Sunday, April 21, 2019

Patriot arrested by the FBI

The number one story on Drudge this morning is the arrest of a leader of an armed group of citizens in New Mexico. The group is called United Constitutional Patriots. The ACLU complained about them and New Mexico's loony governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham, ordered an investigation. The group works with the Border Patrol, and is supported by the Border Patrol. Read the Reuters story here.

Saturday, April 20, 2019

Not snowflakes!

via Bird Dog

Are you ready for some superhuman powers?

Kashyap Vyas reports in Interesting Engineering on bionic technologies that give us a glimpse of a “superhuman” future.
Here’s a list of applications of bionics that may soon enable us to integrate superhuman powers!

1. H.U.L.C Exoskeleton – Turns You Into A Super Soldier

2. Bionic Lens – See Like Superman

3. Invisibility Cloak – A Technology that Makes a Person Invisible

4. Mind Controlling Helmet – Influencing the Brain Activity for the Better

5. Portable Pancreas – The Best Way To Fight Diabetes

6. Prosthetics For The Brain – A Way To Cure/Enhance Brain Function

7. Smart Gloves – Giving Bionic Power to Hands

8. Luke Prosthetic Arm – An Arm Similar To That of Luke Skywalker

9. Here Earbuds – Enhance The Hearing Abilities

Go here to read more about each of these bionic applications.

Thanks to Glenn Reynolds

Have A Grade-A Easter Sunday!

Guest post by Suzann Darnall

Many of us have been listening to news stories for a very long time about places and people doing away with Easter celebrations, Christmas displays, and anything remotely Christian in general. The excuse often used is that Christianity is exclusionary. We are told that not everyone is a Christian or that not all people celebrate holidays.

In my opinion, all of the aforementioned malarkey is simply another bullying tactic used by the Left to push Christians into a deep, dark hole where they want us to keep our mouths shut for fear we will be called bigots or worse. I, for one, refuse to go sit in their creepy corner and keep my belief in God to myself! To do so would be the same as Peter denying Jesus three times before the cock crowed. Not happening on my watch!

Nor do I intend to give up the joy of celebrating Easter. Not just as a celebration of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ's triumph over the grave, but as a happy time of family fun. I am quite capable of knowing the difference between the religious aspects and the secular aspects of Easter . . . as well as being quite capable of enjoying both sides of this very precious holiday.

This year I am not in charge of anything for the family get-together. Although, I did buy some surprises for the grandchildren we will see on Easter. But, our daughter, Charly, has invited Pete and me to spend the afternoon and evening at their home. The kids will do their Easter Egg Hunt, we will give them their gifts, and lots of yummy food will be enjoyed! And, all I have to do is enjoy! This year I am much in need of that less stressful event.

I understand that everyone is not a Christian and that everyone does not celebrate holidays. I respect the right to worship or not worship as one wishes, as well as the choice to celebrate or not celebrate as one wishes. I merely ask that I be allowed the same options. And, by the way, I choose to worship AND celebrate!
So, to paraphrase the scriptures: As for me and my house, we will celebrate Easter . . . and Christmas . . . and . . . Valentine's Day . . . and the Fourth of July . . . and . . . In short, I will celebrate my religion, my country, and my holidays. I will use them as excuses to gather in prayer and in fun. I will celebrate my freedom as an American. Oh wait . . . I guess that is kinda not politically correct either, 'cause America is considered to be exclusionary as well. Oops, my bad!

So, politically correct or not, Happy Easter to my Christian friends and readers. May those who celebrate the Jewish holiday of Passover be blessed as they pay tribute to God and their history. May others enjoy holidays or non-holidays to their liking. May everyone enjoy the renewal of springtime! A time of joy. A time to celebrate new life. Let us all stop and smell the roses, or lilies, or honeysuckle. Whatever is blooming wherever you are . . . enjoy it!

(Update of original, “Easter Egg Extravaganza” written on 2013-03-27)

"The real objection, I think, is not to Kate Smith. It is to both God and America. Any time liberals can suppress references to either or both, they try to do so."

In PowerLine, John Hinderaker takes a look at the decisions of the New York Yankees and Philadelphia Flyers to no longer play Kate Smith's God Bless America.

Hinderaker: "The real objection, I think, is not to Kate Smith. It is to both God and America. Any time liberals can suppress references to either or both, they try to do so."
Read more here.

I had been wondering

Via PowerLine

On second thought...

via PowerLine

Personal consequences for thee, but not for me

Glenn Reynolds writes in Instapundit,
Our ruling class doesn’t learn unless it faces personal consequences. And it never faces personal consequences.
Read more here.

A fabulous post at Bookworm Room!

Bookworm has written one of the best summaries of Trump's accomplishments here.

The Fisherman's Hook

Guest post by Jon Agard

Do you have drive? There is no guideline for how to become successful. If you are not successful you will not be happy. You have to push yourself so you do not become stagnant. Where in a liberal rich family do you see a family that has adopted an African child? Money talks. Everybody wants instant gratification, like a hit from a cigarette.

Enjoy the company of others. Enjoy a good book. Be willing to sacrifice. Pain killers? The best pain killer is your own ability to denounce pain, to see the light. My tunnel is not going to be that long. When you accept Jesus Christ into your heart, you will be fulfilled. Do not submit to evil. Believe in yourself and close your mind to the Devil's temptations. What are the Devil's temptations for me? Pussy, money, weed, alcohol, cigarettes, and greed.

"Just this once!"

Emily Waltz reports in IEEE Spectrum,
Brain Stimulation Gives New Hope For Treating Psychiatric Disorders
Addiction, OCD, PTSD and depression: All of these conditions might be improved by stimulating one deep brain structure
Read more here.

A holy weekend

Did you know this is a holy weekend? Yes, it is 4-20, and I have composed a song for the celebrants. It goes like this...
Holy, holy marijuana,
Holy, holy marijuana,
Holy, holy marijuana,
My lungs are burning now!

Friday, April 19, 2019

"Mindless partisans"

"For two years our capital city became a kind of massive CNN panel, a living monument to ignorance and dishonesty, where the loudest and the dumbest invariably got the most attention!

These are hysterical children. In fact, they should not be in journalism, but they have no plans to give up their power.

What about Brennan and Clapper? Will they get to keep their cable television jobs? Probably. In decadent societies, only the unpopular are punished."

Please watch this Tucker Carlson video, which might be his best ever.

"Connecting dots that were not there"

In the Washington Examiner, Siraj Hashmi writes,
...During the fallout from the 2016 election, Democrats were quick to point the finger at Russia for the reason why their nominee, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, lost in historic fashion. While trying to rationalize what we all witnessed, people like Brennan, Clapper, and Schiff capitalized on their moment, using their status to spread misinformation about collusion with a foreign power, a topic that people would believe them on. However, even for the special counsel, there wasn’t enough evidence to support it.

...people like Brennan, Clapper, and Schiff misled the public and elevated themselves in the process. This sowed discord and distrust in our institutions, which was exactly the aim of the Russians meddling in the election.
Read more here.

Thief sticks chainsaw in his pants and walks out of hardware store

"It was a daily compounded disinformation campaign by senior members of a former administration leaking lies, half-truths and malicious rumors about Trump."

Sara Carter writes,
...Think about it. Trump was being accused of being a spy for Russia. It was a daily compounded disinformation campaign by senior members of a former administration leaking lies, half-truths and malicious rumors about Trump. Those who aided the lies were MSNBC, CNN, The New York Times, McClatchy News, The Washington Post, and many more, who all had stories that the U.S. president was compromised by Russia and worked with the Russians against the American people.

...How can you be accused of obstruction of a crime you never committed? However, how can you not be appalled at the lies being directed at you, your family, your coworkers and those who support you when you know for a fact that is all they are – lies.

America needs to heal first and foremost.

But in order to heal the American justice system, that is revered around the world, must act swiftly and with strength to hold those accountable for these actions and bring those who broke the law to justice.

Transparency and justice is the only way we can regain the trust in the institutions that make our great nation the envy of those around the world.
Read more here.

"In the absence of provable charges, the presumption of innocence still reigns supreme."

John Soloman writes in the Hill,
...One inherent message of the first volume of the Mueller report is clear: It is time for the professional media to assume responsibility for its role in inflaming the public with a scandal that wasn’t proven, by endlessly quoting intelligence and partisan political sources whose claims went far beyond the evidence it slithered upon.

...For the purpose of a court of law, Trump neither committed a Russia collusion crime that he needed to cover up nor took formal action that actually impeded the probe.

And that left only a theoretical case for attempted obstruction. The report shows Mueller’s team so struggled with the issue that it offered novel theories of prosecution, and then abdicated the responsibility it was given to make the traditional charging decision.

...“There is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents and fueled by illegal leaks,” Barr explained. “Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated.”

...But one lesson from this debacle, which Americans might find applicable to both the courts of law and public opinion, is worth grasping: A guilty man’s conduct to get rid of prosecutors, to impact witnesses or to impugn an investigation looks a lot more like obstruction than an innocent man’s similar actions during an effort to defend himself from bogus allegations.

