.
.
![]() |
| At the Kavanaugh hearing { tommclaughlin.blogspot.com } ~ “Are you planning to debate abortion in class?” asked our new principal. We were standing in the hallway near my classroom in the early1980s. “Yes,” I said. “Don’t,” she said. “Why not?” “Because…” She paused, seeming surprised that I would question her. “Because eighth graders are too young to discuss it.” |
![]() |
| At the Kavanaugh hearings |
Of these new squadrons, five would be for bombers (most likely the forthcoming B-21 Raider), seven would be for fighters (F-35s being the most likely option), one would be for transport planes (like the C-17 Globemaster III), two would be for drones like the MQ-9 Reaper that got justice for Malala, 14 would be for tankers (probably the new KC-46), seven would be space squadrons (likely head over to the new Space Force), nine would be for combat search-and-rescue (flying HH-60 Pave Hawks and C-130s), and seven would be special-operations squadrons. There are also plans to add 22 squadrons for command, control, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions.
How to view this? A good start. But only a start. Even if this expansion takes place, there would only be 62 fighter squadrons. We’ve seen a constant decline in the force structure of the Air Force since the end of the Cold War. In 1989, there were far more units, as this order of battle notes. We had 24 squadrons of bombers and 131 fighter squadrons between the active Air Force, the Air Force Reserve, and the Air National Guard back then.
So, after this buildup, we’d still have less than half the number of fighter squadrons than what we had at the end of the Cold War. Of course, thanks to precision-guided weapons, today’s fighters can hit more targets, but there is a problem — each plane needs to be more than in two places at once. That’s going to be problematic, to say the least, against Russia and China.
The fact is, numbers matter, and not just in the sense of matching the enemy plane-for-plane. With the exception of squadrons forward-deployed to places like South Korea and Europe, most of the squadrons rotate to operating theaters like Afghanistan and Iraq. More squadrons means that the units do not have to deploy as often.
That has two effects. First, with more time away from the front, it will improve readiness in the form of maintenance — keeping the fighters in top shape. The second advantage is that the units can train more as well, and their fighting edge will be sharper — either for a major war or for their next deployment.
A third effect could be to allow the Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard to truly be what they were in the Cold War: A backup to the active force in the case of a major war, a reserve to throw into battle to help hold the line — or to tip the fight in our favor. But that’s not what it is today. Presently, these units are in a regular deployment rotation — one that is on a longer scale than the active-duty units, but still counted on to fill certain roles on a regular basis. As a result, our ability to deter aggression has been compromised.
Now, there is still that fighter squadron gap between 131 and 62. How would we get the planes to fill out those 69 additional squadrons? The answer comes in restarting production of two planes — the F-22 Raptor and the A-10 Thunderbolt. That should be done while continuing to build F-15E Strike Eagles (currently built for export customers). Similarly, the bomber force can be helped with getting the B-21 on the line, but also by re-starting B-1 Lancer production. As a side benefit to bolstering our force structure, this will also kick our economic recovery into high gear.
We did not get to the current state of our military overnight. While Secretary of Defense James Mattis has made a very good start in turning that around, readiness is not just about getting what we have in shape to fight — it’s about having enough forces so you can fight and deter other bad actors elsewhere.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/58428?mailing_id=3755&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3755&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
America's Totalitarians
And they’re increasingly embracing totalitarianism as the means to their end.
“I don’t use the ‘T’-word lightly,” writes columnist Sohrab Ahmari. “I’ve spent years pushing back against those who fling it about in free societies like ours. But totalitarianism doesn’t require cartoonish, 1984-style secret police and Big Brother. The classical definition is a society where everything — ethical norms and moral principles and truth itself — is subjugated to political ends.”
Political ends dummycrats-Democrats are willing to trash the Constitution to achieve. Sens. Chuck scumbag/clown-Schumer (D-NY) and scumbag-Mark Warner (D-VA), and Reps. scumbag-Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Nancy Pulosi (D-CA) are demanding that the intelligence community, the FBI, and the Justice Department defy President Donald Trump’s order to release unredacted documents to Congress until they are vetted by the so-called Gang of Eight, calling it a “brazen abuse of power.” Former CIA Director scumbag/commie-John Brennan insisted deep-state officials — unelected and publicly unaccountable officials — were obligated to “push back” against the order as well.
Congress has lawfully subpoenaed the documents, yet a defiant deep state has refused to release them for months, citing “national security concerns.” Those concerns have already been debunked on two separate occasions, including the wiretap warrant applications presented to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that ultimately revealed the warrant to spy on Carter Page was based on the liar-Hillary Clinton/ dummycrats- DNC-funded Steele dossier. Moreover, redactions made by the FBI removed critical exchanges such as this: Lisa Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Peter Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.”
Trump initially ordered “immediate declassification,” but now wants the inspector general to review documents on an “expedited basis,” due to concerns about how it would impact the Russia investigation. Yet in a tweet he noted that he can still “declassify if it proves necessary. Speed is very important to me — and everyone!”
Indeed. The 2018 election is “not going to be just about economic growth and running on the economy,” Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) explains. “It’s going be about what the other side did to play dirty, to dirty up a campaign … by corrupting the FBI and the DOJ. That is important for the American people to know as we have to deliver that message going into October.”
Who’s going to deliver it? The New York Times reported that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein secretly proposed recording Trump’s Oval Office conversations and discussed the idea of Cabinet officials removing him via the 25th Amendment. Rosenstein insists he was joking. Times reporter Adam Goldman says otherwise.
The far bigger story? Rosenstein’s statements were reportedly corroborated in memos written by Andrew McCabe and given to dirty cop-Robert Mueller and kept at the FBI, according to the Times. Yet they were kept from Inspector General Michael Horowitz — while he conducted his investigation of McCabe? If Horowitz is corrupt, “expedited basis” becomes a meaningless term with regard to deep-state corruption impacting the midterm election.
