The Election Chaos...What Happens Next

 

 

Well, the 2020 election is over...except it isn't really over! What we have is a situation where we might not know who really won for some time. As I predicted, there's a great deal of voter fraud involved. But before we go there and examine what happened and what is likely to happen, let's look at what we know in terms of the results, before we get to the shenanigans.

The Republicans will be keeping control of the Senate, with the edition of Tommy Tuberville in Alabama, John James in Michigan (who I was really rooting for), Cynthia Lummis in Wyoming, Bill Haggerty in Tennessee,and Roger Marshall in Kansas. Susan Collins, Mitch McConnell, Joni Ernst, John Cornyn, another of my faves Tom Cotton in Arkansas,  Steve Daines in Montana, Jim Risch in Idaho, and David Perdue in Georgia all were reelected among others. Corey Gardner lost in a close race in Colorado. Lindsay Graham (South Carolina) and Thom Tillus (North Carolina) also got another term.

The Republicans also picked up some House seats and may even pick up a few more once the votes are counted, but the Democrats will likely retain control of the House.

 What this will mean is that Democrat fantasies about packing the Supreme Court and other dreams will end when the bills hit the Senate.

OK, let's examine what actually happened.

First of all, the media, including FOX News were totally unfair in 'calling' states. When it came to states like Texas where President Trump was leading, even by a large amount they refused to call the state for him. When Joe Biden was barely ahead in Arizona, they called the stated for him.

Another thing I noticed and I haven't seen anyone notice is the amount of votes Libertarian candidates like Jo Jorgenson got, especially in battleground states. Since the numbers were far larger then usual for Libertarians, I wouldn't be surprised in the Dems, with a huge amount of money to spend since they barely campaigned gave the Libs some money to actually mount a campaign.Libertarian votes,  they knew that would effect GOP votes, not theirs.

But the real story has to do with actual voter fraud. In Blue run states like Michigan and Wisconsin, once  Trump was firmly ahead, ballot counting mysteriously stopped...ditto in Pennsylvania. It resumed once Biden ballots were cherry picked from the mail ins. That was designed to have Biden called as the winner and have him get the electoral votes.

 Believe it or not, these states also disregarded checking postmarks and comparing the signature with the one on file which should tell you what was really going on. Given that PA's Democrat Attorney General Shapiro crowed before the vote that Biden would win the state, there's no doubt something was up...especially since in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, many polls were mysteriously late in opening in areas known to vote Republican...and poll watchers with legitimate state certificates allowing them to enter the polls and observe the proceedings were forcibly kept out. That, by the way is a felony.

In addition -- Pennsylvania has declared it will accept ballots without a signature and without a post-mark proving they were sent at all, or sent by Election Day.

This is of course done so that illegal ballots can be manufactured and so that they cannot later be challenged.

For what other reason would such an insane thing be done?

Right now, these blue run states still don't have final results: Pennsylvania (Trump has a substantial lead there) Michigan, Wisconsin (States where Trump led handily until these states stopped counting ballots.  Democrat run Nevada is still counting, with the votes less then 8,000 apart. And Arizona is also still counting as well. They are now counting Election Day voters. Maricopa County, which is Trump territory still has lots of votes to count, so we'll see. 

Right now, Joe Biden is credited with 227 Electoral votes to Trump's 217. These tallies obviously are not including states that still have votes to count.

So this is the kind of chaos mail in ballots and 'late voting' has brought us. The main excuse was of course, corona virus and the risk of spreading it.  As I can testify personally, this was and is sheer BS.

I voted in a Masonic hall in the downtown of my home city. Masks were mandatory, and lines were drawn on the floor to allow social distancing while people were in line. It wasn't any more dangerous then going shopping at the market. The reason the Democrats insisted on it is so that they would have time to alter and control the votes. We've already seen people arrested for tampering with the early vote ballots and postal workers caught tossing away ballots. If you mailed in your ballot, you had best hope it got to where it was supposed to, let alone if it was ever counted. Keep in mind this is quite different from absentee voting, which I support and has safeguards.

This reminds me of nothing so much as that famous phone call by Chicago's Mayor Daley to the Kennedys during the 1960 presidential election..."How many more votes does he need?" That is exactly what the Dems will attempt to get Biden in the White House.

 There is a very good possibility of several interesting things  happening thanks to this mess. 

First, it may very well go to the Supreme court, which may insist that the Constitution be followed and that ballots posted after November 3rd not be counted, which is the way it's always been if the results are questioned. That's especially true given the amount of outright voter fraud that's already been discovered.

One blessing in disguise is that this process is going to unveil how deeply inserted voter fraud has become in our election process for the American people to see first hand.

Another interesting possibility is that Joe Biden could well be facing an indictment and be unfit to serve. The evidence of his corruption and perhaps even tax evasion is pretty clearcut and President Trump's DOJ still has ample time to pursue this if it comes to that.

Another possibility is that just as was done in 2020, the ballots themselves maybe sequestered bythe Feds and recounted. I personally think that's a long shot, but it should be mentioned.

And finally, it's high time that America's election process is reformed, even if it means the Feds handle national elections and vote collection. If that happens, the deliberate chaos of 2020 maybe another blessing in disguise

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.

 

 

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  2020 Census citizenship question is one of the  battles taking place in congress right now that isn't being publicized.

Simply put, the Trump Administration wants a citizenship question on the 2020 census, something the Democrats are fighting tooth and nail.

If anyone needed proof that voter fraud exists and that illegal migrants are voting in Democrat ruled fiefdoms like California and a number of cities, there it is. There's no other reason to oppose census workers asking that question. What we're seeing here is nothing less than the flagrant use of non-citizens, including illegal migrants to increase the political power of the Democrat party so that it can decrease the choices, freedom and political power of other Americans.

What's even more comical is that the proposed law itself is useless as it stands. Let's say you're an illegal migrant and the census worker comes to your door. Maybe you just jumped the border awhile ago. Or maybe you were a beneficiary of catch and release who conveniently forgot about that court date and are now in another state. Maybe you're getting social welfare benefits in addition to your off the books job in a restaurant as a busboy.