In the absence of provable charges, the presumption of innocence still reigns supreme.
Read more here.

The Orange Man Bad gospel

Robert Stacy McCain writes in the American Spectator,
Living inside a media-generated echo chamber where everyone shares their simplistic worldview, the Trump-haters tune in nightly to their MSNBC/CNN religious revival and are catechized, so to speak, with the latest reiteration of the Orange Man Bad gospel.

...On Tucker Carlson’s Fox News program last night, the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel said bluntly, “It’s over.” No collusion. No obstruction. No more indictments. The whole Russians-stole-the-election narrative has been conclusively debunked, and despite the Mueller report’s detailed accounting of Trump’s angry outbursts about the investigation, justice was never obstructed. Yet the 3 million viewers of CNN and MSNBC may not realize this, because those networks are still saying the same thing they’ve been saying since 2016: “Orange Man Bad!”

...None of these facts matter to the 3 million who watch CNN and MSNBC, the cable-TV echo chamber defined by the anti-Trump cult mentality of Maddow and Matthews, Joe Scarborough and Erin Burnett, Chris Hayes and Chris Cuomo. The good news is that this alternative universe appears to be shrinking. Maddow has lost nearly a third of her audience since last April, and CNN recently recorded its worst ratings week of the year. It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results, and this is exactly what Trump’s media enemies seem to be doing. The more often the president mocks them as “fake news,” the more determined they become to destroy him, and the more they limit their audience to the most fanatically deranged Trump-haters. However, it never seems to occur to them that they might be mistaken, no matter how often they find themselves humiliated in the ratings. They know only one thing, and they are completely committed to it: “Orange Man Bad!”
Read more here.

"A political proctology exam in which the president emerged with a clean bill of health!"

And the Congressional Democrats? "Just because they are on their t.v. shows vomiting their own talking points every night (and not under oath) doesn't mean that they should face full exoneration!" "Let's investigate the investigators!"

"No probable cause for launching the Mueller probe!"

Government investigating its political opposition. That's Venezuela!

Thursday, April 18, 2019

Of strength and weakness

‘A Republic, madam, if you can keep it.’

Roger Kimball writes in the American Spectator, American, including no one from the Trump campaign, colluded, conspired, or coordinated with the Russian efforts. Moreover, although Donald Trump was (rightly) enraged by the cataract of abuse he and his administration was subjected to, not least by the Mueller investigation, he never attempted to impede, hinder, or obstruct the investigation.

...Barr added a dollop of human interest to his remarks. ‘[As] the Special Counsel’s report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.’

But here is the kicker: ‘Nonetheless, the White House fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation, providing unfettered access to campaign and White House documents, directing senior aides to testify freely, and asserting no privilege claims. And at the same time, the president took no act that in fact deprived the Special Counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation.’ Again my emphasis, which I needn’t add to this conclusion: ‘Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of non-corrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the president had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation.’

What has happened over the past two-plus years is a fundamental attack on the legitimacy of our democratic republic. Tactical partisan maneuvering has overwhelmed the institution of presidential elections. Note that this is a one-party party. It probably started in earnest with the election of George W. Bush in 2000. Al Gore withdrew his concession and put the country through months of legal wrangling. Republicans were unhappy when Barack Obama was elected in 2008 and again in 2012. But there was no question of his legitimacy. But when Donald Trump won in 2016, the sort of anti-democratic forces that beset George Bush had mutated from an angry squad of activists into an army of deniers.

Should that substitution of weaponized tactical maneuvering continue to intrude upon the legitimacy of our elections, those elections will be decided less and less at the ballot box and more and more by interest-group jockeying, bribery, and intimidation.

In other words, it will remind us of the teeth in Ben Franklin’s response to the lady who encountered him after the Constitutional Convention and asked him what sort of government they had given the people. ‘A Republic, madam, if you can keep it.’
Read more here.

Yeah, he ran out of gas!

Have you heard about the college philosophy professor who brought these gas cans and lighter fluids into St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York last night? Ace has the story here.

Rudy Giuliani shines in answering questions of Fox News liberals

Rudy: "A clear victory! ...Does the president have to prove his innocence? That upends 2000 years of jurisprudence! ...These people acted in bad faith numerous times! These people tried really hard to
stretch obstruction beyond any fair meaning of it. ...It is absurd that the president had to prove his innocence! ...They were framing him! This isn't an exercise of fairness. ...They prejudged him to be guilty!"

Deductible goodness

Tucker Carlson declares Beto's campaign dead!

Sliming, not indicting

In the Federalist, Margot Cleveland has this to say about the Mueller report,
...Trump has no process now to clear his name from the taint of obstruction of justice created by Mueller’s report. So, after two years of battling unjust and untrue charges of collusion with Russia, Mueller has destined President Trump to spend the second half of his first term combating claims of obstruction of justice—claims which, even if they had a basis in fact, have no basis in law.
Read more here.

A smear

In the New York Post, Andrew McCarthy has some reaction to the Mueller report.
...This is unbecoming behavior for a prosecutor and an outrageous shifting of the burden of proof: The constitutional right of every American to force the government to prove a crime has been committed, rather than to have to prove his or her own innocence.

This is exactly why prosecutors should never speak publicly about the evidence uncovered in an investigation of someone who isn’t charged. The obligation of the prosecutor is to render a judgment about whether there is enough proof to charge a crime. If there is, the prosecutor indicts; if there is not, the prosecutor remains silent.

If special counsel Mueller believed there was an obstruction offense, he should have had the courage of his convictions and recommended charging the president. Since he wasn’t convinced there was enough evidence to charge, he should have said he wasn’t recommending charges. Period.

Anything else was — and is — a smear. Worse than that, it flouts the Constitution.
Read more here.

"A baseless, partisan investigation"

John Hinderaker writes in PowerLine,
...One of the Democrats’ basic problems is that “attempting” to obstruct the investigation doesn’t make a lot of sense. If Trump had really wanted to obstruct the investigation, he could simply have terminated it. And Mueller acknowledges that the administration fully cooperated with the investigation in every way. So the “attempts to obstruct” come down to Trump expressing outrage at the fact that a baseless, partisan investigation was hampering his administration. Arguably Trump should have brought the Mueller farce to an end, but he didn’t.
Read more here.

What is he doing?


via MOTUS A.D. commenter Son of Sobieski

"If the Democrats get their way, America will be over."

Kurt Schlichter writes in Town Hall about the three new Democratic members of Congress who are dominating the Party. of the two major American parties have fallen into these people’s hands. That’s a bad thing, and indicative of the utter moral and intellectual bankruptcy at the core of modern liberalism. We should celebrate it because the 2020 election is coming and it will be really hard for the Democrats keep a hold on the few remaining normal Americans who support the party out of habit when the collective face of the party is these three banshees cruising around cable TV and the Internet always screaming nonsense.

Can you see their planning session for last week? “I have an idea about how to appeal to normal Americans! Let’s minimize 9/11, diss a Navy SEAL who got his eye blown up by a jihadi bomb, and then pretend criticizing our idiocy is encouraging people to murder us. Oh, and let’s hate on the Jews!”

Of course, that never happened. Their plan never was, never has been, and never will be, to appeal to normal Americans. They have no interest in us, except as slaves or, more likely, as a vaguely troubling memory of a problem solved long ago. Guess how they would solve us? Not sure? Well, there’s this thing called “history,” and you can look up leftism’s track record regarding unapproved people like us unless Google is hiding the results for that too.

...Free Spirit Dancing Girl pretty much said that not agreeing with her pal was like the Holocaust; oddly, she was not roundly laughed at by our awesome elite. Chris Hayes nearly soiled himself over the threat posed by criticizing his allies. Bernie the Jolly Stalinist, sucked up. Big Chief Spewing Bull tried to get on the Commie Bachelorette Party’s good side and jumped in to chide President Trump for pointing out that maybe it’s not cool to mock 9/11. Perfectly Normal Beer-Liking Liz says that by criticizing the Democrat leadership Trump is encouraging violence against these endlessly yakking pinkos, which is weird because he didn’t send anyone to a softball field.

...This “criticizing me puts me at risk” ploy is imported from colleges where SJWs literally shake at the threat posed by ideas they dislike. The answer is, of course, for us to exponentially increase the criticism they object to. Unlike the terrified Democrats who see these knuckleheads ruining the 2020 ruse by spilling the beans and telling everyone what the party really thinks, we will continue to say whatever we please. We’ll roll the dice and take the risk.

Of course, Rep. One Who May Have Married Her Bro considers the NRA the real terrorist gang. Not Hamas, not Hezbollah – why, those are just caring folk working together for a better tomorrow. No, the terrorists are you – you just happen to be really bad at it since NRA members haven’t actually committed any terrorist acts. Whatever. Anyway, the bottom line, as if you couldn’t guess, is that she thinks that you need to be disarmed, which would probably not work out so well for you considering who she thinks should still have guns. Expect the Democrats to follow their leaders on this idea too.

But don’t expect us to.
Read more here.

