Connect with us


Democrat Calif. Gov. Skips Funeral of Police Officer Murdered by Immigrants

Calif.’s gov., Gavin Newsom, is taking criticism for refusing to attend the funeral of an officer who was murdered by illegals.



California’s left-wing governor, Gavin Newsom, is taking criticism for refusing to attend the funeral of an officer who was murdered by illegal immigrants.

Last Tuesday, El Dorado County Deputy Brian Ishmael was laid to rest, but Democrat Newsom was nowhere to be seen.

The deputy was killed two weeks ago while responding to a robbery call.

The incident that the officers had responded to ended up being an argument among several illegals who were involved in an illegal pot-growing operation.

Trending: Joe Biden Wants Christians on Terror List for Opposing LGBTQ Agenda

Police discovered that one of the illegal aliens felt his fellows were withholding money from him so he called the police. That eventually led to the altercation with police where the deputy was killed.

Last Thursday, federal charges were filed against the four illegals arrested in connection Deputy Ishmael’s death.

El Dorado Sheriff John D’Agostini slammed Newsom for refusing to attend Deputy Ishmael’s funeral, according to Fox LA.

D’Agostini was told that Newsom had a meeting with electric provider PG&E that conflicted with the funeral.

The governor’s office noted that he sent representatives for the funeral. But that wasn’t good enough for D’Agostini.

“One morning out of his busy schedule to respect my deputy and his family I don’t think is too much to ask,” D’Agostini said pointedly.

D’Agostini also criticized the state for its response to the crime.

“Please call this what this is,” D’Agostini said. “Don’t soften it. This tragedy was due to an illegal alien tending an illegal marijuana grow who murdered a deputy. That’s what it is.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.



Report: Schiff’s ‘Whistleblower’ Coordinated Attack on Trump with Alexander Vindman

A new report alleges that Democrat Adam Schiff’s so-called “whistleblower” coordinated his attack on President Donald Trump with Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.



A new report alleges that Democrat Adam Schiff’s so-called “whistleblower” coordinated his attack on President Donald Trump with Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the Democrat’s recent star witness.

On Saturday, the Washington Post reported on some of the steps a CIA analyst took to report his concerns that in a July 25 phone call, the president urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to start an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden.

“The analyst had served on the National Security Council during the Trump administration and had been in the presence of the president. After returning to the CIA, his job required him to continue to participate in National Security Council meetings,” the Post reported.

The paper also noted that this faux “whistleblower” had even attended meeting in the White House in August.

The Post also reported that the “whistleblower,” Eric Ciaramella, did not tell any of his CIA colleagues of his plans to attack the president as he worked on the lan in his CIA cubicle after hours.

But before filing the complaint, this “whistleblower” spoke with a White House official who said he was concerned over Trump’s conversation with Zelensky, too. The paper wrote that the “shaken” official said the call was “frightening,” “crazy,” and “completely lacking in substance related to national security.”

The Post said that the White House official the “whistleblower” spoke to was Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.

“The analyst does not identify the official in his July 26 memo, which was obtained by congressional investigators in the impeachment inquiry. But Vindman, in his testimony, disclosed that he had spoken to officials outside the White House within days of the Trump-Zelensky call,” the paper reported.

Some felt Vindman was problematic. For one, Timothy Morrison, a former deputy assistant to the president and the National Security Council’s former senior director for Europe and Russia, testified that he had “concerns” about Vindman’s “judgment.”

And well before the “whistleblower’s” claims, others also said that they felt that Vindman should have been fired from his role in the White House.

In the end, the Post’s report seems to show that Vindman and Ciaramella carried out a coordinated attack on President Trump that was carefully planned for months.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Al Sharpton Gets $1M In Pay From His Own Charity

The million-dollar minister.



Al Sharpton Gets $1M In Pay From His Own Charity

Tax filings show Al Sharpton was paid more than $1 million by his own charity in 2018 but he says he’s worth it because he “works six days a week.”

