partisan democrat impeachment sets an intolerable precedent. Even though Pelosi refuses to send the articles to the Senate, and even though the Senate may or may not hold an impeachment trial and even dismiss with minimal trial, it is a given that this partisan impeachment foolishness will be carried over to all future presidents thereby hampering their ability to govern and carry out their responsibilities.


4. Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and Chuck Schumer need to be sanctioned in the process and resign for their perfidy.


5. There has to be a brake put on this foolish, partisan impeachment vehicle and the logical brake is the Supreme Court. The President needs to appeal to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court needs to weigh in and determine if the House has met the reasonable and constitutional threshold with their impeachment. The Supreme Court needs to step into the breach and stop this no evidence partisan democrat nonsense.


6. They need to shut down illegal star chamber secretive Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi orchestrated partisan impeachment activities and sanction them in the process. 


7. The democrats have no evidence. All they have is partisan bias.


8. Given the partisan nature of the one sided democrat impeachment and the democrat lack of evidence and the democrat violation of rules including star chamber activities plus Adam Schiff’s perfidy, POTUS should talk to his attorneys and  file a complaint today with the Supreme Court and ask the Justices to weigh in and rule whether the House has met the constitutional standards required to submit impeachment articles to the Senate.


9. There are simply no facts warranting high crime or misdemeanor or other facts warranting impeachment. 


10. The idea that POTUS Trump abused power is ludicrous given his letters and interaction with Ukraine which show – despite the blistering democrat impeachment proceedings and non-fact testimonies – that there simply is no factual evidence. There is: 

a.      NO HIGH CRIME!

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR!

c.      NO COLLUSION!

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!

e.      NO  QUID PRO QUO!

f.       NO EXTORTION!

g.      NO BRIBERY!

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE!

i.       NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE!

j.       NO ABUSE OF POWER!

k.      NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE!

l.       NO INDICATION POTUS TRUMP withheld military aid or anything from President Zelensky and Ukraine in return for an investigation of corruption – including an investigation into Burisma company and Joe and his son!

m.      In fact, in conversation with POTUS Trump President Zelensky says he/Ukraine is just about ready to buy Javelins!

n.    The fact is both men have a very low opinion of Ambassador Ivanovich and POTUS Trump is not faulted if he replaced her!

o.      We have a mutual effort on the part of POTUS TRUMP and President Zelensky to work together and to reign in and eliminate corruption – and this with the help of prosecutor(s) in Ukraine and Mr. Giuliani and AG Barr — looking into corruption – including looking into Burisma and Joe and his son and looking into the China billion plus graft to Joe’s son and to Joe – such is a president’s prerogative. If Joe withheld U.S. aid to Ukraine in return for the firing of the prosecutor looking into Burisma and Joe’s son – which Joe admitted and laughed at – and if Joe’s son and Joe got a billion plus from the Chinese, trace the money to Joe’s and his son’s various accounts including any hidden accounts, Joe’s perfidy needs to be exposed and Joe needs to be required to quit his sham political race. If Pelosi and others including Clintons were also tapping the Ukraine or other gravy train, the same must be said of them.

p.      While the phone call transcripts exonerate POTUS TRUMP, nothing to-date exonerates Joe or his son or the do nothing four – Schiff, Nadler, Pelosi, and Schumer.

5. The idea that POTUS Trump obstructed congress with a few tweets or refusal to dignify the partisan one sided hidden whistle blower secret meeting charade with witnesses is ludicrous. The four partisan democrats – Schiff, Pelosi, Nadler, Schumer – are the ones who have obstructed congress by preventing republican witnesses from testifying and by holding secret hearings – by setting forth the the Clinton paid for fake dossier, and the fake Russia collusion story, the fake bribery story, the fake extortion story, etc.. The four are the ones who are guilty of POTUS ABUSE, obstruction of congress, and abuse of power. All members of the house should have voted no on impeachment and had the courage to stop this political madness and focus on helping us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS. 


One more time, I challenge all to show me one thing the democrats have done for me and my family to help us be FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS since POTUS Trump was elected. Passing the recent trade bill is too little too late.

A+A+A+A+A+

FREE SOURDOUGH BREAD EBOOK.

AS A KINDNESS, SCROLL DOWN FOR A

FREE COMPLETE NO CHARGE COPY 

of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, through amazon.com, 

to do so click on this amazon.com link

My ebook is only $3.99. 

My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

E

 Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed when I baked my first loaf.

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is

© Copyright Linford Corporation 2019

All international and domestic rights reserved

Linford Corporation

r.linford@comcast.net

1.      foreword

2.      My daughter visited me and while she was with me she taught me how to make sourdough bread; and she gave me some starter she was given at a Bausch mixer cooking class.

3.      Since that day, and acknowledging her kindness, I’ve taken up sourdough bread making; and to-date, I’ve found a great deal of enjoyment baking and giving away my bread. By now I have given away many more loaves than I have eaten. I’ve also learned a few things about bread making and have thrown away a couple of beginner loaves as well simply because they were not up to my standards.

4.      With these checklists, sourdough bread is not hard to make. It is tasty, healthy, filling, and the loaves make great gifts. With this little intro, keep in mind that well made artisan sourdough bread is to cry for if not to die for. Sourdough bread when well made can be the best.

5.      I hope you find these checklists not only interesting, but also sufficiently motivating so you think seriously about taking up your own Artisan Sourdough Bread making avocation or for that matter vocation.

6.      And while you are at it, think about giving away some if not much of your bread to your family, neighbors, and friends.

7.      I don’t like the traditional recipe format. For ease of use, for avoiding cooking mistakes, I like my recipe checklists better. So here goes.

8.       SOURDOUGH BREAD — BASIC

9.       NEEDED (pun intended):

10.   Quality all-purpose fresh flour, salt, water, starter, non-stick cooking spray, butter or olive oil.

11.   Large non-metal mixing bowl, spatula (I use a rubber one), heavy ceramic* pot with lid, cooking parchment paper, cutting board, plastic wrap or dish towel.

12.   *Purists say do not use metal. Purists say do not use stainless steel. Purists say the acids make sourdough sour and acids react to any metals.

13.   I use a large metal mixing bowl and a rubber spatula and to-date have not noticed any problem with quality.

HOW TO Make Sourdough Bread:

14.   To the large mixing bowl:

15.   Add 3 and ½ cups FLOUR.

16.   Add 2 tsp SALT.

17.   STIR UNTIL MIXED.

18.   Add 2 cups WATER.

19.   Add 1/3 cup STARTER.

20.   STIR UNTIL MIXED.

21.   COVER FOR 12 to 24 HOURS.

22.   SPREAD FLOUR on cutting board.

23.   DUMP DOUGH ON cutting board.

24.   KNEAD DOUGH 15 to 20 times by hand or with spatula.

SPRAY INSIDE OF POT WITH NON-STICK COOKING SPRAY.

25.   PLACE PARCHMENT PAPER IN POT.

26.   PLACE KNEADED DOUGH IN POT.

27.   COVER WITH LID OR PLASTIC WRAP OR DISH TOWEL

28.   LET DOUGH RISE 2 to 3 HOURS UNTIL DOUBLE IN SIZE.

29.   I set my pot in the cold oven while my dough rises.

30.   TURN OVEN ON AT 425 DEGREES AND BAKE FOR 30 MINUTES.

31.   TAKE LID OFF.

32.   BASTE TOP OF BREAD WITH BUTTER OR OLIVE OIL.

33.   BAKE WITHOUT LID FOR ANOTHER 30 MINUTES.

34.   LET COOL.

35.   EAT.

36.   ENJOY.

37.   DOUBLE THE RECIPE?

38.   DOUBLE THE INGREDIENTS.

39.   Feel free to be creative.

40.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – BENEFITS – SAID BY SOME TO BE THE HEALTHIEST BREAD.

41.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – BENEFITS – TAKING UP BAKING HELPED ONE PERSON I KNOW OF STOP DRINKING ALCOHOL

42.   SOURDOUGH BREAD — HISTORY

43.   An oldest form of leavened bread, dating back to Egypt.

44.   Sourdough was carried in back packs and covered wagons by explorers and pioneers – was used by California and Klondike gold rush miners, and was used to leaven bread before commercial baking yeast was available.

45.   Sourdough starter may have been discovered by accident when wild yeast found its way into dough.

46.   Alaskan miners allegedly slept with their starter to keep it from freezing.

47.   I don’t recommend sleeping with your starter.

48.   See Sharon Vail, Sourdough: More than a Bread. September 12, 2006. NPR. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6061648

49.   National Sourdough Bread Day is April 1.

50.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – JOBS.

51.   There are artisan bread making jobs available. Check Google.

52.   SOURDOUGH BREAD VARIATIONS

53.   ADD CHOCOLATE CHIPS DURING KNEADING OR

54.   ADD A PACKAGE OF TRAIL MIX OR

55.   ADD A CUP OF RAISONS OR

56.   THE BEST MOST TASTY VARIATION I’VE FOUND TO-DATE?

57.   ADD A CUP OF CRANBERRY CRAZENS

58.   I don’t recommend adding chocolate chips. The chips melt and the chocolate taste is lost in the sourdough taste.

59.   Trail mix is ok.

60.   Again, if you are going to try adding components, the cranberry crazens work best for me.

61.   There are a number of Artisan Bread making recipe variations.

SOURDOUGH BREAD AND STARTER TIPS

62.   Again, some say don’t use metal or stainless steel.

63.   Use ceramic bowls and wooden spoons

64.   Take good care of your starter, some say out of respect for its long history, out of respect for the many individuals and families fed over the years because of sourdough starter.

65.   There are stories of starter kept alive for ten years or more.

66.   So keep your starter alive.

67.   Add equal parts of warm water and flour to your starter every few weeks.

68.   Store your starter in your refrigerator.

69.   It can last for a long, long time.

70.   It will improve with age.

71.   Stir it periodically.

72.   If you have a sourdough junkie in your family, your sourdough starter may be one of the very best legacies you can pass on from generation to generation.

73.   Again, toss the starter if it shows any pink or orange or other odd color or carries a strange odor.

74.   SOURDOUGH BREAD – SAN FRANCISCO

75.   NEEDED:

76.   4 ¾ cups all-purpose flour

77.   3 tablespoons white sugar

78.   2 ½ teaspoons salt

79.   1 package active dry yeast (.25 ounce)

80.   1 cup warm milk

81.   2 tablespoons softened margarine or butter

82.   1 ½ cups sourdough starter

83.   1 extra large egg

84.   1 tablespoon water

85.   ¼ cup chopped onion

86.   Large non-metal mixing bowl

87.   Non-metal mixing utensil

88.   HOW TO Make San Francisco Sourdough Bread:

89.   To large bowl,

90.   ADD/STIR/MIX –

91.   4 ¾ cups all-purpose flour

92.   3 tablespoons white sugar

93.   2 ½ teaspoons salt

94.   1 package active dry yeast (.25 ounce)

95.   ADD/STIR/MIX.

96.   1 cup warm milk or as much as needed

97.   2 tablespoons softened margarine or butter

98.   1 ½ cups sourdough starter

99.   Flour surface of non-metal cutting board or surface

100.           DROP Dough onto floured surface

101.           Knead for 10 minutes

102.           Drop dough into greased bowl and turn once to oil surface

103.           COVER

104.           LET RISE for 1 hour or until volume doubles

105.           PUNCH DOWN

106.           Let it rest for 15 minutes

107.           Shape loaves

108.           Place loaves on greased baking pan

109.           Let it rise for 1 hour or until doubles

110.           MAKE egg wash – 1 egg mixed with 1 tablespoon water

111.           BRUSH egg wash on tops of loaves

112.           You may want to sprinkle with chopped onion (you may not)

113.           With lid on, BAKE at 425 degrees F  for 30 minutes

114.           With lid off, BAKE at 425 degrees F for another 30 minutes or until fully cooked

115.           Cool

116.           Eat

117.           HOW TO MAKE ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD. CHECK OUT THESE VIDEOS:

118.           Artisan Sourdough Bread – Breadworld by Fleischmann’s Bread World. http://www.breadworld.com/recipe/Artisan-Sourdough-Bread

119.           ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD MADE WITH A STIFF STARTER. https://www.kingarthurflour.com/recipes/artisan-sourdough-bread-made-with-a-stiff-starter-recipe

120.           Artisan Sourdough Bread from Amazon. Free 2-day Shipping with Prime Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=artisan+sourdough+bread&gclid=CjwKCAjwlPTmBRBoEiwAHqpvhSDbbd03Uf4B3w17iFD2SlKdzHJCQw20Xos5OsumGnY8TgaHyMTwohoCY48QAvD_BwE&hvadid=242090241053&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=9051875&hvnetw=g&hvpos=1o1&hvqmt=e&hvrand=1713447390197666619&hvtargid=kwd-320083297189&hydadcr=16183_9800755&tag=googhydr-20&ref=pd_sl_8zgx0th4a5_e

121.           Artisan Sourdough Made Simple. How to Make Simple Sourdough Bread: A Step-By-Step Guide. https://alexandracooks.com/2017/10/24/artisan-sourdough-made-simple-sourdough-bread-demystified-a-beginners-guide-to-sourdough-baking/

122.           Beginner Artisan Sourdough Bread Recipe. Homemade. https://www.homemadefoodjunkie.com/tartine-style-sourdough-bread-recipe/

123.           Easy Sourdough Artisan Bread Recipe. An Oregon Cottage. https://anoregoncottage.com/easy-sourdough-artisan-bread/

124.           How to Make Artisan Sourdough Bread. The Pioneer Woman. https://thepioneerwoman.com/food-and-friends/how-to-make-artisan-sourdough-bread/

125.           Mastering the Art of Artisan Sourdough Bread. Foodal. https://foodal.com/knowledge/baking/artisan-sourdough-bread/

126.           My Best Sourdough Recipe. The Perfect Loaf. https://www.theperfectloaf.com/best-sourdough-recipe/

127.           Rosemary Artisan Sourdough Bread. Aroma Tools Blog. http://blog.aromatools.com/2017/01/26/rosemary-artisan-sourdough-bread/?gclid=CjwKCAjwlPTmBRBoEiwAHqpvhRW7MM0VCpJm_QsZfKILMxumEVoH7k-7gTM4S3uy0rlqAO61cjTN-hoCoPkQAvD_BwE

Here is a free complete copy of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, click on the amazon.com link

to do so. My ebook is only $3.99. My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

·      

 Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.

·      

128.           CHECK OUT THESE TITLES ON THE INTERNET.

129.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – 10+ BEST RECIPES

130.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – AMAZONFRESH GROCERY DELIVERY

131.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – AMISH FRIENDSHIP RUSTIC

132.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ARTISAN

133.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BBC FOOD

134.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BEGINNER’S PERFECT LOAF

135.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — BERKELEY

136.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BEST IN THE WORLD

137.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – BOB’S RED MILL

138.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — CHOCOLATE

139.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CHOCOLATE-CHERRY

140.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CLASSES, CLUBS, COURSES

141.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CLASSIC – BETTER HOMES & GARDENS

142.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – COCO BAKES

143.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — COUNTRY

144.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – COUNTRY CRUST

145.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – CRUSTY

146.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – DukeWorthy™ SEATTLE DOUBLE

147.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – EASY

148.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – EBAY DELIVERY

149.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – Em’s BREAD – PEACE, LOVE, BREAD

150.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FARM-BRED WITH BACON

151.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FARMHOUSE™ PEPPERIDGE FARM

152.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FINNISH RYE

153.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FIVE REASONS YOU WON’T FIND SOURDOUGH BREAD AT THE SUPERMARKET

154.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – FOCACCIA – SIMPLE

155.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GARLIC AND VINEGAR

156.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GENIUS KITCHEN

157.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN AND CARBON DIOXIDE, YEAST

158.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN FREE

159.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GLUTEN FREE KEFIR

160.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – GRAIN FREE CASHEW – THE URBAN POSER

161.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HOMEMADE

162.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HONEY WITH ROASTED WALNUTS

163.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – HOW TO MAKE ARTISON SOURDOUGH BREAD

164.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – IKARIAN-STYLE

165.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – KING ARTHUR

166.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – KOMBUCHA – AND PANCAKE RECIPES ALSO

167.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MADE FROM WHEAT AND NONTOXIC FLOURS

168.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MASTERCLASS

169.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MIXES

170.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – MORE RECIPES

171.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NO KNEAD (CHEATERS?)

172.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NO YEAST

173.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NON-BAKER’S GUIDE

174.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – NORTHWEST

175.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – OPRAH

176.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — OR LEVAIN

177.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — ORDER

178.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ORWASHERS – NYC ORIGINAL ARTISAN BAKERY

179.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — OUTLET

180.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – QUICK

181.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RECIPE FOR RAVE REVIEWS

182.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RECIPES WE LOVE

183.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RESTLESS CHIPOTLE

184.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – ROASTED GARLIC AND ROSEMARY

185.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – RUSTIC

186.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SAN FRANCISCO – WHY IT TASTES SO GOOD

187.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SCHLOTZSKY’S — COPYCAT

188.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SCIENCE

189.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — SECRETS

190.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SIMPLIFIED

191.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – SPROUTED WHEAT – TRADER JOE’S

192.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — STARTER

193.           NEEDED:

194.           All-purpose white flour, 1 package of active dry yeast (.24 ounce), sugar, salt, warm water (NOT HOT. IT WILL KILL YOUR YEAST).

195.           Glass jar with lid or you can cover it with a plastic sandwich bag, wood or plastic spoon, plastic mixing bowl.

196.           HOW TO MAKE STARTER:

197.           Mix –

198.           2 cups flour

199.           2 cups warm water

200.           3 tablespoons sugar

201.           1 teaspoon salt

202.           1 package active dry yeast (.24 ounce)

203.           Place mixed starter in glass quart jar.

204.           Place lid on jar LOOSLY.

205.           Let it sit in your kitchen or pantry for 2-4 days so it ferments.

206.           You may want to place a rubber band at top of starter so you can track increase.

207.           Stir your starter at least once each week.

208.           Watch it periodically to see it doesn’t overflow.

209.           Place it in a bowl or on a cookie sheet or cutting board to catch any overflow.

210.           Refrigerate your starter after it ferments – bubbles and has sour smell.

211.           When you use starter, add equal amounts of flour and water to maintain your starter.

212.           Take your starter out of your refrigerator 12-24 hours before you bake.

213.           Stir it and see if it bubbles.

214.           Where liquid is clear or light brown, that’s ok.

215.           Starters improve with age and as I said can be passed down to family or friends.

216.           If your starter has any odd color, throw it out and try again.

217.           Note that a little sugar helps because wild yeasts add to the mix and augment the fermentation.

218.           One approach to adding to your starter: Day before using your starter, take a cup of starter and mix it in a bowl with equal parts flour and water.

219.           Next day, take half cup of the new mixed starter and return it to your glass jar in your refrigerator and use the rest for cooking.

220.           MORE ON THE INTERNET. CHECK OUT:

221.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — STARTER – WILD YEAST

222.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – S. ROSEN’S CHICAGO

223.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE ART AND THE SCIENCE

224.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE BEST

225.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – THE RISE AND RISE OF SOURDOUGH BREAD

226.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — TRADITIONAL

227.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — VEGAN

228.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – VANILLA AND BEAN

229.           SOURDOUGH BREAD — WHITE

230.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – WHOLE GRAIN

231.           SOURDOUGH BREAD – WILLIAMS SONOMA

232.           SOURDOUGH – OTHER — ON THE INTERNET CHECK OUT:

233.           SOURDOUGH BAGUETTES

234.           SOURDOUGH BISCUITS AND ROLLS

235.           SOURDOUGH BLONDIES

236.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES (The sourdough makes the brownies extra chewy.)

237.           NEEDED:

238.           4 oz baking chocolate,

239.           ½ cup hot water,

240.           1 tsp. baking soda,

241.           1 cup butter or coconut oil,

242.           2 cups sugar,

243.           2 eggs,

244.           2 tsp. vanilla extract,

245.           1 cup chopped walnuts or pecans,

246.           1 ½ cups sifted flour,

247.           ½ tsp salt,

248.           1 ½ cups sourdough starter.

249.           Double boiler or pan;

250.           greased 9 x 13 inch pan.

251.           HOW TO MAKE SOURDOUGH BROWNIES:

252.           Melt 4 oz chocolate in double boiler using medium heat

253.           Pour in ½ cup hot water

254.           Combine the two thoroughly

255.           Stir in 1 tsp baking soda until mix is foamy

256.           Set aside and cool until lukewarm

257.           Cream together 1 cup butter or coconut oil and 2 cups sugar until fluffy

258.           Add eggs.

259.           Mix well.

260.           Add 2 tsp vanilla extract

261.           Add chocolate mixture (steps 4 thru 8)

262.           Add nuts

263.           Add 1 ½ cups flour

264.           Add ½ tsp salt

265.           Add and combine 1 ½ cups sourdough starter (Don’t over mix)

266.           Pour into greased 9 x 13 inch pan

267.           Let rise in warm spot (70 to 85 degrees)

268.           Preheat oven to 35 degrees F

269.           Bake brownies 35-40 minutes

270.           Cool

271.           Serve

272.           See https://www.culturesforhealth.com/learn/recipe/sourdough-recipes/sourdough-brownies/SOURDOUGH COOKIES

273.           ON THE INTERNET CHECK OUT:

274.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES NORTHWEST STYLE

275.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES –RYE – DAIRY FREE ALSO

276.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES — VEGAN

277.           SOURDOUGH BROWNIES WITH CHOCOLATE CHIPS

278.           SOURDOUGH FLATBREAD

279.           SOURDOUGH PANCAKES/FLAPJACKS

280.           SOURDOUGH PASTA

281.           SOURDOUGH PIE CRUST

282.           SOURDOUGH CHOCOLATE CAKE

283.           CHECK OUT THESE VIDEOS FOR ADDED DETAILS:

284.           All-Purpose Gluten-Free Flour Blend – Gluten Free with Alex T. TheOfficialHungry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA-cfnZq35Y

285.           Chemistry of Bread Making: An Introduction to the Science of Baking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-H9pyNHxIO8

286.           Fast Sourdough Recipe by ‘No-Knead Bread’ Maker Jim Lahey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=drCg9IQSGRo

287.           Feeding Sourdough Starter – What to do with your new sourdough … Hobbs House Bakery. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3LXDo9WSlg

288.           Foolproof Sourdough Bread Recipe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxPTdIrsxOw

289.           Gluten-Free Flour Recipe. Our Little Homestead! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWLfkcBWXCw

290.           How to Develop Dough Strength. Full Proof Baking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bncopq4aH1Y&t=1s

291.           How to extract separate gluten from wheat four. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBJ61G4jgNU

292.           How to Get Open Crumb from Stiff Dough. Trevor J. Wilson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxfbiGto4R8

293.           How to Make a Foolproof Sourdough Starter. Mary’s Nest. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae15FVHTIZE

294.           How to make a Sourdough Starter, Amy Duska. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHIOmtuB2oc

295.           How to Make Sourdough Bread by Feel (No Recipe). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yg5nLQVg4VY

296.           How to Make Sourdough Bread Masterclass. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FVfJTGpXnU

297.           How to Make Sourdough Starter. Scandinavian Today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWp_PED6hw8

298.           How To Make The World’s Tastiest Sourdough bread. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be57uXRf5xo

299.           How to Make Your Own Gluten Free Flour Blend. Ariyele Ressler. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n3ENlEiedI

300.           Science: What is Gluten? Here’s How to See and Feel Gluten. America’s Test Kitchen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDEcvSc2UKA

301.           Secrets of Sourdough: Science on the SPOT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5xOpss4j5E

302.           Sourdough Battle – King Arthur vs. San Francisco – Part 1. Vino Farm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBiw3wm6Lys

303.           Sourdough Bread – Part 1: The Starter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FkGX3xGlog

304.           Sourdough Bread – Part 2: The Loaf. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WytffmZQGwA

305.           Sourdough Bread for Backcountry Skiers. Andrew Drummond. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkGjSGtEoNY

306.           Sourdough Demystified: Bulk Fermentation. Ryan Lowe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72CeGonstRs

307.           Sourdough Starter Management. Breadtopia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpxFkUYz8LY

308.           Sourdough Starter tips, part 1. Wellness Made Simple. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axKt60ua8ys

309.           Step By Step No Knead Sourdough // Easy Sourdough // Coil Folding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwsTxK1Xmqk

310.           Tartine Sourdough Bread Recipe – Full Tutorial. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HIUYCDUCdk

311.           The Perfect Sourdough Artisan Bread – A Step-By-Step Guide. Chef Rachida. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAH28Hm81FQ

312.           When is Dough Fully Fermented? Is Bulk Proof Over? – San Francisco … Northwest Sourdough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nrASfyphpU

313.           White Sourdough Bread_Wild Yeast Starter Leaven. Mukgling. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCb4UVTJcSQ

435.           His book written before ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

436.           GROW GOURMET GARLIC – CHECKLISTS AND BUSINESS PLAN

437.           How to Grow, Eat, Use, and Sell GARLIC for fun, food or serious money

438.           © Copyright 22018 Linford Corporation

439.           All international and domestic rights reserved.

440.           r.linford@comcast.net 

441.           ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

442.           They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

443.           Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

444.           Richard W. Linford

445.           © Copyright 2019

446.           Linford Corporation

447.           All international and domestic rights reserved

448.           r.linford@comcast.net

As a kindness, here is a free complete copy of Richard W. Linford’s [MY] ebook.

If you want to buy a copy of my ebook or book, click on this amazon.com link

to do so. My ebook is only $3.99. My paperback is only $6.99.

And feel free to email me and visit at r.linford@comcast.net.

As long as your email is positive, I’m pretty good at getting back to

those who contact me.

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?

They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf!

Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is.

Richard W. Linford

ARTISAN SOURDOUGH BREAD?: They laughed out loud when I baked my first loaf! Then they tasted it and they were amazed at how good it is. Kindle Edition

by Richard W. Linford (Author)


 See all 2 formats and editions

Ebook $3.99; Paperback $6.99.

LAWSUIT TO SUPREME COURT AGAINST NANCY, ADAM, JERRY, CHUCK, AND DEMOCRATS FOR POTUS ABUSE.

1. BARREL, I read POTUS Trump’s 6 page letter to Nancy Pelosi. 

2. POTUS TRUMP sets the record straight. 

3. Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, Nancy Pelosi, and Chuck Schumer and their cronies are guilty of POTUS Abuse and will go down in history with significant egg-opprobrium on their faces.

4. Read POTUS TRUMP’S six page letter. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Letter-from-President-Trump-final.pdf

5. I already read it, PORK. 

6. My recommendation? POTUS TRUMP HAS ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE HE HAS YET TO USE. 

7. What alternative is that, Barrel?

8. PORK, We have three branches of government. In this case, where the Nancy and the House legislature are running roughshod over POTUS TRUMP, the Supreme Court is in place for a reason and is the proper arbiter.

9. MY ANTIDOTE? 

10. POTUS TRUMP should appeal directly to the Supreme Court before the matter goes to the Senate and shut Adam’s and Jerry’s and Nancy’s and Chuck’s charade down. 

11. There is no evidence of obstruction of congress or abuse of power on the part of POTUS TRUMP. 

12. The function of the Supreme Court is to evaluate just such “legal” situations and establish the scope of matters like impeachment as found in the constitution and resolve them. 

13. In this case the Supreme Court has the power to issue an injunction and sanctions on Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler and Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and other parties thus stopping this abuse of a sitting president by an individual or party. 

14. All POTUS TRUMP has to do is file for a ruling and injunction thus asking the Supreme Court for the help.

15. I know an old civil and criminal attorney. His philosophy is simple. “So sue me. But know this. I will be right back at you with a set of counterclaims that eclipse your claims.”

Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and Jerry Nadler do nothing democrats produce no legal cause of action against POTUS Trump. Barrel & Pork.

PORK, I have heard a great deal about the Telephone Conversation POTUS Trump had with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine on July 25, 2019, 9:03 – 9:33 a.m. EDT. What do you think? Does it incriminate POTUS TRUMP?

BARREL, I have just now taken the time to analyze the conversation. My conclusion? We have another Adam Schiff nothingburger! There is nothing with which to impeach POTUS Trump – nothing with which to charge him with a crime – the Adam Schiff hearings are indeed a hoax. Take a look at the following.

    1.       UNCLASSIFIED.

    2.       https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

    3.       “The President: Congratulations on a great victory. We all watched from the United States and you did a terrific job. The way you came from behind, somebody who wasn’t given much of a chance, and you ended up winning easily. It’s a fantastic achievement. Congratulations.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

    4.       “President Zelenskyy: You are absolutely right Mr. President. We did win big and we worked hard for this. We worked a lot but I would like to confess to you that I had an opportunity to learn from you. We used quite a few of your skills and knowledge and were able to use it as an example for our elections and yes it is true that these were unique elections. We were in a unique situation that we were able to achieve a unique success. I’m able to tell you the following; the first time, you called me to congratulate me when I won my presidential election, and the second time you are now calling me when my party won the parliamentary election. I think I should run more often so you can call me more often and we can talk over the phone more often.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

    5.       “The President: [laughter] That’s a very good idea. I think your country is very happy about that.

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

    6.       “President Zelenskyy: Well yes, to tell you the truth, we are trying to work hard because we wanted to drain the swamp here in our country. We brought in many many new people. Not the old politicians, not the typical politicians, because we want to have a new format and a new type of government. You are a great teacher for us and in that.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.       NO EXTORTION.

g.      NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.       NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.       NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.      NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      President Zelenskyy says “we are trying to work hard because we wanted to drain the swamp here in our country.”

    7.       “The President: Well it’s very nice of you to say that. I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine. We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time. Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are. Germany does almost nothing for you. All they do is talk and I think it’s something that you should really ask them about. When I was speaking to Angela Merkel she talks Ukraine, but she doesn’t do anything. A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it’s something you want to look at but the United States has been very good to Ukraine. I wouldn’t say that it’s reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.        The President makes his point that “the United States has been very very good to Ukraine” while Germany and other European countries have not helped Ukraine.

    8.       “President Zelenskyy: Yes you are absolutely right. Not only 100%, but actually 1000% and I can tell you the following; I did talk to Angela Merkel and I did meet with her. I also met and talked with Macron and I told them that they are not doing quite as much as they need to be doing on the issues with the sanctions. They are not enforcing the sanctions. They are not working as much as they should work for Ukraine. It turns out that even though logically, the European Union should be our biggest partner but technically the United States is a much bigger partner than the European Union and I’m very grateful to you for that because the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation. I would also like to thank you for your great support in the area of defense. We are ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      President Zelenskyy agrees with POTUS Trump about Germany’s and Frances’ and the European Union in general lack of help and confirms that “the United States is doing quite a lot for Ukraine. Much more than the European Union especially when we are talking about sanctions against the Russian Federation.” Next, he states that Ukraine is “ready to continue to cooperate for the next steps specifically we are almost ready to buy more Javelins from the United States for defense purposes.”

    9.       “The President” I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people. I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you saw yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      POTUS Trump asks President Zelenskyy “to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… The server, they say Ukraine has it.” Then he says he would “like to have the Attorney General call you or your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it.” Then the POTUS emphasizes the importance of such. “Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.” e.g. Look into corruption. Look into Crowdstrike. Look into Biden.

    10.   “President Zelenskyy: Yes it is very important for me and everything that you just mentioned earlier. For me as a President, it is very important and we are open for any future cooperation. We are ready to open a new page on cooperation in relations between the United States and Ukraine. For that purpose, I just recalled our ambassador from United States and he will be replaced by a very competent and very experienced ambassador who will work hard on making sure that our two nations are getting closer. I would also like and hope to see him having your trust and your confidence and have personal relations with you so we can cooperate even more so. I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine. I just wanted to assure you once again that you have nobody but friends round us. I will make sure that I surround myself with the best and most experienced people. I also wanted to tell you that we are friends. We are great friends and you Mr. President have friends in our country so we can continue our strategic partnership. I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly. That I can assure you.

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      President Zelenskyy confirms his friendship with POTUS Trump. He states that he will receive Mr. Giuliani. He states that he will carry out “all the investigations … openly and candidly.”

    11.   “The President: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      POTUS Trump again asks President Zelenskyy to receive Rudy Giuliani and the Attorney General Bill Barr and to investigate the allegations regarding Biden corruption quid pro quo extortion.

    12.   “Pesident Zelenskyy: I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor. First of all I understand and I’m knowledgeable about the situation. Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue. The issue of the investigation of the case is actually the issue of making sure to restore the honesty so we will take care of that and will work on the investigation of the case. On top of that, I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to us, it would be very helpful for the investigation to make sure that we administer justice in our country with regard to the Ambassador to the United States from Ukraine as far as I recall her name was Ivanovich. It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%. Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous President and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new President well enough.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      President Zelenskyy has his own opinion of Ambassador Ivanovich while agreeing with POTUS Trump about the ambassador  – “It was great that you were the first one who told me that she was a bad ambassador because I agree with you 100%. Her attitude towards me was far from the best as she admired the previous President  and she was on his side. She would not accept me as a new President well enough.”

    13.   “The President: Well, she’s going to go through some things. I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. I’m sure you will figure it out. I heard the prosecutor was treated very badly and he was a very fair prosecutor so good luck with everything. Your economy is going to get better and better I predict. You have a lot of assets. It’s a great country. I have many Ukrainian friends, their incredible people.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      The President reinforces that Mr. Giuliani and Attorney General Barr will be in touch. And says “we will get to the bottom of it.”

    14.   “President Zelenskyy: I would like to tell you that I also have quite a few Ukrainian friends that live in the United States. Actually last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park and I stayed at the Trump Tower. I will talk to them and I hope to see them again in the future. I also wanted to thank you for your invitation to visit the United States, specifically Washington DC. On the other hand, I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation. As to the economy, there is much potential for our two countries and one of the issues that is very important for Ukraine is energy independence. I believe we can be very successful and cooperating on energy independence with United States. We are already working on cooperation. We are buying American oil but I am very hopeful for a future meeting. We will have more time and more opportunities to discuss these opportunities and get to know each other better. I would like to thank you very much for your support.

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      In fact, just the oppositie. President Zelenskyy says “I would like to thank you very much for your support.”

    15.   “The President: Good. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. Thank you. Whenever you would like to come to the White House, feel free to call. Give us a date and we’ll work that out. I look forward to seeing you.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

    16.   “President Zelenskyy: Thank you very much. I would be very happy to come and would be happy to meet with you personally and get to know you better. I am looking forward to our meeting and I also would like to invite you to visit Ukraine and come to the city of Kyiv which is a beautiful city. We have a beautiful country which would welcome you. On the other hand, I believe that on September 1 we will be in Poland and we can meet in Poland hopefully. After that, it might be a very good idea for you to travel to Ukraine. We either take my plane and go to Ukraine or we can take your plane, which is probably much better than mine.

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

    17.   “The President: Okay, we can work that out. I look forward to seeing you in Washington and maybe in Poland because I think we are going to be there at that time.”

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.        NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.       NO CAUSE FOR CENSURE.

    18.   “President Zelenskyy: Thank you very much Mr. President.”

    19.   “The President: Congratulations on a fantastic job you’ve done. The whole world was watching. I’m not sure it was so much of an upset but congratulations.

    20.   “President Zelenskyy: Thank you Mr. President bye-bye.

    21.   End of Conversation.

    22.   UNCLASSIFIED.

    23.   https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

    24.   CONCLUSION:

a.       NO HIGH CRIME.

b.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

c.       NO COLLUSION.

d.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

e.       NO  QUID PRO QUO.

f.        NO EXTORTION.

g.       NO BRIBERY.

h.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

i.        NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

j.       NO ABUSE OF POWER.

k.      NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

l.      NO INDICATION POTUS TRUMP withheld military aid or anything from President Zelenskyy and Ukraine in return for an investigation of corruption – including an investigation into X company and Joe Biden.

m.        In fact, President Zelenskyy says he is just about ready to buy Javelins.

n.    Both men have a very low opinion of Ambassador Ivanovich.

o.      We have a mutual effort on the part of POTUS TRUMP and President Zelenskyy to work together and to reign in and eliminate corruption – and this with the help of prosecutor(s) in Ukraine and Mr. Giuliani and AG Barr — looking into corruption including looking into Crowdstrike and Bidens.

p.      This phone call exonerates POTUS TRUMP completely. Why? Because there is:

                1.      NO HIGH CRIME.

2.      NO MISDEMEANOR.

3.      NO COLLUSION.

4.      NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE.

5.      NO  QUID PRO QUO.

6.      NO EXTORTION.

7.      NO BRIBERY.

8.      NO VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE.

9.      NO WITHHOLDING OF AID TO UKRAINE.

10.    NO ABUSE OF POWER.

11.    NO CAUSE FOR IMPEACHMENT OR CENSURE.

What we do have is Nancy Pelosi, Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff and other do nothing democrats, together with certain disaffected republicans, who have wasted millions of our dollars and years of our precious time in their investigations, all the while doing nothing to help their own constituencies – doing nothing to help us the American voters – be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS since POTUS Trump was elected; while all the while POTUS Trump has eliminated hundreds of onerous regulations, created the best economy in U.S. history, helped eliminate much of the wealth transfer from middle class America to Europe and China, while at the same time keeping more than 300 promises to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS that POTUS Trump made to the American people. 

Why are the democrats losing so badly? Answer: Adam Schiff. Barrel & Pork.

  1. Why are the democrats losing so badly, BARREL?

2. PORK, They are losing and I understand a great number of voters are leaving the democratic party because since POTUS Trump was elected Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi and their crony democrats and republicans have done nothing to help us.

3. THEY HAVE DONE NOTHING TO HELP US – REGARDLESS OF OUR RACE, CREED, OR ORIENTATION – BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS – while at the same time POTUS Trump has helped us – BLACKS, HISPANICS, JEWS, NATIVE AMERICANS, WHITES, ASIAN AMERICANS – be free, safe, and prosperous.

4. Nancy and Adam and their cronies have done nothing to help us have freedom of religion.

5. They have done nothing to help us have freedom of speech.

6. They have done nothing to help us have freedom of assembly including freedom from crime.

7. They have done nothing demonstrable to help us be safe from crime, and terrorism, and the immense expense caused by those who have entered our country unvetted.