When you get asked if you're a citizen, what would you say? Would you jeopardize the nice deal you have going?

Of course, you'd say yes, or refuse to answer the question. After all, when you registered that car you bought, you left that box at the DMV unchecked and now you're getting campaign adds and sample ballots.* So why not say yes? Or refuse to answer?

So we've established that both sides of this Census Citizenship question for 2020 is ridiculous. Is there something that would work far better to tell citizens from non-citizens?
Sure there is, although it would be a real hell raiser.

First, require the courts to release the names of all catch and release beneficiaries who either skipped out on their court hearings or have hearings scheduled on the court's calendar. When these names are cross referenced with things like DMV records, the census workers would thus save time knowing where not to ask the Census Citizenship question and ICE would know where to find people who skipped out on their court hearings.

The State Department could likewise required to release the names and IDs of all Visa overstayers.
Second, an old idea of mine. Require all illegal migrants to register with ICE within 60 days. Those who registered would have a pending status and would be considered for residence permits, depending on their conduct here in America. Those who did not would be deported with no right of appeal. Compare those names with the voter registration lists and you go a long way towards solving two problems, illegal migration and voter fraud.

*The official policy of the California DMV is that if an applicant for a license or someone registering a vehicle fills out everything but leaves the box asking if they are a citizen unchecked, it is considered a 'mistake' or 'omission' and they are automatically registered to vote unless they specifically ask not to be.






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.

Follow him on Twitter here and on Facebook here.
And connect with him on Linked In.

Judge Sets Leaders of New Mexico Terrorist Training Camp Free

A radical Judge has set the leaders of a violent New Mexico terrorist training camp free.

Judge Sarah Bacus ruled that five Islamic radicals in charge of what amounted to a jihadist terrorist training camp on a $20,000 “signature bond,” which requires no payment.

She did this in spite of police warnings that children being trained and indoctrinated in the camp were being trained with guns to carry out school attacks. According to the Albuquerque Journal Judge Sarah Backus concluded that the radical Islamists aren’t “a danger to the community,”



Thank you, infidel!

Here's what local law enforcement had discovered.

Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, 39, Lucas Morton, 40, Jany Leveille, 35, Hujrah Wahhaj, 38, and Subhanah Wahhaj, 35, operated what amounted to a terrorist training camp, where they trained 11 children to use firearms and to attack schools. The compound had been under surveillance for awhile but police only launched a raid when one of the children texted that they were all in need of food and water.

The police found found rifles, handguns ammo and a shooting range, as well a various signs with Islamist slogans posted around the camp. In a tunnel outside the compound they found the remains of a boy later identified as Abdul-Ghani Wahhaj. According to his mother, he took medicine for seizures but the Islamic radicals thought he was possessed by evil spirits.

They also found 11 malnourished children. and Prosecutors also alleged that the suspects planned to commit violent acts and that Siraj Wahhaj had trained at least one child at the compound to use firearms to conduct school shootings.

Siraj Wahhaj has a interesting jihadist background. His father is none other than Siraj Wajjai, an unindicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 who got off due to a technicality. The Imam, a former CAIR advisor, offered prayer at a Democratic National Convention event in 2012. The elder Wahhaj is also close to Linda Sarsour, an anti-semite, Democrat darling and frequent speaker who encourages Muslims to radicalize.

With all that evidence, the prosecutors only charged the five defendants with child abuse. And Judge Backus simply let them go free, without even posting bail.

From the Grant County Beat:

"Judge Sarah Backus made the determination the suspects weren't a danger to the community following several hours of testimony and evidence being presented by prosecutors…State prosecutors outlined evidence suggesting that at least some of the suspects could have been planning some sort of attack…Various weapons and ammo were found during the raid on August 3, and several more firearms were discovered in subsequent searches. The children were allegedly taught how to load and fire assault rifles…In addition, prosecutors described a letter sent to Siraj Wahhaj from his brother allegedly inviting him to come to New Mexico and die as a martyr." (KOB, 8/13/18)

"These suspects face serious charges that they intended to inflict mass violence, possibly through school shootings," added Rep. Bill Rehm (R-Alb), a retired law enforcement officer. "This, combined with the discovery of the remains of a young child, is strong evidence that they pose a high risk of violence and should be behind bars. People who are suspected of killing children and orchestrating mass shootings should not be allowed to walk out of the courthouse and back into their communities with almost zero guarantee that they will ever show up to trial. Regardless of political party, New Mexicans can recognize the danger of the judge's ruling and the risk it poses to public safety. This is Exhibit A as to why we need to pass a new constitutional amendment that would require judges to keep dangerous criminals like these in jail pending trial."

So why would any judge do something like this? These people are a definite flight risk and will likely never show up for trial.

A look at the judge's background sheds some light. She's essentially a San Francisco Bay area transplant. She's a graduate of the University of California Hastings College at UC San Francisco and served as a deputy public defender and deputy attorney general in San Francisco.

As such, it's safe to assume that Judge Backus's ideas and priorities are warped in that direction, and a look at other cases she's handled also give a good indication of that.

Letting a bunch of jihadis go free on their own recognizance is far far, more important than public safety to her.

Oddly enough, she was appointed to fill a judicial vacancy by none other than New Mexico's Republican governor, Susan Martinez, after which Judge Backus ran for the office and won as a Democrat. Needless to say, Governor Martinez is desperately trying to distance herself:

"Unfortunately, it (the verdict) highlights how extreme the New Mexico Supreme Court has been in dictating pretrial release for all kinds of dangerous criminals."

And you're going to do what about this, Governor? Do tell.

How To Stop Mass Shootings In America

Is there a way to stop mass shootings in America?

The latest tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida  cost 17 young lives.

What strikes me is how similar the response to these things always is.  Someone of my acquaintance who works in the administration of a large city in my area told me that less than 15 minutes after the news was reported, several busloads of 'protesters' with ready made signs were already descending on the lawn outside City Hall. The usual suspects in Hollywood and in DC were making statements calling for massive gun control and their friends in the media were doing their bit. CNN even staged what amounts to a faux 'town hall' where a couple of target 'conservatives were subjected to what was obviously a staged, scripted event. It was a blatant example of how America's children are being indoctrinated and taught not to think critically.