Unfortunately, our law-enforcement agencies aren’t the only government departments where rank partisanship — bordering on sedition — exists. Last week Project Veritas released a trio of damning videos. One featured State Department employee and Metro DCdummycrats-Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) member Stuart Karaffa bragging about drafting DSA communications at work, and stating his mission with regard to Trump administration policies. “Resist everything … Every level. F—k s—t up,” he declared.
The second video showed DOJ paralegal anddummycrats- DSA member Allison Hrabar, part of thedummycrats-DSA group that harassed DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen at a DC restaurant, bragging about using the department’s Lexis Nexis account to access home addresses of government officials DSA sought as protest targets. DOJ employee Jessica Schubel, former chief of staff for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is also shown discussing her efforts to resist the administration as well.
In the third video, Government Accountability Office auditor and dummycrats-DSA member Natarajan Subramanian admits he breaks rules “every day.” He boasted, “If you’re in an executive branch agency, you can slow-ball things to a degree.”
Three of these subversives expressed one common belief best stated by Karaffa: “I have nothing to lose. It’s impossible to fire federal employees.”
The DOJ, the State Department, and the GAO are conducting investigations, but if history is any indication, Karaffa’s right. At best it takes on average from 170 to 370 days to fire a government employee according to the GAO. Appeals can drag the process out for years.
Columnist James Simpson optimistically notes there are bills being contemplated in both chambers of Congress that would “greatly streamline the process for firing employees who are poor performers, insubordinate, or otherwise engaged in misconduct.” Will they pass?
Perhaps Simpson hasn’t noticed that some of the nation’s worst government employees are members of Congress.
In fact, it’s impossible to imagine how much lowerdummycrats-Democrats can sink than their Stalin-esque treatment of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanugh, or how much more spineless Republicans can get acquiescing to their contemptuously orchestrated delay. Sentient Americans know this spectacle has nothing to do with Kavanaugh or the increasingly dubious charges leveled against him. “From abortion to gay marriage, plus a host of less titillating issues, modern liberalism has lived by the Court,” Ahmari explains. “And liberals fear their cause will die by the Court.”
Thus, force-feeding their agenda to the American public — by any means necessary — has become the American Left’s modus operandi. Can’t win elections? Insist Russian collusion was to blame and demand an investigation, call voter ID requirements “racist,” or simply grant illegals the right to vote. Don’t like the current administration’s foreign policy? Undermine it, like John Kerry is doing with Iran. Can’t persuade an American public to embrace your ideology? Have your progressive tech allies censor opposing viewpoints or manipulate searches; transform college campuses and public schools into citadels of progressive indoctrination that breed contempt for the nation’s history, traditions, Constitution and its exceptionalism; and turn everything from entertainment venues to corporate business operations into platforms for progressive virtue-signaling.
It’s become clear that virtually every aspect of modern-day progressivism is driven by the same despicable delusions that have animated every totalitarian movement since the dawn of time:
Our cause is “noble” and thus, the ends justify the means. The 2018 election will likely be one of the most clarifying moments in the nation’s history. Either an American Left whose “win by any means necessary,” Constitution-crushing proclivities — never more exposed than right now — will be rejected by the electorate, or the number of Americans poisoned by a corrupt education system has reached critical mass, and a majority of voters will embrace totalitarianism, destroying America in order to “save” it. Save from whom? Themselves.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/58416?mailing_id=3755&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3755&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
NYT Exposing Rosenstein's Insubordination to Bait Trump?
The Times article noted that no actions were ever taken to follow through on Rosenstein’s suggestions. Rosenstein, not surprisingly, has denied the story, calling it “inaccurate and factually incorrect,” adding, “I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this: Based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.”
Interestingly, The Washington Post and NBC News countered the Times story, reporting that Rosenstein’s statements were made in jest. However, infamous former FBI lawyer Lisa Page saw it otherwise, indicating in a memo on the meeting that she took Rosenstein’s secret taping comment seriously. (Can we take Page seriously, though?) And National Review’s Andrew McCarthy, who has closely followed the entire Trump/Russia collusion saga from the beginning, called Rosenstein’s denial of the Times story a “non-denial denial,” while also noting how Rosenstein has flip-flopped in his attempts to appease the Washington establishment.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) responded, “It’s not a very funny joke.” He later added, “One thing that’s clear whether you’re a Republican or dummycrats-Democrat president, you have a right to a deputy attorney general that doesn’t think you’re incompetent and doesn’t feel the need to audio tape conversations with you.”
Trump has repeatedly expressed his frustration with Rosenstein (and even more so with Rosenstein’s boss, AG Jeff Sessions), specifically regarding his appointment of dirty cop-Robert Mueller as special counsel. This latest story now seemingly gives Trump justification to win greater Republican support should he decide to fire Rosenstein. However, the firing of Rosenstein seems to be exactly what dummycrats-Democrats are begging for, which may be the motive for the Times to publish this story. dummycrats-Democrats and their Leftmedia allies are baiting Trump to act before the midterm elections, whichdummycrats- Democrats will use as evidence to support their long-running charge of Trump’s supposed obstruction. It would behoove Trump to wait until after the midterms before pulling the cord on Rosenstein. But reports this morning indicate that Rosenstein anticipates Trump will fire him today. Stay tuned.
Update: As of Monday afternoon, Rosenstein will reportedly remain in the job. At least until he meets with Trump on Thursday…
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/58438?mailing_id=3755&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3755&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
Destroying Kavanaugh, One Scripted Attack at a Time
On Sunday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) announced a deal with Christine Blasey Ford to testify before the Senate this Thursday regarding allegations that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape her when he was a drunk 17-year-old and she was a drunk 15-year-old, approximately in 1982 (she’s not sure). Contemporaries have lined up to deny Blasey Ford’s allegation.
The Party of liar-Bill Clinton waited until that hearing had been set before launching a second accusation Sunday night. Indeed, it’s obvious now that dummycrats-Democrats delayed Blasey Ford’s testimony at least in part in order to wait for the second story to break. Sen. Dianne Fein-stein (D-CA), puppet master of this whole contemptible charade, wasted no time in demanding “an immediate postponement of any further proceedings related to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.” That is dummycrats-Democrats’ endgame, after all. The delays will already almost certainly keep Kavanaugh from joining the Court before the beginning of its term on Oct. 1.
