Mediaboss Marketing

A group of House conservatives has filed an amendment asking the Justice Department for information related to former FBI Director James Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton email case.

The amendment, first reported by the Washington Post, demands information on "leaks by James B. Comey," on "the propriety and consequence of immunity deals given to possible Hillary Clinton co-conspirators" and Comey's decision to "usurp the authority of then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch in his unusual announcement that criminal charges would not be brought against" Clinton.

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., a co-sponsor of the amendment, told the Washington Examiner he aims to "push back" against "accusations" that are distracting from the agenda of President Trump and Republicans in Congress.

"The bottom line is we are tired of passively letting people make accusations to overcrowd our agenda and they ought to respond to claims we know exist about their misconduct," Biggs said in an interview, referring to Clinton and other Democrats targeted in the amendment, including Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama's national security adviser.

The amendment requires the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to explore the Justice Department and FBI's handling of the Clinton email investigation.

"For the past several years, Democrats have obstructed justice and blocked every Congressional investigation imaginable," said Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, another sponsor of the amendment, in a statement to the Washington Examiner. "Both parties have criticized James Comey over the past year for his performance as FBI director. Even Sen. Feinstein [Dianne] says there should be an investigation into Loretta Lynch and James Comey's handling of the Clinton investigation. Let's have a special counsel for that and see how serious congressional Democrats are about getting to the truth."

The amendment, also sponsored by Reps. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., and Mike Johnson, R-La., will be attached to a bill from Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., that requests the Justice Department provide documents related to Comey's firing.

In recent days, Trump has complained on Twitter that Attorney General Jeff Sessions has not moved to investigate Clinton on other issues unrelated to her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. However, when he was president-elect, Trump said that he would not pursue a new investigation of Clinton.

"I don't want to hurt the Clintons, I really don't," Trump told reporters in November. "She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways, and I am not looking to hurt them at all. The campaign was vicious."

The conservative-authored amendment asks the Justice Department to explain why the FBI did not further investigate Clinton for "selling access to the U.S. State Department through Clinton Foundation donations."

Biggs insisted he and his colleagues did not file their amendment to do the bidding of Trump.

"This is a matter of seeking justice," Biggs said. "It's what this is always about. If you don't seek justice, people lose faith and confidence in their representatives."

In addition to Clinton and Comey, the amendment targets Rice, who some conservatives argue inappropriately sought the identities of people close to Trump -- in a process known as "unmasking" -- whose communications were captured after the election in surveillance of foreigners by U.S. spy agencies.

The conservative co-sponsors ask the Justice Department to say whether Comey had advance knowledge of Rice's unmasking request.

Other information sought includes communication between Comey and special counsel Robert Mueller before the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing last month in which the former FBI director described his interactions with Trump, and evidence of "any or all" leaks by Comey to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt dating to 1993.

Schmidt broke the story detailing memos that Comey wrote about his conversations with Trump.

Originally posted here:
House conservatives gunning for probe of James Comey and Hillary Clinton - Washington Examiner

A quote caught my eye (and others' eyes) over the weekend. It was from Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, and it was about how Democrats move forward with a new slogan A Better Deal and new policies.

When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you dont blame other things Comey, Russia you blame yourself, Schumer (D-N.Y.) told The Washington Post's Ed O'Keefe and David Weigel. So what did we do wrong? People didnt know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.

I certainly read that as a not-so-veiled shot at Hillary Clinton, who has spent plenty of time blaming things not named Hillary Clintonsince November 2016 for her election defeat. Fox News went so far as to say: Schumer tells Clinton 'blame yourself.'"And, notably, it comes from none other than Clinton's former New York colleague in the Senate.

Others disagreed, believing it was a more general statement about the party. Some even pointed to Schumer's use of the we personal pronoun in the second part of the quote suggesting that he was talking about the party as a whole and not Clinton specifically.

Here's what I think we can say for sure: Regardless of whether this quote was aimed at Clinton, she's definitely on the receiving end. It's undeniably a rebuke of her choice of public statements since the 2016 election, and it shows how some Democrats believe Clinton's decision to continue re-litigating things something she apparently plans to do at length in a forthcoming book is going to make it tougher for her party to move forward.

Clinton has offered a number of reasons for her loss, including Russia's hacking, James B. Comey's late disclosure of newly discovered Clinton emails,misogyny and debate questions. Clinton has said she takes absolute personal responsibility for her loss, but her repeated claims that she was the target of unfair and nefarious attacks suggest otherwise.

Anytime you write about Clinton making these excuses, her defenders are quick to pounce. It's possible that Russia did, in fact, tip the scales, they argue! FiveThirtyEight has done an analysis that suggests Comeyprobably did lose the election for her! And you can certainly make a credible case for either; we'll simply never be able to know for sure, because it would require psychoanalyzing millions of people in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin about something that happened months ago.

The point is that it's kind of neither here nor there at this juncture especially when it comes to Democrats' efforts to climb out of their historically deep hole in Congress and in the states. And Schumer's comments show exactly how fruitful an exercise he believes all of that is in the meantime.