8. They have done nothing to help us be free and safe by means of a strong military – at the same time nothing to help us stop spending trillions on foreign wars.

9. They have done nothing to help us and our veterans.

10. They have done nothing to help us have more and better jobs.

11. They have done nothing to help us stand up to China.

12. They have done nothing to help us resolve the North Korea or Middle East situations.

13. They have done nothing to help us build a viable economy.

14. They have done nothing to help us cut healthcare costs.

15. They have done nothing to help us prosper through better infrastructure.

16. They have done nothing to help us prosper by getting rid of regulations.

17. They have done nothing to help us prosper by cutting our taxes.

18. They have done nothing to protect our unborn. Instead they have done just the opposite resulting in deaths of millions of our unborn children.

19. They have done nothing to help us be free, safe, and prosperous as has POTUS Trump.

20. You are right, BARREL.

21. In a nutshell, summed up, what you are saying is this fact. Adam Schiff and his secret investigations are the problem for the democrats and for the nation. Adam Schiff has diverted all attention of the democrat legislators and even some republican legislators away from helping us – diverted attention by slandering POTUS Trump.

21. If Mrs. Pelosi and Chuck Schumer really care for us the electorate and still want to win elections, they would be well advised to get rid of Adam Schiff and all this investigation, impeachment nonsense and focus on helping us be free, safe, and prosperous.

AG Barr’s criminal investigation and Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff and others. BARREL & PORK.

1. BARREL, I hear Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff are sweating profusely over AG Barr’s criminal investigation – that all of this impeachment nonsense has boomeranged again on the democrats and on Mrs. Pelosi and on then POTUS Obama as well on those republicans who have been complicit.

2. Yes, PORK. They knew all along that the investigation is a criminal investigation. Such is not new information. The fact that they want the public to think the investigation has not been a criminal investigation until recently is ludicrous.

3. Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff fear, and many others fear, and rightly so, that AG Barr and those working with him have found and documented and presented to a Grand Jury serious game changing felonious and traitorous conduct.

4. They fear that AG Barr and those working with him have found that POTUS Obama and those working for and with him including themselves have committed one or more felonies and traitorous acts deserving of massive fines and jail time and loss of office and the condemnation of the nation.

5. I suspect Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff and many others are immensely worried that AG Barr will document or has documented the details of felonious and traitorous activities and that AG Barr will or has already taken the details and recommendations for indictments to a Grand Jury – all the while Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff should have known of course that any attack in the press or by way of impeachment of AG Barr is clear obstruction of justice.

6. What details of felonious and even traitorous activities might there be, BARREL?

7. Well for starters, PORK: If there was contact with including conspiracy with Ukrainian officials by Mr. Schiff or Mr. Nadler or Mrs. Pelosi or Mr. Biden or then POTUS Obama and their cronies or surrogates to gin up witnesses against POTUS Trump?

8. If there were felonious and even traitorous FISA warrant abuses by any of the mentioned people?

9. If there were felonious and even traitorous Star Chamber secret meetings held by Mr. Schiff and the democrats and others?

10. If there were felonious false and even traitorous accusations brought against POTUS Trump outside the Congressional chambers by Mr. Schiff where such prevents his reliance on Congressional immunity. Mr. Schiff in Congress intentionally lied and falsely characterized POTUS Trump’s language in POTUS Trump’s letter to the Ukrainian President and Mr. Schiff held a press conference about the same so I would think he would be sweating profusely. POTUS Trump is well within his prerogatives to ask not just for Mr. Schiff’s cesure but also for Mr. Schiff’s resignation from Congress. Because he held the press conference, Mr. Schiff should rightly fear a civil action by POTUS Trump and criminal indictment via AG Barr.

11. If there were felonious and even traitorous abuse of Congressional Rules by Mr. Nadler and Mr. Schiff and Mrs. Pelosi and others?

12. If any of the above mentioned persons suborned perjury?

13. What is subornation of perjury, BARREL?

14. PORK, subornation of perjury is the felony and even traitorous crime of persuading a person to lie about POTUS Trump and thus commit perjury.

15. Perjury is swearing a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding whether spoken or written. 

16. In other words, perjury is persuading/influencing a person to lie against POTUS Trump in a legal proceeding.

17. So let’s think about it. If Mr. Schiff or Mr. Nadler or Mrs. Pelosi or all three or all of the “democrats in attendance” are hiding the testimony of witnesses behind closed doors, if the witnesses met with Mr. Schiff or Mr. Nadler or Mrs. Pelosi and were coached or influenced or encouraged to testify falsely against POTUS Trump in any way, then there has been subornation of perjury.

18. For example, did Mr. Schiff or Mr. Nadler or Mrs. Pelosi or other surrogates or co-persons meet with witnesses before they testified? Did they coach or intimidate or influence them in any way, such as by suggesting they might have immunity from prosecution, to perjure themselves in bearing false witness against POTUS Trump? Sounds to me that this is the reason they do not want whistleblower or “Star Chamber” witness testimony readily and transparently available.

19.  Did Mr. Schiff or Mr. Nadler or Mrs. Pelosi and other commit felonious or traitorous acts worthy of being taken to the Grand Jury?

20. These are some of the reasons I can think of as to why Mr. Schiff and Mr. Nadler are sweating profusely enough to hold a press conference condemning and accusing AG Barr of politicizing a criminal investigation. By doing so they have not just tried to cover themselves, and in doing so they have pointed AG Barr directly to them, and at the same time they are on the public record obstructing justice.

Are Elijah Cummings and the democrats accountable for the crime in Baltimore?

1. So BARREL, who is responsible – who is accountable –

for the many murders in Baltimore – 171 from January to July 11, 2019.

2. PORK, obviously those who commit them are responsible. They are the arch criminals.

3. Notwithstanding, Elijah Cummings and the governor of Maryland and the mayor and city council of Baltimore and the police forces of same are also responsible. They are accountable.

4. How so? Isn’t it racism to say so, BARREL.

5. No way, PORK. This isn’t about racism.

6. This is about the simple truth. Those who have oversight for the city – in this case primarily democrats – are responsible for the lack of law and order in the city. They are the ones who are accountable. They are the watchmen and watchwomen on the tower who  are not doing their jobs and cracking down – who are not solving the poverty and other  issues that tend to drive crime.

I think the following stats are correct.

2009 = 238 murders

2010 = 223

2011 = 196

2012 = 218

2013 = 233

2014 = 211

2015 = 344

2016 = 318

2017 = 343

2018 = 309

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Baltimore

The crime in Baltimore is out of control. Much is in high poverty neighborhoods.

So BARREL, what would you do if you were Elijah Cummings?


Well, I would stop all this racism nonsense and get all the help I could get. I would  hold a meeting 

tomorrow and I would hold that meeting with POTUS Trump and the governor and mayor and put together a joint initiative to clean up the city of crime and poverty within the next ten days.

Video Steve Jobs agrees with POTUS Trump. Steve speaks to democrats and republicans.

BARREL, this video of Steve Jobs says it all. Steve speaks from beyond the veil of death to us. He really describes what POTUS Trump is doing and Steve says to the democrats and equally to the republicans where their focus ought to be if they are to be relevant in this world.

So everybody chill out and take a good look at what Steve says and how he responds to an insult and overlay this on the current approach of so many people in dealing with and misunderstanding POTUS Trump.

https://www.inc.com/justin-bariso/20-years-ago-steve-jobs-demonstrated-the-perfect-w.html

BARREL, all POTUS TRUMP and FLOTUS TRUMP are saying to the naysayer critics in both parties, including Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, as well to any who are obvious communists and socialists, as well to all of the media, Hannity, Carlson, Maddow, CNN anchors, MSNBC anchors, Fox News anchors, Drudge, Breitbart, WSJ, New York Times, Infowars, the list goes on and on, all POTUS TRUMP and FLOTUS TRUMP are saying is:

“HELP US AMERICANS BE FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS OR GET OUT OF THE WAY!”

Right on, PORK.  Right on!

Has Kamala Harris beaten Joe badly and locked up the 2020 POTUS nomination? Looks like it. BARREL & PORK.

1. So, BARREL, where are we with democratic party politics today?

2. Has Kamala Harris beaten Biden and secured the Democratic Presidential Nomination?

3. Looks like it, PORK.

4. One Quinnipiac poll shows Joe with a very slight lead over Senator Kamala Harris for the 2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination by 2 points only. https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2631

5. Another shows Harris and Biden tied. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/joe-biden-kamala-harris-virtual-tie-democratic-nomination-new-poll-n1025

6. I think push comes to shove and Harris is way ahead.

7. Like everyone thought Hillary was ahead of POTUS Trump.

8. Proved not to be so.

9. All this tells me Joe’s lead has evaporated.

10. He is on a downward trajectory heading once again for a 3rd or 4th time toward failure to obtain the nomination.

11. Keep in mind that nothing fails like failure.

12. So all this tells me he hasn’t got momentum.

13. His age.

14. His multiple gaffes.

15. His rambling inability to think.

16. The left leaning Democratic party will not let him carry the torch.

17. Why?

18. Because he is a disaster not just waiting to happen. He is a disaster that is in the midst of happening.

19. His responsibility for the many failed Obama initiatives.

20. His Russia misuse of his office connection.

21. His China misuse of his office connection.

22. His multiple failures to secure the nomination in the past.

23. His flip flopping on policy.

24. Again, his gaffes.

25. His negatives cannot be overcome.

26. So, PORK, I’m going to walk out on a limb and say: Senator Kamala Harris will secure the nomination for President.

27. Julian Castro or Cory Booker will be Vice President.

28. A woman and a Hispanic or Black is the democratic dream team.

29. Kamala Harris alone has the good looks.

30. She has the youth.

31. She has the brains.

32. She has the no non-nonsense take no prisoners chutzpah to stand up to POTUS Trump and not just give him a run for his money in debate but also along the campaign trail.

ADVICE TO POTUS TRUMP – STOP THE INVASION TODAY

BARREL, the Mueller Report found no collusion and AG Barr and DAG Rosenstein found no obstruction of justice. 

What THREE PIECES OF CRITICAL ADVICE do you have FOR POTUS TRUMP?

That is easy PORK. 

We are being invaded at our southern border by Mexico 

and other countries and organizations and individuals

that are using a clandestine force of military men and probably women 

under the guise of legitimate immigrants to do so. 

CLANDESTNE MEANS secretive, illicit, covert, furtive, surreptitious, stealthy. 

PORK, These are my THREE PIECES OF CRITICAL “DO IT TODAY AT ALL COSTS” SETS OF ADVICE for POTUS TRUMP:

STEP 1. FIRST AND FOREMOST, POTUS TRUMP. 

THE OBVIOUS ON-GOING INVASION BY MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES IS A NATIONAL CRISIS/EMERGENCY. 

YOU HAVE GOT TO STOP BLOWING SMOKE ABOUT THIN THINGS THAT DON’T MATTER

AND FOCUS AND PULL OUT ALL OF THE STOPS 

WITH YOUR EXECUTIVE ORDERS 

AND IMMEDIATELY DECLARE A NATIONAL EMERGENCY

AND DEPLOY THE MILITARY 

AND ICE 

AND BORDER PATROL 

AND FEDERAL DOJ AND MARSHALLS AND POLICE 

WHICH YOU COMMAND 

TO EXTREME EMERGENCY STATUS 

AND OVERRIDE THE GLOBALISTS 

AND ANTI-AMERICANS AT HOME AND ABROAD 

AND TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS 

AND IMMEDIATELY BUILD THE WALL 

AND IMMEDIATELY FIX AND PREVENT THE IMMIGRATION INVASION CRISIS TODAY. 

SHUT DOWN THE BORDER 

WITH THE MILITARY TODAY 

AND DO NOT LET ANYONE ENGAGE IN CATCH AND RELEASE 

AND DEPORT ALL THOSE WHO DID NOT ENTER 

THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR.

[And while you are at it, lock up the bad actors who colluded with the Russians and created the Russians did it narrative and trashed the country for the last two years.]

STEP 2. SECOND AND FOREMOST, POTUS TRUMP. 

THE ON-GOING INVASION BY MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES IS A NATIONAL CRISIS/EMERGENCY. 

YOU HAVE GOT TO STOP BLOWING SMOKE ABOUT THIN THINGS THAT DON’T MATTER

AND FOCUS AND PULL OUT ALL OF THE STOPS 

WITH YOUR EXECUTIVE ORDERS 

AND IMMEDIATELY DECLARE A NATIONAL EMERGENCY

AND DEPLOY THE MILITARY 

AND ICE 

AND BORDER PATROL 

AND FEDERAL DOJ AND MARSHALLS AND POLICE 

WHICH YOU COMMAND 

TO EXTREME EMERGENCY STATUS 

AND OVERRIDE THE GLOBALISTS 

AND ANTI-AMERICANS AT HOME AND ABROAD 

AND TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS 

AND IMMEDIATELY BUILD THE WALL 

AND IMMEDIATELY FIX AND PREVENT THE IMMIGRATION INVASION CRISIS TODAY. 

SHUT DOWN THE BORDER 

WITH THE MILITARY TODAY 

AND DO NOT LET ANYONE ENGAGE IN CATCH AND RELEASE 

AND DEPORT ALL THOSE WHO DID NOT ENTER 

THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR.

[And while you are at it, lock up the bad actors who colluded with the Russians and created the Russians did it narrative and trashed the country for the last two years.]

STEP 3. THIRD AND FOREMOST, POTUS TRUMP. 

THE ON-GOING INVASION BY MEXICO AND OTHER COUNTRIES IS A NATIONAL CRISIS/EMERGENCY. 

YOU HAVE GOT TO STOP BLOWING SMOKE ABOUT THIN THINGS THAT DON’T MATTER

AND FOCUS AND PULL OUT ALL OF THE STOPS 

WITH YOUR EXECUTIVE ORDERS 

AND IMMEDIATELY DECLARE A NATIONAL EMERGENCY

AND DEPLOY THE MILITARY 

AND ICE 

AND BORDER PATROL 

AND FEDERAL DOJ AND MARSHALLS AND POLICE 

WHICH YOU COMMAND 

TO EXTREME EMERGENCY STATUS 

AND OVERRIDE THE GLOBALISTS 

AND ANTI-AMERICANS AT HOME AND ABROAD 

AND TAKE THE BULL BY THE HORNS 

AND IMMEDIATELY BUILD THE WALL 

AND IMMEDIATELY FIX AND PREVENT THE IMMIGRATION INVASION CRISIS TODAY. 

SHUT DOWN THE BORDER 

WITH THE MILITARY TODAY 

AND DO NOT LET ANYONE ENGAGE IN CATCH AND RELEASE 

AND DEPORT ALL THOSE WHO DID NOT ENTER 

THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR.

[And while you are at it, lock up the bad actors who colluded with the Russians and created the Russians did it narrative and trashed the country for the last two years.]

AG Barr and Mr. Huber WHO IF ANY are the accessories? BARREL & PORK.

A. BARREL, is AG Barr or Mr. Huber or someone else in the FBI, DOJ, Inspector General, or media taking the time to ask the question “Are there accessories to the various crimes that appear to have been committed against the nation and against POTUS Trump?


B. PORK, what do you mean?


C. Well, BARREL, if you read Peter Sweizer’s investigative journalism and listen to Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly and Tucker Carlson and Rush Limbaugh and others, it looks to me like some of the politicians and media owners and journalists and company owners have committed serious crimes and others are accessories to those crimes? 


Here are only a few questions: when did 

– Chuck Schumer and or 

– Nancy Pelosi and or 

– Paul Ryan and or 

– Mitch McConnell and or 

– Peter Strok and or 

– Lisa Page and or 

– Brennan or 

– McCabe or 

– Comey or 

– Lynch or 

– Rice or 

– Hillary or 

– Brazile or 

– Wasserman-Schultz or 

– Podestas or 

– then POTUS Obama or 

– Biden or 

– Holder or 

– Bill or 

– CNN or 

– MSNBC or 

– the New York Times or 

– Washington Post or 

– any of the media personalities 

– and media owners and management and outlets or 

– any of the Senators or 

– any from the House know about:


– the Russian collusion fake narrative and

– the fake dossier and 

– the FISA warrant scam and 

– Uranium One and 

– all the Pay to Play money from foreign countries and 

– Pay to Play money from Chinese and Russian corporations and 

– Email-gate and

– Tech transfers to the Chinese and Russians and

– A billion in cash to the Caliphate, and

– Conspiracy to marginalize a duly elected POTUS?

In other words, did one or more of these folks either know and fail to step forward, or aid and abet, or actually participate, and in the process, and did they enrich themselves at the public trough? 

1.    See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term)#Relative_severity_of_penalties:

2.    BARREL, an accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal.

3.    The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:

4.    The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latinfor “guilty mind”), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus(Latin for “guilty act”).

5.    If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (see common purpose).

6.    The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.

7.    Contents

8.    Elements

8.1.                    1.1Relative severity of penalties

8.2.                    1.2Conspiracy

8.3.                    1.3Criminal facilitation

8.4.                    1.4Knowledge of the crime

8.5.                    1.5Exceptions

9.    2Usage

10.           3History

11.           4Specific laws

11.1.               4.6United States

12.           5See also

13.           6Notes and references

14.           Elements

15.           In some jurisdictions, an accessory is distinguished from an accomplice, who normally is present at the crime and participates in some way.

16.           An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being committed, will be committed, or has been committed.

17.           A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way.

18.           The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment.

19.           Relative severity of penalties

20.           The punishment … for accessories varies in different jurisdictions, and has varied at different periods of history.

21.           In some times and places accessories have been subject to lesser penalties than principals (the persons who actually commit the crime).

22.           In others accessories are considered the same as principals in theory, although in a particular case an accessory may be treated less severely than a principal.

23.           In some times and places accessories before the fact (i.e., with knowledge of the crime before it is committed) have been treated differently from accessories after the fact (e.g., those who aid a principal after a crime has been committed, but had no role in the crime itself). 

24.           Common law traditionally considers an accessory just as guilty as the principal(s) in a crime, and subject to the same penalties.

25.            Separate and lesser punishments exist by statute in many jurisdictions.

26.           Conspiracy

27.           In some situations, a charge of conspiracy can be made even if the primary offense is never committed, so long as the plan has been made, and at least one overt act towards the crime has been committed by at least one of the conspirators.

28.           For example, if a group plans on forging bank checks, and forges the checks but ultimately does not attempt to cash the checks, the group might still be charged with conspiracy due to the overt act of forgery.

29.           Thus, an accessory before the fact will often, but not always, also be considered a conspirator.

30.           A conspirator must have been a party to the planning of the crime, rather than merely becoming aware of the plan to commit it and then helping in some way.

31.           A person who incites another to a crime will become a part of a conspiracy if agreement is reached, and may then be considered an accessory or a joint principal if the crime is eventually committed.

32.           In the United States, a person who learns of the crime and gives some form of assistance before the crime is committed is known as an “accessory before the fact”.

33.           A person who learns of the crime after it is committed and helps the criminal to conceal it, or aids the criminal in escaping, or simply fails to report the crime, is known as an “accessory after the fact”.

34.           A person who does both is sometimes referred to as an “accessory before and after the fact”, but this usage is less common.

35.           Criminal facilitation

36.           In some jurisdictions, criminal “facilitation” laws do not require that the primary crime be actually committed as a prerequisite for criminal liability.

37.           These include state statutes making it a crime to “provide” a person with “means or opportunity” to commit a crime, “believing it probable that he is rendering aid to a person who intends to commit a crime.”[1]

38.           Knowledge of the crime

39.           To be convicted of an accessory charge, the accused must generally be proved to have had actual knowledge that a crime was going to be, or had been, committed.

40.           Furthermore, there must be proof that the accessory knew that his or her action, or inaction, was helping the criminals commit the crime, or evade detection, or escape.

41.           A person who unknowingly houses a person who has just committed a crime, for instance, may not be charged with an accessory offense because they did not have knowledge of the crime.

42.           Usage

43.           The term “accessory” derives from the English common law, and been inherited by those countries with a more or less Anglo-American legal system. The concept of complicity is, of course, common across different legal traditions. The specific terms accessory-before-the-fact and accessory-after-the-fact were used in England and the United States but are now more common in historical than in current usage.

44.           United States

45.           U.S. jurisdictions (that is, the federal government and the various state governments) have come to treat accessories before the fact differently from accessories after the fact.

46.           All U.S. jurisdictions have effectively eliminated the distinction between accessories before the fact and principals, either by doing away with the category of “accessory before the fact” entirely or by providing that accessories before the fact are guilty of the same offense as principals.

47.           The Model Penal Code’s definition of accomplice liability includes those who at common law were called accessories before the fact; under the Model Penal Code, accomplices face the same liability as principals.

48.           It is now possible to be convicted as an accessory before the fact even though the principal has not been convicted or (in most jurisdictions) even if the principal was acquitted at an earlier trial.[2]

53.           However, modern U.S. jurisdictions punish accessories after the fact for a separate criminal offense distinct from the underlying crime and having a different (and less severe) punishment.

54.           Some states still use the term “accessory after the fact”; others no longer use the term, but have comparable laws against hindering apprehension or prosecution, obstruction of justicetampering with evidence, harboring a felon, or the like.

55.           Such crimes usually require proving

56.           (1) an intent to hinder apprehension or prosecution and

57.           (2) actual aid in the form of either

58.           (a) harboring the criminal,

59.           (b) providing specified means (such as a disguise) to evade arrest,

60.           (c) tampering with evidence,

61.           (d) warning the criminal of impending arrest, or

62.           (e) using force or deception to prevent the arrest.[3]

63.           Federal law has followed both these trends.

64.           The U.S. Code effectively treats as principals those who would traditionally have been considered accessories before the fact at common law:[4]

65.           Whoever

66.           aids,

67.           abets,

68.           counsels,

69.           commands,

70.           induces or

71.           procures

72.           the commission of an offense,

73.           is punishable as a principal.

74.           Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense, is punishable as a principal.

75.           However, federal law treats accessories after the fact differently from principals.

76.           Accessories after the fact face a maximum of only half the fine and half the prison time that principals face.

77.           (If the principal faces the death penalty or life imprisonment, accessories after the fact face up to 15 years’ imprisonment.)

78.           Federal law defines accessories after the fact as persons who provide criminals with certain aid in order to hinder a criminal’s apprehension or prosecution:[5]

79.           Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed,

80.           receives,

81.           relieves,

82.           comforts or

83.           assists the offender

84.           in order to

85.           hinder or

86.           prevent

87.           his apprehension,

88.           trial or

89.           punishment,

90.           is an accessory after the fact.

So Mr. Barr and Mr. Huber, here are only a few questions: 

When did 

– Chuck Schumer and or 

– Nancy Pelosi and or 

– Paul Ryan and or 

– Mitch McConnell and or 

– Peter Strok and or 

– Lisa Page and or 

– Brennan or 

– McCabe or 

– Comey or 

– Lynch or 

– Rice or 

– Hillary or 

– Brazile or 

– Wasserman-Schultz or 

– Podestas or 

– then POTUS Obama or 

– Biden or 

– Holder or 

– Bill or 

– CNN or 

– MSNBC or 

– the New York Times or 

– Washington Post or 

– any of the media personalities 

– and media owners and management and outlets or 

– any of the Senators or 

– any from the House know about:


– the Russian collusion fake narrative and

– the fake dossier and 

– the FISA warrant scam and 

– Uranium One and 

– all the Pay to Play money from foreign countries and 

– Pay to Play money from Chinese and Russian corporations and 

– Email-gate and

– Tech transfers to the Chinese and Russians and

– A billion in cash to the Caliphate, and

– Conspiracy to marginalize a duly elected POTUS?

In other words, did one or more of these folks either know and fail to step forward, or aid and abet, or actually participate, and in the process did they misuse their offices and enrich themselves at the public trough? 

What have democrats done since POTUS Trump took office? Answer: Criticize POTUS Trump. Better answer: Nothing.

SINCE POTUS TRUMP TOOK OFFICE, BARREL, WHAT HAVE THE DEMOCRATS DONE FOR BLACK, HISPANIC, LATINO, JEWISH, CAUCASIAN, ASIAN AMERICANS?

PORK, All the democrats have done during the same time frame is criticize and investigate POTUS Trump. 


That’s all.

BARREL, Since he took office, what has POTUS Trump done? For Black, Hispanic, and Latino Americans? Jewish Americans? Native Americans? Asian Americans? Caucasian Americans?

PORK, he has already kept most all of his several hundred campaign promises. 

1.       Freedom of Religion. He is helping us worship how, where, or what we pleases so long as we do not infringe on rights of others.

2.       Freedom of Speech and Education. He is helping us speak without censure of political correctness. Helping us receive all education possible.

3.       Freedom to bear arms. He is helping us to protect self, family, and community.

4.       Safety. He is improving our military. He is reducing threat and actual terrorism and wars.

5.       Safety. He is improving wall and other security at the borders together with a call for more immigrants to come through the front door.

6.       Safety. He is improving security by bolstering police forces cross country.

7.       Safety. He is protecting against democrat abortion. 50,000,000+ Black unborn babies and 50,000,000+  surgically and 200,000,000+ Native American, Jewish American, Asian American, Caucasian American unborn babies have been chemically killed since democrat Roe v Wade in 1973. NO BLACK OR HISPANIC OR LATINO OR NATIVE AMERICAN OR JEWISH AMERICAN OR ASIAN AMERICAN OR CAUCASIAN AMERICAN, NO ONE, WILL VOTE DEMOCRAT UNTIL THEY JETTISON THEIR HATE CRIME GENOCIDE CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY CRIMINAL POLICY OF KILLING OUR UNBORN CHILDREN.

8.       Prosperity. He is generating millions of jobs and a robust economy with fewer regulations and manufacturing in the U.S.

9.       Prosperity. He is lowering taxes

10.   Prosperity. He is increasing wages and income significantly.

What have democrats done to help us be free? Answer. Nothing.

What have democrats done to help us be safe? Answer. Nothing.

What have democrats done to help us be prosperous? Answer. Nothing.

Actor Will Smith hasn’t done his homework. Doesn’t know 50,000,000+ Black unborn babies have been surgically and chemically murdered since Roe v Wade in 1973. BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, it looks to me that Will Smith hasn’t done his homework. He apparently is funding and pushing the democrat agenda.


Yes, PORK. He apparently doesn’t know that 50,000,000+ unborn Black babies, and 50,000,000+ unborn Hispanic Latino babies, and 200,000,000+ unborn Jewish, Native American, Asian American, Caucasian babies have been surgically and chemically murdered, ripped apart, dismembered, dissolved, poisoned, sold for body parts, flushed, sent to land fills since Democrat Roe v Wade. And now some democrats are extending this same genocide, ultimate hate crime, crime against humanity policy to those unborn babies who are just born.


BARREL, I agree. No one who understands this can vote democrat until the democrats jettison this horrific policy of killing our unborn. 

ABORTION LETTER TO PELOSI, ABERLY, AND WEN. BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, take a few minutes and read Richard Linford’s letter to U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Planned Parenthood’s Chairman Naomi Aberly and President Dr. Leana Wen. It is titled:

ABORTIONS – AMERICA’S UNBORN BABY KILLING FIELDS AND MILLSTONES.

It reads:

The 300,000,000+ unborn babies killed since Roe v Wade tipping point has been reached.

IT IS TIME TO ELIMINATE ALL ABORTIONS EXCEPT IN EXTREMELY RARE INSTANCES.

300,000,000+ unborn American babies have been killed surgically and chemically since Liberal Democrats sponsored Roe v Wade – 50,000,000+ were Black babies. 50,000,000+ were Hispanic babies. 200,000,000+ were Jewish, Native American, Asian American, and Caucasian babies. THE TIPPING POINT LONG AGO WAS REACHED. IT IS TIME TO ELIMINATE ALL ABORTIONS EXCEPT IN EXTREMELY RARE INSTANCES. Here is how we must do so.

A letter to Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi and

Planned Parenthood Chairwoman Naomi Aberly, and

Planned Parenthood President Dr. Leana Wen.

cc.

POTUS  Donald J. Trump,

Fox News Sean Hannity,

MSNBC Rachel Maddow,

Chris Matthews,

New York Times (letters@nytimes.com.)

The Republican Party

The Democratic Party

from Richard W. Linford

I am an attorney at law.

I served as state chairman and national board member of The National Conference of Christians and Jews [and Muslims]. (NCCJ).

IT IS TIME TO ELIMINATE ALL ABORTIONS EXCEPT IN EXTREMELY RARE INSTANCES. Here is how we must do so.

Dear Nancy, Naomi, and Leana,

1.      300,000,000+ unborn American babies have been killed (50,000,000+) surgically and (250,000,000+) chemically  during the 46 years since 1973 Roe v Wade.

2.      6,521,739+ unborn American babies have been killed surgically and chemically on average per year during the 46 years since 1973 Roe v Wade – the equivalent in numbers of a Jewish holocaust per year.

3.      50,000,000+ of the 300,000,000 killed were Black babies.

4.      50,000,000+ of the 300,000,000 killed were Hispanic/Latino babies.

5.      200,000,000+ of the 300,000,000+ killed were Asian, Caucasian, Jewish, and Native American babies.

6.      The 50,000,000+ surgical abortion number was taken from Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher Institute abortion website.

7.      250,000,000+ is the approximate number of babies aborted chemically. Add 50,000,000+ to 250,000,000+ and we have the number 300,000,000+. “* The Guttmacher footnote reads: The [number of] abortions [shown] in the “up-dated daily” counters on this site are almost all “surgical abortions”.  We [meaning the Guttmacher Institute and or Planned Parenthood] have made no attempt to tally the totals for “chemically-induced abortions” here [in the counters].  The Pharmacists for Life organization estimates that there have been approximately 250 million babies aborted chemically since 1973 in the USA. http://www.pfli.org/” See http://www.numberofabortions.com/* The abortion numbers for Blacks and Hispanics/Latinos were extrapolated.

8.      1,522,802,735+ IS THE NUMBER OF SURGICAL ABORTIONS WORLDWIDE SINCE 1980 according to Guttmacher Institute detail. http://www.numberofabortions.com/

9.      THESE NUMBERS ARE CONSERVATIVE.The World Wide abortion counter text says that it gives one of the more conservative estimates of the number of abortions world-wide since 1980.

10.  THE GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE IS A DIVISION OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD. See http://www.numberofabortions.com.

11.  THE GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE FOOTNOTE LISTS THE SURGICAL KILLINGS COMMITTED BY PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

12.  4,068,749 killings in the US from 1977 thru 2005.

13.  264,943 killings in the U.S.A. in 2005.

14.  289,750 killings in 2006.

15.  305,310 killings in 2007.

16.  324,008 killings in 2008.

17.  331,796 killings in 2009.

18.  329,445 killings in 2010.

19.  333,924 killings in 2011.

20.  327,166 killings in 2012.

21.  327,166 killings in 2013.

22.  323,999 killings in 2014.

23.  Chemical abortions performed or facilitated by Planned Parenthood are not included in these numbers.

24.  Bottom line, these are Planned Parenthood’s “conservative” numbers. 

25.  THE WORD ABORTION.

26.  Use of the word abortion is a misnomer if not a prevarication or an obfuscation.

27.  Calling it what it really is, it is killing the unborn babies of America. [And the world.]

28.  THE WORD INFANTICIDE.

29.  It is the crime of killing a very young child, usually within a year of birth.

30.  Infanticide is also used to describe a person who kills an infant, especially their own child.

31.  KILLINGS OF BLACK AND HISPANIC/LATINO UNBORN BABIES SINCE ROE v WADE.

32.  Commenting on a recent Wall Street Journal article titled: About the Black Abortion Rate. Written by Jason L. Riley, July 10, 2018. https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697:

33.  This Wall Street Journal op ed states that in New York City thousands more black babies are aborted each year than are born alive,

34.  Jason quotes Jesse Jackson as saying at the time of Roe v Wade in 1973, Abortion is “murder.”

35.  Jesse Jackson also said: “[W]e [blacks] used to look for death from the man in the blue coat and now it comes in a white coat.”

36.  Blue coat is law enforcement officers. White coat is doctors and nurses who perform abortions.

37.   “In the intervening decades, [Jesse’s] views allegedly shifted. “Mr. Jackson [who labors to personify ‘civil rights’] [according to Jason] “abandoned the pro-life ship to run for president in 1984.”

38.  Jason states, “leaders of black civil-rights organizations [I add, like Jessee] today are joined at the hip with abortion-rights proponents such as Planned Parenthood.”

39.  The killing rate among black mothers is more than three times higher than it is for white mothers.

40.  Once again, and paraphrasing, in New York City thousands more black babies are killed by Democrat liberal policies than are born alive each year.

41.  Why is this so? Is the truth the fact that Planned Parenthood has placed a number of its abortion clinics in close proximity to the Black community, if not directly in Black neighborhoods, because Black women are more easily talked into having abortions?

42.  Is the truth that there has been and still is a conscious Margaret Sanger eugenics genocidal/crime against humanity prejudice against blacks and a concomitant ongoing effort to control the black population? And the Hispanic Latino population?

43.  Is it true that Planned Parenthood is “joined at the hip” with and funding Black civil rights organizations, which would obviously facilitate Planned Parenthood’s ability to access the Black community, retain a political climate favoring abortion, while talking Black women into having abortions?

44.  Not as an aside, ostensibly to curry favor and gain influence, Planned Parenthood gave Hillary Clinton the Margaret Sanger award, and today, as presciently observed by POTUS Trump during his 2016 debates with Hillary, we see an ever increasing concerted effort to push for abortion on demand, late term abortion, and even efforts to permit infanticide killing of the just born infant.

45.  Continuing from Jason and the Wall Street Journal: “Nationally, black women terminate pregnancies at far higher rates than other women.

46.  “In 2014, 36% of all abortions were performed on black women, who are just 13% of the female population.

47.  – The [never] discussed flip side of “reproductive freedom” is that

48.  – abortion deaths far exceed those via cancer,

49.  – abortion deaths far exceed those from violent crime (e.g. Chicago and Baltimore),

50.  – abortion deaths far exceed those from heart disease,

51.  – abortion deaths far exceed those from AIDS and

52.  – abortion deaths far exceed those from accidents.

53.  “Racism, poverty and lack of access to health care are [three] typical explanations for these disparities.

54.  “… Black women have much higher abortion rates even after you control for income.

55.  One argument used to explain away the higher number of Black abortions reads: “The more plausible explanation [has] to do with marriage.  Unmarried women are more likely to experience an unintended pregnancy, and black women are less likely than their white, Asian and Hispanic counterparts to marry.”But are they?

56.  A QUESTION FOR NANCY PELOSI. WHY THE FOCUS ON THE FEW ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CHILDREN AND LACK OF FOCUS ON THE MILLIONS OF OUR UNBORN WHO HAVE BEEN KILLED NEEDLESSLY?

57.   “Why is the Liberal media [and the Democratic Party] more concerned about the children of illegal immigrants and not [at all] concerned about the vast number of unborn Black and Hispanic and other babies who are being killed unceremoniously? 

58.  Is it true that the Democratic Party has this policy/attitude because the implementation of a policy of favoring illegal immigration holds out the prospect of more democratic votes?

59.  Is it true, Nancy, that you and your Democrat colleagues are receiving vast sums of campaign financing money from Planned Parenthood and others with like agendas? Hence your reluctance to rock the Planned Parenthood gravy train?

60.  Is the truth also that Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers are making egregious sums of money from the government for the abortions they perform, not to mention the many sterilizations?

61.  Is it true, Nancy, that you received huge campaign financing from Planned Parenthood and this is the reason you invited Dr.Leana Wen, President of Planned Parenthood, to POTUS Trump’s State of the Union address as your guest.

62.  If we conducted an audit of your campaign finances Nancy would we find out that you owe Leana in return?

63.  Notwithstanding the answers to these questions, what does happen when we interview women who have had an abortion and we ask them about their remorse years later?

64.  Do all if not most women regret killing/murdering/aborting their unborn babies? Jason says the answer is YES. 

65.  What happens when we “Interview fathers who never got to meet their child”? Is there serious regret on their part? The answer again is probably YES for most if not all.

66.  Judging from what is done as well by what is said, Nancy, and paraphrasing Jason’s words, are “Democrats and Millennials … being led by the nose by Progressive Liberals [down the abortion trail] and [it is] time to stop the group think [and rethink this whole killing fields 300,000,000+ tipping point matter]?”

67.  Reaching the number of 300,000,000+ killings of our unborn constitutes a horrific tipping point!

68.  It is time for Democrats to jettison their abortion platform position altogether!

69.  YES IT IS.

70.  300,000,000+ killings of our unborn since Roe v Wade means it is finally time for Planned Parenthood to “cut the baby in half” and give up its abortion practice altogether and focus on adoption instead of the killing fields of abortion!

71.  YES it is.

72.  NANCY, NAOMI, AND LEANA, WHETHER YOU ADMIT IT OR NOT ABORTION – THE KILLING OF 300,000,000+ OF OUR UNBORN BABIES SINCE ROE v WADE, NOT RUSSIA, NOT NORTH KOREA, NOT IRAN, NOT JOBS, NOT MANUFACTURING, NOT INFRASTRUCTURE, NOT THE BORDER WALL, NOT THE DIVERSIONARY INVESTIGATIONS, IS THE MOST SERIOUS PROBLEM OUR NATION FACES.

73.  With that in mind, I am asking you, Nancy, Naomi, Leana, and all Democrats, to do an about face, jettison your policy of killing the unborn, and go forward championing the right to life of the unborn plus adoption of those babies who are “not wanted for whatever reason.”

74.  BLACKS AND HISPANICS/LATINOS.

75.  POTUS Trump has repeatedly promised to help Black American communities.

76.  Yet, helping Black Americans is much more than jobs and employment.

77.  Evidence is overwhelming that the press and the Liberal Left including most if not all Democrats are far more interested in giving illegal immigrants unfettered access to America than in the immense abortion genocide crime against humanity [and now infanticide] that has plagued our country from its inception.