"The present identity-politics divisiveness is not a sustainable model for a multiracial nation"

In PJ Media, Victor Davis Hanson writes,
...At some point, American social services will be so taxed that the system will be rendered dysfunctional -- as is already occurring in areas of the American Southwest. Or, some regions of America will so resemble the countries undocumented immigrants abandoned that there will be little point in heading north.

...Yet over the last 20 years we have deprecated "unity" and championed "diversity." Americans are being urged by popular culture, universities, schools and government to emphasize their innate differences rather than their common similarities.

...In sum, the present identity-politics divisiveness is not a sustainable model for a multiracial nation, and it will soon reach its natural limits one way or another. On a number of fronts, if Americans do not address these growing crises, history will. And it won't be pretty.
Read more here.

Do women tend to be malcontents?

Dennis Prager finally read The Feminine Mystique, written 56 years ago by Betty Friedan.
Given that the reality is that American women — especially the ones who do the most complaining — are not oppressed, we are left to conclude that the female of the human species may tend toward being malcontents. The simple-minded will respond to this exactly as they were indoctrinated to respond — not by asking, "Is it true?" but by accusing the person who offers this suggestion of sexism and misogyny.

So, allow me to respond in advance: This is no more an attack on women than describing men's nature as aggressive is an attack on men. Each sex has built-in issues that an individual has to overcome in order to develop into a mature and good person. Men have to deal with aggression and the sexual predatory aspect of male nature in order to develop into mature and good men. Women have to overcome the power of their emotions and their chronic malcontentedness in order to mature into good women. But in our disordered society — a society that has rejected wisdom — in raising their children, two generations of Americans have told only their sons, not their daughters, that they had to fight their nature. The feminization of society has brought with it the destructive notion that only males have to suppress their nature. Feminists really believe females are superior, so why would women have to fight any aspect of their inherently beautiful nature?

Finally, this helps explain why one would consider the left feminine and the right masculine. Though life in America is a blessing for the vast majority of its citizens, the left constantly complains about America. Indeed, the better America gets, the louder the left's complaints about America — about its racism, sexism, misogyny, homophobia, bigotry, xenophobia, inequality, systemic bias, etc. The right, on the other hand, regards life's difficulties as inherent to life, not inherent to America's flaws, and doesn't much complain. Like men, conservatives complain less than liberals. And just as male and female feminists demand that American men complain more — that their lack of complaining is a form of "toxic masculinity" — the American left demands that Americans complain more.

All these women's marches and angry women at colleges probably tell us more about women's nature than about American sexism.
Read more here.

A Trump 2020 landslide is coming

In PJ Media, Spengler gives us his take on 2020.
...No goofier notion ever invaded American political thinking than the idea of a coalition based on entitled victimhood and invented identity. Victimhood is inconsolable and identity is inviolable. In the weird world of intersectionality, gays have to abase themselves before blacks for racism, and blacks have to abase themselves before gays for homophobia, and everyone has to abase himself for exhaling carbon dioxide. This isn't a coalition. It's a mob of mutually irreconcilable elements as likely to turn on each other as on anyone else.

...The Reservoir Democrats are united by hatred of a third party, namely the American republic itself, as well as hatred of each other and often of themselves. Where do we find worse misogyny than in raps about "bitches" and "Ho's"? Where do we find worse homophobia than in Muslim regimes that execute gays? Where do we find classists more arrogant than the liberal environmentalists who are willing to wipe out the livelihood of working people because of their fanatical belief in computer models? Long before these hyenas have finished ravaging the American body politic they will turn on each other. They already have.

A Trump landslide is in the making for 2020.

With the lowest rate of African-American unemployment in history, and wages rising fastest at the low end of the spectrum, a lot of blacks will vote for a president who improved their circumstances.

A lot of legal Hispanic immigrants will vote for a president who wants to protect them from unfair competition from illegal workers, and protect their communities from the social pathologies arising from illegal immigration.

A lot of gays will vote for a president who stands up to Muslim regimes that murder gays, and to apologists for Muslim terrorists who shoot up gay nightclubs.

A lot of Americans will stop believing the liberal media who assured them daily that proof of Trump's collusion with Russia would appear momentarily.

And a lot of Americans will turn away in revulsion from a Democratic Party that eschews any criticism of the likes of Rep. Ilhan Omar. The Dumbocrats don't learn. From the outset, a clear majority of voters has supported Trump's restrictions on travel from Muslim-majority countries. Rep. Omar is a millstone that Nancy Pelosi has hung around her neck. Browbeaten by the loonie left in her own party, Pelosi has no choice but to identify with the odious Omar, claiming to CNN just this morning that Omar is "not anti-Semitic." Omar says that Jews "hypnotized the world" and bribe Congress with "Benjamins" ($100 bills). If that's not anti-Semitic, I'm the Dalai Lama. We may not be a land of geniuses but we're not complete idiots, either.

All of this adds up to a Trump landslide and a miasma of liberal misery unlike anything we've seen since the great days of the Gipper.
Read more here.

Holy Petrol?

From Ace of Spades this morning:
"New Jersey Man" arrested with filled gas cans inside St. Patrick's cathedral in NYC; claims his minivan ran out of fuel

"As the man was turned, police say gasoline spilled out onto the floor. Security then notified nearby police who questioned the man outside the church and took him into custody.

"Police say the man was carrying over four gallons of gas, two bottles of lighter fluid and two butane lighters."

And he decided to pop into church with filled petrol cans for what reason, now? Just a quick benediction from a priest to spur him on the last 100 yards of his journey? Or did he want the priest to bless the gasoline? Does his car run on Holy Petrol?

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

Explaining Identity Politics

The Babylon Bee explains Identity Politics.
What does “identity politics” mean?
“Identity politics” is the term given to a popular practice in which politicians divide people into group identities and inform them that they’re victims of a shadowy, systemic, oppressive power structure, and anyone who disagrees with them on any social issue is not an individual with valid ideas worth considering but is bigoted, full of hate, and wants them and everyone in their group to die a terrible death.

Why do politicians encourage identity politics?
To position themselves at the top of the actual societal power structure.

What are some examples of identity politics?
The idea that being against abortion means you’re “anti-women,” for example. Or that being against the Obergefell decision makes one “homophobic.” Or that having a different view on immigration makes one “racist.” Or that thinking there are inherent differences between males and females makes one “sexist.”

You didn’t mention transgender people in your examples. Are you transphobic?
See, you’ve got it.

Why would people want to label those who disagree with them horrible things in order to not have to listen to what they say?
Have you ever tried to have a discussion with someone you don’t agree with? It’s very triggering.

This seems to be at odds with the important virtues of free speech, due process, and individual rights.
Oh, but it feels so good.

Has there been much pushback against the practice of identity politics?
Yes. One example is sitting in the Oval Office.

Have we seen the political ideal that “the group” is more important than “the individual” implemented on a large scale before?
There are a few examples from the 20th century that you learned about in world history class.

I don’t agree with The Babylon Bee‘s analysis of identity politics.
Then you are brimming with deep-seated hatred for Christianity and your opinion doesn’t matter. Good day!

Comey's spying clarification

From the Babylon Bee:
WASHINGTON, D.C.—After Attorney General Barr suggested that the FBI and other agencies spied on Donald Trump's 2016 campaign, former FBI director James Comey fired back.

"We did not spy," he told reporters as he stretched for his morning yoga class. "We just observed and reported secretly without the subject's knowledge or consent."

"See, I've never considered that spying," he added as he formed the "downward dog" pose. "That's just kind of secret watching. It's definitely not the same thing. When you spy, you watch someone without their knowledge. When you secret-watch, you just kind of secretly watch them."

"If we redefined spying to include all secret watching, we would have to include all the watching of American citizens on a daily basis as spying, and that probably wouldn't be good for our public image."

He then asked reporters if they would take a picture of him looking pensively up at the trees.

"She is a public figure and deserves no special dispensation from debate."

In the Federalist, David Harsanyi writes,
Democrats have spent the past two-plus years accusing the president of the United States and his allies of seditiously conspiring with our enemies to destroy “democracy.” For the most part this fairytale has been cynically deployed by politicians to undermine the legitimacy of a Republican presidency, yet millions of Americans now believe their votes were upended by a foreign power. There is no more serious charge against an elected official than treason.

Then again, for decades before the 2016 election, Democrats argued that Republicans were literally killing their fellow Americans when cutting taxes, murdering the sick when rejecting nationalized health care, and sentencing the poor to death when rejecting socialist schemes. Not to mention suppressing the minority vote when asking for ID, engaging in Nazi-like actions when enforcing existing border laws, and destroying the world when failing to embrace a takeover of the economy. And so on.

...Do reporters and columnists consider the safety of the Trump administration before writing critically about them? I hope not. Because free speech—political discourse and good faith political reporting included—shouldn’t be inhibited by prospective actions of third-party nuts. It is imperative, in fact, that we don’t let those nuts undercut our ability to freely express our political disagreements. If Americans pondered the actions of political terrorists every time they took a position, they would only be empowering criminals.

