Naturally, the mainstream media is taking cues from Democrats and is now framing the normal job-related actions of high-ranking White House officials like Pompeo and Attorney General William Barr as somehow being evidence of corruption. For example, Pompeo is alleged to have engaged in misconduct for simply listening to President Donald Trump’s infamous July 25th phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Why would this be wrong? As The Wall Street Journal notes, “Shouldn’t a Secretary of State be on a call to the new President of an important country? U.S. foreign policy is the secretary’s job.”

Why are Democrats playing this vilification game? Because their “smoking gun” whistleblower complaint  failed to expose any impeachable offense. In all likelihood the Democrats knew that going in, but with a friendly press they calculated that it would serve to provide just enough of a cover story to justify acting on their long-running impeachment obsession. However, House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi and company know they don’t have any actual evidence of a crime, so they’re vilifying anyone near Trump to create the air of corruption around any action. Even innocuous job-related activities can be said to have been done with corrupt motivations to cover up Trump’s crimes. This is an effort to keep the narrative alive through the election.

Trump sees this, which is why he’s calling it what it is: “a coup.” On Tuesday, he asserted, “As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the People, their Vote, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!” He’s right.

There may be another motive for the Democrats’ vilification of Pompeo and Barr — they don’t want them investigating the origins of the 2016 Russia-collusion hoax. In fact, The Washington Post suggests as much in an article titled, “Democrats’ worst fears about William Barr are proving correct.”   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65848?mailing_id=4564&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4564&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

What got us here was a lack of accountability on multiple fronts. Americans, by a slim margin, elected Trump to address problems that were not being addressed, and which they believed the political establishment had no intention of addressing. For many Patriots, there was also a frustration with a clear double standard.

Much of this came into focus with the scumbag/liar-nObama administration. That featured Operation Fast and Furious, in which the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives literally allowed a large number of modern multi-purpose semiautomatic firearms to fall into drug cartel hands. That exploded into the public’s consciousness with the murder of CBP agent Brian Terry. No one — and by that we at The Patriot Post do not refer to Faceless Men — was ever held accountable.

Then came the big one — the IRS targeted Tea Party groups. That took place at high gear from the Citizens United ruling to when liar-Lois Lerner outright admitted it in 2013. liar-Lerner, it was later discovered, quarterbacked the abuses committed against the Tea Party groups. After initial feigned outrage by some on the Left, including Barack scumbag/liar-nObama, nothing happened. liar-Lerner has retired with a six-figure pension.

As that went on, conservative activists in Wisconsin who had successfully supported Scott Walker in budget battles and recall elections were targeted by left-wing prosecutors. Eventually, the Wisconsin Supreme Court stepped in, ruling the “John Doe” investigations illegal. Our Arnold Ahlert did a masterful job covering those abuses, but the prosecutors who ran them never faced consequences.

Then, in 2016, there was Spygate. The intelligence community’s capabilities were turned on the presidential campaign of the party out of power. The initial reasons for the probe were flimsy. The investigators’ texts revealed flagrant bias. Robert Mueller found nothing, but aside from a couple of firings that are being contested, no real consequences have been imposed.

In 2018, there was New York Democrat Gov. scumbag-Andrew Cuomo’s assault on the NRA. His actions — that nobody disputes are taking place — make the unfounded allegations Stacey Abrams has peddled against Georgia Governor Brian Kemp look like tiddlywinks. scumbag-Cuomo has been open about his desire behind the abuses: To silence dissent from his anti-Second Amendment agenda. And his efforts arguably swung a number of House seats, two Senate races, and a governor’s race. Consequences for his blatant abuse of political opponents? None.

Those are just the abuses of power. Just about every Republican presidential nominee or prominent legislative leader has also been smeared one way or another. Remember how rino-Mitt Romney was labeled a tax cheat who would bring back slavery and abuse dogs? Or the way John Lewis defamed rino-John McCain in 2008? How many times were George W. Bush, Bob Dole, George H.W. Bush, and Ronald Reagan labeled “racists”? Remember when rino-Paul Ryan was portrayed pushing an old woman in a wheelchair off a cliff? Or what Newt Gingrich was called when he led the 1994 Republican takeover of the House of Representatives? Heck, Republicans can’t even fix a botched school-lunch program without being smeared.