78.  This discussion is not about trimesters and viability, this discussion is about preservation of the Black family.

79.  This discussion is about preservation of the Hispanic and Latino family.

80.  It is about preservation of all families.

81.  This discussion is about Roe v Wade which is the seminal case that triggered the American abortion epidemic which has resulted in the killing of 300,000,000+ of our unborn babies..

82.  Given this devastation and destruction caused to Black and Hispanic and Latino and other American families, it does not take a conspiracy theorist to conclude that a fundamental tenet of the Democrat Left is the socialist subordination and final destruction of the family and all social institutions and their replacement with Government — with the socialist globalist elitist agenda being accomplished in large measure by abortion killing on demand and illegal immigration through open borders. 

83.  Looking at what has been done and what has been said to destroy Black and Hispanic and other families by Democrat liberal policies, it is not hard to conclude with Jason Riley that the destruction of American churches and civic associations and families is an undergirding tenet of the Left as well.

84.  I agree with Jason Riley.

85.  To the Left it would appear that the all too apparent abortion eugenics genocidal crime against humanity – the destruction of the Black and Hispanic/Latino cultures and communities — is unimportant.

86.  While the media and politicians and special counsels divert us voters with their endless investigations, added Black and Hispanic and Latino and other unborn babies are killed.

87.  The Democrat Left has this same plan for non-Black and non-Hispanic families as well – my family included as well as yours.

88.  Again, see Wall Street Journal article titled: About the Black Abortion Rate. Written by Jason L. Riley, July 10, 2018. https://www.wsj.com/articles/lets-talk-about-the-black-abortion-rate-1531263697

89.  THINK ABOUT IT NANCY, NAOMI, AND LEANA. There are just over 37 Million Black Americans today. Since your Liberal Democrat Roe v Wade abortion policy, 50,000,000+ Black unborn girl and boy babies have been Dismembered/dissolved/killed/murdered/flushed/sent to landfills/used in bizaar experiments/had their spines severed/aborted.

90.   Since Democrat Roe v Wade 50,000,000+ Hispanic/Latino unborn girl and boy babies have likewise been killed/murdered/aborted.

91.  50,000,000+ is more than the current Black population in America. 

92.  50,000,000+ is barely short of the current Hispanic/Latino population in America.

93.  Regardless of any rationalization by you and your Democrat Liberal Left, 300,000,000+ aborted/killed/murdered unborn babies by any stretch of the imagination is a eugenics/genocide/ crime against humanity/and now infanticide – i.e. Virginia; it is a crime or series of crimes against the unborn and now against the just born, at the grossest, most wicked levels, a crime justified in today’s society only by your so-called Democrat liberal Roe v Wade socialist values. 

94.  Every honest parent or grandparent ought to weep over the unwritten obituaries of the myriad unborn whose lives Liberal Democrat Socialist policies have in secret and unceremoniously snuffed out.

95.  Killing of our children is not just a tragedy, Nancy, Naomi, and Leana, murdering our children is criminal activity of the highest order.

96.  Such is much, much worse than the plethora of murders in Chicago and Baltimore.

97.  All it takes is one look at one photograph of an aborted baby and no person in or out of the Black or Hispanic communities, for that matter in her or his right mind, can rationalize away this corruption of morals and decency.

98.  It is inconceivable that a thinking Black, Hispanic, Latino, or person of any other group would vote Democrat until a Democrat Statesman or Stateswoman steps forward within the Democratic party and altogether eliminates this Liberal Democrat abortion policy and initiative.

99.  THE CONTROVERSY.

100. On its surface, this controversy swirls around what you have conveniently named “reproductive rights” or “a woman’s right to choose.” What is on the abortion operating table though is the “reproductive wrongs” not the “reproductive rights.”

101. What is at stake is the unborn baby’s right to life not a woman’s right to pleasure or comfort or “her own body.” Even more than this, what is at stake is the future of our nation.

102. What is at stake is the right of the Black Community not to be destroyed by this continuing eugenics genocide/crime against their humanity/and now infanticide.

103. What is at stake is the right of the Hispanic and Latino Community, the right of all peoples, not to be destroyed in like fashion.

104. THINK ABOUT YOUR PLANNED PARENTHOOD PROPAGANDA DRIVEN AGENDA AND ECONOMICS.

105. Abortion providers including Planned Parenthood take in more than a billion dollars annually and multi-billions of dollars of revenue over time and in the main for performing abortions.

106. By simple definition, you are killing babies for money.

107. Horrific forced and so-called voluntary sterilization of ethnic communities also generates part of your revenue and is another discussion altogether and not included as part of this discussion.

108. The subject of Sterilization in America awaits a courageous set of New York Times or Fox News or for that matter CNN journalists.

109. The U.S. government provides multi-millions of dollars annually and billions over time to abortion providers including those of you at Planned Parenthood.

110. From your annual report, Naomi, which you signed, and which is online, we read: “After 102 years, Planned Parenthood’s mission remains the same: to provide care, no matter what. Last year, our more than 600 health centers provided that care – which includes birth control, cancer screenings, STI testing and treatment, safe and legal abortion, and so much more – to 2.4 million people across the country.”

111. First, although an abortion may in certain jurisdictions and under certain conditions be “lawful,” there is no such thing as a “safe” abortion.

112. Second, you write “We will continue building a world where all people have access to “Care.” No matter what.”

113. Is this prevarication? Yes it is. The word prevarication is a fancy way to say lie.

114. Let’s be truthful. What you are saying is that you will continue building a world where all people have access to abortion on demand. No matter what.

115. Third, you pitch a second propaganda lie that 12 million Americans are in favor of killing, murdering, selling or donating body parts, flushing, sending to land fills, splitting of spinal cords, of our unborn.

116. Your report then obfuscates in stating that “Medication abortion [is] available in 357 health centers.

117. Ladies, there is no such thing as “Medication abortion.”

118. You and or your PR handlers made up this phrase “Medication abortion.”

119. Use of the phrase “Medication abortion” is propaganda and obfuscation.

120. There is no such thing as “Medication abortion” and you know it.

121. This is prevarication at its finest.

122. Your Planned Parenthood report further documents its initiative to “expand reproductive rights in Latin America and into Africa.

123. The Planned Parenthood world-wide agenda is to foster abortion on demand throughout all nations thereby expanding the abortion genocide crimes against humanity killing fields exponentially.

124. The code words you use are “access to care.” That phrase as you use it primarily and simply means “access to kill an unborn baby on demand.”

125. You characterize yourself and your constituents as “Defenders.”

126. Again, this is smokescreen propaganda.

127. You aren’t defending anything except what can only be construed as your billion dollar gravy train.

128. Your policies and actions have resulted in the murder, killing, abortion of 300,000,000+ of our unborn baby girls and boys.

129. At the same time you have banked amazing wealth.

130. All the while the Democratic Party is influenced by your campaign contributions.

131. Another lie, and one no doubt set to galvanize your funding support base, is that people like Judge Kavanaugh and others are in the business of denying legitimate health care. Not so.

132. No one is in the business of denying legitimate health care.

133. You have redefined the words “legitimate health care” by conflating abortion with healthcare.

134. Abortion is not “health care.”

135. Abortion is killing the unborn for an annual revenue sum of $1,665,000,000.

136. Abortion is killing unborn babies, all the while diverting us with discussions about ethereal points along the gestation continuum, and unending investigations, for money. 

137. Your report shows annual revenues of $1,665,000,000 at minimum, more than a third of which came from “Government Health Services Reimbursements & Grants.” 

138. Yes, ladies, as you well know, that is a billion and a half dollars.

139. Notwithstanding your 501 C3 and 501 C4, anyone who suggests that your abortion industry and the abortion industry in general is an eleemosynary charity and not big business is lying or has his or her head in the sand not wanting to do or acknowledge or handle the truth. And obviously you do provide some added services to women.

140. To protect and augment your government and privately funded gravy train, your report shows that you spent:

141. $45,000,000 for Public Policy, [Looks like lobbyists are making huge sums from your abortion initiatives.]

142. $13,000,000 to engage communities [Looks like an excuse to fund local abortion initiatives and organizations], and

143. $76,000,000 for Advocacy, [Looks like law and accounting firms are making huge sums from abortion.]

144. $193,500,000 for management and general, [Looks like you and your board and your management are making serious salaries and vast sums from your abortion initiatives] plus

145. $102,000,000 for fundraising and at the end of the day you had

146. $244,000,000 of excess revenue over expenses, just in one year, which you banked or turned over to investment bankers who manage your portfolio. 

147. IS THERE CAUSE FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND CLASS ACTION CIVIL SUITS?

148. I think so. Yes, there is. Complete with attendant auditing and deep discovery.

149. I am an attorney at law and I think I know a set of potential winnable cases when I see them.

150. Given the 300,000,000+ number, it is not difficult at all to conclude that Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party and those supporting and performing and funding abortions may well be guilty of the evil crimes of Genocide, the grossest Crimes Against Humanity, and now even Infanticide – all actions that warrant criminal prosecution and civil class actions.

151. Given the 300,000,000+ number, it is not difficult to draw the conclusion that pro-abortion legislators and judges, and abortion providers including Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party, yourselves included, and some misguided persons and companies who provide you with funding, including no doubt a number of closet liberal republicans, may be individually and collectively guilty of these same crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity – and now even infanticide crimes [i.e. Virginia] against the just born – not to mention the crimes for harming women who have been talked if not conned into having an abortion – again, it is not difficult to suggest the need for the DOJ to take a hard look at possible criminal prosecution and for law firms across the country to take a hard look at filing civil class actions.

152. It took years for the government and nation to get the act together so as to focus on the tobacco industry.

153. At some point there was a tipping point and Ladies 300,000,000+ is tipping point.

154. The ordinary meaning of genocide is murder of people due to their national, ethnic, racial, or religious group membership.

155. Has the government or Planned Parenthood fostered and funded the murder of ethnic, racial, or religious groups? Looks like both have done so.

156. Can government officers and the Planned Parenthood Board and officers hide behind any shield when it comes to genocide and crimes against humanity and infanticide? I think not.

157. Does killing 50,000,000+ Black unborn babies since Roe v Wade in 1973 constitute a eugenics driven genocide crime against the Black community?  Probably does.

158. How about 50,000,000+ Hispanic/Latino unborn babies?  Likewise.

159. How about 200,000,000+ Jewish, Native American, Asian, Caucasian unborn babies? Looks like it.

160. How many deaths, how many murders, how many killings of our unborn children and grandchildren is enough  to reach the tipping point so as to generate a formal repudiation of all abortion and formal criminal charges and massive class action civil lawsuits?

161. Are 300,000,000+ killings enough? Absolutely.

162. Are 50,000,000+ killings enough? Yes.

163. Are 200,000,000+ killings enough? Absolutely.

164. Should the FBI and Department of Justice take on the abortion industry like they took on the Tobacco industry and investigate the abortion industry carefully and work together to issue indictments? Yes they should.

165. THE TIPPING POINT WAS REACHED LONG AGO.

166. Notwithstanding, the tipping point has now been reached what with 300,000,000+ killings.

167. I predict aggressive pro-life litigators will take on the task of digging up and harrowing these Planned Parenthood and other abortion killing fields to the tune of billions of dollars if not trillions.

168. Is it time for POTUS Trump and the DOJ to appoint a special counsel to investigate the abortion infanticide sterilization industry and its ties to the Democratic Party. The 300,000,000+ tipping point has been reached. Bring on the special counsel. I for one would welcome such an appointment.

169. LADIES, WHAT IS GENOCIDE AND WHAT IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY?

170. Genocide is the deliberate killing of a large group of people [babies], especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

171. Synonyms are

172. racial killing,

173. massacre,

174. wholesale slaughter,

175. mass slaughter,

176. wholesale killing,

177. indiscriminate killing,

178. mass murder,

179. mass homicide,

180. mass destruction,

181. annihilation,

182. extermination,

183. elimination,

184. liquidation,

185. eradication,

186. decimation,

187. butchery,

188. bloodbath,

189. bloodletting,

190. pogram,

191. ethnic cleansing,

192. Holocaust,

193. AMERICAN SKIRTS ARE NOT CLEAN CONSIDERING THE GENOCIDE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY KILLING FIELDS INVOLVING OUR NATIVE AMERICANS.

194. A few minute study and one is hard pressed to deny that America is charged with the largest genocide in world history – with the killing of several millions of Native Americans.

195. I ask you three ladies, what is the difference between killing off 70,000,000 indigenous Native American people and killing 300,000,000+ unborn babies – 50,000,000+ Black unborn babies and 50,000,000+ Hispanic and Latino unborn babies and 200,000,000+ Jewish, Native American, Asian American, Caucasian American unborn babies?

196. This same genocidal crime against humanity policy is continued today against Native Americans in the guise of Planned Parenthood and government sponsored abortions and sterilizations of Native Americans.

197. But again, forced or heavily encouraged sterilization is a discussion topic for another day and no doubt for litigation as well.

198.  “Historian David Stannard writes that by the year 1769, the destruction of the American aboriginal population down to just one-third of one percent of the total American population of 76 million was the most massive genocide in world history, and “there was, at last, almost no one left to kill.”[47] [Divide 76 million by 6 million and what do you get? You get 12.6 holocausts.]

199. “According to anthropologist Russell Thornton, for the American Indians “the arrival of the Europeans marked the beginning of a long holocaust, although it came not in ovens, as it did for the Jews.

200. “The fires that consumed North America Indians were the fevers brought on by newly encountered diseases, the flashes of settlers’ and soldiers’ guns, the ravages of “firewater,” the flames of villages and fields burned by the scorched-earth policy of vengeful Euro-Americans.”[61] 

201. “David Quammen likened colonial American practices toward Native Americans to those of Australia toward its aboriginal populations, calling both genocide.[62] 

202. “Some authors, including Holocaust scholar David Cesarani, have argued that United States government policies in furtherance of its so-called Manifest Destiny constituted genocide.[63]

203. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history#Americas

204. Does this genocidal crimes against humanity killing continue today in America, only in a different form and disguise?

205. Does it continue in the killing fields of abortion and now [i.e. Virginia] that of infanticide of Native American babies?

206. Does it continue in the killing fields of abortion and now infanticide of Black American babies?

207. Does it continue in the killing fields of abortion and now infanticide of Hispanic and Latino American babies?

208. Does it continue in the killing fields of abortion and now infanticides of Jewish and Native American, and Indian, and Asian and Caucasian unborn babies?

209. Does it continue in the forced and heavily encouraged sterilizations, again a topic for another day?

210. Sure it does.

211. AMERICAN SKIRTS ARE NOT CLEAN CONSIDERING THE GENOCIDE CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY KILLING FIELDS OF SLAVERY AND OUR BLACKS.

212. Historically, “estimates by Patrick Manning are that about 12 million slaves entered the Atlantic [slave] trade between the 16th and 19th century, but about 1.5 million died on board ship. About 10.5 million slaves arrived in the Americas. Besides the slaves who died on the Middle Passage, more Africans … died during the slave raids in Africa and forced marches to ports. Manning estimates that 4 million died inside Africa after capture, and many more died young. Manning’s estimate covers the 12 million who were originally destined for the Atlantic, as well as the 6 million destined for Asian slave markets and the 8 million destined for African markets.[68]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade#Human_toll

213.  LADIES, WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF GENOCIDE?

214.  Article 6 of the Rome Statute defines the crime of “genocide” as any of the following acts, committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or, religious group.

215.  It is killing members of a group.

216.  It is causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. See http://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/crimes-against-humanity.html

217.  WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY?

218.  Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Article 7 reads:

219.  For the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:

220.  Murder;

221.  Extermination;

222.  Enslavement;

223.  Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

224.  Imprisonment or

225.  Other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of fundamental rules of international law;

226.  Torture;

227.  Rape, 

228.  sexual slavery,

229.  enforced prostitution,

230.  forced pregnancy,

231.  enforced sterilization [a topic for another day],

232.  or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;

233.  Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on

234.  political,

235.  racial,

236.  national,

237.  ethnic,

238.  cultural,

239.  religious,

240.  gender as defined in paragraph 3,

241.  or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law,

242.  in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;

243.  Enforced disappearance of persons;

244.  The crime of apartheid;

245.  Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing

246.  great suffering,

247.  or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

248.  For the purpose of paragraph 1:

249.  ‘Attack directed against any civilian population’ means a course of conduct involving the multiple commission of acts referred to in paragraph 1 against any civilian population, pursuant to or in furtherance of a State [the USA] or organizational [Planned Parenthood and Democratic Party] policy to commit such attack;

250.  Elements of a Crime against Humanity. According to Article 7 (1) of the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity do not need to be linked to an armed conflict and can also occur in peacetime, similar to the crime of genocide.

251.  This same Article provides a definition of the crime that contains the following main elements:

252.  A physical element, which includes the commission of “any of the following acts”:

253.  Murder;

254.  Extermination;

255.  Enslavement;

256.  Deportation or forcible transfer of population;

257.  Imprisonment;

258.  Torture;

259.  Grave forms of sexual violence;

260.  Persecution;

261.  Enforced disappearance of persons;

262.  The crime of apartheid;

263.  Other inhumane acts.

264.  A contextual element: “when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population” [against Blacks? Against Hispanics? Against Native Americans? Of course.]; and

265.  A mental element: “with knowledge of the attack”

266.  The contextual element determines that crimes against humanity involve either large-scale violence in relation to the number of victims –

267.  [Does 300,000,000+ qualify? How about 50,000,000+? Sure they do.]

268.  [Is this the tipping point? Of course it is.] –

269.   or its extension over a broad geographic area (widespread), 

270.  or a methodical type of violence (systematic).

271.  This excludes random, accidental or isolated acts of violence. 

272.  [No one can argue that abortion is a random, or accidental, or isolated act of violence.]

273.  In addition, Article 7(2)(a) of the Rome Statute determines that crimes against humanity must be committed in furtherance of a State [USA] or organizational [Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party] policy to commit an attack.

274.  The plan or policy does not need to be explicitly stipulated or formally adopted and can, therefore, be inferred from the totality of the circumstances.

275.  In contrast with genocide, crimes against humanity do not [even] need to target a specific group.

276.  [There is no question but what Blacks are targeted and Hispanics and Latinos are targeted. There is no question but what Native Americans are targeted.]

277.  Instead, the victim of the attack can be any civilian population,

278.  regardless of its affiliation or identity.

279.  Another important distinction is that in the case of crimes against humanity, it is not necessary to prove that there is an overall specific intent.

280.  It suffices for there to be a simple intent to commit any of the acts listed,

281.  with the exception of the act of persecution, which requires additional discriminatory intent.

282.  The perpetrator must also act with knowledge of the attack against the civilian population and that his/her action is part of that attack.

283.   [1] For example, William Schabas, Unimaginable Atrocities – Justice, Politics, and Rights at the War Crimes Tribunals, Oxford University Press, 2012 – p. 51-53.

284.  [2] For example, M. Cherif Bassiouni, Crimes Against Humanity in International Criminal Law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1999, p.62

285.  SO LADIES, IT IS TIME.

286. THE TIPPING POINT HAS ARRIVED.

287. IT IS TIME TO PROHIBIT AND ELIMINATE ABORTION ALTOGETHER EXCEPT IN EXTREMELY RARE INSTANCES.

288. IT IS TIME TO RECOGNIZE ABORTION FOR WHAT IT IS – THE GENOCIDE AND CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY AND NOW INFANTICIDE KILLING AND MURDER OF OUR UNBORN?

289. YES IT IS.

290. IT IS TIME TO REMOVE THIS CANCEROUS TUMOR FROM AMERICA’S HEAD.

291. IT IS TIME TO REMOVE THIS ALBATROSS, THIS MILLSTONE, FROM AROUND THE NECKS OF THE BLACK AND HISPANIC AND OTHER COMMUNITIES?

292. It is time to do so:

293. Because it is the morally right thing to do.

294. Because it is the ethically right thing to do.

295. Because it is the legally and Constitutionally right thing to do.

296. Because it is the philosophically right thing to do.

297. Because it is the socially right thing to do.

298. Because it is the theologically/religiously right thing to do.

299. THE TIPPING POINT HAS BEEN REACHED AND IT IS TIME TO CUT OUT THIS CANCER AND ELIMINATE THIS SCOURGE.

300. NOW IS THE TIME.

301. LADIES, THIS DISCUSSION WOULD NOT BE COMPLETE UNLESS I TAKE A MINUTE AND PUT IT IN THE BROADER CONTEXT OF ITS THEOLOGICAL AND RELIGIOUS TEACHINGS.

302. Whether you are a believer or not, the Holy Scriptures teach that you and I are daughters and sons of heavenly parents.

303. Scriptures teach that we lived with our heavenly parents prior to our mortality and that we have always had and always will have our same general appearance, identity and personality.

304. We did not just flare into existence at conception or at some time during our gestation prior to our physical birth.

305. The birth process is the DNA driven process by which we came and our unborn come from heaven into mortality.

306. Scriptures teach that every unborn child is a spirit child of God, and like it or not you are  my sisters and I am your brother.

307. Your mortality is very short and usually too short, as is mine. 

308. Mortality is your very short God given “out of His presence” individually designed test of your and my character.

309. As such, it is easy to conclude that if we are in favor of, and if we knowingly foster and promote and perform, the killing of our spirit sisters and brothers, if we are in favor of killing and in fact are engaged in killing our unborn babies, we are failing our mortal test badly at the moment.

310. Notwithstanding, we still have some time left in mortality before our death.

311.  Scriptures testify that this life is the very short time to repent and prepare once again to meet our Heavenly Father and His Son when we die where we will be judged according to our thoughts, words, and actions.

312.  Luke 17:2 reads “It were better for him [or her after mortality] that a millstone were hanged about his [or her] neck, and he [or she be] cast into the sea, than that he [or she] should offend one of these little ones.”

313.  So how much does a millstone weigh? The weight of a biblical millstone is no light matter. It is as much as 1,500 kilograms or 3,300 pounds.

314.  Jesus the Christ is saying if we harm a little unborn baby girl or baby boy the penalty is far worse than death by drowning with a millstone of 3,300 pounds hanged about our neck!

315.  This thought is sobering and worth thinking deeply about as both moral construct and theological constraint.

316.  This is also of consequence given the fact that for those who take time and have eyes to see it is increasingly apparent that end times are upon the world and Christ will descend from his throne in heaven and return in fearsome great glory and power in the not too distant future to judge you and me and the world. 

317.  Read Revelation 19 and Matthew 25 if you are not afraid of a “Come to Jesus” sobering read.

318.  So because all of us have sinned and come short of the glory of God, ladies, we would all do well  to repent of our sins today.

319. So I ask you, Nancy, Naomi, and Leana, are you three women willing to leave as your legacy the fact that you and your liberal democrat policies and friends caused untold pain, suffering, and death to millions of unborn babies and their mothers and other family members and at the same time run the risk of having to explain your actions at the judgment bar of God when you die?  I think not. I think you are smarter than that.

320.  How many unborn baby killings/murders/deaths are we as a nation willing to stomach before we and your Liberal Democrat political party, and your Planned Parenthood Board, and your leadership officers and medical providers turn this around and eliminate altogether this 300,000,000+ scourge and 3,300 pound millstone around the neck of our nation altogether?

321.  IN SUMMARY.  

322.  THE TIPPING POINT OF 300,000,000+ UNBORN BABY KILLINGS HAS BEEN REACHED.

323.  THE TIPPING POINT OF 50,000,000+ UNBORN BLACK BABY KILLINGS HAS BEEN REACHED.

324.  THE TIPPING POINT OF 50,000,000+ UNBORN HISPANIC AND LATINO BABY KILLINGS HAS BEEN REACHED.

325.  I predict serious criminal prosecutions and civil class action suits are waiting in the wings.

326.  It is time to turn this matter around while there is still patience.

327.  It is time to voluntarily cease and desist committing abortions altogether except in extreme instances.

328.  It is time for great statesmen and stateswoman politicians and great lawyers and great law firms to stand up and be counted and take whatever government investigations, special counsels, criminal and civil case actions are necessary.

329.  IT IS TIME TO ELIMINATE THE SCOURGE OF ABORTION COMPLETELY.

330.  THE 300,000,000+ TIPPING POINT HAS BEEN REACHED.

331.  The horrific internet pictures and facts about abortion can no longer be kept in the closet.

332.  We are long past the time when the Democratic Political Party of abortion and the Planned Parenthood organizational policies and complicit medical and pharmaceutical providers can get away with killing/murdering/ripping apart/sending to landfills/flushing/using tiny body parts in bizaar experiments/severing spinal cords/ selling body parts/committing abortions with impunity and behind closed doors.

333.  300,000,000+ IS THE TIPPING POINT, LADIES.

334.  The abortion party and its gravy train is over whether you acknowledge this fact of unborn life or not.

335.  THESE ARE RATIONAL SOLUTIONS!

336.  IT IS PAST TIME for all Democrats if for no other reason than self-preservation to jettison their current abhorrent abortion policy and eliminate all abortion except in extremely rare cases.

337.  IT IS PAST TIME for all Americans to ‘LOVE’ all of our unborn babies regardless of ethnicity, to “LOVE” our precious little ones who are incapable of protecting themselves.

338.  IT IS PAST TIME for Planned Parenthood and all abortion providers to stop this abhorrent practice of abortion and instead focus their treasure and energies on adoption.

339.  IT IS PAST TIME for POTUS to declare a national holiday of freedom and independence from abortion – to celebrate the freedom and right to life of our defenseless children, born and unborn.

340.  IT IS PAST TIME for Congress to pass a WE LOVE AND PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, BORN AND UNBORN amendment to the U.S. Constitution based on  these inalienable rights and principles:

340.1.                  We LOVE and TREASURE our CHILDREN, born and unborn.

340.2.                  Each of our children, born or unborn, is guaranteed her or his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

340.3.                  No person or organization may traffic in or harm our children, born or unborn without consequence.

340.4.                  No person may commit or perform an abortion or infanticide, or accept remuneration of any kind for an abortion or infanticide.

340.5.                  No abortion may be performed on our unborn children, except as agreed to by the mother in the case of incest, rape, or to protect the health of the mother.

340.6.                  Each and every child is to be brought to term and where the mother elects not to care for or is incapable of caring for the child, that child is to be placed for adoption.

341.  IT IS PAST TIME for Congress to strengthen and approve criminal statutes making it illegal for anyone to traffic in children, or perform or take or give remuneration of any kind for an abortion except as approved by the mother,  in the case of incest, rape, or to protect the health of the mother, under penalty of a fine of $X and imprisonment of not less than Y years.

THE TIPPING POINT HAS BEEN REACHED, NANCY, NAOMI, AND LEANA.

IT IS TIME TO CEASE ALL ABORTIONS EXCEPT IN EXTREMELY RARE INSTANCES.

Best personal regards, Richard W. Linford r.linford@comcast.net

Sarah Sanders how about you and POTUS Trump using part of your press conference time to instruct the nation with some kind of visual counter about how many promises have been kept to BLACKS and HISPANICS and OTHERS including progress on the wall – e.g. with video?

Sarah Sanders, Barrel and I have been thinking about your press conferences. We suggest that you orchestrate your press conferences more often than not to focus on how POTUS Trump is solving real problems for BLACKS and HISPANICS and LATINOS and WOMEN and OTHERS – documenting specifically how POTUS Trump is keeping his promises to us – and in the process seldom call on Jim Acosta and those who carry a negative trash agenda. Why continue to give them an international forum so they can argue and bash you and POTUS Trump? Jim has opened his mouth enough already. Others are of the same ilk. You know who they are. We are tired of the democrat negative, negative, negative. Call on others. You are remiss to call on him. And while you are at it you can show on the visual counter

POTUS Trump promises kept? 300

Democrat promises kept? 0.

While you are at it you may want to get a copy of my little book about FLOTUS – MELANIA TRUMP Honoring FLOTUS: The highly intelligent, pleasant, nice, decent, First Lady of The United States of America – Kindle Edition Buy my new book at amazon at https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B074G43CWC?pf_rd_p=c2945051-950f-485c-b4df-15aac5223b10&pf_rd_r=S5G4RFHSNP9N2P6CE8TG


Back on problem solving, think about it, Sarah, A HOUSE CAN BE 3D PRINTED FOR UNDER $4,000. THIS IS A MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH THAT CAN HELP THE HOMELESS AS WELL THOSE IMPACTED BY DISASTROUS TORNADO, FLOOD, HURRICANE. Click here. https://www.fastcompany.com/40538464/this-house-can-be-3d-printed-for-4000


In the meantime while POTUS Trump is solving world problems and while you are keeping us up-date on how POTUS Trump is keeping his promises, let’s marinalize if not jettison Jim Acosta and any others like him who are trashing POTUS Trump. 


POTUS TRUMP is a builder. He ought to take a look at this 3D house printing technology. Think of what this technology means in the aftermath of a major disaster. Think of what this means world-wide. Think about what this can mean to the homeless everywhere. Maybe the wall can be printed.


Again, how about using part of your press conference to focus on positive things we can do to solve the millennial problems that plague us, Sarah? Let’s make a difference?


Again, how about cutting Jim Acosta and others like him off at the pockets and not calling on them? Jim is one of the wolves in the wood pile. He is a light weight. His continual negative diatribes have been inane. He is wasting your time and ours. He has no credentials and no business monopolizing your time and that of the nation.


Let’s solve some problems and show the nation how POTUS Trump keeps his promises – including building the wall. Let’s be specific about promises kept. Let’s keep track of how many of them have been kept with a running visual counter.

Image result for house printing 3d printer

BARREL & PORK image and blog post. by Richard W. Linford

(c) Copyright 2018 Linford Corporation

All domestic and international rights reserved

     And while you are at it Sarah and POTUS Trump, keep in mind these facts about ABORTION and ELIMINATE IT. FOCUS ON ADOPTION.

IN THE U.S. ALONE, 300,000,000+ UNBORN BABIES HAVE BEEN SURGICALLY AND CHEMICALLY MURDERED, KILLED, DISMEMBERED, FLUSHED, DISSOLVED, POISONED, RIPPED APART, SENT TO LAND FILLS SINCE ROE v. WADE, 50,000,000+ BLACK BABIES, 50,000,000+ HISPANIC BABIES, 200,000,000+ JEWISH, NATIVE AMERICAN, ASIAN AMERICAN, CAUCASIAN BABIES KILLED.

OUR CRY SHOULD BE ADOPTION NOT ABORTION.

WHY WOULD ANYONE VOTE DEMOCRAT, FOR THAT MATTER SPECIFICALLY WHY WOULD BLACKS AND HISPANICS VOTE DEMOCRAT AS LONG AS THE DEMOCRATS HAVE THEIR BLACK AND HISPANIC GENOCIDAL ABORTION POLICIES INCLUDING THEIR MOST RECENT LATE TERM ABORTION AND EVEN POST BIRTH ABORTION POLICIES? Richard William “Wilberforce” Linford.

WILL POTUS TRUMP SAY THE FOLLOWING SATURDAY? BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, POTUS Trump is going to make a major announcement from the Oval Office on Saturday. What do you think he is going to say?


PORK, I don’t speak for POTUS Trump but I know what I hope he says.


What is that BARREL?


1. I hope he lays the blame for the deaths by illegals and the deaths from drugs coming across the border and the economic chaos and personal loss caused by illegals stealing jobs from Hispanics and Blacks especially and the immense cost to the nation that these illegals are costing the American tax payer squarely on the democrats and in particularly on Nancy and Chuck.


2. I hope he makes it clear that nobody, and I mean nobody, is against immigration as long as all who come into our country come in by the front door and are vetted and e-verified.


3. I hope he declares a military emergency to protect the country and tasks the Army Corps of Engineers to pull all stops and build the wall with help from contractors and have it completed within the next 3 months.


4. I hope he shares the statistics about what is happening, how many are coming across, how many are criminals, how many are trafficking in children and women, the rapes and injuries to so many women and children, the fact that the caravans are made up of young men mainly who make up a military force. 


5. I hope he assigns the military to the border and seals the border as of Saturday afternoon.


6. I hope in all this he doesn’t even give Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pelosi the time of day because of their perfidy. These are people who voted for closed borders in the past how many times and now will not provide him with a measly $6 billion to protect the country simply because he was elected and their flawed candidate was not.


7. I hope he reopens the government at the same time. The time for all negotiation is long past. The democrats have dug their own grave by failing to protect the country. Now they can lie in it.

Potus Trump to N. Pelosi. You lose. BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, did Nancy lose? Yes she did, PORK, and big time. POTUS Trump pulled her plug and refused to let her and her entourage take military jets. Blocked them at the airport a hour before take off. A comeuppance for her amazingly rude behavior in trying to block POTUS from delivering his State of the Union message wherein he would lay all blame for the government shutdown and the deaths by illegal aliens and the drug deaths from drugs crossing the border off on Nancy and Chuck and the democrats. Prevented her from leaving before the second paycheck to government employees is due. Now she has no excuse for not negotiating a settlement. If she doesn’t perform and give POTUS Trump his wall, she will be hung with the responsibility for denying the government employees their paychecks. The American people are smart. They know she is the fly in the ointment.

PORK, POTUS Trump can deliver his State of the Union from the Senate. He can deliver his State of the Union on television and he will reach 50 million people with his message which is that the democrats do not care to protect the American people, that the democrats do not care for the government workers.

Mexico murders. Build the wall.

BARREL, Howard Stern and Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer need to read this article which top notes the level of violence that further makes the case for a wall – and not a steel one that can be sawed through.

1.      “In an area known for its gruesome violence, 20 bodies were found near the Mexican border city of Nuevo Laredo on Wednesday.

2.      “Most all of them, 17, were burned.

3.      “The discovery, reported by Reuters, marks the latest in grisly murders that have plagued the northern state of Tamaulipas – next to the U.S. border – in large part because of drug cartels.

4.      “The city of Nuevo Laredo itself borders the Rio Grande, directly across the river from Laredo, Texas.

5.      “Hundreds of bodies have been found in unmarked graves over the years. And while much of the crime is blamed on warring cartels, some of it also is believed to have occurred at the hands of the Mexican Marines.

6.      “More than 200 Marines were dispatched to the area to try to control violence in the area.

7.      “But after gunmen attacked three Marine patrols last year, the violence surged.

8.      “And the Marines apparently retaliated, attacking people suspected of having been involved in the ambush, according to the San Antonio Express-News.

9.      “Aside from the frequent discovery of mutilated bodies in the area, more than 5,000 people are missing in Tamaulipas, the newspaper reports.

10.  “Violence in the area soared after the Sinaloa cartel, which had been led by Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, established its presence there to control smuggling routes between the Nueva Laredo region and U.S., a key drug trafficking spot along the border.

11.  “But after Guzman was extradited to the U.S. in 2017 to stand trial in New York, the cartel split into factions that engaged in bloody battles to wrest control of the lucrative route.

12.  “A 2018 Congressional Research Service report noted: “A new transnational criminal organization, Cartel Jalisco-New Generation, which split from Sinaloa in 2010, has sought to become dominant with brutally violent techniques.”

13.  “The report added: “In 2017, Mexico reached its highest number of total intentional homicides in a year, exceeding, by some counts, 29,000 murders.

14.  “In the 2017-2018 election period that opened in September 2017 and ran through June 12, 2018, 114 candidates and politicians were killed allegedly by crime bosses and others in an effort to intimidate public office holders.”

15.  “Elizabeth Llorente is Senior Reporter for FoxNews.com, and can be reached at Elizabeth.Llorente@Foxnews.com. Follow her on Twitter @Liz_Llorente.  https://www.foxnews.com/world/mexican-police-find-20-bodies-most-burned-close-to-u-s-border

Chuck & Nancy lied to the American people. Time for negotiation is over. Fund and build the wall.

BARREL, what is your take on the President’s speech last night?


PORK, 

1.      POTUS Trump gave a great speech.

2.      He gave a concise, compassionate speech.

3.      He pinned the tail on the Donkey where it belongs.

4.      The democrats are responsible for open borders and the carnage derivative of drugs, human trafficking, other crimes of theft and burglary, extreme social expense and redistribution of wealth, destruction of jobs and injury to the legitimate Black and Hispanic communities.

5.      The democrats are responsible for the invasion of America.

6.      5-6 billion, indeed 27 billion, is a pittance compared to the killings, rapes, expense, and overall damage done by the illegal aliens and the cartels.

7.      All must come through the front door and be vetted and e-verified.

8.      Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi lied to the American people while POTUS Trump told the truth.

9.      There is a military, humanitarian, and social expense crisis at the Southern border.

10.  Chuck and Nancy voted to secure the border. They voted to build walls. Now they have flip flopped simply because POTUS Trump is president.

11.  The time for negotiations is over.

12.  Note to POTUS Trump: Declare the national emergency and build the wall now.

By dog-in-the-manger trying to prevent POTUS Trump from building the wall, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are either lying or don’t know what they are talking about. BARREL & PORK.

PORK, POTUS Trump made his case last night from the Oval Office. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are either lying or don’t know what they are talking about when they refuse to fund the wall. Walls work. Annually, the wall will prevent 200,000 to 1.7 million from invading the country. It will press all who want to enter to do so through the front door where they can be vetted and e-verified. Why should POTUS TRUMP declare an emergency and assign the military to build the wall today?


BARREL, he needs to do so today. Here are 24 clear and indisputable reasons why we need the wall immediately. Some of these reasons appear to be redundant. Not so. Each reason is rational and worthy of its own thoughtful explanation. The wall is for the safety of America. It does and will


1. Prevent crime.

2. Prevent drugs.

3. Prevent between 200,000 to 1,700,000 illegals from entering the U.S. annually.

4. Prevent the massive social services effort and expenses required to pay for illegals.

5. Prevent terrorists.

6. Prevent military and non-military invasion of the U.S.

7. Prevent abuse of the rule of law and order.

8. Prevent caravans from forming and moving to the border.

9. Prevent night or daytime illegal crossings hard to detect by border patrol.

10. Prevent women and children and families from making the horrific journey through deserts and cartel territories without food, shelter and security.

11. Prevent the raping of and other violence to women and children who are gulled by traffickers or their own misinformation into making the journey.

12. Prevent smugglers from lying and taking great sums of money and property from families and individuals to smuggle them across the border.

13. Prevent deaths and injuries and illness of those making the journey by discouraging dangerous migration.

14. Prevent the prosecution and separation of those coming to America by funneling them through ports of entry and U.S. embassies in their own countries.