This stuff has been going on since Columbine. Let's examine some  interesting similarities these mass shooting events seem to share as well as what's been tried in response. Maybe we can come up with an answer.

Here are some similarities:

Most of these shootings were carried out by people already known to be people of interest well known to local authorities. They were known to be moody trouble makers already on the edge. The most recent Florida shooter fits the profile perfectly.

In many mass shootings, certainly Sandy Hook as well as this most recent one, even basic security practices were not followed. Adam Lanza was known to be trouble, yet someone let him into Sandy Hook Elementary, where he murdered 20 young children. This was a direct violation of the school's lockdown procedures, and we've never found out who let him in. At Stoneman Douglas, there was an actual Broward County Sheriff designated to guard the kids. Somehow, the shooter got past him, and when the shooting started the sheriff refused to go into the schoolroom to confront him and take the shooter out. The deputy resigned in order to avoid a suspension and probably a later dismissal. The Gabby Giffords shooting was a similar case, with yet another troubled loner well known to local police  able to shoot a number of people including Congresswoman Giffords because the local sheriff didn't see fit to assign a couple of men to oversee security in a large, open crowd at a shopping mall. This pattern is a recurring one.

Each shooting was followed immediately by calls for increased gun control laws, lots of media hubris and political posing and absolutely ZERO action that made any difference. Remember this one, we will explore it in a bit more detail later.

Let's look at the kind of action proposed and sometimes implemented  to solve this problem. It always ranges from confiscation to laws that make it difficult or impossible for law abiding citizens to own firearms to protect themselves. Heavy taxation on guns and ammo, outright banning of many weapons, bureaucratic resistance to concealed carry laws or firearms permits, all have been used, especially in Democrat controlled urban  kingdoms and states. How well have these policies worked?

Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington DC have incredibly strict gun control laws. They haven't decreased homicide rates. Apparently people bent on evil aren't having any trouble getting their hands on firearms. France has even stricter gun control laws, there being no 2nd Amendment. That didn't stop the Bataclan jihadis frrom getting their hands on actual military assault weapons and murdering a large number of people in Paris, and that is by no means the only time this has happened. The Russian Federation has some of the strictest gun laws on the planet, virtually eliminating private ownership of firearms.  Just today, four people were shot leaving church after Lent services in Dagastan by a jihadi, and there have been other similar incidents.  I could cite many more examples of where extreme gun control doesn't stop killers from obtaining weapons.

Obviously, severe gun laws or prohibitions don't stop people intent on obtaining guns from getting them.

Even more interesting, in a number of places where gun controls are fairly lax, mass shootings are reare or even non-existent.  I'm thinking of two countries in particular, Israel and Switzerland. Israel has mandatory conscription for most of its population, and reserve duty afterwards. People actually keep real, fully automatic military assault weapons as well as emergency rations, ammo and even hand grenades at home.  Yet there are hardly any mass shootings. In fact, the last major school shooting was carried out by  'Palestinian' terrorist who attacked a school in Ma'alot. It began when three armed 'Palestinians'  attacked a van, killing two Israeli Arab women while injuring a third and entered an apartment building in the town of Ma'alot. There they murdered a couple and their four-year-old son in cold blood.From there, they headed for the Netiv Meir Elementary School, where they took more than 115 people including 105 children, many of them children on a field trip. They ended up slaying 25 hostages and injuring 68 more. This happened in May, 1974.

After the initial horror faded, the Israelis ramped up border security. Since many of the schoolteachers actually served in the military, they also implemented plans for enhanced school security. The teachers all took firearms and ammo to class, and needless to say, they knew exactly how to use them and had contingency plans to secure the schools. It's a strange sight to American eyes to see a couple of young schoolteachers escorting kids on a field trip with Uzis in hand, but it also is a secure one, because you know these children aren't going to be slaughtered like the ones in Ma'alot.

In Switzerland, nothing like Ma'alot ever occurred and compulsory conscription was recently ended, but many Swiss still train with the reserves and likewise keep weaponry in their homes that would make the average America Leftist politician faint. Again, no mass shootings, and crime is more likely to involve ledgers and computer programs than firearms.

There are other reasons why these two countries lack mass shootings and have what I'd call a healthy gun culture, but the bottom line is that gun control doesn't prevent mass shootings and lack of it doesn't cause them. The state in the union with the loosest gun laws also has the lowest gun homicide rate per capita in America...and that's Vermont.

Confiscation and bans don't really work either. Just ask the Australians.

One thing we do know for certain is that after all the rhetoric from the Left, nothing much has been done to stop mass shootings. Why do you suppose that is? After all, since Columbine, the Democrats have controlled both Houses of Congress with veto proof majorities on different occasions. They never came up with anything to solve the problem, have they? And you can't blame the NRA, since they have little or no influence on Left leaning Democrats. So why has nothing been done,  if they're so passionate about 'protecting kids?'

Well, I live in reality. I  think what the Left really cares about is confiscating firearms and disarming the American populace. Like most totalitarians, the Left salivates over the idea of an America where  they and the government forces they control are the only ones legally allowed to bear arms. And people cheering for that need to digest one of my favorite Machiavelli quotes; "When you are disarmed, you are not only helpless, you are despised."

That's the only logical reason for why the Left refuses to actually address the problem of mass shootings. To come up with a real solution would  get rid of their entire cause celebre', banning and confiscation. They're still hoping that after a few more incidents like this, they will eventually get popular support for that. It's a fool's hope in my opinion, but apparently they're willing to risk kids' lives to take a shot at it, no pun intended.

The answer to the question I pose is an obvious one. Yes, mass shootings can be severely curtailed and perhaps even ended with time. But here's what it would take:

1) Far more emphasis on school security. Non -students should not be allowed on campus without explicit permission and should be walked through a metal detector. At my former high school, a fence surrounded the place and a police patrol car circled the place all day long and at night for things like athletic matches. It worked for the most part. Arming members of the faculty, particularly those who know how to use firearms effectively and safely would be a pretty good idea as well. School kids should also be drilled on exactly what to do and where to go in the event a killer gets in.

