Consider it another promise kept. President Trump has commuted the 14-year prison sentence of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Trump, who seems to be focusing on correcting what he sees as miscarriages of justice lately, has long said that Blagojevich got a raw deal, and has been talking for months about commuting his sentence.
“Yes, we commuted the sentence of Rod Blagojevich. He served eight years in jail, a long time. He seems like a very nice person, don’t know him,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday.
A statement released by the White House revealed that Trump also pardoned former New York City Police Department Commissioner Bernie Kerik and financier Michael Milken. Kerik spent four years in prison from 2010 to 2013 after being found guilty of tax fraud and lying to government officials. Milken spent two years in prison from 1991 to 1993 and was fined $600 million on securities fraud charges.
Earlier in the day, it was announced that Trump granted a pardon to Edward DeBartolo Jr., the former owner of the San Francisco 49ers.
Blagojevich has served roughly eight years in prison after being convicted on corruption charges. He is expected to be set free from the Englewood Federal Correctional Institution in Colorado on Tuesday.
For many months now, the president signaled he might commute the former Democratic governor’s prison sentence. Trump said in August that he was “strongly” considering the move and that Blagojevich’s case was being reviewed.
The president appeared to back away from the idea about a week later after hearing strong opposition from a group of Illinois Republican legislators.
“It’s important that we take a strong stand against pay-to-play politics, especially in Illinois, where four of our last eight governors have gone to federal prison for public corruption,” Illinois Reps. Darin LaHood, John Shimkus, Adam Kinzinger, Rodney Davis, and Mike Bost said in a joint statement.
LaHood and Bost made the lawmakers’ case to Trump over the phone, and Trump appeared to be receptive to their argument, telling them, “I wish I had the perspective before.”
But, Trump has long thought that Blagojevich’s sentence was too harsh. In 2012, Trump called Blagojevich’s sentence “outrageous.”
Blagojevich, 63, was convicted on corruption charges in 2011 for attempting to extort campaign donations from a children’s hospital and for attempting to sell former President Barack Obama’s U.S. Senate seat. Blagojevich called Obama’s vacated Senate seat “f—ing golden” on a phone call recorded by the FBI.
His wife, Patricia Blagojevich, lobbied for her husband’s early release and made appearances on Fox News in 2018 to make her case in the hope that the president was watching. Patricia Blagojevich began her media circuit after the former governor lost his last appeal to the Supreme Court.
Trump and the former governor know each other from Trump’s NBC reality television show The Celebrity Apprentice. Blagojevich appeared on the ninth season of the show in 2010. Trump fired him from the show but said the former governor had “a hell of a lot of guts” for the fight he was then putting up in court against the corruption charges.
As a lifelong political analyst, I have had to deal with polls – all kinds of polls. I have even had to construct them for clients. Those years of experience have taught me that polls are merely events to give reporters something to report or to deceive the public. Yep! Deceive, not inform.
Polls only give an approximation of fact at best – or merely the APPEARANCE of facts that do not exist. They gain credibility because all those reporters and columnists report polling results as fact – as if the information is accurate. For example, they may say, “Today’s Gallup Poll shows that 49 percent of voters now approve of President Trump.”
That sounds convincing. But what about the Quinnipiac Poll of the same day that says, “Trumps popularity has declined to 42 percent.” That seven-point difference represents millions of voters. So, who is correct? Is either correct? We really do not know. Still, the polls are given maximum exposure and credibility in the media.
Then there is that “margin of error.” One might assume that the results of any elections should fall within that range – but they often do not. So what value is the “margin of error” when the “error” falls outside the “margin.”
To show just how inaccurate these polls can be, you should recall that, in the New Hampshire primary, the networks reported that 48 percent of the voters did not make up their mind until 24 hours before they voted. Almost half the voters were undecided before then.
Weeeeell … what about all those polls taken in the previous weeks in which 80-plus percent of the voters told their preference long before election day. By most polls, the “undecideds” leading into the primary were somewhere between 10 and 20 percent. Obviously those two reports could not have both been even remotely true.
You must also consider who is doing the polling. Polling firms, such as Gallup and Quinnipiac, are considered to be the most objective – but even then, it may depend on who pays for the poll. Biases get built in.
Campaigns often take two polls – a public-consumption poll to indicated that they are doing well and a private poll to see where they actually stand. On the surface, both polls look very legitimate, but subtle variations in the questions will influence public opinion.
Polls also have a very short shelf-life. They will mostly approximate an outcome on the eve of an election – and even then, they can be egregiously wrong. No political advisor or analyst would believe that polling done long before an election has any bearing on the ultimate results.
