Posts

Twitter Uses Fact-Checking as a Weapon Against Trump

Fact-checking sounds innocuous enough. After all, as the late Senate Democrat Patrick Moynihan reportedly once said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”

But Twitter just showed that fact-checking can also be weaponized, used in a way that promotes one side’s ideology over another.

The tech giant, which has been under pressure from the left for years to censor or delete President Donald Trump’s tweets, did a “fact check” Tuesday on two of Trump’s tweets about mail-in ballots.

Conveniently for liberals, the fact check, which cited media outlets like The Washington Post and CNN as its only named sources, found that Trump’s facts were wrong. Notably, it was also the first time Twitter—which hosts politicians across the ideological spectrum—fact-checked a tweet.

Unsurprisingly, Trump was furious, threatening in a tweet Wednesday to “strongly regulate, or close them down” in reference to social media companies. He also said: “Republicans feel that Social Media Platforms totally silence conservatives [sic] voices.”

Neither Trump nor Twitter is in the right here. As a private company, Twitter should be legally free to do what it wants on its own platform. Trump is free to suggest that Americans who value serious debate and free expression, regardless of their ideologies, boycott Twitter. But this is no case for government intervention in a private business.

However, unless the goal was to be seen as a left-leaning company, Twitter was irresponsible and foolish with its “fact check”—which I’m putting in scare quotes because it’s not even an accurate fact check.

Here are the two Trump tweets that got slapped with the fact-checking label from Twitter:

Twitter posted below Trump’s tweet: “Get the facts about mail-in ballots.” When you click on that, it takes you to this message:

Trump makes unsubstantiated claim that mail-in ballots will lead to voter fraud

On Tuesday, President Trump made a series of claims about potential voter fraud after California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced an effort to expand mail-in voting in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. These claims are unsubstantiated, according to CNN, Washington Post and others. Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.

First of all, it’s simply not true that “mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud,” or that Trump’s claim was “unsubstantiated.”

The Daily Signal’s national affairs correspondent, Fred Lucas, reported last month on “15 instances in which courts threw out an election result based in whole or in part on absentee voting fraud,” citing The Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Database and other sources.

Then there’s Twitter’s telling attribution: “These claims are unsubstantiated, according to CNN, Washington Post and others.”

Ah, yes, CNN, whose White House correspondent Jim Acosta basically has been engaged for years in verbal sparring with Trump. And the Post, which has its own reputation as a liberal outlet, is hardly a completely objective source, either.

So who are these “others”? Did Twitter consult with anyone, researcher or journalist or scholar, at a less liberal publication or institution? Did Twitter make any good faith attempt to consult with a variety of experts of differing ideological leanings, so that it could see the full context and data before making a ruling?

Because if Twitter is only relying on liberals for its fact-checking, it won’t be surprising if the supposedly unbiased fact-checking becomes quite ideological.

Unfortunately, conservatives have reason for concern here. The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Peter Hasson reports:

The Twitter official [Yoel Roth] overseeing the tech company’s efforts to combat misinformation is a left-wing partisan who in the past has derided President Donald Trump as a ‘wretched orange man’ and said he donated to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Of course, ultimately, Twitter is a private company and it can choose its own standards and practices. But consumers are also free to decide whether to remain on a platform that seems to be on the cusp of implementing a double standard when it comes to fact-checking.

It will be extremely telling what Twitter chooses to do in the days ahead.

Will the social media company fact-check liberals, too—or will Trump alone bear the stigma of a fact check? Will fact checks rely only on liberal sources, or will they involve conservative sources as well? Will Twitter modify its fact check of Trump’s tweet, acknowledging that instances of voter fraud are tied to absentee ballots?

No doubt, Twitter has been under unusually high pressure from the left in recent days.

A widower wrote to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey this month, distraught that Trump was tweeting conspiracy theories that the man’s late wife, a staffer for then-Rep. Joe Scarborough, had been murdered.

While Trump’s tweets on this matter are shameful—if he wants to fight with Scarborough, now an MSNBC host, he can do so without bringing up an unrelated person’s death—the answer is not for Twitter to take action on Trump’s tweets.

