From Paul Mirengoff at


I’m not on Facebook, but I was told that Cleta Mitchell’s page contains a brief discussion of the legal implications of the Hillary Clinton-DNC scandal. As many of our readers know, Cleta Mitchell is a star lawyer. She has played a leading role in defending conservatives targeted by the IRS under the Obama administration and in pushing to hold the IRS accountable for the targeting.

Here is Cleta’s take on the Clinton-DNC scandal as it appears on Facebook, according to what I was told (her first sentence is a quote from Donna Brazile):

“Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.”

If this statement by Donna Brazile is true and if those transfers actually happened, then what she says the DNC and the Clinton campaign did was a massive violation of federal law, and triggers criminal penalties. It underscores what I’ve always said: the Democrats and left wing groups have no compunctions about demanding contribution limits and restrictions on the free speech rights of the American people because THEY have no intention of abiding by the rules and the laws they write for others.

Political Party committees such as the DNC have statutory limits on the amount of money the party can give (or transfer) to a candidate. A joint fundraising committee such as the one Donna Brazile describes cannot be used to circumvent the contribution limit for any donor. ANY DONOR. So IF the DNC transferred funds to the Clinton campaign as stated by Donna Brazile, it was a knowing and willful action involving amounts of $25,000 or more. Which triggers a criminal offense under the Federal campaign finance law.

John McCain: Where are you? This was in your bill in 2002. New York Times and Washington Post: where are you? This is the Law at whose altar you worship.

So, did the DNC actually transfer the proceeds from the joint fundraising committee – or ANY other source – to the Clinton campaign? Yes or no. Easy answer. But doubt they will answer. Time for a criminal investigation.

Christie Is Gone, Good; Fiorina Gone, Sad.

The aftermath of the New Hampshire vote this week lead to the departure of Chris Christie and Carl Fiorina from the Republican candidate list.  Christie’s departure is a win and Fiorina’s departure is a real loss.

As I wrote on September 9,2015 “Why Republicans Hate Chris Christie”; which pointed to Christie’s obsequious behavior towards candidate Obama following the Sandy storm in 2012 that propelled Obama to a narrow victory over Mitt Romney. Christie’s behavior was a calculated attempt to give the election to Obama so that the field would be open for Christie in 2016. He Jettisoned the interests of the nation and his party for his personal ambition. He should not be allowed to benefit from this egregious act.

HIs second egregious act was his attack on Marco Rubio at a debate before the New Hampshire primary. This attack against a fellow Republican was made to benefit Christie, was mean spirited, cruelly done and resulted in damaging Rubio’s campaign. Given that Rubio was the candidate said to have the best chance to beat Democrats next November, this was also attack against the Nation and his party all for his own aggrandizement.

Christie is a bully of the first order. Is porcine physique implies eating disorders and other psychological disorders, probably extreme narcissism, but certainly clinical issues exist. That he has no loyalty to his country is significant in that he must have as a basic tenet of his belief system that having a Republican president is far better for the country than having a Democrat in office. He does not believe this and only thinks of having Christie in office. It is very good for all that he is gone.

The only remaining question is to find out who he was working for when he attacked Rubio. If for himself, he is a fool, but he may have been working for Trump in an effort to get rid of a competitor, or he could, of course, be working for Hillary Clinton, who would lose to Rubio according to recent polls. Nevertheless, Christie is our Jack Ruby, but we may find out who he was acting for fairly soon.

The sad item I referred to was the departure of Carly Fiorina from the race. She is remarkable, the un-Hillary woman. Competent, accomplished, super smart and, hopefully, our first woman president in a future campaign. I’ve been telling people that she is my favorite candidate and I was looking forward to having her eviscerate Hillary Clinton in an all female debate, which whe would have certainly done.

Of interest here is that Hillary says you can’t comment on a woman’s looks in a campaign, but must focus only on her issues, but Liberal commentators referred  to Fiorina’s looks on a regular basis, as did Donald Trump, who is more Christie than I’m comforable with. The self-serving motivation for Hillary Clinton’s comments are obvious as was the yellow parka she wore at the debate.

Carly Fiorina is the perfect candidate and will be back and will run the United States in the foreseeable future and that’s a good thing.

The Republican’s shed a load with Christie’s departure but his damage will last. Without him, we would be considering the re-election of President Romney in a better world. It is good that he’s gone, I’m sorry it took so long.




Joe Biden’s Particular Dilemma

Joe Biden has been a prominent politician for his life time. He sat in the Senate for multiple terms and as Vice-President to Barack Obama for 6 1/2 years. He clearly wants to be President to continue the Obama policies. Biden once said, “That’s a big f—-g deal.” as he articulated his opinion on Obama Care. His support for Obama programs is without limit.