Irrespective of whether he was sending a message to Clinton and her defenders, they should consider it a commentary on her and their unwillingness to let go of the 2016 election and the many ways in which they feelthey were wronged. Regardless of those feelings, Schumer seems to be arguing that the fact the Democrats were even in a position to lose to the most unpopular president-elect in modern history is an indictment of them. He doesn't want the party to continue trying to rely on how unpopular Trump is moving forward, and looking backward makes it more difficult to dothat.

That's a message that can't help but be about his former colleaguefrom New York.

Read the rest here:
Chuck Schumer's shot at Hillary Clinton? - Washington Post

Today's Highlight in History:

On July 26, 2016, Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major political party at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia.

On this date:

In 1775, the Continental Congress established a Post Office and appointed Benjamin Franklin its Postmaster-General.

In 1788, New York became the 11th state to ratify the U.S. Constitution.

In 1847, the western African country of Liberia, founded by freed American slaves, declared its independence.

In 1887, the artificial language Esperanto, intended as a universal form of communication, was published by its creator, Dr. L.L. Zamenhof.

In 1908, U.S. Attorney General Charles J. Bonaparte ordered creation of a force of special agents that was a forerunner of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

In 1945, the Potsdam Declaration warned Imperial Japan to unconditionally surrender, or face "prompt and utter destruction." Winston Churchill resigned as Britain's prime minister after his Conservatives were soundly defeated by the Labour Party; Clement Attlee succeeded him.

In 1947, President Harry S. Truman signed the National Security Act, which reorganized America's armed forces as the National Military Establishment and created the Central Intelligence Agency.

In 1952, Argentina's first lady, Eva Peron, died in Buenos Aires at age 33. King Farouk I of Egypt abdicated in the wake of a coup led by Gamal Abdel Nasser.

In 1971, Apollo 15 was launched from Cape Kennedy on America's fourth successful manned mission to the moon.

In 1986, Islamic radicals in Lebanon released the Rev. Lawrence Martin Jenco, an American hostage held for nearly 19 months. American statesman W. Averell Harriman died in Yorktown Heights, New York, at age 94.

In 1990, President George H.W. Bush signed the Americans with Disabilities Act.

In 1992, singer Mary Wells died in Los Angeles at age 49.

Originally posted here:
Today in history: Hillary Clinton became the first woman to be nominated for president by a major political party. - Shelby Star

NewsBusters (press release) (blog)

CNN's John Avlon: 'Hatred of Hillary Clinton Uniting Trump Coalition' NewsBusters (press release) (blog) During a Tuesday panel discussion on CNN, John Avlon -- editor-in-chief of the liberal Daily Beast website and a CNN political analyst -- claimed that with all the turmoil surrounding GOP President Donald Trump, the only thing that unites his ...

Continued here:
CNN's John Avlon: 'Hatred of Hillary Clinton Uniting Trump Coalition' - NewsBusters (press release) (blog)

Which makes what Schumer said about Clinton over the weekend all the more intriguing.

Gauntlet thrown.

Remember that Clinton has laid her defeat in the 2016 election directly at the feet of Russia's meddling -- via a series of hacked emails -- and then-FBI Director James Comey's decision to re-open the investigation into Clinton's private email server.

Schumer's comments to the Post are a direct rebuke of the idea that Clinton has pushed since the election: That she lost because of factors entirely beyond her control, not because of any flaw in her as a candidate or in the message she ran on. (It was "Stronger Together," in case you forgot.)

Schumer is arguing that Clinton lost because she ran a campaign devoid of any real message other than "I'm not Donald Trump." Schumer is also saying that if the Democratic Party wants to succeed in future elections, Democrats need to understand they didn't lose the White House because of Russia and Comey alone.

Neither candidate was at all well-regarded by the electorate. Trump was viewed favorably by 38% of people and Clinton by an only slightly better 43%. What the election came down to was this: Voters wanted change and viewed Trump as the candidate of change. Of the four in 10 voters who said a candidate who could "bring about needed change" was the most important trait for them, Trump won 82% to 14%. That's the entire election.

That Schumer would be willing to slam Clinton's campaign -- and her defense of that campaign -- also speaks to the fact that most Democrats want to move beyond the former secretary of state and the 2016 election. It may be in Clinton's interest to re-litigate the election to ensure she isn't blamed, but most Democrats trying to win reelection (or election) next November want to put her campaign far in their rear-view mirror. (Remember that 10 Senate Democrats are seeking reelection in states Trump won last fall.)

The problem with Schumer's attempt to get beyond the 2016 election is that Democrats remain largely leaderless in the aftermath of an election that no one in the party thought they would lose. Schumer is simply not a well-known enough figure nationally to speak for the party. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is too unpopular among anyone outside of the Democratic base to be that person. Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are prominent but cancel one another out somewhat as they both seek to be the leader of the liberal wing of the party. Former Vice President Joe Biden is in the background even as he makes clear a 2020 bid is an option. Former President Barack Obama seems very conscious of not injecting himself into every debate involving his successor.

All of which means Clinton continues to fill that leadership vacuum with a message much more focused on reshaping her own personal narrative than re-positioning her party to persuade voters in 2018.

Excerpt from:
Chuck Schumer just threw Hillary Clinton under the bus - CNN