As we’ve been saying more and more over the past decade and change, America is a divided nation, with heated opinions on both sides on a host of topics. Selective fact-checking, aimed at the right and only looking to the left for the truth, will only increase that division.

Twitter has opened a real Pandora’s box here. Let’s hope the tech giant realizes its mistake, takes down the fact check of Trump’s accurate tweet, and returns to being a company that merely hosts, not criticizes, viewpoints. (For more from the author of “Twitter Uses Fact-Checking as a Weapon Against Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Report: Secret Service Rushed President Trump to Underground Bunker

Secret Service agents moved President Donald Trump to the underground bunker in the White House on Friday, according to a report from the New York Times.

The Times cited “a person with firsthand knowledge” as a source for the report and an official said that the president was never in any real danger.

Hundreds of protesters gathered outside the White House on Friday night, hurling fireworks, debris, and bottles at Secret Service as they stood on Pennsylvania Ave, blocking them from approaching the 13-foot fence at the White House. (Read more from “Report: Secret Service Rushed President Trump to Underground Bunker” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: President Trump National Address on the Death of George Floyd and National Outcry

There are a lot of people asking for President Trump to give remarks to the nation about the ongoing violence and riots in the aftermath of George Floyd’s horrific murder.

Apparently many people did not listen to President Trump’s address on Saturday afternoon about this exact issue. Or perhaps the media’s need to ignore the content of his speech has led to some confusion. Regardless, here’s the transcript:

[Transcript of Remarks] –

“I want to say a few words about the situation in Minnesota. The death of George Floyd on the streets of Minneapolis was a grave tragedy. It should never have happened. It has filled Americans all over the country with horror, anger, and grief.

Yesterday, I spoke to George’s family and expressed the sorrow of our entire nation for their loss. I stand before you as a friend and ally to every American seeking justice and peace. And I stand before you in firm opposition to anyone exploiting this tragedy to loot, rob, attack, and menace. Healing, not hatred; justice, not chaos are the mission at hand.

The police officers involved in this incident have been fired from their jobs. One officer has already been arrested and charged with murder. State and federal authorities are carrying out an investigation to see what further charges may be warranted, including against, sadly, the other three.

In addition, my administration has opened a civil rights investigation, and I have asked the Attorney General and the Justice Department to expedite it.

I understand the pain that people are feeling. We support the right of peaceful protesters, and we hear their pleas. But what we are now seeing on the streets of our cities has nothing to do with justice or with peace.

The memory of George Floyd is being dishonored by rioters, looters, and anarchists. The violence and vandalism is being led by Antifa and other radical left-wing groups who are terrorizing the innocent, destroying jobs, hurting businesses, and burning down buildings.

The main victims of this horrible, horrible situations are the citizens who live in these once lovely communities. The mobs are devastating the life’s work of good people and destroying their dreams. Right now, America needs creation, not destruction; cooperation, not contempt; security, not anarchy. And there will be no anarchy. Civilization must be cherished, defended, and protected. The voices of law-abiding citizens must be heard, and heard very loudly.

We cannot and must not allow a small group of criminals and vandals to wreck our cities and lay waste to our communities. We must defend the rights of every citizen to live without violence, prejudice, or fear.

We support the overwhelming majority of police officers who are incredible in every way and devoted public servants. They keep our cities safe, protect our communities from gangs and drugs, and risk their own lives for us every day.

No one is more upset than fellow law enforcement officers by the small handful who fail to abide by their oath to serve and protect. My administration will stop mob violence and will stop it cold.

It does not serve the interests of justice or any citizen of any race, color, or creed for the government to give into anarchy, abandon police precincts, or allow communities to be burned to the ground. It won’t happen.

Those making excuses or justifications for violence are not helping the downtrodden, but delivering new anguish and new pain.

From day one of my administration, we have made it a top priority to build up distressed communities and revitalize our crumbling inner cities.