There has been no accountability for these leftist smears, either. Clearly, leftists are the perpetrators, but a big chunk of the blame falls on leadership of both the conservative movement and the Republican Party. Restraint in the name of civility became unilateral disarmament and a projection of weakness. Donald Trump, for all his character flaws, at least fights back against the smears. He punches back — harder than any of those past Republicans who were defamed. This past weakness is fundamentally why we are at the place we are at today.

If Republicans had committed even a fraction of the alleged abuses — say against Planned Parenthood or any of Michael Bloomberg’s anti-Second Amendment groups — we’d never hear the end of it. And we get the usual scolding from when Trump fights fire with fire. But the harsh truth is that the lack of accountability has created a double standard, both in the application of Rule of Law and in terms of public discourse. America can survive a lot of mistakes, but it is the double standards that are tearing this country apart.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65806?mailing_id=4562&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4562&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

The reasons for their hatred of the president are clear.

He blew the whistle on how the DC establishment left our border essentially open so that Democrats could get new future voters and the Republican business class could get more cheap labor. He stood up and called out the NFL kneelers, flag burners, cop haters, and the “America was never great” crowd. They were shocked. Didn’t anyone tell him the left owns the culture and gets to write our history and that its bad politics for a Republican to talk about anything other than capital gains taxes? He exposed the China scandal that resulted in 60,000 closed factories in places like Peoria, Cincinnati, Ames, Knoxville, Duluth, etc., while money flowed to the denizens of Chevy Chase, Maryland, Great Falls, Virginia, and the leftist enclaves of San Francisco, Manhattan, and Silicon Valley. The president blew the whistle on how the left has been using the courts to force radical social change while undermining religious liberty and the sanctity of life. He ran on promising to put constitutionalists on the courts and even named them BEFORE the election.

The president has exposed the rip-off of the American taxpayer that occurred as we funded NATO, while its European members cut their contributions and used the money to subsidize their socialist economies. The Atlantic alliance is important, but in what world are hard-working Americans supposed to pay for the defense of our “allies” if our allies aren’t willing to defend themselves?

I could go on and on but you get the point. They must take him down because they must take us down. They will fail. But it is going to be brutal. Fights that really matter are always brutal, nasty, and worth winning. Stand strong.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65815?mailing_id=4562&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4562&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Jeffress said, “liar-Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats can’t put down the impeachment match. They know they couldn’t beat [Trump] in 2016 against scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton, and they’re increasingly aware of the fact that they won’t win against him in 2020, and impeachment is the only tool they have to get rid of Donald Trump. And the Democrats don’t care if they burn down and destroy this nation in the process.”

In fact, he continued, “I don’t pretend to speak for all Evangelicals, but this week I have been traveling the country and I’ve literally spoken to thousands and thousands of evangelical Christians. I have never seen them more angry over any issue than this attempt to illegitimately remove this president from office — overturn the 2016 election and negate the votes of millions of evangelicals in the process. And they know that the only impeachable offense President Trump has committed was beating scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton in 2016. That’s the unpardonable sin for which the Democrats will never forgive him.” Jeffress predicted, “If the Democrats are successful in removing the president from office, I’m afraid it will cause a Civil War-like fracture in this nation from which this country will never heal.”

Democrats have only two things to offer in 2020: socialist redistribution of wealth by way of an endless list of “free” stuff in return for votes, and impeachment to appeal for votes from those suffering severe Trump Derangement Syndrome. And, on top of that, they are openly proposing to confiscate guns. Unfortunately, these combined threats to Liberty make the reference to “civil war” relevant.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65818?mailing_id=4562&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4562&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

For the past 24 hours, the liberal media have engaged in tremendous journalistic malpractice. Virtually every outlet has represented President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenksy as a call exclusively about former Vice President Joe Biden. 

For example, here’s how NPR and most media outlets presented the details of the call:

“I would like you to do us a favor,” Trump asked President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, according to the official account released on Wednesday. Later in the conversation, according to the memo, Trump said:

“I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation in Ukraine … There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that loose lips liar-Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that.”

That brief description leaves readers with the impression that the specific “favor” Trump requested was related to loose lips liar-Biden. And, of course, that’s the basis for demanding Trump’s impeachment — that he abused his authority by asking a foreign government to meddle in the 2020 election by investigating a potential opponent. 