Grassley has given dummycrats-Democrats everything they wanted.
The second allegation was reported by The New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer. The pair also broke Blasey Ford’s allegation without naming her, and Farrow authored the original #MeToo story blockbuster about Harvey Weinstein. Yet right off the bat, this latest scoop falls flat. For one thing, the authors don’t even get to the allegation until they tell us in the first paragraph thatdummycrats-Democrats are taking it “very seriously.”
Did someone say “collusion”? Then on Monday, Farrow said the accuser “came forward because Senatedummycrats- Democrats came looking for this claim.” You don’t say.
Deborah Ramirez, a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale and a registered dummycrats-Democrat, “was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident,” The New Yorker tells us. Fair enough. Hesitance doesn’t prove or disprove anything, as lots of women are afraid to report legitimate sexual assault, especially if they were too drunk to truly consent, fully function, or remember details.
But the report continues, “In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney [emphasis added], Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh’s role in the incident. ‘I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted,’ she said.”
As with Blasey Ford’s allegation, the FBI has no jurisdiction to investigate and has already conducted multiple, thorough background checks on Kavanaugh.
Later in the story, we learn that Ramirez admits to being “on the floor, foggy and slurring her words,” and she wasn’t even sure it was Kavanaugh, though she insists she remembers another student yelled, “Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face.” The report also cites an unidentified student who wasn’t at the party but says another student told him about an incident vaguely resembling the accusation at the time. Counter to that flimsy hearsay, “The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.” Moreover, six witnesses reached by The New Yorker — including Ramirez’s best friend — “disputed Ramirez’s account of events.”
Yes, these unbelievably glaring weaknesses appear in a story hit piece meant to ruin Kavanaugh’s career.
For his part, Kavanaugh said in a statement, “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name — and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building — against these last-minute allegations.”
Another major point against The New Yorker — The New York Times declined to publish the story, saying (buried deep in its own Kavanaugh report after Farrow’s scoop): “The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”
So to sum up, there’s as much corroboration for this story as there was for Blasey Ford’s — precisely none.
Yet dummycrats-Democrats are gleefully using these coordinated and orchestrated attacks to destroy a good man, all as his wife and daughters endure death threats. Furthermore, these fake, uncorroborated, and unsubstantiated claims, politically scripted by Fein-stein and company, undermine the credibility of legitimate claims of abuse, and thus do enormous damage to those who have actually been abused.
Thus dummycrats-Democrats leave a Category 5 wake of destruction in their crusade to destroy our republic.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/58437?mailing_id=3755&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3755&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body
Be sure to Click LIKE at the bottom of this article, and share it everywhere!!
By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
Right about now, Rod Rosenstein should be sweating like a Kardashian on Jeopardy, but he is far from the only one who should be feeling the extreme heat.
Last Friday, the NY Times published a piece stating that Rosenstein had suggested wearing a wire to secretly record President Trump, as well as suggesting employing cabinet members to do the same, and then use the 25th Amendment to deem President Trump unfit to hold the office, and remove him from office.
Make no mistake…that is a coup attempt…a plan to overthrow a sitting, duly elected President of the United States.
In no uncertain terms…
by Paul Jacob
{ townhall.com } ~ “Ask Tucker Carlson whatever happened to Tucker Carlson,” writes Lyz Lenz for the Columbia Journalism Review, “and he gets upset.”
Hmm. I guess some rich, white, male, conservative television hosts just don’t like being pigeonholed and belittled.
Ms. Lenz’s profile, entitled, “The mystery of Tucker Carlson,” details Carlson’s descent from apparent good guy to racist bad guy with 2.7 million viewers on Fox News and a conservative position on immigration.
How was he a good guy? Well, he once worked for CNN and MSNBC, and sometimes wrote articles that skewered Republicans. Side of the angels.
Now, however, he appears nightly as a new Grand Wizard.
“If you look at a lot of his early writings,” Lenz explains on CNN’s Reliable Sources, “there has always been kind of a latent racism.”
Always!
So, what is the evidence for this? Lenz dredges up this confession from Carlson’s past: “The idea that I’d be responsible for the sins or, for that matter, share in the glory of the accomplishments of dead people who happened to share my skin tone has always confused me.”
His confusion does not confuse Lenz, apparently. Not at all! Being resistant to racial identitarianism, which is all that Carlson fessed up to, amounts toracism, dontcha know.
The peculiarities of Lenz’s gumshoe work on the Carlson Mystery are not limited to uncovering the depths of his racism, though. She begins her piece focusing on “shouting.”
Tucker’s a shouter. She says. “‘You were definitely shouting before. That’s why this is funny,’ I say laughing nervously. ‘Because you are like, “I AM NOT SHOUTING!”’”
I guess those all-caps help. Case closed!
But there is a problem with writing this analysis out, orthographics aside. A strong, confrontational argumentation style is not understood in the exact same manner by everyone. What’s shouting to one person isn’t shouting to another. This is an area where people can honestly differ.
It’s all very subjective.
So could that be the excuse for Lyz Lenz’s odd forays into old-fashioned “New Journalism”?
In the course of regaling us with the factoid that Carlson is “worth over $8 million” and stands to inherit even more because his step mom is “Patricia Swanson of the Swanson frozen dinner fortune,” Lenz contrasts that with her own struggle as “a single mom, a freelance writer with two kids, swiftly facing a future with no health care.”
Uh, OK. Thanks for sharing? Lenz acknowledges that journalists are “not supposed to make it about ourselves,” but does anyway. CNN Money describes this as “daring,”
We learn more, alas. Lenz is divorcing her husband of 12 years, who is . . . gut-punch . . . a Republican. Their split “didn’t come because of the election,” she says, though “the election certainly revealed a lot of huge problems that we couldn’t overcome.”
