Washington Post Threat "No Biden, No Peace"

 

 

As disgusting as much of the media has become, the Washington Post has hit a new low. 

 

 In a new op-ed written by Rosa Brooks, a law professor at Georgetown University, the Left is telling us that unless Biden wins big, there will be a major insurrection and violence galore. Now remember, Ms. Brooks is a law professor in a major university. Based on an article she wrote for the far Left Atlantic, she's no big fan of our police either. And here, she's advocating for street violence as a tool to threaten voters. 

 Now, she doesn't exactly say so. What she hides this behind is that these are simply the results of 'research' by the Transition Integrity Project, something she cofounded. What they did was to construct series of 'war game's, hand pick some participants, and ask them to say what they would do in various election scenarios. And of course, a landslide for Joe Biden (whom she obviously supports, just like the Wapo) results in a relatively orderly transfer of power. 

Every other scenario that she'war-gamed' for the hand picked participants resulted in street-level violence and chaos. My, my. So it's quite clear that the American left is actually threatening the American public, 'vote Joe or it'll be hell.' And they're using a major newspaper to do it. 

 Actually, this is no secret. It's what the Left has been up to for the last 3 years. Now they're forewarning us directly just in case we haven't gotten the message yet. To those of us who have actually following what's been going on, this is what everything they have been doing this year has been to give a taste of what they have in store if they don't get their way. All of their behavior has been headed towards this. It's all been planned.In other words, they have had a strategy to attempt to intimidate you, manipulate you and scare you.

And now they're being open about it. Their message is simple. Just vote for Biden and get rid of Trump and you'll stay safe. Cross us, and it will be hell. If Trump gets re-elected, theyare saying, 'll be even worse than it is now. 

They're being very open about this. They’re just coming right out and telling you now that if Biden doesn't win, then your country is going to be violent and chaotic. And since this garbage was published at the Washington Post, they stand behind it.

 

 

 Will it really be that bad if Trump wins? Let's look at that. In the first place, let's remember that this stuff has only occurred in areas run by the Democrats, with mayors who handcuff their police, Governors with political reasons for letting things get crazy, and cities with far left  city councils and District attorneys who will drop charges and let violent rioters leave scot free. Many of them were bankrolled by tax free 'social justice organizations' run by George Soros. 

If you notice, there hasn't been anything like this in places with Republican mayors and city councils, governers or DA's. In Texas, for instance, there was a small fracus in Austin, definitely a blue run city. It didn't last long, the perps were promptly arrested and that was that. So what we would see,essentially is a temper tantrum in blue run jurisdictions. As a re-elected President Trump could definitely exercise the Insurrection statutes to stop it.

 We have a choice. We can cower to this blackmail and elect a figurehead President who will take his orders from his far left puppet masters. I guarantee they will destroy our economy, kill our second amendment, raise our taxes and destroy our suburban neighbrhoods and turn America into something very different in terms of our individual freedoms and liberty.

Trust me when I say that the 'safety' they're promising you will not be very safe at all. Just look at the cities they already run! They aren't very safe at all. Or we can stand up to these freedom hating, Marxist loving Lefties and keep America on the path we have already started on, one of prosperity, lower taxes, individual freedom, school choice, opportunity and policies that consider America first. Oh yes, and a president who stands up for America and is a real leader. 

 

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications

DOJ is Closing In on Spygate...and Biden Is In The Middle Of It

 

 

 The Department Of Justice Is closing in on Spygate, probably the worst election scandal in American history.

Basically, here's what happened. Former DNI Richard Grenell who had access to everything explains it quite well here in a great speech at the Republican National Convention. While the whole speech is a gem, the part on Spygate  starts at 5:40

As former DNI Grenell points out, Biden came up with the idea of targeting General Flynn, the incoming National security advisor  weeks before the inauguration. Declassified notes written by Peter Strzok proved that Joe Biden was the one who suggested going after General Michael Flynn using the Logan Act.

And exactly as Richard Grenell said, they came up with totally bogus 'evidence' from a dossier paid for by the DNC to get a FISA order to spy on the Trump campaign during the election itself. They also lied to judges and conducted secret surveillance on the Trump campaign beyond what FISA's rules call for. And the FBI, CIA and members of the Obama Administration were all part of this. 

U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is leading the investigation into the Obama administration’s spying on the Trump campaign has already gotten a guilty plea out of former former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted to altering evidence that the FBI used to get a FISA warrant extension for another 90 days to continue spying on the Trump campaign.

The FBI even admits they acted wrongly. FBI Director Christopher Wray has agreed there was illegal surveillance on the Trump campaign.

Think about that for a moment. Here we have the lame duck administration of a Democrat president spying on the candidate of the opposing party during an election. And using the American people's national security apparatus to do it.

This has never happened before in America's history. And it's worth  asking why this happened. Who would have given the orders for this? Would high government officials and the then vice president have done this on their own? 

Doubtful. The orders for this came from someone at the top. And it's worth recalling that this is an administration whose President was willing to weaponize the IRS,  the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, ICE and other government agencies for partisan political reasons, something else unprecedented in American politics.

It gets better. In May, declassified Department of Justice (DOJ) documents showed clearly that President Obama was aware of the illegally wiretapped conversations of then-incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak as far back as December, 2016. Joe Biden was also aware, and was present at a White House meeting where the bogus Flynn investigation was discussed. So yes, they knew.

Also, U.S. Attorney Durham is also investigating whether Obama’s former CIA Director, John Brennan, pressured the Intelligence Community into pushing the theory that Russia was trying to help Donald Trump win in 2016. That of course was bogus as well.

Actually, Putin was really hoping Hilary Clinton would win. Aside from  fact that Russian intelligence, along with Iran and the Chinese among others had already hacked into her unprotected and illegal  server and retrieved classified documents ('Come now Mrs. President. We wouldn't want to release these to the American public, now would we?') Putin had already dealt with Hillary Clinton before and knew she was easy to bend. Among other things, during her Russian 'reset', Mrs. Clinton gave the Russians full details of America's most secret anti-missile defenses, known as 'hit to kill.'

Also, Fred Fleitz,a former CIA analyst who also worked on the House Intelligence Committee accused  then-CIA Director John Brennan of suppressing the truth in a report in 2017 that alleged that  Russia backed Trump over Clinton, which contradicted a House committee report from March 2018 showing that it did not. 

As it turns out,  newly declassified intelligence of the kind former DNI Richard Grennel accused the Obama administration of classifying to hide exactly how spygate was pulled off. In this case, Flietz revealed that his sources inside the House Intelligence Committee told him “the actual drafting of the intelligence community assessment was done by three close associates of former CIA Director John Brennan who refused any evidence, even high quality evidence that suggested that Putin would have preferred dealing with the venal and self centered Clintons. This is contrary to the usual practice which makes these things a community effort of all 14 US intelligence services.

What we maybe seeing here as this gathers steam is a criminal prosecution of John Brennen for lying to congress. Of course, as a Muslim, he's allowed to lie to infidels.

Brennen has been a very interesting CIA head. As The Weekly Standard‘s Stephen Hayes reported, Brennan directed the CIA to hide most of the documents seized in the Osama bin Laden raid, because that information contradicted the Obama administration’s narrative of a “decimated” al-Qaeda, a moderate Iran, and success in fighting radical Islamist terror.

 Brennan also had the CIA force survivors of the Benghazi attack to sign non disclosure documents to silence them...at the funeral service  for the victims. 

 As I said, an interesting CIA director. Here's hoping John Durham's investigation reveals the truth.