Polls that show President Trump behind his Democrat opponents mean nothing … yes, nothing … in predicting the outcome of the November election. Keep in mind that President Obama had polling numbers worse than Trump’s at around this time before his re-election.
One of the greatest examples of meaningless polling is the so-called national popularity poll. It is irrelevant to the outcome of a presidential election because it counts a lot of folks who will not be voting. Even worse. It does not take into consideration our Electoral College system. One only need recall that Hillary Clinton was consistently more popular than Trump in the 2016 election.
In many ways, polls are the opiate of politics. We are hooked on them even though they offer no real benefit other than to provide a desired alternate reality.
So. There ‘tis.
With a horrendous showing in both Iowa and New Hampshire, is it all but over for former VP Joe Biden?
He was once the presumptive Democratic nominee, but on Tuesday, Joe Biden fled New Hampshire with his tail between his legs — and headed to South Carolina, where he watched his dismal results come in.
Sensing a humiliating defeat in the Granite State, Biden’s team announced the former vice president was throwing in the towel before the polls had even closed, spending Tuesday evening at a campaign launch party in Columbia, SC, about 1,000 miles away.
It seems the former veep was right to get outta Dodge. Biden ended up placing fifth in New Hampshire, capturing less than 9 percent of the vote and none of the state’s pledged delegates. Despite the disastrous showing, Biden rallied with supporters in South Carolina, insisting the first two states in the primary season are not bellwethers.
“Tonight, though, we just heard from the first two of 50 states. Just two,” Biden said. “It ain’t over, man. We’re just getting started.”
Political experts, however, saw a campaign with little to offer new voters.
“It’s never a good sign when you leave a primary before the results are in,” said University of Southern California political scientist Robert Shrum, who managed Democrats Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s White House campaigns.
Shrum continued, “It’s probably not a good message to people who might be inclined to vote for him, but on the other hand, [Biden’s team is] anticipating a mediocre result.”
For his part, Biden remains confident in his ability to bounce back. He stressed in a tweet and an accompanying video on Wednesday that “nobody told me the road would be easy, but together we can and will win.”
But, with the best of intentions, with his campaign in a nose-dive, Biden is trying to do what’s never been done in modern history.
“In the last 40 years, just one person has gone on to win the presidency after losing both Iowa and New Hampshire — Bill Clinton. And in his case, he came in second place in New Hampshire in 1992,” said veteran New Hampshire-based political scientist Wayne Lesperance, the vice president of academic affairs at New England College.
Biden’s campaign has long pointed to Nevada and South Carolina, with their diverse electorates, as much friendlier ground than the overwhelmingly white states of Iowa and New Hampshire.
Minimizing the results in the first two states — and spotlighting Biden’s strong support with African American and Latino voters — senior campaign adviser Symone Sanders stressed that “it would be a mistake for anyone to write Biden and our campaign off before people of color have had their say in this election. You know people of color — black folks, Latino voters — are the base of this party.”
However taking off those aviator shades his is fond of wearing, and looking at the reality of the situation, for Biden, who’s long struggled with fundraising, the poor results in Iowa and especially New Hampshire make hauling in campaign cash now, all the more difficult.
And his inability to come even close to winning in the first two contests in the nominating calendar puts a big dent in Biden’s argument that he’s the most electable candidate to take on President Trump in November.
In what can only be described as a “tit for tat” scenario, a freshman GOP senator has said that if Joe Biden should somehow be elected president in November, he could face immediate impeachment.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) has warned that former Vice President Joe Biden could immediately face calls for impeachment if elected president. The first-term Republican went on the offense in a recent interview with Bloomberg News, saying that Biden’s prior dealings with Ukraine puts a target on his back.
“I think this door of impeachable whatever has been opened,” she said. “Joe Biden should be very careful what he’s asking for because, you know, we can have a situation where if it should ever be President Biden, that immediately, people, right the day after he would be elected would be saying, ‘Well, we’re going to impeach him.’”
Ernst accused Biden of interfering in an investigation into the Ukrainian energy company Burisma. She said then-President Barack Obama tasked Biden with weeding out corruption, but that Biden ignored “Burisma because his son was on the company’s board making over a million dollars a year.”
Ernst’s comments come as President Trump’s own impeachment trial in the Senate is set to conclude this week. Trump has continually said, as has his defense team, that he withheld congressionally approved aid to the war-torn country due to his own concerns about internal corruption – and nothing to do with the Bidens.
In an interview with CNN, Ernst said she will vote to acquit Trump on Wednesday, arguing that what he did does not merit being removed from office.
She added that Trump meant well but went about things in “the wrong manner.”
