Thursday's HOT MIC

Welcome to HOT MIC, PJ Media's daily liveblog. Join our editors and contributors for news updates and conversation throughout the day, and add your thoughts to the mix in our comments section at the bottom or by clicking on the comment bubbles on individual posts.  Be sure to save this link so you can find HOT MIC every day.

Happy Thursday Morning!

No info yet on the President's agenda today

Day 2: A nation held hostage by the media/Democrat narrative

We are now on day two of the Great Comey Meltdown. Here are the recent developments:

Comey sends farewell letter.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has invited Comey to testify next week.

The testimony would be given in a closed session without cameras, but it is not yet known whether Comey has accepted the invitation.

Prior to his dismissal, Comey was scheduled to testify Thursday at the World Wide Threats Hearing with the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, but will now be replaced by Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe.

Expect the Democrats to leak whatever suits their narrative from the closed meeting.

theSome Democrats are floating impeachment, but that's not really news. We hear from Democrat politicians and media pretty much on an hourly basis about impeaching Trump. While on a conference call with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Reps. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and Mark Pocan (D-WI) [who?] said the impeachment fires were stoked.

“We are certainly moving down that path,” Gallego said. “There is a lot of runway until we get there, but the president is not helping himself by firing the person investigating him. … We don’t have the numbers to do something right now, but when it comes to a point when we feel there is no other recourse, you’d have — I think — we’d have the full support of the Democratic caucus.”

Rep. Pocan said that impeachment might be an option “if there was obstruction of justice by firing [the] FBI director … We’re seeing Democrats and Republicans concerned with timing of this decision … We would first need a majority in Congress or some Republican votes … but we need to keep every tool available to make sure the president follows the law.”

There's a report that President Trump was upset that Comey would not allow his recent testimony before the Senate to be reviewed and this disloyal act is what led Trump to fire the FBI director.

White House officials told Reuters that Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein requested a preview from Comey.

Comey reportedly declined to share his testimony before a May 3 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing regarding his handling of the probe into Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Previews to superiors of congressional testimony are generally considered a courtesy.

And of course, there is the story that Comey was aggressively pursuing the made-up Red Scare "scandal," asking for more resources to uncover "the truth."

Days before he was fired as F.B.I. director, James B. Comey asked the Justice Department for more prosecutors and other personnel to accelerate the bureau’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the presidential election.

It was the first clear-cut evidence that Mr. Comey believed the bureau needed more resources to handle a sprawling and highly politicized counterintelligence investigation.

It is curious that no matter what events befall the administration, the story always manages to fit the opposition narrative about Trump. Trump fired Comey because he was getting too close on Russia, because Comey wouldn't prove his loyalty to Trump.  There's never a simple explanation and it's never what the administration says it is. For instance, we saw no media curiosity when Bill Clinton met with DOJ honcho Loretta Lynch in a "chance" private meeting on the tarmac in Arizona last fall. The public was told that the two just spoke about their grandchildren and not at all about the investigation Lynch's agency was conducting on his failed presidential candidate wife Hillary. The media bought that explanation, sold it and they moved along to something else. It was very different from what we are seeing now, where nothing is trusted and nothing is logical, but instead magically supports the designated, negative real story.

The New York Times gives it a try

The NYT pays some heed to the other side. I give it an A for effort but a D for execution. For Trump Supporters, the Real Outrage Is the Left’s Uproar Over Comey

The script should be familiar by now. President Trump takes action that stuns the country, eliciting indignation and disbelief from Democrats and leading them to conclude that the vitality of American democracy is under assault.

Yet among those who are sympathetic to the president — a minority, to be sure, but somewhere around 40 percent of the country, according to recent polls — the outrage is that Mr. Trump is again being held to an unfair standard set by the very people and institutions that tried to stop his election in the first place: Democrats, resentful Republicans and, perhaps most of all, the news media.

"Stun the country" or stun the media? Well, we can't expect the Times to fully reflect and acknowledge how out of touch they really are with the American voter.

More clearly than other recent Trump-induced uproars, the reaction to the Comey firing illustrated how many conservatives now justify their defense of the president as part of a fight against a rising tide of overreaction and manufactured hysteria by the left. Mr. Trump, who has long understood the political power of demonizing his opponents as crazed and irrational, has helped stoke those resentments.

You know who else has helped that perception? The media, and the airtime and "legitimacy" the media gives to the left's hysteria.

Is anyone arguing that Comey was great and competent and should not have been fired? Up until the WH announced he was fired, Comey was public enemy #1 for the Democrats. But that's not the story the media wants to tell.

Other Morsels:

GOP Lawmakers getting death threats before townhalls

"The Rock" might run for President

Everyone wants Chris Pratt’s FBI agent from ‘Parks & Rec’ to replace James Comey

Hollywood braces for box office failure this summer

Obamacare continues to collapse

Trump appoints opioid commission

Reporter arrested for "questioning" HHS Sec. Tom Price

Mike Flynn subpoenaed by Senate Intel. Committee

That's all I've got, now go beat back the angry mob!