But that is a false interpretation of the call, and the worst possible spin.

The ellipsis in the second paragraph, representing words cut from the president’s conversation, covers more than 500 words! You can say a lot in 500 words, and the president did.

Here’s the “favor” quote in full context:

I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike… I guess you have one of your wealthy people… the server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation. I think you’re surrounding yourself with some of the same people.

I would like to have the Attorney General call you and your people and I would like you to get to the bottom of it. As you said yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine. Whatever you can do, it’s very important that you do it if that’s possible.

As you can see from the transcript, the “favor” isn’t about loose lips liar-Biden or the 2020 election. Kimberley Strassel of The Wall Street Journal noted:

Trump’s actual “favor” is that Ukraine look backward, to what happened in the 2016 election. This is a legitimate ask, since election meddling looks to have come from both Russia and Ukraine.

Kudos to our friends at The Federalist for drawing attention to the media’s gross distortion of the facts. 

President Trump legitimately asked the president of Ukraine to cooperate with investigators regarding what happened in the 2016 campaign. He appointed an attorney general with the expectation that we could get to the bottom of this, and seeking the cooperation of a foreign government frequently requires presidential action. 

What the Democrats and the media are desperately trying to gloss over is what Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz and U.S. Attorney John Durham are currently investigating — the Deep State’s meddling in the 2016 election. 

This selective editing is not just bad journalism. It is media malpractice — deliberately misleading the American public to advance the radical left’s narrative and agenda. It is, as President Trump said, not just “fake news” but “corrupt news.”

The DNI Testifies

Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire appeared yesterday before a rare public hearing of the House Intelligence Committee. Maguire, a former Navy SEAL, served 36 years in uniform until he retired as a vice admiral. 

Director Maguire was hauled before the committee to explain why he initially withheld a complaint from an intelligence community employee regarding the president’s call with the Ukrainian leader. Some have accused him of engaging in an illegal cover-up.

It’s a pretty poor cover-up considering that the White House has publicly declassified the complaint AND the transcript of the call AND permitted Maguire to testify publicly AND the president is talking about it. 

President Trump could have exerted executive privilege to block the release of this information if he really felt it was so damning to him. But he did not, and that speaks volumes. Moreover, there is a perfectly valid reason why the complaint was initially withheld from the congressional intelligence committees. 

Maguire explained that the allegations in the complaint were unprecedented in that they involved a phone call between the president and a foreign leader. 

The president is not an intelligence community official and the subject of the call did not pertain to an intelligence operation. Thus, he wasn’t certain whether the law governing the transmission of whistleblower complaints to Congress applied in this case. 

So he sought a second opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel, which determined that because the complaint involved a presidential phone call, the information was subject to executive privilege and not subject to the whistleblower law.

But that’s not the end of the story. 

As we noted in yesterday’s report, Maguire and the intelligence community inspector general both referred the complaint to the Justice Department’s Criminal Division for an additional review, which determined that no laws had been violated. 

Think about that for a moment: If you’re trying to cover up wrongdoing, do you send the evidence to the Justice Department’s Criminal Division?

So just to be clear, Maguire was presented with a complaint based on secondhand information from a biased individual that involved presidential communication subject to executive privilege. And he still goes the “extra mile” of ensuring that there wasn’t a violation of the law.

I think it is clear that Director Maguire behaved appropriately at all times. 

scumbag-Schiff’s Skit

Someone who did not behave appropriately was Intelligence Committee Chairman scumbag-Adam Schiff. 

As you may recall, scumbag-Schiff infamously insisted that there was evidence of Russian collusion “in plain sight.” We later learned from Robert Mueller that scumbag-Schiff’s charges were simply not true. scumbag-Schiff lied for two years to stoke that drama and divide the country. 

Well, the drama continued yesterday. During his opening testimony, scumbag-Schiff put on a little skit for the committee. He performed a dramatic reading of a “parody transcript” of Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president. Here’s what scumbag-Schiff read before the committee:

We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. You know what I mean? I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good.

I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of dirt, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, and not just any people. I’m going to put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States — my Attorney General, Bill Barr — he’s got the whole weight of American law enforcement behind him. And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy, you’re going to love him. Trust me.