Al’s the million-dollar minister. He defended his hefty paycheck, claiming CEOs at other non-profit organizations make similar amounts of money.

Fox News:

The Harlem-based nonprofit — which Sharpton controls as president and CEO — said the extra cash was to make up for the years from 2004 to 2017 when he didn’t get his full pay.

NAN said it hired an executive compensation firm that determined the good reverend was owed $1.252 million — but he was generously willing to take $500,000 less.

Sharpton and the nonprofit’s board also agreed “he has now been fully compensated for all the years he was underpaid and received no bonus,” the NAN statement said.

The sharp-dressing, silver-tongued preacher defended the windfall before taking the stage for his weekly rally at NAN’s House of Justice in Harlem, an event where attendees throw cash in the collection bucket at the reverend’s behest.

“Fifteen years, you are talking about since 2004 when I came back after running for president,” he said. “For anybody else it would be laughable.”

He said he also deserved the 2018 raise.

“It’s a six-day-a-week job and several hours a day and when [the compensation firm] compared it to other companies, other nonprofits, that’s the salary that they would get,” he said. More

Just your typical Democrat doing what they do best. Biden, Hillary, Sharpton they are all the same. And yet they attack President Trump that works for free and gets results that are practically unheard of.

Twitter weighs in:
Continue Reading


Democrat ‘Witness,’ Marie Yovanovitch, Contradicted Herself at Faux ‘Impeachment’ Hearing

Former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch contradicted herself during her Friday testimony at the Democrat fake show impeachment trials.



Former Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch contradicted herself during her Friday testimony at the Democrat fake show impeachment trials and ultimately proved she had nothing pertinent to say about the charges the Democrats are throwing at President Donald Trump.

It looks like Yovanovitch lied when she said that the Obama administration never questioned the Hunter Biden and Ukrainian gas company Burisma situation but then later she said the Obama administration prepped her on that exact same issue.

This deep Democrat operative’s contradictory statements came during questioning by Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY):

Stefanik: The first time that you personally became aware of Burisma was actually when you were being prepared by the Obama State Department for your Senate confirmation hearings and this was in the form of practice questions and answers. This was your deposition. And you testified that in this particular practice Q&A with the Obama State Department, it wasn’t just generally about Burisma and corruption, it was specifically about Hunter Biden and Burisma. Is that correct?

Yovanovitch::Yes, it is.

Stefanik::And the exact quote from your testimony is, “The way the question was phrased in this model Q&A was, ‘what can you tell us about Hunter Biden being named to the board of Burisma?’” So for the millions of Americans watching, President Obama’s own State Department was so concerned about potential conflicts of interest from Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma that they raised it themselves while prepping this wonderful ambassador nominee before her confirmation and yet our Democratic colleagues and the Chairman of this committee cry foul when we dare ask that same question that the Obama State Department was so concerned about.

That is not what she said earlier…

“And although I have met former Vice President Biden several times over the course of our many years in government service, neither he nor the previous administration ever raised the issue of either Burisma or Hunter Biden with me,” she said.

Later, Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) later raised this question:

Ratcliffe: I’d like to ask you about your earlier testimony about your Senate confirmation and congresswoman Stefanik had asked you how the Obama-Biden State Department had prepared you to answer questions about Burisma and Hunter Biden specifically. You recall that?

Yovanovitch: Yes.

Ratcliffe:And she mentioned that you had been asked or been prepared for a question about Hunter Biden’s role on the board of Burisma but I don’t think that you gave us the answer or answers that the Obama-Biden State Department prepared you to give in response to that question. Do you remember what those answers were?

Yovanovitch:Yeah it was something along the lines of, “I would refer you to the vice president’s office on that.”

Ratcliffe:So did they in the course of that brief you about the amount of money that Hunter Biden was being paid by Burisma?