15. Prevent human trafficking and prostitution of those making the journey.

16. Prevent infiltration of America by cartels, gangs, drug dealers,  human traffickers. and non-U.S. military forces.

17. Prevent vehicles and trucks from crossing our borders illegally.

18. Prevent those coming, slowing them down, so border patrol has time to apprehend them.

19. Prevent bringing significant supplies and military equipment and dangerous materials into the U.S. covertly.

20. Prevent damage to the environment by vehicles crossing the border illegally.

21. Prevent pollution and littering and tearing up of plant life and disturbing drainage and harming wild and domestic animals.

22. Prevent invasion of private homes and property and businesses along the border.

23. Prevent harm, the ravages of theft and burglary and violence, to individuals and families and business owners and businesses and animals along the border.

24. Prevent criminal activity and violence, drugs and burglary and theft, from spilling over from the Mexico cities along the border which are ranked as the most dangerous cities in the world.


Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer are either lying or don’t know what they are talking about when they refuse to fund the wall. Walls work. BARREL & PORK.

Honor POTUS Trump and FLOTUS Trump! BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, I have come up with this three part description honoring POTUS Trump and FLOTUS Trump, and this same description is a blueprint for every country leader in the world.

What is it, PORK?

BARREL, if POTUS Trump and FLOTUS Trump continue on track, keeping their promises to us, building the wall, stopping the invasion, generating jobs, lowering taxes, prosecuting those who have abused their elected or paid offices, history will show that POTUS Trump and FLOTUS Trump are two of the greatest most honorable national and world leaders.

1. FREE. These two great and honorable leaders are focused [including a strong military] on helping us enjoy INDEPENDENCE AND FREEDOM – freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom to travel, freedom to bear arms, freedom of religion – letting the people worship how where or what they may so long as they don’t force others to worship as they do.

2. SAFE. These two great and honorable leaders are focused on helping us and our children and unborn be SAFE – safe from terrorism, safe from crime, safe from invasion, safe from war, safe from abortion, safe from human trafficking, safe from predator politicians, safe from physical or emotional or intellectual or sexual or other abuse.

3. PROSPEROUS. These two great and honorable leaders are focused on helping us be PROSPEROUS with adequate health care, education, entrepreneurial opportunities, manufacturing in country, minimal taxation, and jobs.

BREXIT TODAY NOT TOMORROW. EVERY COUNTRY SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT, FREE, SAFE, AND PROSPEROUS. BARREL & PORK

  1. What do you think of BREXIT, PORK?

    BARREL, every country should be free and independent. I have 52 REASONS Why the United Kingdom should leave the European Union and regain its “INDEPENDENCE,” “FREEDOM,” and “SOVEREIGNTY” AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE, and if the current PM won’t or is incapable of making it happen, then vote in a new one who will help the people be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS, BARREL.

    1. ANGER WITH PRIME MINISTERS. The British people are angry with David Cameron and Theresa May because they have not been firm in support of the INDEPENDENCE, SOVEREIGNTY, FREEDOM, SAFETY, and PROSPERITY of the British people. Their compromises are problematic to say the least.
    2. ANGER WITH PRIME MINISTERS. Tensions among the British people are at a breaking point regarding the wave of asylum seekers and migrants invading from the Middle East and Africa.
    3. CONTROL. Leaving most if not all onerous control by EU institutions is a primary reason for leaving the EU. Freedom to choose for oneself no matter the consequences is at the heart of BREXIT independence.
    4. CONTROL. The idea that laws governing British citizens are decided by politicians from other nations is troubling at best. The EU polygamous relationships between the countries tends to be counterproductive.
    5. COST OF BELONGING TO THE EU. The budget contribution for the EU is onerous and without commensurate benefits.
    6. CUSTOMS. Remaining in the EU customs union is problematical given EU customs regulations.
    7. ECONOMICS. Economics is a reason. Britain’s privileged position is under threat from Germany and France and others. Contrary to some opinions, competitiveness as between European “states” is often heightened and not mitigated by EU involvement.
    8. ECONOMICS. Financial and economic regulations are onerous.
    9. ECONOMICS. Non-euro currencies (e.g. the pound) are at risk.
    10. ECONOMICS. There are limitations to an EU single market.
    11. ECONOMICS. There is lack of financial control and autonomy.
    12. EU BUREAUCRACY. The European Union’s excessive “German and Belgium and French” globalist bureaucracy is problematical and often antithetical to the values and interests of the UK.
    13. EU CONTROL. The European Union is highly controlling.
    14. EU CONTROLS FRONTIERS. Frontiers of the state of Britain, including fishing waters, are curtailed at a European level.
    15. EU AS GLOBALIST INTENTIONAL DESTRUCTION OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTIES. UK National sovereignty is marginalized, minimized, jeopardized by globalist agendas. Nationalism is a virtue not a vice as globalists would have one believe.
    16. EU DYSFUNCTION. The European Union is highly dysfunctional.
    17. EU EURO. The common euro currency threatens the pound.
    18. EU IS EXCESSIVELY BUREAUCRACTIC.
    19. EU LACK OF DEMOCRATIC ACCOUNTABILITY. The European Union’s lack of democratic accountability is discomfiting.
    20. EU SUPERSTATE. The British people are suspicious of a political union with the rest of Europe because the thrust and agenda is toward a “global” and “globalist” “European superstate” including an EU military, ostensibly to compete with the United States, or to counter threats from those within or without the EU.
    21. EXPENSE. The expense of participation is onerous without commensurate benefits.
    22. HISTORICAL CONNECTIONS. UK has historical connections with many other parts of the world from its past empire and commonwealth relationships and is quite capable of making its own treaties and trade arrangements.
    23. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. Asylum seekers are not remaining in the first EU country they enter as promised.
    24. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. Immigration is increasing while paying lip service to its reduction. The immigration waves have all the earmarks of an invasion of the west.
    25. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. Immigration policy is unclear and favors open borders, and unvetted cross-country movement, each of which threaten Great Britain’s identity as a people.
    26. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. Remaining in the EU Single Market and submitting to EU requirements mandating free movement of people from anywhere in the EU without careful vetting is extremely risky, causing more problems than it is worth and makes no sense.
    27. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. The border-free Schengen area is problematic to say the least. It comprises 26 European states that have abolished passports and all forms of border control. With the movement of peoples unchecked this a recipe for terrorist and military disaster.
    28. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. The idea and practice of free movement across borders throughout Europe is fraught with perils including conflicts with cultures and religions and economic interests.
    29. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. The wave of asylum seekers – the EU’s open borders plans to resettle hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees from the Middle East and Africa – is disturbing and destabilizing.
    30. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. An invasion of vast numbers of people is moving uncontrolled without proper vetting or control across the continent, with the result that many are taking over enclaves in the UK.
    31. IMMIGRATION/MIGRATION/INVASION. Limits on the number of migrants are discussed but are not implemented.
    32. INDEPENDENCE. Leaving the EU means the UK will jettison the globalist agenda and be more nearly independent and will take responsibility for its own economy, security, and laws.
    33. LANGUAGE BARRIERS. Language difficulties are significant given the unchecked immigration/migration/invasion.
    34. PRINCIPLES. No deal is indeed better than a bad deal. No deal, if it comes to that, simply means Great Britain will be independent.
    35. REGULATIONS. Standardization of everything from labor regulations to the size of olive oil containers threatens Europe with persistent low growth and high unemployment.
    36. REGULATIONS. Article 50 of the 2009 Lisbon Treaty required official notification of the EU by the UK government, and PM May triggered the article on March 29, 2017.
    37. REGULATIONS. Disentangling the UK from EU regulations though difficult is doable and contrary to some opinions is not a major problem in “settling the status of millions of UK citizens residing in the EU and non-EU citizens in the UK”and although it will require present and future UK-EU security cooperation, the final withdrawal deal approved “by a super majority of EU countries” has bearing on the EU and is irrelevant to the European Parliament.” Whoever permits the provision requiring a “super majority approval,” as an excuse for preventing Great Britain from withdrawing, deserves significant opprobrium.
    38. REGULATIONS. EU laws and regulations are onerous. Independence, indeed separateness, and the common law, is a primary source of strength of Great Britain.
    39. REGULATIONS. Opt-outs have failed to protect UK interests.
    40. REGULATIONS. Reduction of EU regulations has not been forthcoming.
    41. REGULATIONS. There is limited ability to negotiate with the EU.
    42. SOVEREIGNTY. “Ever closer union with EU “states”” is antithetical to British independence and sovereignty.
    43. SOVEREIGNTY. Destruction of national sovereignty by the globalist agenda has been a result of getting involved with the EU.
    44. SOVEREIGNTY. Reclaiming independence and sovereignty is a primary reason for leaving the EU.
    45. STATUS of the UK. The UK did not lose the first or second world war and was not invaded during the second world war either. The UK has a unique history having just recently ceded control over large areas of the world. With its penchant for industry, its economic system, and its common law system, it is destined for continued greatness, which is best realized by being independent and by not ceding its options to the EU governing board comprised of Germany, France, Belgium and others.
    46. STATUS of the UK. The UK was not invaded during second world war.
    47. STATUS of the UK. The UK was victorious in second world war. Now territorial ambitions of other actors, including those who lost the second world war, appear to be realized by so-called “peaceful migration” which by any other definition is simple invasion.
    48. TERRORISM. EU nationals traveled to Syria to fight with the self-proclaimed Islamic State and now many have returned with their radical ideas and terrorist activities thereby making the UK vulnerable — jeopardizing the safety and security of British citizens.
    49. TERRORISM. Knife attacks and car and truck attacks in Great Britain have increased in number and this increase can be traced to the immigration/migration/invasion policies of the EU.
    50. TERRORISM. Terrorist attacks in Europe have not been eliminated as promised.
    51. TRADE. There is inability to integrate with the European Coal and Steel Community.
    52. TRADE. There is inability to integrate with the European Economic and Cultural Community. Again, BARREL, Great Britain, and for that matter each country, needs to be independent, sovereign, and free of entanglements.
    53. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brexit-means?gclid=CjwKCAiA0O7fBRASEiwAYI9QAu7PR4EDTGCeR0OXy7BKq2TCh0nRip1v2UoGbcJo8Vi2MSEecFvlNRoCzuMQAvD_BwE

What 5 Steps can POTUS Trump take to guarantee he will only serve one term? BARREL & PORK

PORK, what steps can POTUS Trump take to guarantee that he will be a one term president?


BARREL, I think POTUS Trump can guarantee that he will be a one term president if he fails to keep us FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS, if he fails to clearly show the nation all the promises he has kept. 


[YOU MAY WANT TO BUY RICHARD LINFORD’S NEW BOOK “RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER?]

In particular, he can guarantee that he will be a one term president simply by taking all or some combination of the following five steps:


STEP 1. IMMIGRATION. Fail to control the border and stop the invasion and fail to build the wall as he promised. 


STEP 2. ABORTION. Fail to protect the BLACK, HISPANIC, JEWISH, NATIVE AMERICAN, ASIAN AMERICAN, CAUCASIAN AMERICAN unborn as he promised.** 


3. JOBS AND TAXES. Fail to keep front and center the message to BLACKS and HISPANICS and ALL OTHER AMERICAS that he is helping them with jobs and tax breaks as he promised. 


4. RULE OF LAW. Fail to indict and prosecute and bring to justice those including rich and famous who have aggrandized and enriched themselves by prostituting their elected or appointed offices as he promised. 


5. MESSAGE. Fail to show and teach the nation’s Republican and Democrat WOMEN, MEN, YOUTH, BLACKS, HISPANICS, JEWISH AMERICANS, NATIVE AMERICANS, ASIAN AMERICANS, CAUCASIAN AMERICANS all of the promises he has kept and the immense good he has done during his term in office.


** Since democrat founded Roe v Wade in 1973 more than 300,000,000+ unborn American babies have been surgically and chemically murdered, killed, flushed, sent to land fills, sold for body parts, aborted: 50,000,000+ of the 300,000,000+ were BLACK babies. 50,000,000+ were HISPANIC babies.


[YOU MAY WANT TO BUY RICHARD LINFORD’S NEW BOOK “RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER?]

BARREL & PORK IMAGE AND POSTS

(C) Copyright 2018

Linford Corporation

r.linford@comcast.net

FREE BOOK RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER? BARREL & PORK

To sponsor Richard W. Linford’s new book RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER? BARREL & PORK are giving away a free copy here below.  An ebook copy can be purchased for $4.95 on amazon.com by clicking here:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07KPLTMDC/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1542662387&sr=1-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Jeff+Sessions

RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER?

Was AG Sessions’ recusal falsely engineered to the extreme harm of Jeff Sessions and POTUS TRUMP? Yes.  Should Acting AG Whitaker recuse himself? No.

Richard W Linford

RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER? 

Was the AG Sessions’ recusal falsely engineered to the extreme harm of Jeff Sessions and POTUS TRUMP? Yes. Should Acting AG Whitaker recuse himself? No.

© Copyright 2018

Linford Corporation

All domestic and international rights reserved

Foreword. Some accept Jeff Sessions’ recusal at face value while such should not be the case. Judging Jeff Sessions’ recusal by what politicians and political groups did and do, by the effect of their votes and actions, not simplistically by what they say, suggests that AG Sessions’ recusal was  engineered to the extreme harm of POTUS TRUMP.  Acting AG Matthew Whitaker would be remiss to recuse himself and POTUS Trump would be remiss to let him.

RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! OF MATTHEW WHITAKER?

Was the AG Sessions’ recusal falsely engineered to the extreme harm of Jeff Sessions and POTUS TRUMP? Yes. Should Acting AG Whitaker recuse himself? No.

 

  1. RECUSAL DEFINED?
  2. “Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, is the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. “
  3. https://www.google.com/search?q=recusal&oq=Recusal&aqs=chrome.0.0l6.1520j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification
  4. Another definition. “The verb recuse is used in legal situations and means to remove someone from a position of judicial authority, either a judge or a member of a jury, who is deemed unacceptable to judge, usually because of some bias.” “The Latin recusare, meaning “to refuse” is the place to start in the history of recuse. You can recuse someone else, but also yourself.
  5. https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/recuse
  6. Recusal “… means to disqualify oneself as a judge in a particular case. It means to remove oneself from participation in a situation in order to avoid a conflict of interest.”
  7. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recuse

 

  1. CONFLICT OF INTEREST DEFINED?
  2. A conflict of interest is “a situation in which the concerns or aims of two different parties are incompatible.” A conflict of interest is a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.” https://www.google.com/search?ei=C0TrW_HRAfHBjgTT66LoBQ&q=conflict+of+interest&oq=conflict+of+interest&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i20i263j0j0i20i263j0l7.6693.9500..9771…0.0..0.125.2180.1j19……0….1..gws-wiz…….35i39j0i131j0i67j0i131i67.DJJsVT6g4OM
  3. A conflict of interest “is a situation in which an individual has competing interests or loyalties. Conflicts of interest involve dual relationships; one person in one relationship and a relationship in another situation.
  4. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-a-conflict-of-interest-give-me-some-examples-398192

 

  1. HOW ARE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST RESOLVED?
  2. Through recusal. Either a person recuses himself or herself, as in the U.S. Supreme Court justices, or a person can be compelled to recuse himself by virtue of administrative decree, edict, order, command, or injunction.

 

  1. Through waiver. The opposition can waive any conflict of interest.

 

  1. Through contract. Parties can agree to terms of a recusal.

 

  1. Through insurance. The party with the alleged conflict of interest can provide a pledge or insurance guaranteeing he or she will not permit earlier or present conflicts to make a difference in decisions or actions.

 

  1. The party with the alleged conflict of interest can refuse to accept a recusal, thereby setting the stage for litigation of the matter before a court of law or administrative judicial body.

 

 

  1. WHAT ARE JUDICIAL EXAMPLES OF RECUSAL?
  2. Clarence Thomas recused himself in a case involving Virginia because his son attended Virginia Military Institute.
  3. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Conner recused herself from participation in telecommunications cases. Why? Because she owned stock in telecommunications companies.
  4. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer recused himself from participation in insurance related matters because of a connection he had to Lloyd’s of London.
  5. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist recused himself from several cases Arizona attorney James Brosnahan argued before the Supreme Court because James Brosnahan gave testimony against Justice Rehnquist during his confirmation hearing.
  6. Three Supreme Court Justices – Scalia, Souter, and Thomas recused themselves in a death penalty appeal because they knew the victim’s son.
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification. Legal Citations provided at this URL.

 

  1. WHAT ARE JUDICIAL EXAMPLES OF REFUSAL TO RECUSE?
  2. Justice Hugo Black did not recuse himself in the Jewell Ridge Coal case.
  3. Even though in the past he opined that arrests were valid, Associate Justice Rehnquist refused to recuse himself in a case involving validity of certain arrests.
  4. Justice Scalia refused to recuse himself in a case involving VP Dick Cheney as a party even though Justice Scalia was a participant in a hunting trip with Mr. Cheney.
  5. Justice Scalia refused to recuse himself in a Pledge of Allegiance-related case, notwithstanding Justice Scalia stated his view that a party’s claims had no merit.
  6. There are a number of other federal cases where judges refused to recuse themselves, one involving federal judge Leon Higginbotham, one involving Paul Borman, one involving Michael Mukasey.
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_disqualification.  Legal Citations provided at this URL.

 

  1. RECUSAL IN ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES?
  2. The concept of recusal applies to administrative agencies.
  3. Perhaps the most famous recusal to-date is that of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
  4. He recused himself from matters relative to “Russian interference in the 2016 election.”
  5. Sessions claims he did not give up his responsibility to serve as the nation’s law enforcement officer.
  6. Sessions claims he merely ceded control of “Russia investigations” to Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
  7. https://www.romper.com/p/what-does-recuse-mean-jeff-sessions-is-stepping-away-from-russia-investigations-41995

 

  1. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE REGULATION MR. SESSIONS RELIED UPON AS LEGAL SUPPORT FOR HIS RECUSAL?
  2. He relied on Department of Justice regulation: Title 28, Chapter I, Section 45.2, Code of Federal Regulation, title “Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.”
  3. 2(a) and (b) read:
  4. (a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:
  5. (1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or
  6. (2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.
  7. (b) An employee assigned to or otherwise participating in a criminal investigation or prosecution who believes that his participation may be prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section shall report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his supervisor at the level of section chief or the equivalent or higher. If the supervisor determines that a personal or political relationship exists between the employee and a person or organization described in paragraph (a) of this section, he shall relieve the employee from participation unless he determines further, in writing, after full consideration of all the facts and circumstances, that:
  8. (1) The relationship will not have the effect of rendering the employee’s service less than fully impartial and professional; and
  9. (2) The employee’s participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest likely to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution.
  10. ( c) For the purposes of this section:
  11. (1) Political relationship means a close identification with an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization, arising from service as a principal adviser thereto or a principal official thereof; and
  12. (2) Personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality. An employee is presumed to have a personal relationship with his father, mother, brother, sister, child and spouse. Whether relationships (including friendships) of an employee to other persons or organizations are “personal” must be judged on an individual basis with due regard given to the subjective opinion of the employee.
  13. (d) This section pertains to agency management and is not intended to create rights enforceable by private individuals or organizations.

 

  1. DID MR. SESSIONS COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE REGULATION UPON WHICH HE RELIED? ANSWER: IT APPEARS THAT HE DID NOT.
  2. Paragraph b) of the DOJ regulation reads: An employee assigned to or otherwise participating in a criminal investigation or prosecution who believes that his participation may be prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section shall report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his supervisor at the level of section chief or the equivalent or higher.
  3. Sessions was obligated to “report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his supervisor [POTUS Trump].” Did he do this? No he did not.

 

  1. UNLIKE RECUSAL IN THE MATTER OF A SUPREME COURT OR OTHER JUDGE WHEREIN THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY WILL OR WILL NOT RECUSE THEMSELVES, WHOSE CHOICE WAS IT WHETHER MR. SESSIONS RECUSE HIMSELF OR NOT?
  2. According to the DOJ regulation Mr. Sessions relied upon, the choice as to whether Mr. Sessions should recuse himself belonged to POTUS Trump.
  3. Why? Because The DOJ regulation reads:
  4. If the supervisor determines that a personal or political relationship exists between the employee and a person or organization described in paragraph (a) of this section, he shall relieve the employee from participation unless he determines further, in writing, after full consideration of all the facts and circumstances, that:
  5. (1) The relationship will not have the effect of rendering the employee’s service less than fully impartial and professional; and
  6. (2) The employee’s participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest likely to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution.
  7. Who was Mr. Sessions’ supervisor?
  8. Answer: POTUS Trump.
  9. Again, whose choice was it whether Mr. Sessions recuse himself?
  10. Answer: POTUS Trump’s choice.
  11. Session arbitrarily decided to and then announced that he was recusing himself.

 

  1. WHAT DIFFERENCE DID MR. SESSIONS’ RECUSAL MAKE?
  2. Sessions said it was “absurd” to suggest that his recusal would render him unable to manage the Department of Justice?
  3. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/13/heres-the-regulation-that-sessions-said-required-him-to-quit-probe.html
  4. Was it absurd to suggest that his recusal would render him unable to manage the Department of Justice?
  5. Was he in fact able to manage the Department of Justice?
  6. The answer is no.
  7. He was only able to manage a part of the Department of Justice.
  8. For his work combating gangs, dealing with drug and immigration issues, and DOJ related matters other than “Russians involved in influencing the U.S. election,” Mr. Sessions is
  9. He focused his administration on “rolling back the work of the Obama administration in liberalizing drug laws, reducing mass incarceration, and ending federal monitoring of troubled police departments.
  10. With all the good work he did, however, did his recusal make it impossible for him to manage and direct matters pertaining to the “Russian interference in the 2016 election”?
  11. Did his recusal make it –
  12. (1) impossible for him to manage and direct and call grand juries and investigate and indict and prosecute those involved in “Russian” connections to the democratic party including the Clintons and the Podestas? and
  13. (2) impossible for him to manage and direct and call grand juries and investigate and indict and prosecute those involved in “Russian” connections to Hillary Clinton including investigating whether she misused her office and colluded with the Russians and took vast sums of money from the Russians and others as campaign funds or otherwise in return for influence, whether she paid a million dollars for the “Russian dossier, “whether she took control of democratic party funds to the harm of Bernie Sanders, whether she colluded with others, including perhaps then POTUS Obama, to damage a sitting president POTUS Trump by using ill-gotten FISA warrants?
  14. Did his recusal make it (3) impossible for him to manage and direct and call grand juries and investigate and indict and prosecute those involved in the “Russian” elements of the Mueller investigation(s)?
  15. His recusal made such impossible. There is no indication Mr. Sessions provided management and direction to matters pertaining to “Russian interference in the 2016 election.”
  16. This was left to Assistant AG Rod Rosenstein who had oversight for the “Russian investigation.” Mr. Rosenstein apparently appointed and gave Mr. Mueller the investigative latitude he enjoys.
  17. Today Matthew J. Whitaker serves as acting Attorney General. He has not recused himself and any recusal would be determined by POTUS Trump if there is a continued call for recusal.
  18. Looking at the political landscape, what appears to a reasonable person, to a reasonable investigative journalist, to a reasonable special counsel, is this:
  19. It would appear that the democrats manufactured the “Russians” did it narrative as a smokescreen to cover their own perfidy in dealing with the Russians.
  20. To-date there is no indication the Russians colluded with POTUS Trump.
  21. There is a reasonable conclusion that the Democrats, including Hillary Clinton and Mr. Podesta and others, including the complicit media on the left, manufactured the “Russians influenced the 2016 election” narrative.
  22. If Mr. Sessions knew the Democrats manufactured the “Russians influenced the 2016 election” narrative, then he is either a closet liberal and party to the elaborate, far reaching fraud on the Republican party and the nation, and his recusal was intentionally designed to hamstring POTUS Trump and prevent POTUS Trump from carrying out his duty as regards criminal actions, OR
  23. If Mr. Sessions did not know that the Democrats manufactured the “Russians influenced the 2016 election” narrative, then he has been deceived by the Democrats. In this case, Mr. Sessions’ recusal was misinformed.
  24. Either way, as a consequence of the Democrat falsehood, and the subsequent Sessions recusal,
  25. (1) we the American people are not just saddled with the multi-million dollar Mueller special investigation,
  26. (2)We are saddled with a two tier justice system where the rich and famous commit felonies and escape grand jury indictment and subsequent arrest, prosecution, fines, and imprisonment.

 

  1. CONSEQUENCES OF THE SESSIONS RECUSAL?
  2. To-date, after all this time, we the people still have no answers to critical questions.
  3. Did the Democrats collude with the Russians?
  4. Did the Democrats receive funds from the Russians?
  5. Did the Democrats manufacture the “Russians interfered in the 2016 election” narrative?
  6. Did they, including then Barack Obama, and closet or open liberals in the Republican Party, engineer Mr. Sessions’ recusal and the “Mueller special counsel” in order to marginalize a duly elected sitting president POTUS Trump?
  7. Have they aggressively followed the Saul Alinsky principle of accusing your opponent of the very same thing you are guilty of?
  8. Did Hillary Clinton and her campaign wrongfully confiscate millions of dollars of Democratic national committee funds to the great harm of Bernie Sanders and others?
  9. Did Hillary Clinton with give or take a million dollars fund the fake “Russian” dossier denigrating POTUS Trump and do so through a Democrat law firm and fusion GPS and operatives?
  10. Did Hillary Clinton use her private email and servers and Blackberries to knowingly, or unknowingly, transfer classified information to the Russians and Chinese and others? Either way, this is felonious conduct.
  11. To what degree were the FBI leadership and other FBI persons complicit in activities that harmed and still harm POTUS Trump? Mr. Comey? Mr. Clapper? Media personalities? Others?
  12. Had Mr. Sessions failed to “recuse himself,” had he adhered to the policy and given POTUS Trump his right to choose, would we have answers to each of these questions?
  13. Is it reasonable to conclude that indictments would have been issued beyond the few seeming inconsequential indictments issued by Mr. Mueller to-date?

 

  1. FOR THESE AND OTHER REASONS, MARK LEVIN, AMONG OTHERS, CALLED FOR JEFF SESSIONS TO RESIGN AS ATTORNEY GENERAL.
  2. In April of 2018, MARK said: “The buck stops on the Attorney General’s desk, even if he recused himself as he did with the Russian matter. This is not the Russian matter. And the entire [Justice] Department is out of control now and its country first, over any politician, even if I’ve known that politician for a long, long time, his attorney general now.“I watch the president of the United States here now. He doesn’t deserve any of this. He didn’t do anything. He didn’t do anything. What do you think it is, Chappaquiddick?

    “And so it’s time for the Attorney General to step aside and for the president of the United States, he can make a recess appointment, … [of] somebody … who’s going to take … charge over what’s going on in this country.

    (Real Clear Politics, Mark Levin: Time For Jeff Sessions To Resign, Posted by Ian Schwartz, April 9, 2018. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/04/09/mark_levin_time_for_jeff_sessions_to_resign.html)

 

  1. WHAT ABOUT MR. SESSIONS’ RESIGNATION AS ATTORNEY GENERAL?
  2. Sessions’ resignation was made according to Mr. Sessions at POTUS Trump’s instance.
  3. His letter of resignation reads:
  4. “Dear Mr. President,
  5. “At your request, I am submitting my resignation.
  6. “Since the day I was honored to be sworn in as Attorney General of the United States, I came to work at the Department of Justice every day determined to do my duty and serve my country.
  7. “I have done so to the best of my ability, working to support the fundamental legal processes that are the foundation of justice.
  8. “The team we assembled embraced your directive to be a law and order Department of Justice.
  9. “We prosecuted the largest number of violent offenders and firearm defendants in our country’s history.
  10. “We took on transnational gangs that are bringing violence and death across our borders and protected national security.
  11. “We did our part to restore immigration enforcement.
  12. “We targeted the opioid epidemic by prosecuting doctors, pharmacists, and anyone else who contributed to this crisis with new law enforcement tools and determination.
  13. “And we have seen results.
  14. “After two years of rising violent crime and homicides prior to this administration, those trends have reversed – thanks to the hard work of our prosecutors and law enforcement around the country.
  15. “I am particularly grateful to the fabulous men and women in law enforcement all over this country with whom I have served.
  16. “I have had no greater honor than to serve alongside them.
  17. “As I have said many times, they have my thanks and I will always have their backs.
  18. “Most importantly, in my time as Attorney General we have restored and upheld the rule of law – a glorious tradition that each of us has a responsibility to safeguard.
  19. “We have operated with integrity and have lawfully and aggressively advanced the policy agenda of this administration.
  20. “I have been honored to serve as Attorney General and have worked to implement the law enforcement agenda based on the rule of law that formed a central part of your campaign for the Presidency.
  21. “Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. President.
  22. “Sincerely, Jeffery B. Sessions
  23. (CNN politics, Read Jeff Sessions’ resignation letter, Wednesday, November 7, 2018, https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/07/politics/sessions-resignation-letter/index.html)
  24. Again, I for one praise Mr. Sessions for the good that he has done.
  25. What is missing from his letter is any indication whatsoever that he helped resolve the serious issues raised by the above questions.

 

  1. SHIFTING GEARS, WHAT OF MATTHEW J. WHITAKER’S APPOINTMENT AS ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL? WHAT OF THE CALL BY DEMOCRATS AND OTHERS FOR MR. WHITAKER TO RECUSE HIMSELF FROM GIVING OVERSIGHT TO THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION?
  2. POTUS Trump appointed Matthew J. Whitaker as Acting Attorney General and this despite the fact Rod Rosenstein was Assistant Attorney General.
  3. POTUS Trump is authorized to make the appointment of Mr. Whitaker to serve as Acting Attorney General.
  4. You can read the Department of Justice Memorandum justifying Mr. Whitaker’s appointment. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5113276/Read-the-Justice-Department-Memo-defending.pdf.
  5. This document is also included herein as APPENDIX A.
  6. One might have thought Mr. Rosenstein had a shot at being chosen to succeed Mr. Sessions but Mr. Rosenstein didn’t get the nod from POTUS Trump.
  7. Why not?
  8. Who knows for certain?
  9. Perhaps because Mr. Rosenstein was complicit in the appointment of Mr. Mueller.
  10. Perhaps because Mr. Rosenstein has not helped resolve the issues set forth in the above list of questions.
  11. Perhaps because Mr. Rosenstein was part of the problem not part of the solution.
  12. The fact is “Mr. Rosenstein was not chosen by POTUS Trump.”
  13. Matthew George Whitaker chosen.
  14. Whitaker was born October 29, 2969 in Des Moines, Iowa.
  15. He is an American lawyer and politician.
  16. He is now Acting United States Attorney General, Appointed November 7, 2018 pursuant to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998.
  17. He was appointed after resignation of then AG Jeff Sessions at POTUS Trump’s instance.
  18. Whitaker was appointed by POTUS Donald Trump.
  19. At time of appointment, Mr. Whitaker was serving as Chief of Staff to AG Jeff Sessions.
  20. Earlier he served as a U.S. Attorney during the Bush Administration.
  21. He is a graduate of Ankeny High School and University of Iowa.
  22. He holds these degrees –
  23. a bachelor’s in communications,
  24. an MBA, and
  25. A Juris Doctorate Law Degree.
  26. He played tight end for U of Iowa Hawkeyes football team.
  27. He played in Iowa’s Rose Bowl game 1991.
  28. Whitaker worked for regional law firms; served as corporate counsel for a national grocery company; was a small businessman; served as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa; served as managing partner of a law firm; served as chairman of several political campaigns; ran for U.S. Senate in Iowa; served as executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust; served as a CNN contributor; then he joined the Department of Justice.
  29. He is an evangelical Christian.
  30. He obviously got along well enough with POTUS Trump.
  31. He does not support the Mueller investigation.
  32. He is in favor of prosecuting Hillary Clinton.
  33. He has no legal or ethical obligation or reason to step aside from giving oversight to the Mueller investigation or from prosecuting Mrs. Clinton.
  34. As is to be expected, he has garnered his share of criticism.
  35. The Wikipedia article about him is obviously a “left” biased hit piece designed to highlight all of Mr. Whitaker’s faults and establish in a public record the negative reasons why Mr. Whitaker should be rejected as Acting AG and AG and why he should recuse himself from giving oversight to the Mueller investigation.
  36. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Whitaker_(attorney)

 

  1. A FEW CONCLUSIONS? Does investigative journalism and forensic evidence support the following? If so, the DOJ and Mr. Mueller need to indict and prosecute.
  2. 1) Was the fake “Russians influenced the 2016 election and POTUS Trump colluded with the Russians” narrative manufactured by the Democrats including Hillary Clinton and John Podesta and others as an excuse for their overwhelming, unexpected 2016 loss to POTUS Trump?
  3. 2) Following the classic Saul Alinsky Rule for Radicals which is to “attack your opponent for anything wrong you are doing,” have the Democrats including Hillary Clinton and John Podesta and others including complicit media outlets and personalities manufactured and promoted the fake “Russians influenced the 2016 election and POTUS Trump colluded with the Russians” narrative and foisted which is to say wrongfully imposed the same off on the nation and world? Was this a great lie created to cover up the actual felonious collusion by the Democrats and Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaign and others including actors like John McCain with the Russians?
  4. 3) Was the Democrat false narrative and great lie created to cover up the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party collusion with and funding to and funding from the Russians? Did Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaign people pay Russians give or take a million dollars for a false dossier denigrating POTUS Trump? Did the Clintons receive serious hundreds of thousands of dollars and even millions in money from the Russians and other country representatives in return for influence including giving away 20-50 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russians? And if the latter is true, does such rise to the level of treason?
  5. 4) Have the Russians been attempting to influence our elections for years and is this an old accusation pre-dating POTUS Trump’s election, a Russian activity well known by then POTUS Obama and his administration? Did the Russians have any influence on the 2016 election? Is there any indication that votes were influenced by the Russians?
  6. 5) Did POTUS Trump collude with the Russians to steal the 2016 election from Hillary Clinton or was it the other way around? Did Hillary Clinton and her campaign operatives collude with the Russians to steal the 2016 election from POTUS Trump?
  7. 6) Did POTUS Trump work with the Russians and change the outcome of the 2016 election in his favor? Or is it just the opposite. Did Hillary Clinton and her operatives and the Democratic Party work with the Russians and promote the false “Russians influenced our elections and Donald Trump colluded with the Russians” narrative to the harm of POTUS Trump and the Republic Party and thereby cause the immense turmoil we have experienced in the country?
  8. 7) Did Jeff Sessions meet with the Russians in order to influence the election?
  9. 8) Was and on a continuing basis is still the tragic fallout from the Democrat false narrative the Jeff Sessions misinformed recusal? In other words, did the Democrats falsely engineer the Jeff Sessions recusal?
  10. 9) Did the Russians initiate the Assange Wikileaks hacking and leaking of emails? Or did Mark Rich or another inside the Democratic National Committee office offload hacked emails to Wikileaks?
  11. 10) As a consequence of Mr. Sessions’ recusal, are we the American people now saddled with a two tiered justice system? Have the rich and famous who allegedly did collude with the Russians and pay the Russians for a fake dossier and receive thousands if not millions of dollars from the Russians in return for influence and 20-50 percent of U.S. uranium, to-date, escaped indictment and prosecution for their felonies?
  12. 11) If it is true that the “Russians influenced the 2016 election and POTUS Trump colluded with the Russians” narrative was feloniously manufactured by the Democrats and disaffected Republicans and is overwhelmingly false, is it not then time for Acting AG Whitaker, and any new AG if Mr. Whitaker is not so appointed at a later date, and for Mr. Mueller, to unseal any additional indictments they may have from grand juries, assuming they have such indictments under seal, and answer these many questions and indict those including the rich and famous who have used their offices to enrich themselves, those who have lied to the nation, those who have feloniously enriched themselves and broken election laws to the tune of millions of dollars?
  13. 12) Is it true or false that Mr. Mueller has given the nation value for his work? Is it true or false that he has issued a few minor indictments to-date which in the grand political scheme are of little or no value and which suggests that his investigation may turn out to be a colossal boondoggle wherein he and high priced attorneys have banked serious millions of dollars while their work product to-date is not worth the fortune paid them?
  14. 13) In other words, will Mr. Mueller’s far reaching investigation uncover answers to the heretofore stated questions including those found in paragraphs 92 thru 103?
  15. 14) If Mr. Mueller’s work is in fact laudatory, which hopefully it is, is it possible we will soon be pleasantly surprised by an AG Whitaker and Mr. Mueller joint press conference wherein they disclose a number of indictments and arrests?
  16. 15) Is it possible that the grand jury has been called and has deliberated and all we are waiting for is the right time for Mr. Mueller and Mr. Whitaker to unseal and issue the indictments, make the arrests, and surprise us by letting the nation know which party and which individuals actually colluded with the Russians and committed felonies?

