by Michael Swartz:  Last week we were waxing bearish on the prospect of actually seeing President Donald Trump’s tax cuts pass. But a significant initial step came this week when the House approved a budget blueprint that would allow for better control of the GOP’s tax legislation, placing it under the budgetary rules in place to prevent Senate minority Democrats from denying cloture. Not all Republicans voted for the bill — it passed by a thin 216-212 margin — but several of those GOP members voting no did so in symbolic fashion to express their opposition only after enough votes were there for passage. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy expressed his belief that some of the 20 holdout Republicans “will be there for tax reform” because they were only objecting to the budget.

          The House Republicans who most loudly opposed the measure were those most vulnerable to Democrat challenge next year. Coming mostly from longtime blue states such as New Jersey and New York, these dozen GOP moderates were upset about the idea of tax reform including the phase-out of the deduction for state and local taxes, as their overtaxed constituents use that deduction more often than most Americans. Losing it would certainly hit those states hardest, but it would also bring more to the Treasury.
          A second point of objection expressed by members and conservative pundits alike was the prospect of severely curtailing the tax benefits of the retirement accounts that millions of Americans use to shelter funds from the tax man. Oddly enough, they took their cues from the man at the top this time: “There will be NO change to your 401(k),” President Trump tweeted. “This has always been a great and popular middle class tax cut that works, and it stays!”
          Sharply limiting this practice, or converting these accounts to be like the less popular Roth IRAs (which are taxed now but tax-free upon withdrawal, the inverse of a standard IRA) would be an easy target for Democrat and media demagoguery. Witness the rhetoric of Oregon Democrat Sen. Ron Wyden, who warned that Republicans “cannot keep their hands off your 401(k).”
          Yes, the hypocrisy can be cut with a knife. Just four years ago, the shoe was on the other foot because Barack liar-nObama thought some people had too much retirement money stashed away. Two years later, it was tax-free college savings that seemed like a ready pool of cash for liar-nObama to take from the rich. Wyden didn’t object to that bill, by the way, and in 2010 he co-sponsored a tax bill that proposed many of the same things — such as fewer brackets, a lower top rate, a reduced number of deductions, and a slashed corporate tax rate — that Donald Trump’s tax reform is advocating today. The only difference is the occupant of the Oval Office.
          Yet even if changes are made, there are legitimate arguments that Roth-style 401(k)s make some sense from a retirement standpoint and won’t negatively affect savings rates. The biggest gamble with the Roth IRA is that someone will change the rules before you retire. After all, once upon a time Social Security benefits were tax-free, too.
          These changes to the individual tax burden are drawing the most press, along with the tired old Democrat mantra of “tax cuts for the rich” that the media blurts out like it’s breaking news. This lead item has pushed the equally radical proposed changes to corporate taxes to the back burner, but there’s an even larger problem with the framework needed to commence the necessary sausage-grinding for tax reform. “We’re about to go through Class 5 rapids,” said House Speaker Paul Ryan, referring metaphorically to the hordes of lobbyists preparing to swarm Capitol Hill in the attempt to preserve their clients’ tax breaks and carve-outs. “We’ve got to make sure everybody stays in the boat and we get the boat down the river.”
          We know that leftists will object no matter what conservatives try to do, but with this budget Republicans have placed themselves in a no-win situation. There are enough so-called “cuts” in entitlement programs to provide a long heyday for Democrat naysayers, but not enough to really improve our long-term financial solvency, let alone get government back to its proper role. Even with the Congress and White House belonging to the party that has long preached fiscal responsibility, members of our legislative body are confessing this budget framework once again kicks the can down the road in areas that desperately need reform.
          And while fiscal responsibility is the first casualty of this new deal, the part that survives but deserves to die is the notion that tax cuts must be “paid for.” Disregard the faulty static analysis that leads opponents to whine that cutting taxes costs the government money, and ask the larger question: Whose money it is anyway?
          Real people have to hope that their annual raise is enough to cover their increasing expenses. A single vote or a simple change to a few lines in the tax code allows the IRS to reach more deeply into our collective pockets. Unfortunately, the people don’t seem to have a lobbyist to beseech Uncle Sam to give them a break — unless, of course, you’re one who doesn’t mind getting more from the national treasury and hasn’t noticed the chains that accompany this gift.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52093

by Thomas Gallatin:  On Thursday, the U.S. government apologized for the IRS scandal of illegally targeting Tea Party groups during the liar-nObama administration. Barack liar-nObama’s enemies list sidelined literally hundreds of conservative organizations looking to exercise their free speech rights during the 2012 election. Attorney General Jeff Session slammed “the last administration,” saying that the targeting “was wrong and should never have occurred.” Sessions continued, “There is no excuse for this conduct. Hundreds of organizations were affected by these actions, and they deserve an apology from the IRS.” Indeed, though if liar-nObama won re-election because of this weaponization of government, an apology is woefully inadequate.

