Three Things You Need to Know - December 18, 2017

Democrats Want This to be Watergate With a Passion

All Democrats want for Christmas is impeachment.

Their best hope for seeing President Trump removed from office is special counsel Robert Muller’s Russia-collusion investigation. Now they’re terrified that Trump might fire Muller while the investigation is still under way.

Last week the Justice Department provided Congress with a large batch of text messages from former members of the special counsel’s team. Many of the text messages were hostile toward Trump. Several Republican congressmen are criticizing the integrity of the special counsel, adding fuel to Trump’s claim that the investigation is a “witch hunt.”

As if things aren’t dicey enough already, over the weekend, a lawyer for Trump’s transition team suggested Muller inappropriately gained access to thousands of transition team emails from government servers. Legal analysts say Muller didn’t break any rules, but the debate is giving Republican critics more reason to cry foul.

So now, Democrats say the Right is trying to shut down the whole investigation. Democrats have never been so concerned about the rule of law. Yesterday, former Attorney General Eric Holder weighed in, because it’s so important and helpful when former Attorney Generals weigh in. He tweeted that firing Muller was an “Absolute Red Line” – in all caps.

Holder also said he spoke “on behalf of the vast majority of the American people” in warning Republicans that any attempt to remove Muller “will not be tolerated.” I love how Progressives automatically assume that they speak for the vast majority of America.

Meanwhile, President Trump told reporters Sunday night that he is not going to fire Muller.

Democrats simply want to get to the truth in this investigation – as long as that truth leads to the outcome they desire, which is Trump’s impeachment. Democrats so desperately want this to be bigger than Watergate, which is saying something, because they worship Watergate like a sacred holiday. Why? Because it ushered in a golden era for them.

Three months after Nixon resigned from office, Democrats gained 53 seats in Congress in the 1974 midterm election. Republicans wouldn’t gain control of both houses again for 20 years. The 1974 midterm marked the most magical liberal transformation of Congress in history. That is why they worship Watergate, and it’s the same reason that the biggest wish on their Christmas list this year is an airtight indictment of Trump from the special counsel.

Banning Words at the CDC

Vulnerable. Entitlement. Diversity. Transgender. Fetus. Evidence-Based. Science-Based.

These are the seven words that the Trump Administration has reportedly banned the CDC from using in its 2019 budget proposals.

If this is true, it’s a clear attempt to target progressive causes and an early Christmas present to those hungry for red meat.

After the report on the ban was published in the Washington Post, the CDC’s director, Dr. Brenda Fitzgerald, insisted that “there are no banned words at CDC. We will continue to talk about all our important public health programs.”

But the damage was already done.

Everyone on the left is outraged about the supposed ban.

And I have to say, I understand the feeling. I’m NEVER happy when words are banned.

If this was the Trump Administration’s way of “de-politicizing” the CDC, it kind of backfired.

It just makes Republicans look like they hate science and trans-people. Do we really want to send that message?

Here’s what I think. The CDC, The Center for Disease Control and Prevention, should stick to controlling and preventing disease. That’s it. Their budget of $7 billion should all go to doing that and nothing else.

If they just stick to that blueprint, there is no need to ban any words.

Obama's Blind Ambition

Remember that scene in Saving Private Ryan, where the fear frozen soldier watches his buddy get killed by a knife-wielding Nazi? It’s probably the most gut-wrenching and fast forwarded scene in the movie. The scene is so hard to watch on multiple different levels. Being paralyzed by fear AND enabling evil are two things largely unfathomable to most people. Politico published an article yesterday alleging the Obama administration was living and playing out that scene over and over again for the sake of the Iran deal. Fear and ambition caused them to look the other way while evil grew at unprecedented levels.

Project Cassandra was launched by the DEA in 2008. Over the following years they would be successful in mapping out an intricate web of global Hezbollah financing operations that included drug trafficking from South America, money laundering in the United States, and weapons procurement in both Syria and Iraq. Hezbollah was being run like the Corleone family, and the DEA had them dead to rights. Their criminal financing networks were mapped out and their agents were identified.