Just as Tucker Carlson cannot fathom his responsibility for all Caucasoid sins, he probably won’t grok how her divorce could be in any way relevant to his peculiar essence, either.
Racist! Sexist! Meany!
Or just a Man of Mystery.
{ sultanknish.blogspot.com } ~ On Saturday, the Human Rights Campaign, the country's top gay rights lobby, held its 22nd annual dinner. Top speakers included loose lips-Joe Biden, who bemoaned the lack of acceptance for gay people, Anne Hathaway, who shrieked, “Let’s tear this world apart and build a better one”, and scumbag/liar-nObama's Attorney General, scumbag-Eric Holder, who declared, “The age of bullies and bigots is not fully behind us”.
scumbag-Holder would know. He was last seen posing with Louis Farrakhan at Aretha Franklin's funeral. The leader of the Nation of Islam is both a bigot and a bully. He also loathes gay people.
The HRC dinner was taking place at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center concurrently with the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation's Phoenix Awards.
Holder's boss, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama, had been caught posing with Farrakhan at a Congressional Black Caucus event. And multiple CBC members have refused to condemn Farrakhan. They include Rep. Danny Davis, who had called Farrakhan an “outstanding human being”. They also include Rep. scumbag/mad-Maxine Waters.
On Friday, the day before, Rep. scumbag/mad-Maxine Waters had received the National Leadership Award from the National Newspaper Publishers Association.
The NNPA is an association of black papers that includes Final Call, the paper of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam. Ford, GM, AT&T, Pfizer, AARP, Comcast, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation act as partners and sponsors of an association that includes a notorious racist and anti-Semitic hate group.
Ford had spent a long time trying to live down its past association with another anti-Semitic paper, The Dearborn Independent, only to end up associated with yet another violently anti-Semitic publication.
The HRC has its own extensive relationship with Ford. It has nothing to say about Ford’s NNPA role.
At the 2018 Black Press conference sponsored by the NNPA, which had previously honored Senator lowlife-Kamala Harris, the First Place Feature Writing Award went to a Final Call article, “The Feminization of Black Men” which quoted Farrakhan’s claims that drugs were being used to turn black men gay.
"He can make you think you’re a homosexual, he’s feminizing the Black man," the racist leader declared. "You are the guinea lambs of White experimentation."
"We now have feminization and homosexual behaviors being normalized in the Black community," another of the article's experts warned.
The NNPA awarded piece then went on to quote Nation of Islam minister Wesley Muhammad, whose version of the ‘Pot Plot’ warned that that the government and the Jews were using pot to make black men gay.
“It’s the US government and the Synagogue of Satan’s scheme to use manipulated marijuana along with other drugs to de-masculinize and feminize the black male of America," Wesley warned at a mosque. “While it cannot be said that the Pot Plot that we are exposing is a strictly Jewish conspiracy, the Synagogue of Satan is the key player."
Last month, Mary Beth Maxwell was forced to resign as the head of the education arm of the Human Rights Campaign for using the ‘N-word’ twice. But nobody at the Congressional Black Caucus or the NNPA is resigning. Not for the racism, the anti-Semitism or the homophobia.
The NNPA’s tolerance for both shouldn’t be surprising. It’s headed by Ben Chavis, a former NAACP boss and former member of the Nation of Islam, who had tried to steer the NAACP closer to Farrakhan.
At the HRC dinner, Anne Hathaway denounced white and straight privilege, attacking the “myth” that “gayness orbits around straightness, transgender orbits around cisgender, and that all races orbit around whiteness.” The tidy intersectional formula though doesn’t remotely reflect reality.
Identity politics is a coalition of separate identity resentments united only by loathing the construct of an oppressive majority, of whiteness, straightness and whatever othering formula the left is offering this week. Once you get past those common bonds of bigotry, of hating the same people, unity falls apart.
The attendees at the National Newspaper Publishers Association and the Congressional Black Caucus dinner move in the same dummycrats-Democrat orbits, but have very different views of each other. scumbag-Eric Holder goes from rubbing shoulders with Louis Farrakhan to pontificating for wealthy gay donors at the HRC dinner.
Wells Fargo and Pfizer sponsor both the NNPA and the HRC, funding both celebrations of gayness and of the promotion of conspiracy theories about drug companies, governments and Jews conspiring to make black men gay. It’s not just individuals, but politicians and major corporations on the ‘down-low’, appealing separately to wealthy gay men and the black political allies of an anti-gay hate group.
Nobody speaks about the essential contradictions of a movement that includes both militant denunciations of homophobia at the HRC dinner and the NNPA’s support for Farrakhan’s militant denunciations of homosexuality. The friction between gay nationalism and black nationalism is just another of the many schizophrenic frictions of the dummycrats-Democrats in the dark age of identity politics.
Identity politics nationalism is based on a thousand clashing convictions of the superiority of the group and the inferiority of outsiders. Every identity politics group has its own Farrakhan, the ‘extremist’ who is popular within that group because he preaches its total superiority and the inferiority of the ‘Other’.
No matter how much the left wants to unify pride and identity politics nationalism around hating an artificial idea of straight white men, a multicultural society is one with a multitude of hatreds. The more diverse America becomes, the more diverse the varied hatreds of the rainbow coalition will get.
The left killed liberalism, tolerance and coexistence. What’s waiting in the wings is Farrakhan
Apologists on the left insist that black people love Farrakhan, not because of his bigotry, but because of his message of empowerment. But Farrakhan’s message of ‘empowerment’ is based entirely on his bigotry. The Nation of Islam’s message of black empowerment derives from its theological conviction that black people are a master race while white people and especially Jews are genetically evil.
Farrakhan’s message of “empowerment” is the same as Hitler’s. It lays out a vision of a naturally superior people being oppressed by their racial inferiors through trickery and cunning. The NNPA awarded an article whose rhetoric echoes Nazi Germany’s Goebbels almost word for word.