          The government reached a “very substantial” settlement agreement in a class action lawsuit that had been brought by more than 400 conservative groups illegally targeted by the IRS. Edward Greim, the lawyer representing the targeted groups, said, “A true reckoning is finally up to the agency itself. Until the IRS itself steps forward to admit what really happened, we cannot have faith that the same abuse won’t be repeated again.”
          While this settlement is indeed a win for those who suffered under liar-nObama’s politicized IRS, it does not close the book on the issue. Several new filings have been raised that specifically single out the former IRS director of Exempt Organizations, Lois Lerner, for her role in “failing” to stop the targeting by IRS employees. Recall that in 2015 a joint Justice Department and FBI investigation found “substantial evidence of mismanagement, poor judgment and institutional inertia,” and yet dubiously “found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on political, discriminatory, corrupt or other inappropriate motives that would support a criminal prosecution.”
          Tom Zawistowski, head of the Portage County Tea Party in Ohio, believes that Lerner should have faced criminal charges for her role in attempting to hide the agency’s activity by changing names while still approving of the targeting tactics. To date no evidence has come to light directly linking the IRS targeting scandal with the liar-nObama White House — nor will it, thanks to a deft use of cutouts and other tactics to avoid leaving fingerprints.
          And this is what so frustrates many Americans. When laws have been clearly violated, those in Washington who are guilty of having violated the law are seemingly immune to having to face any criminal liability or accountability. Lerner is enjoying a lucrative retirement. The scandal is simply swept under the rug and business continues as usual. This is why the swamp must be drained, as more and more Americans have lost their faith in government.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52097

          Thus it was big news when, on Thursday, President Trump released 2,800 records on Kennedy’s assassination but delayed the release of thousands more, evidently under pressure from the CIA and FBI so as not to harm national security. The remaining documents will be reviewed over the next 180 days, after which there’s no guarantee they’ll see the light of day. The release was in compliance with a law signed in 1992 by George H.W. Bush.
          The Washington Post reports, “Researchers had hoped the release would shed new light on Oswald’s movements and contacts in the months before he shot Kennedy. Historians were particularly eager for new details of Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico City, where he met with Cubans and Soviets two months before the assassination. None of those documents appeared to be in the batch released Thursday.”
          In fact, no documents released Thursday undermined the conclusion of the Warren Commission that Oswald acted alone, and yet a majority of Americans continue to believe there was a wider plot. Perhaps that’s because part of the unveiled material included this from FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover: “The thing I am concerned about … is having something issued so we can convince the public that Oswald is the real assassin.” That was likely just an observation, but those inclined to disbelieve the government may always wonder if it was an imperative.
          A president must make different decisions than a presidential candidate, and the CIA may be correct about not wanting to reveal assets or methods, even more than 50 years later. But we remain puzzled by the shroud of secrecy surrounding JFK’s assassination and think the whole country would benefit from more transparency.  
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52100

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5626304882001

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5625166044001

by Arnold Ahlert:  “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” —Barack liar-nObama’s open mic assurance to former Russian President Dmitri Medvedev, March 26, 2012