2) When local police have knowledge of a potential shooter who fits the pattern of almost any of the killers who pull this stuff off, there's no reason a confidential list couldn't be circulated to local gun dealers to put a hold on purchases. This won't always work (the Sandy Hook killer was actually refused an attempted purchase and simply murdered his mother and took her guns) but it would definitely help. Local dealers would absolutely cooperate, too. Contrary to what you might hear on CNN or MSNBC, most gun dealers are scrupulous in cooperating with law enforcement on matters like these. Being on the 'hold' list would also have to be subject to appeal in the courts, of course.

3) I've always believed that an effective way to cut way down of gun crimes is simply to make use of a firearm to commit a felony a capitol crime. It might not effect the kind of born losers who commit mass shootings overly much but would definitely effect a lot of other gun criminals. After all, somebody aiming a .32 at the head of a convenience store clerk is signifying his or her willingness to kill that person and take their life. And more than one helpless person has been murdered merely to make sure they won't bear witness against a criminal, even in robberies that involved an insanely small sum of money. A death penalty for using a firearm in this way might make a lot of people think twice and help remove those from society who don't. It could also have a significant effect on America's gun culture, which used to be healthy but which now, thanks to Hollywood and the music biz tends to lionize such thuggish behavior.

4) We need to totally remake America's gun culture. Aside from the above step, we need to train kids so that they see guns as protection and defense used by responsible adults rather than things used to obtain instant gratification and coercion. I think Hollywood, the music industry and the game industry could be persuaded to help here. A big part of the poisoning of America's gun culture can be traced to certain changes in the entertainment business in terms of what kind of behavior it promotes. That applies to a lot of things, but definitely in how America's young view guns, particularly in certain communities. If the Left really wants to strop these mass shootings, they ought to be willing to go along and encourage the entertainment biz to go along...unless. of course, they're more interested in mega-donations from that industry rather than kid's lives, right?

I'd also like to see a re-establishment of the cabinet post of Secretary of Civilian Marksmanship. Yes, we actually had one of those, who worked with the NRA on programs to teach kids how to safely and effectively use guns properly and see them in their proper context in society. An increased emphasis on discipline and proper behavior in the public schools wouldn't hurt either.

Kids really do live what they learn.

Taking these four steps might not eliminate mass shootings. But it would definitely make them very rare.

A Lion Among Jackals - Gen. Kelly Rips Dems,Press Over Lies About Trump's Condolence Call

What we have here is a man who has lived his life in service to his country explaining what that means... to jackals who serve nothing but themselves and their agenda to tear down what most Americans still hold sacred.

White House chief of staff John Kelly lashed out at Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Fla.) today (and by extension her fellow Democrats who piled on) saying he was "stunned" by her negative description of President Trump's call to the wife of a U.S. soldier who was killed in combat inNiger.

I went over this yesterday and explained the real reason the press jumped on this, as a tool to keep other news off the headlines.

So General Kelly, who recently lost his own son in combat patiently explained exactly what happens when a service person is killed. And  that the wife or parents of the deceased service person must agree beforehand to take the call, and exactly why President Trump's call was completely appropriate...and not at all a common gesture by presidents in wartime. President Trump personally called all 4 families.

To me, the most telling moment when when General Kelly agreed to take a few questions "but only on this subject" and asked if any of the reporters were Gold Star parents, or even knew any Gold Star parents and the room went silent. Finally he found a couple of reporters who claimed they knew Gold Star families, and of course their questions were not about the topic of the condolence call at all but about the raid itself in Niger, which Kelly addressed but refused to answer for reasons that are apparent if you watch the video. And this time the usual spectacle of the press yelling out over each other was absent.

Can it be that the lion shamed the jackals this time? Can it be that the blatant contrast between themselves and those who serve being made so nakedly obvious made them, for the first time perhaps, see themselves for who they really are?

A must watch video.

Trump Politicizing Our Military? The Real Story

President Trump politicizing our military? Here's the real story.

President Trump is currently being demonized for 'politicizing our military' and for his supposedly uncaring attitude when making a condolence call to the widow of a Green Beret Army sergeant, one of four American servicemen killed in an ambush by Islamic militants in Niger.

The fire is being stoked by a notoriously racist and partisan black Democrat congresswoman, 75-year-old Frederica Wilson (D-FL).



She's claiming that the president was "heartless" and that "This is a sick man who feels no pity or sympathy for anyone."

Far Left Democrat Senators Bernie Sanders and Tammy Duckworth chimed in as well of course with similar language, and I'm sure there will be more of them. After all, it takes this particular story out if the headlines . That story is an account of the FBI's findings in their investigation of the massive Russian bribery given to the Clintons before our then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed off on giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply.And how the Obama Department of Justice, run by Loretta Lynch, stonewalled the initial investigation.

This, by the way, comes after the FBI mysteriously 'found' over thirty pages of notes about Lynch's secret meeting on the airport tarmac with former President Bill Clinton after saying in court that no notes existed. It seems they discussed a lot more than grandchildren.

You'd think these stories would be screaming headlines if there was any journalistic integrity among the usual suspects. But no...some rabidly partisan nonsense about a condolence call is what they deem the peasants need to be informed of, right?

Oh, the insensitive remarks? Here's what they consist of...that President Trump referred to the soldier as 'Your guy' during the phone call instead of calling him by name, and that the president said, "He (the sergeant) knew what he signed up for, but it's tough just the same."

Let's remember that personal condolence calls from the president of the United States are not mandatory, and some presidents have preferred to simply have a letter mass printed and auto signed.The fact that President Trump took some time from his busy schedule to make a personal condolence call to a Gold Star widow is both honorable and admirable.

And if this was actually what was said, does it sound remotely cold or disrespectful? It's obvious that the president is making reference to the bravery of a widow's husband,who knew full well what he was facing but chose to serve, and an expression of empathy over her loss.

But it does serve to help bury the stories exposing the corrupt Clintons and the collusion of the Obama Administration, doesn't it? Oh look, a squirrel!