“I think, generally speaking, going after corruption would be the right thing to do,” she said. “He did it maybe in the wrong manner.”
Ernst has since walked back the comments she made over the weekend about impeaching Biden. Speaking with reporters just off the Senate floor, on Monday, Ernst said her weekend remarks were overblown and that she was trying to argue that Democrats have made impeachment — once a political tool reserved for extreme circumstances — the new normal in today’s partisan warfare.
“That was taken entirely out of context. The point is that the Democrats have lowered the bar so far that … regardless of who it is, if you have a different party in the House than that of an elected president, you can have just random comments thrown out there with folks saying we’re going to impeach,” Ernst said when asked by The Hill about her earlier Biden comments.
Probably no senator sitting in the impeachment trial has faced a more fateful decision on both the issue of additional witnesses and on voting to convict President Trump than Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins.
By all definitions, she is in a tough race for re-election. Maine is a very progressive state and she had been able to maintain her seat by being among the more liberal Republicans. But the perception of her in the Pine Tree State started to change when she voted in favor of confirming Brett Kavanaugh as a justice on the Supreme Court.
That Kavanaugh hearing pushed Collins through the wringer on the abortion issue. As a pro-choice Republican, Collins was under intense pressure to vote “no” on seating a clearly pro-life Justice. She did so in the belief – or with the excuse – that Kavanaugh said he respected precedent when looking at cases. That could mean he would vote to uphold Roe v. Wade. The pro-abortion advocates were not as convinced as Collins seemed to be.
The Trump impeachment trial put Collins back into the boiling water with two votes – one to vote in favor of having more witnesses and ultimately on the vote to convict or acquit. Even more than the Kavanaugh vote, the impeachment put Collins into an even more untenable political position.
Collins voted against Trump on the issue of witnesses, but since her vote did not change the favorable outcome for Trump, she will not suffer any retribution from Trump voters. But neither will she gain any favor from Maine’s progressive voters.
Collins political coup de grace may come with her vote on the issue of guilt. Ironically, she is likely to lose support no matter which way she casts her vote. The Democrats covet that seat. If they cannot beat Collins, their chance of taking control of the Senate is greatly reduced.
On the other hand, Collins is not the darling of conservative Republicans and the Trump fans. Their lack of enthusiasm will cost her some support – not from Republicans voting against her, but from those who stay home.
In short, it does not look good for Collins regardless of her impeachment votes.
So, there ‘tis.
Like many Republicans, independents – and Democrats – President Trump is a pro-lifer. He is joined in that belief by most Republican leaders and a sprinkling of Democrat leaders. Abortion is arguably the most significant moral issue of our day. It is an understatement to say that it is a highly emotional issue with very strong feelings on both sides.
It is not a simple pro and con issue. – abortion at any time for any reason versus a total ban on all abortions for any reason. The public has varying beliefs regarding abortion – such as when an abortion can take place, procedures used or medical necessity.
The general pro-life view is that an abortion should only take place where there is a compelling necessity – such as the life of the mother, rape or incest. It should never be considered for questions of convenience, economics or simple desire – abortion-on-demand, as they put it.
Pro-lifers believe that the fetus in the womb is a human being with all the rights and protections of a moral and just society. Pro-lifers reject the illogical and scientifically inaccurate description of the fetus as an integral “part of a woman’s body” over which she has exclusive right to keep or discard – with all the moral vaue of getting a haircut or clipping fingernails.
Even though past presidents have described themselves as pro-lifers, they have too often dealt with the issue by avoidance rather than activity – lip service over policy. In the modern era, only President Reagan was an active abortion critic. Regardless of their stated stand on the issue, no President has ever participated in or even attended the annual pro-life demonstration in Washington. In fact, it was newsworthy when Vice President Pence spoke at the rally in recent years.
That all changed this year.
For the first time ever, a President of the United States attended the rally to underscore his commitment to pro-life policies. In view of Trump’s view on the subject — and his policies and appointments that clearly established his view – it should not have been surprising that he would underscore his commitment to the pro-life agenda by speaking at the rally.
The left reacted as if Trump was creating new controversy. How could he weigh-in on the issue in such an obvious manner? FOX News regular, Juan Williams personified the reaction of the pro-abortion left. He accused Trump of intentionally using his appearance to divide the nation. He should have stayed out of the issue. After all, there are lots of people who favor abortion and it is “the law of the land.” Williams – as a black media personality — should be one of the last to need reminding that slavery, too, was once “the law of the land.”