 

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications

The Real Banana..Weekend Monkey And I Look At Biden's VP Choices

 After a long absence from the political scene, expert political handicapper and 2008 presidential candidate Weekend Monkey* joins me as we look over Joe Biden's Vice Presidential running mate choices.

Rob: Well hello Monkey, it's good to have you back.  What ever happened with that  thing in Brazil, you know where you got drunk and groped the bar maid..?

WM: Thanks, I guess.It's been awhile and I have no intention of discussing that. All they did was throw me out of the country.

Rob: What were you doing there anyway?

WM: Look, I was thinking of running for Presidente for life, OK? Didn't work out. 

Rob: It would have been interesting if it had.  So let's get down to biz and look at who Biden's choices might be. Not that he's actually going to make the choice, (chuckle)

WM: You got that right. At this point I think somebody else picks out his socks!

Rob: OK, lets begin. Let's start with Kamala Harris. Monkey?

WM: Well she's a real possibility. Biden promised to pick a woman of color who's hair he liked the smell of, and she might be it. On the plus side, she's Lefty enough to appeal to the extreme Democrat Left, and let's face it, they're running the party now.

Rob: I think she's a good possibility  but she has some problems. For one thing, she's not particularly bright, also she was involved in the criminal justice system as California's AG. She also comes across as rude and even somewhat nasty and then there's how she got into politics in the first place...

WM: Yeah, as Willie Brown's mattress even though he was married. Among Black Christians that would be a no no.  I wonder if she still has that fancy BMW he bought her? I betcha he didn't pay for it!

Rob: Also, let's face it. California is in the bag for the Dems. I used to live there not so long ago and it's voter fraud heaven. She doesn't help the ticket in that respect. Also, let's face it. Biden is a figure head. He's going to do what the puppet masters tell him to do. Kamala seems to want to be a star and might not be so good at following orders. Agreed though, she's a definite possibility.

WM: Yeah, exactly. OK, let's move on. How 'bout Karen Bass?

Rob: Well, if people want to vote for an admitted commie who actually belonged to a Sandinista terrorist group, yeah, maybe. Also, she's not as good a speaker as Kamala. And she's another California Pol. She adds nothing to the ticket in that respect. She also really favors giving people money who were never slaves by taking it from people who never owned any and other radical ideas. Although she would probably be more controlable bythe puppet masters than Kamela.

WM: OK genius, who would you pick?

Rob: I'd say Susan Rice. She'll take orders, knows how to lie and the puppet masters probably see her as reminding people of the good old 'Obama Daze.' And uh, having Gravitas...(laughs out loud)...

WM: (Laughs out loud)....'Gravitas'!!!

Rob: Yeah (chuckles) that's how they'll present it.  But she has some weak points too. For one thing, she openly lied about Benghazi and for another, she was directly involved in  the Obama Administrations attempt to use the FBI and CIA to game the FISA courts so they could spy on the Trump campaign in 2016. She was also involved in them deliberately setting up General Flynn. That will almost certainly come out. Also, I'm not sure she's openly radical enough for the Dem Left, although she certainly does hate Israel and probably Jews to a sufficient degree. I think she's going to be the one, especially because she suddenly sold off all of her Netflix stock, a move she would probably not make unless something was coming her way that required it.

WM: HMMMM.....I hadn't heard that. Yeah, she's a possibility. My money's still on  Kamala. Let's move on....

Rob: Okay, what about your old flame, Fake-a-Hontus?

WM: Lizzy Warren? Ah, those were the days.

Rob: Are you two still friends? 

WM: WHAT!! After she dumped me and fired me? Nah. But she might just be the one. She's a real far Lefty and does have a following...but after not even winning the primary in her home state of Massachusetts, I dunno. She's also a good speaker, although she come across as kinda mean. But let's be honest. The fake Native American shtick really hurt her, and besides, she's white, and I don't see her carrying any states for Biden he isn't going to get anyway. I'd say she's a maybe at best.

Rob: OK, although I think the bitter memories of your relationship with her are maybe affecting your judgement?

WM: Maybe.  She broke my monkey heart. if she does get it, I have some pictures I'm going to forward to the press...very interesting pictures.... 

Rob: What about Tammy Duckworth? I doubt Illinois will be a problem for the Dems as long as they can can mysteriously keep coming up with more Democrat votes to count in Chicago. But  she does have that war veteran thing going for her. Although considering the slovenly  way she ran the VA during the Obama years, that likely won't help with Vets although it's still a selling point to the yokels. 

WM: She's a possible, but she has some drawbacks. Like you say, Illinois will probably go Dem for the reasons you mentioned. Also, she's not black, a lot of black voters don't particularly like Asians, and her mom was Thai. But that might also bring  some Asian votes. She also was sued and had to settle a case with employees of the VA when she terminated one employee without cause and threatened and intimidated another for bringing reports of abuse and misconduct of veterans when she was head of the VA. If that comes out and is used, well....who knows.

Rob: Val Demmings?

WM: Well she'd be interesting, except that she was the former chief of police in Orlando, Florida. BLM and Antifa no like.Plus she's not radical enough.  Reeeeal long shot, pal.

Rob: Stacey Abrams? I'd call her a real long shot.

WM: And a real heavy one, ah hah hahahahah! Plus she isn't the kind to take orders. Anybody else?

Rob: What about the Black female mayors? 

WM: Keisha Bottoms had a shot but she caught corona virus. As for the others, when people take a look at how places like San Francisco and  Chicago are being run, faggetaboutit

Rob: Okay, no odds but name your top three choices. Mine are Susan Rice, Kamala Harris, and Karen Bass, ot necessarily in that order.

WM: I'd say Kamala, Lizzy, and maybe Susan Rice as a long shot.

Rob: Well Weekend monkey, interesting as always. Are you going to do a prediction of the election?

WM: Yeah, I probably will. See you then.

*Weekend Monkey was a Democratic candidate for president in the 2008 election. He also served as a key aide in Washington DC to Senator Elizabeth Warren, who's campaign he worked on. He is also a well known predictor and handicapper of elections and a commentator to this site and other media outlets. And as it turns out, he was right on this one.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications

Israel Badly Needs To Face Reality

There's a name for trying the same thing over and over again and expecting different result, thanks to Albert Einstein. It's called insanity.And sadly, we're once again witnessing the Israeli government doing just that.

Anyone who still thinks there's any life in the so called 'peace process' and the so-called 'two state solution' is playing this game and wearing blinders.

First, this nonsense has been tried several times with absolutely no success. This was what Oslo was supposed to be all about, remember? And remember how it turned out, with a terrorist squat in Judea and Samaria and one in Gaza? Exactly. 

If we look at the facts, there have been several times when the Arabs who refer to themselves as 'Palestinians' have been offered peace deals...at one time, three different Israeli left wing prime ministers offered the Palestinian Authority ninety-five, and then ninety-six percent of the “occupied” territories. And the 'Palestinians; refused, just as they're refusing now. I wonder why....wait, of course it's an easy one to figure out...this is what they really want:

Why yes! What they want isn't peace. They want no Israel to exist at all. How hard is that to figure out? OK, it's obvious They never intended at all to live in peace with the Jews. After all, they have never kept a single part of any agreement they've signed and have actively promoted terrorism in their mosques, media and schools.  Abbas habitually refers to imprisoned terrorists as 'holy martyrs' for deliberately targeting and killing Jews and Palestinian media actually encourages this...and then of course there's the money you get whether your killed or just thrown in jail, $500 and up depending on how many Jews you killed. It's a nice income by Palestinian standards.

