Fierce Patriots

Conservative Political News

  • Subscribe

<![CDATA[Hillary Clinton]]>

Report: Surprising Private Message Trump Sent to Merrick Garland After Mar-a-Lago Raid Revealed

by Leave a Comment

Welp, now it’s getting really interesting, America. “It,” of course, being the FBI raid on Donald and Melania Trump’s private residence at Mar-a-Lago. As reported by several sources on Sunday, the former president sent a private message to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday, prior to a Justice Department afternoon news conference. Grab the popcorn: The contents of that message have now been revealed.

Shortly before the press conference, a person close to Trump reached out to an official at the Justice Department to deliver a message to Garland. As reported by The New York Times, the message Trump wanted to be passed to Garland reads:

The country is on fire. What can I do to reduce the heat?

Let the speculation begin, which I will gladly start.

Aside from the stunned look on my face when I first read the message, I said to myself, “You gotta be kidding me.” No way does this fit Trump’s persona, particularly when The Donald does battle with the legions who despise him. Then I wondered, assuming the message is genuine, why would he send it? To Merrick Garland, of all people? Was it a legit question out of legit concern?

Was Trump truly concerned with the country being “on fire” — a fire with the left he stoked throughout his presidency and in the aftermath of the 2020 election — and was he truly wondering what he could do to “reduce the heat”?

Or, was it a ploy by Trump to appear reasonable to Garland as part of an attempt to engineer some sort of amends? I don’t know  — and neither do any of us — so I will not speculate.

Don’t misunderstand; I’m not suggesting any of the above would have been wrong on Trump’s part, but questions remain — the reason being, it simply doesn’t add up; it is the antithesis of the Donald Trump some have come to know and love over the last seven years.

And as we reported on Thursday, the key question remains:

Why did the FBI raid Mar-a-Lago just two months after Trump secretly received a grand jury subpoena for classified documents belonging to the National Archives, and then voluntarily cooperated by turning over the asked-for documents? He also surrendered security surveillance footage of his private storage locker and aided federal agents and a senior Justice Department lawyer in searching the locker, according to multiple people present, some of whom said Trump cooperated extensively.

What changed over the course of two months?

If Trump willingly and extensively cooperated, and the DOJ later decided to seek additional information, including, perhaps, documents Trump failed to provide the first time, why not issue a second subpoena rather than conduct a full-blown raid? These are legitimate questions, while a bit rhetorical, as well, given the past unacceptable tactics of former FBI head James Comey against Trump.

The decision by Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice to conduct a raid on Mar-a-Lago appears neither justified, based on what we know, nor does it track with the DOJ’s past non-decisions in situations not involving Donald Trump. If Garland’s “final okay,” which he made clear he alone gave during his Thursday news conference, was based on Trump’s alleged removal of classified material from the White House, that would appear to be a blatant double standard of justice.

Where was the raid on Hillary Clinton‘s home, after a software manufacturer bragged that his product — Bleachbit — was used to delete more than 33,000 emails from a private email server Hillary used for official State Department business, in clear violation of government policy? Incredibly, Hillary later claimed the deleted emails contained only personal, non-work-related subjects like yoga sessions and the planning of her daughter Chelsea’s wedding.

Yet Donald Trump’s private residence is raided, just two months after he voluntarily cooperated with a secret subpoena. Moreover, previous violations of the Presidential Records Act have generally been punished by administrative fines; certainly not by raids on former presidents’ homes and/or criminal prosecution.

Maybe there are legitimate reasons for the clear double standard in Trump’s case that have not yet been revealed. Then again “maybe” the raid on Mar-a-Lago was just the next episode of the TDS-riddled Democrat Party’s never-ending witch hunt against Trump.

A witch hunt that began before Donald Trump was even sworn into office.

Feel the Bern: Hillary Shades Sanders as Sexist in New Book

by Leave a Comment

There’s nothing more entertaining than when liberals go after each other, so grab the popcorn because a new book is coming out this month that reignites an old spat between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and threatens to provoke a new one between Sanders and Hillary Clinton. The book is called “Electable: Why America Hasn’t Put a Woman in the White House” and was written by NBC Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitali. It comes out August 23.

The book is excerpted in Politico, which writes that Vitali “covered the 2016 and 2020 presidential contests from primary to inauguration—on the ground and with the candidates.” In the tome she dregs up the epic post-debate showdown between Sanders, the Independent Senator from Vermont, and Warren, the Democrat Senator from Massachusetts. Remember?

The “lying” charges they hurled at each other stem from a claim Warren made that Sanders said at a private 2018 dinner that a woman could not win the presidency. Sanders denied the accusation on the Democrat Primary debate stage, hence causing Warren to seek him out afterward, with the embarrassing moment captured on a hot mic. Publicly, the two senators tried to mend their rift, but privately things remained heated. Vitali writes:

Behind the scenes, candidates and staffs alike were fuming, with fingers pointing and accusations flying about who leaked this news and what ends it served them in doing so. Among some was the view that it was Warren’s team that put it out there, looking to reignite her stalling campaign while knocking off the man who carried the progressive mantle. The Warren team, meanwhile, closed ranks, but saw Sanders’ denial and the aggressive posture of his campaign’s response as a betrayal. More than that, they were angry about how the media seemed far more willing to give Sanders the benefit of belief than Warren, who had also put herself on the record with her account of the story.