The black empowerment of the Nation of Islam that the left praised is based on racism, dehumanization and power. When scumbag/liar-nObama, scumbag-Holder, leaders of the Women’s March, and members of the Congressional Black Caucus embrace Farrakhan, they’re showing their own hate. And the farce of identity politics.
When scumbag-Eric Holder flirts with black nationalists and gay rights activists, whom does he go home with at night? dummycrats-Democrats running for the White House inevitably head to New York City to meet with Al Sharpton who once ranted about, “Greek homos”, and then condemn homophobia. scumbag/mad-Maxine Waters plays aunt to the #resistance of white lefties, but hugs Louis Farrakhan and collects an award from a press association that includes Farrakhan’s Final Call, with its claims of a plot to make black men gay.
The dummycrats-Democrats are all on the ‘down-low’, flirting with bigots and then condemning bigotry.
Corporations throw money at both the NNPA and the HRC, and any other diverse dinner they can find. The media could expose the contradictions, but it chooses to ignore principles for political expediency.
The obsessive accusations of bigotry aimed at Republicans are a typical example of projection. The left needs to believe that Republicans are bigots so that its members can pretend that they aren’t. As the devil’s bargain with identity politics takes hold, the accusations of bigotry grow shriller, not because Republicans have become more bigoted, but because the dummycrats-Dems are dealing with more internal bigotry.
The schizoid nature of identity politics is turning the dummycrats-Democrats into bigots who scream about bigotry.
And the more they scream, the more bigoted they are.
Meanwhile the NNPA, an organization that includes a racist paper put out by a racist hate group, is sponsored by Ford, GM, Bill Gates, AT&T, MillerCoors, the AARP, Coca Cola, Macy's, Toyota, VW, Pfizer, Wells Fargo and many other major corporations and organizations. Racism is big business once again.
Major corporations have gotten behind racism and anti-Semitism because the dummycratsDemocrats have.
by Kurt Schlichter
{ townhall.com } ~ As I write this, the “I really, really wanna testify, but…” goalpost has moved west right past my house and out over the Pacific Ocean. You get the distinct impression that Christine Ford’s handlers are making it up as they go along – “She can’t testify on Monday because, I dunno, she’s afraid of airplanes. Yeah, that’s a thing now.”
The GOP is, as usual, afraid to be seen as insufficiently submissive. We have Chuck Grassley announcing, by tweets that sound like they were composed by a twelve-year-old texting her girlfriends after breaking into mom’s cooking sherry, that he’s ready to roll over yet again. The only way this could get worse is if the crusty Iowan discovered emojis:
“Sorry Brett gotta postpone ur vote until 2021 cuz reasons Sad Face Blue Wave Poop.”
No. Hold the vote, confirm Kavanaugh, and then let him set about making the libs sorry they ever pulled this stunt.
I am not alone in my disgust and desire to fight this appalling atrocity. There is a weird disconnect between the elite and normal Americans on the Kavanaugh smear issue and so many others, as I chronicle in my book Militant Normals: How Regular Americans Are Rebelling Against the Elite to Reclaim Our dummycrats-Democracy, which drops next week Pre-order it right this second so all 288-pages of the kind of liberal and Fredocon abuse you enjoy here at Townhall, but with more swears, will be delivered to you fresh from the furnace on October 2. Within the elite bubble, the Republican gimps are carefully trying to pretend that they should respect this bizarre and uncorroborated tale of convenience by a liberal activist while out in America, Normal people are all, “Nah, I don’t buy it. Confirm him.”
Leave it to our unelite elite to be willingly grifted by this nonsense, and watch them bend over backwards to avoid saying what any Normalperson would say – “No.”
“AFTER THREE MONTHS OF PREPARING, I CAN’T POSSIBLY TESTIFY MONDAY.”
“How about we move it from Monday to Wednesday?”
“STOP BULLYING ME!”
"We’re sorry! We want to hear your story.”
“THEN WHERE’S MY PONY?”
“We have a pony for you. He’s a nice pony. His name is Tim.”
“BUT WHERE’S HIS HORN? I ASKED FOR A UNICORN! NOT GIVING ME A UNICORN IS MISOGYNY AT ITS WORST!”
“Okay, instead of Tim, this is Chet the unicorn…”
“STOP SILENCING ME BY TRYING TO HAVE ME TESTIFY!”
This woman’s performance rider has more provisions than Van Halen’s. If she ever does show up – maybe she’s in her Prius scooting across the country as we speak, along with her unicorn – she’ll probably walk out when she discovers the witness table candy bowl contains brown M&Ms.
It doesn’t help that the rules about what does and doesn’t disqualify someone from something seem to be – let me be charitable – in flux.
We keep hearing about how we’re supposed to believe women making accusations without bothering to confirm them, as if the Duke lacrosse team and the UVA frat frauds didn’t happen, and as if every few weeks we don’t see another story of some poor sucker walking out of jail after doing a decade in the stoney lonesome because some chick got buzzed, got busy, then decided to call the cops rather than let her BF find out she was tramping around. But Normals get it. They understand life isn’t the black-and-white, Manichean SJW paradigm where all girls are angels and all boys are monsters. And they wonder why the “Well, some woman said you were bad so you’re ruined” principle – there’s that weasel word again, principle – only seems to apply to Normalsand those Normals like.
Let’s review liberalism’s greatest hits, literally. scumbag-Keith Ellison, right now. liar-Bill Clinton’s chivalrous “Better put some ice on that.” Ted Kennedy’s confirmed kill. Bob Menendez, trolling for jailbait in the Caribbean. Tom Carper allegedly slapping around his wife. Sherrod Brown’s wife said in a filing I assume it was sworn that he manhandled her in 1986 – as an adult, and several years more recently than whenever the Kavanaugh thing supposedly happened. Oh, but wait, now the ex-Mrs. Brown is walking it back. So, either Ohio’s Champion of the Chicks beat on her, or she lied about it, which we’re told never ever happens, you misogynist monster for even thinking that. Both possibilities kind of detonate the narrative.
Except they don’t, because the narrative is a lie.