Oslo, of course was a product of Bill Clinton, who had Arafat to the White House more than any other foreign leader.Since Labor leader Yizhak Rabin owed President Clinton for some clandestine aid in getting him elected Prime Minister, Oslo was a done deal, a terrorist enemy right next door to Israel that resulted in zero peace and a lot of dead and maimed Jews.

And guess what? Nothing, I mean nothing has changed. It wasn't so long ago that PLO leader Jibril Rajoub said openly that "If we had a nuclear weapon I'd use it on Israel tomorrow."  This is the same terrorist who the Israelis actually gave medical care to. They also gave Medical care to Abbas and to his wife. Can you imagine doing this for  someone who hates you with all his heart and wants to exterminate you?

And we haven't even mentioned Hamas yet. My point is simply this...the Arabs who call themselves 'Palestinians' have no interest in peace with Israel. We can accept that as a given, simply because it's be proven numerous times.

The latest manifestation of this fairy tale about peace is known as 'The Deal Of The Century' presented by the Trump administration. And as much as I respect President Trump, it's at least a viable attempt. But it won't ever work since its just another attempt to get the PLO to accept something they will never accept and don't want.

And frankly, as written, it's not really that good a deal for Israel. Let's look at why, shall we?

First of all,Israel is being asked to give up something it owns anyway.

The land in question is Judea and Samaria, AKA The 'West Bank' although it's only that if you're looking at it from Jordan. After WWI, the UK was given a Mandate by the League of Nations to administer all of what was then the former Turkish province known as Palestine. Originally, all of this was supposed to be the Jewish State. A couple of years later, The Brits asked the League for permission to divide the area, the reason being that they wanted a kingdom for one of the Sharif of Mecca's sons, Abdullah. He wanted Syria but so did the French, so what he got was 78% of 'Palestine' as the Arab State, Jordan which consisted of everything east of the Jordan River.  The Jews were to get the other 22%, everything west of the Jordan River for the Jewish state. This division was agreed on and signed on to by the Brits, The Jews, the Arabs and the League in 1922 in a treaty called the San Remo Accords.

The Brits saw to it that the Arabs got their state very quickly. And then proceeded to do everything they could to stop the Jews from establishing theirs in numerous ways. They deliberately limited Jewish migration to what became Israel while allowing unlimited Arab migration. This came to a head when the Brits chose to violate the San Remo accords and stopped all Jewish migration . In 1939, Britain anti-Semitic Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain issued an order not to let any Jews into Palestine at all... at a time when thousands of Jewish refugees from Germany and other countries who had fled to France and other countries had nowhere else to go.

Not content with that,  after WWII, when Labour's Clem Atlee took over, he made the decision to not allow Jews into Palestine. The Brits  even had their own concentration camp on Cyprus for any survivors of the Holocaust they caught trying to get in, and in some cases, they even sent Jews back to the very same camps in Europe they had been  imprisoned in.

In 1948, when Israel declared its independence  the UN recognized it, although  Britain didn't. The UN also made the San Remo Accords part of its charter, in Article 80...which has never been  removed or repealed.

So under international law, Everything west of the Jordan River belongs to Israel. They have no need to bargain about it or make any exchange that will only result in more terrorist violence.

 Israel lost this land for 19 years  because in 1948,  Brit PM Clem Atlee armed the surrounding Arab armies to the teeth, even though they were openly promising a second Holocaust three years after Auschwitz was liberated. Not only that, but he sent British officers to command the Jordanian Arab Legion under Colonel John Glubb, a known anti-semite. It was these officers who oversaw the ethnic cleansing of every Jew in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem as well as the destruction of many Jewish shrines and synagogues. While the UN never recognized THAT illegal occupation, they never did anything about it either.

To add insult to injury, the areas Israel is going to be allowed to regain officially involve established Israeli communities already existing  for years. You know, what the UN and EU like to refer to as 'settlements.'

In fact, most of this area was promised to Israel as part of GW Bush's 'Road Map' in exchange for giving up Gaza. These are the same commitments Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton swore didn't exist even though  they were referred to in a Bush speech and in the agreement itself. Arik Sharon, who made the agreement with GW Bush was in a coma at that point, and of course Bushie Boy kept his mouth shut.

Not only that, but the EU is threatening Israel with sanctions if they make these areas an official part of Israel. And the US is still thinking it over, whether Israel gets even this much.Some deal hmm? And here's the cherry on top. Israel has to give the PLO 4 years to decide if they'll abide by any part of this, And during those 4 years Israel is not allowed to build anything in areas they've lived in for years!

Some sovereignty!

And here's the real loser......some of the land the 'Palestinians' and the PLO would retain based on this 'deal' are within easy shooting distance of some of these Jewish communities. These attackson Jewish communities are even actually happening now in Judea and Samaria.

Second, Israel is being asked to give any 'Palestinians' living in these areas Israeli citizenship.

True there aren't that many of them, but would Trump and the US give citizenship automatically to people who had been brain washed to hate America for three generations? People who may conceivably have blood on their hands? People who in many cases have citizenship in a country that has a 'treaty' which is basically a cease fire and which still is extremely hostile to America? That's exactly the situation between Israel and Jordan. There have been numerous instances when 'Palestinians' given work permits in Israel have committed terrorism.

Third, the map lines as now drawn simply give the 'Palestinians' a closer range to shoot from. Several of the Israeli communities we're talking about would be easy targets.

And finally, Fourth,the object here, 'peace' between Israel and the PLO is a non-starter. They're not interested in peace and they never have been. It's that simple. And both the Trump Administration and Israel's current government are fooling themselves if they think this means peace with the PLO and Hamas.

Allow me to present a way to actually achieve peace that will definitely work and end this once and for all.

And the irony of it is that it could have been done years ago.

In the Six Day War, Jordan attacked Israel. The IDF pushed the Jordanian troops back across the river. At that time, they could easily have sent the 'Palestinians' who all had Jordanian citizenship back across the Jordan River as well, and this entire mess would have been avoided. However, Israel's Labor government made a mess of things. They made the mistake of thinking these Arabs would be able to live in peace with them, and it turned out to be a huge mistake.

The Israelis built virtually the entire infrastructure in Judea and Samaria....the power grid, the water systems, schools, houses, roads, sewage, irrigation,hospitals, even a university. Their reward of course was that first Intifada. They definitely should have seen that coming.

The way to finally solve this problem is to do what should have been down back in 1967. Simply move the Arabs who call themselves 'Palestinians' across the river, perhaps with cash settlements for people who can actually prove they purchased and own property. This  is certainly more than the Arabs gave the almost one million Jews they ethnically cleansed from the Arab world after 1948. They plundered them for everything they had and these Jews left with the clothes on their backs. 

Jordan of course would not like this but there's not much they could do about it, especially since they have already agreed to abandon all claim to Judea and Samaria. Jordan's  midget King Abdullah would also be upset because many of these  people tend to cause problems where ever they go...Iraq, Kuwait,Lebanon, Egypt and yes, Jordan, which Arafat almost took over in 1970's Black September.

Odd, isn't it? All refugees are supposedly taken care of by UNHCR(also known as the UN Refugee Agency) except one...the almost 1 million penniless Jews ethnically cleansed by the Arab world in1948.Most of them ended up living in tent cities in Israel.  They never received a dime except from Jewish charities. President Trump, to his credit, mentioned this in his peace plan, although without actually suggesting any, kind of payback by the countries involved in stealing well over a billion and a half dollars US in property, homes, businesses, bank accounts and personal property according to the most conservative estimates.