The juicy behind-the-scenes back-and-forth continued, but eventually, they both lost to Joe Biden and the world moved on. Here to stir it back up: none other than former Secretary of State and two-time presidential race loser Hillary Clinton. Vitali writes:

Hillary Clinton was watching this debate moment, too. “I believed her, because I know Sanders, and I know the kind of things that he says about women and to women,” she told me, her distaste for her 2016 opponent still palpable. “So, I thought that she was telling an accurate version of the conversation they’d had.” [Emphasis mine.]

Bernie, say it isn’t so! What kinds of things do you say about women? Clinton doesn’t tell us of course, she just throws the nasty charge out there and leaves it to fester. But in a Dr. Evil level of brilliance, she goes on further to trash both Sanders and Warren:

“I wish she had done it on mic,” Clinton said. “I wish that she had pushed back in front of everybody. I think it weakened her response that it was after the cameras were supposedly off and, you know, they were just standing there. I think it’s important that you call it out when it happens, and that was my only regret for her: that I wish she had just turned on him and said, ‘You know, it’s one thing to mislead people about your healthcare plan. It’s another thing to tell someone to her face that a conversation which you know happened didn’t happen.’ I mean, that would have been, I think, a really important moment for her.”

Well played, Mrs. Clinton, well played. You managed to portray one of your biggest rivals as a sexist and the other as a weakling. Even if you don’t like Hillary, you have to respect the way she appears to sympathize with Warren but actually tears her down.

The question is, why would she do that? Does she have plans for 2024…?

Feel the Bern: Hillary Shades Sanders as Sexist in New Book

by Leave a Comment

There’s nothing more entertaining than when liberals go after each other, so grab the popcorn because a new book is coming out this month that reignites an old spat between Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and threatens to provoke a new one between Sanders and Hillary Clinton. The book is called “Electable: Why America Hasn’t Put a Woman in the White House” and was written by NBC Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitali. It comes out August 23.

The book is excerpted in Politico, which writes that Vitali “covered the 2016 and 2020 presidential contests from primary to inauguration—on the ground and with the candidates.” In the tome she dregs up the epic post-debate showdown between Sanders, the Independent Senator from Vermont, and Warren, the Democrat Senator from Massachusetts. Remember?

The “lying” charges they hurled at each other stem from a claim Warren made that Sanders said at a private 2018 dinner that a woman could not win the presidency. Sanders denied the accusation on the Democrat Primary debate stage, hence causing Warren to seek him out afterward, with the embarrassing moment captured on a hot mic. Publicly, the two senators tried to mend their rift, but privately things remained heated. Vitali writes:

Behind the scenes, candidates and staffs alike were fuming, with fingers pointing and accusations flying about who leaked this news and what ends it served them in doing so. Among some was the view that it was Warren’s team that put it out there, looking to reignite her stalling campaign while knocking off the man who carried the progressive mantle. The Warren team, meanwhile, closed ranks, but saw Sanders’ denial and the aggressive posture of his campaign’s response as a betrayal. More than that, they were angry about how the media seemed far more willing to give Sanders the benefit of belief than Warren, who had also put herself on the record with her account of the story.

The juicy behind-the-scenes back-and-forth continued, but eventually, they both lost to Joe Biden and the world moved on. Here to stir it back up: none other than former Secretary of State and two-time presidential race loser Hillary Clinton. Vitali writes:

Hillary Clinton was watching this debate moment, too. “I believed her, because I know Sanders, and I know the kind of things that he says about women and to women,” she told me, her distaste for her 2016 opponent still palpable. “So, I thought that she was telling an accurate version of the conversation they’d had.” [Emphasis mine.]

Bernie, say it isn’t so! What kinds of things do you say about women? Clinton doesn’t tell us of course, she just throws the nasty charge out there and leaves it to fester. But in a Dr. Evil level of brilliance, she goes on further to trash both Sanders and Warren:

“I wish she had done it on mic,” Clinton said. “I wish that she had pushed back in front of everybody. I think it weakened her response that it was after the cameras were supposedly off and, you know, they were just standing there. I think it’s important that you call it out when it happens, and that was my only regret for her: that I wish she had just turned on him and said, ‘You know, it’s one thing to mislead people about your healthcare plan. It’s another thing to tell someone to her face that a conversation which you know happened didn’t happen.’ I mean, that would have been, I think, a really important moment for her.”

Well played, Mrs. Clinton, well played. You managed to portray one of your biggest rivals as a sexist and the other as a weakling. Even if you don’t like Hillary, you have to respect the way she appears to sympathize with Warren but actually tears her down.

The question is, why would she do that? Does she have plans for 2024…?

4 Reasons Why We Should Be Skeptical of the FBI Raid on Trump’s Home

by Leave a Comment

The FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s home remains a hot topic of conversation on social media and the airwaves. The Bureau has not yet provided additional details about the matter, and they are unlikely to do so any time soon. But critics from the right and left have pointed out that the agency’s actions are coming off as politically motivated, and there are plenty of reasons why so many are suspicious.