And if we're talking about politicizing military casualties, let's look at a president who actually did it, Barack Hussein Obama. Now, all of the Democrat congress members mentioned in this article were rabid Obama partisans. Let's examine their disgusting hypocrisy, shall we?

• It was President Barack Hussein Obama who used the coffins of returning dead servicemen as a photo op at Dover Airport, something that was against the wishes of the family members and against DOD procedure and policy. He did it anyway.

• It was President Barack Hussein Obama who decided that a priority during the government shutdown in 2013 was to cut the funds congress had already allocated as death benefits for families of military killed in action, and to use them for things more dear to his heart. And he made sure that the families, already worried about paying the mortgage and how the kids were going to afford college received a blatantly political letter informing them that it was all the republican's fault. As everyone knows, it was the president and his team who made the decisions on what was funded and what wasn't, and he made sure to make the maximum in political capital out of it..even when it involved military families wondering how they were going to be able to live.

• It was President Barack Hussein Obama who deliberately had his Justice Department show states how to defy established law and suppress the votes of active duty military overseas simply because they tend to vote Republican.

• It was President Barack Hussein Obama and his administration that turned the VA into a dysfunctional nightmare for our wounded warriors, after he failed to take away their VA benefits entirely.

• And finally, it was commander-in-chief Barack Hussein Obama who concocted the ridiculous rules of engagement in AfPack and Iraq that led to a much greater tally of American fighting men and women not coming home alive. Ask anyone who was there during those years. And it was President Obama who ransomed deserter Bowe Bergdahl for five top level Taliban commanders we had in Gitmo...who went right back to killing Americans

These items show you exactly how distorted and twisted the morality and judgement of these congress members actually is. I defy anyone to show me a single word any of them had to say about these episodes of actually politicizing our military and using them as pawns when they occurred, and all of them were in a position to do so.

Yet they have the audacity, the nerve to whine that Trump's politicizing our military?

Beside that kind of callousness and hypocrisy, anything President Trump may have done or not done in this instance fades into insignificance.

Welcome To Venezuela North AKA Illinois

Venezuela north, AKA Illinois is now at the next stage all bankrupt entities go through...simply ignoring bills and failing to pay them.

The AP and several other outlets reported that as of the end of June, 2017, over $7.5 billion worth of unpaid bills — over half the total due — hadn't been sent to the official who writes the checks. That would be the woman pictured above, Illinois Comptroller Susana Mendoza.

While a number of the bills have been finally paid, they've been replaced by a new flood of $16 billion in past due bills over the last three months that haven't even been sent to the Comptroller's office yet. And that doesn't include $9 billion worth of checks that are at the office but are not being sent out for a very good reason. The state of Illinois simply hasn't got the money to pay them!

You may recall my previous look at this ongoing farce. While it was exacerbated by a deadlock between Republican Governor Bruce Bauer and the Democrats who control the General Assembly it certainly didn't start there.

For years the state government has been controlled by the Democrats, who engaged in the typical Blue State economics we now see coming to their inevitable conclusion in various Democrat run cities and states; spend like crazy to bribe the public employee unions for their support and promote various dubious programs and 'benefits'. Spend money on projects that benefit the cronies and political supporters of those in power. And of course, raise taxes and increase the cost of basic services and permits whenever you need a chunk of other people's money.

Republican Governor Bruce Bauer won election in a Democrat dominated state by promising fiscal responsibility and convincing people he wasn't going to end up in jail like some of his predecessors. Unfortunately, the Illinois General assembly is controlled by Democrats led by House Speaker Michael Madigan, who made it their business to torpedo any attempt at fiscal sanity. So Illinois hasn't had a budget in 3 years while the unpaid bills piled up.

 Bauer finally called an emergency meeting of the Assembly and demanded they submit a budget. So they did. And it called for a huge $5 billion tax increase,and a lot more spending. Especially for public employee union benefits, public schools, universities, and other projects aimed to reward a lot of Democrat financial backers and select special interest groups. When Governor Bauer vetoed it, the Assembly simply overrode him and passed it anyway.

The results won't surprise anyone who's ever had to deal with debts well beyond their means to repay.

First off, people become very reluctant about loaning you any money at all. And those that will want repayment  at exorbitant terms.

Moody’s recently downgraded the state's credit rating to its lowest investment grade rating, the lowest of any state.Standard and Poor's rates Illinois bonds - just barely  - at BBB- it's lowest investment grade and just above 'junk.' That means that those investors who aren't scared away will demand premium interest rates to buy the state's debt if they buy at all.

When you don't pay your bills on time, another thing happens. Vendors, contractors and people you do business with start questioning whether it's worth it to continue doing business and providing services to you if they have to end up carrying you for 90, 120, even 180 days. Certainly, their vendors, suppliers and employees on the payroll aren't going to wait that long to get paid!  What happens is exactly what you'd expect. Either they cut off supplies and services if they're able to contractually until they get paid their past due balance, or they only supply these things when payment is rendered in full at the time they perform the service or upon delivery. No more credit or net 30 billing.

Another problem you run into is that a lot of these bills sitting in limbo have late fees and penalty charges. According to the terms the state negotiated, a lot of the unpaid bills that are 90 days or older incur a 1 percent-per-month late-payment fee. That's about $5.5 billion of the current $15.9 billion backlog. Doesn't seem like much? Well not if it's other people's money. Comptroller Mendoza estimates the taxpayers of Illinois will ultimately get stuck for $900 million - almost a billion dollars- in late-payment fees on just the existing pile of unpaid bills.

And we haven't even mentioned an additional whammy; $251 billion in unfunded pension obligations.

For instance, if the Illinois Teachers Retirement Service (TRS) had to pay out all of its pensions today, it could only afford to give its members 40 cents on the dollar.

Yet  the number of six-figure pensions TRS has been doling out has increased 24 percent this year compared to last, with about 6,000 retired educators collecting more than $100,000 annually. And I'm sure it isn't just the TRS. The other public employee unions can't be far behind.

What happens when the money runs out? Once the payments end to the public employee unions, aside from violent demonstrations, strikes and unrest, the unions will sue and win, especially in a place like Chicago. It doesn't matter that the state of Illinois can't cover the payments because it simply does not have the money. The judge will rule that Illinois MUST pay.