Oh, but wait, there's another group the UNHCR doesn't handle They're handled by one of the UN's biggest and well funded sections,  UNRWA which is solely devoted to the care and welfare of these alleged 'Palestinian' refugees many who left willingly under orders from the Arab States attacking Israel and their leader, Haj Amin al-Husseini. Except these refugees were never refugees at all! In 1954, the Jordanian Parliament gave Jordanian citizenship to all of them including the ones in the UNRWA facilities. And even UNRWA's first American Chief Executive to the US Congress admitted that since they didn't bother checking, many of these 'refugees might never have lived in 'Palestine' at all, but were given food, lodging etc anyway. And unlike any other group of refugees, the train just keeps on rolling.

These people supposedly 'fled ' from Israel 72 years ago but the UN makes sure their refugee status is hereditary! No other group of refugees gets this kind of gravy train. Could it be because they picked the right enemies, the Jews?

I have to give President Trump credit for finally ending US funding of UNRWA. Among other things, UNRWA's schools teach 'Palestinian' kids to hate Jews and that terrorism against Jews is a holy act that will make them 'holy martyrs' as Abbas calls them.  UNRWA has even been caught hiding terrorists and arms in their schools, Mosques and other buildings. 

In short, Jordan is the Arab 'Palestinian' State and the Jordan River the logical and legal boundary between that and Israel. It's time Israel realized  this, instead of wasting time with so called peace plans that have never and will never work.

It's time Israel faced reality.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications

To A Friend

Hi Louie,

The Email I have on file with you is no longer good. Please send another comment with your correct email so I can respond. It won't be published obviously, but at least that way we can correspond.

All Good Things,

Rob

If They Win In 2020, The Left Will Steal Your Home And Destroy Your Neighborhood

From this to this....👇

The American Dream has always been to own a home of your own in a decent neighborhood.

Do you own a home? Like your neighborhood? Guess what?  The 2020  election will decide if you are able to keep your home and what happens to your neighborhood.

The radical Left which now controls the Democrat Party has some plans for your home and your neighborhood if they get elected.

Let's start with Joe Biden's 2020 platform. It calls for ending suburban American communities by flooding them with forced low-income housing into every neighborhood and flooding them with immigrants, legal or otherwise.

This is the Biden-Sanders Unity Task Force Recommendations, which would  give instant amnesty and a pathway to U.S. citizenship for the 22 million illegal aliens now living in America. And guess what, it would  also give legal status to any 'refugees' that want to come here whether their claims are legitimate or not.

But wait, there's more.

The Biden platform will also put Barack Hussein Obama's Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rules into practice. It would force communities receiving any federal funding, including FEMA disaster aid  to abide by strict rules mandating  "proactively examine housing patterns and identify and address policies that have discriminatory effects.”

The AFFH was a rule added by former President Barack Obama to the 1968 Fair Housing Act. Once revived by Joe Biden if he's elected, it is going to radically undercut the political and economic Independence of America’s suburbs...and that includes your neighborhood.

Or in other words, if your neighborhood doesn't pass their mandatory diversity  test, (and I'm sure you can imagine what that entails) you will be forced to do so...and this could include eminent domain on private houses, including yours,  to ensure that they're available for the government's preferred groups. Need I say more?

President Trump managed to curtail and make certain reforms to most of this, but of course those changes would all be rolled back in a Biden administration.

Think I'm kidding?

Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez attacked “homeowners” just yesterday,  saying that they are hurting people that can’t afford to own land. Her rant comes as her fellow squad member congresswoman Rep. Ilhan Omar proposed a bill that would strip property owners of their property if the federal government deems it necessary. 

The law will put control of nearly every small town, local, municipal, and state powers and responsibilities under the power of federal control. That includes schools, police, housing and much more. It destroys zoning laws. If local governments don’t go along, the government will cut off all funds and very probably will use the Biden Department of Justice to file suit aganst communities and evenindividual home owners to make them comply.

The bill would also cancel all rent and mortgage payments regardless of income or employment throughout the duration of the Corona  pandemic.

And a  fund would be created “to fully finance the purchase of private rental properties by non-profits, public housing authorities, cooperatives, community land trusts, and states or local governments — in order to increase the availability of affordable housing . Guess who's going to pay for this...you are especially if you own a home. You are.

As socialists and communists like to say, 'Property is Theft...unless it belongs to us'!

You see, the Left doesn't like single family housing. They want people in multi family dwellings to give them more control of how you live. Essentially, they see middle class homeowners as Kulaks.*

The platform also states Biden would: “Ensure effective and rigorous enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. Hold financial institutions accountable for discriminatory practices in the housing market.

As the platform states:

"Democrats will vigorously enforce the Fair Housing Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and hold lenders accountable for discriminatory practices. We will use the federal government to enforce settlements against discriminatory lenders, and require communities to proactively review housing patterns and remedy local policies that have a discriminatory effect. Democrats will give local elected officials tools and resources to combat gentrification, penalize predatory lending practices, and maintain homeownership, including exploring targeted rental relief when exorbitant rent increases force long-term residents from their communities and tackling persistent racial bias in appraisals that contributes to the racial wealth gap.

As someone who made a successful career in Real Estate, allow me to translate what this will mean.

Home loans used to be underwritten based on the borrower's credit record, what were known as 'ratios' meaning what  the amount of the mortgage payments would add to already existing debt the borrower had and whether the borrower would b e able to afford to make all of his payments and not default. Another factor was the borrower's overall credit record...things like consistent late payments, items at collection agencies, foreclosures, repos, things like that. Job history and length of time on the job would also be looked at. In other words, to avoid having to foreclose, lenders would underwrite to make sure the borrower was likely to  repay the loan and had the income to afford to pay the mortgage along with any other debts they had. It was sound, common sense and it worked.

That ended thanks to changes in the laws during the Clinton and Obama Administrations that forced lenders to make loans to people who didn't meet sound underwriting standards and had poor credit. These new standards were based a great deal on exactly what the Biden platform plans to base it on....the borrower's race and/or ethnicity.  As I'm sure you'll remember, this led to a lot of  bad loans and foreclosures. And when these bad loans were bundled with other loans and sold on the secondary market (Which is what banks do with them normally) it contributed a great deal to the 2008 recession. And the banks didn't pay for it, you did. President Barack Hussein Obama simply raised the maximum amount Government financed FHA and  similar loans could be financed at to allow a lot of these bad loans to be refinanced at little cost to the owners, but at the expense of  the taxpayers.

Let's look at the rest.

'Gentrification' merely means that as a neighborhood gets nicer and more desirable, the price to live there increases. The Biden plan is to allow Left wing goons like the current mayors of various blue controlled cities like Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, New York, Chicago and Los Angeles legal tools to prevent those neighborhoods they and their cronies don't live in from becoming nice and desirable places to live. What they will use is forced low income multi family dwellings, housing projects, mandatory rent control where it doesn't already exist and eminent domain to take over houses occupied by people they feel aren't entitled to 'privilege.' They will then use their own city employed  appraisers to decide what the owners will be paid and I guarantee you, it will be less than market value. Some of this has already occured in some Blue run cities.

Picture how your own  your own neighborhood will change once this goes into effect. Living in the same area with a housing project and what that usually brings in terms of crime, vandalism, a drop in property values and a general lower standard of living...and especially think about it in terms of defunding your police department, something that's also on the way if these people get in power.

It will also result in a lot more difficulty in even finding housing, unless you're one of the preferred groups of people this is aimed at. And thanks to corporate America gobbling up homes and renting them out, owning your own home might just become a dream denied. 

A Trump administration might abrogate this. A Biden Administration assuredly won't.