We fought hard with Senator Tim Scott and many others to create Opportunity Zones, helping to draw a surge of new investment to the places in our country that need it most. We must all work together as a society to expand opportunity and to create a future of greater dignity and promise for all of our people. We must forge a partnership with community leaders, local law enforcement, and the faith community to restore hope.

Radical-left criminals, thugs, and others all throughout our country and throughout the world will not be allowed to set communities ablaze. We won’t let it happen. It harms those who have the least. And we will be protecting those who have the least.

The leadership of the National Guard and the Department of Justice are now in close communication with state and city officials in Minnesota. And we’re coordinating our efforts with local law enforcement all across our nation.

In America, justice is never achieved at the hands of an angry mob. I will not allow angry mobs to dominate. It won’t happen. It is essential that we protect the crown jewel of American democracy: the rule of law and our independent system of justice. Every citizen in every community has the right to be safe in their workplace, safe in their homes, and safe in our city streets.

This is the sacred right of all Americans that I am totally determined to defend and will defend. My administration will always stand against violence, mayhem, and disorder.

We will stand with the family of George Floyd with the peaceful protesters and with every law-abiding citizen who wants decency, civility, safety, and security.

We are working toward a more just society, but that means building up, not tearing down; joining hands, not hurling fists; standing in solidarity, not surrendering to hostility.

Moments ago, as we witnessed the launch of two great American astronauts into space, we were filled with the sense of pride and unity that brings us together as Americans. That same spirit which powered our astronauts to the Moon has also helped lift our country to ever greater heights of justice and opportunity throughout our history.

So today, as we mark a renewed commitment to America’s future in space, a tremendous commitment it is. Let us also commit to a brighter future for all of our citizens right here on Earth.

When Americans are united, there is nothing we cannot do. From day one of my administration, we put America first.” (link)

(For more from the author of “Watch: President Trump National Address on the Death of George Floyd and National Outcry” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Donald Trump: George Floyd’s Death a ‘Terrible Insult to Police’

President Donald Trump said Friday at the Whtie House that the death of George Floyd was a “terrible insult” to police officers in America.

“We also know that most policemen … you see the great job they do. This was a terrible insult to police and policemen,” he said.

The president commented on Floyd’s death and the protests and rioting that followed after a roundtable with business leaders about the progress in reopening the country after the peak of the coronavirus pandemic.

Trump said he spoke with members of Floyd’s family earlier Friday and said he was disturbed by the video of Floyd’s death that was captured by bystanders.

“Just a terrible thing. He was in tremendous pain obviously and couldn’t breathe,” Trump said. “It’s very obvious to anybody that watched it, it was a very very sad thing for me to see that.” (Read more from “Donald Trump: George Floyd’s Death a ‘Terrible Insult to Police’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Donald Trump Signs Exec Order to Curb Big Tech’s ‘Unchecked Power’

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday in the White House to defend free speech on social media and regulate social media companies for selectively censoring users.

“We’re here today to defend free speech from one of the greatest dangers,” the president said, referring to the “unchecked power” wielded by social media companies in the United States.

The president signed the order in the Oval Office on Thursday afternoon.

“They’ve had unchecked power to censor restrict, edit shape hide alter virtually any form of communication between private citizens or large public audiences,” Trump said.

The president criticized the growing monopoly of social media companies in America, vowing to act to change the regulatory framework for the companies. (Read more from “Donald Trump Signs Exec Order to Curb Big Tech’s ‘Unchecked Power’” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

President Trump Vows to Veto FISA Reauthorization If Passed (VIDEO)

Moments ago President Trump tweeted he will veto the House FISA re-authorization if it is passed without first investigating and exposing prior FISA abuses committed against his prior election campaign and administration[.]

The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote by proxy on the FISA re-authorization previously passed by the Senate. No-one has any idea if the FISA vote will actually pass the House and it appears most republicans are positioned to vote against it.

Lou Dobbs discusses the issues with Representative Jim Jordan shortly before President Trump tweeted his intent. WATCH:

These developments come on the heels of increased sunlight into the corrupt purposes and intents of Obama-era intelligence officials and how they weaponized their authorities to target the Trump administration starting with National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.