There wasn’t a power on earth strong enough to stop Hezbollah from going down after all this evidence. That’s what the DEA figured. It turns out they never could have imagined the power of Obama’s ambition. Reconciliation with Iran and a nuclear deal that would catapult his legacy to new unreachable heights was the only thing his administration was interested in. Former members of Project Cassandra allege that their agents were purposely stonewalled in order to keep Iran happy. While Iran and Hezbollah were carving up the Middle East, planning terrorist attacks and raking in billions in drug money, the Obama administration was looking the other way with visions of a sugar plummed nuclear deal dancing in their heads.

If this Politico story is accurate, this is Obama’s legacy. His blind ambition - not only - enabled Iran and Hezbollah to become the major power in the Middle East, but they did it by corrupting our values, flooding our streets with drugs and used our own businesses to launder the money back to the Middle East. All this for a nuclear deal that could have been nothing more than a smoke screen. A distraction that a legacy crazed US President would easily jump at to quench his unbridled thirst for ambition. And like that scene from Saving Private Ryan, we may one day see this moment in our history as the most gut-wrenching and fast forwarded moment in modern history.

MORE 3 THINGS

I'm going to introduce you to what is by far the most annoying trend on social media involving a particular emoji. The annoying online trend features the clapping emoji 👏 in 👏 between 👏 each 👏 word.

The technique is most often used — unironically — by the social justice types to express indignation or condescension.

RELATED: De Niro at da Tony's gets obscenely political

It's meant to imply that the person who is writing the message is so much more "woke" than you that they are righteously allowed to clap in your face. Just looking at it is enough to test your blood pressure. Among the most recent standouts is the controversy surrounding Scarlett Johansson's decision to play a transgender character, which LGBTQ advocates would view as a good thing, right? You know, her being an ally to their cause and all. Here's one of the myriad tweets that sums up the feeling:

For weeks, the social justice types had been raging about Johansson, who was slated to portray a crime kingpin who was born a woman but identified as male in the film Rub & Tug.

In an interview with NPR — naturally — a trans activist had this to say about it:

Casting male actors to play trans women and female actors to play trans men really reinforces the idea that trans men are really women who are pretending to be men and tricking people into thinking they're men as opposed to the truth, which is that transgender men are living authentically as themselves. And we look like men and we feel like men, and we are perceived as men, and there's no reason, like, women should be playing us.

Listen to the full interview here:

Boy, if it weren't already confusing enough…

In response to this so-called backlash, Scarlett Johansson released a statement to her critics, noting to "tell them that they can be directed to Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto and Felicity Huffman's reps for comment."

But, finally — as most people do these days — she buckled. She released the following statement:

In light of recent ethical questions raised surrounding my casting as Dante Tex Gill, I have decided to respectfully withdraw my participation in the project. Our cultural understanding of transgender people continues to advance, and I've learned a lot from the community since making my first statement about my casting and realize it was insensitive.

What's the source of all this outrage? Because, we all know that the small but vocal mob — who the mainstream media has for some reason given a platform, and whose voice is louder than the rest of ours — is able to bully until they get what they want.

There's no winning.

Let's say that Scarlett Johansson had refused the role to begin with, on the grounds that she will not play a transgender character. You can guarantee the same crowd that's outraged now would be in fits. There's no winning. The best we can do is treat those around us with respect, live humbly and, for heaven's sake, don't clap between every damn word.

We should all be praying for success at the Trump/Putin sit-down

ALEKSEY NIKOLSKYI/AFP/Getty Images

92 percent of the world's nuclear weapons are in TWO countries: the U.S. and Russia. And as I'm speaking right now, the leaders of both countries are sitting down at a table to try and figure out how to coexist with one another. Sounds kind of important right? And even though the media will slap-fight each other to death today in an attempt to turn the Trump/Putin summit partisan, what's happening right now in Helsinki is probably the least most partisan thing happening right now… like anywhere. As in, the entire planet.