Even though the voters in California voted down  a proposition on the ballot for mandatory rent control, the Democrat controlled state legislators simply voted it into law. Ask anyone you know who lives there how hard it is to find housing. Also, since the new Biden program will be exploring targeted rental relief when exorbitant rent increases force long-term residents from their communities.   In other words, if you have rental property you will not be able to decide what your property will rent for, whom you may rent it to or whether you can increase the rent to compensate for increased property taxes. Which are definitely on the way

Another thing about appraisers...notice this: tackling persistent racial bias in appraisals that contributes to the racial wealth gap.

Appraisers are trained and licensed  professionals. They use standardized  methods to come to an opinion of value which includes using other similar property sales in the area to determine value of the property in question, and they are strictly regulated.   What the new Biden platform plans to do is to force them to lower sales values so that the favored ethnicity can buy your house...because it's racist for you to own property anyway, right? And of course you will have to settle for what these diversity appraisers say your property is worth, even if the house next door almost exactly like yours sold for a lot more before the Dems took over.

This is part of what's at stake in the next election among other things. Think about it when you vote, not just for president but for congress and your state legislators and governors. Your home and your neighborhood are at stake.

*Kulaks are what the Communists called the prosperous middle classes of professionals, artisans, shop keepers and  wealthy and successful farmers who employed hired labor or their own possessed farm machinery. They were treated as oppressors and class enemies and were forced to give up their 'privilege.'

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications

Murder Most Foul- Black Trump Supporter Murdered Execution Style

60-year-old Bernell Trammell owned a small store in Milwaukee. He was kind man, well liked in his neighborhood, a religious man who did some street preaching. He was also a Trump supporter. That got him murdered. 

This is a man who worshipped G-d and a man of faith. You can hear it in his voice. In a video shot near his store, Bernell Trammel said the following: “I am Bernell Trammell, I am at my office at the Expressions Journal publication, and I am encouraging afro-Americans from all walks of life and culture here in Wisconsin, particularly here in Milwaukee, to vote Donald Trump for this year, Trump 2020.” This was just a few hours before he was murdered. He also made a Facebook post showing him carrying the same 'vote for Donald Trump sign.'

Here's what one of his neighbors posted onTwitter about him. " Bernell Trammell was shot in the head execution style broad daylight yesterday in front of his store. He was a God fearing Trump supporting man. Was it because he was a Trump supporter? He didn't look for fights, he lived a good life. Sick and sad! "

Wisconsin Senator RonJohnson also had something to say about this:

Bernell Trammell was known to many in Milwaukee. My condolences to his family and friends. I hope they get answers and justice soon.

Will they? Perhaps. But since no one else had any reason to kill Bernall Trammel, he was obviously murdered because of his political beliefs. They simply decided he was one Black life that didn't matter and since he was well known and respected in his part of Milwaukee and might influence people, they killed him.

We live in an age when expressing your views freely, the basis of our First Amendment only applies to

the Radical Left. Even in our neighborhoods, people realize that supporting President Trump with a bumper sticker or a lawn sign can get your car or home vandalized. Even worse is the way sports teams, colleges, certain city and state governments, many corporations, Hollywood and most of our media cowardly adhere to this Orwellian punishment for thought crimes.

Not only can it get your property vandalized or get you socially ostracized, it can get you fired from your job for the least infraction. It can even get you seriously injured or killed.

This needs to be stopped, or it will destroy our country and melt away our freedoms.

On Bernall Trammel's sign in front of his store, one of the signs mentions Matthew 16 verse 3 and urges us to discern the signs of the times:

And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven.  He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’

And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

Very appropriate. We had better start learning to interpret the signs of the times....and start taking action accordingly

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.

Gettysburg- A Fourth of July Long Ago

(reposted by request)

Two years, ten years, and passengers ask the conductor:What place is this? Where are we now? I am the grass.Let me work. - Carl Sandburg

One hundred and fifty five years ago today, brave men fought in and around a small town in Pennsylvania to determine whether the Union would endure or whether it would not.

The Battle of Gettysburg broke the tide of the advance of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia and while the war itself didn't end for another 22 months, Gettysburg decided the outcome.

Lee's objective was psychological as much as strategic. By 1863 there was substantial sentiment in the North to allow the Confederacy to go its own way and end what had become an increasingly bloody, unpopular and costly war. By subjecting the North to the same sort of invasion the South had been subjected to - in essence, bringing the war home - Lee hoped to increase this sentiment and force the North to negotiate a settlement.

Gettysburg was very much an accidental battle. Neither side was really looking to fight here, but the armies accidentally collided, largely because Lee was deprived of Jeb Stuart's cavalry in the early stages of the battle and thus lacked his usual awareness of where the Union forces were. Once the initial impact was made,on July 1st 1863 in a battle between Brigadier General John Buford's Union cavalry division and two corps of Union infantry and two large Confederate corps that attacked from the north and northwest under General Richard Ewell, the armies came together and the battle was on.

An astounding fact about Gettysburg is that the victorious commander of the Union forces, General George Gordon Meade, had only been in command of the Army of the Potomac for a scant three days, after General Joseph Hooker was relieved of command. Meade was caught by surprise with the sudden collision of the two armies, but he reacted with coolness and unexpected courage at several points when the battle could very well have been lost with a different sort of general in charge.

The missing man at Gettysburg, one who might very well have altered the course of the battle and of history was Confederate General Stonewall Jackson, who was accidentally killed by his own troops after his amazing victory at Chancellorsville.

The key to Gettysburg was the control of the high ground, the hills and ridges outside the town. After Gen. Buford's troops were scattered into the hills that first day of battle, they could easily have been driven out of the high ground with an assault by the victorious Confederates, and had Stonewall been in command there's no doubt he would have driven his troops to do exactly that, digging them in on the high ground and reinforcing them with Longstreet's divisions to wait for General Meade's Union Army to come at them. Gettysburg would then have been a very different battle. But the troops Jackson would normally have commanded were under the command of General Richard Ewell.

General Ewell, even after he was ordered by Lee to take the Union position on Cemetery Hill "if practicable" chose not to make the attack. There's no question that Stonewall Jackson would have ordered his troops to take the high ground and dig in to wait for the main Confederate forces which were coming to the ridges from the  west. In that case, it would have been the Union forces attacking uphill at an entrenched Southern army backed up by dug in  artillery. The battle coud verywell have ended quite differently.

When Ewell finally did attack, on the second and third day of the battle, it was the Union forces who were reinforced and dug in and the Confederates who were forced to assault them. Ewell's hesitancy likely cost the South the battle.

On the second day of the fighting, July 2nd, General Lee sent General Longstreet's divisions against the Union Left flank in an attempt to roll it up and knock the Union forces off of the high ground. Meade sent reinforcements to the Left flank to shore up positions that later became legendary - the Peach Orchard, the Wheatfield, Plum Run Valley and the Devil's Den. The Union forces held on in spite of horrendous casualties. One of the most amazing exploits of that day happened in the defense of Little Round Top, where Colonel Joshua Chamberlain, a former college professor in command of the 20th Maine maintained a precarious hold on the Union's extreme left flank under assault from General John Hood's troops.When the 20th were almost out of ammunition, Colonel Chamberlain led them in a surprise bayonet charge downhill that swept the Confederates off the hill, saved the position and likely the Union, a deed for which he later won the Medal of Honor.

On the third day, July 3rd, Lee decided to risk everything on a frontal assault on the right center on the Union lines, and 12,500 Confederate troops advanced from the ridge line three-quarters of a mile (1,200 meters) towards Cemetery Ridge in that gallant attempt to reverse fortune known to history as Pickett's Charge.