          Progressive ideology is about winning — by any means necessary. Thus, the same Russians Barack liar-nObama’s administration accommodated for years — from liar-Hillary Clinton’s “reset button”and liar-nObama’s cancellation of missile defense systems for Poland and the Czech Republic, to allowing the Kremlin to become a Middle East powerbroker, and liar-nObama mocking Mitt Romney’s correct 2012 assertion that Russia was our foremost geopolitical foe — quickly became the mortal enemies that orchestrated Trump’s election victory. In short, they told us, “collusion” between Trump administration figures and Russia was the primary reason liar-Hillary lost. Yet as we are only beginning to learn, liar-nObama administration collusion with Russia might constitute the greatest scandal in the history of the republic.
          Andrew McCarthy sums it up. The liar-nObama administration “green-lighted the transfer of control over one-fifth of American uranium-mining capacity to Russia, a hostile regime — and specifically to Russia’s state-controlled nuclear-energy conglomerate, Rosatom,” he explains. “Worse, at the time the administration approved the transfer, it knew that Rosatom’s American subsidiary was engaged in a lucrative racketeering enterprise that had already committed felony extortion, fraud, and money-laundering offenses.”
          Who approved the transfer? The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, (CFIUS) an intergovernmental panel representing 14 departments and offices, including the Treasury, the U.S. Departments of Energy, Commerce, State, Homeland Security, Justice, Trade, Science and Technology Policy and Defense. CFIUS is tasked with determining whether transactions and investments by foreign companies align with national security, and they unanimously approved the deal — despite the reality that when they were considering it, nine members of the Canadian company Uranium One that would receive the uranium contributed more than $145 million to the liar-Clinton Foundation.
          Moreover, while the Russians were transferring control of Uranium One to its state-controlled nuclear-energy conglomerate Rosatom via three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records reveal Uranium One chairman Ian Telfer also donated $2.35 million to the liar-Clinton Foundation. And in 2010, liar-Bill Clinton received a $500,000 speaking fee from Renaissance Capital, a Kremlin-linked bank that was promoting Uranium One stock.
          Telfer’s contributions were not publicly disclosed, violating an agreement liar-Hillary Clinton had struck with the liar-nObama White House to publicly identify all donors.
          In terms of concealment, she was not alone. The liar-nObama administration knew “congressional Republicans were trying to stop the transfer,” McCarthy explains. “Consequently, the Justice Department concealed what it knew. DOJ allowed the racketeering enterprise to continue compromising the American uranium industry rather than commencing a prosecution that would have scotched the transfer.”
          It was a racketeering enterprise conducted by Vadim Mikerin, the Russian official in charge of Tenam USA, which is the American arm of Rosatom subsidiary Tenex. Following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1992, Tenex was given control of the sale and transportation of blended-down uranium from dis-assembled Russian nuclear warheads to U.S. nuclear providers. Mikerin was extorting those U.S. companies, forcing them to pay inflated prices, and leaving them vulnerable to blackmail by Russia.
          To facilitate the process, Mikerin secured the help of an unnamed lobbyist who became uncomfortable with the seemingly illegal arrangement, and notified the FBI. As a result he became an informant. At the time, the FBI was headed by Robert Mueller and the investigation was supervised by current Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. It was centered in Tenam’s home base of Maryland, whose U.S. attorney was Rod Rosenstein. It ended in late 2015, during the tenure of former FBI Director James Comey.
          The FBI had proof of Mikerin’s racketeering in 2010, when any disclosure of it would have killed the uranium deal. Yet they let the scheme continue until 2014 when the agency quietly allowed Mikerin to plead guilty to one count of money-laundering conspiracy, courtesy of Rosenstein, whose office chose to prosecute Milkerin under the far less onerous section 371 of the U.S. penal code rather than section 1956 which could have imprisoned him for up to 20 years on each count of racketeering. The deal was cosigned by the DOJ’s Fraud Section, then run by Andrew Weissmann — one of the attorneys Mueller selected to investigate Trump.
          While the DOJ slow-walked this prosecution, Russia gained complete control of Rosatom. And despite Nuclear Regulatory Commission assurances made in 2011 to a highly concerned Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) that Rosatom could not export uranium out of the country, The New York Times revealed Uranium One exported it to Canada using the licenses of a proxy transport company to do so. Moreover, where the uranium is headed remains unknown.
          What about the lobbyist/informant? He was issued a gag order and threatened with prosecution by the Loretta Lynch-led Justice Department when he pursued a civil action that would have revealed information about the sale. He is currently represented by attorney Victoria Toensing, who insists her client has “specific information about contributions and bribes to various entities and people in the United States.”
          Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) is investigating the deal, and has sent letters to 10 federal agencies explaining he remains unconvinced there was no national security concerns associated with it, despite assurances to the contrary. He also pushed to have the gag order lifted.
          Which brings us to U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions. While the DOJ finally announced late Wednesday night the gag order has been lifted, Sessions apparently continues to countenance the agency’s refusal to turn over documents related to the infamous Christopher Steele dossier compiled by Fusion GPS that was subpoenaed by the House Intelligence Committee.
          On Tuesday, The Washington Post revealed the most likely reason for the DOJ’s stonewalling. In a bombshell exposé, the paper reported the liar-Clinton campaign and the DNC helped fund the dossier. The same dossier liar-Clinton may have given the FBI (who initially offered to pay for it themselves), the one that may be the sole basis by which liar-nObama administration officials justified the unmasking of Trump associates — and the entire rationale behind the Leftmedia’s orchestrated effort to convince Americans Trump’s presidency is illegitimate.
          The dossier’s disseminators? In the last two weeks, Fusion’s partners exercised their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination during House Intelligence Committee meeting, and filed a complaint in federal court aimed at keeping their subpoenaed banking records secret.
          Regardless, Sessions continues to abide an investigation of Trump administration collusion with Russia, conducted by many of the same people who buried possible liar-nObama administration collusion. People like Robert Mueller who “has the means, motive and opportunity to obfuscate and distract from matters embarrassing to the FBI,” WSJ columnist Holman W. Jenkins Jr. astutely notes.
          America is facing an existential crisis, one where it appears the same institutions designed to provide law and order and national security are guilty of wholesale corruption — and possible treason. Either the Trump administration will root out the rot, or the electorate will be faced with the undeniable reality we live in a nation where “justice” consists of one set of laws for the rich and powerful, and another for everyone else. A nation where Congress conducts toothless hearings, those who should be investigated conduct the investigations, and utterly corrupt media censor anything inimical to their own interests and those of their ideological allies.
          Absolutely no one can justify the sale of the main ingredient used in nuclear weapons to the Russians. Either the swamp gets drained — or the entire nation drowns in it.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52074

by Political Editors:  Donald Trump’s temporary ban on refugees came to an end on Tuesday, but with it came a new executive order from the president that enacts “extreme vetting” on individuals seeking to enter the U.S. from 11 nations deemed hostile to America. As a senior official further explained, “There will be a general resumption of refugee admissions under this exec order, while that review is ongoing refugee admissions from the 11 countries will be considered on a case by case basis and poses no threat to the welfare of the United States.”