...Let’s remember one of the times we actually saw overt political violence was when progressive activist and Bernie Sanders campaign volunteer attempted to assassinate the entire Republican congressional delegation. As far as I can tell, no one in the media asked Sanders or any other Democrats to temper their political rhetoric about Republicans. If the reverse had occurred we would have been plunged into a national discussion about right-wing rhetoric. (Wait, what am I saying, Republicans are already asked to take responsibility for violent actions of people who have nothing to do with them!)

...Of course, the notion that someone’s color or ethnicity or religion offers them a dispensation from the political debate is one of the most destructive aspects of this debate.

Democrats chose to rally around Omar, celebrating her immigrant story and appearing with her on magazine covers. Now those Democrats are compelled to cover up and rationalize her comments (though we shouldn’t underestimate how popular some of her anti-Jewish tirades and ugly views of America are among progressives). There is no freshman-level Marxist gobbledygook or conspiracy theory that Omar won’t regurgitate, from claiming that the US was “founded by genocide” to claiming that American power is built through “neocolonialism” to embracing morally decrepit ideas about the Middle East and Jews.

...Now, they’ve moved onto covering for her with “fact checks” and feigned indignation. It is clear to me that Omar was minimizing 9/11, as she does Islamic terrorism in general. It’s clear to me she is a defender of theocrats and an apologist for terror organizations like Hamas. You might disagree. You can view her comments and decide for yourself. Whatever the case, threats of violence against politicians are illegal and should be condemned by any decent person. In the end, though, whether Omar has increased threats against her or not, she is a public figure and deserves no special dispensation from debate.
Read more here.

"38% of Americans believe reality is real!"

The headline is a quote from Ace of Spades, who links to a Politico article quoting the results of a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll in which 38% of Americans believe Trump was spied on.
Read more here.

Tuesday, April 16, 2019

Obama administration's spying on Donald Trump

In the New York Post, Andrew McCarthy explains how the Obama administration spied on Donald Trump before and after the 2016 election. Read more here.

Tiger's final holes en route to Masters championship

Spin and hype

In the Federalist, Mollie Hemingway reports that Barr and Rosenstein
went through the report, consulted with department officials, applied the principles of federal prosecution that guide decisions about whether to charge someone with a crime, and “concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.”

They went out of their way to say this wasn’t because he was a president, and it wasn’t even just because there was no actual collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election, but because Mueller had failed to show the things that would be necessarily proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish a crime had been conducted. Those things they’d have to prove are that Trump tweeted and engaged in other actions with “corrupt intent,” and that the obstruction had a sufficient connection to a “pending or contemplating proceeding.”

...The special counsel was imagined as an “insurance policy” to help undermine the administration of the Department of Justice and possibly impeachment. This report will seek to accomplish that goal, even with no indictments. Expect the media to spin and hype whatever they can out of the report, as per usual.
Read more here.

Preventing the public from understanding

In his Morning Report, JJ Sefton writes in part,
...the redacted Mueller report is set to drop on Thursday, and the geschrei from the Democrat-Left-Media Complex persists. It's a coverup, Barr is in cahoots with Trump and Mueller not saying anything about obstruction proves Trump's guilty. Of what, no one knows, nor does it matter, of course. What matters is now that a majority of Americans can see that the past two years were nothing more than a witch hunt and persecution of an innocent man and his allies, the Left will do whatever it can to prevent the public from understanding that all of it was engineered by Clinton, Obama and their allies in the national law enforcement and intelligence communities (aided and abetted by our so-called allies abroad) who nakedly abused their power to sabotage the Trump campaign and to overthrow his presidency.
Read more here.

An aside on Assange

Ace reports that Assange got booted out of the Ecuadorian embassy after
embarrassing pictures of the socialist president of Ecuador, whose first name is actually Lenin, were leaked, showing him in swank hotel rooms with beds loaded with expensive items from the room service menu.

President Lenin Moreno blamed Assange for the hacking and leaking of these personal travel photos, though I don't think there's any real reason to suspect that.

An accident?

A map of churches that were vandalized in France in 2018

Co-blogger CBD reports in the Ace of Spades blog,
According to the French police, 875 of France's 42,258 churches were vandalized in 2018. And who is being blamed? "Militant Secularism."

I didn't make that up!

Until last evening I was unaware that there was a powerful movement of secularists ready to do violence to combat the rampant spread of religion through France. Of course, the pesky little fact that the number of religious Frenchmen is shrinking rapidly, and has been for years, is conveniently ignored, as is the fact that France is already a carefully secular country, where even marriages are separated into two distinct events...the civil and the religious.

Maybe there is a deep vein of hatred for organized religion in France. Anything is possible, except of course Islamic terrorists starting the fire! The immediate rush to claim that it was an accident when the fire was still smoldering seems to me more of the same cowardly insistence that Islam is a "Religion of peace," and blaming Muslims for the terrorist acts committed by their coreligionists is Islamophobic and awful and oh so un-Western.

Do I think Notre Dame was torched? I have no idea, but in the current geopolitical climate, in which attacks on Western religious and cultural icons are an important part of the playbook of militant Islam, one would think that an investigation that does not include a priori assumptions is a good thing.
Read more here.

Monday, April 15, 2019

"Once, the FBI fought organized crime. Then the FBI became organized crime."

That is the comment made by Glenn Reynolds as he provided a link to an article by Roger Kimball in American Greatness. Roger writes,
Think about it: without Nunes we wouldn’t know that “Susan Rice, Obama’s National Security Adviser, spied on members of the Trump campaign before the election and then unmasked their names with the likely knowledge that they would be leaked—which they were.” Pause for a moment to think about that. The national security advisor for one administration spied on members of her political opponents in a presidential election and then unmasked their identities and made sure their names were leaked to the press.

If you don’t find that breathtaking you have become too inured to living in a banana republic.

...without Nunes, “We would not have details about the plot in the FBI and DOJ to use the phony dossier paid for by the Clinton campaign, created by Democratic party-aligned opposition research firm Fusion GPS, and circulated by an associate of Republican senator John McCain.”

Savor that tidbit as well: a dossier of unverifiable gossip secretly commissioned and paid for by one campaign covertly injected into the intelligence apparatus of the United States to justify a counterintelligence investigation against an opposing campaign. And note the role of the late “maverick” John McCain, surely one of the most disgusting political actors in recent American history: it was at his request that Christopher Steele wrote the final installment of his vampire fantasy, a.k.a., “the dossier,” and it was through McCain’s intervention that the dossier was given to the FBI and emunctory media outlets like BuzzFeed.

...As I have been saying for a couple of years now, this is the biggest scandal in American history. It dwarfs Watergate. Indeed, it challenges the fundamental integrity of our democratic—i.e., accountable—institutions. It challenges, too, the sacrosanct ideal of the separation of powers. Finally, it challenges the presumption of basic fairness and open competition without which our republic could endure in name only.

Anyone who cares about future of our political system, be he Democrat or Republican, owes Devin Nunes thanks for his efforts. And that debt has just been compounded with Nunes’s announcement that, “now that we have an attorney general,” i.e., William Barr, not Jeff Sessions, he is sending eight criminal referrals to the Department of Justice.

...A Lengthy List of Suspects
But who do you think makes the list? Were I a modern-day Koko, my little list would include former CIA Director John Brennan, an implacable enemy of the president and a good candidate for the title of fons et origo of the Trump-Russia investigation.

It would include the FBI’s Peter Strzok, Andrew McCabe, and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former acting attorney general Sally Yates, Bruce Ohr and his wife Nellie who (unbelievably) actually worked for Fusion GPS.

That other James, the oleaginous James Comey, former Director of the FBI, would certainly be on the list, as would several people in the Obama Administration: the aforementioned Susan Rice, for example, and former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, who, like Rice, did a lot of unmasking in her final months in office.

...But the scary bottom line is this: over the last couple of years, one political party, aided and abetted by a compliant media and a deep-state bureaucracy, conspired to void the results of a free, open, and democratic election because they disapproved of the people’s choice.

What just happened in the United States represented an existential threat to the integrity of our institutions. It happened because highly placed individuals had cultivated a sense of entitlement and presumption of higher virtue—what James Comey called a “higher loyalty”—which they believed exempted them from the constraints and procedures that the rest of us must observe. They broke the law because they believed that they answered to a “higher” law. Out of such convictions are revolutions born and countries destroyed. The best safeguard against it happening again—indeed, against it continuing on now—is to hold those responsible to account. It is too early to say whether that will happen.

As I say, some of my friends think it would be a bad thing for the country to pursue high-profile indictments. I, on the contrary, thinking about what the country has just been put through, believe that our best hope of preventing this from happening again is to make an example of those who, smitten with the delicious sensation of their own virtue, did their best to reverse the results of an election because a candidate they did not like had the temerity to win.
Read more here.

Slave markets in Libya: thanks Hillary and Barack!

WR Meade writes in American Interest,
From Responsibility to Protect to Slave Markets
If a Republican President had invaded Libya and overthrown its government, then left bloody chaos, terrorism and rampant arms smuggling behind, our courageous press corps would be all over the story like a chicken on a June bug.