Yovanovitch: No, this wasn’t part of a briefing. I mean I had sort of big old books with questions that might come up.

Ratcliffe:In preparation for your confirmation and they thought that Hunter Biden’s role at Burisma might be significant enough that it would come up during your confirmation, is that correct?

Yovanovitch: Apparently so, I mean there were hundreds of questions.

Ratcliffe:Well, hundreds of questions, but were there hundreds of companies? how many companies other than Burisma did the Obama-Biden State Department prepare you to give answers for and if so, if there were others. which ones?

Yovanovitch:I just don’t recall.

Ratcliffe:You don’t recall that there were any other companies, is that correct?

Yovanovitch: I’m quite sure there probably were some companies, but I mean, you know, this is a while ago and I don’t recall.

Ratcliffe:But you specifically recall Burisma?


Ratcliffe:All right, out of thousands of companies in the Ukraine the only one that you recall the Obama-Biden State Department preparing you to answer questions about was the one where the vice president’s son was on the board, is that fair?

Yovanovitch: Yes.

Rep. Stefanik did a great job on Friday:

Rep. Chris Stewart also revealed how meaningless Yavanocitch’s “testimony” was:

The facts show that Yovanovitch had absolutely no testimony that related to President Trump’s Ukraine call and it appears that her initial intention was to cover for the Bidens. Until the Republican Reps uncovered her lies.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Poll: Most Minorities Feel Media is Advocating for Impeachment, Instead of Reporting On It

Black and Hispanic voters feel that the media is not doing its job and reporting on the impeachment of Donald Trump, but is trying to help Democrats achieve his ouster.



A new poll finds that black and Hispanic voters feel that the media is not doing its job and reporting on the impeachment of Donald Trump, but is, instead, trying to help Democrats achieve the ouster of the president.

According to a national survey by Rasmussen Reports, 53 percent of all voters said that the media is trying to help the Democrats destroy Trump.

That means most Americans think the media is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party and has failed to do its job of reporting the news.

This is terrible news for the left-wing, biased, mainstream media.

“When they write or talk about the impeachment effort, are most reporters trying to help impeach President Trump or block his impeachment? Or are most reporters simply interested in reporting the news in an unbiased manner?” Rasmussen wrote.

The answers the polling firm got were telling:

  • 53 percent said the media is trying to “Help impeach President Trump.”
  • Only 32 percent said they report “news in an unbiased an unbiased manner”
  • And a tiny 8 percent said the media is trying to “block his impeachment.”

Drilling down to the demos, though, shows that minorities are sour on the media’s efforts in this impeachment farce.

While 51 percent of whites said that the media is out to get Trump, an even greater 53 percent of blacks said that the media is biased against Trump, while 60 percent of other minorities think the media is failing to do its job as reporters.

“Voters are mad at Trump and his political opponents, but they’re angriest at the media these days,” Rasmussen noted.

“Distrust of political news reporting remains at a record high, with just over half of voters now convinced that most in the media are out to get Trump. By contrast, 48% thought most reporters were trying to help Obama pass his agenda.”

The survey of 1,000 likely voters has a margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Democrats Continue to Ignore Ukraine Officials Who Say NO Pressure or Quid Pro Quo

As Democrats continue their impeachment show trials, they continue to ignore the fact that several Ukrainian officials have said they felt NO pressure from Trump.



As Democrats continue their fantasy impeachment show trials, they continue to ignore the fact that several Ukrainian officials have said they felt no pressure from Trump and never understood there were any quids pro quo in effect over President Trump’s interactions with them.

The latest Ukrainian official who said there was no quid pro quo is Ukrainian foreign minister Vadym Prystaiko.

On Thursday, Prystaiko said that U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. Gordon Sondland had “never” linked U.S. aid to Ukrainian investigations of the Biden and Burisma.