For starters, the FBI has demonstrated an apparent level of bias when it comes to the high-profile individuals it targets. Remember the Hillary Clinton email scandal? Even though she did not bother to turn over the emails on her private server, the Bureau didn’t even come close to raiding her home. In fact, then FBI Director James Comey publicly exonerated her shortly before the 2016 election.

Clinton isn’t the only one who enjoys the privilege of engaging in corrupt activity without having to fear consequences. Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, has engaged in all kinds of shady conduct. Despite attempts on the part of social media and the activist press to suppress the story initially, Hunter’s laptop has still seen much daylight. Now, reports suggest that the federal investigation into his business activities is reaching a critical point. But realistically, nobody actually believes Hunter will face any consequences even if it is found that he committed a crime.

Then, there is also the fact that the Bureau has been gunning for Trump since 2016. Not only did they falsify a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page, a member of the former president’s campaign team, they even participated in perpetuating the Russia collusion hoax to deceptively besmirch Trump. Even though agents knew Christopher Steele’s dossier had been largely debunked, they still used it to obtain the warrant used to spy on Page.

Even worse, remember when former FBI agents Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were found to have been using their positions to prevent Trump from becoming president? This appeared to be only a microcosm of what many agents were up to when it came to attacking the former chief executive.

Lastly, we have the FBI raid itself, which is not the normal course of action for a high-level official who is holding on to classified documents that are supposed to be given to the National Archive. Trump’s team was already in conversations with the government to hand over the documents. But even if this wasn’t the case, this alleged offense does not rise to the level of carrying out a predawn raid on a former president’s residence.

To those suspicious of the Bureau, this appears to be a situation in which the agency used the documents as a pretext for invading Trump’s home so they could find evidence of other alleged offenses that could be used against him. It would not be outside the realm of possibility that they are trying to find something related to Jan. 6 or even a piece of evidence of another issue of which we are not yet aware. The objective is to get an indictment on any crime they can find – or concoct.

At this point, it is clear the FBI and the Justice Department cannot be trusted. If they had this same energy with Hunter and Clinton and hadn’t tried to derail Trump’s presidency in the past, they would have at least a modicum of credibility. But the reality is that this seems to be that to which we have already become accustomed: Another politically-motivated hit job on Trump.

4 Reasons We Should Be Skeptical of the FBI Raid on Trump’s Home

by Leave a Comment

The FBI raid on former President Donald Trump’s home remains a hot topic of conversation on social media and the airwaves. The Bureau has not yet provided additional details about the matter, and they are unlikely to do so any time soon. But critics from the right and left have pointed out that the agency’s actions are coming off as politically motivated, and there are plenty of reasons why so many are suspicious.

For starters, the FBI has demonstrated an apparent level of bias when it comes to the high-profile individuals it targets. Remember the Hillary Clinton email scandal? Even though she did not bother to turn over the emails on her private server, the Bureau didn’t even come close to raiding her home. In fact, then FBI Director James Comey publicly exonerated her shortly before the 2016 election.

Clinton isn’t the only one who enjoys the privilege of engaging in corrupt activity without having to fear consequences. Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son, has engaged in all kinds of shady conduct. Despite attempts on the part of social media and the activist press to suppress the story initially, Hunter’s laptop has still seen much daylight. Now, reports suggest that the federal investigation into his business activities is reaching a critical point. But realistically, nobody actually believes Hunter will face any consequences even if it is found that he committed a crime.

Then, there is also the fact that the Bureau has been gunning for Trump since 2016. Not only did they falsify a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page, a member of the former president’s campaign team, they even participated in perpetuating the Russia collusion hoax to deceptively besmirch Trump. Even though agents knew Christopher Steele’s dossier had been largely debunked, they still used it to obtain the warrant used to spy on Page.

Even worse, remember when former FBI agents Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were found to have been using their positions to prevent Trump from becoming president? This appeared to be only a microcosm of what many agents were up to when it came to attacking the former chief executive.

Lastly, we have the FBI raid itself, which is not the normal course of action for a high-level official who is holding on to classified documents that are supposed to be given to the National Archive. Trump’s team was already in conversations with the government to hand over the documents. But even if this wasn’t the case, this alleged offense does not rise to the level of carrying out a predawn raid on a former president’s residence.

To those suspicious of the Bureau, this appears to be a situation in which the agency used the documents as a pretext for invading Trump’s home so they could find evidence of other alleged offenses that could be used against him. It would not be outside the realm of possibility that they are trying to find something related to Jan. 6 or even a piece of evidence of another issue of which we are not yet aware. The objective is to get an indictment on any crime they can find – or concoct.

At this point, it is clear the FBI and the Justice Department cannot be trusted. If they had this same energy with Hunter and Clinton and hadn’t tried to derail Trump’s presidency in the past, they would have at least a modicum of credibility. But the reality is that this seems to be that to which we have already become accustomed: Another politically-motivated hit job on Trump.