Mediaboss Marketing

Barack Obama defended his administration Tuesday against charges from President Trump that it did not do enough to secure the release of an American student jailed in North Korea.

During the course of the Obama administration, we had no higher priority than securing the release of Americans detained overseas, Obama spokesman Ned Price said in a statement, according to Deadline.com.

Their tireless efforts resulted in the release of at least 10 Americans from North Korean custody during the course of the Obama administration, he added.

It is painful that Mr. (Otto) Warmbier was not among them but our efforts on his behalf never ceased, even in the waning days of the administration, said Price, who was Obamas National Security Council spokesman.

Trump on Tuesday called the death of the 22-year-old Warmbier who was returned comatose to the US last week after 18 months in captivity a total disgrace.

The president took aim at Obama for not gaining the release of the University of Virginia student.

It should never, ever be allowed to happen. And frankly, if he were brought home sooner, I think the results would have been a lot different, Trump told reporters at the White House.

Warmbiers father, Fred, has praised Trump for helping secure his sons release.

Asked a few days ago whether he felt the Obama administration had not done enough to help his family, Warmbier said, I think the results speak for themselves, the Washington Post reported.

US

See original here:
Obama: We never stopped trying to get Otto Warmbier home - New York Post

By using fired FBI Director James Comey to attack the new Republican administration, Democrats have opened up a legal can of worms for the Obama administration.

Under sworn questioning, Comey has veered off the topic of President Trump and Russia and revealed several damning incidents in which his predecessors administration politically interfered in the Hillary Clinton email investigation. And now the Senate will investigate Team Obama for obstruction of justice.

Specifically, the Senate Judiciary Committee announced last week it will hold hearings to examine then-Attorney General Loretta Lynchs involvement in the Clinton email server investigation.

The findings of the powerful panel, which has oversight of the Justice Department and FBI, could lead to a separate criminal investigation and the naming of another special counsel exactly what Trump needs to distract attention from his growing legal woes.

What Lynch did reeks of obstruction. According to Comey, his ex-boss:

There are also concerns, raised by a New York Times report, that Lynch privately assured the Clinton campaign she would keep FBI agents in check and wouldnt let their investigation go too far, according to a message the FBI intercepted involving then-Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

Worried his boss had a conflict of interest overseeing the Clinton investigation, Comey testified he considered whether I should call for the appointment of a special counsel to take over the case. That wouldve been the right move. Curiously, Comey instead shut down the probe and let Clinton off the hook three weeks before her presidential nomination.

How compliant was Comey? Heres how he responded to Lynchs demand he align his rhetoric with the Clinton camp: I just said, OK. What other Lynch meddling did he go along with during the yearlong Hillary probe, which was marred by suspiciously generous immunity deals, favorable ground rules, a near-absence of grand jury subpoenas and a rushed closure ahead of the DNC convention?

These are questions the Senate judiciary panel, chaired by GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley, might like to ask Comey, along with: Who else was in the room during your meetings with Lynch, and did you take notes?

Any notes could be subpoenaed, along with the Wasserman Schultz document, which, contrary to recent media reports, isnt fake. (Comey testified such reports are nonsense.) So might the NSA recording of Lynchs chat with Clinton, which took place on board a government plane.

Congressional sources say Lynch will almost certainly be called to answer Comeys allegations under oath. What did she and Bill Clinton discuss? Did the investigation come up? Why didnt she recuse herself, despite admitting it looked bad? And did she in fact promise the Clinton campaign a whitewash?

Also on the potential witness list are Wasserman Schultz and Amanda Renteria, the senior Clinton campaign staffer with whom Wasserman Schultz claimed Lynch had been in communication.

Democrats will have a hard time dismissing the inquiry as partisan. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary panel, is on record saying Lynchs suspicious actions are a legitimate avenue of inquiry. Those remarks provide Republicans the political cover they need to aggressively pursue Comeys leads, and refer evidence to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution.

Because Attorney General Jeff Sessions would recuse himself from that probe, too, the case could end up in the hands of a special prosecutor, who, like Robert Mueller, would have wide-ranging authority to poke around.

Thats a nightmare scenario for Democrats, who are betting the 2018 midterms on convincing voters of Trump graft. Much to their chagrin, Comeys testimony has given Republicans grounds to shift focus from the Russia probe back to Clinton-Obama corruption.

Witch-hunting Democrats may soon learn that turnabout is fair play. Paul Sperry is a former Hoover Institution fellow and author of The Great American Bank Robbery.

Follow this link:
Next up: a special counsel to probe Team Obama's obstruction of justice - New York Post

Gallup reports:

Former President George W. Bushs national image continues to improve in his retirement, with his favorable rating rising seven percentage points over the past year to 59%. This continues the fairly steady improvement in Bushs favorable rating since it registered a meager 35% at the start of his post-presidential years in March 2009.

Bushs favorability now approaches that of former President Barack Obama, who measured at 63% in the same poll, conducted June 7-11.

Over the past year, Bushs image has improved, and to a similar degree, among nearly all major demographic and political groups. One exception is young adults, among whom his favorable rating is unchanged and well below the national average, at 42%.Compared with Bushs post-presidential low point in 2009, his favorable rating has nearly doubled among political independents to 56% and has increased fourfold among Democrats to 41%. His already positive 72% rating from Republicans in 2009 has improved less, registering 82% today.

When former president George W. Bush left office, he was one of the most hated people on the planet. Things have been different lately. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

Another interesting note: Obamas current rating is far more politically polarized than Bushs. To some degree, that may reflect the passage of time since each was president just five months for Obama versus eight years for Bush giving Americans more time to forget about any political disagreements they may have had with Bush. Moreover, Bushs extraordinarily successful post-presidency as a painter, author and continued activist for disabled veterans has at the very least confounded critics who were certain he was intellectually uncurious.