Which of course is when things will get interesting.

Property taxes, state income taxes, corporate taxes, sales taxes and fees for things like building permits and vehicle registration are already sky high. And Illinois is surrounded by fiscally healthy states like Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin, all of them with far lower taxes, a much healthier business climate, lots of jobs and far more reasonable housing costs and cost of living. Of course, a lot of the Other People as well as a lot of businesses in Illinois whose money has been financing this orgy of greed and malfeasance have already made that decision and left in record numbers. They're essentially voting with their feet

Somewhere, the ghost of Margaret Thatcher is laughing out loud.



So that's the state of affairs in Venezuela North AKA Illinois. While municipalities can go bankrupt, states can't, at least not yet. There are some close competitors to see who's first to try it...New Jersey, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland and of course California among others.

But I'd put my money on our own Venezuela North, AKA Illinois to win and come in first. They're practically there already.

Breaking! Trump Activist Executes Prominent Democrat Neighbor

This is a breaking news item. It  apparently happened a week ago, and unfortunately fits in with the media meme about violent right wing Trump supporters.

According to ABC channel 6 news in Chester County Pennsylvania, Clayton Carter allegedly shot his neighbor, George Jennings, both 51, twice in the head outside his home in Pennsylvania in the early hours of August 8 and murdered him.

Carter was reportedly a huge Trump supporter with pro Trump signs on his lawn and a MAGA hat he frequently wore. Jennings was a prominent Democrat and actually a member of the Chester County Democratic Party Committee, and the two neighbors argued frequently. There was actually a previous gun incident where Clayon had pulled a loaded gun on Jennings, but it was diffused when police arrived.

Many people in the neighborhood spoke to the media about Carter's volatile nature and that they were very apprehensive of what appeared to be frequent fits of rage.

On August 8th Carter accused Jennings of shining a light into his eyes as he was returning home, and went inside to fetch a .380-caliber Ruger semi-automatic handgun. (otherwise know as a revolver).

Carter reportedly went back outside and parked his car up on Jennings’ lawn with his lights on full beam, according to a criminal complaint.

When Jennings came outside, they had words and Carter shot him at close range, knocking him to the ground. He then shot Jennings in the head a second time while standing over his body, as his distraught wife watched from inside the house.

This is exactly the sort of hideous violence on the Right the media has been warning us about. It's exactly what happened in Charlottesville. When will we learn?





Oh wait a minute! Actually, Clayton Carter is a left wing Democrat and Trump Hater with loads of 'resistance ' signs on his lawn And the late George Jennings was a member of the Chester County Republican committee. The rest of the story is as written.

But of course you knew that, right?  If my headline was accurate, it would be the lead story on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CBS, and tomorrow's front page headline in the WAPO, New York Times, Politico, the L.A. Times...and you know the rest of the list.

Of course, since Clayton Carter is a Democrat and a violent man of the left, the story will be buried quicker than yesterday's dog turds. And the reporters who put this story  out will be sent to the Gulag for some re-education, Da?

Mark Steyn Weighs In On Special Election Outcomes…

 


The one and only Mark Steyn had a few things to say about the special elections in his own inimitable style:



 I'm still laughing at Steyn's characterization of the bogus 'Russia' scandal - “Deep State Dinner Theater!”


I liked this tweet as well:

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump

Well, the Special Elections are over and those that want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN are 5 and O! All the Fake News, all the money spent = 0

Steyn of course is completely right. Einstein's classic definition of insanity applies...doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, That's exactly where the leadership of the Democrat Party is now. Oddly enough, what's left of sanity in the party, the 18 member strong Blue Dog caucus of conservative and Centrist Democrats is meeting with top aides of President Trump, doing exactly what Steyn and President Trump suggested; opening discussions to come to agreements on issues like tax reform  to come up with policies Democrats- sorry, the Blue dogs, at least - can work on and support.

While the Democrat  media is characterizing this as Trump being desperate to break the DC logjam I see it as strategy, splitting the Blue Dogs off from the radical left that now has control of the Democrats. Based on the constituencies most of them represent (primarily in Red States) not only does he have a good chance at getting them to work with him, he might even get some of them to switch parties. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) who has consistently voted to support President Trump's  agenda is said to be fairly close to doing that already.

L.A. City Council Votes To Back Trump Impeachment Investigation

 

CBS has reported that the L.A.  City Council voted 10-0 last Friday,May 5th to back an investigation of President Donald Trump in order to to find grounds to impeach him.

The city’s 2017-18 federal legislative program will be required to include support, financial or otherwise for any legislative action to investigate whether Trump is guilty of high crime or misdemeanors.

 

The L.A. City  Council is completely composed of Democrats except for one member, Councilman Mitchell Englander. He reportedly stepped out during the vote, but was present both before and after.

The resolution was presented by the West Valley Resistance to Council member Bob Blumenfield.

The focus is on an alleged violation of the the Foreign Emoluments Clause, because of the president's
real estate holdings in the form of hotels in foreign countries. That clause bars government officials from accepting gifts or benefits from foreign leaders or foreign states, something a little difficult to extend to things like renting hotel rooms, drinks at the bar or greens fees on a hotel golf course. That's especially true since President Trump is now no longer running his companies, in common with most presidents with outside investments, and has pledged to donate any foreign profits to to the U.S. Treasury on an annual basis to reduce the deficit. But if that doesn't pan out, the L.A. City Council is mandated to continue to back investigations into, well, anything as long as it might remotely involve impeaching President Trump.

The whole idea of invoking the  rather hypocritical in view of what Hillary Clinton was allowed to get away with while she was secretary of state. Talk about accepting money from Foreign governments! But I digress.

What the L.A. City Council has now endorsed is the use of taxpayer funded resources and funds to support the impeachment proceedings against a sitting president on partisan grounds, and that is a fascinating precedent.

Isn't the L.A. City Council and their respect for democracy touching?

CrazyFornia -Dems Want Willfully Infecting Others With HIV To Be 'Misdemeanor'

Democrats are rallying around a new bill by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco,(where else?) that would make it a misdemeanor instead of a felony to intentionally expose someone to HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.



