Trump Sees Many Successes and Puts White House in Order with General Kelly as Chief of Staff

THE TABLES ARE TURNING ON THE DEMOCRATS : THAT IS THE REAL NEWS TODAY. The mainstream media and its Progressive Democrat masters seem to be less anxious to blame President Trump for Russian interference in the 2016 presidentia election. • • • A SECOND SPECIAL COUNSEL? TheHill reported last week that Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee are asking for a second special counsel separate from Robert Mueller to probe aspects of the 2016 election and actions by officials in the Obama administration, including former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. TheHill says that Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte and other Republicans on the Committee sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Thursday requesting the appointment of a second special counsel. The letter asked for a second special counsel to investigate officials including former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former FBI Director James Comey. The letter was sent a day after Republicans on the Committee voted to request documents related to Comey's communications with the Obama administration and journalists. The GOP request for documents focuses on questions raised by Republicans and the Trump administration about Comey's handling of the FBI investigation into Clinton's email use and the former FBI Director's alleged "leaks" of memos he wrote to document his interactions with Trump. • • • HAS A SENIOR DEEP STATE LEAKER BEEN FOUND? On Friday, American Thinker's Thomas Lifson wrote that a suspect has been identified in leaking of classified info from the FBI. Lifson quotes Sara Carter of Circa citing three anonymous sources in an exclusive report identifying a suspect in the investigation of the criminal leak of classified information from the FBI. The surprise is that the suspect is highly regarded and a close friend of James Comey, according to Carter, who writes : "FBI General Counsel James A. Baker is purportedly under a Department of Justice criminal investigation for allegedly leaking classified national security information to the media, according to multiple government officials close to the probe who spoke with Circa on the condition of anonymity. FBI spokeswoman Carol Cratty said the bureau would not comment on Baker and would not confirm or deny any investigation. This comes as Department of Justice Attorney General Jeff Sessions said he would soon be making an announcement regarding the progress of leak investigations. A DOJ official, while not commenting on Circa’s inquiry into Baker, did say that the planned announcement by Sessions is part of the overall "stepped up efforts on leak investigations." • Baker was appointed to the FBI's general counsel by Comey in 2014. Baker worked as a federal prosecutor in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice during the 1990s, then joined the Office of Intelligence Policy and Review in 1996, according to his FBI bio. (https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/pressrel/press-releases/james-a.-baker-appointed-as-fbis-general-counsel). In 2006, Baker received the George H.W. Bush Award for Excellence in counter-terrorism -- the CIA’s highest counter-terrorism award, according to his biography. During Baker's long and distinguished career he received the "NSA’s Intelligence Under Law Award; the NSA Director’s Distinguished Service Medal; and DOJ’s highest award -- the Edmund J. Randolph Award." • AND, says Lifson, "Baker may be totally innocent of leaking, and it may be others." A federal law enforcement official with knowledge of ongoing internal investigations in the bureau told Circa, "the bureau is scouring for leakers and there's been a lot of investigations." • • • OBAMA ADMINISTRATION UNMASKED HUNDREDS OF AMERICANS. TheHill reported last week that the House Intelligence Committee chairman has accused Obama aides of hundreds of unmasking requests during the 2016 election to unmask the names of Americans picked up in intelligence reports, including Trump transition officials. Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes wrote a letter to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, saying the requests were made without giving justifications about why the information was needed : “We have found evidence that current and former government officials had easy access to US person information and that it is possible that they used this information to achieve partisan political purposes, including the selective, anonymous leaking of such information.” The letter was provided to The Hill from a source in the intelligence community. • TheHill report states that in March, Nunes disclosed that he had seen data suggesting Trump campaign and transition officials were having their names unmasked by Obama White House officials -- National Security Adviser Susan Rice and CIA Director John Brennan have acknowledged making such requests though they insisted the requests were for legitimate work reasons. Nunes was forced to recuse himself from his Committee’s work on its investigation of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election because he had reviewed intelligence reports on White House grounds that he said showed unmasking of Trump officials by Obama aides. Democrats accused him of working with the White House to make the disclosures. • But, TheHill says that in Thursday’s letter, Nunes said the total requests for Americans’ names by Obama political aides numbered in the hundreds during Obama’s last year in office and often lacked a specific intelligence community justification. He called the lack of proper justifications a “serious deficiency.” His letter also said there were many requests from