 

  1. A CONCLUDING THOUGHT?
  2. There are a great number of us Americans, who work hard at being law abiding and who labor to conduct their lives based on a fairness ethic, who are discouraged because of the lack of answers and the drawn out nature of matters.
  3. We believe Mr. Whitaker would be remiss to recuse himself.
  4. We believe POTUS Trump would be remiss to permit such to take place.
  5. As for recusal, by appointing Mr. Whitaker, we hope POTUS Trump is saying to the Democrats, “burn me once by engineering the Jeff Sessions AG recusal, fie on me.”
  6. Burn me twice by once again trying to engineer an AG recusal, fie on thee.
  7. Hopefully, recusal of Mr. Whitaker isn’t going to happen. Hopefully, there will be no recusal this time around.
  8. Hopefully, those who have enriched themselves at the expense of the people, those who have feloniously broken election and other laws, will now be held accountable.
  9. We believe POTUS Trump when he says he wouldn’t have picked Jeff Sessions as Attorney General had he known that Mr. Sessions was going to recuse himself.
  10. Today the corollary is also true. We believe POTUS Trump would not have picked Matthew Whitaker as Acting Attorney General if there were a hint that he would recuse himself.
  11. Should there be any kind of a change of heart on the part of Mr. Whitaker, which is unlikely, keep in mind the Federal Regulation section (b).
  12. Read paragraph (b) again. Title 28, Chapter I, Section 45.2, Code of Federal Regulation, title “Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship” 45.2(b) which reads in full:

 

  1. “(b) An employee assigned to or otherwise participating in a criminal investigation or prosecution who believes that his participation may be prohibited by paragraph [in this situation Mr. Whitaker] (a) of this section shall report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his supervisor at the level of section chief or the equivalent or higher [in this situation POTUS Trump is Mr. Whitaker’s supervisor]. If the supervisor [POTUS Trump] determines that a personal or political relationship exists between the employee and a person or organization described in paragraph (a) of this section, he shall relieve the employee from participation unless he determines further, in writing, after full consideration of all the facts and circumstances, that:
  2. (1) The relationship will not have the effect of rendering the employee’s service less than fully impartial and professional; and
  3. (2) The employee’s participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest likely to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution.
  4. ( c) For the purposes of this section:
  5. (1) Political relationship means a close identification with an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization, arising from service as a principal adviser thereto or a principal official thereof; and
  6. (2) Personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality. An employee is presumed to have a personal relationship with his father, mother, brother, sister, child and spouse. Whether relationships (including friendships) of an employee to other persons or organizations are “personal” must be judged on an individual basis with due regard given to the subjective opinion of the employee.
  7. (d) This section pertains to agency management and is not intended to create rights enforceable by private individuals or organizations.
  8. [Private individuals or organizations have no cause of action against Mr. Whitaker or POTUS Trump if Mr. Whitaker or POTUS Trump does not recuse Acting AG Whitaker.]

 

  1. WHEN MUCH IS SAID AND LESS APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN DONE TO PROVIDE SERIOUS ANSWERS, PERHAPS THE WASHINGTON POST STATES IT BEST:
  2. “Acting attorney general Matthew G. Whitaker has no intention of recusing himself from overseeing the special-counsel probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to people close to him who added they do not believe he would approve any subpoena of President Trump as part of that investigation.” (National Security, Acting attorney general Whitaker has no intention of recusing himself from Russia probe, associates say, By Devlin Barrett, Matt Zapotsky and Josh Dawsey, Washington Post, November 8, 2018.)

 

 

 

  1. APPENDIX A
  2. Department of Justice
  3. Office of Legal Counsel
  4. Office of the Assistant Attorney General Washington, D. C. 20530
  5. November 14, 2018

 

  1. S. Department of Justice
  2. Office of Legal Counsel
  3. Office of the Assistant Attorney General
  4. Washington DC 20530
  5. November 14, 2018

 

  1. MEMORANDUM FOR EMMET T. FLOOD
  2. COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT

 

  1. Re: Designating an Acting Attorney General

 

  1. After Attorney General Jefferson B. Sessions 111 resigned on November 7, 2018, the President designated Matthew G. Whitaker, Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to the Attorney General, to act temporarily as the Attorney General under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3345-3349d. This Office had previously advised that the President could designate a senior Department of Justice official, such as Mr. Whitaker, as Acting Attorney General, and this memorandum explains the basis for that conclusion.

 

  1. Whitaker’s designation as Acting Attorney General accords with the plain terms of the Vacancies Reform Act, because he had been serving in the Department of Justice at a sufficiently senior pay level for over a year. See id. 3345(a)(3). The Department’s organic statute provides that the Deputy Attorney General (or others) may be Acting Attorney General in the case of a vacancy. See 28 U.S.C. 508. But that statute does not displace the President’s authority to use the Vacancies Reform Act as an alternative. As we have previously recognized, the President may use the Vacancies Reform Act to depart from the succession order specified under section 508. See Authority of the President to Name an Acting Attorney General, 31 Op. O.L.C. 208 (2007) (“2007 Acting Attorney General”).

 

  1. We also advised that Mr. Whitaker’s designation would be consistent with the Appointments Clause of the US. Constitution, which requires the President to obtain “the Advice and Consent of the Senate” before appointing a principal officer of the United States. US. Const. art. 11, 2, cl. 2. Although an Attorney General is a principal officer requiring Senate confirmation, someone who temporarily performs his duties is not. As all three branches of government have long recognized, the President may designate an acting official to perform the duties of a vacant principal office, including a Cabinet office, even when the acting official has not been confirmed by the Senate.

 

  1. Congress did not first authorize the President to direct non-Senate-confirmed officials to act as principal officers in 1998; it did so in multiple statutes starting in 1792. In that year, Congress authorized the President to ensure the government’s uninterrupted work by designating persons to perform temporarily the work of vacant offices. The President’s authority applied to principal offices and did not require the President to select Senate-confirmed officers. In our brief survey of the history, we have identified over 160 times before 1860 in which non-Senate-confirmed persons performed, on a temporary basis, the duties of such high offices as Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of War, Secretary of the Navy, Secretary of the Interior, and Postmaster General. While designations to the office of Attorney General were less
  2. [page] 1

 

  1. frequent, we have identified at least one period in 1866 when a non-Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General served as Acting Attorney General. Mr. Whitaker’s designation is no more constitutionally problematic than countless similar presidential orders dating back over 200 years.

 

  1. Were the long agreement of Congress and the President insufficient, judicial precedent confirms the meaning of the Appointments Clause in these circumstances. When Presidents appointed acting Secretaries in the nineteenth century, those officers (or their estates) sometimes sought payment for their additional duties, and courts recognized the lawfulness of such appointments. The Supreme Court confirmed the legal understanding of the Appointments Clause that had prevailed for over a century in United States v. Eaton, 169 US. 331 (1898), holding that an inferior officer may perform the duties of a principal officer “for a limited time[] and under special and temporary conditions” without “transform[ing]” his office into one for which Senate confirmation is required. Id. at 343. The Supreme Court has never departed from Eaton’s holding and has repeatedly relied upon that decision in its recent Appointments Clause cases.

 

  1. In the Vacancies Reform Act, Congress renewed the President’s authority to designate non-Senate-confirmed senior officials to perform the functions and duties of principal offices. In 2003, we reviewed the President’s authority in connection with the Director of the Officer of Management and Budget who is a principal officer, and concluded that the President could designate a non-Senate-confirmed official to serve temporarily as Acting Director. See Designation of Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, 27 Op. O.L.C. 121 (2003) (“Acting Director of Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama placed non-Senate-confirmed officials in several lines of agency succession and actually designated unconfirmed officials as acting agency heads. President Trump, too, has previously exercised that authority in other departments; Mr. Whitaker is not the first unconfirmed official to act as the head of an agency in this administration.

 

  1. It is no doubt true that Presidents often choose acting principal officers from among Senate-confirmed officers. But the Constitution does not mandate that choice. Consistent with our prior opinion and with centuries of historical practice and precedents, we advised that the President’s designation of Mr. Whitaker as Acting Attorney General on a temporary basis did not transform his position into a principal office requiring Senate confirmation.

 

  1. The Vacancies Reform Act

 

  1. Whitaker’s designation as Acting Attorney General comports with the terms of the Vacancies Reform Act. That Act provides three mechanisms by which an acting officer may take on the functions and duties of an office, when an executive officer who is required to be appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate “dies, resigns, or is otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office.” 5 U.S.C. 3345(a). First, absent any other designation, the first assistant” to the vacant office shall perform its functions and duties. Id. 3345 Second, the President may depart from that default course by directing another presidential appointee, who is already Senate confirmed, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office. Id. 3345(a)(2). Or, third, the President may designate an officer or employee within the same agency to perform the functions and duties of
  2. [page] 2

 

  1. the vacant office, provided that he or she has been in the agency for at least 90 days in the 365 days preceding the vacancy, in a position for which the rate of pay is equal to or greater than the minimum rate for GS-15 of the General Schedule. Id 3345(a)(3). Except in the case of a vacancy caused by sickness, the statute imposes time limits on the period during which someone may act. Id. 3346. And the acting officer may not be nominated by the President to fill the vacant office and continue acting in it, unless he was already the first assistant to the office for at least 90 days in the 365 days preceding the vacancy or is a Senate-confirmed first assistant. Id. 3345(b)(1)-(2); see also Nat’l Labor Relations Bd. v. SW General, Inc, 137 S. Ct. 929, 941 (201 7).

 

 

  1. The Vacancies Reform Act unquestionably authorizes the President to direct Mr. Whitaker to act as Attorney General after the resignation of Attorney General Sessions on November 7, 2018.1 Mr. Whitaker did not fall within the first two categories of persons made eligible by section 3345(a). He was not the first assistant to the Attorney General, because 28 U.S.C. 5 08(a) identifies the Deputy Attorney General as the first assistant to the Attorney General” “for the purpose of section 3345.” Nor did Mr. Whitaker already hold a Senate-confirmed office. Although Mr. Whitaker was previously appointed, with the advice and consent of the Senate, as the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, he resigned from that position on November 25, 2009. At the time of the resignation of Attorney General Sessions, Mr. Whitaker was serving in a position to which he was appointed by the Attorney General.

 

  1. In that position, Mr. Whitaker fell squarely within the third category of officials, identified in section 3345(a)(3). As Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor, he had served in the Department of Justice for more than 90 days in the year before the resignation, at a GS-15 level or higher. And Mr. Whitaker has not been nominated to be Attorney General, an action that would render him ineligible to serve as Acting Attorney General under section 3345(b)(l). Accordingly, under the plain terms of the Vacancies Reform Act, the President could designate

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 1 Attorney General Sessions submitted his resignation “[a]t [the President’s] request,” Letter for President Donald J. Trump, from Jefferson B. Sessions Attorney General, but that does not alter the fact that the Attorney General “resign[ed]” within the meaning of section 3345(a). Even if Attorney General Sessions had declined to resign and was removed by the President, he still would have been rendered “otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office” for purposes of section 3345(a). As this Office recently explained, “an officer is “unable to perform the functions and duties of the office” during both short periods of unavailability, such as a period of sickness, and potentially longer ones, such as one resulting from the officer’s removal (which would arguably not be covered by the reference to “resign[ation]. Designating an Acting Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 41 Op. O.L.C. at *4 (2017); see also Guidance on Application of Federal Vacancies Reform Act of1998, 23 Op. O.L.C. 60, 61 (1999) (“In floor debate, Senators said, by way of example, that an officer would be “otherwise unable to perform the functions and duties of the office” if he or she were fired, imprisoned, or sick”). Indeed, any other interpretation would leave a troubling gap in the ability to name acting officers. For most Senate-confirmed offices, the Vacancies Reform Act is “the exclusive means” for naming an acting officer. 5 U.S.C. 3347(a). If the statute did not apply in cases of removal, then it would mean that no acting officer – not even the first assistant – “could take the place of a removed officer, even where the President had been urgently required to remove the officer, for instance, by concerns over national security, corruption, or other workplace misconduct.
  2. [page] 3

 

  1. Whitaker to serve temporarily as Acting Attorney General subject to the time limitations of section 3346.

 

 

  1. The Vacancies Reform Act remains available to the President even though 28 U.S.C. 508 separately authorizes the Deputy Attorney General and certain other officials to act as Attorney General in the case of a vacancy.2 We previously considered whether this statute limits the President’s authority under the Vacancies Reform Act to designate someone else to be Acting Attorney General. 2007 Acting Attorney General, 31 Op. O.L.C. 208. We have also addressed similar questions with respect to other agencies’ succession statutes. See Designating an Acting Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, 41 Op. O.L.C. (2017) (“Acting Director of Acting Director of 0MB, 27 Op. O.L.C. at 121 n.1. In those instances, we concluded that the Vacancies Reform Act is not the “exclusive means” for the temporary designation of an acting official, but that it remains available as an option to the President. We reach the same conclusion here: Section 508 does not limit the President’s authority to invoke the Vacancies Reform Act to designate an Acting Attorney General.

 

  1. We previously concluded that section 508 does not prevent the President from relying upon the Vacancies Reform Act to determine who will be the Acting Attorney General. Although the Vacancies Reform Act, which “ordinarily is the exclusive means for naming an acting officer,” 2007 Acting Attorney General, 31 Op. O.L.C. at 209 (citing 5 U.S.C. 3347), makes an exception for, and leaves in effect, statutes such as section 508, “[t]he Vacancies Reform Act nowhere says that, if another statute remains in effect, the Vacancies Reform Act may not be used.” Id. In fact, the structure of the Vacancies Reform Act makes clear that office-specific provisions are treated as exceptions from its generally exclusive applicability, not as provisions that supersede the Vacancies Reform Act altogether.3 Furthermore, as we noted, “the Senate Committee Report accompanying the Act expressly disavows” the View that, where another statute is available, the Vacancies Reform Act may not be used. Id. (citing S. Rep. No. 105-250, at 17 (1998)). That report stated that, “with respect to the specific positions in which temporary officers may serve under the specific statutes this bill retains, the Vacancies [Reform] Act would continue to provide an alternative procedure for temporarily occupying the office.” Id. We therefore concluded that the President could direct the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division to act as Attorney General under the Vacancies Reform Act, even though the incumbent Solicitor General would otherwise have served under the chain of succession specified in section 508 (as supplemented by an Attorney General order).
  2. __________

 

  1. 2 Under 28 U.S.C. 508(a), in the case of a vacancy in the office of Attorney General, “the Deputy Attorney General may exercise all the duties of that office, and for the purpose of [the Vacancies Reform Act] the Deputy Attorney General is the first assistant to the Attorney General.” If the offices of Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General are both vacant, “the Associate Attorney General shall act as Attorney General,” and “[t]he Attorney General may designate the Solicitor General and the Assistant Attorneys General, in further order of succession, to act as Attorney General.” Id. 508(b).

 

  1. 3 One section (entitled “Exclusion of certain offices”) is used to exclude certain offices altogether. 5 U.S.C. 3349c. Office-specific statutes, however, are mentioned in a different section (entitled “Exclusivity”) that generally makes the Vacancies Reform Act “the exclusive means” for naming an acting officer but also specifies exceptions to that exclusivity. Id. 3347(a)(l).
  2. [page] 4

 

  1. At the time of our 2007 Acting Attorney General opinion, the first two offices specified in section 508(a) and (b)”Deputy Attorney General and Associate Attorney General” were both vacant. See 31 Op. O.L.C. at 208. That is not currently the case; there is an incumbent Deputy Attorney General. But the availability of the Deputy Attorney General does not affect the President’s authority to invoke section 3345(a)(3). Nothing in section 508 suggests that the Vacancies Reform Act does not apply when the Deputy Attorney General can serve. To the contrary, the statute expressly states that the Deputy Attorney General is the first assistant to the Attorney General” “for the purpose of section 3345 of title 5” the provision of the Vacancies Reform Act providing for the designation of an acting officer). 28 U.S.C. 508(a). It further provides that the Deputy Attorney General “may” serve as Acting Attorney General, not that he “must,” underscore that the Vacancies Reform Act remains an alternative means of appointment. 4 These statutory cross-references confirm that section 508 works in conjunction with, and does not displace, the Vacancies Reform Act.

 

  1. Although the Deputy Attorney General is the default choice for Acting Attorney General under section 3345(a)(1), the President retains the authority to invoke the other categories of eligible officials, “notwithstanding [the first-assistant provision in] paragraph 5 U.S.C. 3345(a)(2), (3). Moreover, there is reason to believe that Congress, in enacting the Vacancies Reform Act, deliberately chose to make the second and third categories of officials in section 3345(a) applicable to the office of Attorney General. Under the previous Vacancies Act, the first assistant to an office was also the default choice for filling a vacant Senate-confirmed position, and the President was generally able to depart from that by selecting another Senate-confirmed officer. See 5 U.S.C. 3347 (1994). That additional presidential authority, however, was expressly made inapplicable “to a vacancy in the office of Attorney General.” See also Rev. Stat. 179 (2d ed. 1878). Yet, when Congress enacted the Vacancies Reform Act in 1998, it did away with the exclusion for the office of Attorney General. See 5 U.S.C. 3349c (excluding certain other officers).5

 

  1. Our conclusion that the Vacancies Reform Act remains available, notwithstanding section 508, is consistent with our prior opinions. In Acting Director of OMB, we recognized that an OMB-specific statute, 31 U.S.C. 502(f), did not displace the President’s authority under the Vacancies Reform Act. See 27 Op. O.L.C. at 121 n.1 (“The Vacancies Reform Act does not provide, however, that where there is another statute providing for a presidential designation, the Vacancies Reform Act becomes unavailable?). More recently, we confirmed that the President could designate an Acting Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“CFLPB”).

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 4 We do not mean to suggest that a different result would follow if section 508 said “shall” instead of “may,” since as discussed at length in Acting Director such mandatory phrasing in a separate statute does not itself oust the Vacancies Reform Act. See 41 Op. O.L.C. *7-9 n.3, The point is that, in contrast with the potential ambiguity arising from the appearance of “shall” in the CFPB-specific statute, section 508 expressly acknowledges that the Deputy Attorney General is the first assistant but will not necessarily serve in the case of a vacancy in the office of Attorney General. 5 When it reported the Vacancies Reform Act, the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs contemplated that the Attorney General would continue to be excluded by language in a proposed section 3345(c) that would continue to make section 508 “applicable” to the office. See S. Rep. No. 105-250, at 13, 25; 144 Cong. Rec. 12,433 (June 16, 1998). But that provision “was not enacted as part of the final bill, and no provision of the Vacancies Reform Act bars the President from designating an Acting Attorney General under that statute.” 2007 Acting Attorney General, 31 Op. O.L.C. at 209 n.1.
  2. [page] 5

 

  1. notwithstanding 12 U.S.C. 5491(b)(5), which provides that the Deputy Director of the CFPB “shall” serve as Acting Director when the Director is unavailable. See Acting Director of CFPB, 41 Op. O.L.C. We reasoned that the CFPB-specific statute should “interact with the Vacancies Reform Act in the same way as other, similar statutes providing an office-specific mechanism for an individual to act in a vacant position.” Id at *7-9 n.3. We noted that the Vacancies Reform Act itself provides that a first assistant to a vacant office “shall perform the functions and duties” of that office unless the President designates someone else to do so, 5 U.S.C. 3345(a), and that mandatory language in either the CF PB-specific statute or the Vacancies Reform Act does not foreclose the availability of the other statute. Acting Director of CFPB, 41 Op. O.L.C. at *7-8.

 

  1. Courts have similarly concluded that the Vacancies Reform Act remains available as an alternative to office-specific statutes. See Hooks v. Kitsap Tenant Support Servs., Inc. 816 F.3d 550, 55 5-56 (9th Cir. 2016) (General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, which has its own office-specific statute prescribing a method of filling a vacancy); English v. Trump, 279 F. Supp. 3d 307, 323?24 (D.D.C. 2018) (holding that the mandatory language in the CFPB-specific statute is implicitly qualified by the Vacancies Reform Act’s language providing that the President also “may direct” qualifying individuals to serve in an acting capacity), appeal dismissed upon appellant’s motion, No. 18?5007, 2018 WL 3526296 (DC. Cir. July 13, 2018).

 

  1. For these reasons, we believe that the President could invoke the Vacancies Reform Act in order to designate Mr. Whitaker as Acting Attorney General ahead of the alternative line of succession provided under section 508.

 

  1. The Appointments Clause
  2. While the Vacancies Reform Act expressly authorizes the President to select an
  3. unconfirmed official as Acting Attorney General, Congress may not authorize an appointment mechanism that would conflict with the Constitution. See Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U.S. 868, 883 (1991). The Appointments Clause requires the President to “appoint” principal officers, such as the Attorney General, “by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” U.S. Const., art. 11, 2, cl. 2. But for “inferior Officers,” Congress may vest the appointment power “in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.” Id.

 

  1. The President’s designation of Mr. Whitaker as Acting Attorney General is consistent with the Appointments Clause so long as Acting Attorney General is not a principal office that requires Senate confirmation. If so, it does not matter whether an acting official temporarily filling a vacant principal office is an inferior officer or not an “officer” at all within the meaning of the Constitution, because Mr. Whitaker was appointed in a manner that satisfies the requirements for an inferior officer: He was appointed by Attorney General Sessions, who was the Head of the Department, and the President designated him to perform additional duties. See Acting Director of OMB, 27 Op. O.L.C. at 124-25. If the designation constituted an appointment to a principal office, however, then section 3345(a)(3) would be unconstitutional as applied, because Mr. Whitaker does not currently occupy a position requiring Senate confirmation.
  2. [page] 6

 

  1. For the reasons stated below, based on long-standing historical practice and precedents, we do not believe that the Appointments Clause may be construed to require the Senate’s advice and consent before Mr. Whitaker may be Acting Attorney General.

 

 

  1. The Attorney General is plainly a principal officer, who must be appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate. See Edmond v. United States, 520 U.S. 651, 662-63 (1997); Morrison v. Olson, 487 U.S. 654, 670-72 (1988). The Attorney General has broad and continuing authority over the federal government’s law-enforcement, litigation, and other legal functions. See, e. g, 28 U.S.C. 516, 533. The Supreme Court has not “set forth an exclusive criterion for distinguishing between” inferior officers and principal officers. Edmond, 520 U.S. at 661. “Generally speaking, the term “inferior officer” connotes a relationship with some higher ranking officer or officers below the President.” Id at 662. There is no officer below the President who supervises the Attorney General.

 

  1. Although the Attorney General is a principal officer, it does not follow that an Acting Attorney General should be understood to be one. An office under the Appointments Clause requires both a “continuing and permanent” position and the exercise of “significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States.” Lucia v. SEC, 138 S. Ct. 2044, 2051 (2018) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Officers of the United States within the Meaning of the Appointments Clause, 31 Op. O.L.C. 73, 74 (2007). While a person acting as the Attorney General surely exercises sufficient authority to be an “Officer of the United States,” it is less clear whether Acting Attorney General is a principal office.

 

  1. Because that question involves the division of powers between the Executive and the Legislative Branches, “historical practice” is entitled to “significant weight.” Nat’l Labor Relations Bd v. Noel Canning, 134 S. Ct. 2550, 2559 (2014); see also, e. The Pocket Veto Case, 279 U.S. 655, 689 (1929). That practice strongly supports the constitutionality of authorizing someone who has not been Senate-confirmed to serve as an acting principal officer. Since 1792, Congress has repeatedly legislated on the assumption that temporary service as a principal officer does not require Senate confirmation. As for the Executive Branch’s practice, our non-exhaustive survey has identified over 160 occasions between 1809 and 1860 on which non-Senate-confirmed persons served temporarily as an acting or ad interim principal officer in the Cabinet.

 

  1. Furthermore, judicial precedents culminating in United States v. Eaton, 169 U.S. 331 (1898), endorsed that historical practice and confirm that the temporary nature of acting service weighs against principal-officer status. The Supreme Court in Eaton held that an inferior officer may perform the duties of a principal officer “for a limited time [ ] and under special and temporary conditions” without “transform[ing]” his office into one for which Senate confirmation is required. Id. at 343. That holding was not limited to the circumstances of that case, but instead reflected a broad consensus about the status of an acting principal officer that the Supreme Court has continued to rely on in later Appointments Clause decisions.
  2. [page] 7

 

 

  1. Since the Washington Administration, Congress has “authoriz[ed] the President to direct certain officials to temporarily carry out the duties of a vacant PAS office one requiring Presidential Appointment and Senate confirmation] in an acting capacity, without Senate confirmation.” SW General, 137 S. Ct. at 934; see also Noel Canning, 134 S. Ct. at 2609 (Scalia J., dissenting in relevant part) (observing that the President does not need to use recess appointments to “fill vacant offices because “Congress can authorize “acting” officers to perform the duties associated with a temporarily vacant office” – “and has done that, in one form or another, since 1792”). Those statutes, and evidence of practice under them during the early nineteenth century, did not limit the pool of officials eligible to serve as an acting principal officer to those who already have Senate-confirmed offices. This history provides compelling support for the conclusion that the position of an acting principal officer is not itself a principal office.

 

  1. In 1792, Congress First “authorized the appointment of ‘any person or persons’ to fill specific vacancies in the Departments of State, Treasury, and War.” SW General, 137 S. Ct. at 935 (quoting Act of May 8, 1792, ch. 37, 8, 1 Stat. 279, 281). Although the statute expressly mentioned vacancies in the position of Secretary in each of those Departments, the President was authorized to choose persons who held no federal office at all – much less one requiring Senate confirmation. Although the 1792 statute “allowed acting officers to serve until the permanent Officeholder could resume his duties or a successor was appointed,” Congress “imposed a six-month limit on acting service” in 1795. Id. at 935 (citing Act of Feb. 13, 1795, ch. 21, Stat. 415). In 1863, in response to a plea from President Lincoln, see Message to Congress (Jan. 2, 1863), Cong. Globe, 37th Cong, 3d Sess. 185 (1863), Congress extended the provision to permit the President to handle a vacancy in the office of “the head of any Executive Department of the Government, or of any officer of either of the said Departments whose appointment is not in the head thereof.” Act of Feb. 20, 1863, ch. 45, 1, 12 Stat. 656, 656. The 1863 statute allowed the duties of a vacant office to be performed for up to six months by “the head of any other Executive Department” or by any other officer in those departments “whose appointment is vested in the President.” Id.

 

  1. In 1868, Congress replaced all previous statutes on the subject of vacancies with the Vacancies Act of 1868. See Act of July 23, 1868, ch. 227, 15 Stat. 168. That act provided that, “in case of the death, resignation, absence, or sickness of the head of any executive department of the government, the first or sole assistant thereof shall . . . perform the duties of such head until a successor be appointed or the absence or sickness shall cease.” Id, 1, 15 Stat. at 168. In lieu of elevating the first or sole assistant,” the President could also choose to authorize any other officer appointed with the Senate’s advice and consent to perform the duties of the vacant office until a successor was appointed or the prior occupant of the position was able to return to his post. Id 3, 15 Stat. at 168. In cases of death or resignation, an acting official could serve for no longer than ten days. Id. The 1868 act thus eliminated the President’s prior discretion to fill a vacant office temporarily with someone who did not hold a Senate-confirmed position. Yet, it preserved the possibility that a non-Senate-confirmed first assistant would serve as an acting head of an executive department.
  2. [page] 8

 

  1. Over the next 120 years, Congress repeatedly amended the Vacancies Act of 1868, but it never eliminated the possibility that a non-Senate-confirmed first assistant could serve as an acting head of an executive department. In 1891, it extended the time limit for acting service in cases of death or resignation from ten to thirty days. Act of Feb. 6, 1891, ch. 113, 26 Stat. 733. In 1966, it made minor changes during the course of re-codifying and enacting title 5 of the United States Code. See S. Rep. No. 89-1380, at 20, 70-71 (1966); 5 U.S.C. 3345-3349 (1970). Congress amended the act once more in 1988, extending the time limit on acting service from 30 to 120 days and making the statute applicable to offices that are not in “Departments” and thus are less likely to have Senate-confirmed first assistants. Pub. L. No. 100-398, 102 Stat. 985, 988 (1988).

 

  1. Accordingly, for more than two centuries before the Vacancies Reform Act, Congress demonstrated its belief that the Appointments Clause did not require Senate confirmation for temporary service in a principal office, by repeatedly enacting statutes that affirmatively authorized acting service – even in principal offices at the heads of executive departments – by persons who did not already hold an appointment made with the Senate’s advice and consent.

 

 

  1. Not only did Congress authorize the Presidents to select officials to serve temporarily as acting principal officers, but Presidents repeatedly exercised that power to fill temporarily the vacancies in their administrations that arose from resignations, terminations, illnesses, or absences from the seat of government. In providing this advice, we have not canvassed the entire historical record. But we have done enough to confirm that Presidents often exercised their powers under the 1792 and 1795 statutes to choose persons who did not hold any Senate-confirmed position to act temporarily as principal officers in various departments. In the Washington, Adams, and Jefferson Administrations, other Cabinet officers (or Chief Justice John Marshall) were used as temporary or “ad interim” officials when offices were vacant between the departure of one official and the appointment of his successor. See, e. Biographical Directory of the American Congress, 1 774497], at 13??14 (1971); see id at 12 (explaining that the list of Cabinet officers excludes “[s]ubordinates acting temporarily as heads of departments” and therefore lists only those who served ad interim after an incumbent’s departure).

 

  1. President Jefferson made the first designation we have identified of a non-Senate-confirmed officer to serve temporarily in his Cabinet. On February 17, 1809, approximately two weeks before the end of the Jefferson Administration, John Smith, the chief clerk of the Department of War, was designated to serve as Acting Secretary of War. See id. at 14; Letter from Thomas Jefferson to the War Department (Feb. 17, 1809), Founders Online, National Archives, (“Whereas, by the resignation of Henry Dearborne, late Secretary at War, that office is become vacant. I therefore do hereby authorize John Smith, chief clerk of the office of the Department of War, to perform the duties of the said office, until a successor be appointed”). As chief clerk, Smith was not a principal officer. He was instead “an inferior officer . . . appointed by the [Department’s] principal officer.” Act of Aug. 5, 1789, ch. 6, 2, 1 Stat. 49, 50. The next Secretary of War did not enter upon duty until April 8, 1809, five weeks after the beginning of the Madison Administration. See Biographical Directory at 14.
  2. [page] 9

 

  1. Between 1809 and 1860, President Jefferson’s successors designated a non-Senate-confirmed officer to serve as an acting principal officer in a Cabinet position on at least 160 other occasions. We have identified 109 additional instances during that period where chief clerks, who were not Senate confirmed, temporarily served as ad interim Secretary of State (on 51 occasions), Secretary of the Treasury (on 36 occasions), or Secretary of War (on 22 occasions). See id. at 15-19; 1 Trial of Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, Before the Senate of the United States, on Impeachment by the House of Representatives for High Crimes and Misdemeanors, 575?81, 585-88, 590-91 (Washington, GPO 1868); In re Asbury Dickins, 34th Cong, Sess., Rep. CC. 9, at 4?5 (Ct. C1. 1856) (listing 18 times between 1829 and 1836 that chief clerk Asbury Dickins was “appointed to perform the duties of Secretary of the Treasury” or Secretary of State “during the absence from the seat of government or sickness” of those Secretaries, for a total of 359 days).6 Between 1853 and 1860 there were also at least 21 occasions on which non-Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretaries were authorized to act as Secretary of the Treasury.7

 

  1. We have also identified instances involving designations of persons who apparently had no prior position in the federal government, including Alexander Hamilton’s Son, James A. Hamilton, whom President Jackson directed on his first day in office to “take charge of the Department of State until Governor [Martin] Van Buren should arrive in the city” three weeks later. 1 Trial of Andrew Johnson at 575; see Biographical Directory at 16. President Jackson also twice named William B. Lewis, who held no other government position, as acting Secretary of War. See 1 Trial of Andrew Johnson at 575. Moving beyond the offices expressly covered by the 1792 and 1795 statutes, there were at least 23 additional instances before 1861 in which Presidents authorized a non-Senate-confirmed chief clerk to perform temporarily the duties of the Secretary of the Navy (on 21 occasions), or the Secretary of the Interior (on 2 occasions).8

 

  1. At the time, it was well understood that when an Acting or ad interim Secretary already held an office such as chief clerk, he was not simply performing additional duties, but he was deemed the Acting Secretary. We know this, because the chief clerks sometimes sought

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 6 See also Act of July 27, 1789, ch. 4, 2, 1 Stat. 28, 29 (providing that the chief clerk in what became the Department of State was “an inferior officer, to be appointed by the [Department’s] principal officer”); Act of Sept. 2, 1789, ch. 12, 1, 1 Stat. 65, 65 (providing for an “Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury,” later known as the chief clerk, who “shall be appointed by the said Secretary”). The sources cited in the text above indicate that (1) the following chief clerks served as ad interim Secretary of State: Aaron Ogden Dayton, Aaron Vail (twice), Asbury Dickins (ten times), Daniel Carroll Brent (five times), Daniel Fletcher Webster, Jacob L. Martin (three times), John Appleton, John Graham, Nicholas Philip Trist (four times), Richard K. Cralle, William S. Derrick (fifteen times), William Hunter (seven times); (2) the following chief clerks served as ad interim Secretary of the Treasury: Asbury Dickins (eight times), John McGinnis, and McClintock Young (twenty-seven times); and (3) the following chief clerks (or acting chief clerks) served as ad interim Secretary of War: Albert Miller Lee, Archibald Campbell (five times), Christopher Vandeventer, George Graham, John D. McPherson, John Robb (six times), Philip G. Randolph (five times), Samuel J. Anderson, and William K. Drinkard.

 

  1. 7 See 1 Trial of Andrew Johnson at 580-81, 590-91 (entries for William L. Hodge and Peter Washington); Act of Mar. 3, 1849, ch. 108, 13, 9 Stat. 395, 396-97 (providing for appointment by the Secretary of an “Assistant Secretary of the Treasury”).

 

  1. 8 See Biographical Directory at 14-17 (chief clerks of the Navy in 1809, 1814-15, 1829, 1831, and 1841); id. at 18 (chief clerk of the Department of the Interior, Daniel C. Goddard, in 1850 (twice)); In re Cornelius Boyle, 34th Cong, 3d Sess., Rep. CC. 44, at 3, 12-13 (Ct. C1. 1857) (identifying 13 times between 1831 and 1838 that chief clerk John Boyle was appointed as Acting Secretary of the Navy, for a total of 466 days).
  2. [page] 10

 

  1. payment for the performance of those additional duties. Attorney General Legare concluded that Chief Clerk McClintock Young had a claim for compensation as “Secretary of the Treasury ad interim.” Pay of Secretary of the Treasury ad Interim, 4 Op. Att’y Gen. 122, 122-23 (1842). And the Court of Claims later concluded that Congress should appropriate funds to compensate such officers for that service. See, e. g, In re Cornelius Boyle, 34th Cong, 3d Sess., Rep. CC. 44, at 9, 1857 WL 4155, at *4 (Ct. C1. 1857) (“The office of Secretary ad interim being a distinct and independent office in itself, when it is conferred on the chief clerk, it is so conferred not because it pertains to him ex officio, but because the President, in the exercise of his discretion, sees fit to appoint Dickins, 34 Cong. Rep. CC. 9, at 16, 1856 WL 4042, at *3.

 

  1. Congress not only acquiesced in such appointments, but also required a non-Senate-confirmed officer to serve as a principal officer in some instances. In 1810, Congress provided that in the case of a vacancy in the office of the Postmaster General, “all his duties shall be performed by his senior assistant.” Act of Apr. 30, 1810, ch. 37, 1, 2 Stat. 592, 593. The senior assistant was one of two assistants appointed by the Postmaster General. Id. When I Congress reorganized the Post Office in 1836, it again required that the powers and duties of the Postmaster General would, in the case of “death, resignation, or absence” “devolve, for the time being on the First Assistant Postmaster General,” who was still an appointee of the Postmaster General. Act of July 2, 1836, ch. 270, 40, 5 Stat. 80, 89. On four occasions before 1860, a First Assistant Postmaster General served as Postmaster General ad interim. See Biographical Directory at 17-19 (in 1841 (twice), 1849, and 1859).

 

  1. On the eve of the Civil War in January 1861, President Buchanan summarized the Chief Executive’s View of his authority to designate interim officers in a message submitted to Congress to explain who had been performing the duties of the Secretary of War:

 

  1. The practice of making . . . appointments [under the 1795 statute], whether in a vacation or during the session of Congress, has been constantly followed during every administration from the earliest period of the government, and its perfect lawfulness has never, to my knowledge, been questioned or denied. Without going back further than the year 1829, and without taking into the calculation any but the chief officers of the several departments, it will be found that provisional appointments to fill vacancies were made to the number of one hundred and seventy-nine . . . . Some of them were made while the Senate was in session, some which were made in vacation were continued in force long after the Senate assembled. Sometimes, the temporary officer was the commissioned head of another department, sometimes a subordinate in the same department.

 

  1. Message from the President of the United States, 36th Cong, 2d Sess., Exec. Doc. No. 2, at 1-2 (1861) (emphases added).

 

 

  1. When it comes to vacancy statutes, the office of Attorney General presents an unusual case, albeit not one suggesting any different constitutional treatment. The office was established in the Judiciary Act of 1789, see Act of Sept. 24, 1789, ch. 20, 35, 1 Stat. 73, 93, and the Attorney General was a member of the President’s Cabinet, see Office and Duties of Attorney
  2. [page] 11

 

  1. General, 6 Op. Att’y Gen. 326, 330 (1854). But the Attorney General did not supervise an “executive department,” and the Department of Justice was not established until 1870. See Act of June 22, 1870, ch. 150, 1, 16 Stat. 162, 162. Thus, the terms 0fthe 1792, 1795, and 1863 statutes, and of the Vacancies Act of 1868, did not expressly apply to vacancies in the office of the Attorney General.

 

  1. Even so, the President made “temporary appointment[s]” to the office of Attorney General on a number of occasions. In 1854, Attorney General Cushing noted that “proof exists in the files of the department that temporary appointment has been made by the President in that office.” Office and Duties of Attorney General, 6 Op. Att’y Gen. at 352. Because the 1792 and 1795 statutes did not provide the President with express authority for those temporary appointments, Cushing believed it “questionable” whether the President had the power, but he also suggested that “[p]erhaps the truer view of the question is to consider the two statutes as declaratory only, and to assume that the power to make such temporary appointment is a constitutional one.” Id Cushing nonetheless recommended the enactment of “a general provision . . . to remove all doubt on the subject” for the Attorney General and “other non-enumerated departments.” Id.

 

  1. Congress did not immediately remedy the problem that Cushing identified, but Presidents designated Acting Attorneys General, both before and after the Cushing opinion. In some instances, the President chose an officer who already held another Senate-confirmed office. See Acting Attorneys General, 8 Op. O.L.C. 39, 40-41 (1984) (identifying instances in 1848 and 1868 involving the Secretary of the Navy or the Secretary of the Interior).9 In other instances, however, non-Senate-confirmed individuals served. After the resignation of Attorney General James Speed, for instance, Assistant Attorney General J. Hubley Ashton was the ad interim Attorney General from July 17 to July 23, 1866. See id. at 41; Biographical Directory at 20. At the time, the Assistant Attorney General was appointed by the Attorney General alone. See Act of March 3, 1859, ch. 80, 11 Stat. 410, 420 Attorney-General is hereby[] authorized to appoint one assistant in the said office, learned in the law, at an annual salary of three thousand dollars[x]”).10

 

  1. On other occasions between 1859 and 1868, Ashton and other Assistant Attorneys General who had not been Senate confirmed also signed several formal legal opinions as “Acting Attorney General,” presumably when their incumbent Attorney General was absent or otherwise

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 9 This list is almost certainly under-inclusive because the published sources we have located identify only those who were Acting Attorney General during a period between the resignation of one Attorney General and the appointment of his successor. They do not identify individuals who may have performed the functions and duties of Attorney General when an incumbent Attorney General was temporarily unavailable on account of an absence or sickness that would now trigger either 28 U.S.C. 508(a) or 5 U.S.C. 3345(a).