It was a slaughter. The Union artillery had deliberately held its fire during the Confederate bombardment prior to the Charge, but as the Confederate troops approached they were hit with fierce artillery fire from Union positions on Cemetery Hill and north of Little Round Top, and from the Union center. Nearly one half of the Confederate troops who participated in the Charge failed to return from the attack. Somehow, some way, Confederate General Lewis Armistad's brigade managed to make it through the withering fire and briefly breach the Union lines at a place called the "Angle", a place with a low stone fence near a small wooded area. But they were quickly hurled back, and with that, the battle was essentially over.

After the battle it rained, something that occurred frequently enough to give rise to a belief among soldiers on both sides that the smoke and gunpowder somehow brought on the weather.

The two armies, both licking their wounds and having been through almost more than men should be able to bear gazed at each other across the field of battle on that long ago July Fourth. On both sides combined, there were over 50,000 casualties from three days of battle.

Late in the evening, Lee began the torturous retreat southwards. Did he understand at that point that the war was lost? Perhaps, since he was recorded as telling his troops "This is all my fault." We have no way of knowing. But on that July Fourth, one nation's hopes for independence were doomed and another nation's hopes reaffirmed.

After the battle, there were huge amounts or corpses that needed to be disposed of, and the Union decided to make the site a national cemetery, for convenience as much as anything else. Four months after the battle, on November 19, the cemetery was dedicated, and a ceremony was held.

The main speaker was a nationally known orator, Edward Everett. In those days of oratory as a national sport, he was expected to deliver a real rip snorter of a speech, and he reportedly did just that.

Oddly enough, Everett's isn't the speech that's remembered.Almost as an afterthought, the organizing committee invited President Abraham Lincoln to participate a scant two weeks before the ceremony, where they requested that he appear and "make a few brief remarks to honor the occasion".

So after Edward Everett finished his speech, which clocked in at close to an hour, the President rose and delivered those few brief remarks, ones that started with "Four score and seven years ago" and have come down to us through the mists of history.

Gettysburg today is a living version of Sandburg's poem, in a way. The grass has done its work,but much of the original landscape has been altered and it takes some effort to visualize what happened there. To do that, you have to go there when its quiet and listen to the ghosts. Trust me, they're there in abundance and they'll tell you the whole story if you feel like listening.

Best wishes for a wonderful July Fourth...and take a moment to remember and honor the ghosts of July Fourths past. They deserve that much, at least.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.

Boris Johnson - Just Another Cowardly, Empty Suit

When Boris Johnson first became the UK's Prime Minister, my original opinion was that he would finally see Brexit completed, deal with the migration problem and put the UK back on the right path. Yes, he fooled me too, although given the alternative of a Labour Party with anti-semitic Jeremy Corbyn, Boris Johnson was the best choice available.

It has turned out that the difference isn't all that much, really.

Bojo has done little or nothing to deal with the UK's problem with violent migrants. In fact, none other then Nigel Farage has actually filmed the UK authorities allowing boatloads of Muslim migrants shipped across the Channel by France into Britain with virtually no vetting.

Crime in London continues to skyrocket, and Mayor Sadiq  Kahn of course has done little or nothing to stop it. Nor have London's police, who are obviously under orders not to do so. Just recently, the Antifa and Black Lives Matter rioters took a large part of the city apart. 

Enoch Powell

In the latest dust up, the mob was allowed by the police to do quite a bit of  beating down on anyone they wanted to as well as a lot of looting and destruction,  vandalizing statues of Queen Victoria, Lord Nelson, one of King James II, George Washington and Winston Churchill as well as a number of historic buildings like the Cenotaph War memorial, The National Gallery,  The police essentially ran away as themob chanted "Run piggy run.". Those who attempted to stop the carnage were assaulted by the mob which had no fear of them at all.

And why would they? London’s assistant commissioner for police Anil Kanti “Neil” Basu said he would “probably” have joined Black Lives Matter protests himself if he was not a police officer. That even though 60 of his police officers were injured by the rioters, some of them quite seriously.

And Boris Johnson's comment on the vandalizing of a statue  of one of Britain's greatest leaders? "Churchill sometimes expressed opinions that were and are unacceptable today.”

 Like perhaps Churchill's assessment of Islam? Sheer cowardice on Bojo's part, but this fits in with Mayor Kahn's new campaign to 'diversify the landmarks of London.'  And believe,that's not all that's being 'diversified' in London as well as other cities in Britain.

And remember Boris Johnson's talking about a new and better relationship with Israel? Don't bet on it. He's proved himself to be basically a more sophisticated and smoother version of Jeremy Corbyn.

His latest stunt is to  join other hostile EU countries in  threatening Israel with sanctions if Israel applies Israeli sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and parts of Judea and Samaria where Israeli cities exist..the opposite of what he said before.

MP Crispin Blunt, a  member of Bojo's own party put this together in collusion with something called the Council for Arab British Understanding. There's no question this was done with Bojo's consent.

Blunt was one of 130 British parliamentarians who signed a letter to Johnson in May urging him to impose sanctions on Israel if it moved ahead with its sovereignty plan.

Bojo's remarks at question time about this? Here they are:

“I believe that what is proposed by Israel would amount to a breach of international law and we strongly object to it, and we believe profoundly in a two-state solution and will continue to make that case.”

Sanctions then?

My, my! First of all, Israel didn't propose this. President Trump did as part of his peace plan.

Second, according to international law, ALL of Judea and Samaria (AKA the West Bank to the uninitiated) belongs to Israel.  And Britain happily signed on to that.

In 1922, Britain, as the  Mandatory Power appointed by the League of Nations decided to ask for permission to divide the Palestine Mandate into two parts, one for a Jewish state the other for an Arab state because they wanted to reward Abdullah, one of the sons of the Hashemite Sharif of Mecca with a kingdom.*

This new treaty,the San Remo Accords was ratified  between Britain,the League, the Jews and the Arabs, It stated that the Jews would receive everything west of the Jordan River (22%) and the Arabs  would get everything east of the Jordan River(78%). The Brits made sure the new Arab  kingdom, named Trans-Jordan was quickly created. After which they went out of their way to prevent the creation of a Jewish state in numerous ways.

The most disgraceful of these was to prevent Jews from migrating to Palestine while allowing unlimited Arab migration. In 1939, Neville Chamberlain, a known anti-semite issued an order not to let any Jews into Palestine at all... at a time when thousands of Jewish refugees who had fled to France and other countries had nowhere else to go. He also  appointed a rabid Jew hater and Nazi Ally, Amin al-Husseini as leader of the Palestinian Arabs. During WWII, when Israel's Jews fought with the Allies, Husseini was in Europe recruiting Bosnian Muslims for Hitler's armies and translating Mein Kamph into Arabic.

After WWII, when Labour's Clem Atlee took over, he made the decision to allow Husseini back into Palestine. At the same time, the Brits were still not allowing Jews into Palestine, and even had their own concentration camp on Cyprus for any survivors of the Holocaust they caught trying to get in, and in some cases, they even sent Jews back to the very same camps in Europe they had been  imprisoned in.

In 1948, when Israel declared its independence  the UN recognized it, although  Britain didn't. The UN also made the San Remo Accords part of its charter, in Article 80.

So according to international law, the area in question all belongs to Israel.

When the Arabs made it very plain in 1948 that they intended a jihad to get rid of the Jews, the UK, which when it pulled out left a number of strategic areas like the Taggart forts in Arab hands They also armed the Arab nations involved and in the case of Jordan, even sent  officers to command them under Colonel John Glubb, a notorious anti-semite. In other words, three years after Auschwitz was liberated, the Brits were  aiding and abetting what could have become a second Holocaust. 