[…] It was the FBI, not the NSA, that wiretapped Kislyak’s calls and created the summary and transcript, the former officials said. (link)

The FBI was conducting (FISA) surveillance on Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. When Kislyak contacted Flynn the call was intercepted by the FBI. The calls were then transcribed and “tech cuts” created.

On January 3rd Lisa Page and Peter Strzok were text messaging about the intercept. It is important to note these text messages have never been released; and were intentionally removed and hidden from the text messages that were released.

We only know about these specific texts from a Senate oversight committee paper that put a timeline together.

This January 3rd communication is critical so I’m going to explain it. You will see why the FBI and DOJ and Intelligence Community have kept it hidden[.]

A FISA order, in this case on Sergey Kislyak, is referred to as “technical coverage” or a “tech”. The FBI interceptors, staff doing the interception, then type up summaries of telephone conversations captured. Those are referred to as “tech cuts” or “cuts”.

The “CR cut” in the text message above is a “Crossfire Razor cut”, or a Flynn cut.

This is a summary of the call intercept. This is the non-traditional intelligence document that FBI Director James Comey gave to DNI James Clapper to use for the briefing of President Obama on January 4th. There are no redacted or masked names because it is a raw intelligence document.

The Clapper briefing officially informed the White House of the existence of an open FBI investigation into Michael Flynn. That briefing led to the January 5th “pull aside” meeting outlined in the Susan Rice memo.

The FBI was investigating Flynn and monitoring Russian communications to see a reaction to the sanctions imposed on December 29, 2016. When Kislyak called Flynn the FBI legally intercepted the call because the FISA authority was surveillance on Kislyak and Flynn was also under investigation.

But there are more implications…

Peter Strzok texts: “[Bill Priestap], like us, is concerned with over sharing. Doesn’t want Clapper giving [the Flynn cut, or summary of intercepted call] to White House.” All political, just shows our hand and potentially makes enemies.

Lisa Page responds: “Yeah but keep in mind we were going to put that in the doc on Friday, with potentially larger distribution than just DNI.”

Strzok Replies: “The question is should we, particularly to the entirely of the lame duck U.S. Intelligence Community with partisan axes to grind.”

We don’t know if the Kislyak-Flynn call was used as a part of the classified evidence within the ICA. It sounds from Lisa Page’s text response that the issue was discussed and then a decision made not to include it: “we were going to put that in”, implies they did not.

Bill Priestap and Peter Strzok have issues with the raw “tech cut” of the intercept being shared with DNI Clapper and White House. Lisa Page downplays those concerns by saying: ‘hey relax, in context we were about to put that readout in the ICA which is a far bigger deal than just sharing it with the White House.’

Putting it all together. The FBI intercepted the call. A “tech cut” summary of the call was generated exclusive to the FBI. James Comey gave that call summary including Flynn’s name to James Clapper; and James Clapper briefed President Obama.

Michael Flynn wasn’t unmasked in documents related to the call because Flynn’s name was never masked in the documents, the FBI “CR cut”. [READ SENATE DOCUMENT] (For more from the author of “President Trump Vows to Veto FISA Reauthorization If Passed” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Attorney General Barr Has Become Trump’s Religious Liberty Enforcer

When President Trump announced Friday that he would “override” governors who did not adopt his new guidelines for the reopening of churches, critics were quick to question if he had that authority.

Reporters in the White House pressroom hammered press secretary Kayleigh McEnany about whether or not Trump could legally act upon his threats. McEnany appeared to walk back the president’s words, suggesting that Trump would only “strongly encourage” governors to comply. It seemed to work: Over Memorial Day weekend, California, Minnesota, and Vermont, three of the five states still upholding complete bans on church services, relaxed their restrictions.

These results were a needed win for Trump, whose approval rating with many faith groups has slipped in the past month, partly because of his inconsistent attitude on churches remaining open during the coronavirus pandemic. And it’s a win Trump wouldn’t have scored without his dedicated enforcer on religious liberty issues: Attorney General William Barr.