          Recall that Trump’s initial order was aimed at reviewing and strengthening the refugee vetting process that had come under increased criticism during Barack liar-nObama’s time in office. The new vetting process comes with enhanced screening and security protocols, with officials prioritizing cracking down on drug offenders, human traffickers, smugglers and individuals tied to terrorist organizations or activities.
          The new vetting measures include the addition of new fraud detection officers who will be deployed overseas to help assist current vetting officials. “It’s not in our interest to bring people into our country with views hostile to the United States,” said a senior administration official. That should be a no-brainer, but it wasn’t under liar-nObama.
           In September, Trump dropped the cap for the number of refugees accepted into the U.S. in 2018 down to 45,000 after liar-nObama had dramatically increased the number to 110,000 last year. Prior to 2014, the traditional number of refugees accepted annually was 50,000. However, this year officials do not expect the number of refugees to reach the new ceiling. Times they are a changin’.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52053

by Louis DeBroux:  The Washington Post, progressive bastion of hyperbole and perpetual outrage against all things Republican and conservative, is again fearful. This week, Post writer Aaron Blake contracted the vapors while warning of the danger to free speech posed by President Donald Trump. After posting a list of Trump’s alleged attacks on free speech, Blake warns, “The White House isn’t disputing the criticisms; it’s suggesting they shouldn’t even be tolerated and aren’t good for the country. That’s a stunning posture for any White House to take.”

          This is, to be blunt, utter nonsense. Donald Trump poses far less risk to free speech than did Barack liar-nObama, and less than your average social justice warrior college student.
          It was columnist Salena Zito who astutely noted last year, “The press takes [Trump] literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.” That’s why his supporters cheer the general sentiment behind Trump’s verbal attacks on the “fake news” or NFL players who disrespect the flag or national anthem, without ever thinking Trump will abuse his power as president to compel the firing of players or shut down the media.
          In electing Trump, the American people knew what they were getting — a master of media, showman and bombastic ringleader with little patience for the accepted rules of politics; a billionaire street fighter who would wade into the DC swamp, arms flailing and fists pumping. And that was okay because Americans were sick of enduring a militant form of political correctness that attacked their beliefs and values daily.
          The free speech abuses of the liar-nObama regime, and Democrats in general, elicited little more than a yawn from the progressive Left. Indeed, they often demanded and cheered such abuses, as when liar-nObama forced Catholic nuns to pay for birth control and abortion in their health insurance, or used the IRS to harass conservative non-profits, or when 16 Democrat attorneys general launched a campaign to prosecute anyone who dared question the “settled science” of climate change.
          Nor did they care that their presidential nominee, liar-Hillary Clinton, used a private email server so she could avoid congressional oversight and FOIA requests, or when Obama openly attacked the Supreme Court during a State of the Union address for its decision in the Citizens United case.

They didn’t care when the Committee to Protect Journalists reported, “Barack liar-nObama [pledged] open government, but he has fallen short of his promise. Journalists and transparency advocates say the White House curbs routine disclosure of information and deploys its own media to evade scrutiny by the press. Aggressive prosecution of leakers of classified information and broad electronic surveillance programs deter government sources from speaking to journalists.”
          They didn’t bat an eye when liar-nObama spied on the press and investigated a reporter as a “co-conspirator” for writing about a national security issue. They supported liar-nObama’s efforts to silence “offensive” political speech, calling for the FEC and the FCC to be the arbiter of what is and is not legitimate free speech.
          The Left demands Christians violate their faith, forcing them to provide services for same-sex “marriages” or face public excoriation and the destruction of their businesses. They cheered when Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter and fascist “antifa” thugs rioted, dragged innocent people out of their cars and beat them, flipped cars and set businesses on fire, claiming it was just an understandable reaction to institutional racism and capitalist oppression.
          Even the most ardent Trump supporter freely acknowledges Trump does not abide by the decorum normally expected from the Oval Office. Trump shuns political correctness and fights back. You throw a jab, he throws an uppercut. To a progressive power base used to Republicans who spend all their time on the defensive, trying lamely to refute accusations of hatred, bigotry, racism, homophobia, xenophobia and more, the Left has not figured out how to handle a Republican that fights back, relentlessly.
          But it is disingenuous for the Left to act horrified by Trump’s combativeness. After all, liar-nObama routinely used violent and hateful rhetoric. Or do they not recall liar-nObama telling his supporters to bring a gun to a knife fight with Republicans, and “get in their face”?
          The reality is that Donald Trump can be abrasive, combative and coarse, but the fear that he poses a threat to free speech is simply overblown.
          A far greater danger to free speech lies with the American people themselves, who are thoroughly ignorant regarding the founding principles of our nation that enshrine the protections found in the First Amendment.
          Various polls and surveys reveal a stunning number of Americans are clueless regarding the basics of American civics, unable to name one, much less all, of the First Amendment protections, or even name one of the three branches of government.
          Such ignorance leads to an embrace of power over principle, as evidenced by polls showing a shocking level of support for silencing speech with which they disagree, even by violent means. Brute force replaces the free marketplace of ideas, and stokes tribalism. A free republic cannot survive under such conditions.
          Thomas Jefferson understood this truth more than two centuries ago, noting, “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52025