In Williams view, no president has ever done such a dastardly thing. Williams did not actually call it “dastardly,” but from the tone of his rant, the word is not an inappropriate description. That seems to be the strategy of the left. Do not talk about abortion. Do not debate it. And above all, do not show all those images of all those crushed skulls and dismembered bodies.
For those of us who believe that life in the womb is an imbued with what we call inalienable rights, it is as fitting and proper for Trump to put his belief on the record as it is for him to fight for policies that would make abortions EXTREMELY rare. As a pro-lifer, myself, I applaud Trump for standing tall on the issue.
So, there ‘tis.
Looks like despite his denials to the contrary, it looks like the son of former Vice President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, is the “Baby Daddy,” to a former D.C. area stripper.
The judge in the paternity case brought against the younger Biden by the ex–stripper, 29-year-old, Lunden Alexis Roberts, ruled that Hunter is the “biological and legal father” of a child he fathered with Roberts.
In an order establishing paternity, Independence County, Ark., Circuit Judge Holly Meyer noted that the results of DNA tests indicated Biden was the father “with near scientific certainty,” and instructed the Arkansas Department of Health to issue a birth certificate listing Biden as the father of Roberts’ child.
Roberts, who The New York Post reported was a stripper at a Washington, D.C., club that Biden patronized, received “primary physical and legal custody” of the child. In previous filings, Roberts told the court that Hunter Biden “had no involvement in the child’s life since the child’s birth, never interacted with the child, never parented the child,” and “could not identify the child out of a photo lineup.”
Biden “shall have visitation with the child as agreed between the parties,” Judge Meyer ruled.
The next hearing in the case is now set for Jan. 29 at 9:30 a.m. ET, to address “temporary child support for the minor child and other matters,” the judge wrote, adding that the parties have until Jan. 16 to comply with all “pending discovery” which is currently “past due.”
Another hearing is set for the morning of March 13 to handle any remaining discovery issues, with a final hearing on May 13 to set “permanent child support for the minor child.”
In a separate order, Meyer also dismissed attempts by a private investigation firm — D&A Investigations — to join the case, saying the company’s pleadings were frivolous and that future attempts might incur a contempt citation.
Hunter Biden’s personal indiscretions, including his past drug use, have taken center stage in recent months. Republicans have argued the younger Biden was a drug-addicted, irresponsible playboy, and that he secured his lucrative overseas business roles not because of his own competence, but because he could sell access to his father.
Hunter Biden reportedly is expecting a child with his wife, Melissa Cohen Biden, whom he married this past May.
Only days after President Trump speaking to American troops said he was honored to be a part of it, and that it was one of his “favorite” Christmas movies, a Canadian broadcaster has cut his cameo when it recently aired “Home Alone 2.”
Don Jr. sounded off at the action in a tweet, calling it “pathetic.”
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation argued the ten second scene was removed to make room for commercials. Chuck Thompson, the CBC’s head of public affairs, said in a statement the edits “were done in 2014 when we first acquired the film and before Mr. Trump was elected president.”
But Don Jr. said “it’s all part of the mainstream media’s leftist bias.” He said, “Their bias is so flagrant, they don’t even try to hide it anymore.”
Earlier this week, when delivering a Holiday address via satellite to US troops serving overseas, President Trump told service members he was honored to be in the movie and called it his favorite holiday film.
“It’s a good movie,” he said. “It turned out to be a big Christmas hit, one of the biggest, so it was an honor to be involved in something like that.”
Don Jr. went on to say this is just the beginning of what can be expected in the 2020 election by the mainstream media’s left-leaning bias. He added that the president will win despite the unfair fight.
This time of year is usually full of cheer, especially if one’s economics are right. If someone is suffering economically or having serious issues with their family, then this time of year can be a trying time. Most people buy and spend over-extending their credit and putting themselves in debt. But, people usually are in good spirits. Right now, the holiday season is in full swing. I think it’s about time people got the skinny on one of the most popular holidays, Christmas.
Let’s get right into it, shall we? December 25th is not the birthdate of Jesus. Jesus being born on December 25th is not backed up by the scriptures at all. In fact, it is the noted birthdate of a great number of those that would be considered sun gods or pagan deities. One has to go back about 4,000 years to a place called Shinar. Shinar was located in Babylonian which is now modern-day Iraq. Nimrod was the ruler of Babel, which was later known as Babylon. He was well-loved by the people. He was known to the ancient Egyptians as Osiris. Nimrod’s date of birth was December 25th. Nimrod’s symbol was the evergreen tree which represented everlasting or renewed and regenerated life through Tammuz. Nimrod’s wife was named Semiramis. She was also known as Isis. As the story goes, Semiramis was also the mother of Nimrod. Nimrod was the first being on earth to be deified. During his deification, he was then named Bael the Sun God. At his death he he was said to be eternal and ruled the universe as the Sun God.