But fortunately all this happened under President Obama, so we don’t hear all that much about it. And when we do, nobody tries to assign blame to the arrogant ignoramuses who “organized” this disaster.

But the latest news, that slave markets are now operating in Libya, where desperate black Africans are being bought and sold as slaves, ought to trigger some kind of response. The Guardian:

The north African nation is a major exit point for refugees from Africa trying to take boats to Europe. But since the overthrow of autocratic leader Muammar Gaddafi, the vast, sparsely populated country has slid into violent chaos and migrants with little cash and usually no papers are particularly vulnerable.

One 34-year-old survivor from Senegal said he was taken to a dusty lot in the south Libyan city of Sabha after crossing the desert from Niger in a bus organised by people smugglers. The group had paid to be taken to the coast, where they planned to risk a boat trip to Europe, but their driver suddenly said middlemen had not passed on his fees and put his passengers up for sale.

“The men on the pick-up were brought to a square, or parking lot, where a kind of slave trade was happening. There were locals – he described them as Arabs – buying sub-Saharan migrants,” said Livia Manante, an IOM officer based in Niger who helps people wanting to return home.

She interviewed the survivor after he escaped from Libya earlier this month and said accounts of slave markets were confirmed by other migrants she spoke to in Niger and some who had been interviewed by colleagues in Europe.

Again, if Republicans were responsible for this it would be the Biggest. Disaster. Ever.

As it is: crickets.

How illegal immigration has affected life in central California

Victor Davis Hanson writes in American Greatness,
In an age of 500 sanctuary city and county jurisdictions, few illegal aliens believe they will ever be deported permanently, even if they have been apprehended committing serious crimes. There is also a general perception among would-be illegal entrants that prominent Democrats and progressives welcome their massive influxes as useful and will do their best to ensure illegal immigration continues unabated.

...How Illegal Immigration Changes Us
Illegal immigration and its effects on a community are incremental but steady. This past week, two miles from my home, an illegal alien fled the scene of an accident that he had caused, which killed a pregnant Mexican-American and critically injured her 11-year-old daughter. He is still at large. Within a 100-mile radius of central California, at least five citizens were killed by illegal alien gunmen in the last four months. When I go to town to drop off dry cleaning, I rarely hear English spoken. Almost all the stores in the shopping center (where I have gone for 50 years) have Spanish names. Few English signs are apparent or needed.

The formerly rich diverse community of Japanese-, Armenian-, Basque-, Portuguese-, Mexican- and Scandinavian-Americans have long since vanished. I stopped riding a bike in my rural environs four years ago, given the packs of unlicensed and unvaccinated dogs, and the owners' indifference to their attacks on passersby. From experience of driving each week across the Central Valley to the California coast, I assume that about one of every 20 cars at rural intersections will run the stop sign. I make the further assumption that if I am hit, the driver of the other car may well flee the scene and has no license, insurance or registration—and has never felt any real need to obtain them.

In my immediate rural environs, there is now the following: 1) an illegal dump of various junk, wrecked cars, and discarded household items; 2) a strange open-air vacant storage lot dotted with porta-potties, trailers and assorted junk spread over five acres; 3) a bizarre sort of camp, in which lean-tos, shacks, and tents are hidden among an old persimmon orchard, where no one quite knows how many such structures are hidden inside the mysterious grove; 4) a permanent hanging gardens of Babylon-type of yard sale where a home’s trees and bushes are littered with hanging clothing and flotsam and jetsam, some of them rotting from the recent rains; 5) a former backyard that is now a small goat mart; 6) an unlicensed, ad hoc outdoor barber shop; 7) an unlicensed, ad hoc outdoor daycare center.

...the avenue where I have lived for 65 years in terms of the fundamental metrics of civilization—sanitation, single-family zoning, building codes, mosquito abatement, dog licensing and registration, and sanctions for illicit activity—has regressed a half-century or more.

Officials apparently assume that visiting these places can become a lose-lose-lose situation: the miscreant will not comply with citations, the bureaucratic costs of enforcement are not offset by collectible fines, and the touchy subject of illegal immigration may earn either unfavorable press coverage or censure from politically sensitive county and local officials. In other words, we are a world away from Nancy Pelosi’s gated Napa estate, or Dianne Feinstein’s $40 million hilltop Pacific Heights mansion but not from the results of their ideology.

...If one reads either the local or regional papers, it is composed of stories about one of three themes.

One, the disturbing litany of DUIs, gang stabbings and shootings, fatal hit-and-run accidents, police shootings of armed suspects, high-speed chases, robberies, and drug busts.

Two, there are also many human interest inspirational stories of illegal aliens from Mexico who are running successful businesses, whose children are star athletes or students. The subtext is not that they are doing the exceptional things other Americans are not doing, but that they merit special attention and approbation because of their immigrant status and the obstacles they have overcome.

Three, the grievance or victimization meme: the lawsuit against law enforcement, the filing of a bias claim against the county, the firing of an official for some alleged insensitivity, or the injustice of some agency that has curtailed support from, tried to deport or was somehow biased against, an illegal alien.

The point is, that unlike the past, almost every new story is grounded in some sort of overt ethnic context, and ultimately related to illegal immigration and its effects.

Latino and Hispanic citizens, to the extent that they identify as such, may in the American Southwest be the key to the future of illegal immigration. So far, they have put up with higher taxes, swamped social services, gang activity, hit and run accidents and subpar schools that are the wages of illegal immigration, on the theory of ethnic solidarity and of general sympathy with the underclass of which many now in the middle class were once a part.

But no one wishes to have a neighbor who is an MS-13 member, or schools where non-English speakers hold back collective learning, or to be hit by an unlicensed driver who flees the scene. For successfully assimilated Hispanics there is a growing resentment that they are being used to support political agendas that are not conducive to improving the quality of life in their own backyards.

Translated that means, for example, that California’s high income, sales, and gas taxes, along with sky-high housing, electricity, and gasoline costs, do not make one sympathetic to millions who arrive illegally and without English skills or a high school diploma but with plenty of instant needs for state services.

In sum, either when Mexico resembles California, Texas, Arizona, or New Mexico, or when these border states resemble Mexico, then illegal immigration will likely cease.

...The other day I noticed for the first time that I have a lot more fear of an oncoming car in rural California than I had of intersections in Libya; a lot more worries about a wild stray dog wandering into my yard than I did while living in Greece; a lot more anxiety of being shot or robbed than I did when visiting the current Middle East; and a lot less hope of being treated promptly in extremis at the local emergency room than I would have expected in Eastern Europe.
Read more here.

McConnell is out of touch

In PJ Media, Rick Moran asks,
Why Is Mitch McConnell Telling 2020 GOP Candidates to Run 'Independent of Trump'?

I believe that if the election were held today, Trump would win in a landslide. Read more here.

A measles outbreak in Madagascar has killed more than 1,200

Zack Budryk reports in the Hill,
A measles outbreak in Madagascar has killed more than 1,200, with much of the island lacking the resources to combat the disease, according to NBC News.
Read more here.

An anti-American activist

In the American Spectator, Jed Babbin is no fan of Julian Assange.
The example of Assange’s behavior that defines him and WikiLeaks was WikiLeaks’ March 2017 publication of a substantial portion of the computer hacking tools that the CIA uses to conduct espionage abroad. The “stories” were published in WikiLeaks’ “Vault 7.” They weren’t news stories revealing what the CIA was doing: it was the computer software itself — the lines of code — that were being used.

The difference there was rather than publish news about the CIA’s behavior and the targets against which the tools were employed, Assange and WikiLeaks published the actual computer software. Doing so gave every adversary — nations, terrorist networks, and others — information which they could use to protect themselves against U.S. espionage.

WikiLeaks isn’t a news publication but a cyber bulletin board on which any leaker can have America’s most closely-guarded secrets published. Assange isn’t a journalist: he’s an anti-American activist whose mission in life is to damage the United States. As Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said when he was CIA director, WikiLeaks functions as if it were a “non-state hostile intelligence service.”
Read more here.

Crying to the Social Media Hall Monitors

With regard to Ilhan Omar's whining about the president's tweet, Ace of Spades replies,
I'm sure most of you know the game here: the crybullies of the left engage in never-ending harassment and incitement themselves, and then when anyone stands up to them and claps back, they begin crying to the Social Media Hall Monitors that they're being "threatened" and "harassed" and they want their bullies deplatformed.

Bear in mind, these claims of fear of "incitement" come from people who have called Trump a traitor and actual Russian agent for two and a half years and from people who use network television resources to incite people to "punch Nazis" (spoiler alert: all Trump voters are Nazis) and to actually assassinate the president.
Read more here.

China's Concentration Camps

Isabel Van Brugen reports in the Epoch Times,
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is scanning Xinjiang residents’ phones for foreign social media apps and throwing those with the apps into Xinjiang’s vast network of “vocational re-education centers,” according to a Uyghur living in the region who says he has risked his life to share photos of the facilities on Twitter.

“If you got Twitter or Facebook in your phone, you will be sentenced to 15 years in concentration camps,” he said.
Go here to read more.