His particular dilemma is that Hillary Clinton is running and has the support of many Democrats, overwhelming numbers of women voters, and control of the majority of Democratic Super Delegates to the convention that will select the candidate. He can’t be perceived to be the candidate that unseats the formerly “inevitable” candidate for president, Hillary Clinton.

Biden’s main support comes from Hillary herself who is ensnared in a growing scandal over her use of private email, housed on an insecure server housed in a aide’s bathroom. The discovery of top secret emails on an insecure server that has certainly been hacked by foreign governments and others, including Islamic terrorists, is her major problem. It seems there were emails that showed the location of, Christopher Stevens, who was murdered in Benghazi. Security personnel wondered why it was so easy to find him. The email scandal may carry criminal exposure.

Biden’s ace in the hole is that the Obama administration has always been anti-Hillary and it is being more aggressive as time passes. It is the White House that leaked email stories, it is Obama’s politicized Department of Justice and FBI that are pursuing the scandal and who could indict Hillary in time. Add to these matters the huge support the Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders who is now leading her in key states, by as much a 22 points in New Hampshire, for example. That an avowed Socialist is popular, is alarming in itself! Obama, however, who has no love for the Clintons, has a problem in that an indictment of his Secretary of State would seriously blemish his foreign policy legacy.

Back to “Biden’s Dilemma.” He doesn’t want to take on the Clintons, who have an advantage in delegates and money, and he is a gaffe prone, stumbling candidate, who is tied to Obama’s dwindling legacy. Obamacare is Biden’s too, as enrollment drops and insurance charges soar. So, too, is the Arab Spring with violence in the Mid East and a Muslim invasion of Europe. The Iranian agreement is his, too. It goes on.

It is clear the Joe Biden wants to run, but he needs to have Hillary out of the race first, and he will depend on Obama’s hand on the stiletto to bring her down. Of course, Bill Clinton is the most adroit politician of our time and he may conjure a way out of his wife’s problems and Joe Biden may never get a chance. Of course, let’s not forget Bernie Sanders. It will be a fun year, but the issue is the future of America and that makes it deadly serious.

Trump, Sanders and Politics in 2015

The 2016 Presidential Campaign is marked by two remarkable people whose success is worthy of commentary. The first is Donald Trump, a egoist of the first order, whose candidacy is supported by three factors: his fame, his money and the fact his statements embarrass Republicans.

Trump gets attention because his name is immediately recognized by those who have seen his TV shows, and his countless media appearances, His statements about immigration were inflammatory, but resonated with those who are actually concerned because immigrants break the law and seem to kill people for no reason. The recent murders in Chattanooga of Marines and the random, senseless killing of a woman in San Francisco come to mind. There are many others.

The mainstream media covers Trump because he attracts attention and boosts audiences. Of course, Hillary Clinton makes reference to Trump for those reasons and because he injures Republicans and helps her so she calls attention to him. That, however, will not last as Trump has limited shelf life and due to his McCain comments, is dwindling as a candidate. He will be gone soon.

He will be gone unless he has other motives. He has profited enormously during Obama’s presidency and may see Hillary as the way to maintain his momentum.  He helps that cause by running as a Republican and injuring that party. I think he knows what he is doing. His plan may be to run as a third party candidate to help Hillary as well. That is how her husband won his presidency, after all.

Bernie Sanders is worth looking at as his candidacy is more astounding. Sanders is the Socialist party Senator from Vermont and is running as a Democrat, with whom he caucuses in the Senate. He is not running as a Socialist but as a Democrat and Hillary is not running away from Sanders, trying to distinguish her campaign positions from hers, she is running toward him and moving into radical leftist positions. She has always been at the far left of her party, but is now becoming Sanders like-a Socialist. She will run to the center in the actual campaign, if nominated.

Being a Socialist once, not very long ago, would have relegated him and her to a minority party that may get 4% of the vote, like the Green Party in Minnesota.

The political scene has changed to the point where being a Socialist is seen as a benefit, especially among the coveted millennials, whose knowledge of the world is lamentably poor as history is not taught in college or on the Dally Show. They simply think that Socialist has something to do with having fun.

This fact was shown to me this weekend when I was taken to a restaurant in Minneapolis called, “Hammer and Sickle.”  The communist symbol was displayed everywhere, It was shocking. I see that symbol of mass murder as truly offensive, but I am of a different generation. I remember Americans dying fighting against enemies under that symbol. It is perfectly acceptable now.

We find ourselves with Trump the disingenuous and Sanders the Socialist running for president. It will be an interesting year. I have always adhered to the Chinese proverb, “Hope you live in interesting times.” These times may be too interesting.