You know what I’m asking, so I’m only going to say this a few more times, in a few more ways. And don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.

It was a gross exaggeration intended to make the president sound like a criminal. And it was all fake. As Brit Hume noted, “If the conversation were as damning as scumbag-Schiff et al would like, he would have simply read directly from it, instead of making up dialogue.”

Unfortunately, anyone not paying very close attention to the proceedings could have easily misunderstood scumbag-Schiff’s parody and assumed that the president actually said those things. 

Democrats are demanding impeachment, an extraordinarily serious matter for the entire country. But scumbag-Adam Schiff is putting on a big act to smear the president. 

The left will do virtually anything to destroy Donald Trump, Mike Pence, and the 63 million people who voted for them.

The Democrats, the Deep State, and their media allies never accepted the results of the 2016 elections. Now, with an election just a little more than a year away, they are refusing to trust the American people. They are determined to force Trump from office by any means necessary.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/65745?mailing_id=4554&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4554&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

Put simply, Americans pay a lot of money for their children to receive an education that will supposedly equip them for their future professions and careers.

So, when you see that the top theme assigned for summer reading by colleges during the summer of 2018 was racism and slavery, based on a study of 475 universities and colleges conducted by the National Association of Scholars, there are a few dots connected in seeing the failure of too many higher-education endeavors and the exploding prevalence of college-aged kids who are disgruntled and dysfunctional. What were the second and third most-often assigned topics for summer study? A couple of other subjects that stem from the race-tinged agenda of the educrats of academia: police and crime along with immigration, respectively. Almost 60% of the assigned books for reading in the lists offered stemmed from nonwhite people groups.

What’s wrong with diversity? Nothing. What’s wrong with the obsession and fixation on the differences that divide us with the sledgehammer of a growing population of activists hidden in the world of education constantly beating the wedge of race-baiting between our population? Everything.

The determination of some to literally split our nation into populations of colors, a growing list of gender categories, class warfare and any other factor that can possibly be used in the strategy of identify politics is truly staggering — and unhealthy. It’s time that we get value and actual education for our kids’ tuition, not indoctrination.

Americans, on the whole, are not racists. No, racism is not completely extinct in America, yet the prevailing thought being reinforced on higher-ed campuses, as well as throughout most of the politics of the Left, points to some raging pandemic of racism. The current culture is being treated as some cult of fearmongering to keep the combustible engine of politics ignited. Instead, America is witnessing the inferno of destruction of the Democrat Party. Race and the industry of race-baiting appears to be almost all that remains as tools on the Left.

Instead of choosing selections of reading that value the heroics of family, the dignity of personal achievement and excellence, or attempting to understand that everything from poverty to the increase of mental illness is tied to broken homes, these “institutions of higher learning” offered tomes with storylines sure to instill the social-justice narrative — must reading for the next generation of Black Lives Matters or antifa activists — highlighting the dreadful oppression of America that certainly is a rotten nation because some believe it’s great and offers the best way of life based on authentic Liberty. Let’s look at the five most frequently assigned readings in 2018, as noted in the study, Beach Books 2018-2019:

• Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption by Bryan Stevenson — “a pedestrian memoir that argues that America’s criminal justice system is fundamentally corrupted by racism” with open recruitment of readers to become activists aiming to free criminals from jail.

• Make Your Home Among Strangers by Jennine Capo Crucet — a novel tied to the international Elian Gonzalez story with the main character in her “first year at a white, wealthy Rawlings College” where her Cuban heritage is a focal point of the story.

• The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot — a nonfiction biography about a poor southern African-American woman whose cancer cells were used as the basis for cervical cancer research with the focus on medical ethics “specifically in relation to race and class,” so says the Sparknotes from the assignment that goes on to advocate for universal healthcare.

• Between the World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates — penned as a letter to the author’s son, the writing explains to his son “the racist violence that has been woven into American culture” and was inspired by a meeting with former President Barack scumbag/liar-nObama.

• The Hate U Give by Angie Thomas — a novel about a teenage girl, according to Sparknotes, that “grapples with racism, police brutality and activism.”