senior government officials, unlike career intelligence analysts, who “made remarkably few individualized justifications for access” to the US names. Nunes wrote : “The committee has learned that one official, whose position had no apparent intelligence related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama administration. Of those requests, only one offered a justification that was not boilerplate.” Sources familiar with the Nunes letter told TheHill the official was then-UN Ambassador Samantha Power. Nunes also wrote that “Obama-era officials sought the identities of Trump transition officials within intelligence reports.” • Nunes said he intends to introduce legislation to address concerns about the unmasking process impacting Americans' privacy. The usual procedure is that Americans whose email or phone data or conversations are intercepted by the National Security Agency without a warrant overseas are legally required to have their names redacted or masked with descriptions like “US person 1” to protect their identities in intelligence reports. But, beginning in 2011, Obama loosened the rules to make it easier for intelligence officials and his own political aides to request that the names be unmasked so they could better understand raw intelligence being gathered overseas. The change has been criticized by groups as diverse as the liberal ACLU and conservatives like Nunes because of the privacy implications. • The law containing the unmasking authorization is set to be renewed before the end of this year, and Congress is sufficiently concerned about the Obama lapses in following the procedure set by Congress that it is questioning whether the unmasking procedure ought to be scrapped completely. • • • SESSIONS ANNOUNCES CRACKDOWN ON SANCTUARY CITIES. Liberty Headlines reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced last Tuesday that sanctuary cities around the US must give immigration officials more access, or else they’ll lose millions of dollars in DOJ grants. Sessions said sanctuary cities will be punished for not communicating with ICE (US Immigration and Customs Enforcement) officials or not allowing them access to inmates in jails or failing to announce the release of criminal aliens, according to a release from the Center for Immigration Studies. The CIS is accused by Progressives of being right-wing. CIS is a non-profit research organization "that favors far lower immigration," and has been described as conservative, a label rejected by CIS. After an NPR story described CIS as "decidedly right-wing," Edward Schumacher-Matos, the then ombudsman of NPR, argued that this mislabelled CIS, noting the organization's "political diversity." CIS funding comes from contributions and grants by private foundations, from contracts with the Census Bureau and Department of Justice, and from donations by individuals, including donations made through the Combined Federal Campaign. The Center's staff have been called on to give testimony before federal and state legislators dozens of times and on numerous subjects within the realm of immigration. In 2006 and 2007, as Congress worked on comprehensive immigration reform, CIS gave congressional testimony 27 times. The Center's research was cited by Justice Kennedy in his opinion in Arizona v. United States, on June 25, 2012, as evidence of Arizona's problem with crime committed by illegal aliens. • The CIS director of policy studies said in last week's release : “The four largest Byrne/JAG grants in 2016, worth more than $10 million, all went to sanctuaries jurisdictions: New York City; Cook County, Ill.; the City of Los Angeles; and Philadelphia. The Department of Justice should cut them off unless they change their policies. Taxpayers should not be subsidizing local governments that interfere with immigration enforcement and endanger the public.” • There were over $30 million in Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grants given to over 300 sanctuary city jurisdictions in 2016, according to CIS. Justice assistance grants are given to cities and help out in a number of ways -- cities use the grant money to “support a range of program areas including law enforcement, prosecution, indigent defense, courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, planning, evaluation, technology improvement, and crime victim and witness initiatives and mental health programs and related law enforcement and corrections programs, including behavioral programs and crisis intervention teams. • The DOJ will not stop all sanctuary city grants under the new sanctions, but those with stronger sanctuary policies will, according to CIS : New York City; Chicago; Cook County, Ill.; Philadelphia; San Francisco County, Calif.; Orleans County, La.; Newark, N.J.; Travis County, Texas; Taos County, N.M.; Lycoming County, Pa.; and Butler County, Pa. • Attorney General Sessions said in announcing the crackdown : “So-called sanctuary policies make all of us less safe because they intentionally undermine our laws and protect illegal aliens who have committed crimes. These policies also encourage illegal immigration and even human trafficking by perpetuating the lie that in certain cities, illegal aliens can live outside the law. We must encourage these ‘sanctuary’ jurisdictions to change their policies and partner with federal law enforcement to remove criminals.” Liberty Headlines noted that the DOJ pressure on sanctuary cities began to increase when Sessions addressed the issue in Philadelphia recently. He stressed the tension between law enforcement and city officials when it comes to helping immigration agents : “Local police I know totally are supportive and want to work together on so many of these issues and I know you want to help. The problem are the policies that