Even if true, should this disqualify Kavanaugh 36 years later, after an indisputably pristine and exemplary life (the total lack of anyone else making this kind of allegation is powerful evidence her accusation is false; Normals know that pervs always re-perv)?
Libs manifestly would not care if it was one of their own, and their double standard is unacceptable. Choose one rule and stick to it. The fact is that such acts only act to bar those who Normals support. Let’s look at yet anotherdummycrats-Democrat with car trouble, Tex Kennedy. Beto got hammered at 26, drove into traffic, and tried to run from the cops. But that’s okay, apparently. We’re supposed to forgive and forget the undisputed act of an adult who nearly killed people then split. That doesn’t disqualify him from office? Why is that?
What’s the rule? You can slap around your spouse as an adult, and you get a pass? Credible rape claims as an adult, and hail to the chief? Leave a woman to drown, as an adult, a senator, and you’re the Lion of the Senate? Booze it up and hit the gas – as an adult – but who cares?
That seems incongruous. Gosh, what’s the common thread between all these malefactors? Adults, dummycrats-Democrats, up to kill babies. Gee, I’m seeing a pattern. But minor, Republican, not wanting to kill babies – unforgiveable!
“Oh, you can’t do whataboutism!” hiss the Cheese-eating surrendercons. Baloney. Whataboutism is a moral necessity, because it disarms the hypocrisy the left wields like a battle axe by illustrating the undeniable truth.dummycrats-Democrats don’t care if Kavanaugh grabbed that girl, and they don’t really think it should disqualify him if he had. They just don’t want him on the Supreme Court because that will make them lose power. And power is all they care about.
So, if Brett Kavanaugh and his family must be ruined, well, they deserve it for getting in the left’s way. That will teach people to resist them. And your sons, whose lives can be wrecked by a single lie under the new Gillibrand-Hirono Standard, are next.
No. Stop this charade. Vote. Confirm Kavanaugh. And then let us Normals get on with the business of rebelling against the liberal elite.
IS HE? if so then he sure has the logs for the fire. Many things have happened since he announced his candidacy for the pres of the united states. First was kate steinle. HE has been right all along. The blatant and disgusting show by the Dems and never trumpers is a horror. The blatant treason and subversion of our govt by Obama; Hillary and their buddies is an act that needs to land them in prison. Will he declare marshall law? that remains to b seen. I think that for a very short time to clean up this mess he may no one knows but something has to be done. Will he just fire them all. Could be. This article lays out a good case and he sure has one no argument here. I guess w/the mid terms coming and the Brett KAvanaugh nominatiion circus playing we shall see. The Dems are a disaster and we know we cannot vote for them the GOP on the o/hand well some are still decent. Some.
WE have a job to do to save this nation period and that is what has to be done. Our schools and the border wall are 2 things that have to be priority. Schools for our kids have to be what we learned about this countrys history and the us constitution and the wall we have to stop the invasion of America.
All have some blame. The rest is our job. We cannot loose.
by Bruce Bialosky
{ townhall.com } ~ While sitting in Yom Kippur services, I was focused on the essence of the holiday -- Jews atoning for their sins. The 10 Days of Awe conclude with Yom Kippur – a joyful beginning to the remainder of the year. Despite that, I, like many Americans, was seething about the charges lodged by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh that became public a week prior to the Senate committee vote on his Supreme Court nomination.
I am a dedicated supporter of women. When I started my political involvement, I was mentored by a woman. Patty Cafferata, from Reno, Nevada, was the person with whom I cut my teeth in my post-college political career. Ms. Cafferata was a member of the State Assembly, Treasurer of the State of Nevada and a candidate for Governor. She is now a special assistant to Attorney General Adam Laxalt, who is running for Governor. In addition to Patty, more than 50 percent of my non-presidential donations have gone to women.
I am also a believer in women’s rights and find sexual assault not only demeaning to women, but likewise demeaning to the good men the preponderance of American men who would never do such a despicable act. I am proud to say I raised my son, now a grown man, to think and act the way I do toward women – only with respect.
I was so concerned about writing this column, I consulted a psychiatrist friend. My concern stems from the fact that in 10 years of writing weekly columns on Townhall.com plus an additional 25 years before that, I have never ever written a column expressing that “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” Because of the highly questionable charges by Dr. Ford and the political maneuvers by Ford’s attorneys and handlers, it is obvious that for political reasons they are willing to destroy a good man’s name. To quote Secretary Raymond Donovan after winning his court fight on false charges: “Where do I go to get back my reputation.”
I will not go into the details about Ford’s charges because unless you have been in seclusion you know what she has charged against Kavanaugh. After she won support for a hearing on her charges, she laid out the fact she wanted an FBI investigation prior to appearing. Let’s not focus on the fact that Ford’s attorneys should know that does not happen in real life where the witness gets to lay out demands. Let’s also not focus on the supposed assault not being the purview of the FBI, but of whatever jurisdiction in Maryland where this allegedly happened. Let’s just focus on what I conclude will be the interview. I am qualified to surmise this as someone who has watched 5,000 cop show episodes, read hundreds of crime novels and have a level of common sense.
Interviewer – “Dr. Ford, when did this crime occur?”
Dr. Ford – “I am not sure exactly when it occurred, but I was a teenager and so was Kavanaugh.”
Interviewer – “How did you know Mr. Kavanaugh’s age?”
Ford – “I figured it out by knowing his current age and working backward to about the time the incident occurred.”
Interviewer – “Where did the alleged assault occur?”
Ford – “Well, I know it happened in Maryland, but I am not sure exactly what city or county.”
Interviewer – “Did you have a rape kit done or have any medical exam concurrent with the alleged incident?”
Ford – “No.”
Interviewer – “How did you get to this party?”
Ford – “I don’t know for sure.”
Interviewer – “Do you know how you got home?”
Ford - “I don’t know for sure.”
Interviewer – “Do you remember who was at this party other than the named individuals?”
Ford – “No, sorry.”
Interviewer – “Did you report this to any of your family or friends after the alleged assault?”