The Notre Dame Cathedral is on fire in France

Part of the spire has collapsed. Ace has a live feed here.

How to get on the New York Times best seller list when you are number 1,030 on Amazon

Ace of Spades reports, Valerie Jarrett's Book Makes the Corrupt New York Times' Bestseller List -- Despite Being Ranked 1,030 on Amazon


Ace links to this article by Luke Rosiak in the Daily Caller. "Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett’s book is number 1,030 on Amazon with only three reviews, but is on the NYT Best Seller list. An industry insider said that was "inconceivable" and that Jarrett likely paid a company that helps authors buy their way onto the list.

One such company buys 10,000 copies of an author's book and tries to prevent bestseller lists from realizing the sales aren’t organic, in which case the book may be moved down or taken off the list.

There were 12,600 reported sales of Jarrett’s book, enough to rank it highly on the Publishers Weekly chart, but Publishers Weekly did not put it on its list at all.


"Given the organic sales of that book and the fact that during the entire week of rollout it barely cracked the top 100 on Amazon, there's no way the book should have a place on the NYT Best Seller list. Inconceivable," one prominent book industry insider, speaking on condition of anonymity, told The Daily Caller News Foundation. "There's likely an effort to game the system, it's the only explanation."

Jarrett's book outsold all but the top four books on the NYT list, according to BookScan, which tracks sales figures. But instead of putting it at number five, the Times placed it lower, including behind one book billed as "a behind-the-scenes look at the daytime talk show 'The View,'" which is seventh.

"It should have been number five, except they excluded a big chunk of her sales for being sketchy. They've declared shenanigans," one longtime book editor told TheDCNF also on the condition of anonymity."

Ace concludes,
The New York Times uses certain bookstores for its list. I think this is how they keep conservatives off the list -- when you're sampling a dozen bookstores in New York and other leftwing cities, Bill O'Reilly books aren't going to be high on the list.

The bookstores the Times samples aren't known to the public -- supposedly. But I've read that these strategic book-buying companies actually do know which book stores matter for the list, and buy from them. It's the equivalent of rigging a poll's sample.

Would any sane person want to take part in this extreme nonsense?

Thanks to Greg Agard

Too much of a good thing

Via Oregon Muse

Showing respect for a listener

via 90 Miles from Tyranny

Sunday, April 14, 2019

Six ways the Obama Administration spied on the Trump campaign

Jasper Fakkert reports in the Epoch Times,
At this point in time, at least six different methods that the Obama administration used to spy on the Trump campaign have been made public:

1. FISA Warrant: Former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was targeted with a FISA warrant by the FBI in October 2016. The warrant was subsequently renewed three times for 90-day periods. Other members of the Trump campaign might have had FISA warrants on them, as well.

2. Unmasking: Hundreds of so-called unmasking requests were made for the identities of members of the Trump campaign in intelligence reports. The House Intelligence Committee has so far identified Obama’s national security adviser Susan Rice, Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power, and former CIA Director John Brennan, as having filed such requests.

3. Undercover Informant: The FBI used Stefan Halper, an undercover agent, to infiltrate the Trump campaign. He contacted Trump campaign associates Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. Halper has ties to the CIA, as well as MI6.

4. National Security Letters: The use of national security letters to target the Trump campaign was first revealed by officials to The New York Times in a May 16, 2018, article. National security letters allow the FBI to secretly subpoena customer records from banks, phone companies, internet service providers, and others.

5. Foreign Intelligence: British intelligence agency GCHQ provided officials within the CIA with information on the Trump campaign as early as late 2015, The Guardian reported in April 2017. Then-head of GCHQ Robert Hannigan also provided Brennan with sensitive information on the Trump campaign on a “director level” in the summer of 2016.

6. Reverse Targeting: Brennan admitted in an Aug. 17, 2018, interview with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow that the CIA had obtained the communications of Americans associated with the Trump campaign through what appears to have been the use of reverse targeting. “We call it incidental collection in terms of CIA’s foreign intelligence collection authorities,” Brennan said.
Read more here.

"What is going on here?"

In National Review, Andrew McCarthy asks why isn’t Assange charged with ‘collusion with Russia?’
In a nutshell: Knowing that Russia had the capacity to hack the DNC and perhaps Clinton herself, WikiLeaks urged it to come up with new material and vowed to help bring it maximum public attention. By necessity, this desire to hurt Clinton would inure to Sanders’s benefit. And sure enough, WikiLeaks eventually published tens of thousands of the Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence.

...First, why was there no Sanders-Russia probe? Why, when President Obama directed John Brennan, his hyper-political CIA director, to rush out a report on Russia’s influence operations, did we not hear about the WikiLeaks-Russia objective of helping Sanders win the Democratic nomination? Brennan & Co. couldn’t tell us enough about our intelligence-agency mind readers’ confidence that Putin was rootin’ for Trump. Why nothing about the conspirators’ Feelin’ the Bern?

Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think there is any basis for a criminal investigation of Senator Sanders. But there appears to have been no criminal predicate for a “collusion” investigation of Donald Trump, either — not a shred of public evidence that he conspired in the Putin regime’s hacking, other than that presented in the Clinton-campaign-sponsored Steele dossier (if you can call that “evidence” — though even Christopher Steele admits it’s not). Yet, Trump was subjected to an investigation for more than two years — on the gossamer-light theory that Trump stood to benefit from Moscow’s perfidy.

A more serious question: Why hasn’t Assange been indicted for criminal collusion with the Kremlin — the same hacking conspiracy for which Mueller indicted the Russian operatives with whom Mueller says Assange collaborated? The same conspiracy for which the president of the United States, though not guilty, was under the FBI’s microscope for nearly three years?

The most striking thing about the Assange indictment that the Justice Department did file is how thin it is, and how tenuous. Leaping years backwards, ignoring “collusion with Russia,” prosecutors allege a single cyber-theft count: a conspiracy between Assange and then–Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning to steal U.S. defense secrets. This lone charge is punishable by as little as no jail time and a maximum sentence of just five years’ imprisonment (considerably less than the seven years Assange spent holed up in Ecuador’s London embassy to avoid prosecution).

...espionage charges are time-barred. Which brings us to the possibility — perhaps even the likelihood — that Assange will never see the inside of an American courtroom.

As I pointed out on Thursday, the 2010 Assange-Manning cyber-theft conspiracy charged by prosecutors is outside the standard five-year statute of limitations for federal crimes: The limitations period was already exhausted when the indictment was filed in 2018. To breathe life into the case, the Justice Department will have to convince both British and American judges that this comparatively minor conspiracy charge is actually a “federal crime of terrorism,” triggering a three-year statute-of-limitations extension.

Adversary countries are a security challenge, not a law-enforcement problem. Because they don’t have to surrender their officials for an American trial, an indictment is a pointless gesture. But now, having with great fanfare filed charges against Russia that implicate Assange, the government shrinks from lodging these same charges against Assange — who, unlike the indicted Russian officials, may be in a position to put the government to its burden of proof. This just makes Mueller’s indictment of Russians look more like a publicity stunt than a serious allegation. If the government is afraid to try the allegations against Russia in court, people will naturally suspect the allegations are hype.

...Meanwhile, let us remember: Despite a dearth of evidence that he was complicit in Moscow’s hacking, President Trump was forced by the Justice Department and the FBI, urged on by congressional Democrats, to endure a two-year investigation and to govern under a cloud of suspicion that he was an agent of the Kremlin. Now we have Assange, as to whom there is indisputable evidence of complicity in the hacking conspiracy, but the Justice Department declines to charge him with it — instead, positing the dubious Manning conspiracy that may very well be time-barred.

What is going on here?
Read more here.

"Raised by their parents without any manners and educated by their educators without any education!"

Tiger Woods wins the Masters

TTiger Woods won the Masters today. Read more and listenhere.

What needs to happen in order to expose the corrupt schemers of spygate

In the Conservative Treehouse, Sundance lays out what needs to be released
the entire corrupt construct is exposed….
Read more here.

"The hunters are about to become the hunted!"

Joe DiGenova writes in the Epoch Times,
Those responsible for the two-and-a-half year witch hunt against the President of the United States must now realize they’re about to be put under the microscope themselves.

...If I were John Brennan, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce Orr, Andy McCabe, or any of the other Obama administration officials involved in the “counterintelligence” spying that fueled the discredited Russia collusion conspiracy theory, I’d lawyer-up, because this will be intense for the snake-oil merchants who brought disgrace to the most revered investigative and law enforcement agencies in the world.

The hunters are about to become the hunted, and no amount of sympathy from Democratic politicians and media talking heads will save them from the wrath of the American people they’ve been lying to for the past two and half years.
Read more here.

Ilhan Omar's upbringing in Somalia

J. Michael Waller reports in the Center for Security Policy,
The election of Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) is often seen as a celebration of diversity: An immigrant from the wasteland of Somalia, and one of the first two Muslim women, elected to the United States Congress.

Omar personifies the Red-Green Axis: an ideological and political combination of Marxism-Leninism and Islamism.