As for the two state solution, aside from the fact that's already been tried and has utterly failed, there is no reason for it since Jordan exists and most of the Arabs who started calling themselves 'Palestinians' after the'67 war have Jordanian citizenship, including the so-called refugees, They've had it since 1954, courtesy of Jordan's parliament. And that includes Mahmoud Abbas.

If the Brits want to give these people a country so much, perhaps they should hand them a piece  their country. Why not? Parts of it are already filled with Muslims, there are already sharia courts, more mosques than churches, honor killings, sex grooming gangs, acid throwing etc. and the Brits don't seem disposed to change any of  that.So they'd be right at home

As for Boris Johnson, he's essentially just another Theresa May with a penis.

He is obviously not the solution to what's ailing Britain, although it seemed like it at the time.

It's obvious to me that the solution is more like this....and I hope the Brits wake up.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.

Corparate America Caves... Half a Billion to Antifa And Black Lives Matter

A number of the businesses you might currently patronize hate you. They have bowed to pressure and are cringing, so they've  coughed up $454 million to support Black Lives Matter and their Antifa allies.

What that means, of course, is that they are more than willing to back rioting, anarchy, pogroms against Jews and the complete destruction of law and order. It means they no longer care about you and have taken sides against you,your businesses, your homes  and your families. It means they consider our Constitution so much toilet paper and our freedom unimportant.

This resembles nothing so much as the German companies who jumped on Hitler's bandwagon after he took power and they rushed to give the Nazis money so they could get in on the gravy train and by protection for themselves. It resembles the way America's treasonous  Tories behaved  during America's revolution and founding.

It means they have taken sides in what amounts to a war. It means they support racism, anti-semitism  and anarchy. And they foolishly believe that bribing BLM and Antifa will buy them protection.

Some businesses are even  donating to controversial bail funds like the Minnesota Freedom Fund so they can bail out violent looters, criminals and rioters.

Here is a list thus far, and I'm sure it will grow.

Sony Music—a fund “to support social justice and anti-racist initiatives around the world”—$100 million

Walmart—a new racial equity center—$100 million

Warner Music—campaigns against violence and racism and social justice causes related to music industry—$100 million.

Nike—“Organizations that put social justice, education and addressing racial inequality in America at the center of their work”—$40 million

Alphabet/Google—various organizations, starting with $1 million each to Center for Policing Equity and Equal Justice Initiative—$12 million

Amazon—American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Foundation, Brennan Center for Justice, Equal Justice Initiative, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), National Bar Association, National Museum of African American History and Culture, National Urban League, Thurgood Marshall College Fund, United Negro College Fund (UNCF), Year Up—$10 million

Facebook—“groups working on racial justice”—$10 million

Target—long-standing partners such as the National Urban League and the African American Leadership Forum in addition to adding new partners in Minneapolis-St. Paul and across the country—$10 million

Verizon—National Urban League, NAACP, National Action Network, Leadership Conference for Civil and Human Rights, Rainbow Push Coalition, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund—$10 million

United Health—YMCA Equity Innovation Center of Excellence and Minneapolis-St Paul businesses—$10 million

Goldman Sachs—donor-advised fund to support “leading organizations addressing racial injustice, structural inequity and economic disparity”—$10 million

Spotify—matching employee donations—$10 million

Disney—organizations that advance social justice—$5 million

Procter & Gamble—NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, YWCA Stand Against Racism, and UNCF; also smaller organizations that mobilize and advocate, such as Courageous Conversation—$5 million

Cisco—Equal Justice Initiative, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Color of Change, Black Lives Matter, and a Cisco fund for fighting racism and discrimination—$5 million

Lego—organizations supporting black children and educating all children about racial equality—$4 million

Microsoft—Black Lives Matter, Equal Justice Initiative, Innocence Project, Leadership Conference on Civil & Human Rights, Minnesota Freedom Fund, and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund—$1.25 million

Starbucks—“Organizations promoting racial equity and more inclusive and just communities” nominated by employees—$1.25 million

Intel—support of efforts to address social injustice and anti-racism across various nonprofits and community organizations, and encouraging employees to consider donating to organizations focused on equity and social justice, including the Black Lives Matter Foundation, the Center for Policing Equity, and the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, all of which are eligible for Intel’s Donation Matching Program—$1 million

McDonald’s—unspecified—$1 million

Uber—Equal Justice Initiative and Center for Policing Equity—$1 million

Duke Energy—nonprofit organizations committed to social justice and racial equity–$1 million

The Travelers Companies—organizations such as the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the National Urban League, YWCA Minneapolis, and the We Love Midway fund established by the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce in collaboration with the City of St. Paul–$1 million.

Warby Parker—organizations “combating systemic racism”–$1 million

PwC Charitable Foundation—NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Dream Corps, ACLU, and the Center for Policing Equity—$1 million

Glosser—$500,000 to various organization that are focused on combating racial injustice, including Black Lives Matter, the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, and We The Protesters; also an additional $500,000 in grants to black-owned beauty businesses—$1 million.

Etsy—$500,000 to the Equal Justice Initiative, $500,000 to Borealis Philanthropy’s Black-Led Movement Fund, and match any employee donations—$1 million.

Yelp Foundation—Equal Justice Initiative and NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund—$500,000

H&M—NAACP, ACLU, and Color of Change—$500,000

Levi’s—$100,000 to the ACLU and $100,000 in grants to Live Free USA—$200,000

Lululemon—the Minnesota Freedom Fund—$100,000

There's no count yet about how many celebutards are also kicking in to finance this anarchy and attack on our country,our culture and our freedom.   Nor am I mentioning the media companies like CNN and the New York Times who are actively supporting this carnage. Dealing with them is an easier matter...you simply don't watch and don't watch the movies and TV shows these people appear in.

So how to  deal with companies that nourish this sort of cowardly and anti -America behavior? There are ways. One way is to pass this list around to others. Another way is simply not to do business with them and let them know why via e-mail. My friend Bookworm has a sample e-mail here, or make up your own. No profanity, no threats, simply let them know why you aren't going to patronize them anymore,because now you know which side they're on. If they feel like alienating law abiding decent customers no matter what race or ethnicity they are, that's a choice.

There's no need for Americans who love their country to put up with this kind of craven cowardice. They are colluding with the enemies of our democracy and our republic

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.

Defund The Police? Sure, Why Not?

The latest demand by the folks at Black Lives Matter is to defund the police departments in the cities they and the Antifa pals have rioted in. The carnage in these cities is supposed to be a message and a warning, I suppose.

And why not? Apparently some politicians seem to like the idea just fine. So do a number of celebs, who are busily raising funds to promote this.

Richard Vogel/Ap

In Los Angeles, Mayor Eric Garcetti referred to the LAPD as 'killers', took to his knees in surrender

in front of a number of 'protestors' and promised to defund the LAPD.

He has in fact defunded the LAPD to the tune of $150 million and cancelled a budget increase that had already been approved. He also pledged to cut another $250 million "to be focused on our black community here in Los Angeles, as well as communities of color, and women, and people who have been left behind, for too long.”

Every city department will be affected by major budget cuts to satisfy the people who rioted and looted the city.

“We all have to step up and say: What can we sacrifice?”

Racial justice, he said, was “worth sacrificing for.”

Of course, Asians, Jews, Latino, Black and White business owners who saw their businesses go up in smoke are not included.

Spokespeople for the LAPD said that aside from reducing manpower, the cut may mean firing all or most of the civilian employees...like 911 operators.