Prystaiko said that there had been no link in discussions at the time with Sondland, as Reuters reported:

Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Vadym Prystaiko said on Thursday that U.S. ambassador Gordon Sondland did not explicitly link military aid to Kiev with opening an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Interfax Ukraine reported.

“Ambassador Sondland did not tell us, and certainly did not tell me, about a connection between the assistance and the investigations. You should ask him,” Prystaiko said about Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union.

“I have never seen a direct relationship between investigations and security assistance,” Prystaiko was quoted as saying by Interfax. “Yes, the investigations were mentioned, you know, in the conversation of the presidents. But there was no clear connection between these events.”

Prystaiko is not the first Ukrainian official to say there was no quid pro quo.

Back in October, UkrainianPresident Volodymyr Zelensky said he felt no pressure at all from Trump on the Biden matter. According to CNBC, Zelensky said he saw no evidence that Trump was trying to blackmail him, he felt no pressure, and there was no quid pro quo.

And yet, the Democrats have completely ignored this testimony from Ukrainian officials in favor of believing the third and fourth-hand exclamations of Democrat operatives who worked at the White House, and the Department of State, not to mention Obama’s corrupt CIA.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials have also revealed that millions of dollars were funneled to Hunter Biden and John Kerry’s family by Burisma.

We also know that once all these millions were paid to Biden’s kid and Kerry’s kid, Burisma mysteriously found itself easily gaining the ear of Obama’s State Department for favorable treatment.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


First Day of ‘Impeachment Hearings’ Immediately Prove Farcical

The faux impeachment “hearing” show trial being conducted by the Democrats in the House have already proved to be a partisan farce.



The faux impeachment “hearing” show trial being conducted by the Democrats in the House have already proved to be a partisan farce full of bluster but no facts.

As the so-called hearings kicked off, President Trump slammed the Democrats for their witch hunt.

The president also unleashed a torrent of tweets blasting the fake trials:

A number of other Republicans and commentators also noted that Democrat committee chairman Adam Schiff’s conduct is undemocratic, partisan, and illegitimate and that so far all of Schiff’s “witnesses” have either lied or undermined the Democrat’s accusations.

The fake “hearings” will continue today and will be convened again on Friday.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading


Democrat’s Faux Impeachment Gambit Not Hurting Trump’s Approval Rating

The Democrats are into their fake impeachment effort, but if the American people are impacted by it, you sure can’t tell from Trump’s steady approval ratings.



The Democrats are fully into their fake impeachment show trials, but if the American people are impacted by it, you sure can’t tell from Trump’s approval ratings, which haven’t much changed despite the onslaught.

First of all, and it must be said with every story about the “impeachment,” this effort in the House of Democrats is no a legal impeachment effort. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not fulfilled the legal requirements for an official impeachment procedure.

What the Democrats are doing is all political theater, not a legal proceeding. So, when Democrats say they are “impeaching Trump,” as of right this moment, they are liars. Until a formal vote is taken and articles of impeachment are officially entered, no actual</i impeachment is happening.

Anyway, even if the liberals think that they are destroying Trump, his polling numbers are not seeing much impact.

Some polls have found small dips and rises in Trump’s approval rating, but they are staying between 45 percent and 47 percent despite the Democrats and their fake impeachment show trials.

The media is trying to spin this as bad, granted. According to Newsweek:

But despite his approval rating hitting 47 percent in two polls released on Monday, the amount of people who strongly disapprove of Trump’s performance is almost as high at 45 percent, according to a Rasmussen Reports poll.

Meanwhile, the Harris X-Hill survey of 1,204 voters released on Monday showed that 53 percent of respondents either strongly disapproved or somewhat disapproved of the president’s performance, with 39 percent of those people strongly disapproving. The poll, conducted from November 8-9, has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.8 percentage points.

But the fact remains that Trump’s approval rating has not really dipped a whole lot for well over a year.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on

Continue Reading

Become an insider

Latest Articles

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Pin It on Pinterest