A look at Omar’s upbringing is a key to identifying her extremism, and where she wants to take the country that took in her and her family.
Read more here.

"You think you're getting another pair of socks, and yet there it is, a pony delivered right to your house!"

"How can the presence of immigrants perpetuate fear? Immigrants aren't dangerous. They told us that a thousand times!"

"An avalanche is coming!"

Contemplating treason

Don Surber clarifies,
Let me make this clear: President Donald John Trump is not answerable to the FBI. The FBI is answerable to him.

It is not an independent agency but rather a government bureaucracy under command of the nation's chief executive. He in turn is accountable to Congress and the America people.

McCabe and his co-conspirators contemplated treason.
Read more here

Saturday, April 13, 2019

Three prominent conservatives attacked for their beliefs in one day!

In Big League Politics, Tom Pappert reports that three prominent conservatives were attacked for their beliefs just yesterday. Read who they were here.

What is worse for the environment, plastic grocery bags or paper grocery bags?

In NPR (of all places), Greg Rosalsky reports,
Plastic haters, it's time to brace yourselves. A bunch of studies find that paper bags are actually worse for the environment. They require cutting down and processing trees, which involves lots of water, toxic chemicals, fuel and heavy machinery. While paper is biodegradable and avoids some of the problems of plastic, Taylor says, the huge increase of paper, together with the uptick in plastic trash bags, means banning plastic shopping bags increases greenhouse gas emissions. That said, these bans do reduce nonbiodegradable litter.

A 2011 study by the U.K. government found a person would have to reuse a cotton tote bag 131 times before it was better for climate change than using a plastic grocery bag once. The Danish government recently did a study that took into account environmental impacts beyond simply greenhouse gas emissions, including water use, damage to ecosystems and air pollution. These factors make cloth bags even worse. They estimate you would have to use an organic cotton bag 20,000 times more than a plastic grocery bag to make using it better for the environment.

...The most environment-friendly way to carry groceries is to use the same bag over and over again. According to the Danish study, the best reusable ones are made from polyester or plastics like polypropylene. Those still have to be used dozens and dozens of times to be greener than plastic grocery bags, which have the smallest carbon footprint for a single use.
Read more here.

Unpardonable sins

Jonathan Turley opines in USA Today,
Assange committed the unpardonable sins of embarrassing the establishment — from members of Congress to intelligence officials to the news media.

...For years, the public has debated what Assange is: journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange is first and foremost a publisher.

Moreover, he was doing something that is usually heralded in the news media. WikiLeaks disclosed disclosed controversial intelligence and military operations. It later published emails that showed that the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton lied in various statements to the public, including the rigging of the primary for her nomination. No one has argued that any of these emails were false. They were embarrassing. Of course, there is no crime of embarrassing the establishment, but that is merely a technicality.

...A glimpse of that artificial scope was seen within minutes of the arrest. CNN brought on its national security analyst, James Clapper, former director of national intelligence. CNN never mentioned that Clapper was accused of perjury in denying the existence of the National Security Agency surveillance program and was personally implicated in the scandal that WikiLeaks triggered.

Clapper was asked directly before Congress, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” Later, Clapper said his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make.

That would still make it a lie, of course, but this is Washington and people like Clapper are untouchable. In the view of the establishment, Assange is the problem.

So on CNN, Clapper was allowed to explain (without any hint of self-awareness or contradiction) that Assange has “caused us all kinds of grief in the intelligence community.” Indeed, few people seriously believe that the government is aggrieved about password protection. The grief was the disclosure operations and controversies long unknown to the American people. Assange will be convicted of the felony of causing embarrassment in the first degree.

Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs. Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance of the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however, could well do time.

With Assange’s extradition, all will be well again in Washington. As Sen. Manchin declared, Assange is their “property” and will be punished for his sins. Once he is hoisted as a wretch, few will again entertain such hubris in the future.
Read more here.


M.O.T.U.S. salutes President Trump on his brilliant idea to resettle "refugees" in sanctuary cities here.

"The crimes were committed by the people who instigated this investigation!"


John Leonard writes in American Thinker,
In 1972, Republicans were caught using former CIA operatives to spy on their political rivals. In 2016, Democrats have now been caught using active FBI and senior Department of Justice employees to spy on President Trump. It is no longer debatable whether or not it happened, because A. G. Barr just told us it happened. The only question that remains is whether or not they had any sort of justifiable reason for doing so, except that question seems to have already been resolved by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, because his report found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. In fact, the opposite appears to be true -- it looks as if federal agencies conspired with foreign governments to entrap peripheral members of the Trump campaign.

Heads need to roll. Maybe even literally. This appears to be the crime of sedition, the act of conspiring to incite rebellion against the authority of our government. If it could be proved that a foreign government had been involved in the conspiracy, the crimes involved might even rise to the level of treason. Sedition is bad enough.

At the heart of the Watergate scandal was a bungled burglary. No one got hurt. If Nixon hadn’t tried to obstruct justice, his presidency might have survived the scandal. Watergate is about to become ancient history because it pales in comparison to what the Obama administration just did. Innocent American citizens have had their lives destroyed in a criminal attempt to topple the Trump administration. Let’s recap how it happened.

To the surprise of pretty much everyone except Donald Trump, he rose to the top of the field and became the Republican nominee. Despite Bernie Sanders appearing to win most of the primaries and having the enthusiasm of most liberals behind him, Hillary Clinton became the Democratic nominee because the fix was in before the votes were cast. While working for the Democratic National Committee and campaign of Hillary Clinton, Marc Elias (from the law firm Perkins-Coie) hired Fusion GPS to create opposition research now commonly known as the “Steele dossier,” a collection of memos full of salacious unsubstantiated rumors and ridiculous claims that only a gullible maverick like Senator John McCain would believe. Fortunately for the conspirators, McCain passed the dossier over to James Comey at the FBI, giving the Obama administration an excuse to open a counterintelligence investigation into Trump even though they knew the “information” originated from the Clinton campaign and was unverified.

...Although President Obama frequently claimed he never knew about anything until after he’d seen it in the news, he might not be able get away with pleading ignorance this time. According to texts sent between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, President Obama wanted to know everything they were doing. In contrast, Nixon didn’t find out about the Watergate break-in until after it had already happened.
Read more here.

History in the making

In the American Spectator, George Parry asserts that the day of reckoning is at hand.
As we now know, in sworn testimony given in the United Kingdom, not even Christopher Steele would vouch for the dossier’s accuracy. And equally damaging, in testimony before Congress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page stated that, contrary to standard FBI procedure in counterintelligence operations, the Trump campaign, purportedly the target of Russian infiltration, had not been warned of the Kremlin’s nefarious efforts because the FBI did not deem the Steele dossier reliable enough to compel such a warning.

Page’s testimony sets up an irresistible line of inquiry. If the dossier was not reliable enough to justify a warning to Trump’s campaign about the Kremlin’s plot, how could it even remotely serve as the basis for obtaining FISA warrants to spy on the campaign? By her benighted testimony, Page has framed the issue nicely and invited a full vetting of who, what, where, when, why, and how the dossier was used to dupe the FISA court.

Barr also made clear that, beyond the FBI and Justice Department, the investigation will also be looking at “intelligence agencies.” This makes sense given that low-level Trump campaign associates such as George Papadopoulos and Sam Clovis were approached by foreign operatives with CIA ties in an effort to plant the seeds of the Trump-Russia collusion illusion. As for the FBI, Barr made clear that, while he does not think that there is an “endemic” problem at that agency, he thinks that “there was probably a failure among a group of leaders there, at the upper echelon.”

No kidding.

And, of course, any investigation into the spying must logically and inexorably lead to the clandestine state-sponsored plot to unwind the 2016 election and remove President Trump from office. In short, the subject matter of any proper investigation will necessarily encompass the first attempted coup d’├ętat in our nation’s history.

So here we are. After suffering through Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ comatose stewardship of the Justice Department, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s underhanded machinations, and Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s protracted rearguard action to protect the anti-Trump deep state conspirators, the day of reckoning is at hand. Attorney General Barr’s testimony portends a long overdue cleansing of the government temple the likes of which has never before happened in this country. This will be history in the making.
Read more here.
George Parry is a former federal and state prosecutor who practices law in Philadelphia. He is a regular contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer and blogs at He may be reached by email

Bill Priestap's testimony

In Real Clear Investigations, Eric Felten reveals
recently released testimony that ex-FBI official Edward William Priestap provided to Congress in a closed-door interview last summer.

...his testimony contains extensive indications of wrongdoing, including that the FBI and DoJ targeted Trump and did so with information it made no effort to verify. It paints a portrait of the Obama-era bureau as one that was unconcerned with political interference in investigations and was willing to enlist the help of close foreign allies to bring down its target. And, perhaps presaging a defense to Barr’s claim that American officials had spied on the Trump campaign, it showcases the euphemisms that can be used to disguise “spying.”