Ford – “No.”
Interviewer -- “So if I may summarize, you were the alleged target of attempted rape by one Brett Kavanaugh sometime in the 1980s, somewhere in Maryland, which you have no physical evidence for or medical reports and you did not report the events to the police, a medical practitioner, your friends or your family. What exactly do you remember of this event?”
Ford – “Kavanaugh jumped on me and tried to rape me. I was scared for my life.”
Interviewer – “I am sorry ma’am, but I cannot take this to my senior officer or the DA because they would find this chargeable. I am sure you believe this incident happened, but I hope you can see the facts are sketchy and you have no corroboration.”
If Ford does come forth and testify, she may present more than currently in the public domain.
No one would proceed on these facts, but members of the U.S. Senate have deemed Brett Kavanaugh presumptively guilty. We expect this behavior from lowlife-Kammy Harris and Spartacus scumbag-Booker based on their over-the-top behavior in the committee hearings. But then there are other people who fashion themselves as the next president, like Senator Kirsten Gillibrand from New York who has convicted Kavanaugh on these skimpy facts because Ford said them and thus they are true. The latest knucklehead is Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono. "We all signed on this letter to demand an FBI investigation," said Hirono. "But really, guess who is perpetuating all of these kinds of actions? It's the men in this country and I just want to say to the men of this country, just shut up and step up. Do the right thing." Really?
And where were you when all the real perps were belittling women and sexually harassing them? You know, the legions of people in the entertainment business and news business where over 90 percent of them were heroes to the Left, not to mention money sources. Sure, you said nasty things when they were exposed, but you knew the rumors about all these people like Charlie Rose and Harvey Weinstein and partied with them anyway and took their money. You know, while those perps attended their “I support women” events.
This is all a political stunt. Senator scumbag/clown-Schumer, another one who harbored all those perps, talks tough now only because he wants Kavanaugh off the court and is willing to do whatever it takes even if it means destroying his life with these flimsy charges.
Let’s take a moment to focus on the irresponsible press. The editorial board of the NYT -- which is the epicenter of all Left-wing thought -- stated that the Republicans are irresponsible for not calling for an FBI investigation and refusing to call other witnesses. It is not just that they should know better; they do know better and they don’t care because they have an agenda. They know an FBI investigation is a ridiculous thought and, if anything, the wrong police force to do such. What witnesses do they want called? By Dr. Ford’s own admission there are none. I guess they would like 20 psychologists to be called to talk about what they have seen in prior cases that have no relevance to this matter.
And who suffers here? The American people when their government is tarnished. Women suffer, when the real sexual predators are scoffed at because another charge is brought against someone and shot down even though this time it might be real because people have reflexively rejected these charges because they mirror the charges brought by Ford. Think Duke University or University of Virginia.
We know this is a set-up. How did Dr. Ford end up with the credentialed law firm of Katz, Marshall and Banks from Washington, D.C., representing her when she is merely a psych professor at Palo Alto University in California? Who is paying these people? Why are they insisting their client interview last when they know our legal system provides for the accused an opportunity to answer the accuser?
scumbag/clown-Schumer and his gang are counting on tainting Kavanaugh for years even if they cannot keep him off the court. And the immediate game is to lie to the women of America that the Republicans are the ones not defending their interests so that on Election Day 2018 they will turn out in droves and vote dummycrats-Dem.
This is all so tawdry. So low. So despicable. The only way to protect the women of America and the #MeToo movement is to defeat this charade. Protect this man from these scurrilous charges and put him on the Supreme Court and then on Election Day turn these folks out of office or prevent them from taking real power.
It is not acceptable to destroy peoples’ lives to obtain power. This man has a real wife and real daughters and real female colleagues and former clerks who love and respect him.
This has been done before, but not now, not this time.
by Charlie Kirk
{ townhall.com } ~ When dummycrats-Democrats start losing an argument they typically resort to smearing and slandering their opponents. Such is the case with their eleventh-hour attempt to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination for the Supreme Court.
There they were, quaking in their boots as Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote was just days away, and all of their previous efforts at sinking his nomination came fell short.
Their attempt to paint the judge as an anti-abortion extremist? It failed.
Their attempt to slander the judge as a Republican partisan? It failed too.
Senator scumbag-Cory Booker’s “I am Spartacus” moment? That failed miserably.
The writing was on the wall. Brett Kavanaugh was a dedicated family man, accomplished jurist, and widely-respected member of the legal profession. His confirmation was all but a done deal.
Enter Dianne Fein-stein, who in the knick of time magically produces a letter out of thin air, detailing a decades-old ancient — and unprovable — allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh.
The accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, has identified two witnesses, both of whom have stated emphatically that the incident didn’t happen, along with Kavanaugh himself.
And now she is conveniently and suspiciously refusing to answer the Senate’s call to testify in either a public or private session. Ford is instead demanding an investigation by the FBI — which already passed on this matter, stating that no federal law would have been violated even if substantiated — before she is willing to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But the Senate is not a courtroom, and dummycrats-Democrat senators care little for the law or the truth. Their sole purpose is to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation or, failing that, to ensure that a cloud of uncertainty and illegitimacy hovers above his head for the rest of his career.
This is character assassination in its purest form, an undeniable hit job. And it’s hardly the first time the dummycrats-Democrats have opened this page of their playbook. Indeed we’ve seen this movie before.
In 1987, President Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court. Arguably one of the greatest American legal minds of the 20th century, Bork was a staunch originalist and ever faithful to the Constitution.
This, of course, made Bork a direct threat to the dummycrats-Democrats’ radical liberal agenda, and they promptly proceeded to launch a hysterical smear campaign against the judge.
Following the nomination, Senator Ted Kennedy took to the Senate floor to blast Bork faster than he fled Chappaquiddick. “Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens,” Kennedy railed.
Unfortunately for Judge Bork — and the Republic itself — the dummycrats-Democrats smear campaign against him was successful. This turn of events was in fact doubly unfortunate, as it taught the dummycrats-Democrats that they could successfully destroy the career of an ideological opponent through slander.