Semiramis was said to be impregnated with the seed of Nimrod by the rays of the sun god Nimrod or Bael. She gave birth to their son Tammuz who was said to be Nimrod’s resurrection through birth. This is where the Biblical story of the immaculate conception comes from. Semiramis and Tammuz were married. This was an incestual relationship. Nothing holy about that. But it turns out that Tammuz is also Cupid. Tammuz was a great hunter which is why there is a constellation of Osiris The Great Hunter. After forty years Tammuz was killed by a wild boar.
December 25th represents the return of the rising sun during the winter equinox or the sun’s (son’s) resurrection. According to the Book of Genesis, Nimrod was the great-grandson of Noah. As a side note, I have to mention that originally there were only ten months to the standard calendar. The prefix dec represents ten. Our number system is a base-ten system. This where the term decimal comes into play. Also, decade represents a ten-year span. December used to be the tenth month until Julius Ceasar added July and Augustus Ceasar added August. These two additional months were smuggled in during the great Roman era. So now we have twelve months that represent our modern-day Gregorian calendar. So, even if Jesus’ birthday was on December 25th, we would overshoot it by two months each year.
Like the story of Osiris, Nimrod was murdered by a relative. Semiramis claimed that a full-grown evergreen tree emerged from a dead stump overnight which symbolized the re-erected phallus of Nimrod as well as a new life. The old stump symbolizes the dead Nimrod and the evergreen symbolizes the birth of son Tammuz. Nimrod (Tammuz) would place gifts on the tree every December 25th. This is where the yule log comes into play where the log represents dead Nimrod and is placed into a fire. The next day the log would be a full tree with a snake coiling throughout the branches. The serpent or snake represents resurrection. This is symbolic in the sense that snakes shed their skin which represents resurrection.
In Egyptian mythology, Tammuz is known as Horace who was the son of Osiris and also his resurrection. The ornaments placed on the trees in Babylon were balls dipped in gold or testicles of a sacrificed animal. Now Santa Claus was actually called Nimrod (Molech, Odin). Every December 25th, public child mass sacrifices were held. So, if one placed the “n” in Santa at the end of the word, we would have the word Satan. Satan’s Claws (Claus). Get the picture? The chimney that Santa was said to come down in the story of Santa Claus represents the alter that the children were sacrificed to. The parents would ask the alter for what they wanted before they would drop their newborn child in the fiery alter.
Another couple of names for Christmas is Natalis Invicti and Mithra. On December 17-21, the people would celebrate Saturnalia. During this time the people would get drunk and have wild and violent sex orgies. On the 22nd of December, they would participate in Sigillaria, the second feast or the feast of the dolls.
All of the information stated above is where the so-called holy day of Christmas was extrapolated. With that said, I hope you had a Merry Christmas!
On Friday, Dec. 27, former Vice President Joe Biden said that he would not comply with a subpoena to testify in President Trump’s upcoming Senate impeachment trial.
In an interview with the editorial board of the De Moines Register in Iowa, Biden claimed that if he were issued a subpoena to appear before the Senate, any testimony he would give would only draw attention away from Trump’s alleged wrongdoing and would effectively let the president off the hook.
“What are you going to cover?” Biden said to Register Executive Editor Carol Hunter in response to a question about the possibility of his participation in the trial. “You guys are going to cover for three weeks anything that I said. And (Trump’s) going to get away.”
“You guys buy into it all the time. Not a joke …” he added. “Think what it’s about. It’s all about what he does all the time, his entire career. Take the focus off. This guy violated the Constitution. He said it in the driveway of the White House. He acknowledged he asked for help.”
The Democrat-controlled House impeached Trump earlier this month for “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” related to his dealings with Ukraine. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has yet to deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Biden Forced to Clarify His Statement on Subpoena
However, soon after the former VP made those statements, he was forced to clarify his position – which as stated – meant he would be breaking the law.
By Saturday, Biden was singing a different tune.
“I want to clarify something I said yesterday. In my 40 years in public life, I have always complied with a lawful order and in my eight years as VP, my office — unlike Donald Trump and Mike Pence — cooperated with legitimate congressional oversight requests,” he tweeted.
“But I am just not going to pretend that there is any legal basis for Republican subpoenas for my testimony in the impeachment trial. That is the point I was making yesterday and I reiterate: this impeachment is about Trump’s conduct, not mine,” he said.
Later on Saturday, during a town hall in Iowa, Biden said he “would obey any subpoena sent to me.”
“The question is, did Trump do his job,” he added.