 

  1. 10 In 1868, Congress created two new Assistant Attorneys General positions to be “appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate,” and specified that those positions were “in lieu of,” among others, “the assistant attorney-general now provided for by law,” which was “abolished” effective on July 1, 1868. Act of June 25, 1868, ch. 71, 5, 15 Stat. 75, 75. A few weeks later, Ashton was confirmed by the Senate as an Assistant Attorney General. See 18 Sen. Exec. J. 369 (July 25, 1868). He was therefore holding a Senate-confirmed office when he served another stint as Acting Attorney General for several days at the beginning of the Grant Administration in March 1869, see Biographical Directory at 21, and when he signed five opinions as “Acting Attorney General” in September and October 1868.
  2. [page] 12

 

  1. See Case of Colonel Gates, 11 Op. Att’y Gen. 70, 70 (1864) (noting that the question from the President “reached this office in [the Attorney General’s] absence”). 11 In 1873, when Congress reconciled the Vacancies Act of 1868 with the Department of Justice’s organic statute, it expressly excepted the office of Attorney General from the general provision granting the President power to choose who would temporarily fill a vacant Senate-confirmed office. See Rev. Stat. 179 1st ed. 1875). There is accordingly no Attorney General-specific practice with respect to the pre-1998 statutes.

 

 

  1. Well before the Supreme Court’s foundational decision in Eaton in 1898, courts approved of the proposition that acting officers are entitled to payment for services during their temporary appointments as principal officers. See, e. g. United States v. White, 28 F. Cas. 586, 587 (C.C.D. Md. 1851) (Taney, Circuit J.) often happens that, in unexpected contingencies and for temporary purposes, the appointment of a person already in office, to execute the duties of another office, is more convenient and useful to the public, than to bring in a new officer to execute the Dickins, 34 Cong. Rep. CC. 9, at 17, 1856 WL 4042, at *3 (finding a chief clerk was entitled to additional compensation “for his services as acting Secretary of the Treasury and as acting Secretary of State”). Most significantly, in Boyle, the Court of Claims concluded that the chief clerk of the Navy (who was not Senate confirmed) had properly served as Acting Secretary of the Navy on an intermittent basis over seven years for a total of 466 days. 34 Cong. Rep. CC. 44, at 8, 1857 WL 4155, at *1-2 (1857). The court expressly addressed the Appointments Clause question and distinguished, for constitutional purposes, between the office of Secretary of the Navy and the office of Acting Secretary of the Navy. Id. at 8, 1857 WL 4155 at *3 (“It seems to us . . . plain that the office of Secretary ad interim is a distinct and independent office in itself. It is not the office of Furthermore, the court emphasized, the defining feature of the office of Secretary ad interim was its “temporary” character, and it must therefore be considered an inferior office:

 

  1. Congress has exercised the power of vesting the appointment of a Secretary ad interim in the President alone, and we think, in perfect consistency with the Constitution of the United States. We do not think that there can be any doubt that he is an inferior officer, in the sense of the Constitution, whose appointment may be vested by Congress in the President alone.

 

 

  1. When the Supreme Court addressed this Appointments Clause issue in 1898, it reached a similar conclusion. In United States v. Eaton, the Court considered whether Congress could authorize the President alone to appoint a subordinate officer “charged with the duty of temporarily performing the functions” of a principal officer. 169 US. at 343. The statute

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 11 There were two additional opinions signed by Ashton as “Acting Attorney General” in 1864 and 1865 (11 Op. Att’y Gen. 482; 11 Op. Att’y Gen. 127); as well as four signed as “Acting Attorney General” by Assistant Attorney General John Binckley in 1867 (12 Op. Att’y Gen. 231; 12 Op. Att’y Gen. 229; 12 Op. Att’y Gen 222; 12 Op. Att’y Gen. 227); two signed as “Acting Attorney General” by Assistant Attorney General Titian J. Coffey in 1862 and 1863 (10 Op. Att’y Gen. 492; 10 Op. Att’y Gen. 377); and one signed as “Acting Attorney General” by Assistant Attorney General Alfred B. McCalmont in 1859 (9 Op. Att’y Gen. 389).
  2. [page] 13

 

  1. authorized the President “to provide for the appointment of vice-consuls . . . in such a manner and under such regulations as he shall deem proper.” Id. at 336 (quoting Rev. Stat. 1695 (2d ed. 1878)). The President’s regulation provided that case a vacancy occurs in the offices both of the consul and the vice-consul, which requires the appointment of a person to perform temporarily the duties of the consulate, the diplomatic representative has authority to make such appointment, with the consent of the foreign government . . . immediate notice being given to the Department of State.” Id. at 338 (quoting regulation). Pursuant to that authority, Sempronius Boyd, who was the diplomatic representative and consul-general to Siam, appointed Lewis Eaton (then a missionary who was not employed by the government) as a vice-consul-general and directed him to take charge of the consulate after Boyd’s departure. Id. at 331-32. With the “knowledge” and “approval” of the Department of State, Eaton remained in charge of the consulate, at times calling himself “acting consul-general of the United States at Bangkok,” from July 12, 1892, until a successor vice-consul-general arrived on May 18, 1893. Id. at 332-33. In a dispute between Boyd’s widow and Eaton over salary payments, the Court upheld Eaton’s appointment, and the underlying statutory scheme, against an Appointments Clause challenge. Id. at 334-35, 352.

 

  1. The Constitution expressly includes “Consuls” in the category of officers whose appointment requires the Senate’s advice and consent. US. Const. art. ll, 2, cl. 2. The Eaton Court, however, concluded that a “Vice-consul” is an inferior officer whose appointment Congress may “vest in the President” alone. 169 US. at 343. The Court held that Eaton’s exercise of the authority of a Senate-confirmed office did not transform him into an officer requiring Senate confirmation:

 

  1. Because the subordinate officer is charged with the performance of the duty of the superior for a limited time and under special and temporary conditions, he is not thereby transformed into the superior and permanent official. To so hold would render void any and every delegation of power to an inferior to perform under any circumstances or exigency the duties of a superior officer, and the discharge of administrative duties would be seriously hindered.

 

  1. The Court concluded that more than forty years of practice “sustain the theory that a vice-consul is a mere subordinate official,” which defeated the contention that Eaton’s appointment required Senate confirmation. Id at 344. In so doing, the Court cited Attorney General Cushing’s 1855 opinion about appointments of consular officials, which had articulated the parameters for that practice. See id.12 Significantly, the Court also made clear that its holding was not limited to vice-consuls or to the exigencies of Eaton’s particular appointment. Rather, the Court emphasized that the temporary performance of a principal office is not the same as holding that office itself. The Court feared that a contrary holding would bear upon “any and every delegation of power to an inferior to perform under any circumstances or exigency.” Id at
  2. __________
  3. 12 In the 1855 opinion, Attorney General Cushing explained that a vice-consul is “the person employed to fill the [consul’s] place temporarily in his absence.” Appointment of Consuls, 7 Op. Att’y Gen. 242, 262? (1855). He noted that consuls had to be Senate-confirmed, but vice-consuls were regarded as the “subordinates of consuls” and therefore did not require “nomination to the Senate.” Id. at 247.
  4. [page] 14
  5. 343 (emphasis added). In View of the long history of such appointments, Eaton simply
  6. confirmed the general rule. It did not work any innovation in that practice. .
  7. The Court has not retreated from Eaton, or narrowed its holding, but instead has repeatedly cited the decision for the proposition that an inferior officer may temporarily perform the duties of a principal officer without Senate confirmation. In Edmond, the Court observed that “’inferior officers’ are officers whose work is directed and supervised at some level by others who were appointed by Presidential nomination with the advice and consent of the Senate.” 520 U.S. at 663. But the Court also observed that there is no “exclusive criterion for distinguishing between principal and inferior officers” and restated Eaton’s holding that “a vice consul charged temporarily with the duties of the consul” is an “inferior” officer. Id at 661. In Morrison, the Court emphasized that a subordinate who performed a principal officer’s duties “for a limited time and under special and temporary conditions” is not “thereby transformed into the superior and permanent official,” and explained that a Vice-consul appointed during the consul’s “temporary absence” remained a “subordinate officer notwithstanding the Appointment Clause’s specific reference to “Consuls” as principal officers.” 487 U.S. at 672-73 (quoting Eaton, 169 U.S. at 343)). Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion in Morrison similarly described Eaton as holding that “the appointment by an Executive Branch official other than the President of a “vice-consul,” charged with the duty of temporarily performing the function of the consul, did not violate the Appointments Clause.” Id. at 721 (Scalia, .. dissenting). Likewise, in his dissenting opinion in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 537 F.3d 667 (DC. Cir. 2008), aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 561 U.S. 447 (2010), then-Judge Kavanaugh cited Eaton to establish that “[t]he temporary nature of the office is the . . . reason that acting heads of departments are permitted to exercise authority without Senate confirmation.” Id at 708 n.17 (Kavanaugh, J. dissenting). Notably, Judge Kavanaugh also cited our 2003 opinion, which concluded that an OMB official who was not Senate confirmed could serve as Acting Director of OMB. See id. (citing Acting Director of 0MB, 27 Op. O.L.C. at 123).

 

  1. In SW General, the Court acknowledged the long history of Acts of Congress permitting the President to authorize officials to temporarily perform the functions of vacant offices requiring Senate approval. 137 S. Ct. at 935. Although the Court’s opinion did not address the Appointments Clause, Justice Thomas’s concurring opinion suggested that a presidential directive to serve as an officer under the Vacancies Reform Act should be viewed as an appointment, and that such a direction would “raise [ ] grave constitutional concerns because the Appointments Clause forbids the President to appoint principal officers without the advice and consent of the Senate.? Id. But Justice Thomas also distinguished Eaton on the ground that the acting designation at issue in SW General was not “special and temporary” because it had remained in place “for more than three years in offices limited by statute to a 4-year term.” Id. At 946 n. 1. Justice Thomas’s opinion may therefore be understood to be consistent not only with Eaton, but also with the precedents of this Office, which have found it “implicit” that “the tenure of an Acting Director should not continue beyond a reasonable time.” Status 0f the Acting Director, Office of Management and Budget, 1 Op. O.L.C. 287, 289-90 (1977). Even under Justice Thomas’s opinion, Mr. Whitaker’s designation as Acting Attorney General, which was made one week ago, and which would lapse in the absence of a presidential nomination, should qualify as “special and temporary” under Eaton.
  2. [page] 15

 

 

  1. Executive practice and more recent legislation reinforces that an inferior officer may temporarily act in the place of a principal officer. In 1980, for instance, this Office raised no constitutional concerns in concluding (in the context of a non-executive office) that the Comptroller General was statutorily authorized to “designate an employee” of the General Accounting Office to be Acting Comptroller General during the absence or incapacity of both the Senate-confirmed Comptroller General and the Senate-confirmed Deputy Comptroller General. Authority of the Comptroller General to Appoint an Acting Comptroller General, 4B Op. O.L.C 690, 690-91 (1980).

 

  1. Most significantly, in 2003, this Office relied on Eaton in concluding that, although “the position of Director [of is a principal office, . . . an Acting Director [of is only an inferior officer.” Acting Director of OMB, 27 Op. O.L.C. at 123. We did not think that that conclusion had been called into question by Edmond’s statement that an inferior officer is one who reports to a superior officer below the President, because in that case “[t]he Court held only that [g]enerally speaking” an inferior officer is subordinate to an officer other than the President,” and because Edmond did not deal with temporary officers. 27 Op. O.L.C. at 124 (citations omitted). Assuming that for constitutional purposes the official designated as acting head of an agency would need to be an inferior officer (and that the OMB official in question was not already such an officer), we further concluded that the President’s designation of an acting officer under the Act should be regarded as an appointment by the President alone” a constitutionally permissible mode for appointing an inferior officer. Id. at 125. Since then, Presidents George W. Bush and Obama each used their authority under the Vacancies Reform Act to place non-Senate-confirmed Chiefs of Staff in the lines of succession to be the acting head of several federal agencies.13 In three instances, President Obama placed a Chief of Staff above at least one Senate-confirmed officer within the same department.14 And, in practice, during the Bush, Obama, and Trump Administrations, multiple unconfirmed officers were designated to serve as acting agency heads, either under the Vacancies Reform Act or another office-specific

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 13 See Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the Social Security Administration, 71 Fed. Reg. 20333 (Apr. 17, 2006); Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the Council on Environmental Quality, 73 Fed. Reg. 54487 (Sept. 18, 2008) (later superseded by 2017 memorandum cited below); Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to Act as President of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, 76 Fed. Reg. 33613 (June 6, 2011); Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the Millennium Challenge Corporation to Act as Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, 77 Fed. Reg. 31161 (May 21, 2012); Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the General Services Administration to Act as Administrator of General Services, 78 Fed. Reg. 59161 (Sept. 20, 2013); Memorandum, Designation of Officers of the Office of Personnel Management to Act as Director of the Office of Personnel Management, 81 Fed. Reg. 54715 (Aug. 12, 2016); Memorandum, Providing an Order of Succession Within the National Endowment of the Humanities, 81 Fed. Reg. 54717 (Aug. 12, 2016); Memorandum, Providing an Order of Succession Within the National Endowment of the Arts, 81 Fed. Reg. 96335 (Dec. 23, 2016); Memorandum, Designation of Officers or Employees of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to Act as Director, 82 Fed. Reg. 7625 (Jan. 13, 2017); Memorandum, Providing an Order of Succession Within the Council on Environmental Quality, 82 Fed. Reg. 7627 (Jan. 13, 2017).

 

  1. 14 See Executive Order 13612, Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Agriculture, 77 Fed. Reg. 31153 (May 21, 2012); Executive Order 13735, Providing an Order Within the Department of the Treasury, 81 Fed. Reg. 54709 (Aug. 12, 2016); Executive Order 13736, Providing an Order of Succession Within the Department of Veterans Affairs, 81 Fed. Reg. 54711 (Aug. 12, 2016).
  2. [page] 16

 

  1. 15 Those determinations reflect the judgments of these administrations that the President may lawfully designate an unconfirmed official, including a Chief of Staff, to serve as an acting principal officer.

 

  1. Congress too has determined in the Vacancies Reform Act and many other currently operative statutes that non-Senate-confirmed officials may temporarily perform the functions of principal officers. By its terms, the Vacancies Reform Act applies to nearly all executive offices for which appointment “is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.” 5 U.S.C. 3345(a); see id (excluding only certain members of multi-member boards, commissions, or similar entities). And it specifically provides for different treatment in some respects depending on whether the vacant office is that of an agency head. Id 3348(b)(2). Moreover, the statute contemplates that non-Senate-confirmed officials will be able to serve as acting officers in certain applications of section 3345(a)(1) as well as in all applications of section 3345(a)(3), which refers to an “officer or employee.” The latter provision had no counterpart in the Vacancies Act of 1868, but it was not completely novel, because clerks, who were not Senate-confirmed, were routinely authorized to serve as acting officers under the 1792 and 1795 statutes.16

 

  1. Congress has also enacted various statutes that enable deputies not confirmed by the Senate to act when the office of the Senate-confirmed agency head is vacant. See 12 U.S.C. 4512(f) (providing for an Acting Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency); id 549l(b)(5) (providing for an Acting Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection); 21 U.S.C. 1703(a)(3) (providing for an Acting Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy); 40 U.S.C. 302(b) (providing for an Acting Administrator of the General Services Administration); 44 U.S.C. 2103(c) (providing for an Acting Archivist). All of those provisions contemplate the temporary service of non-Senate-confirmed officials as acting

 

  1. __________

 

  1. 15 For example, during this administration, Grace Bochenek, a non-Senate-confirmed laboratory director, served as Acting Secretary of Energy from January 20, 2017, until March 2, 2017; Tim Home, a non-Senate-confirmed Regional Commissioner, served as Acting Administrator of the General Services Administration from January 20, 2017, until December 12, 2017 (pursuant to a designation under a GSA-specific statute); Phil Rosenfelt, a non-Senate-confirmed Deputy General Counsel, served as Acting Secretary of Education from January 20, 2017, until February 7, 2017 (pursuant to a designation under a statute specific to that department); Don Wright, a non-Senate-confirmed Deputy Assistant Secretary, served as Acting Secretary of Health and Human Services from September 30, 2017, until October 10, 2017; Peter O’Rourke, a non-Senate-confirmed Chief of Staff, served as Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs from May 29, 2018, until July 30, 2018; and Shelia Crowley, a non-Senate-confirmed Chief of Operations, served, upon President Obama’s designation, as Acting Director of the Peace Corps from January 20, 2017, until November 16, 2017. During the Obama administration, Darryl Hairston, a career employee, served as Acting Administrator of the Small Business Administration from January 22, 2009, until April 6, 2009, and Edward Hugler, a non-Senate-confirmed Deputy Assistant Secretary, served as Acting Secretary of Labor from February 2, 2009, until February 24, 2009. During the Bush Administration, Augustine a non-Senate-confirmed Executive Associate Director served as Acting Director of OMB from June 10, 2003, until late June 2003, consistent with our opinion.

 

  1. 16 Echoing the movement in the early nineteenth century to chief clerks rather than Senate-confirmed officials from other departments, section 3345(a)(3) was reportedly the product of a desire to give the President “more flexibility” to use “qualified individuals who have worked within the agency in which the vacancy occurs for a minimum number of days and who are of a minimum grade level.” S. Rep. No. 105-250, at 31 (additional views of Sen. Glenn et id at 35 (minority views of Sens. Durbin and Akaka).
  2. [page] 17

 

  1. principal officers, and these statutes would appear to be unconstitutional if only a Senate-confirmed officer could temporarily serve as an acting principal officer. Similarly, other current statutes provide that, although the deputy is appointed by the President with the Senate’s advice and consent, the President or the department head may designate another official to act as the agency head, even though that official is not Senate-confirmed. See 20 U.S.C. 3412(a)( 1) (providing that “[t]he Secretary [of Education] shall designate the order in which other officials of the Department shall act for and perform the functions of the Secretary . . . in the event of vacancies in both” the Secretary and Deputy Secretary positions); 31 U.S.C. 502(f) (providing that the President may designate “an officer of the Office [of Management and Budget] to act as Director”); 38 U.S.C. 304 (providing that the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs serves as Acting Secretary “[u]nless the President designates another officer of the Government”); 42 U.S.C. 7132(a) (providing that “[t]he Secretary [of Energy] shall designate the order in which the Under Secretary and other officials shall act for and perform the functions of the Secretary . . . in the event of vacancies in both” the Secretary and Deputy Secretary positions); 49 U.S.C. 102(e) (providing that the Secretary of Transportation shall establish an order of succession that includes Assistant Secretaries who are not Senate-confirmed for instances in which the offices of the Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy are vacant); 4O U.S.C. 302(b) (providing that the Deputy Administrator serves as Acting Administrator of General Services when that office “is vacant,” “unless the President designates another officer of the Federal Government”); cf 44 U.S.C. 304 (limiting the individuals whom the President may choose to serve as Acting Director of the Government Printing Office to those who occupy offices requiring presidential appointment with the Senate’s advice and consent).

 

  1. Indeed, if it were unconstitutional for an official without Senate confirmation to serve temporarily as an acting agency head, then the recent controversy over the Acting Director of the CFPB should have been resolved on that ground alone – even though it was never raised by any party, the district court, or the judges at the appellate argument. On November 24, 2017, the Director of the CF PB appointed a new Deputy Director, expecting that she would become the Acting Director upon his resignation later that day. Acting Director of CFPB, 41 Op. O.L.C. at *2 n. 1. The Director of the CFPB relied on 12 U.S.C. 5491(b)(5), which expressly contemplates that a non-Senate-confirmed official (the Deputy Director) will act as a principal officer (the Director). The President, however, exercised his authority under 5 U.S.C. 3345(a)(2) to designate the Director of OMB as Acting Director of the CF PB. See English, 279 F. Supp. 3d at 330. When the Deputy Director challenged the President’s action, we are not aware that anyone ever contended that the Deputy Director was constitutionally ineligible to serve as Acting Director because she had not been confirmed by the Senate. If the newly
  2. installed Deputy Director of the CFPB could lawfully have become the Acting Director, then the
  3. Chief of Staff to the Attorney General may serve as Acting Attorney General in the case of a vacancy.

 

 

  1. The constitutionality of Mr. Whitaker’s designation as Acting Attorney General is supported by Supreme Court precedent, by acts of Congress passed in three different centuries,
  2. and by countless examples of executive practice. To say that the Appointments Clause now
  3. [page] 18

 

  1. prohibits the President from designating Mr. Whitaker as Acting Attorney General would mean that the Vacancies Reform Act and a dozen statutes were unconstitutional, as were countless prior instances of temporary service going back to at least the Jefferson Administration.

 

  1. There is no question that Senate confirmation is an important constitutional check on the President’s appointments of senior officers. The Senate’s role “serves both to curb Executive abuses of the appointment power, and to promote a judicious choice of [persons] for filling the offices of the union.” Edmond, 520 US. at 659 (internal quotation marks omitted). At the same time, the “constitutional process of Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation . . . can take time: The President may not settle on a nominee to fill an office; the Senate may be unable, or unwilling, to speedily confirm the nominee once submitted.” SW General, 137 S. Ct. at 935. Despite their frequent disagreements over nominees, for over 200 years, Congress and the President have agreed upon the value and permissibility of using temporary appointments, pursuant to limits set by Congress, in order to overcome the delays of the confirmation process.

 

  1. If the President could not rely on temporary designations for principal offices, then the efficient functioning of the Executive Branch would be severely compromised. Because most Senate-confirmed officials resign at the end of an administration, a new President must rely on acting officials to serve until nominees have been confirmed. If Senate confirmation were required before anyone could serve, then the Senate could frustrate the appropriate functioning of the Executive Branch by blocking the confirmation of principal officers for some time. See 144 Cong. Rec. 27496 (Oct. 21, 1998) (statement of Sen. Thompson) (noting that section 3345(a)(3) had been added because “[c]oncerns had been raised that, particularly early in a presidential administration, there will sometimes be vacancies in first assistant positions, and that there will not be a large number of Senate-confirmed officers in the government,” as well as “concerns . . . about designating too many Senate-confirmed persons from other offices to serve as acting officers in additional positions?). A political dispute with the Senate could frustrate the President’s ability to execute the laws by delaying the appointment of his principal officers.

 

  1. The problems with a contrary rule are not limited to the beginning of an administration. Many agencies would run into problems on an ongoing basis, because they have few officers subject to Senate confirmation. Thus, when a vacancy in the top spot arises, such an agency would either lack a head or be forced to rely upon reinforcements from Senate-confirmed appointees outside the agency. Those outside officers may be inefficient choices when a non-Senate-confirmed officer within the agency is more qualified to act as a temporary caretaker. At best, designating a Senate-confirmed officer to perform temporary services would solve a problem at one agency only by cannibalizing the senior personnel of another.

 

  1. It is true that these concerns do not apply to the current circumstances of the Department of Justice, which is staffed by a number of Senate-confirmed officers. Following Attorney General Sessions’ resignation, the President could have relied upon the Deputy Attorney General, the Solicitor General, or an Assistant Attorney General to serve as Acting Attorney General. But the availability of potential alternatives does not disable Congress from providing the President with discretion to designate other persons under section 3345(a)(3) of the Vacancies Reform Act. Nothing in the text of the Constitution or historical practice suggests that
  2. [page] 19
  3. the President may turn to an official who has not been confirmed by the Senate if, but only if, there is no appropriate Senate-confirmed official available.
  4. The President’s designation to serve as Acting Attorney General of a senior Department of Justice official who does not currently hold a Senate-confirmed office is expressly authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3345(a)(3). Mr. Whitaker has been designated based upon a statute that permits him to serve as Acting Attorney General for a limited period, pending the Senate’s consideration of a nominee for Attorney General. Consistent with our 2003 opinion, with Eaton, and with two centuries of practice, we advised that his designation would be lawful.
  5. [Signed]
  6. STEVEN A. ENGEL
  7. Assistant Attorney General
  8. [page]20

 

 

 

 

  1. THIS WRITER?
  2. Richard is an attorney at law, and has served as an advertising and marketing and operations executive, a copy and slogan and technical and fiction writer, an auditor, an educator, and as CEO, Executive Vice President, and Vice President of several companies, one of which was among the largest privately owned broadcasting companies in the world. He works at being an oil, acrylic, and watercolor artist, and more than 800 of his oil, acrylic, and watercolor paintings are found on fineartamerica.com or www.richard-w-linford.pixels.com. He has written more than 75 non-fiction and fiction books listed in this appendix to this small work, most of which are available on www.amazon.com (type Richard W. Linford.) He was co-producer of audio programs The World’s 100 Greatest Books, The World’s 100 Greatest People, and The World’s 50 Greatest Composers, their lives and their music. He served as state chairman of the National Conference of Christians and Jews (and Muslims) and on NCCJ national board for 14 years, as chairman of a multi-county Red Cross, and on other non-profit boards. He currently serves as the representative of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on the Utah State Volunteers Active in Disaster Board.

 

 

 

 

  1. Most of Richard’s Writings are on Amazon.com. Type Richard W. Linford.

 

  1. His art – 800+ oil and acrylic paintings – is found at richard-w-linford.pixels.com or by typing Richard W. Linford in www.fineartamerica.com.

 

 

 

 

  1. If you have observations feel free to talk to him via linford@comcast.net.

 

 

 

 

  1. Following is a catalog of his book subjects and titles, most of which are found at amazon.com and which can be accessed by clicking on the link following a title below or by typing Richard W. Linford or Richard Linford in the amazon.com search box.

 

  1. ABS OF STEEL. HOW TO BUILD SIX-PACK ABS OF STEEL THE QUALITY REP WAY! Man or Woman! In the Privacy of your own home!https://www.amazon.com/HOW-BUILD-SIX-PACK-STEEL-QUALITY-ebook/dp/B010EM6MY6/ref=sr_1_85?ie=UTF8&qid=1502472532&sr=8-85&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. MARKETING. Jackalope Mindset: Focus on your Jackalope! Break through the social and media clutter. Sell yourself, your products and your services. https://www.amazon.com/Jackalope-Mindset-clutter-yourself-services-ebook/dp/B01LG786EW/ref=sr_1_35?ie=UTF8&qid=1502472693&sr=8-35&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. Marty and The UK Brexit High Anxiety Hotel and Restaurant. A short story. An allegory. https://www.amazon.com/Marty-Mouse-Brexit-Anxiety-Restaurant/dp/152109649X/ref=sr_1_49?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870920&sr=8-49&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. BAKING SODA USES? 325 ARM & HAMMER BAKING SODA USES??? (Sodium Bicarbonate; Bi-carbonate Soda) USES THAT PEOPLE CLAIM WORK??? https://www.amazon.com/325-HAMMER-BAKING-SODA-USES-ebook/dp/B011CF6U0K/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1502486878&sr=8-6&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. BEST PRACTICE AND BEST PRACTICES. THE POWER OF BEST PRACTICE AND BEST PRACTICES. https://www.amazon.com/Power-Best-Practice-Practices/dp/1521361398/ref=sr_1_24?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-24&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. BLINDING FLASHS OF THE OBVIOUS. IN SEARCH OF 500 NOT SO BLINDING AND BLINDING FLASHES OF THE OBVIOUS. https://www.amazon.com/SEARCH-500-BLINDING-FLASHES-OBVIOUS-ebook/dp/B01N0EHXVM/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-9&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. BRAIN POWER. Better Brain! Super Brain! Supercharge Your Brain! Supercharge Your Brain 1209 Ways! https://www.amazon.com/Better-Brain-Super-Supercharge-Your-ebook/dp/B014EVX8WW/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-14&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. BUSINESS TURNAROUND. HOW TO BEGIN TURNING YOUR BUSINESS AROUND IN 30 MINUTES: Save a fortune on consulting services! https://www.amazon.com/BEGIN-TURNING-BUSINESS-AROUND-MINUTES-ebook/dp/B011T55SUG/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-8&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. BUSINESS TURNAROUND. Stop Strolling Around Naked In Your Business Empire Like “ALITTLEKINGLY”. Begin to turn your business around now. https://www.amazon.com/Strolling-Around-Business-Empire-ALittle/dp/1575740206/ref=sr_1_36?ie=UTF8&qid=1505839392&sr=8-36&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. BUY or LEASE, and DRIVE a FORD AMERICAN “LUXURY” CAR and TRUCK TODAY! 222 AFFIRMATIONS. HONORING FORD MOTOR COMPANY. GREATEST CAR AND TRUCK COMPANY AND BRAND IN THE WORLD. Don’t procrastinate. Do it now! https://www.amazon.com/LEASE-DRIVE-AMERICAN-LUXURY-TRUCK-ebook/dp/B07GQBJYP2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1535389923&sr=8-1&keywords=bUY+LEASE+DRIVE+A+FORD&dpID=514BieDNMkL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. CONCORD, CALIFORNIA. concord in the Son: honoring concord california. https://www.amazon.com/concord-Son-honoring-california-ebook/dp/B00ZSRASYS/ref=sr_1_34?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-34&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. INTERMEDIATION. Disintermediation, Intermediation, or Both: 200 steps to greater prosperity by eliminating or adding intermediaries. https://www.amazon.com/Disintermediation-Intermediation-Both-eliminating-intermediaries-ebook/dp/B01DMIJ0DY/ref=sr_1_27?ie=UTF8&qid=1505838733&sr=8-27&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS. Sleep While The Wind Blows! Survival Checklists! Prepare Now! When a disaster or emergency happens, your time for preparation is over! https://www.amazon.com/Sleep-While-Wind-Blows-preparation-ebook/dp/B00P00RUOO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-1&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=51-6x1719WL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. Andrew Chipman’s Christmas Angel. https://www.amazon.com/Andrew-Chipmans-Christmas-Richard-LInford/dp/1575740176/ref=sr_1_38?ie=UTF8&qid=1505839508&sr=8-38&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. Andy Pepper and Prince Kalid’s Solid Gold Western Flyer X-53. https://www.amazon.com/Pepper-Prince-Kahlids-Solid-Western-ebook/dp/B01EYXVZOI/ref=sr_1_76?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-76&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. Driving Mabel for Christmas Dinner. https://www.amazon.com/Driving-Christmas-Dinner-Richard-Linford-ebook/dp/B078HB4XC3/ref=sr_1_22?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-22&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=5178sLG1twL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. I Am the Count of Monte Cristo. Short story. https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_6?rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3ArICHARD+w+lINFORD&page=6&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985

 

 

 

 

  1. JOSHUA REDSHIELD’S DNA AND THE ILLUMINATI? A TECHNOTHRILLER (JOSHUA REDSHIELD AND THE ILLUMINATI Book 1. https://www.amazon.com/JOSHUA-REDSHIELDS-DNA-ILLUMINATI-TECHNOTHRILLER-ebook/dp/B01E91I4S0/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-30&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. The Bulletproof Invincible Man. Sheik Harun al-Rashid – A short story. https://www.amazon.com/Bulletproof-Invincible-Man-Sheik-al-Rashid-ebook/dp/B011FKPMP6/ref=sr_1_62?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-62&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. The KITE MAKER’S DAUGHTER: A fabled story for every daughter and every son? An allegory. https://www.amazon.com/KITE-MAKERS-DAUGHTER-daughter-allegory/dp/1718028172/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1534887731&sr=8-1&keywords=The+KITE+MAKER%27S+Daughter

 

  1. The Minimalist: 89 EMAILS TO MY MARINE SON RAFAEL. https://www.amazon.com/Minimalist-EMAILS-MARINE-RAFAEL-novel/dp/1980353794/ref=sr_1_61?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-61&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. The Receiver. A short story about an appointed Securities and Exchange Commission Receiver, his work and response. https://www.amazon.com/Receiver-short-Richard-W-Linford-ebook/dp/B0134GYM2I/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-18&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. THE WHITE UNICORN CODE: Mystery of the Lady with the Unicorn and other Unicorn tapestries. https://www.amazon.com/White-Unicorn-Code-tapestries-2010-07-21/dp/B01F9GTEM4/ref=sr_1_94?ie=UTF8&qid=1534883070&sr=8-94&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. The Young Marine and the Snow an allegory. https://www.amazon.com/Young-Marine-Snow-Allegory/dp/1575740192/ref=sr_1_37?ie=UTF8&qid=1505839508&sr=8-37&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford; https://www.amazon.com/Young-Marine-Snow-short-allegory-ebook/dp/B011PHGFH8/ref=sr_1_83?ie=UTF8&qid=1534882887&sr=8-83&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. Waiting with Brutus Caesar Anthony the 7th, William and Mary, for SAM THE MECHANIC MAN. https://www.amazon.com/Waiting-Brutus-Anthony-William-MECHANIC/dp/1521158010/ref=sr_1_32?ie=UTF8&qid=1505839176&sr=8-32&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. WESTERN. The Cowboy Bar L Dude Ranch, Five Guests, and the Mean Banker. https://www.amazon.com/Cowboy-Dude-Ranch-Guests-Banker-ebook/dp/B0756JG4K2/ref=sr_1_27?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-27&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. Seven DEADLY NEGATIVE HABITS of Highly Ineffective People plus The Young Knight with the short lance and the Black Knight – An Allegory. https://www.amazon.com/DEADLY-NEGATIVE-HABITS-Highly-Ineffective/dp/1549957171/ref=sr_1_55?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-55&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. HABITS OF LOSERS. How to Lose! 70 habits of losers who abuse or lose friends, health, influence and money! https://www.amazon.com/How-Lose-habits-friends-influence-ebook/dp/B01AAV6CGO/ref=sr_1_40?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-40&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP AND SUGAR BELLY. https://www.amazon.com/HIGH-FRUCTOSE-SYRUP-SUGAR-BELLY-ebook/dp/B01B554JAK/ref=sr_1_28?ie=UTF8&qid=1505838733&sr=8-28&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. A letter to my grandson, Jason: You are a son of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. I love you. Your grandpa. https://www.amazon.com/letter-grandson-Jason-Heavenly-grandpa-ebook/dp/B01AOWGOQC/ref=sr_1_33?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-33&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. ANGELS. ARE SHOULDER ANGELS AMONG US? Yes. There are good and bad angels. https://www.amazon.com/ARE-SHOULDER-ANGELS-AMONG-US-ebook/dp/B00Q3GX8Q8/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-12&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. ARTICLES OF FAITH. My 32 Articles of Faith in God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ: Based on Joseph Smith’s 13 Articles of Faith, LDS Gospel Principles, and my understanding of the doctrine and Church of Jesus Christ. https://www.amazon.com/Articles-Faith-Father-Jesus-Christ-ebook/dp/B011DTKQSC/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-10&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. BEHOLD THE MAN: Jesus is The Christ, The Great Jehovah, The Holy Messiah who soon will come! https://www.amazon.com/Behold-Man-Christ-Jehovah-Messiah-ebook/dp/B011YLLSKO/ref=sr_1_43?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-43&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Christmas and Easter Opus. Honoring and testifying that GOD OUR HEAVENLY FATHER AND HIS BELOVED SON LIVE. https://www.amazon.com/Christmas-Easter-Opus-Honoring-testifying-ebook/dp/B00ZS53A0O/ref=sr_1_51?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-51&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=51eBFOrba7L&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. COME UNTO CHRIST: REPENT AND PRAY MIGHTILY FOR FORGIVENESS OF YOUR SINS! Meditations on Repentance, Prayer, and The Book of Mormon, Book of Enos: The Jesus Christ papers. https://www.amazon.com/COME-UNTO-CHRIST-Forgiveness-MEDITATIONS-ebook/dp/B01N5HJFUW/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-12&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. DEATH. DEATH SOLUTION HOW TO AVOID YOUR DEATH? https://www.amazon.com/DEATH-SOLUTION-HOW-AVOID-YOUR-ebook/dp/B01LTGUPZ8/ref=sr_1_49?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-49&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. HONORING PRESIDENT MARION G. ROMNEY. Noble Apostle of Jesus the Christ the Holy Messiah. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-President-Marion-G-Romney-ebook/dp/B077GY3ZSX/ref=sr_1_54?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-54&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS: JESUS CHRIST IS THE HOLY MESSIAH: HE SOON WILLL COME TO BEGIN HIS MILLENNIAL REIGN OF PEACE. https://www.amazon.com/JESUS-CHRIST-PAPERS-MESSIAH-MILLENNIAL-ebook/dp/B01EEK4386/ref=sr_1_77?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-77&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Meditations on Jesus The Christ and the Book of Mormon, Book of Moroni. https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Jesus-Christ-Mormon-Moroni-ebook/dp/B01MDJT7R7/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-8&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. ENEMIES. How to get rid of your enemies? https://www.amazon.com/How-get-rid-your-enemies-ebook/dp/B01KVY0VK8/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-6&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. GRANDPA TO GRANDSON. A letter to my grandson, Jason: You are a son of our Heavenly Father and Mother. I love you. Your grandpa. https://www.amazon.com/letter-grandson-Jason-Heavenly-grandpa-ebook/dp/B01AOWGOQC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542222675&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+a+lETTER+TO+MY+GRANDSON+jASON