...The political abuse foremost in Republican minds was, and remains, that collection of howlers and hearsay allegedly compiled by Christopher Steele, who was sold to the public as a high-minded former British spy instead of a man being paid by the Clinton campaign to dirty up Trump. Steele’s efforts were lapped up by the FBI and DoJ even though the lawmen knew Steele was peddling political work-product — opposition research paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

...So what did we learn from Bill Priestap’s compendious and revealing testimony?

We learned that the FBI and Justice targeted and took action against Trump.

We learned that the FBI, according to Priestap, is incapable of securing a FISA warrant with information that isn’t credible, although the judge’s approval of the warrant means by definition that the information is credible.

We learned that the FBI believes political interference in an investigation can be proper as long as the bureau isn’t acting purely politically.

We learned that the FBI did send at least one asset to do to the Trump campaign an activity that even the bureau would call “spying” — if it were done by foreign operatives.

We learned that the origins of the Trump-Russia tale will never be fully understood until the part played by British intelligence is made clear.

That’s an awful lot to take away from one largely neglected transcript. But it suggests just how much remains unknown about the Trump-Russia investigation while providing a glimpse at the people that want to keep it that way.
Read more here.


The dam is about to break!

From Director Blue:
As a public service for long-time viewers of CNN and MSNBC who were shocked to discover that the two-year-long narrative of Trump-Russia collusion was a total and complete hoax, the following tidbits may help in your red-pill journey:

Did you know that Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan, was a Communist and, according to a former FBI agent, is a convert to Islam?

In court proceedings in the UK, Christopher Steele, the man behind the “Russian Dossier”, has admitted under oath that the entire document was “unverified material" and expressed shock that it was made public by BuzzFeed.

Remember when Rep. Adam Schiff published a response to the “Nunes Memo”, outlining how the DOJ and FBI really didn’t violate any norms, laws or protocols in spying on the Trump campaign (and, later, the administration)? Guess what? Now that the transcripts of DOJ/FBI officials are becoming public, it turns out Schiff’s document is filled with lies and misstatements. Exhibit 1: Schiff’s claim that the “Collusion” probe was opened in July of 2016. This appears to be a direct lie, as both The New York Times and Rep. Devin Nunes have confirmed that the secret investigation into Trump began in “late 2015, early 2016”.

Obama-era FBI director James Comey also apparently lied about when the investigation began. Like his disgraced, fired FBI deputy Andrew McCabe, Comey is reported to be the subject of a criminal referral for perjury and leaking of classified information.

Stay tuned for more, my fellow open-minded liberals. The dam is about to break.

She learned this in college!

From the satirical Babylon Bee:
HOLLYWOOD, CA—Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was pumped to attend a taping of The Price Is Right in Hollywood this week. The special guest introduced herself as a U.S. representative and rising star of the Democratic Party. Things got interesting when the game began and every time it was her turn to estimate the price of an item her answer was "free."

Items included a set of Italian leather handbags, an all expenses paid trip to the Bahamas, and a brand new 2019 BMW 330i, at all of which Ocasio-Cortez shouted, "FREE!"

When host Drew Carey asked if Ocasio-Cortez understood the game's rules, she told Carey not to cat-call her and then responded, "Don't hate me cause you ain't me."

She went on to guess that diamond earrings, a set of jet skis, and even a giant pile of cash were all free. Carey unveiled a package containing world-class healthcare and she said, "Definitely free." She was at one point puzzled by a stack of croissants but eventually guessed that they also were free.

Cortez was never able to advance to the game proper, and as the credits rolled she appeared visibly upset. A hot mic picked up comments she made in frustration, claiming that the game was rigged by capitalism and that "everybody knows giant piles of money are free, that's like basic economics 101".


Guest post by Suzann Darnall

“Givers have to learn to set limits because takers don’t have any.”

Hard-working Americans really need to learn the truth behind political language. Especially when it comes to the phrases “government funded” and “free”. There is no such thing as “government funded” or “free”. Both are “taxpayer funded” and often come at quite a cost to the citizens who are being robbed of their hard-earned monies to allow politicians to make campaign promises and buy votes without actually paying out anything but lip service!

If every hard-working American citizen would automatically think “taxpayer funded” when they heard or read or saw the phrases “government funded” or “free”, they might be less inclined to support those politicians who constantly preach a litany of all the government is going to provide for “free” to their constituents. ‘Cause maybe if hard-working citizens think “taxpayer funded” they will realize that the monies are coming out of their pocket, their paycheck, their spending money, their savings, their investments, and their children’s inheritance. Particularly since the government not only taxes us while we live, they essentially tax us after our deaths, and sometimes they tax each dollar more than once!!!

Perhaps I am especially sensitive to the tax issue at present ‘cause we are coming upon the dreaded Ides of April, also known as Tax Day. April 15th. When our tax returns must be filed with the IRS. Income Revenue Service. Or, as my hillbilly ancestors most likely referred to them, Revenuers. Personally, I see no service involved. I see only government basically stealing our monies to give to others. Not only do we pay income tax, we can be hit with audits, fines, and even criminal charges. Sometimes for simply not understanding a tax code so convoluted that the IRS does not even know how to explain portions of it! On top of that, in this day and age, very little of the monies collected are actually used for keeping us or our communities safe. How can it be when there is pretty much a Congressional Hush Fund for paying to make sex scandals go away??? And, that is not the only money waster we support.

Anyway, back to “free” or “government funded” versus “taxpayer funded”. A favorite here is “free tuition”. A pet project for politicians and activists on the Left. Excuse me? Colleges are not giving education away. I find this is kinda funny considering that so many academicians are supporters of “free” education and “free” tuition, yet they are not willing to work for “free”. They seem to keep insisting upon salaries, which means somebody has gotta pay the bills. Even for the “free” tuition recipients. Again, this most often means the American taxpayers.

Even the student loans are now, all too often, falling upon the backs (and wallets) of the taxpayers. Student loans are being forgiven or defaulted with regularity. Which means that those who assumed the loans are not paying back the dollars that were lent to them. They have basically stolen that money. Quite often that money came from the taxpayers in one way or another. Yes, even student loans are pretty much “taxpayer funded”.

Even so-called public education is not “free”! Yes, it is true that people send their children to public schools and do not pay fees or tuitions. But, it is taxes which support those schools and pay those education employee salaries. So, again, “free” means “taxpayer funded”. School bonds to finance district projects are also “taxpayer funded”, although voters do at least get a voice in whether the school bond election is passed or not.

When will the Left and the government admit that nothing is “free”! Not food, housing, healthcare, education, cellphones, or anything else. Somebody pays, which generally means the hard-working citizens. Heck, it has gotten so the government has figured out how to tax us for just about anything, including air, water, and soil. What do you think the EPA runs on??? Yep! The Environmental Protection Agency annual budget is over $8 billion. That means each American pays about $20 per year for the EPA to figure out new ways
to fine us for supposed infractions of their non-understandable codes. ‘Cause, oh yeah, we do not just fund them through the budget, we fund them through fines and fees as well.

IRS and EPA are not the only government entities which double and triple dip as they take money from taxpayers. If it is a bureaucracy it is probably getting funds through budget, fines, fees, and any other way it can grab a bit of our hard-earned money. Income is not the only tax that robs citizens - road taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, etc. Every “free” program raises the taxes that must be collected which means everything costs all of us more.

But, as we are talking about “government funded” programs, let us be sure to separate the goats from the sheep in one very particular area. When people speak of “entitlements” they often lump everything together. Let me be very clear on this: Military Retirement or Veterans Administration Benefits are not the same as Welfare. Social Security Benefits are not the same as Welfare. State Pensions or Retirement are not the same as Welfare. Government Pensions or Retirement are not the same as Welfare.

Military veterans earned their retirement or VA benefits through their service. Government employees earned their pensions or retirement through service and often from paying into a retirement system. Most workers pay into the Social Security system through payroll deductions for a working “lifetime” to earn their Social Security Benefits upon retirement. These retirees and pensioners are entitled to the monies they are paid. The “entitlement” label being used on Welfare is not at all the same thing. Welfare should not be an entitlement, it should only be a last resort for the truly needy.

I am not sure how we fix the very much broken system that is our now “taxpayer funded” free-for-all. We have too many greedy politicians, too many bloated bureaucracies, and not enough concerned voters. But, so long as American taxpayers ignore the overspending situations in government (pretty much at all levels) we will continue to lose vast amounts of our income to what amounts to little more than government Slush Funds which keep the swamps well and truly filled to overflowing with corruption, fraud, waste, and abuse.

We are quickly approaching the tipping point where taxpayers cannot pay enough in taxes to fund the ever-increasing amounts that bureaucracies are either swallowing down or throwing away. Tax and spend only works for so long. Eventually there are no more taxes which can be collected. But, will our governments ever learn to curb their spending sprees? Only if voters realize they are the citizens who are the taxpayers and that everything called “free” or “government funded” is actually “taxpayer funded”. And, citizens, even the wealthy, do not have unlimited funds for government to take. At the rate governments are spending, politicians will run out of other people’s money. In this case, my dear fellow taxpayers, we are the other people whose money they are spending!

“If too many people enjoy the free ride . . . and not enough people help pull, the wagon isn’t going anywhere.”