Americans are paying for this garbage to be taught as truth and reality with little or no room for challenge, criticism, or debate. Instead of our young adults being offered readings of inspiration, challenge, and empowerment to excel on campus, too many of our college students are being force-fed activism with censorship as the only response if there’s disagreement. Yeah, we’re paying for this … and not just with money.  

~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65789?mailing_id=4558&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4558&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body 

Recently, I pulled a top-of-the-fold headline from The Washington Post to demonstrate how the news cycle serves, in effect, as a mass “push poll,” or what we coined years ago as “Pollaganda” — “mainstream media saturation of news-cycle loops with a particular narrative bias, then polling media consumers for their perspective as shaped by that narrative or bias.” It is an incestuous cycle of media deception.

Consequently, public opinion is shifting on impeachment of Donald Trump.

After the Democrats’ Obstruction 1.0 charade was exposed for the fraud it was in the final Mueller report, poll numbers supporting impeachment dropped significantly.

However, Democrats and their Leftmedia propagandists  have now re-fired their base with their latest ruse, and accordingly, polling in support of impeachment has climbed. In July, a Quinnipac poll reported that 32% of Americans supported impeachment. In August, a  Monmouth poll reported 35% support for impeachment. By the end of September, the Politico/Morning Consult poll reported 43% support for impeachment.

Completing the impeachment Pollaganda cycle comes this headline from The Hill: “Public opinion polls show shift toward impeaching Trump.” Now that the full force of the media is trumping up impeachment, Hill-HarrisX reports that impeachment support is 47% and CAPS-Harris reports it’s now split 50-50. And that is exactly the calculus of the Pollaganda cycle.

This polling propaganda cycle is akin to the “lemming effect,” where collective actions compel individuals to comport with their group, with undesirable or even tragic results. It is an insidious and fallacious deception, and media organizations pushing such poll results without the Pollaganda disclaimer (that would be every news organization but The Patriot Post) has forfeited the last shreds of any journalistic integrity they may have once possessed.

Finally, regarding the question of the effect the Democrats’ impeachment charade will have on the 2020 presidential election, political observer David Thornton notes, “If public opinion is swinging rapidly based on the new revelations then it drastically changes the political calculus of impeachment. Where many Republicans assumed that impeachment would help the president politically, the opposite may be true given the widespread opinion that Trump’s actions were wrong.”  

~The Patriot Post

VIDEO:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wD1MDRY98k

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65780?mailing_id=4558&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4558&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

How many times do Democrats get to cry wolf before a rational body politic tells them to go fly a kite? Instead of retreating with tails between their legs over their failed Russia hoax, they’re already at it again.

Did any Democrats leading the false charge that President Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election ever apologize for putting the country through this nightmare? Did any of their media water carriers ever backpedal from their anti-Trump sensationalism?

Of course not, because in their minds Trump is so evil and his presidency so bad for the country that even ignoble efforts to remove him are morally warranted. What’s wrong with deceit and abuse of process if it will rid the country of the orange scourge?

Alert people should now recognize that Democrats are still willing to go to almost any lengths to undo the 2016 election — or preempt Trump’s 2020 reelection. Their raw contempt for Trump and his supporters knows no bounds, and their just-launched “impeachment inquiry” is further evidence of it.

I note in my soon-to-be-released new book, “Guilty By Reason of Insanity: Why the Democrats Must Not Win,” that there is no real fissure in the Democratic Party between the old guard and the young radicals, the latter of whom are led by the “Squad.” Sure, there is sometimes spirited debate between the established powers and Rep. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s socialist quartet, but in the end, the entire party has embraced a thoroughly extremist leftist agenda.

Even if House Speaker liar-Nancy Pelosi would have us believe that she and her veteran Democratic colleagues are more measured, there is no doubt where her party is headed. Even if in her heart of hearts, she thinks the Young Turks are going too far too fast, which I strongly doubt, the Democratic Party base is not about to allow her to vacillate, much less to moderate.

So it is that liar-Pelosi, despite having long resisted Rep. scumbag liar-Jerry Nadler’s and other Democratic congressional militants’ efforts to initiate impeachment proceedings, has snapped to attention over these new hyped-up allegations concerning Ukraine and opened an impeachment inquiry herself.