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. GRANDPAS. GRANDSONS. GOD COULDN’T BE EVERYWHERE SO HE CREATED GRANDPAS: 692 WAYS TO BE A BETTER GRANDPA TO YOUR GRANDSON. https://www.amazon.com/GOD-COULDNT-EVERYWHERE-CREATED-GRANDPAS-ebook/dp/B01EKKIAZ2/ref=sr_1_36?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-36&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=51kbey4orcL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. HOLINESS! Worship the LORD in the Beauty of Holiness! https://www.amazon.com/HOLINESS-Worship-Beauty-Holiness-Christ-ebook/dp/B06XDHCBS6/ref=sr_1_29?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-29&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Honoring God the Son whose Second Coming is near: Holy Names, Titles and Concepts that describe Jehovah Jesus Christ The Holy Messiah. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-whose-Second-Coming-near/dp/1521473811/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1505838733&sr=8-30&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Honoring Moses and Thomas S. Monson, Prophets of God. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-Moses-Thomas-Monson-Prophets/dp/1521399239/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-23&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Meditations on The Book of [the Prophet] Jacob as found in the [Holy] Book of Mormon including Meditations on The Prophet [Zenos’] Allegory of the Tame and Wild Olive Trees. https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Book-Mormon-Prophet-Jacob-ebook/dp/B07F98LM3V/ref=sr_1_38?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-38&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=611X8baOG4L&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. The Holy Ghost Power and Gift. https://www.amazon.com/Holy-Ghost-Power-Gift-Meditations-ebook/dp/B06W2KB7MZ/ref=sr_1_48?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-48&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. TWELVE RULES FOR ETERNAL LIFE. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=TWELVE+RULES+FOR+ETERNAL+LIFE&ref=nb_sb_noss_2

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS VOLUME 1: THE MANY WITNESSES THAT “HE LIVES!” https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Christ-Papers-Witnesses-Jehovah/dp/1575740214/ref=sr_1_70?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-70&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=51v8JgbrR9L&preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Jesus Christ lives! The many witnesses. Volume 1. https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_6?rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3ArICHARD+w+lINFORD&page=6&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Jesus Christ’s True Church: 70 characteristics with scriptural references. https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Christs-True-Church-characteristics-ebook/dp/B01BO9849E/ref=sr_1_44?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-44&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. JESUS IS THE CHRIST, THE RESURRECTED HOLY MESSIAH. He will come someday in power and great glory. Kindle ebook edition. https://www.amazon.com/JESUS-CHRIST-RESURRECTED-HOLY-MESSIAH-ebook/dp/B07KFQZTFN/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542217215&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Jesus+is+The+Christ%2C+The+Holy+Messiah; Paperback edition. https://www.amazon.com/JESUS-CHRIST-RESURRECTED-HOLY-MESSIAH/dp/1731249470/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1542217290&sr=8-2&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Jesus+is+The+Christ%2C+The+Holy+Messiah+Paperback&dpID=51NQQxwkjGL&preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. LIFE. DEATH. he planted Utah strawberries and then he died: richard w Linford. https://www.amazon.com/planted-utah-strawberries-then-died-ebook/dp/B00ZQ1OO64/ref=sr_1_28?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-28&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. MARRIAGE. Choose Your Love! Love Your Choice! 22 Anti-divorce Principles for Christian Couples. https://www.amazon.com/Choose-Your-Love-Choice-Anti-divorce-ebook/dp/B011EQ9KSG/ref=sr_1_21?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-21&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=61DnI9110OL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. MEDITATIONS on “THE IMITATION OF CHRIST by Thomas A Kempis” BOOK ONE “Admonitions Profitable for the Spiritual Life”: Translated by Rev. William Benham. Meditations by Richard W.  https://www.amazon.com/MEDITATIONS-IMITATION-Admonitions-Profitable-Spiritual-ebook/dp/B01L2SANDW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1502471298&sr=8-4&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Meditations on Jesus the Christ and the Book of Mormon, Book of Moroni – Come unto Christ and be perfected in Him. Read the Book of Mormon at lds.org. Ask God if these things are not true. https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Jesus-Christ-Mormon-Moroni-ebook/dp/B01MDJT7R7/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1502484088&sr=8-6&keywords=richard+linford

 

 

 

 

  1. MINISTER TO THE ONE NEAREST TO YOU – MOTHER TERESA Her life – with 1248 faith promoting facts, quotes and stories This ebook and paperback book are available on amazon.com. https://www.amazon.com/MINISTER-ONE-NEAREST-YOU-promoting-ebook/dp/B07JJX1YJJ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542215988&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Minister&dpID=51GPQ02LCkL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. PEACE. PUT DOWN YOUR THOUSAND STONES – Peace between Muslim, Jew and Christian – 304 thoughts – With all thy being, be at peace! https://www.amazon.com/PUT-DOWN-YOUR-THOUSAND-STONES-ebook/dp/B01DREDVC4/ref=sr_1_12?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-12&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. PERSECUTION. HAUN’S MILL TREBLINKA TOO: The Persecution. https://www.amazon.com/HAUNS-MILL-TREBLINKA-TOO-Persecution-ebook/dp/B0106R3T0Y/ref=sr_1_42?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-42&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. PRAYER. PRAY ALWAYS TO OUR FATHER IN HEAVEN IN THE SACRED NAME OF HIS BELOVED SON JESUS CHRIST: The Purifying Power of Humble Prayer. https://www.amazon.com/ALWAYS-FATHER-HEAVEN-SACRED-BELOVED-ebook/dp/B01GWD5FSU/ref=sr_1_75?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-75&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. PRIESTHOOD KEYS. APOSTOLIC KEYS. All Apostolic Keys of the Holy Priesthood and Kingdom of God were conferred upon the Prophet Joseph Smith. https://www.amazon.com/APOSTOLIC-KEYS-Apostolic-Priesthood-conferred-ebook/dp/B01BPSQID8/ref=sr_1_35?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869792&sr=8-35&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. REPENT. Repent America or Be Destroyed Like the Jaredites! Repent and Serve The God of This Land who is Jesus Christ! https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Repent+America

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS – The Father, The Son, The Holy Ghost – Our Divine Origin, Mortality and Destiny. https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Christ-Papers-Mortality-Destiny-ebook/dp/B01GEYJ47K/ref=sr_1_57?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-57&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. THE HOLY GHOST. POWER AND GIFT. MEDITATIONS. https://www.amazon.com/Holy-Ghost-Power-Gift-Meditations-ebook/dp/B06W2KB7MZ/ref=sr_1_30?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-30&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. THE LION OF JUDAH ROARS! REPENT! https://www.amazon.com/LION-JUDAH-ROARS-REPENT-Jehovah-ebook/dp/B00ZVB02DS/ref=sr_1_92?ie=UTF8&qid=1534883070&sr=8-92&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. THE MANY WITNESSES THAT “HE LIVES!” https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Christ-Papers-Witnesses-Jehovah/dp/1575740214/ref=sr_1_35?ie=UTF8&qid=1505840223&sr=8-35&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. THE SECOND COMING OF JESUS CHRIST THE MESSIAH Libretto Sacred Oratorio. The Second Coming as a destruction from the Almighty is near! Repent! https://www.amazon.com/SECOND-COMING-MESSIAH-Libretto-Oratorio-ebook/dp/B0103H3U0Q/ref=sr_1_91?ie=UTF8&qid=1534883070&sr=8-91&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. SABBATH BREAKING. Sabbath Breaking and Sports as The Worlds’ Religion: Fix it Richard! https://www.amazon.com/Sabbath-Breaking-Sports-Worlds-Religion-ebook/dp/B010MJFH06/ref=sr_1_31?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-31&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. JESUS CHRIST PAPERS. Would Jesus Christ Do That? Is the first question! https://www.amazon.com/Would-Jesus-Christ-first-question/dp/1575740168/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&qid=1505838470&sr=8-25&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. MAKE MORE PEPPERONI “MONEY.” How to Make More Pepperoni?: How did Steven Jobs; Fed de Luca; Warren Buffett; Bill Gates; Larry Ellison; Carlos Slim; Fred, Charles, David Koch; do it. https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-More-Pepperoni-pepperoni-ebook/dp/B011F4WZP2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542216656&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+How+to+make+more+pepperoni&dpID=51qKBQOtG5L&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. MATEO CERVANTES SERIES. NOVEL. Mateo Cervantes – The Old Cowboy Prospector and The Buckskin Rocinante. https://www.amazon.com/Mateo-Cervantes-Prospector-Buckskin-Rocinante-ebook/dp/B06WLN34PD?keywords=Mateo+Cervantes&qid=1539887390&sr=8-1&ref=sr_1_1

 

 

 

 

  1. MELANIA TRUMP. MELANIA TRUMP – HONORING FLOTUS. https://www.amazon.com/MELANIA-TRUMP-Honoring-FLOTUS-intelligent/dp/1521995273/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1502471298&sr=8-2&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. 7 MARRIAGE GIFTS FOR 7 DAYS: To make your good marriage great or your bad marriage better. https://www.amazon.com/Marriage-Gifts-Days-marriage-better/dp/1575740249/ref=sr_1_69?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-69&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=41pb0KXJj-L&preST=_SX218_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

 

  1. 199 Ways to Make Your Good Marriage Great or Your Bad marriage Better: Romance and improve your marriage today. https://www.amazon.com/Ways-Make-Marriage-Great-Better/dp/1575740184/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-14&keywords=Richard+W+Linford; https://www.amazon.com/Ways-Make-Marriage-Great-Better/dp/1575740184/ref=sr_1_66?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878879&sr=8-66&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. How to Make More Pepperoni? How did Steven Jobs; Fred de Luca; Warren Buffett; Bill Gates; Larry Ellison; Carlos Slim; Fred, Charles, David Koch; and the Waltons make more pepperoni and how can you? https://www.amazon.com/How-Make-More-Pepperoni-pepperoni-ebook/dp/B011F4WZP2/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-9&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. COWBOY POETRY. Mustangs Running With The Judas Horse: How to Write Cowboy Poetry. https://www.amazon.com/Mustangs-Running-Judas-Horse-Cowboy-ebook/dp/B010OTOLS8/ref=sr_1_88?ie=UTF8&qid=1534883070&sr=8-88&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. Honoring God the Son whose Second Coming is Near; Holy Names and Concepts that describe Jehovah Jesus Christ The Holy Messiah. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-whose-Second-Coming-near/dp/1521473811/ref=sr_1_64?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-64&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. Honoring Moses and Thomas S. Monson, Prophets of God. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-Moses-Thomas-Monson-Prophets/dp/1521399239/ref=sr_1_23?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-23&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. HONORING PRESIDENT MARION G. ROMNEY. Noble Apostle of Jesus the Christ the Holy Messiah. https://www.amazon.com/Honoring-President-Marion-G-Romney-ebook/dp/B077GY3ZSX/ref=sr_1_54?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-54&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. HONORING SEAN HANNITY. His critics fail in their attempts to dishonor and marginalize him. https://www.amazon.com/HONORING-SEAN-HANNITY-Political-marginalize-ebook/dp/B07HPFRFK1/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542216701&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+Honoring+Sean+Hannity

 

 

 

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. Honoring Stephen R Covey October 24, 1932 to July 16, 2012 Life is not accumulation! Think win-win! https://www.amazon.com/HONORING-STEPHEN-COVEY-October-1932-ebook/dp/B0784CYSJJ/ref=sr_1_59?ie=UTF8&qid=1534870960&sr=8-59&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. KILLING BILL O’REILLY. The LEFT tried to KILL BILL’S CAREER! They failed! Bill is back with a VENGEANCE! https://www.amazon.com/KILLING-BILL-OREILLY-CAREER-VENGEANCE-ebook/dp/B077SH9Z1X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-3&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. Push Your Limits! Honoring General John Francis Kelly! Semper Fidelis! [Always faithful! Always loyal!] The marines have landed at the US White House! https://www.amazon.com/Limits-Honoring-General-Francis-Fidelis/dp/1522066187/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1502471298&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. PERFORMANCE AND SUCCESS. PUSH YOUR LIMITS! Honoring Ueli Steck with His two Golden Ice Axes In memoriam. A revolutionary way to live your life by challenging and speed climbing your seemingly impossible physical and spiritual mountains. https://www.amazon.com/limits-Honoring-Steck-Golden-memoriam-ebook/dp/B0727ZL9QS/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1502484088&sr=8-10&keywords=richard+linford

 

 

 

 

  1. DID THE PATIENT DIE ON THE OPERATING TABLE? OBAMACARE 101 THOUGHTS: Is Obama’s “Affordable Health Care” Plan affordable? Is Universal Health Care the answer? https://www.amazon.com/PATIENT-OPERATING-TABLE-OBAMACARE-THOUGHTS-ebook/dp/B01DOR17HU/ref=sr_1_79?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-79&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. DONALD TRUMP: 307 Promises and Positions. https://www.amazon.com/DONALD-TRUMP-307-Promises-Positions-ebook/dp/B01BWDHLVO/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-7&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. KILLING BILL O’REILLY. The LEFT tried to KILL BILL’S CAREER! They failed! Bill is back with a VENGEANCE! https://www.amazon.com/KILLING-BILL-OREILLY-CAREER-VENGEANCE-ebook/dp/B077SH9Z1X/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-3&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. 19 Executive Orders I Recommend President Obama sign Before He Leaves Office. https://www.amazon.com/Executive-Orders-Recommend-President-Obama-ebook/dp/B010ODV0TM/ref=sr_1_89?ie=UTF8&qid=1534883070&sr=8-89&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. 50 Reasons to Honor President Barak Obama!: Even if you didn’t vote for him! https://www.amazon.com/Reasons-Honor-President-Barack-Obama-ebook/dp/B010OD6FOC/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-15&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. 50 Reasons to Honor President George W. Bush!: Even if you didn’t vote for him! https://www.amazon.com/Reasons-Honor-President-George-Bush-ebook/dp/B012PG4KSE/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&qid=1502484088&sr=8-8&keywords=richard+linford

 

 

 

 

  1. 28 Reasons I WILL NOT VOTE FOR Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine in November! 30 Reasons I will VOTE FOR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP. https://www.amazon.com/Reasons-Hillary-November-PRESIDENT-President-ebook/dp/B01KWEX9MO/ref=sr_1_39?ie=UTF8&qid=1534869921&sr=8-39&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. Marty Mouse and The UK Brexit High Anxiety Hotel and Restaurant. A long story. An allegory. https://www.amazon.com/Marty-Mouse-Brexit-Anxiety-Restaurant/dp/152109649X/ref=sr_1_27?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-27&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. North Korea Solution – THE UNIFIED REPUBLIC OF KOREA! Tear down that DMZ wall Wise Leader Kim Jong-un! President Donald J. Trump. https://www.amazon.com/North-Korea-Solution-President-peacefully/dp/1521131716/ref=sr_1_26?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-26&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. Repent America or Be Destroyed Like the Jaredites! https://www.amazon.com/Repent-America-Destroyed-Like-Jaredites-ebook/dp/B013FDG8L8/ref=sr_1_82?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-82&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. THE ART OF THE STEAL – THE LITTLE RED POLITICAL BIBLE, ALMANAC, AND CAMPAIGN HANDBOOK. 237 LESSONS FROM THE 2015-2016 TRUMP AND OTHER AMERICAN POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS. https://www.amazon.com/ART-STEAL-POLITICAL-2015-2016-CAMPAIGNS-ebook/dp/B01E7K829E/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-15&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. TRUMP: NO THIRD TERM IN WHITE HOUSE FOR BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON!: TRUMP Pence LANDSLIDE! Follow blog. https://www.amazon.com/TRUMP-HILLARY-CLINTON-LANDSLIDE-richlinfordreport-com-ebook/dp/B01LP5JR2U/ref=sr_1_72?ie=UTF8&qid=1534878985&sr=8-72&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. The Power of Best Practice and Best Practices. https://www.amazon.com/Power-Best-Practice-Practices/dp/1521361398/ref=sr_1_26?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-26&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT. RAINMAKER, WHO STOPPED THE RAIN DANCE AND TURNED OFF MY RAIN? Rainmaking for lawyers and non-lawyers. https://www.amazon.com/RAINMAKER-STOPPED-RAIN-DANCE-TURNED-ebook/dp/B00Q7QH9NC/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-11&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. In Search of Silence. https://www.amazon.com/Search-Silence-521-quiet-thoughts-ebook/dp/B01M7UCRX8/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-10&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. SPEED LEARNING. SPEED READING.Speed Learning Checklists: How to speed learn your way to greater expertise and fortune. https://www.amazon.com/Speed-Learning-Checklists-greater-expertise-ebook/dp/B0106L853G/ref=sr_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-11&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. SURVIVAL CHECKLIST HANDBOOK. https://www.amazon.com/SURVIVAL-CHECKLIST-HANDBOOK-Principles-Checklists-ebook/dp/B00PXLSD6E/ref=sr_1_15?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-15&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. ABS. ED. LOW TESTOSTERONE, ED, AND 6-8 PACK ABS: 558 thoughts to help you maintain and increase your T, overcome ED, and build 608 Pack Abs. https://www.amazon.com/LOW-TESTOSTERONE-6-8-PACK-ABS-ebook/dp/B01BCX3Q90/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-16&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

 

  1. Think and Grow Smart!  Think and Grow Rich! The Story of Ineptitude and the foolish cutting of the Golconda Great Mogul Diamond – The Largest Diamond Found in India Coupled with 50 Tried and True Ancient and Modern Knowledge and Wealth Wisdom Principles. https://www.amazon.com/Think-Grow-Smart-Rich-Principles/dp/1521710155/ref=sr_1_21?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-21&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. 730 Ways to Compress and Extend Your Time and Get More Done. For Businesses, Non-profit organizations, Professional firms, Librarians, and Clergy who have SO MUCH TO ACCOMPLISH! SO LITTLE TIME! https://www.amazon.com/Ways-Compress-Extend-Your-Time-ebook/dp/B012BLRWFG/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868603&sr=8-18&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

  1. Waiting with Brutus Caesar Anthony the 7th and William and Mary Waiting for SAM THE MECHANIC MAN, A long story. An allegory for our auto-driven times. I write. You read. You decide. https://www.amazon.com/Waiting-Brutus-Anthony-William-MECHANIC/dp/1521158010/ref=sr_1_25?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-25&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. The White Unicorn Code: Mystery of the Lady with the Unicorn and other Unicorn tapestries. https://www.amazon.com/White-Unicorn-Code-Mystery-tapestries/dp/1452852383/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1502487183&sr=8-13&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

  1. WEIGHT REDUCTION. HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP AND SUGAR BELLY: 550 thoughts to help you lose your ugly fat and rip your set of six or eight pack abs no matter your age! https://www.amazon.com/HIGH-FRUCTOSE-SYRUP-SUGAR-BELLY-ebook/dp/B01B554JAK/ref=sr_1_20?ie=UTF8&qid=1534868802&sr=8-20&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD&dpID=617Lfk2i3XL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. WORLD PRISON REFORM SOLUTIONS? 2016 – 2017 INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH REPORT  In Search of Prison Reform — Are our prisons an ethical stain on American society? https://www.amazon.com/WORLD-PRISON-REFORM-SOLUTIONS-2016-ebook/dp/B01N3LDTJ5/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1505837336&sr=8-7&keywords=Richard+W.+Linford

 

  1. WORLD ANTI-TERRORISM SOLUTIONS IN SEARCH OF POSITIVE WAYS TO ELIMINATE TERRORISM 2016 – 2017 COUNTER TERRORISM RESEARCH REPORT 1st Edition. https://www.amazon.com/WORLD-ANTI-TERRORISM-SOLUTIONS-BIBLE-TERRORISM-ebook/dp/B01N4A1UVN/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1542216822&sr=8-1&keywords=Richard+W+Linford+In+Search+of+Positive&dpID=51DLvlksHKL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch

 

 

 

 

  1. WORLD WATER SOLUTIONS? 2016 – 2017 INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH REPORT: CHEAP? WATER PURIFICATION, SALT WATER DESALINATION, ATMOSPHERIC WATER GENERATION. https://www.amazon.com/WORLD-WATER-SOLUTIONS-2016-PURIFICATION-ebook/dp/B01M12XHTA/ref=sr_1_32?ie=UTF8&qid=1502473575&sr=8-32&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

 

 

 

 

  1. YOU ARE GREAT. YOU HAVE THE POWER! BECAUSE YOU ARE GREAT! Paint yourself a WHITE, BLACK, GREEN, RED, GOLD SWAN today (My free verse poem). https://www.amazon.com/YOU-HAVE-POWER-BECAUSE-GREAT-ebook/dp/B011D9024K/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&qid=1534865760&sr=8-13&keywords=rICHARD+w+lINFORD

 

 

 

 

  1. A Number of Articles and Papers, one of the most read Ensign articles from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is his 20 Ways to Make Your Good Marriage Great, Ensign 1983. He was responsible for writing and producing an earlier version of The Church Welfare Services Handbook and Essentials of Home Production and Storage and similar manuals. A Number of Talks, Poems, and Critical Reports. [Not found at amazon.com.]

 

 

 

 

  1. His art – 800+ oil and acrylic paintings – is found at richard-w-linford.pixels.com

 

  1. One of his blogs – POTUSWARS(tm)(c) FLOTUSWATCH(tm)(c) PEACE! RichLinfordReport(tm)(c) richlinfordreport.com

 

 

 

 

  1. RECUSAL OF JEFF SESSIONS! RECUSAL OF MATTHEW WHITAKER?
  2. Was the AG Sessions’ recusal engineered to the extreme harm of POTUS TRUMP? Yes. Should recusal apply to Acting AG Whitaker? No.
  3. © Copyright 2018
  4. Linford Corporation
  5. All domestic and international rights reserved

 

 

POLITICAL ALBATROSS SYNDROME. We think Democrats are suffering from POLITICAL ALBATROSS SYNDROME. BARREL & PORK.

BARREL, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Clintons and Obamas and the democrats cannot sidestep the fact that they have negative messages and they have done nothing to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS. Chuck and Nancy and Clintons and Obamas and their cronies have no platform of substance that is helpful to us. Their policies are all albatrosses around their necks. The democrats are suffering from what I call POLITICAL ALBATROSS SYNDROME. 


Unless the democrats jettison their current leadership and their albatrosses, they have little or no hope of winning elections and governing.


What do you mean, albatrosses and albatross syndrome, PORK? 


BARREL, the albatross is a very big sea bird. 


In the poem “The Rime of the ancient Mariner,” by Samuel Taylor Coleridge, the sailor who shoots and kills the friendly albatross is compelled by the ship crew to wear the albatross carcass around his neck as a terrible punishment because the crew blames the sailor for the horribly bad luck that befalls the ship and the crew.


Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Clintons and Obamas and their cronies have saddled the rank and file democrats with policies that don’t work and now at minimum these 5 albatrosses are hanging around the necks of Chuck and Nancy and Clintons and Obamas and their cronies and by extension all democrats, and they must jettison and get rid of them if they are ever to be relevant, win elections, and govern well, if at all – hence my characterization – the democratic party leadership and many if not all democrats are suffering from political albatross syndrome.


1) ALBATROSS ONE. They have done nothing of substance to help us be FREE. 


2) ALBATROSS TWO. They have done nothing of substance to help us be SAFE. 


3) ALBATROSS THREE. They have done nothing of substance to help us be PROSPEROUS. 


4) ALBATROSS FOUR. They have a policy of CRITICISM and ACCUSATIONS of POTUS Trump and anyone, Judge Kavanaugh included, who does anything to help us be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS. 


5) ALBATROSS FIVE. They have a policy of INVESTIGATIONS designed to marginalize POTUS Trump and all efforts to help us, to help America, be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS. 


6) ALBATROSS SIX. They have a globalist policy of open borders without proper vetting and e-verification and this to our definite harm. 


All women want to be safe. 


All men want to be safe. 


All who come to America need to come through the front door, be vetted and e-verified. 


Our borders are valued and must be protected with troops, with a wall, whatever is necessary. 


All immigration into the U.S. must be orderly.


7) ALBATROSS SEVEN. They have a globalist policy of open abortion to the genocidal destruction of BLACK babies and HISPANIC babies and NATIVE AMERICAN babies and JEWISH AMERICAN babies and ASIAN AMERICAN babies and CAUCASIAN babies. 


You and I both know, BARREL, that primarily on the democrat’s watch and at their instance more than 300,000,000 American unborn babies have been surgically and chemically killed, murdered, dismembered since Roe v Wade in 1973. 


50,000,000+ were BLACK babies. 50,000,000+ were HISPANIC babies. (It is no wonder we see BLEXIT – and Walkaway – with Blacks and Hispanics and others leaving the democratic party in droves.)


The other 200,000,000+ were JEWISH, NATIVE AMERICAN, ASIAN AMERICAN, and CAUCASIAN babies.


The only one who is keeping his positive campaign promises front and center with laser focus on helping us and our unborn be FREE, SAFE, and PROSPEROUS is POTUS Trump and most of his colleagues.

BUY “KILLING BILL O’REILLY” – HOW THE LEFT TRIED TO KILL BILL’S CAREER AND FAILED. BARREL & PORK.

WE BARREL & PORK ENDORSE RICHARD’S NEW BOOK “KILLING BILL O’REILLY” – How the LEFT tried to kill Bill’s career and failed. Bill is back with a vengeance. By Richard W Linford.

Buy it on amazon.com.  Click on this link.

https://www.amazon.com/KILLING-BILL-OREILLY-CAREER-VENGEANCE-ebook/dp/B077SH9Z1X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1540940572&sr=8-2&keywords=Richard+W+Linford

\

WE HONOR AND THANK POTUS TRUMP FOR HIS 314+ PROMISES KEPT AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS DURING HIS FIRST 20 MONTHS IN OFFICE. BARREL & PORK.

WE HONOR AND THANK POTUS TRUMP FOR HIS 314+ PROMISES KEPT AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS DURING HIS FIRST 20 MONTHS IN OFFICE. Besides continuing those positive actions, these areas require added energy and focus:

  1. SAFETY. Build the wall yesterday. Make all come through the front door and be vetted and e-verified.
  2. PROSPERITY. Improve disaster prevention, disaster response, and disaster recovery capabilities immediately.
  3. PROSPERITY. Redo our infrastructure as promised and protect and augment our electrical, gas and oil, communications, and internet grids and capabilities.
  4. FREEDOM. Relentlessly continue the fight against terrorism, indict and arrest those who have feloniously violated federal law, and tamp down any hint of domestic mobocracy and violence including efforts by anti-Americans to curtail Constitutional rights to FREEDOM OF SPEECH, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, FREEDOM TO BEAR ARMS, FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY.

NOW KNOWN FOR HIS RELENTLESS PROMISE-KEEPING, POTUS TRUMP DOES NOT RETREAT. HE IS RELENTLESS IN KEEPING HIS PROMISES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. HIS WINNING STREAK IS OVER THE TOP. HE JUST KEEPS ON WINNING.

Honoring Susan Collins! Votes for Kavanaugh! Gets an A+ for her remarkable speech! BARREL & PORK

BARREL, what kind of a grade should I give Senator Susan Collins for her speech today?

PORK, give her an A+. She nailed it. She set forth Brett Kavanaugh’s excellent credentials. She documented that there is no corroborating testimony whatsoever for Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony and allegations. Ended by saying she is voting to confirm Judge Kavanaugh to sit on the Supreme Court.

Click here for the full text. https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/10/05/full-text-susan-collins-senate-speech-announcing-yes-vote-for-brett-kavanaugh/

CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S TESTIMONY NEGATED COMPLETELY. BARREL & PORK.

PORK, Christine Blasey Ford’s story has completely unravelled. It was stitched together with lies. It is my conclusion that Christine Blasey Ford is a consummate liar and that her story is a calculated, fabricated effort to take down Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a man with an unblemished record.

Why do I say that? Because of the following:

  1. After 36 years, did she “remember” and claim that she drank only “one beer?” Yes.
  2. After 36 years, did she “remember” music was playing in the room? Yes.
  3. Can she show us the house on a map? No.
  4. Can she tell us how many people were there at the house? No.
  5. Can she tell us how old she was? No. She said 17. Then she said 15.
  6. Can she tell us how she got home? No.
  7. Can she tell us the address where the alleged assault took place? No.
  8. Can she tell us the date of the alleged party? No.
  9. Can she tell us the month the alleged party happened? No.
  10. Can she tell us the place? No.
  11. Can she tell us the year the alleged assault took place? No.
  12. Can she tell us who drove her home? No.
  13. Can she tell us who drove her to the alleged party? No.
  14. Can she tell us who owned the house the alleged party was in? No.
  15. Can she tell us how many persons were in the room where she was allegedly assaulted? No. First it was 4 and then 2.
  16. Did she leave who her parents and brothers are off from her Wikipedia site? Yes.
  17. Did she admit that she drinks, having drunk only “one” beer at the alleged party? Yes.
  18. Did she explain why she is alleged to have been a serious alcohol binge drinker during high school? No.
  19. Did she explain to us why she is a liberal activist? No.
  20. Did she explain to us why she is anti-Trump? No.
  21. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to have written “Scalia-types must be banned from law” on her Facebook page in 2016?
  22. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to be portrayed in Holton Arms year books as a wild promiscuous party girl with multiple partners, as many as 54, during high school to college? No.
  23. Did she explain why it is alleged that she asked that the letter not be disclosed and then personally disclosed the letter? No.
  24. Did she explain why it is alleged that she colluded with Senator Feinstein and or her staff to create and leak the letter? No. Did she name the other people she allegedly colluded with to produce the letter? No.
  25. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II worked and still works for the CIA? No.
  26. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II was vice president for the National Savings and Trust “black budget bank” known for funding CIA deep state operations? No.
  27. Did she explain why it is alleged that her grandfather was a key figure in the CIA? No.
  28. Did she explain why it is alleged that she heads up the CIA undergraduate internship program at Stanford University? No. Did she explain that her husband is responsible for mind control drugs? No.
  29. Did she explain why she has now raised $750,000 off her story and will yet make several millions of dollars – Anita Hill is now a millionaire after lucrative book writing contract with Doubleday – when her attorneys are allegedly working pro bono? No. Did she explain who set up the go fund me initiative that raised the $750,000 plus? No. Did she explain when the go fund me initiative was set up? No.
  30. Did she explain why there are at least 14 serious errors in the letter she claims to have written, errors no PhD would make, errors that would be made by an inexperienced writer or an old person of another generation like Senator Feinstein? No.
  31. Did she state that she left the alleged party without telling anyone there were two rapists in the building? Yes.
  32. Did she lie about being claustrophobic? Yes. Has she explained why her ex-boyfriend has come forward to state that she has no fear whatsoever of close spaces – no fear of rooms or buildings with single exits? No. Did she explain why she lived in a small 500 square foot house with one door without complaint? No. Did she explain why she really got a second door so she could rent out part of her house not because she was claustrophobic? No.
  33. Did she fly long distances for vacations yet use the excuse of fear of failing to put off the hearing and buy the democrats added time? Yes. Did she explain why she readily flew during six years while involved with a boyfriend? No. Did she explain why her ex boyfriend says she flew on small prop planes without complaining? No.
  34. Did she and or her accomplices diligently try to scrub the internet of anything incriminating? Yes. i.e. her binge drinking and promiscuity.
  35. Did she reveal her alleged harm to democrats only? Yes. Did she collude with them? Yes.
  36. Did she go out of the way to reveal herself to the anti-Trump Washington Post all the while trying to convince the nation that she didn’t want her letter disclosed? Yes.
  37. Did she state that she came forward because she saw Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list? Yes.
  38. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list at the time she alleges? No. It was added later so she would not have seen it and thus she lied about it.
  39. So did she lie about the reason she came forward? Yes.
  40. Did she tell anyone at the time of the alleged incident? No.
  41. Did she tell anyone there were two “rapists” in the house? No.
  42. Did she tell her brothers? She says not
  43. Did she tell her father? She says not.
  44. Did she tell her mother? She says not.
  45. Did she tell us why it is alleged that her brother Ralph Blasey III worked for the International Law Firm of … Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier”? No.
  46. Did she tell us who her brothers are and what they do for a living and what they did when she was in high school? No.
  47. Did she tell us who her father is? No.
  48. Did she tell us who her mother is? No.
  49. Did she turn over her therapist notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee? No.
  50. Did she withhold dispositive details about the alleged polygraph? Yes. Is she still doing so? Yes. Did she explain why, according to her ex-boyfriend, she coached a close friend who subsequently joined the FBI and worked for the DOJ on how to take a polygraph? No
  51. Does any person she lists as being at the alleged party confirm her story? No.
  52. Does any witness corroborate any element of her story? No.
  53. Does her life-friend who Mrs. Ford alleges was at the alleged party support or deny her story? Denies. Did she tell us that Monica Lee McLean, another best friend, was an FBI Special Agent, who lives in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware? No. Did Mrs. Ford tell us she drafted her “letter accusing Brett Kavanaugh” from Rehoboth Beach, Delaware? Yes. Did the democrats know a former FBI agent was close to Ford? Yes. Did the democrats orchestrate FBI Director Andrew McCabe’s lawyer, Michael Bromwich, to Ford’s legal team? Yes.
  54. Is her “little girl voice” demeanor during her testimony credible? No.
  55. Is her lack of emotion credible? No.
  56. Is her polygraph uncorroborated as it is and thus worthless? Yes.
  57. Is her Safeway reference credible? No.
  58. Is her slight show of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
  59. Is her tucking of the head demeanor and tongue pushing during her testimony indicative that she was not credible? Yes. Did she look abnormal during her testimony? Yes.
  60. Is she specific after 36 years that she locked herself in the bathroom? Yes. Did she mention once during six years she dated her ex boyfriend that she had been victim of sexual assault? No. Did she tell anyone else? Not according to her testimony. Did she mention Brett Kavanaugh during that time? No.
  61. Is she an accomplice and shill of the far left democrats? Yes.
  62. Was she raped? No.
  63. If she was Holton Arms High School promiscuous during her teenage years as alleged does this negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes.
  64. If she is tied to certain people in the CIA and the FBI and the law firm that created the infamous “dossier” and the Clintons in multiple ways as alleged, and the democrats, in a coordinated scripted effort to take down Judge Kavanaugh, does this further negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes.
  65. Did she collude with others including Senator Feinstein, whose attempt at plausible deniability was blatant and unconvincing, and Senator Feinstein’s staff, and others she refers to as friends in California and elsewhere? Yes.
  66. Did she fabricate her story about Judge Kavanaugh? Yes. Did she commit perjury? Yes. Did she and the democrats con the nation? Yes. Did she and the democrats con Judge Kavanaugh and the Senate? Yes. Did Senator Feinstein commit perjury? Yes. Keep in mind Senator Feinstein pled plausible deniability.
  67.  AreMrs. Ford and Chuck Schumer and Senator Feinstein and the democrats responsible for the lies that caused the trauma to Judge Kavanaugh and his family? Yes. Do they owe him? Yes. Big time.
  68. What happens now? Wait and see what the FBI reports and applaud Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation by the Senate in the next few days.

WHO IS CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD? BARREL & PORK.

PORK, it is my conclusion that Christine Blasey Ford is a consummate liar and that her story is a calculated, fabricated effort to take down Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a man with an unblemished record.

Post re Mrs. Ford: http://www.potuswars.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=160&action=edit

Why do I say that?