tie your hands and that makes all citizens, especially the police on the streets, less safe. I urge the City of Philadelphia and every sanctuary city to reconsider the harm they are doing to their residents.” • While the effort to crack down on sanctuary cities harboring of illegal immigrants may seem minor, it is clear that AG Sessions is giving these cities that are violating US law the opportunity to come into compliance. More severe sanctions can be considered later for those sanctuary cities that continue to scoff at US immigration law -- FBI criminal conspiracy investigations, and charges of harboring criminals and obstructing justice, as well as prosecutions of individual govenrment officials can come later. • • • OBAMA DEEP STATE SLOWS DEPORTATION. the Washington Examiner's Paul Bedard wrote recently that former President Obama's administration named the bulk of members on the Justice Department's deportation appeals board : "Nearly seven in 10 members of an influential deportation appeals court were named by pro-immigration former Presidents Obama and Clinton, adding to concerns of delays in the process of sending an illegal home. According to a new report, 11 of 16 members of the Justice Department Board of Immigration Appeals were named by Attorneys General working for Democratic Presidents, nine by Obama and two by Clinton. The other 5 were named by former President George W. Bush's Justice Department." • The Board oversees the backlogged immigration courts and decisions by the Department of Homeland Security, making it the ultimate appeals court. There is a vacancy on the board, prompting the Center for Immigration Studies to call on President Trump to immediately fill it and even consider adding more Republican members. Using data from the Governmental Accountability Office, CIS said that there is a backlog of about 437,000 cases pending before immigration courts, and the average time for each is 404 days, with appeals often taking another 211 days, for a total of 615 days per case that goes into appeal. CIS says adding more members to the Board could speed the process. • • • TRUMP HAS GOOD SUPPORT AT STATE LEVEL. "Real Clear" reported Trump's job approval ratings are 50% or higher in 17 states, and above his job approval average of 39% in another 16 states, meaning that over two-thirds of the nation feels better about him than reported in national poll headlines. • Gallup summarized the President's polls since coming into office and reported these details : Trump had approval ratings of 50% or higher in 17 states in the first half of 2017; another 17 states gave him approval ratings below 40%; 16 states produced a rating average of between 40% and 49%. The highest approval ratings were in West Virginia, North Dakota and South Dakota, while the lowest were in Vermont and Massachusetts.Gallup said that Trump largely owed his victory in the 2016 presidential election to his wins in three key Rust Belt states -- Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. In these states, his January-June approval ratings were just slightly above his overall average of 40%, including 43% in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and 42% in Michigan. Gallup says that for President Trump to successfully win re-election, "historical patterns suggest his overall 40% rating would need to rise closer to 50%." He would also need to improve his support in the key Rust Belt states that delivered the Electoral College win to him. In those states, his job approval is slightly above 40%, but barely so, raising questions of whether he can carry them in 2020. • • • RUSSIA, DEMOCRATS AND FUSION GPS. WND says suddenly Russia is the last thing Democrats want to discuss : "The establishment media has gone from virtual 24/7 coverage of the narrative that President Trump colluded with Russia to almost nothing, and they did it overnight. How far has Russia fallen off the media’s radar? So far, that, in a noteworthy role-reversal, it is actually the White House now pushing the story on the media. And why is the White House suddenly embracing the Russia story? Because it is now poised to boomerang on the Democrats, big time, following a key Senate Judiciary committee hearing last Thursday." Then, at the end of Thursday’s daily press briefing, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders chided reporters, “You guys love to talk about Russia, and there’s been nonstop coverage. And the one day that there might have been a question on Russia, there wasn’t.” So, tongue-in-cheek, Sarah raised the topic herself, noting, “[T]here was public testimony that further discredited the phony dossier that’s been the source of so much of the fake news and conspiracy theories. And we learned that the firm that produced it was also being paid by the Russians.” • That was the revelation that shut down mainstream media interest. Thursday’s testimony indicated the entire Russia collusion story may be turned on its head. WND says : "While there is still no evidence the President or his associates colluded with Russia against Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, evidence may be emerging that there was collusion by Democrats with Russians against Trump. The FBI investigation into possible Trump team collusion with Russia seems to have been based entirely, as WND has reported, on an infamous dossier of dubious veracity." WND says that after the Senate hearing, a Capitol Hill source with knowledge of the investigations told its reporter : “Democrats have peddled the dossier’s claims, but if it turns out Democrat groups actually cooperated with Kremlin-linked individuals in compiling the dossier or funding its compilation, they may have to explain that under oath.” • In plain Englishn that would mean that it was the Democrats who