Just like the Russia hoax, this one already involves more damning evidence against Democrats than Trump. Democrats, in a monumental act of projection, tried for three years to interfere with an election by falsely claiming Trump interfered with that same election. Now they’re alleging that Trump abused his presidential power with Ukraine by trying to expose loose lips liar-Joe Biden’s possible abuse of power with Ukraine. In addition to loose lips liar-Biden’s alleged misconduct, three Democratic senators wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general in May 2018 urging him to cooperate with the Mueller investigation. This is plot thickening on steroids.

liar-Pelosi acted precipitously, before Trump released notes from his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and before release of the whistleblower complaint against Trump, both of which are turning out to be nothing — veggie burgers with no fries. Then again, with the liberal media in their pocket (or vice versa), Democrats have little to fear from performing such stunts.

Some commentators argue that though Democrats know they don’t have the votes to convict Trump in the Senate, they are pursuing this “inquiry” because their agenda isn’t resonating with the people. Corruption charges will distract from their policy bankruptcy and might cripple Trump enough to defeat him in 2020. Others say their angle is more subtle — to snooker Trump and his officials into committing a process crime by defying court orders to produce documents, or perhaps lying to Congress or the FBI.

Of course, liberal commentators dispute that Democrats are trying to distract from their preposterous agenda, because in their view, the Democrats’ insane environmental and fiscal proposals and their ruthless obsession over identity politics are winning ideas. Thus, they don’t need to fabricate phony corruption charges. These allegations are legitimate. Though there was manifestly no quid pro quo in Trump’s comments to Zelensky, the Trump haters divine evil intent and malice aforethought with every Trump stream-of-consciousness utterance.

That they were all embarrassingly wrong for three years over Russiagate gives them no pause. They are incorrigible and shameless.

Some Trump supporters are concerned about this, fearing that Democratic relentlessness will finally bear fruit. I honestly don’t think so. Once again, the Trump haters, so consumed with venom that they’ve lost objectivity, have overplayed their hands. This impeachment fantasy is going nowhere. Democratic excessiveness is part of what led to Trump’s rise in the first place, and there’s good reason to believe it will aid in his reelection. People have had enough of this insanity. By becoming more extreme and unreasonable, the left is only solidifying and amplifying Trump support. So bring it on.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/65739?mailing_id=4554&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4554&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

At the time, Mark Landler of The New York Times argued that Trump’s decision threatened to damage America’s fragile trans-Atlantic relationship. He added, “Mr. Trump’s move could embolden hard-line forces in Iran, raising the threat of Iranian retaliation against Israel or the United States, fueling an arms race in the Middle East and fanning sectarian conflicts from Syria to Yemen.”

President Trump didn’t see it that way.

During a formal White House announcement in 2018 of the U.S. decision to pull out of the deal, the president said, “This was a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made,” adding, “It didn’t bring calm, it didn’t bring peace, and it never will.”

Known as the Joint Comprehension Plan of Action, or simply the “Iran Deal,” the 2015 agreement brought together the five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the U.S., Great Britain, France, Russia, and China) as well as Germany and the European Union. In theory, the JCPOA was designed to ease economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for allowing its government to pursue a limited nuclear program. Although the U.S. is no longer part of the deal, the other member states held firm to the agreement.

The naysayers’ dire warnings of chaos and warfare breaking out across Europe never panned out, although when news broke that Saudi oil facilities had been  attacked by drones on Sept. 14, many wondered whether Trump’s critics were right. But Iran hasn’t made a move since, and for now it seems that its attack on the Saudi oil supply was more an attempt at goading the U.S. into a military response than causing any serious threat to the region.

To his credit, Trump has avoided war despite pressure from within. The exit of National Security Advisor John Bolton may have been the result of Bolton’s “war hawk” reputation clashing with Trump’s more nuanced approach.

And it’s Trump’s approach that seems to be paying off.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board writes, “Iran will also now face even greater pressure to renegotiate. So far its leaders have refused, saying they will not do so under the pressure of sanctions. They are also violating the terms of the nuclear deal, stockpiling excessive enriched uranium. Iran could break out of the accord even further by enriching to weapons-grade levels. Or it could ratchet up its terror campaign with more attacks on Arab states, oil supplies, or U.S. and allied forces in the region.”

But just this week, there have been two important developments.