  1. After 36 years, did she “remember” and claim that she drank only “one beer?” Yes. Could she remember the day of her alleged polygraph even though it was a couple of weeks earlier on her grandmother’s birthday? No.
  2. After 36 years, did she “remember” music was playing in the room where allegedly she was assaulted? Yes.
  3. Can she show us the house on a map? No.
  4. Can she tell us how many people were there at the house? No.
  5. Can she tell us how old she was? No. She said 17. Then she said 15.
  6. Can she tell us how she got home? No.
  7. Can she tell us the address where the alleged assault took place? No.
  8. Can she tell us the date of the alleged party? No.
  9. Can she tell us the month the alleged party happened? No.
  10. Can she tell us the place? No.
  11. Can she tell us the year the alleged assault took place? No.
  12. Can she tell us who drove her home? No.
  13. Can she tell us who drove her to the alleged party? No.
  14. Can she tell us who owned the house the alleged party was in? No. Can she drive us to the house? No. Can she tell us the color of the house or the landscaping? No.
  15. Can she tell us how many persons were in the room where she was allegedly assaulted? No. First it was 4 and then 2.
  16. Did she leave who her parents and brothers are off from her Wikipedia site? Yes.
  17. Did she admit that she was drinking at the alleged party? Yes.
  18. Did she explain why she is alleged in yearbooks and internet sites to have been a serious alcohol drinker during high school? No. Did she address whether she is currently an alcoholic? No.
  19. Did she explain to us why she is a liberal activist? No.
  20. Did she explain to us why she is anti-Trump? No.
  21. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to have written the words “Scalia-types must be banned from law” on her Facebook page in 2016? No.
  22. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to be portrayed in Holton Arms yearbooks as a binge drinker and a promiscuous wild party girl with multiple partners, as many as 54, during high school to college? No.
  23. Did she explain why it is alleged that she asked that the letter not be disclosed and then personally disclosed the letter? No.
  24. Did she explain why it is alleged that she colluded with Senator Feinstein and or her staff to create and leak the letter? No.
  25. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II worked and still works for the CIA? No.
  26. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II was vice president for the National Savings and Trust “black budget bank” known for funding CIA deep state operations? No.
  27. Did she explain why it is alleged that her grandfather was a key figure in the CIA? No.
  28. Did she explain why it is alleged that she heads up the CIA undergraduate internship program at Stanford University? No.
  29. Did she explain why she has now raised $750,000 off her story when her attorneys are allegedly working pro bono and travel at most costs a few thousand dollars? No. And did she explain that she is or soon will be a millionaire because she “came forward” like Anita Hill who became a millionaire writing books for Doubleday? No. And did she explain why her attorneys are now being investigated? No.
  30. Did she explain why there are at least 14 serious errors in the letter she claims to have written, errors no PhD would make, errors that would be made by an inexperienced writer, perhaps an inexperienced writer from another country, or an old person of another generation like Senator Feinstein? No.
  31. Did she state that she left the alleged party without telling anyone there were two rapists in the building? Yes.
  32. Did she lie about being afraid to fly? Yes.
  33. Did she fly long distances for vacations yet use the excuse of fear of flying to put off the hearing and buy the democrats added time? Yes.
  34. Did she or her accomplices diligently try to scrub the internet of anything incriminating about her binge drinking and promiscuity as a teen? Yes.
  35. Did she reveal her alleged harm to democrats only? Yes. Did she explain why she did not go to the police at any point? No.
  36. Did she reveal herself to the anti-Trump Washington Post? Yes.
  37. Did she state that she came forward because she saw Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list? Yes.
  38. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list at the time she alleges? No. It was added later so she would not have seen it and thus lied about it.
  39. So did she lie about the reason she came forward? Yes.
  40. Did she tell anyone at the time of the alleged incident? No.
  41. Did she tell anyone there were two “rapists” in the house? No.
  42. Did she tell her brothers? She says not
  43. Did she tell her father? She says not.
  44. Did she tell her mother? She says not.
  45. Did she tell us why it is alleged that her brother Ralph Blasey III worked for the International Law Firm of … Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier”? No.
  46. Did she tell us who her brothers are and what they do for a living and what they did when she was in high school? No. Did she tell us how many times her brothers drove her to parties or other places? No. Did she tell us her brothers’ involvement in such parties? No.
  47. Did she tell us who her father is? No.
  48. Did she tell us who her mother is? No.
  49. Did she turn over her therapist notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee? No.
  50. Did she withhold essential details about the alleged polygraph? Yes.
  51. Does any person she lists as being at the alleged party confirm her story? No.
  52. Does any witness from anywhere in the world corroborate any element of her story? No.
  53. Does her life-friend support or deny her story? Denies.
  54. Is her “little girl voice” demeanor during her testimony credible? No.
  55. Is her lack of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
  56. Is her polygraph uncorroborated and as such is it worthless? Yes. Does she tell us who ordered her polygraph? No.
  57. Is her Safeway reference credible? No.
  58. Is her slight show of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
  59. Is her tucking of the head demeanor and tongue pushing during her testimony indicative that she was and is not credible? Yes.
  60. Is she specific after 36 years that she locked herself in the bathroom? Yes. Has she explained why the two “rapists” did not follow her? No.
  61. Is she an accomplice and shill of the far left? Yes.
  62. Was she raped? No. Was she assaulted? May have been but it wasn’t by Brett Kavanaugh.
  63. If she was Holton Arms High School promiscuous during her teenage years as alleged in immense detail in “her” school yearbooks, does this negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes. Has she explained the “erotic” details about Holton Arms High School girls alcohol binges to blackout and multiple sex partners and break beach parties/black out orgies even involving older men? No. Has she explained why two other men have come forward to say they assaulted her? No.
  64. If she is tied to the CIA and the law firm that created the infamous “dossier” and the Clintons in multiple ways as alleged (Judge Kavanaugh called out the Clintons), if she colluded with the democrats as is apparent from the Kavanaugh Ford hearing, if she colluded with Senator Feinstein (who went out of her way to set herself apart with plausible denability,  yet Senator Feinstein duplicitously withheld the alleged Ford letter from Senator Grassley and the committee, thereby obstructing justice, and if she colluded with Senator Feinstein’s staff, does even a fraction of such conduct negate her story that she was assaulted, that two men attempted to rape her? Yes.
  65. Did she collude with others including Senator Feinstein, whose attempt at plausible deniability was blatant and whose intent and conduct was to obstruct justice, and did Mrs. Ford collude with Senator Feinstein’s staff, and others she refers to as friends in California? Yes.
  66. Did she fabricate her story about Judge Kavanaugh? Yes.
  67. Is she responsible for the trauma caused to Judge Kavanaugh and his family including daughters and wife and others? Yes.
  68. What happens now? Wait and see what the FBI reports and applaud Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation by the Senate in the next few days. Although Mrs. Ford may have been assaulted sometime in the past, there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever that Christine Ford was assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh.

NOTE TO SENATOR JEFF FLAKE. 68 REASONS WHY FORD TESTIMONY IS BOGUS. BARREL & PORK.

PORK, it is my conclusion that Christine Blasey Ford is a consummate liar and that her story is a calculated, fabricated effort to take down Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a man with an unblemished record.

Why do I say that? Because of the following:

  1. After 36 years, did she “remember” and claim that she drank only “one beer?” Yes.
  2. After 36 years, did she “remember” music was playing in the room? Yes.
  3. Can she show us the house on a map? No.
  4. Can she tell us how many people were there at the house? No.
  5. Can she tell us how old she was? No. She said 17. Then she said 15.
  6. Can she tell us how she got home? No.
  7. Can she tell us the address where the alleged assault took place? No.
  8. Can she tell us the date of the alleged party? No.
  9. Can she tell us the month the alleged party happened? No.
  10. Can she tell us the place? No.
  11. Can she tell us the year the alleged assault took place? No.
  12. Can she tell us who drove her home? No.
  13. Can she tell us who drove her to the alleged party? No.
  14. Can she tell us who owned the house the alleged party was in? No.
  15. Can she tell us how many persons were in the room where she was allegedly assaulted? No. First it was 4 and then 2.
  16. Did she leave who her parents and brothers are off from her Wikipedia site? Yes.
  17. Did she admit that she was drinking at the alleged party? Yes.
  18. Did she explain why she is alleged in year books and internet sites to have been a serious alcohol drinker during high school? No.
  19. Did she explain to us why she is a liberal activist? No.
  20. Did she explain to us why she is anti-Trump? No.
  21. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to have written the words “Scalia-types must be banned from law” on her Facebook page in 2016?
  22. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to be portrayed in Holton Arms year books as a binge drinker and a promiscuous wild party girl with multiple partners, as many as 54, during high school to college? No.
  23. Did she explain why it is alleged that she asked that the letter not be disclosed and then personally disclosed the letter? No.
  24. Did she explain why it is alleged that she colluded with Senator Feinstein and or her staff to create and leak the letter? No.
  25. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II worked and still works for the CIA? No.
  26. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II was vice president for the National Savings and Trust “black budget bank” known for funding CIA deep state operations? No.
  27. Did she explain why it is alleged that her grandfather was a key figure in the CIA? No.
  28. Did she explain why it is alleged that she heads up the CIA undergraduate internship program at Stanford University? No.
  29. Did she explain why she has now raised $750,000 off her story when her attorneys are allegedly working pro bono? No. And did she explain why her attorneys are now being investigated? No.
  30. Did she explain why there are at least 14 serious errors in the letter she claims to have written, errors no PhD would make, errors that would be made by an inexperienced writer, perhaps a writer from another country, or an old person of another generation like Senator Feinstein? No.
  31. Did she state that she left the alleged party without telling anyone there were two rapists in the building? Yes.
  32. Did she lie about being afraid to fly? Yes.
  33. Did she fly long distances for vacations yet use the excuse of fear of flying to put off the hearing and buy the democrats added time? Yes.
  34. Did she or her accomplices diligently try to scrub the internet of anything incriminating about her binge drinking and promiscuity as a teen? Yes.
  35. Did she reveal her alleged harm to democrats only? Yes. Did she explain why she did not go to the police at any point? No.
  36. Did she reveal herself to the anti-Trump Washington Post? Yes.
  37. Did she state that she came forward because she saw Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list? Yes.
  38. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list at the time she alleges? No. It was added later so she would not have seen it and thus lied about it.
  39. So did she lie about the reason she came forward? Yes.
  40. Did she tell anyone at the time of the alleged incident? No.
  41. Did she tell anyone there were two “rapists” in the house? No.
  42. Did she tell her brothers? She says not
  43. Did she tell her father? She says not.
  44. Did she tell her mother? She says not.
  45. Did she tell us why it is alleged that her brother Ralph Blasey III worked for the International Law Firm of … Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier”? No.
  46. Did she tell us who her brothers are and what they do for a living and what they did when she was in high school? No. Did she tell us how many times her brothers drove her to parties or other places? No. Did she tell us her brothers’ involvement in such parties? No.
  47. Did she tell us who her father is? No.
  48. Did she tell us who her mother is? No.
  49. Did she turn over her therapist notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee? No.
  50. Did she withhold dispositive details about the alleged polygraph? Yes.
  51. Does any person she lists as being at the alleged party confirm her story? No.
  52. Does any witness from anywhere in the world corroborate any element of her story? No.
  53. Does her life-friend support or deny her story? Denies.
  54. Is her “little girl voice” demeanor during her testimony credible? No.
  55. Is her lack of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
  56. Is her polygraph uncorroborated as it is worthless? Yes.
  57. Is her Safeway reference credible? No.
  58. Is her slight show of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
  59. Is her tucking of the head demeanor and tongue pushing during her testimony indicative that she was and is not credible? Yes.
  60. Is she specific after 36 years that she locked herself in the bathroom? Yes.
  61. Is she an accomplice and shill of the far left? Yes.
  62. Was she raped? No. Was she assaulted? May have been but it wasn’t by Brett Kavanaugh.
  63. If she was Holton Arms High School promiscuous during her teenage years as alleged does this negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes. Has she explained the “erotic” details about Holton Arms High School girls alcohol binges to blackout and multiple sex partners and break beach parties/black out orgies? No.
  64. If she is tied to the CIA and the law firm that created the infamous “dossier” and the Clintons in multiple ways as alleged, and colluded with the democrats, including Senator Feinstein and her staff, does this also negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes.
  65. Did she collude with others including Senator Feinstein, whose attempt at plausible deniability was blatant, and Senator Feinstein’s staff, and others she refers to as friends in California? Yes.
  66. Did she fabricate her story about Judge Kavanaugh? Yes.
  67. Is she responsible for the trauma caused Judge Kavanaugh and his family including daughters and wife and others? Yes.
  68. What happens now? Wait and see what the FBI reports and applaud Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation by the Senate in the next few days. There is no evidence whatsoever that Christine Ford was assaulted.

Senator Jeff Flake and Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony and Senator Feinstein. Barrel & Pork.

I watched the Judge Brett Kavanaugh Dr. Christine Blasey Ford hearings with great interest and have several observations which some no doubt will criticize as being partisan, BARREL. The following is not partisan. It is a note to Senator Flake, Senator Grassley, Senator McConnell, and POTUS Trump. Democrats may read this if they have interest because I suspect they will be sorry they ever asked for an FBI probe. Having seen both accuser and then accused in living color, I ask these most basic questions regarding the Judge Kavanaugh Dr. Ford Senate hearing. The questions are:

Have 85 year old Senator Dianne Feinstein and her office and Dr. Ford and other Democrats links to the CIA so-called deep state including the Clintons, who Judge Kavanaugh called out during his impassioned defense, have these people orchestrated the Ford testimony in order to pull off the greatest felony fraud on the United States Senate and the American people in Senate history? It looks like it, BARREL, and before I get into the detail, is the following list of questions and answers some concocted conspiracy theory? No it is not. Something is totally rotten in the State of Denmark, Shakespeare’s Hamlet Act I, Scene IV, which is to say there is overwhelming political corruption on the part of some of the nation’s democrat political leaders.

PORK, I’m on the same page with you. So what are your questions.

BARREL, we know the answers to many of the following questions. A few of the questions still need answers. So think about the following, BARREL. Sounds like the FBI investigation is something the Democrats may not enjoy if the FBI investigation is carried out with integrity. Anyway, here are some serious questions and answers I ask and answer after watching the recent Ford-Kavanaugh testimonies.

  1. Did Dr. Ford tell us the year the alleged assault took place? No.
  2. Did Dr. Ford tell us the address? No.
  3. Did Dr. Ford show us the house? No.
  4. Did Dr. Ford tell anyone at the time of the alleged event? No.
  5. Does Dr. Ford head up the Stanford University’s Undergraduate Intern Recruitment Program, for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency or is this fake news? [Question for the FBI.] https://the-fringe.com/thread-this_poor_victimized_woman_heads_the_undergraduate_intern_recruitment_program_for_the_cia_at_stanford_u
  1. Is there a single witness corroborating Dr. Ford’s story? No.
  2. Did Dr. Ford tell us the month? No.
  3. Did Dr. Ford tell us the day? No.
  4. Did Dr. Ford tell us how old she was at the time? No. She said 17 and then 15.
  5. Did Dr. Ford tell us the grade she was in? No.
  6. Did Dr. Ford tell us who took her to the party? No.
  7. Was Dr. Ford drinking? Yes. She remembers specifically that she had just “one beer” at the party – no more.
  8. With her “one beer” answer in mind, is the following true or is this fake news? “Christine Blasey Ford admitted she was an alcoholic back then, & regretted being so easy. She told her best friend she had 64 sexual partners between 11th grade thru college. She is also liberal activist who wrote on her FB [Facebook] in ’16 [2016], “Scalia-types must be banned from law!” or is this fake news? BOMBSHELL: Blasey-Ford’s HS Yearbooks Brag of Drunken Promiscuity, ’54 Sex Partners Before College’ [Continuing:]
    September 20, 2018 They didn’t quite get it all scrubbed from cyberspace quickly enough. High School yearbooks from Holton Arms preparatory school (Bethesda, Maryland, 1982-1985) purportedly show Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey-Ford as a wild party girl in a wild party era, with yearbook passages by classmates bragging of spending the night with adult men during “Beach Week” and enjoying male strippers in G-strings for “Sweet 16” birthday parties. … As Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s rape accuser today pulls back from an invited offer for Senate testimony, (saying through her attorney that a Friday deadline set by Republicans is quote, “arbitrary,”) the inevitable lev[ee] break of background information allegedly reveals Christine Blasey-Ford as a prolific high school party girl who is alleged to have bragged to a friend of having 54 sexual partners prior to college. If true, the emergence of five high school yearbooks from exclusive college preparatory school, Holton Arms (Bethesda, Maryland) destroys Blasey-Ford’s self portrayal as an innocent coed [tiny child voice during the hearing] “church mouse” taken advantage of by an aggressive sexual predator. Even summarizing the totality of what the yearbooks contain is difficult, given that it paints a picture of hedonistic, debauched teenage behavior in which Christine Blasey-Ford is alleged to have not only indulged but promoted and led as an acknowledged focal point of American Pie, or Animal House-style fraternizing with eager young men, often in (by Holton Arms classmates’ descriptions) alcohol-saturated social settings that left participants unable to recall exactly what had taken place. One excerpt from a yearbook entry detailed the philosophy of binge drinking to memory loss as a necessity of the Holton Arms party scene: “Although these parties are unforgettable, they are only a memory lapse for most, since loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene. Nothing emerges but a vague feeling of intense enjoyment when one tries to recall them. We were probably, you know, really tired and all.”
  9. One friend, (identified briefly on social media) alleges Blasey-Ford (Holton Arms, Class of 1984) suffered no memory loss whatsoever in describing and bragging about her sexual conquests and paramours, identifying 54 sexual partners between her junior year of high school and enrollment in college. The social media post (below) claims Blasey-Ford previously allegedly admitted to being an alcoholic in high school and regretted, “being so easy,” in high school. She is alleged to have told the best friend that she had 54 sexual partners between 11th grade and enrollment in college. The post also identified Blasey-Ford as a liberal activist with an obvious sensitivity to Supreme Court ideology, once writing on social media, “Scalia-types must be banned from law!” [Is this fake news?]

“[A]s quickly as the images began to emerge on social media Monday, Blasey-Ford’s supporters worked this week to scrub them or have them taken down from various outlets. The entries describe wild drunken romps with boys, binge drinking blackouts, birthday parties with male strippers and the benefits of passing out drunk to avoid guilt and shame of alleged sexual activity. On one yearbook page, a passage is dedicated to artful description of a “Sweet 16” birthday party for one Blasey-Ford, Holton Arms classmate, complete with a male stripper wearing a gold G-string and dancing to the delight of the obviously underage attendees:

“The tenth grade taught us how to party also and Martha (redacted) [has the FBI interviewed Martha?] usually provided the circumstances in which to do so. Celebrating her sweet sixteen or just the weekend. Martha managed to entertain her guests with her hospitality, her pool …, and her erotic male dancer, the latter in his gold G-string, being by far the most effective.”

“Martha managed to entertain her guests with her hospitality…and her erotic male dancer, the latter, in his gold G-string being by far the most effective.”

“While dancing in the middle of coastal Highway, Ann [redacted last name and friends ][Has the FBI interviewed Ann and friends?]picked up some men who passed out in their apartment…” [Two men said they “assaulted Dr. Ford” not Judge Kavanaugh. Have they been interviewed by the FBI?]

Multiple Holton Arms yearbook entries show racy images purported to be Blasey-Ford in evocative clothing and sensuous repose, including photos of three minors dressed provocatively in Playboy Bunny and French maid costumes. (Redacted photos are allegedly much racier.) The caption describes underage high school girls dancing seductively in the middle of a highway during “Beach Week,” and then enticing some (adult?) men to come back to their apartment for binge drinking and a night of whatever libidinous fun might have transpired:

“Beach week culminated the year for those of us lucky enough to go. With school and our minds in temporary recess, we were able to release all those troubling inhibitions of the past year. While dancing in the middle of coastal Highway, Ann [redacted last name] and friends picked up some men who passed out in their apartment…”

“Other passages hint at the dating habits and adventurous process of selecting boys for romantic interest and activity, indicating that some female members of the Holton Arms senior class preferred freshman and sophomore boys as their companions: “Other seniors preferred to expand their horizons and date younger men, usually sophomores, who could bring the vitality and freshness of innocence to a relationship.”

It’s not clear who began redacting the photos and entries and who spearheaded the scrubbing operation that became a race against independent outlets who snapped up the photos as soon as they became public knowledge. [Has the FBI figured this lead out?]

“What is known is that Blasey-Ford avoided public revelation of her accusations until the conclusion of Kavanaugh’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearings and now, shows no interest in meeting a Friday deadline to testify under oath to her allegation of sexual assault against him, which in context, even if it were true, seems one of the tamer things that might ever happened in her high school career in what public yearbook accounts reveal as a WASP-ish, elitist East Coast, upper crust bacchanal scene in the 1980’s.

“Multiple reports Thursday (9/20/18) indicated that Blasey-Ford was demanding the meeting of undisclosed conditions to testifying before the U.S. Senate concerning her claims against Kavanaugh, and that her attorney had termed a Friday deadline for such testimony to be, “arbitrary.” [Was the delay to give the conspirators time to scrub the internet of the incriminating evidence? Again, one for the FBI.] And is this all fake news? http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-news/3689760/posts

  1. Did Dr. Ford tell us who took her to the alleged party [or should it read parties]? No.
  2. Did Dr. Ford tell us who took her home from the alleged party [or should it read parties]? No
  3. Did Dr. Ford tell us the names of her brothers? No.
  4. Was one of her brothers or both brothers complicit and or were they the drivers – taking Dr. Ford to the PARTIES? Bringing her home? [Another one for the FBI.] Or did her father or mother drive her to and from her parties?
  5. Did Dr. Ford tell one or both of her parents? She says not.
  6. Was Dr. Ford raped? No. She does not allege rape.
  7. Did Dr. Ford tell her best friend? No.
  8. Did Dr. Ford tell any other student? No.
  9. Dr. Ford says Leland Ingham Keyser, a lifelong friend, was at the party. Yes.
  10. Does Leland Ingham Keyser confirm that there was in fact such a party? No. Leland Ingham Keyser denies that there was such a party.
  11. Dr. Ford claims that Judge Kavanaugh talked to Keyser and Smyth right after he assaulted her. Do either confirm in any way Dr. Ford’s memory? No.
  12. Is there any witness who corroborates any part of Dr. Ford’s story? No.
  1. Are Dr. Ford’s immediate family members anywhere on record as backing her up? No. Isn’t it at all interesting to the FBI and Senate Republicans that there is not even a whiff of support from her immediate family? In fact, on her Wikipedia blurb, her parents and siblings are not listed. Why is that?
  2. Is her immediate personal family – mother, father, siblings — even present in the equation? No.
  3. Have we heard from her mother backing her up? No.
  4. Have we heard from her father backing her up? No.
  5. Have we heard from either of her brothers backing her up? No.
  6. Who are her brothers? And again, were they complicit in the “PARTIES” scene? Were they the party Uber drivers?
  7. Did Dr. Ford’s father Ralph Blasey II work and does he still work for the CIA. Was he vice president for the National Savings and Trust “black budget bank” known for funding CIA deep state operations?  Is there a deep state collusion regarding this effort to discredit Judge Kavanaugh? Looks like it. One for the FBI.  

https://thegodofrage.wordpress.com/2018/09/20/kavanaugh-accuser-christine-ford-donated-to-clinton-campaign-and-dnc-is-daughter-of-cia-operative-and-vp-of-security/

  1. Do either of her two siblings back her up? No.
  2. Did Dr. Ford’s brother Ralph III work for the International Law Firm of … Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier”? https://the-fringe.com/thread-this_poor_victimized_woman_heads_the_undergraduate_intern_recruitment_program_for_the_cia_at_stanford_Did Dr. Ford’s brother Ralph II drive her to and from the PARTIES?
  1. Is the following true about Dr. Ford?
    https://michaelsavage.com/is-dr-ford…y-tied-to-cia/

    “WHO IS DR BLASEY FORD?

    “WELL, BESIDES BEING A “PROFESSOR” AT THE OFF BRAND UNIVERSITY, SHE ALSO WORKS AT A MAJOR UNIVERSITY DOWN THE STREET FROM PALO ALTO. SHE JUST SO HAPPENS TO HEAD UP THE CIA UNDERGRADUATE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY.

    CHRISTINE BLASEY’S BROTHER, RALPH THE THIRD, USED TO WORK FOR THE INTERNATIONAL LAW FIRM OF BAKER, HOSTETLER. THE FIRM CREATED FUSION GPS, THE COMPANY WHO WROTE THE RUSSIAN “DOSSIER”. THEY LATER ADMITTED IT WAS ONLY A COLLECTION OF FIELD INTERVIEWS.

    “BAKER HOSTETLER IS LOCATED IN THE SAME BUILDING WHERE THE CIA OPERATES THREE COMPANIES CALLED:
    RED COATS INC.
    ADMIRAL SECURITY
     SERVICES AND
    DATAWATCH
    THEY ARE OPERATED BY RALPH BLASEY II. HE IS THE FATHER OF CHRISTINE AND RALPH III.

    “CHRISTINE AND RALPH III’S GRANDFATHER WAS NICHOLAS DEAK. FORMER CIA DIRECTOR WILLIAM CASEY ACKNOWLEDGED DEAK’S DECADES OF SERVICE TO THE CIA.

  2. https://www.smithandwessonforums.com/forum/news-links-forum/180755-dr-blasey-ford-cia-deep-state-ties-true-coincidence.html
  3. Is this the greatest con-job on the Senate since Roman times? Answer: Looks like it.
  1. It is my turn, PORK.
  2. Did Leland Ingham Keyser know Judge Kavanaugh? No.
  3. Did Leland Ingham Keyser’s lawyer tell the Senate Judiciary Committee that Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh, has no recollection of EVER being at a party or gathering where Judge Kavanaugh was present with or without Dr. Ford? Yes.
  4. Is there a letter of support from a dozen relatives, all on her husband’s side of the family? Yes.
  5. What does that letter do? It merely says they think she is honest. [But is she?]
  6. Again, did her parents and brothers sign the letter attesting to her honesty and integrity? NO. They are strangely absent from her Wikipedia bio.
  7. Did Dr. Ford try to reach old friends from school and college to “jog her memory?” Yes.
  8. Could any old friend from school or college “jog her memory?” No.
  9. Did Dr. Ford say and complain “I’ve been trying to forget this all my life, and now I’m supposed to remember every little detail?” Yes. [If even a small part of the bacchanal allegations against Dr. Ford is true, is it any wonder she is “trying to forget this all my life?”
  10. Is Dr. Ford a Democrat? Yes.
  11. Is Dr. Ford an anti-Trump marcher? Yes.
  12. Despite having not one corroborating witness, did Democrat Dr. Ford with help of Senator Feinstein and her cronies and staff push forward with her bombshell charge, contacting the Washington Post tip line and Democratic lawmakers, while hiring a Democratic activist lawyer recommended by Senator Feinstein and or her staff? Yes.
  1. Did Dr. Ford contend that her therapist took notes in 2012? Yes.
  2. Do those notes mention Judge Kavanaugh? No.
  3. Did Dr. Ford say there were “four boys” in the bedroom? Yes.
  4. Does Dr. Ford now say there were “two boys” in the bedroom? Yes.
  5. Do the therapist notes say Dr. Ford said she was in her “late teens?” Yes.
  6. Isn’t that a contradiction? Yes.
  7. Does Dr. Ford now say she may have been only 15? Yes.
  8. Does Dr. Ford shows up in the year book of Holton Arms, Class of 1984? Yes.
  9. Is there clear evidence that some if not many of the young women, Dr. Ford included, were far from saints during high school – that they in fact were over the top promiscuous? Yes.
  1. Did Dr. Ford tell the Washington Post she was upset when POTUS Trump won in 2016? Yes.
  2. Did Dr. Ford say she was upset with POTUS Trump because he mentioned Judge Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court pick? Yes.
  3. But wasn’t Judge Kavanaugh not added to POTUS Trump’s list of possible Supreme Court choices until November 2017, a full year later? Yes.
  4. Isn’t this another of Dr. Ford’s contradictions? Yes.
  5. After 36 years, has Dr. Ford remembered several very specific details? Yes. [Example – she says she only had “one drink.” Has any one of her “details” been corroborated? No.
  6. Did Dr. Ford claim Mark Judge was present? Yes.
  7. Did Mark Judge confirm that there was such a party? No. Mark Judge denies under penalty of perjury any recollection of attending such a party.
  8. Did Patrick “P.J.” Smyth deny any recollection of attending such a party under penalty of perjury? Yes.
  9. Did the Senate Committee take sworn statements “under penalty of perjury” from the persons Dr. Ford said attended the party and did those persons deny that there was such a party? Yes.
  10. Do all witnesses Dr. Ford “recalls” deny that there was such a party? Yes.
  11. Again, do the people Dr. Ford identified as attending the party, corroborate her story in any way? No.
  1. Is there even one corroborating witness who supports Dr. Ford’s story that there was such a party as she alleges? Answer. NO. Not one.
  2. Is Dr. Ford’s story a set of bare allegations with no corroborating witnesses? Yes.
  3. Does Dr. Ford list persons by name who were allegedly present at the party? Yes.
  4. Again, does any one of the persons she lists confirm that there even was such a party? Not one.
  5. Is it correct that even the woman alleged to be a friend denies that there was such a party? Yes.
  6. I repeat again, do the persons she lists deny that there was such a party? Yes. All of them.
  7. Again, has Dr. Ford told us who took her to the alleged party? No.
  8. Has Dr. Ford told us who took her home from the alleged party? No.
  9. Did her brothers serve as her party Uber drivers? A task for the FBI.
  10. Did Dr. Ford exhibit any emotion during her testimony? Little if any. She did lapse into her “little girl voice” and manifest strange behavioral mannerisms? Yes.
  11. Did Dr. Ford hold herself out to be a “psychologist” during her testimony? Yes.
  12. Did she use scientific jargon during her testimony as if to establish her credentials as a “psychologist” and her veracity? Yes.
  13. Is it true she is not a licensed “psychologist” and has no legal right in the state of California or any other state to call herself a psychologist? Yes.
  14. Is calling herself a psychologist a crime and the equivalent of a law student calling herself a lawyer when she has not passed the bar exam? Yes.
  15. Has anyone else said they assaulted Dr. Ford? Yes. Two men have said that they NOT BRETT KAVANAGH assaulted Dr. Ford. Have these threads been unraveled? We don’t know. Senators allegedly interviewed them. One for the FBI.
  1. Does Dr. Ford have a PhD? Yes.
  2. Is Dr. Ford a published science author? Yes.
  3. Is Dr. Ford a graduate of a major well respected university? Yes. Stanford.
  4. Does Dr. Ford teach at Stanford? Yes.
  5. Did Dr. Ford say she alone wrote the letter accusing Judge Kavanaugh? Yes.
  6. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “1980’s” in her alleged letter? Yes.
  7. Is this a common grammatical error made by inexperienced or older writers? Yes.
  8. Why no apostrophe? Because it indicates possession.
  9. Does any PhD know that using “1980’s” makes no sense because to do so creates a possessive and 1980 cannot possess anything? Yes.
  10. Is the conclusion that the letter was not written by a PhD and was probably written by Senator Feinstein’s staffer or Senator Feinstein herself or a combination of staffer  or staffers and Senator Feinstein, with help from Dr. Ford perhaps? Yes.
  1. Did Dr. Ford capitalize the phrase “High School” in her letter? Yes.
  2. Why is high school not capitalized? Because high school is not a proper noun and so is not capitalized.
  3. Is it correct that the phrase “High School” is only capitalized when the full name of the high school is in question? Yes.
  4. So one conclusion again is that Dr. Ford did not write the letter? Yes.
  5. Who wrote it? Although Dr. Ford says she wrote the letter and was the only one who wrote the letter, something is amiss. This letter was not written by a PhD and was probably written by Senator Feinstein’s staffer(s) or Senator Feinstein or both. 
  1. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “Both were 1-2 years older than me and other students at a local private school”? Yes.
  2. How should the sentence read? It should read: “Both were 1-2 years older than myself and other students at a local private school.”
  3. Again, who did write it? Answer: either Senator Feinstein or a poorly educated staff person with very little writing experience wrote this. A PhD did not write it.
  1. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “I feared he may inadvertently kill me”? Yes.
  2. What is wrong with this construction? There is verb tense disagreement.
  3. How should it read? It should read “I feared he MIGHT inadvertently kill me.”
  4. Who wrote the letter? Again, the conclusion is the letter was written by someone other than Dr. Ford who claims status as a PhD, published science author, and has a graduate degree from Stanford, as well a teaching responsibility at Stanford.)
  1. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “drunken” in her letter? Yes. She says “From across the room, a very drunken Judge said mixed words to Kavanaugh …”
  2. What difference does it make? The phrase should be “a very drunk Judge.” Answer: Only an inexperienced or old writer would use the phrase drunken.
  1. Did Mrs. Ford use the phrase “… Judge said mixed words …”? Yes.
  2. What difference does it make? “Mixed words” is a construct a non-native English speaker or very inexperienced old writer working a cover-up would write, not a highly trained PhD who went to Stanford.
  1. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “the two scrapped with each other”? Yes.
  2. Do Americans say “scrapped?” No. Only a Non-native English or an old speaker would use the word “scrapped.” No one uses the word “scrapped” today. “Scrapped” is archaic. The word is “fought.”
  3. So who wrote the letter? Answer: Dr. Ford did not write this letter. A member of Senator Feinstein’s staff wrote it or Senator Feinstein is old enough to have written or edited it herself.
  1. Did Dr. Ford use the phrase “opportune moment” in her letter? Yes.
  2. What difference does it make? Answers: Low-level writers use sophisticated-sounding words that are “above their pay grade.” Or, someone who is old from an earlier generation might use that phrase. Senator Feinstein is 85 years old. “Opportune moment” and “the two scrapped” are phrases from her generation.
  3. Who wrote the letter? Answer: Only a low-level writer or an old person from Senator Feinstein’s generation would use either one of these phrases.
  1. Did Dr. Ford fail to capitalize the word “I”? Yes. She says “It is upsetting to discuss sexual assault and its repercussions, yet i felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything.” Again, the “i” is not capitalized. No PhD from Stanford would make such an error.
  2. So who did write it? Answer: A low-information blogger or activist is likely to make such an error or an old person like Senator Feinstein might let such go as a cover-up. Failure to capitalize “I” is common among younger writers in their twenties.
  1. Did Mrs. Ford use the phrase “yet i felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything”?  Yes.
  2. Isn’t that ok? No. This is a strange construct. The words “compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything” is poor sentence structure and shows lack of coherent thinking.”
  3. Who wrote it? This is a construct you might find in the writing of an uneducated, inexperienced writer or an old writer like Senator Feinstein who was trying to make the letter sound like she didn’t write it. Think about it. Dr. Ford has written many published science papers. This letter was not written by Dr. Ford.
  1. Shifting gears, did Dr. Ford say she is afraid to fly? Yes.
  2. Did she lie and use this excuse to delay the hearing? Yes.
  3. Was she caught in that lie during her testimony? Yes.
  4. Is there more? Yes.
  5. A close look at her letter says she is “vacationing in the mid-Atlantic until August 7th and will be in California after August 10th.” She is flying great distances for a vacation. Her online photos show her vacationing in Hawaii. Thus, the big lie. Take a vacation and she can fly anywhere. Called to testify and she is afraid of flying. She colluded with Senator Feinstein’s office and lied in order to help the democrats delay.
  1. So what is the bottom line? Conclusion: The letter was not written by Dr. Ford. It was written by Senator Feinstein or a staffer or a staffer and Senator Feinstein – perhaps with Dr. Ford’s help by telephone.
  1. Was the letter leaked? Yes.
  2. Who leaked it? Didn’t Senator Feinstein say that “she” did not do it? Yes.
  3. What is the effect of Senator Feinstein’s denial? Answer: She gave herself plausible deniability. The definition of PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY “is the effort by people (typically senior officials [in this situation Senator Feinstein] in a formal or informal chain of command) to deny knowledge of or responsibility for any damnable actions committed by others in their organizational hierarchy and this to establish a lack of evidence that can confirm their participation, even though they were responsible for the actions in question.” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability#Overview)
  4. So who leaked the letter? Answer: Given Dr. Ford didn’t write the letter and it was written by Senator Feinstein and her staff colluding, and even if by some stretch of the imagination Dr. Ford did write the letter, one of Senator Feinstein’s staff leaked the letter. It is illogical and makes no sense whatsoever to suggest Dr. Ford or California cronies of Dr. Ford leaked the letter. Dr. Ford was the one who allegedly asked that the letter not be leaked. Then again, Dr. Ford may have said “Don’t leak the letter,” then leaked the letter herself. Given CIA connections and it is not hard to find that she knows how to beat a polygraph. To-date, Dr. Ford has been unwilling to provide the foundation documents for the alleged polygraph.
  1. Did Senator Feinstein dishonestly sit on the alleged letter throughout hearings and leak it contrary to Dr. Ford’s instructions and thereby obstruct justice? That is what the timeline and Dr. Ford’s testimony shows.
  2. Again, can Dr. Ford state where the alleged assault took place? No.
  3. Can Dr. Ford tell us who took her to the alleged party and who took her home? No. Probably one of her brothers.
  4. Is there even one corroborating witness in support of Dr. Ford’s testimony? No.
  5. Is Dr. Ford’s body language during the hearing when she goes into her little girl voice and ducks her head a dead demeanor giveaway indicating that she colluded with Senator Feinstein and her staff and perhaps even with the acquaintances she kept referring to with whom she says she had conversations? Looks like it. Who were those acquaintances? Her brother or brothers? Her father? CIA related? Her cronies with an objective of taking out POTUS Trump’s “conservative” recommendation for the Supreme Court Brett Kavanaugh? (One for the FBI.)
  1. Has Judge Kavanaugh denied all accusations by the different women who allege sexual misconduct? Yes – under threat of felony perjury.
  2. Does Judge Kavanaugh have impeccable personal and family credentials? Yes. Keep in mind he was vetted 6 times already by the FBI.
  3. Does Judge Kavanaugh have corroborating evidence that he was not at any such alleged party? Yes. Multiple witnesses Dr. Ford identified while at the same time Dr. Ford has no corroborating witness, not one.
  4. Does Judge Kavanaugh have a history of supporting women? Yes. In the law and otherwise.
  5. Does Judge Kavanaugh have an impeccable record as a jurist? Yes.
  6. Does Judge Kavanaugh have the knowledge, talent, background to sit on the Supreme Court and decide Supreme Court cases? Yes.
  7. Would Judge Kavanaugh adjudicate fairly? Yes. This is not supposition. This is fact. His track record, the cases he has adjudicated, demonstrate and prove his fairness.
  8. Do the Democrats have anything to fear in confirming Dr. Kavanaugh? No. At least they didn’t until they trashed his family and caused his wife and children to receive death threats.
  9. Does Judge Kavanaugh have one of the finest legal minds in the nation? Yes.
  10. Was Judge Kavanaugh forthright and emphatic in his testimony? Yes.
  11. Did he fully answer all questions? Yes.
  12. Again, does Judge Kavanaugh “unequivocably deny Dr. Ford’s allegations … under penalty of perjury?” Yes. Multiple times.
  13. Have the Democrats tried and convicted Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault – even calling him an “out-and-out ‘rapist,” a “sexual predator,” a “child predator,” based on bald accusations, without any evidence – with no substantiation – with no corroborating witnesses? Yes.
  14. Are the Democrats’ allegations anything but bare allegations? No. There is no evidence against Judge Kavanaugh. To the contrary, all evidence is for Judge Kavanaugh and the evidence is now mounting overwhelmingly against Dr. Ford.
  1. Is Dr. Ford’s story credible? No. HER STORY HAS LITTLE OR NO CREDIBILITY. There are no corroborating witnesses supporting her story.
  2. Has Dr. Ford now raised approximately half million dollars off her story? Yes.
  3. Have the Democrats created this political and media confusion and “circus” to delay and possibly prevent Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation? Yes.
  4. Is this a Democrat and according to Judge Kavanaugh Clinton coordinated set-up? Yes.
  5. Did and does the Senate Committee have the complete authority “under penalty of perjury” to investigate and decide? Yes. Or, is there need for an FBI investigation? No there is no such need for an FBI investigation. Now that there is one, however, I predict that the democrats will rue the day they asked for one and their perfidy in trashing Judge Kavanaugh has turned the nation against them this fall and in 2020.
  6. As a consequence of the Democrats’ actions, has Judge Kavanaugh’s family received death threats? Yes.
  7. Does Judge Kavanaugh deserve to be confirmed a member of the U.S. Supreme Court? Yes.
  8. Why? Because there is no shred of evidence against him and the presumption of innocence applies and because there is no shred of evidence for Dr. Ford.
  9. Source for the letter analysis (paragraphs 58 thru 70) – Mike Adams who holds an interdisciplinary academic degree in technical writing, reporting on the supposed evidence against Brett Kavanaugh.  https://www.infowars.com/report-14-glaring-errors-highlighted-in-fords-letter-to-feinstein/
  10. See also Eight Big Problems for Christine Blasey Ford’s Story, https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/

BARREL & PORK AND BLOG POST(S)

(C)(TM) Copyright Linford Corporation