Even before churches began suing states for alleged First Amendment violations, Barr was already sensing the coming fight over church closures. While Trump urged people to stay home for Easter, Barr said he was “very concerned” that churches were being given the short shrift in the rush to lock down the country. (Read more from “Attorney General Barr Has Become Trump’s Religious Liberty Enforcer” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Dweeb Andrew Napolitano: I’ll ‘Defend to the Death’ Twitter’s Right to Fact Check Trump (VIDEO)

Appearing Wednesday on the Fox News Channel, network senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said he will “defend to the death” Twitter’s right to fact check President Donald Trump.

(Read more from “Andrew Napolitano: I’ll ‘Defend to the Death’ Twitter’s Right to Fact Check Trump (VIDEO)” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

It’s Not the Trump Administration Politicizing Flynn’s Case, It’s Judge Sullivan

Not quite two weeks ago, Judge Emmet Sullivan threw open the doors of his federal courtroom to the swamp when he invited third parties to pontificate on the propriety of the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss the criminal charges against Michael Flynn. The next day Sullivan went further: He appointed a former federal judge, John Gleeson, as an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, to argue that the government’s motion to dismiss should be denied.

Judge Sullivan’s selection of Gleeson as amicus curiae gave away the game. The same day Sullivan named Gleeson as amicus curiae, an op-ed by Gleeson and two cohorts ran in the Washington Post declaring the government’s decision to dismiss the charge against Flynn “reeks of improper political influence.”

The Washington Post cloaked Gleeson and his co-authors, David O’Neil and Marshall Miller, with an aura of impartiality and authority by highlighting their past service in the Department of Justice: “John Gleeson served as a U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of New York and chief of the Criminal Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in that district. David O’Neil served as the acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. Marshall Miller served as the highest-ranking career official in the Criminal Division and as chief of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District.” . . .

Already the anti-Trump Protect Democracy Project has submitted an amicus curiae brief to Judge Sullivan. That brief rehashes many of the political talking points left-leaning pundits and politicians have been peddling since Trump took office, then argues that in seeking to dismiss the criminal charge against Flynn, Trump and Barr have “flouted” the principle that the DOJ’s investigatory and prosecutorial powers should “be exercised free from partisan consideration.”

The irony couldn’t be richer. The Obama administration targeted Flynn because the glow of Orange Man Bad reached the retired general’s orbit. But, according to Protect Democracy, it is the Trump administration’s DOJ that is playing politics with prosecutions! (Read more from “It’s Not the Trump Administration Politicizing Flynn’s Case, It’s Judge Sullivan” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Key Reason DC Hates President Trump – It’s a Big Club, and He Ain’t in It…

Something 99% of American voters do not understand. Congress doesn’t actually write legislation. The last item of legislation written by congress was sometime around the mid 1990’s. Modern legislation is sub-contracted to a segment of operations in DC known as K-Street. That’s where the lobbyists reside.

Lobbyists write the laws; congress sells the laws; lobbyists then pay congress commissions for passing their laws. That’s the modern legislative business in DC.

CTH often describes the system with the phrase: “There are Trillions at Stake.” The process of creating legislation is behind that phrase. DC politics is not quite based on the ideas that frame most voter’s reference points.

With people taking notice of DC politics for the first time; and with people not as familiar with the purpose of DC politics; perhaps it is valuable to provide clarity.

Most people think when they vote for a federal politician -a House or Senate representative- they are voting for a person who will go to Washington DC and write or enact legislation. This is the old-fashioned “schoolhouse rock” perspective based on decades past. There is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws.

In modern politics not a single member of the House of Representatives or Senator writes a law, or puts pen to paper to write out a legislative construct. This simply doesn’t happen.

Over the past several decades a system of constructing legislation has taken over Washington DC that more resembles a business operation than a legislative body. Here’s how it works right now.

Outside groups, often called “special interest groups”, are entities that represent their interests in legislative constructs. These groups are often representing foreign governments, Wall Street multinational corporations, banks, financial groups or businesses; or smaller groups of people with a similar connection who come together and form a larger group under an umbrella of interest specific to their affiliation.