If there was ever a time to be partisan… this isn't it. To any Democrat, Republican or mainstream media pundit looking to turn this into some gotcha political narrative… what the hell is wrong with you? The last time the U.S. and Russian presidents sat down for a summit was in 2010… eight years ago! Here's a small rundown of how "cold" our relationship has been since then.

RELATED: Putin to Megyn Kelly: Jews are to blame for US election interference

Russia still has troops in Georgia after their invasion during Obama's first term. Keep in mind, Georgia was a country considering joining NATO. That invasion was Russia's coming out party. It was a warning to the world that things were about to change, and they were just getting started. They would then invade, steal and annex Crimea from Ukraine. They'd also invade, destabilize and wage war in Eastern Ukraine. That war is still going on to this day, but rarely does the media talk about it anymore. And the backdrop to that invasion and silent war was an accusation from the Russians that the United States deliberately encouraged the fall of the Ukrainian president and government.

Meanwhile, Russia continues supplying troops and equipment to their side, and we are now providing military training and anti-tank missiles to ours.

And Ukraine is just one of the proxy wars currently being fought between the two nuclear powers. Syria is the other. In April, we admitted to killing nearly 200 Russians in that conflict.

Over the past four years, over 700 Russian citizens and companies have been sanctioned, 35 diplomats have been declared persona non grata, 2 Russian diplomatic compounds have been closed, one consulate and two diplomatic annexes. Oh… and Russia has ejected over 700 U.S. diplomatic staff.

Between cyber attacks and indictments on Russian intelligence personnel, tensions have never been higher.

Between cyber attacks and indictments on Russian intelligence personnel, tensions have never been higher. Russia currently maintains an arsenal of 6,600 nuclear weapons. We have 6,450. The next closest nuke holders are France with 300 and China with 280. It's not even close. Between Washington and Moscow, there are over 13,000 nuclear weapons pointed at one another.

Forget partisan politics. The two toughest kids on the block just met for a sit-down, and we should all be praying for their success.

It's not just the Twitter mobs, the Leftist extremists and the flagrant fourth-wave feminists who want ICE abolished. As we've seen, there's a growing number of politicians who want to see it as well.

Cue Alejandro Alvarez, who in his 32 years has managed to cultivate his brand as a "serial immigration violator." Alejandro has been deported 11 times. Well, he's facing deportation once again, after allegedly "slashing his wife with a chainsaw." His wife is in recovery and is expected to survive.

RELATED: The cost of unchecked illegal immigration is very real, and very high

Around 3:00 pm last Wednesday, police arrived at Alejandro's. When they arrived, they found Alvarez's wife suffering from "traumatic physical injuries, believed to have been inflicted by a chainsaw." The couple's three children were huddled in fear inside the home. Alejandro's wife was rushed to a nearby trauma center for an emergency surgery.

Alejandro fled the scene of the crime, but was eventually hauled in by police and booked under "suspicion of attempted murder, child endangerment, hit and run, and grand theft auto."

Sounds like the kind of guy who should be in our country illegally, right?

ICE spokeswoman Lori Haley noted that "Immigration officers have lodged a detainer against Alvarez, requesting that local authorities notify Immigration and Customs Enforcement before his release to allow them to take the man into custody."

This is the new reality.

This is the new reality. The immigration agency has to ask for permission, to file requests, to have illegal immigrants who are guilty of crimes dealt with. Luckily for Alejandro, Los Angeles is a sanctuary city, so maybe he'll get another pass and be back on the streets in no time.

UPDATE: Here's how the discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.

Why is nobody talking about this?

Alabama law enforcement officials say that an illegal immigrant and an immigrant in the United States on a green card are responsible for the brutal murders of a grandmother and her 13-year-old special needs granddaughter in what investigators say is violence related to Mexican drug cartels.