This headline made me laugh...

#Annapolis is trending on Twitter, and I must say -- the conspiracy theories being promulgated therein make for some highly entertaining reading.

Trump-haters are pretty convinced that the FBI raid at the Republican fundraising and campaign firm spells doom for Team Trump -- the beginning of the end to our national nightmare.

The truth is not quite as scintillating.

The Strategic Campaign Group appears to be in trouble for shady fundraising practices:

The Washington Post spoke to the firm’s president, Kelley Rogers, and he said agents collected documents related to its direct-mail and fundraising operations.

According to The Hill, the Strategic Campaign Group worked for Conservative Strikeforce, which critics call a "Scam PAC." Ken Cuccinelli sued the group in 2014 for fundraising off his name without authorization.

 

Count me as one who doesn't believe there is anything at all to the Russia story.  Nada. Zilch. I don't believe McGabe's testimony that this is a "highly significant FBI  probe."Not for a second.  Probe of what?  Other than hacking, which goes on all the time and some people should learn how to defend themselves, what exactly has happened?  Oh, yes, the ever-evil Mike Flynn blabbed to the Russian ambassador.  But what did he say exactly?  Here's my bet (and I'd give odds): it's something like  "those sanctions will be on the table after the inauguration."  Which of course they would be because that's what sanctions are for.  You make them to get your adversary to do something.  Your adversary does it, so you lift them.  He doesn't, you don't.  That one gets about three dozen "dubs." (More important and more dangerous than Pinocchios.) In other words, if I'm right, what Flynn did was basically meaningless and the ambassador, assuming he has an IQ in triple digits, would have known it anyway.  It may have gone a little further than that, but not much.  This entire brouhaha engulfing Washington is about nothing.  Trump, unfortunately, doesn't seem to have the skills to defuse it.  Or his adversaries are too insane to make that possible.  More likely a fusion of the two.

And then the media -- specifically the NY and the WaPo -- can't stop lying about what happened.  Every time you see an unnamed source, you know straight away -- it's a lie.

Corrine Brown was convicted of tax fraud today — for using a nonprofit to enrich herself while claiming to give needy children scholarships.

Her six most embarrassing videos provide some wonderful conservative schadenfreude.

Look, at this point, if you see something about Trump from an anonymous source in the NY Times or Washington post, your first take should be (1) the source is a Senate Democrat, and (2) it's going to be denied, but the Times and the Post will make sure they get a news cycle out of it first instead of trying to confirm.

Deb caught this earlier:

Look, it's on TV!

The bankruptcy proceedings for Puerto Rico are going forward slowly, and as this Bloomberg article points out, because of the unique circumstances, nobody knows what's coming next.

Simply put, the bankrupt island can’t pay everything it owes, so creditors are taking aim at each other as they squabble over who will get what’s left. But the debt’s size and the tangled process invented to rescue Puerto Rico mean there’s no established rule book to shape what comes next.

Holders of general-obligation debt have declared their right to be paid first, owners of sales-tax bonds are squabbling with one another over who deserves priority, and they’re all up against the commonwealth’s leaders, who want the cash for essential services. Amid this melee, Puerto Rico’s federal overseers will have to choose between paying U.S. hedge funds everything they’re owed or keeping schools, water and electricity running.

“There just isn’t enough money,” said Matt Fabian, a partner with Municipal Market Analytics Inc. in Concord, Massachusetts, who foresees a chaotic brew of lawsuits, federal interventions and politics. “Nobody has any idea what’s going to happen.”

All told, Puerto Rico has about $74 billion in debt and $49 billion in pension liabilities. Hedge funds holding $1.4 billion of general-obligation bonds, including Aurelius Capital Management and Monarch Alternative Capital, have already sued to get overdue principal and interest. On the other side, owners of $17 billion in sales-tax bonds, including Tilden Park Capital Management and GoldenTree Asset Management, have entered the fray. They’ll meet for the first time in court on May 17 in San Juan.

This is not going to end well for anyone - the hedge funds, other debt holders, and the people and government of Puerto Rico. People have been fleeing the island for years -- usually the most productive and industrious citizens. Of course, this exacerbates the economic problems of the island and compounds the difficulties for the Puerto Rican government to get out from under its debt obligations and emerge fully able to stand on its own.

You can be sure that before it's all said and done, the Puerto Rican government will make a formal request to Washington for some kind of bailout. Both President Trump and the GOP Congress have indicated they will not go that route, although the feds could offer other help that might alleviate some of the pain.

Suffice it to say that the largest bankruptcy in U.S. is not going to be easy.

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Guess what? President Donald Trump and Rosie O'Donnell actually agree on something.

Woah! The FBI is carrying out a warrant search on a GOP fundraising firm in Annapolis.

Jon Ossoff, Democrat golden boy running in Georgia's 6th congressional district, has raised a whopping 95 percent of his money from out of state.