Under current laws , if someone who knows they are infected with HIV infects someone else deliberately - say, with unprotected sex or even sexual assault - it's a major felony and can lead to years of jail time if they're convicted. Wiener's bill wants that repealed.

Wiener's bill, SB239, would also repeal California laws that require people convicted of prostitution for the first time to be tested for AIDS and that increase penalties for prostitution if the prostitute tested positive for AIDS before after a previous arrest.

The rationale for this? Believe it or not 'science.' And equality, of course! Here's the Sacramento Bee quoting Wiener:

"These laws were passed at the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic when there was enormous fear and ignorance and misinformation around HIV," Wiener said. "It's time for California to lead and to repeal these laws to send a clear signal that we are going to take a science-based approach to HIV not a fear-based approach."

The last time I checked, 'Science' hadn't yet found a complete cure for HIV or AIDS and it still kills people. According to the last figures we have from the Center For disease Control, in 2014, there were 12,333 deaths of people with diagnosed HIV infection from various causes attributed to effects of the disease and 6,721 deaths were attributed directly to HIV. Thankfully, the number is going down because more of the population most directly affected, male homosexuals, are practicing safe sex and treatment has improved. But ask yourself...how many of these 19,000 people were unknowingly infected? How many were infected by people who knew they had HIV but simply didn't give a damn? And what about the people who were unknowingly infected with HIV by someone who knew they had it, and who didn't die but whose lives were changed forever? Shouldn't people willing to do that to another human being be punished for what amounts to 2nd degree murder or manslaughter at worst and playing Russian roulette with someone else's life at best?

Wiener also claims that the current laws deter people from getting tested for HIV and seeking treatment. Impossible to see how that could be true...unless we're talking about people who are prostitutes and already got caught and were tested once but continued to practice their trade anyway. Or people so self centered and irresponsible that they don't care that having unprotected sex with an unknowing partner could be a death sentence for that person.

Even the most ancient law codes we know recognize that someone deliberately causing injury or death to another person is guilty of a serious crime, and that concept is deeply embedded in common law today worldwide...except in Crazyfornia, a bizarro land where things are different.

I can't imagine homosexuals supporting this lunacy, but given where Wiener's district is, enough of them must be. Given that this is Crazyfornia, I expect the legislature to pass SB239.

How The Leftist Media Obsession With Attacking Trump Is Hurting America

 

Victor Davis Hanson, not exactly a Trump cheerleader, has an interesting piece on the subject of fake news. Not only does he call out what he calls ‘the contemporary mainstream media’ as purveyors of fake news, but he accuses them of dereliction of duty when it comes to the role of journalists in a free society, to act as disinterested, neutral reporters who act as a brake on power by informing the American people.

Donald Trump conducted a press conference recently as if he were a loud circus ringmaster whipping the media circus animals into shape. The establishment thought the performance was a window into an unhinged mind; half the country thought it was a long overdue media comeuppance.

The media suffer the lowest approval numbers in nearly a half-century. In a recent Emerson College poll, 49 percent of American voters termed the Trump administration “truthful”; yet only 39 percent believed the same about the news media.

Every president needs media audit. The role of journalists in a free society is to act as disinterested censors of government power—neither going on witch-hunts against political opponents nor deifying ideological fellow-travelers.

Sadly, the contemporary mainstream media—the major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN), the traditional blue-chip newspapers (Washington Post, New York Times), and the public affiliates (NPR, PBS)—have lost credibility. They are no more reliable critics of President Trump’s excesses than they were believable cheerleaders for Barack Obama’s policies.

Trump may have a habit of exaggeration and gratuitous feuding that could cause problems with his presidency. But we would never quite know that from the media. In just his first month in office, reporters have already peddled dozens of fake news stories designed to discredit the President—to such a degree that little they now write or say can be taken at face value.

No, Trump did not have any plans to invade Mexico, as Buzzfeed and the Associated Press alleged.

No, Trump’s father did not run for Mayor of New York by peddling racist television ads, as reported by Sidney Blumenthal.

No, there were not mass resignations at the State Department in protest of its new leaders, as was reported by the Washington Post.

No, Trump’s attorney did not cut a deal with the Russians in Prague. Nor did Trump indulge in sexual escapades in Moscow. Buzzfeed again peddled those fake news stories.

No, a supposedly racist Trump did not remove the bust of Martin Luther King Jr. from the White House, as a Time Magazine reporter claimed.

No, election results in three states were not altered by hackers or computer criminals to give Trump the election, as implied by New York Magazine.

No, Michael Flynn did not tweet that he was a scapegoat. That was a media fantasy endorsed by Nancy Pelosi.

In fact, Daniel Payne of the Federalist has compiled a lengthy list of sensational stories about Trump’s supposed buffooneries, mistakes, and crudities that all proved either outright lies or were gross exaggerations and distortions.

We would like to believe writers for the New York Times or Washington Post when they warn us about the new president’s overreach. But how can we do so when they have lost all credibility—either by colluding with the Obama presidency and the Hillary Clinton campaign, or by creating false narratives to ensure that Trump fails?

Ezra Klein at Vox just wrote a warning about the autocratic tendencies of Donald Trump. Should we believe him? Perhaps not. Klein was the originator of Journolist, a “left-leaning” private online chat room of journalists that was designed to coordinate media narratives that would enhance Democratic politicians and in particular Barack Obama. Such past collusion begs the question of whether Klein is really disinterested now in the fashion that he certainly was not during the Obama administration.

Recently, New York Times White House correspondent Glenn Thrush coauthored a report
about initial chaos among the Trump White House staff, replete with unidentified sources. Should we believe Thrush’s largely negative story?

Perhaps. But then again, Thrush not so long ago turned up in the Wikileaks troves as sending a story to Hillary Clinton aide John Podesta for prepublication audit. Thrush was his own honest critic, admitting to Podesta: “Because I have become a hack I will send u the whole section that pertains to u. Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this Tell me if I f**ked up anything.”

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post has become a fierce critic of President Trump. Are his writs accurate? Milbank also appeared in Wikileaks, asking the Democratic National Committee to provide him with free opposition research for a negative column he was writing about candidate Trump. Are Milbank’s latest attacks his own—or once again coordinated with Democratic researchers?