by Mark Alexander:  Several months ago, I asked the question, “Who funded the fake Trump/Putin dossier?,” knowing full well the answer was most assuredly going to be liar-Hillary Clinton and her Democrat National Committee hacks — the same black-bag bunch who sandbagged liar-Clinton’s primary opponent, Bernie Sanders.

          Well, The Washington Post published a blockbuster story last night indicating that, yes, it was liar-Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democrat National Committee who put up the dirty dossier dollars. Now we know why Fusion was in court trying to conceal who funded the fake dossier they created, as well as invoking the Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination.
          Predictably, The Post was more interested in promoting the latest “Republican Party fissure” — more criticism of Donald Trump by Sen. RINO-Jeff Flake (R-AZ). More on that later.
          It’s no surprise that liar-Clinton’s campaign and the DNC, through Democrat law firm Perkins Coie, retained Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research that resulted in the now-infamous dossier. After liar-Clinton’s retention, Fusion hired former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to conduct that research. The resulting fake dossier became the centerpiece not only of the entire Trump/Russia collusion delusion but of James Comey’s — and now Robert Mueller’s — investigation. In fact, Comey took the dossier to Barack liar-nObama after the election, and reportedly agreed to pay Steele for further research until Steele was publicly identified. Was/is Comey that stupid?
          One other question congressional Republican investigators have is whether the FBI used the dossier as justification for any surveillance intercepts. The Bureau has so far refused to answer that question.
          As Byron York notes, “And why did the story break when it did? Credit the much-maligned Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The California Republican has been pursuing the dossier more aggressively than anyone else, and it was his Oct. 4 subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that handled the dossier, that finally shook loose the information.”
          So, rather than Trump’s campaign colluding with Moscow, it turns out the real collusion was between liar-Clinton and Russia, as parts of the dossier were scripted by Russian security services. That kind of makes Trump Jr.‘s meeting with a Russian lawyer pale in comparison. And as for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort, it could be that he’s ensnared in Mueller’s investigation not because of his ties to Trump but because of his ties to John Podesta. More on that later.
          According to former Bush White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, “We now know [liar-Hillary Clinton] paid for international dirt [on an opponent] that ended up going through America’s intelligence agencies, as well as Comey’s FBI and to liar-nObama, where they all treated it with credibility … only to learn now that the source for this, the funding for it, the impetus behind it, was liar-Hillary Clinton’s campaign. This is very troubling if the FBI didn’t know that the funding for this came from liar-Clinton’s campaign.”
          But hey, that private liar-Clinton email communications server? Nothing to see here; move along.
          Brian Fallon, a former spokesman for the liar-Clinton campaign, basically claimed as liar-nObama always did that he heard about the dossier in the news. “But if I had gotten handed it last fall, I would have had no problem passing it along and urging reporters to look into it,” Fallon added. “Opposition research happens on every campaign, and here you had probably the most shadowy guy ever running for president, and the FBI certainly has seen fit to look into it. I probably would have volunteered to go to Europe myself to try and verify if it would have helped get more of this out there before the election.”
          The DNC responded by also pointing the finger back at Trump: “Let’s be clear, there is a serious federal investigation into the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, and the American public deserves to know what happened.” But let me be clear: As I have also argued all along, Democrats needed to be cautious what they wished for. Their sole aim was to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s election. Now that liar-Clinton’s hand was in the cookie jar, I’m willing to bet Democrats no longer think Russian interference heralds the end of the republic.
          The news almost makes it humorous that a protester got close enough to Trump Tuesday to throw Russian flags at him and yell, “Trump is treason!” Out on a limb, but I’m guessing he voted for liar-Hillary.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52039

by Thomas Gallatin:  Forget the dubious Donald Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy that liar-Hillary Clinton funded — it now appears that the real story is a much deeper and more insidious Russian collusion scenario, which goes back to liar-Clinton’s time as head of the State Department. Tuesday evening, Fox News’ Tucker Carlson detailed information received from a source familiar with the ongoing Mueller investigation into Russian election interference. This new information essentially flips the script on the whole collusion narrative.