The director of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, Jamie McBride responded, to no real avail:

Eric, do you really believe that Los Angeles police officers are killers? The same officers that provide you 24-hour security at your residence 365 days a year? The same officers that gave you political rescue when crime was out of control, when shootings were exploding? The same officers you sent to address your failure to get homelessness under control?

And Garcetti's capitulation is by no means enough for the  'activists.' They are insisting that the police budget be cut by 90% . I kid you not.

Of course, now that thousands of criminals have been freed in California and New York just prior to the riots, it's a perfect time to defund the police, right?

And it's not just LA.

In Minneapolis it got even more phantasmic.

Mayor Jacob Frey, who jumped all over his own police force also went to capitulate to the mob, without success. They basically chased him out of their 'protest' and no matter how many boots he licked it wasn't enough. Not even for his own city council, let alone the mob.

According to Minneapolis City Council President Lisa Bender"If you are a comfortable white person asking to dismantle the police I invite you to reflect: are you willing to stick with it? Will you be calling in three months to ask about garage break-ins? Are you willing to dismantle white supremacy in all systems, including a new system?"

The new system, of course, will be police free  or at best have a small group of disarmed security guards for the well connected.

Of course, you should be willing to abandon your right not to have your home broken intot. Otherwise, you're a Racist. Right? Especially if you do call the cops..oh wait, there won't be any cops, remember?

You see, your either an 'ally' willing to beg on your knees, express shame for your white privilege and cheerfully allow the people who have broken into your home to make off with whatever they want or you're a white supremacist.

Understand?

Unfreakingbelieveable.

As a matter of fact, serious conversations are being held right now about defunding the police forces in  Boston, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Seattle, and Portland. My my, all Democrat run cities that had major riots and places where Antifa and Black Lives Matter are welcomed warmly by these cities politicians for the most part and literally can get away with murder.

Now this actually might work. Cities that wish to do this should be allowed to, but only under the following conditions:

1) The inhabitant of these cities should be allowed to vote on whether they still want police. Of course, if the city government decides to defund police no votes are necessary in true socialist style. Who wants to hear from those racists anyway?

2) Those inhabitants of the city who are stinking racists and decide they want police should have a designated time, say a month or two to leave the city limits.

3) Now that these cities no longer have these white supremacists...and probably a number of black, Asian and Latino citizens who also like the idea of a fully funded police force like the race traitors and Uncle Toms they are, we can proceed.

4) These cities would be independently run and governed. The inhabitants could vote (even felons, and illegal migrants, there might be quite a few of those) in municipal elections but not in federal elections.

5)  Since the police would likely leave since they no longer would have jobs, they can be hired by the feds or the state to maintain barriers around these cities. They would not be permitted to enter these newly autonomous cities, nor would the inhabitants be allowed to exit without special permits and positions.

 6) This would also have the benefit of satisfying those inhabitants who are woke and like the idea of no police to limit their activities. Whatever system the 'government' of these cities decide to enforce what's left of any laws they still have is their business. Also, since some inhabitants have left, there would be ample empty housing available for section 8, crack houses, or what have you as well as for the citizens to live in.

7) The Federal government or state governments where these cities are located would not be responsible for financial aid or law enforcement. Exceptions would be Social Security and pensions for those people now receiving them who continue to reside in these autonomous cities.  In every sense these cities would be autonomous enclaves. They would not be allowed to exercise the rights and powers already  under the jurisdiction of the Federal  government under the Constitution. That would include foreign policy, postage and currency, immigration , etc.

8) The Federal and state governments where these newly independent enclaves are situated would enter into negotiations with these new autonomous enclaves to come to a fair and equitable settlement for payments or arrangements for  state or federal facilities and buildings.

This could actually work. These people would no longer be a real part of a country they consider racist, sexist, fascist, capitalist, what have you.  On the other hand, the rest of the United states of America would no longer be responsible for the welfare, financial help, law enforcement or government of these independent enclaves. They would be able to live out their socialist dream.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.

Candace Owens " George Floyd Is No Martyr

Candace Owens belongs to a group of African Americans who see beyond the BS and understand what the real problems black Americans face are...and it isn't 'white racism.'

She's totally correct that George Floyd is no martyr. He's a thug who is simply convenient to the Democrats, BLM and Antifa and the left with an election coming up. As I mentioned here 

 he has a great deal in common with the rest of the so called 'martyrs' used to incite riots and racist 'hate whitey' dialogue.

Like Trayvon Martin*, Rodney King, and the so-called 'Gentle Giant' he has a rap sheet for a number of violent crimes, including theft,   a number of drug dealing offenses, robbery, and a home invasion where he pointed a loaded gun at the stomach of a pregnant black woman while she begged for her life. In fact, he had a bag of cocaine with him when he was stopped.

He had just committed or  was in the process of committing a felony when he had his altercation with police.

He was crazy high on drugs  when he was stopped, another felony. That was revealed by the autopsy.

Instead of doing  what the police asked him to do, he resisted furiously to the point where they had to drag him out of his car. The two friends (accomplices??) he had with him did exactly what the police said to do. Both of them  are alive and neither was injured in any way.

My point here is not that George Floyd deserved to die in the way he did, but that Black Lives Matter, Antifa, Democrat politicians, the Leftist Media and the various companies, individuals and institutions  using him as a 'battle cry', martyr and role model for virtue signalling is cynical to a disgusting degree and simply a matter of convenience. It is also racist in and of itself, since lauding people like this insures more will follow George Floyd using the same pattern for their lives. They too will get involved in crime,  drug use, and refuse to obey police at some point.

Candace Owens makes an interesting point here...that black culture is the only one that makes heroes out of career criminals like George Floyd. She also shows us something I've been aware of for some time...that white men are far more likely to be killed by police then black men, even though black men, 6% of our population commit a ridiculously out sized percentage of violent crime....

So here's the question.

How long are a substantial percentage of Black Americans going to allow themselves to be used this way?

Where are Black fathers? 75% of black births happen out of wedlock.

How long are you going to be tools for the Democrat party and the Left? Do black Americans realize that the vast majority of Democrat supported Planned Parenthood's abortions and baby parts for sale come from black babies? Read up on Margaret Sanger, who started Planned Parenthood and why she did it. And maybe remember which political party fights tooth and nail to finance and protect Planned Parenthood.

Do you think your kids don't learn something from you or other black Americans when they see you looting and destroying? You bet they do and it puts them on the same path as George Floyd. Is that what you really want? Think about why they might learn from you about  not  following a policeman's instructions and resisting violently and how that might end.

Think about it.

And again, I'll repeat what I've written elsewhere. If you think America is a racist country with no opportunity for black Americans and where your kids are in danger of being shot by police, I suggest you think seriously about finding another country to migrate to. It's a big world and a truly moral decision would be to migrate to someplace you think would be  better. That's a moral decision and one I would certainly make if I felt like that.

*Trayvon Martin didn't have much of a rap sheet, but he was clearly headed that way. He was no innocent, having a background as a truant, a liar, a thief, a schoolyard bully, and a doper.He was on suspension when he was shot in February, after officials caught him with a 'marijuana pipe' and a baggie with drug residue; He was suspended three times for graffiti, being in possession of  'burglary tools' and a bag full of women's jewelry and for attacking a bus driver. He was on suspension when he had his altercation with George Zimmerman, who he assaulted. Except for not doing jail time, he fits the profile perfectly.

Rob Miller writes for Joshuapundit. His articles have appeared in The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Examiner, American Thinker, The Los Angeles Times, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The San Francisco Chronicle, Real Clear Politics, The Times Of Israel, Breitbart.Com, Yediot and other publications.