colluded with Russia. Not Trump. • The dossier and where it came from are the keys. It was filled with errors and later-discredited salacious allegations against Trump, and was compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, who wildly claimed the hackers who obtained the leaked Democratic Party emails were “paid by both Trump’s team and the Kremlin.” The truth now seems to be emerging -- WND says the dossier "was commissioned and peddled by a company called Fusion GPS. Aimed at Trump, it is now back-firing on Democrats." • Ranking Democrats on investigative committees and former Obama administration intelligence official have repeatedly said that they have seen no evidence of collusion between the Trump presidential campaign or administration and Moscow. But, last Thursday Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, who did opposition research for a former Clinton White House operative before joining Fusion GPS, refused to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel reported : “Word is Mr. Simpson has made clear he will appear for a voluntary committee interview only if he is not specifically asked who hired him to dig dirt on Mr. Trump. Democrats are going to the mat for him over that demand. Those on the Judiciary Committee pointedly did not sign letters in which Mr. Grassley demanded that Fusion reveal who hired it.” Strassel also noted that although the left was “salivating at the prospect of watching two Trump insiders [Donald Trump Jr. and Paul Manafort] being grilled about Russian ‘collusion,'” suddenly Democrats on the committee “meekly and noiselessly retreated,” and let both men speak to the committee in private. Strassel suggests that "Democrats are willing to give up just about anything -- including their Manafort moment -- to protect Mr. Simpson from having to answer that question.” • However, WND says a witness who did testify publicly made the potentially game-changing disclosure that Fusion GPS is also on the payroll of the Russians -- investor William Browder testified that Fusion GPS should have registered as a foreign agent because it was acting on the behalf of the Russians. Senator Lindsey Graham then asked Browder, “The group that did the dossier on President Trump hired this British spy, wound up getting it to the FBI, you believe they were working for the Russians?” Browder answered affirmatively : “And in the Spring and Summer of 2016 they were receiving money indirectly from a senior Russian government official.” Browder said Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya had hired Fusion GPS, via a lobbying firm, to lobby against the 2012 Magnitsky Act, a law passed to punish Russian officials thought to be responsible for the death of tax-fraud whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky by prohibiting their entrance to the United States and denying their use of the American banking system. Veselnitskaya met in June 2016 with Donald Trump Jr., which Democrats initially claimed proved collusion by his father’s campaign with Russia, but Veselnitskaya really wanted to talk about the Magnitsky Act, so Donald Jr., seeing that the meeting was a complete “waste of time,” abruptly left. Browder said he believes that meeting was just part of a massive Russian effort to lobby against the Magnitsky Act. • The WSJ's Strassel wondered : “What if, all this time, Washington and the media have had the Russia collusion story backward? What if it wasn’t the Trump campaign playing footsie with the Vladimir Putin regime, but Democrats? The more we learn about Fusion, the more this seems a possibility....What if it was the Democratic National Committee or Hillary Clinton’s campaign? What if that money flowed from a political entity on the left, to a private law firm, to Fusion, to a British spook, and then to Russian sources? Moreover, what if those Kremlin-tied sources already knew about this dirt-digging....What if they specifically made up claims to dupe Mr. Steele, to trick him into writing this dossier?” • Strassel speculated that if Russia were really looking to meddle in the 2016 election and create chaos, “few things could have been more effective than that dossier,” which underpinned the FBI investigation, congressional investigations and deeply wounded President Trump, all of which worked to the benefit of Russian President Putin. The question, Strassel added, “Is whether Russia engineered it.” • • • DEAR READERS, Andrew McCarthy has suggested in National Review that Trump should turn the tables on his tormenters in three moves that would make the Democrats the hunted : Appoint a special counsel to investigate political spying, including unmasking and leaks to the media; have Congress hold hearings on whether the Obama Justice Department colluded with the Hillary Clinton campaign to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election; have Congress hold hearings on collusion between the Clinton Foundation and Russia. McCarthy contends those investigations could succeed where the Trump-Russia collusion investigation failed, because, unlike the latter, there is evidence of actual wrongdoing. But, it now appears that Andrew McCarthy's work may be done by congressional committee investigations already underway. The tables do seem to be turning in President Trump's favor on a number of issues plaguing his presidency. • Many years ago, America enjoyed the film comedy titled, "The Russians are Coming, the Russians Are Coming." Perhaps the Democrats aren't laughing now. And, perhaps they're learning to be more afraid of General Kelly, the new White House Chief of Staff, than of the Russians. General Kelly in his first half day on the job has convinced the President to let go Anthony Scaramucci, the vulgarity-prone White House communications director.