          Carlson explained that Paul Manafort, the man who has been at the center of the Mueller investigation and who for several months worked as Trump’s campaign manager, used to work with the Podesta Group — an operation of Democrat hacks John and Tony Podesta — on behalf of Russian government interests. Manafort and the Podesta Group’s working relationship goes back to at least 2011. Carlson states, “He [the source] saw Paul Manafort in the Podesta Group offices, ‘All the time, at least once a month.’ Manafort was not there to socialize. He was representing Russian business and political interests, who sought to influence Capitol Hill, liar-Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the liar-nObama administration.”

Carlson continued: The central effort to extend Russian influence was focused on the executive branch, the liar-nObama administration. The vehicle through which Manafort worked for the Russians was a shell group called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. The group was supposedly based in Belgium but had no offices there. It had only two employees, both based in Ukraine.
          Their telephone number in Brussels rang in Kiev. It was a sham, yet it had a presence in Washington. The European Centre for a Modern Ukraine was a major client of the Podesta Group. Why did the Russians choose the Podesta Group? Because both Podestas were close to the liar-Clintons, and liar-Hillary was then secretary of state. She could get things done for the Podestas’ Russian clients. It was influence peddling — the most obvious kind.
          Sometimes, our source told us, ties between the Podesta Group and the liar-Clintons were explicit. Tony Podesta spoke regularly to liar-Hillary Clinton while she ran the State Department. Our source remembers Podesta’s assistant announcing that Secretary liar-Clinton is on the line.
          According to our source, Manafort was clear that Russia wanted to cultivate ties to liar-Hillary Clinton, in the belief she was likely to become president. These links to liar-Hillary were apparently valuable; our source believes that the Russian money Manafort funneled to the Podesta Group greatly exceeds the roughly $1 million they were officially paid. Some of these payments, he said, could be hidden kickbacks that would be hard to trace. He described the Podesta Group’s books as a “treasure trove” and highly secret. He told us the Podesta Group had no board, and all financial decisions were personally made by Tony Podesta. The Group’s employees, he said, included a person whose only official job was managing Tony Podesta’s art collection. It would be easy for such an organization to conceal financial transactions.
          Our source says investigators are very interested in Manafort’s behavior while he ran the Trump campaign, but otherwise that description is mostly bogus. The investigation has broadened to determine which people and organizations in Washington have spent years working secretly as de facto operatives on behalf of the Russia government. The Podesta Group is chief among these de facto foreign operatives. “They are more focused on facilitators of Russian influence in this country, not election collusion,” our source said. The Podesta Group is “in their crosshairs.”
          It appears that Mueller may have hooked a much bigger fish than the Washington swamp thought possible, and, as with the phony dossier, Democrats should have been more careful what they wished for.
          Here is Carlson’s report.  ~The Patriot Post  VIDEO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIApwsOnP2Y
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52040

          According to Pruitt during a recent visit to Nashville, “The level of protection I have is dictated by the level of threat. … Unfortunately, we’ve had unprecedented threat levels, which has necessitated unprecedented levels of protection.” Citing the security detail’s $2 million price tag, one Nashville televisions station amusingly complained, “Some lawmakers are wondering if it’s a little too much.” They’ve apparently never witnessed the ferocity of so-called peace and harmony-loving environmentalists.
          No doubt the ones providing death threats are some of the same ecoterrorists who protested the Dakota Access Pipeline in Iowa and South and North Dakota, wreaking millions of dollars’ worth of damage. And that was in addition to the theatrics they imposed on Keystone XL. Both pipelines weren’t just politically targeted by the liar-nObama administration; they and the land they reside on were trashed and blockaded by angry zealots masquerading as “protesters.”
          Pruitt’s predecessor, Gina McCarthy, didn’t need an inordinate level of protection because she was on their side. Moreover, most conservatives don’t respond to policies with which they disagree by engaging in reprehensible antics. The ecoterrorists’ own actions provide Pruitt ample reason for taking measures to mitigate the threat these arsonists pose.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52021

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5624099393001

http://video.insider.foxnews.com/v/5624142228001

by Todd Johnson:  This week marks the 230th anniversary of the first essay in what would later be known as The Federalist Papers. Federalist No. 1, penned under the pseudonym “Publius” (later identified as Alexander Hamilton), was the first salvo launched by Hamilton and his two compatriots, John Jay and James Madison, to convince the New York delegation to ratify the U.S. Constitution.