Sometimes the groups are social interest groups; activists, climate groups, environmental interests etc. The social interest groups are usually non-profit constructs who depend on the expenditures of government to sustain their cause or need.

The for-profit groups (mostly business) have a purpose in Washington DC to shape policy, legislation and laws favorable to their interests. They have fully staffed offices just like any business would – only their ‘business‘ is getting legislation for their unique interests.

These groups are filled with highly-paid lawyers who represent the interests of the entity and actually write laws and legislation briefs.

In the modern era this is actually the origination of the laws that we eventually see passed by congress. Within the walls of these buildings within Washington DC is where the ‘sausage’ is actually made.

Again, no elected official is usually part of this law origination process.

Almost all legislation created is not ‘high profile’, they are obscure changes to current laws, regulations or policies that no-one pays attention to. The passage of the general bills within legislation is not covered in media. Ninety-nine percent of legislative activity happens without anyone outside the system even paying any attention to it.

Once the corporation or representative organizational entity has written the law they want to see passed – they hand it off to the lobbyists.

The lobbyists are people who have deep contacts within the political bodies of the legislative branch, usually former House/Senate staff or former House/Senate politicians themselves.

The lobbyist takes the written brief, the legislative construct, and it’s their job to go to congress and sell it.

“Selling it” means finding politicians who will accept the brief, sponsor their bill and eventually get it to a vote and passage. The lobbyist does this by visiting the politician in their office, or, most currently familiar, by inviting the politician to an event they are hosting. The event is called a junket when it involves travel.

Often the lobbying “event” might be a weekend trip to a ski resort, or a “conference” that takes place at a resort. The actual sales pitch for the bill is usually not too long and the majority of the time is just like a mini vacation etc.

The size of the indulgence within the event, the amount of money the lobbyist is spending, is customarily related to the scale of benefit within the bill the sponsoring business entity is pushing. If the sponsoring business or interest group can gain a lot of financial benefit from the legislation they spend a lot on the indulgences.

Recap: Corporations (special interest group) write the legislation. Lobbyists take the law and go find politician(s) to support it. Politicians get support from their peers using tenure and status etc. Eventually, if things go according to norm, the legislation gets a vote.

Within every step of the process there are expense account lunches, dinners, trips, venue tickets and a host of other customary financial way-points to generate/leverage a successful outcome. The amount of money spent is proportional to the benefit derived from the outcome.

The important part to remember is that the origination of the entire process is EXTERNAL to congress.

Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do. Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group.

When you are voting for a Congressional Rep or a U.S. Senator you are not voting for a person who will write laws. Your rep only votes on legislation to approve or disapprove of constructs that are written by outside groups and sold to them through lobbyists who work for those outside groups.

While all of this is happening the same outside groups who write the laws are providing money for the campaigns of the politicians they need to pass them. This construct sets up the quid-pro-quo of influence, although much of it is fraught with plausible deniability.

This is the way legislation is created.

If your frame of reference is not established in this basic understanding you can often fall into the trap of viewing a politician, or political vote, through a false prism.

The modern origin of all legislative constructs is not within congress.

“We have to pass the bill to, well, find out what is in the bill” etc. ~ Nancy Pelosi 2009

“We rely upon the stupidity of the American voter” ~ Johnathan Gruber 2011, 2012.

“If Congress isn’t going to convene until the bill is ready to vote on… who the hell is writing the bill?” ~ Tom Massie, 2020

Once you understand this process you can understand how politicians get rich.

When a House or Senate member becomes educated on the intent of the legislation, they have attended the sales pitch; and when they find out the likelihood of support for that legislation; they can then position their own (or their families) financial interests to benefit from the consequence of passage. It is a process similar to insider trading on Wall Street, except the trading is based on knowing who will benefit from a legislative passage.

The legislative construct passes from K-Street into the halls of congress through congressional committees. The law originates from the committee to the full House or Senate. Committee seats which vote on these bills are therefore more valuable to the lobbyists. Chairs of these committees are exponentially more valuable.