This all comes at a time when President Trumps approval is at a historical low point at this juncture in a presidents term. Its impossible not to view past presidents in light of the current Oval Office inhabitant. Well, at least Bush hired good people, read books and didnt peddle in ludicrous conspiracy theories, Democrats can acknowledge. Obama never attacked his own intelligence community and understood his own health-care bill, Republicans can acknowledge. He wasnt an obnoxious, know-nothing bully. Its fair to conclude that intellectually, temperamentally and ethically, Trump is a far worse president than either Bush or Obama. How can the latter twonot look better in hindsight?

That said, part of our affection for past presidents relates to the tribalism that infects the current political scene. Its become a them or us political world, most especially for Trump cultists who cannot process any facts at odds with the Trump party line nor reject any daft rumor if it helps discredit their opponents. Tribalism the intense identification with one party or another that matters more than ideology, policy or personality has turned politics from problem-solving to an endeavor in self-expression or psychotherapy. With regard to ex-presidents, however, they no longer threaten the tribe of either party; they become in retirement (sadly, only then) the presidents of all Americans. Their errors are not forgotten, but the venom is gone, as is the need to savage the other guys leader.

We are left to contemplate two aspects of ex-presidents tenures. First, they hold a unique unifying role that exceeds the current political players. They cannot and should not weigh in on every policy debate, but they have a special role when it comes to defending our institutions. At meaningful moments, a unified statement from ex-presidents can be powerful, particularly because they comment so rarely. Should, for example, Trump arrange to fire special prosecutor Robert S. Mueller III, a joint statement from ex-presidents could be a powerful inducement for members of Congress and the public to defend democratic norms. Second, the hyperactive 24/7 news environment which five minutes away from Twitter leaves one feeling as if theyve fallen hopelessly behind the news deprives us of perspective and nuance. We all suffer from the impulse to infuse every presidential decision with grave importance and to render a verdict on presidents moment by moment.

Ex-presidents remind us that their tenure can be assessed only over time and graded on a curve. In that regard, every president (even James Buchanan) owes Trump a debt of gratitude. Wed take just about any one of Trumps 44 predecessors around now.

The rest is here:
The growing affection for Obama and Bush: Nostalgia or misremembering? - Washington Post (blog)

He may have been the 44th president of the United States, but theres one role that Barack Obama cherishes above all: Dad.

The former commander-in-chief shared an endearing throwback photo of him squeezing his two daughters, Sasha and Malia, back when they were tiny girls.

Of all that Ive done in my life, Im most proud to be Sasha and Malias dad, he wrote while linking to the photo. To all those lucky enough to be a dad, Happy Fathers Day!

Former first lady Michelle Obama, who was first to post the photo, also expressed the familys ongoing love for him in its caption:

Happy #FathersDay @BarackObama. Our daughters may be older and taller now, but theyll always be your little girls. We love you.

Sasha and Malia were just 7 and 10 years old, respectively, when they moved into the White House in 2009. The girls have since grown up in the public eye, with Sasha recently turning 16 and Malia turning 19 in July.

REUTERS/Marcos Brindicci and REUTERS/Jim Bourg

Happy Fathers Day to all the dads out there!

Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly identified Malia as the youngest. She was in fact 10 when she moved into the White House and her sister, Sasha, was 7.

Originally posted here:
Barack Obama Just Posted The Sweetest Father's Day Throwback ...

The NSCinformed Judicial Watch in a letter dated May 23 that materials related to Rices requests to know the identities of Americans swept up in surveillance of foreign targets, including any Trump campaign or transition officials, have been moved to the library.

The NSCs Director of Access Management John Powers said in the letter:

Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.

Judicial Watch earlier this year filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for those documents, including of communications between Rice and any intelligence community member or agency regarding any Russian involvement in the 2016 elections, the hacking of Democratic National Committee computers, or any suspected communications between Russia and Trump officials.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the group will seek to find out when the records were moved, and warned of legal actions. He said:

Prosecutors, Congress, and the public will want to know when the National Security Council shipped off the records about potential intelligence abuses by the Susan Rice and others in the Obama White House to the memory hole of the Obama Presidential Library. We are considering our legal options but we hope that the Special Counsel and Congress also consider their options and get these records.

In April, blogger Mike Cernovich, Bloomberg, and Fox News revealedthat Rice had requested to unmask or unveilthe hidden names of Trump transition officials who were caught up in surveillance of foreign targets.

Typically, in surveillance of foreign targets communications, U.S. citizens mentioned or participating in them would have their names masked, or hidden, due to ethical, legal, and privacy concerns. However, government consumersof the intelligence can request to have their names unmasked if it is important to understanding the communications.

According to Cernovich, The White House Counsels office identified Rice as the person who had requested the unmasking, after examining her log requests, Cernovich reported on April 2. Bloomberg and Fox News would later corroborate the report. The revelation lent credence to Trumps assertion that the Obama administration had been surveilling his transition team.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board has argued Rice had no reason to request the unmaskings. Since then, the House intelligence committee has also subpoenaed theintelligence community for information on unmasking requests by Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan, and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power.

Themisuse of unmasking came under media scrutiny afterU.S. officialsillegally leaked to the Washington Post a private conversation between formerTrump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak on December 24. Flynnresigned after those communications, not because anything inappropriate was found, but because he had misrepresented those communications to Vice President Mike Pence.

NSC Unmasking Records Response by Kristina Wong on Scribd

P.S. DO YOU WANT MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS ONE DELIVERED RIGHT TO YOUR INBOX?SIGN UP FOR THE DAILY BREITBART NEWSLETTER.

Go here to read the rest:
BRAZEN POLITICAL MACHINATION BY OBAMA: NO ONE ... - breitbart.com