One is that the U.S. is clearly signaling its readiness to respond if Iran escalates the situation with more attacks. President Trump’s assertion that the U.S. was “locked and loaded” has been followed up by a Pentagon  announcement that the U.S. will send a Patriot missile battery, radars, and 200 support personnel to Saudi Arabia.

Equally important was the joint statement earlier this week by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and French President Macron that blamed Iran for the attack and pushed the regime to “accept negotiation on a long-term framework for its nuclear programme as well as on issues related to regional security, including its missiles programme and other means of delivery.”

In other words, those critics who claimed that Trump was alienating America’s allies were wrong. Thanks to the president, some of them now seem to realize that the so-called Iran deal was a bad deal, and that any new version of the JCPOA must include President Trump’s broader concerns about Iran’s missile program and its desire to exert power in the region.

With pressure coming from all directions, Iran is now showing signs of concession due to the painful sanctions implemented by the Trump administration, as well as additional penalties enacted after the incident in Saudi Arabia.

At the United Nations this week, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani hinted that Iran may be willing to make a new deal if sanctions are lifted. However, Reuters  reported that the rogue regime’s Foreign Minister, Javad Zarif, was unwilling to change the original provisions of the JCPOA.

And so it goes.

Iran’s leadership is unpredictable, and that’s why President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Iran Deal was the right one. Too bad it took our allies so long to catch on to the big idea: Deals that benefit and embolden the enemy are not deals worth making.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65760?mailing_id=4554&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4554&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body  

How much credibility should we give to a 16-year-old when considering her qualifications to lecture adults about science and an end-of-the-world scenario?

Greta Thunberg has been dubbed by the media as a “climate change activist” and a teen “eco-warrior.” She was at the United Nations in New York last Monday to appear before diplomats and others at a “climate action summit.” Only the UN has less credibility than a teenager.

Thunberg is on a world tour promoting the latest end-of-the-planet scenario. By the way, shouldn’t she be in school? Reporters won’t ask because most appear to buy into her secular doctrine that the apocalypse is just around the corner.

Thunberg claims “people are dying” because the Earth is getting hotter. She warns that adults had better wake up or they will burn in ecological hell or perhaps even the real thing. Her theological qualifications have yet to be examined.

Think back to when you were 16 and believed you knew it all. At 18, an adult called me “precocious” (he didn’t mean it as a compliment). I had to look up the meaning in a dictionary. It was a humbling experience.

As their adolescent brains continue to develop, most teenagers know only what their teachers and textbooks tell them and maybe their parents, if they still listen to them. Science textbooks mostly embrace the climate change scenario, so why wouldn’t kids believe what they read and what they’re taught?

Thunberg was preparing to speak to the assembled adults at the UN when President Trump walked in ahead of her. The man knows showmanship. The expression on Thunberg’s face was priceless. If spitting fire contributed to “global warming,” we’d have been in real trouble.

It appears the girl is being held in intellectual captivity. She might benefit from consulting a list of “50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalytpic Predictions” compiled by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI.org), the nonprofit libertarian think tank based in Washington, D.C.

Just a few examples:

In 1967, the Los Angeles Times carried a story headlined “Dire Famine Forecast by 1975.” The story said it might “already be too late.”

On August 10, 1969, The New York Times quoted a 37-year-old scientist predicting a new ice age and that “everyone will disappear in a cloud of blue steam by 1989.”

An April 16, 1970 story in the Boston Globe quoted Dr. Paul R. Erlich of the University of California, Riverside, predicting America will be “subject to water rationing by 1974 and food rationing by 1980.” Erlich said the oceans would be as dead as Lake Erie in less than a decade.

On July 9, 1971, The Washington Post, which, like most other media, now claims climate change and a warming planet is “settled science,” thought differently then. It quoted Dr. S. I. Rasool of NASA and Columbia University. Rasool predicted a coming “new ice age.” He was described as a “leading atmospheric scientist,” so he should be believed, right? He predicted we had only about “50 or 60 years” to save ourselves from freezing to death.

On her way back to Sweden, Ms. Thunberg should take along a copy of the CEI summary. She just may discover that some older people might know more than she does about most things and that those who preceded her in these “Chicken Little” hysterics were as wrong then as she is now.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/opinion/65706?mailing_id=4552&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4552&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body