The Washington Post censor Glenn Kessler posted the yarn about Trump’s father’s racist campaign for New York mayor—until he finally fact-checked his own fake news and deleted his tweet.

Sometimes the line between journalism and politicians is no line at all. Recently, former Obama deputy National Security advisor Ben Rhodes (brother of CBS news president David Rhodes) took to Twitter to blast the Trump administration’s opposition to the Iran Deal, brokered in large part by Rhodes himself. “Everything Trump says here,” Rhodes stormed, “is false.”

Should we believe Rhodes’s charges that Trump is now lying about the details of the Iran Deal?
Who knows, given that Rhodes himself not long ago bragged to the New York Times of his role in massaging reporters to reverberate an administration narrative: “We created an echo chamber They were saying things that validated what we had given them to say.” Rhodes also had no respect for the very journalists that he had manipulated: “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”

Is Rhodes now being disinterested or once again creating an “echo chamber”?

His boss, former UN Ambassador and National Security Advisor in the Obama administration, Susan Rice (married to Ian Cameron, a former producer at ABC news), likewise went on Twitter to blast the Trump administration’s decision to include presidential advisor Steven Bannon in meetings of the National Security Council: “This is stone cold crazy,” Rice asserted, “After a week of crazy.”
Is Rice (who has no military experience) correct that the former naval officer Bannon has no business participating in such high strategy meetings?

In September 2012, Rice went on television on five separate occasions to insist falsely to the nation that the attacks on the Benghazi consulate were the work of spontaneous rioters and not a preplanned hit by an al Qaeda franchise. Her own quite crazy stories proved a convenient administration reelection narrative of Al Qaeda on the run, but there were already sufficient sources available to Rice to contradict her false news talking points.

There are various explanations for the loss of media credibility.

(read the rest here)

Jeff Sessions Is GUILTY...Of Nothing. The Real Non Fake News Story

 

The Democrats and their trained seals in the media are hyperventilating with excitement. New attorney general Jeff Sessions is a pawn of Putin's! He talked to a Russian ambassador and didn't disclose it! He was part of Trump's plot to have the Russians hack the election! Gasp! He must resign immediately!

Sheer fake news horse manure.

The Left simply can't accept that they lost the election. So they continue to try to deligitimize President Trump, and the fairy tale they continue to tell is that Russia somehow hacked the election to spoil Queen Hillary coronation. President Obama had something to say about that:



Of course, that was before the election, when President Obama, the media and the usual suspects all knew Mrs. Clinton would win. When she didn't, President Obama changed his mind about that and a lot of other things, including that peaceful, smooth transition. But I digress.

Here's exactly what happened.

In January, Sessions was asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) for answers to written questions. One of them wasg if he had “been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after Election Day?”

Sessions answered no. Notice exactly how the question was framed. The attorney general wasn't asked if he had been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government for any reason during the entire course of the year. He was asked specifically if he had been in contact with the Russian government about the 2016 election.

Now as it happens, Jeff Sessions, as a senator and a member of the Armed Services Committee, met tw3ice with Russian diplomats in connection with his work on that committee. This, by the way, is standard operating procedure for senators. It's part of the job. His meetings were leaked by 'intelligence sources' to the Washington Post, now an official organ of the Democrat Party and the 'Resistance'.

Senator Claire McCaskill from Missouri, a Democrat, stepped into this one full force and ended up with manure all over her shoes. To witness, check out these tweets:

Follow

Claire McCaskill ✔ @clairecmc

I've been on the Armed Services Com for 10 years.No call or meeting w/Russian ambassador. Ever. Ambassadors call members of Foreign Rel Com.

4:06 AM - 2 Mar 2017

• 10,794 10,794 Retweets
• 16,388 16,388 likes

 Except it turns out she has met with the Russian ambassador a few times:

Follow

Claire McCaskill ✔ @clairecmc

Today calls with British, Russian, and German Ambassadors re: Iran deal. #doingmyhomework

4:49 AM - 6 Aug 2015

• 328 328 Retweets
• 162 162 likes

Follow

Claire McCaskill ✔ @clairecmc

Off to meeting w/Russian Ambassador. Upset about the arbitrary/cruel decision to end all US adoptions,even those in process.

7:25 AM - 30 Jan 2013

• 470 470 Retweets
• 214 214 likes

Whoopsie! Good ol' Claire McCaskill, the original $5 girl in a $10 town...

And AG Sessions? Here's what he had to say about the matter:

“I have not met with any Russians at any time to discuss any political campaign. And those remarks are unbelievable to me and are false. I don’t have anything else to say about that.”

Are we at war with Russia? I know there are a few crazy politicians who'd love that, but it hasn't happened yet and hopefully won't. It isn't a crime to talk to Russian diplomats. There's absolutely no evidence of 'Russian hacking' as even Obama's DNI James Clapper testified before congress and Assistant Director of the FBI McCabe reiterated. And Session's talks with Russia's ambassador were both normal and a part of his duties as part of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

And finally, even if Jeff Sessions did mention the campaign (and there's zero evidence he did) where's the crime? Former AG Micheal Mukasey schools CNN talking head Erin Burnett, who apparently has never read the Constitution and has no idea what treason consists of:



The Democrats have two things in mind here. Along with their creatures in the media, they want to keep the water boiling in the Democrat fever swamp fantasy land about Russia hacking the election. And having failed to stop Jeff Sessions from being confirmed, they're attempting to delegitimize him and take him out because he's a white Southerner, scary smart and because of his views on enforcing our laws on illegal migration.

Their first objective is disgusting and shows their vile nature and their essential disrespect for our democracy. The second will be an exercise in failure.

UPDATE: AG Sessions has apparently agreed to recuse himself when it comes to the House's bogus 'investigation' into Russian hacking. On the one hand, it's a mistake, since the entire charge is bogus and this gives it a slight appearance of credence. On the other hand, it shows that Sessions is an ethical man not worried about his actions who wants to avoid even the appearance of bias.

Pretty different then the last two corrupt figures we had for attorney generals, that's for sure.