          Considered by many legal scholars and historians to be the premier documents for understanding the original intent of the Constitution, The Federalist Papers are truly cornerstones of the republic. Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, said the documents were “the best commentary on the principles of government … ever written,” and yet many Americans are unfamiliar with their contents or their importance to the foundation of the United States.
          In an era where people try to communicate ideas in 140 characters or less, The Federalist Papers serve as a shining example of clear thought and well-argued rhetoric. They also serve as a clarion call for unity in a day and age when people seem more focused on what divides us rather than what unites.
          Hamilton’s prose in Federalist No. 1, while incredibly moving and poignant, was also the dynamic scene setter for the rest of the essays and articles. When Hamilton wrote about how the proposed Constitution’s conformity nests with the true principles of Republican virtues he was advocating for nothing short of a political revolution.
          As a veteran of the War of Independence, Hamilton innately understood that the conflict with the British was but the first step in the transformation of 13 separate and distinct colonies into a new nation. Understanding the momentous crossroads facing the United States, Hamilton asked the critical question in Federalist No. 1: “whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.”
          Hamilton, and his numerous allies, realized they had to put forth a well-reasoned and cogent argument in favor of a strong government that would preserve the Union while still respecting states’ and individual rights.
          And that is the key legacy of The Federalist Papers. They serve as the intellectual underpinning of the Liberty that we, as American citizens, continue to enjoy today. While the 21st century is a vastly different environment — socially, economically, politically and culturally — from when the Papers were written, the values they represent continue to resonate with all Americans.
          The ideas propagated in the Federalist Papers — union, representative government and judicial review to name a few — form the bedrock of the compact we live under today. For that, all Americans owe a debt of gratitude to Hamilton, Jay and Madison.
          Yet as Ronald Reagan once said, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction,” and recent polling shows that the nation is failing to live up to the legacy bequeathed to us by the Founding Fathers.
          According to the Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, 37% can’t name any of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment and only 26% can name all three branches of government. These numbers are quite shocking, especially considering when we all live in “The Information Age.” Worse, this ignorance is an enormous threat to our Constitution.
          The Federalist Papers are a seminal text for all Americans and it’s time for all citizens to reacquaint themselves with these dynamic treatises. We encourage all readers to look at outstanding links like Gregg Maggs’ guide on the Federalist Papers or take the free online The Federalist Papers course offered by Hillsdale College.
          Both links are incredibly relevant to the challenges faced by our nation today and will enable anyone to better understand their feeling about things like judicial overreach, usurpation of individual rights and legislative gridlock. Only by studying and appreciating our past can we move forward in our individual and collective pursuits of life, liberty and happiness.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52010

by Thomas Gallatin:  If one blatantly dismisses all accusation of bias as patently false when data would suggest otherwise, one will find little sympathy to accept one’s accusation of another as guilty of the same sin. Or to put it in more common parlance, it’s the pot calling the kettle black.

          Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, in the run-up to the presidential election, ran an experiment to determine just how biased toward leftist politics were the nation’s leading social media giants. As Frank Foer, a writer for The Atlantic, describes, “The social media companies are the gatekeepers. Whatever choices these companies make to elevate or bury information is very powerful and will have a big impact on what people read.” Epstein found that Google searches returned twice as many pro-liar-Hillary Clinton news articles as did Yahoo. Even more disturbing was Google’s targeting tactic. Men in blue states saw more than double the pro-liar-Clinton articles than did women in red states. Epstein charges that Google’s search algorithm ranked pro-liar-Hillary articles ahead of any positive articles on Donald Trump.
          Another study conducted by Nicholas Diakopoulos, a professor at Northwestern University, found that in December 2015 Google search results of presidential candidates showed seven out of every 10 articles were positive toward Democrats, whereas less than six out of 10 were positive for Republican candidates. We’re surprised it was that high. On election night, only 1% of 113 featured Google election-related searches produced articles from conservative news sources.
          Meanwhile, in spite of the mainstream media’s overwhelmingly negative coverage of Donald Trump, he won the election, which prompted the MSM to immediately lob charges of a dubious Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy as well as the “major” problem of “fake news.” Facebook later announced that it would be looking to develop programs to limit fake news, especially from the Russians. But conservative media outlets began to see more of their content limited on leading social media sites, such as Prager University witnessing much of its content on Google-owned YouTube being labeled as restricted for no apparent reason other than the fact that it promotes conservative ideology.
          So, is it really the Russians that the MSM and the social media giants are seeking to stop? If it is, they don’t seem to be doing a very good job. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Russian state-run news network RT is thriving on YouTube and Facebook. RT’s English language YouTube channel has garnered more than 2.1 billion views and has 2.2 million subscribers, putting it on par with CNN’s YouTube channel. Add another 3.3 billion views from 20 other RT-related YouTube channels and one can clearly see that the Russians are having little trouble getting their message into American media.
          The Journal reports, “Unlike other government-funded news outlets, such as the U.K.‘s BBC or the U.S.’s Radio Free Europe, researchers say RT is more overtly political, with a goal of undermining Western institutions and democracies. … Researchers and former RT employees say the outlet highlights conflict in the West, questions prevailing narratives in Western media and promotes conspiracy theories.”
          Humorously, CNN has just launched an ad campaign entitled “Facts First” designed to sell its brand as genuinely real news from a trusted source as opposed to fake news. The ad features an apple with a voice over telling viewers not to believe those who would say it is a banana. CNN, dost thou protest too much?  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/52016

by Political Editors:  From 2012 through 2016, labor unions donated roughly $765 million to political causes and groups, and a staggering 99% of those donations went to leftist political causes or candidates. Luka Ladan, communications director for the Center for Union Facts, stated, “For years, labor unions have hijacked member dues to fund Planned Parenthood, Emily’s List and other pro-abortion groups. Yet many union members oppose the abortion lobby. The Employee Rights Act would require union officials to obtain permission before spending dues dollars on left-wing political advocacy.”