Now, think about this reality against the backdrop of the 2016 Presidential Election. Legislation is passed based on ideology. In the aftermath of the 2016 election the system within DC was not structurally set-up to receive a Donald Trump presidency.

If Hillary Clinton had won the election, her Oval Office desk would be filled with legislation passed by congress which she would have been signing. Heck, she’d have writer’s cramp from all of the special interest legislation, driven by special interest groups that supported her campaign, that would be flowing to her desk.

Why?

Simply because the authors of the legislation, the originating special interest and lobbying groups, were spending millions to fund her campaign. Hillary Clinton would be signing K-Street constructed special interest legislation to repay all of those donors/investors.

Congress would be fast-tracking the passage because the same interest groups also fund the members of congress.

President Donald Trump winning the election threw a monkey wrench into the entire DC system…. In early 2017 the modern legislative machine was frozen in place.

The “America First” policies represented by candidate Donald Trump were not within the legislative constructs coming from the K-Street authors of the legislation. There were no MAGA lobbyists waiting on Trump ideology to advance legislation based on America First objectives.

As a result of an empty feeder system, in early 2017 congress had no bills to advance because all of the myriad of bills and briefs written were not in line with President Trump policy. There was simply no entity within DC writing legislation that was in-line with President Trump’s America-First’ economic and foreign policy agenda.

Exactly the opposite was true. All of the DC legislative briefs and constructs were/are antithetical to Trump policy. There were hundreds of file boxes filled with thousands of legislative constructs that became worthless when Donald Trump won the election.

Those legislative constructs (briefs) representing tens of millions of dollars worth of time and influence were just sitting there piled up in boxes under desks and in closets amid K-Street and the congressional offices. Legislation needed to be in-line with an entire new political perspective, and there was no-one, no special interest or lobbying group, currently occupying DC office space with any interest in synergy with Trump policy.

Think about the larger ramifications within that truism. That is also why there was/is so much opposition.

No legislation provided by outside interests means no work for lobbyists who sell it. No work means no money. No money means no expense accounts. No expenses means politicians paying for their own indulgences etc.

Politicians were not happy without their indulgences, but the issue was actually bigger. No K-Street expenditures also means no personal benefit; and no opportunity to advance financial benefit from the insider trading system. Republicans and democrats hate the presidency of Donald Trump because it is hurting them financially.

President Trump is not figuratively hurting the financial livelihoods of DC politicians; he’s literally doing it. President Trump is not an esoteric problem for them; his impact is very real, very direct, and hits almost every politician in the most painful place imaginable, the bank account.

In the pre-Trump process there were millions upon millions, even billions that could be made by DC politicians and their families. Thousands of very indulgent and exclusive livelihoods attached to the DC business model. At the center of this operation is the lobbying and legislative purchase network. The Big Club.

Without the ability to position personal wealth and benefit from the system, why would a politician stay in office? It is a fact the income of many long-term politicians on both wings of the uniparty bird were completely disrupted by Trump winning the 2016 election. That is one of the key reason why so many politicians retired in 2018.

When we understand the business of DC, we understand the difference between legislation with a traditional purpose and modern legislation with a financial and political agenda.

When we understand the business of DC we understand why the entire network hates President Donald Trump.

Lastly, this is why -when signing legislation- President Trump often says “they’ve been trying to get this through for a long time” etc. Most of the legislation that is passed by congress, and signed by President Trump in his first term; is older legislative proposals, with little indulgent value that were shelved in years past.

Example: Criminal justice reform did not carry a financial benefit to the legislative bodies, and there was no financial interest funding the politicians to pass the bill. If you look at most of the bills President Trump has signed, with the exception of a few economic bills, they stem from congressional construction many years, even decades, ago.

Think about it carefully and you’ll see it. The “First step act”, “Right to Try”, etc. were all shelved by Boehner, Pelosi, Ryan, McConnell, Reid and others before them. When the value of legislation is measured by the financial underwriting and payoffs behind it, what type of legislative calendar does that require?…. (For more from the author of “The Key Reason DC Hates President Trump – It’s a Big Club, and He Ain’t in It…” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE