Campaign for Working Families

Thursday, February 13, 2020 -- Stone's Sentence, Huawei's Hackers, What Moderates

Stone's Sentence
Once again, the Democrats and their media enablers are screaming "IMPEACHMENT!"  This time it's the faux controversy stemming from Roger Stone's sentencing recommendation.  To be clear, neither the attorney general nor the president have done anything irregular or illegal, much less impeachable. 
The president is the chief law enforcement official in the country.  He can voice an opinion about a legal matter any time he wants. 
The attorney general is in charge of the Justice Department.  It is completely within his purview to review the recommendations of U.S. attorneys, especially if he believes one is particularly out of line. 
Roger Stone is not a threat to the public.  He has not committed a harm to society so egregious that he should spend the better part of a decade behind bars. 
As one commentator put it, if leftists were really serious about criminal justice reform, they wouldn't be so eager to throw the book at a 67-year-old, first-time, non-violent offender. Even CNN's own legal analyst thought the initial sentence was "excessive."
So Justice Department officials recommended a lower sentence in Stone's case.  But the sentence will not be set by the attorney general or the U.S. attorney.  It will be set by the judge, who is free to ignore any recommendations the government offers. 
But if you're looking for examples of inappropriate behavior, it is being reported that several members of Roger Stone's jury had obvious partisan biases.  The jury foreman was a former Democrat congressional candidate and an avowed opponent of the president.  This raises serious questions of whether Stone received a fair trial. 
And we know that individuals in the Obama Justice Department lied to the FISA court to get warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.  The House Intelligence Committee, under Rep. Adam Schiff, refuses to investigate this gross abuse of power.  That sounds like obstruction of justice to me.
Huawei's Hackers
As you may recall, a big part of the Trump Administration's "get tough" approach to China has been to hold the line against telecommunications giant Huawei due to concerns that it could hack communications systems and allow the Chinese government to spy on virtually everyone.
Here's one indication of just how seriously the U.S. views this potential threat:  Vice President Mike Pence said the Trump Administration was "profoundly disappointed" by Great Britain's decision to allow Huawei to build out part of its 5G infrastructure. 
Pence also suggested that it could even be a "deal breaker" for a future trade agreement between the U.S. and the U.K.  As you know, Britain is one of our main allies and trading partners.
But Huawei is not a hypothetical threat.  The U.S. government knows Huawei is hacking its own communications systems.  In fact, we've been watching them do it for the past ten years with its 4G systems. 
Now the Trump Administration is sounding the alarm, trying to get our European allies to wake up before they are further compromised by communist China.  By the way, the Trump Administration just filed new charges against Huawei, charging the company with racketeering and conspiracy.
Speaking Of Compromised. . .
As the coronavirus continues to spread, more people are raising concerns about how previous administrations that worshipped at the altar of free trade have seriously compromised our safety and security.
Sadly, we encouraged many manufacturers and drug companies to transfer production to China because far too many politicians and corporate elites bought into the lie that "trade with China will change China." 
Some are warning that China could wage war on us without ever firing a shot.  How?  Key medicines and pharmaceuticals that millions of Americans depend on could be cut off because we are so dependent on Chinese medical supply lines. 
To be fair and balanced about this, what were Presidents Bush and Obama thinking?  Did no one raise this issue before?
And medicines aren't the only problem.  We're already largely dependent on China for rare earth metals that are critical to everything from iPhones to missiles.
On yet another front, the Department of Education is aggressively going after Harvard and Yale.  Both institutions failed to report billions of dollars that they are legally required to disclose from foreign sources like China and Saudi Arabia. 
Not only are they turning our kids into historically ignorant socialists, they are comfortable taking money from Chinese communists and Saudi extremists.  Both of these elite schools produce graduates who end up in leading positions in government, industry and on Wall Street.
Omar Targets Israel
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) just introduced several bills which she's calling the "Pathway to Peace."  Among other things, her legislation aims to rollback the president's ability to impose sanctions on nations like Iran and Venezuela, and transfers billions of dollars from the Pentagon to the State Department to establish a "peacebuilding fund." 
And, of course, she's also targeting Israel. 
Omar's "Stop Arming Human Rights Abusers Act" may sound reasonable, except that when the progressive left complains about "human rights abuses" it rarely refers to Iran, North Korea or Venezuela.  It's almost always a ruse to browbeat and condemn Israel for its response to Palestinian incitement and terrorism.
And Omar is a leading advocate of the anti-Semitic BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) movement against Israel, which is targeting the Jewish state for its alleged "human rights abuses."
What Moderates?
A few post-New Hampshire headlines caught my attention recently.  (Here, here and here.)  The common theme is that the "moderate" candidates in the Democrat primary are dividing the vote and allowing Sanders to prevail.
This is utter nonsense.  There are no "moderates" in this field.  I know I have written about this before, but it cannot be stressed enough. 
As we saw in the last Democrat debate, all the candidates (save one) are comfortable with the "socialist" label. They are all pro-abortion, open borders, big government extremists.  And, please, do not take my word for it.
One news outlet analyzed Joe Biden's platform and wrote this:
"The 2020 Democratic frontrunner's emerging policy agenda is anything but moderate. . . Biden has proposed ideas more ambitious and liberal than policies supported by Hillary Clinton in the 2016 campaign."
The Washington Post editorial board recently stated, "No, Pete Buttigieg and Joe Biden are not 'centrists.'"  The Post wrote that the narrative of a left/center split in the race was "false." 
It noted that Pete Buttigieg had "expressed sympathy" for Bernie Sanders's policy goals, and concluded by observing that, "Every major Democratic candidate is running on an agenda to the left of Mr. Obama's."

And the left-wing outlet Axios declared, "Democratic 'Moderates' Are Liberal As Ever," adding:

"Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg are considered the leading 2020 Democratic moderates, but even they have taken positions to the left of Barack Obama. . . The fact that they're called centrists now in the media shows how much the Democratic Party has shifted."

Please share this message with all your friends and family members!  Don't let them fall for the fake news that any of the Democrat contenders are "moderates."