          For example, in 2007 alone, labor unions donated $1.8 million to Planned Parenthood, $810,000 to Emily’s Choice and $45,000 to NARAL Pro-Choice America. Often a majority of union members do not know that their dues are funding the abortion lobby. “Big Labor doesn’t really want to publicize it,” Ladan said. Public unions are hardly better. In fact, the Supreme Court will soon hear a caseinvolving their political contributions.
          Recognizing the massive imbalance in union spending on leftist political causes, Pennsylvania AFL-CIO President Rick Bloomingdale stated in July, “We may have gotten too close to one party. We should be for people who are for us, regardless of party label.”
          Now there’s a novel concept, considering that roughly 40% of union household members vote Republican.
          The Employee Rights Act, introduced in the House this past May, seeks to stop current unfair labor union practices by enabling workers the freedom to select or refrain from union representation, as well as require union officials to obtain permission from members before spending dues on causes they may oppose. There’s a reason why unions have steadily lost membership, much of it having to do with the fact that union leadership for years has been using member dues as slush funds for Democrats and leftist politics rather than truly advocating for workers’ rights. Hopefully, the Employee Rights Act passes, giving not only workers more choice in accepting union representation, but also giving union members the power to choose those political causes they wish to support.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/51996

by Political Editors:  Last Thursday, White House Chief of Staff John Kelly sought to put to bed a week-long, Leftmedia-driven story of Donald Trump’s phone call to a grieving widow. Kelly rightly called out Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL) as an “empty barrel” for her self-promoting politicizing of a sacred, private event — separate from her criticism of Trump’s phone call and exploitation of a widow’s grief — even though he was inaccurate on the details. His point was that Wilson is a grandstanding narcissist who, in the words of White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, is “all hat, no cattle.” Kelly is exactly right. Ignoring his call for respecting American military personnel killed in action and their grieving loved ones, however, Wilson and her cohorts in the media labeled Kelly’s remarks as racist, demanded an apology for Kelly’s “character assassination,” and further churned an entire weekend’s worth of “news.”

          Meanwhile, having already once made this assertion, on Sunday Wilson tweeted that “Niger is [Trump’s] Benghazi. He needs to own it.” Like the good Demo/MSM propaganda outlet that it is, CNN and other Leftmedia outlets took the cue to search for the “massive intelligence failure” in Niger prior to the ambush killings of four Americans. CNN also sought to exploit other grieving Gold Star parents in an attempt to paint Trump as uncaring and un-presidential.
          Mark Alexander explains, “CNN is doing everything possible to use the death of four Americans in Niger as political fodder to hack Trump. This time, it’s trotting out a grieving couple whose son was recently killed complete with subtext lines initially targeting Trump. But this family had no intention of letting their son’s death be used as fodder for CNN’s totally disgraceful political charade.”
          In continuing to run with this story, CNN and the Leftmedia are not simply continuing their anti-Trump resistance campaign. They are seeking to sow division between military members and Trump, as well as divert attention away from, of all issues, Russia. The Mueller Special Counsel investigation into Russian election meddling has recently turned its focus onto several Democrats. There is also renewed interest being shown over the deal Barack liar-nObama and then-Secretary of State liar-Hillary Clinton made with the Russians to sell them uranium.
          Back to that CNN interview — a tearful Sheila Murphy, the mother of a fallen soldier, told the host, “I have no hard feeling towards anyone, because it’s not about me. It’s about my child and all the other countless fallen heroes, and those who are still over there now and the families that are here grieving. … That’s what it’s all about. I don’t want it to be about me or a letter, I want it to be about my child. And what he stood for, and what they’re fighting for over there right now as I speak.” Wise words.

VIDEO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY0pu48d0B0

          Addendum: Myeshia Johnson, the widow in Trump’s infamous phone call, broke her silence, saying, “What he said was — yes the president — said that he knew what [my husband, Sgt. La David Johnson] signed up for, but it hurts anyways. And I was — it made me cry because I was very angry at the tone of his voice and how he said it. He couldn’t remember my husband’s name.” She added, “Whatever Ms. Wilson said was not fabricated, what she said was 100 percent correct.”
          Trump, naturally, punched back on Twitter, saying, “I had a very respectful conversation with the widow of Sgt. La David Johnson, and spoke his name from beginning, without hesitation!”
          Memo to Trump: Posting anything about this on Twitter cheapens ALL of it.  ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/51990