They’ve been doing it ever since.
In the decades since Bork was “borked,” dummycrats-Democrats and liberals have turned character assassination into a fine art. When their arguments fail and the truth is on their opponent’s side, they call into question his character and try to destroy his reputation.
When it was Clarence Thomas’s turn to be confirmed to the Supreme Court, the dummycrats-Democrats had enough foresight to know that “he’s a racist” wouldn’t work on a black man, so instead they drudged up unsubstantiated and unprovable sexual harassment allegations. Sound familiar?
They don’t just target judicial appointments, either. dummycrats-Democrats and their media friends smeared rino-John McCain, Mitt Romney, and Donald Trump as sexist and racist when each GOP nominee ran for President; and they’re still doing it to President Trump.
As for President Trump’s supporters? They’re nothing but “deplorables and irredeemables” and “the dregs of society.” Anti-illegal immigration activists? They’re just a bunch of racists. Folks who value traditional family values? Nothing more than sexists and homophobes.
Time and time again, dummycrats-Democrats have resorted to smearing those with whom they disagree with baseless and crude allegations.
They think Americans are fools who will believe their blatant deceptions. But like Clarence Thomas, Kavanaugh will still be confirmed to the Supreme Court. And as the election of President Trump proved, the dummycrats-Democrats’ slanderous words are losing their effect.
Nonetheless, if the character assassination of Brett Kavanaugh is any indication, they won’t engage in civil debate and discourse any time soon.
by Cal Thomas
{ townhall.com } ~ The woman who alleged in a confidential letter that as a high school student in Maryland in the '80s Brett Kavanaugh "pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it" has now revealed her identity to surprise! the Washington Post.
Christine Blasey Ford, who the Post says is now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California, originally said she did not want to tell her story or reveal her identity. Then the story went public without her consent. The letter eventually found its way to the office of Sen. Dianne Fein-stein of California, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, and Fein-stein, citing Ford's wish to remain anonymous, refused to share it with her dummycrats-Democratic colleagues. "I have, however," Fein-stein wrote in a statement, "referred the matter to federal investigative authorities."
"An FBI spokesperson confirmed that the bureau had received the referral ... and included it as part of Kavanaugh's background file," writes the Los Angeles Times, "as per the standard process."
Ford claims she didn't tell anyone about the alleged assault until 2012 when she was in couples therapy with her husband, but even then she didn't mention Kavanaugh's name. If this sounds like a replay of Anita Hill's last-minute allegations against Clarence Thomas during his confirmation hearings, it should. In football a late hit can bring a penalty. In politics it's all part of the game.
Kavanaugh denies any inappropriate behavior took place, and as of this writing, both he and Ford have agreed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee, a la Anita Hill. Already two Republicans, rino-Jeff Flake of Arizona and Bob Corker of Tennessee, both of whom are leaving at the end of their terms, have called for a delay in Kavanaugh's confirmation vote, which plays into the hands of dummycrats-Democrats trying to block him from the court.
Some dummycrats-Democrats and liberal activists apparently determined to preserve the Supreme Court's leftward shift have chosen to get down in the mud, throwing it at a highly qualified nominee for the Supreme Court. Even Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg bemoaned how these confirmation hearings have become "a highly partisan show."
The smear is nothing new in politics, but while it once might come back to stain the one throwing the mud, it is now regarded as a legitimate tool for achieving one's political goals. The end not only justifies the means, but to the left, it mandates the means.
Republicans should fight back, labeling the smear tactics and those who employ them as demeaning and sullying their office. If one can't win a civil debate over issues and law, then an elected official should not receive the public's trust.
"Have you no shame?" was a line made famous during the Army-McCarthy hearings in the 1950s when Sen. Joseph McCarthy (R-WI) claimed to have a list of communists who had infiltrated the federal government. The left rode the "McCarthyism" horse for decades, accusing any Republican or conservative of emulating McCarthy when they opposed the liberal agenda or criticized producers of movies and TV programs they believed contributed to the moral decline of the nation.
This letter should be seen for what it is -- a last-minute, desperate attempt to prevent Kavanaugh's confirmation and part of a broader plan to reverse the results of the 2016 election. This smear campaign includes not only Ford's perfectly timed letter, but also the New York Times op-ed from an unnamed "official" in the Trump administration and many of Bob Woodward's "sources" in his new book "Fear."
These tactics should be denounced immediately, or they will be repeated. Is it any wonder why good people don't want to serve in government? Who wants to face an avalanche of mud?
by Judge Andrew Napolitano
{ townhall.com } ~ If you have been following the serious destruction brought about by Hurricane Florence in North Carolina and the political turmoil caused by the allegations of teenage sexual misconduct made by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, along with his firm and unbending denials, you might have missed a profound event in a federal courtroom in the nation's capital late last week.
The Florence damage may take years to repair, and the Kavanaugh nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, which once seemed assured, at this writing is in a sort of limbo, pending an Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas-like confrontation before the Senate Judiciary Committee next week. But when Paul Manafort, President Donald Trump's one-time campaign chair, entered a guilty plea in federal court last week, it created the potential for a political earthquake.
Here is the backstory.
Manafort was indicted by two federal grand juries -- one in Arlington, Virginia, and the other in Washington, D.C. -- for financial crimes committed before and during his time running the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. Both prosecutions have been led by dirty cop-Robert Mueller, the Department of Justice-appointed special counsel charged with investigating whether there was a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and people working for the Russian government.
Often, when prosecutors are looking for evidence of crime A, they find evidence of crime B. This is what happened to Manafort. Yet, as the trial judge said in Manafort's Virginia trial last month, which ended in convictions on 8 of 18 charges, the feds were indeed looking for evidence of crime B as well. We all know that the principal reason for pursuing Manafort on financial crimes has been to squeeze him for what he knows about Trump.
Last week, on the eve of Manafort's second trial, that prosecutorial strategy paid off when he entered a guilty plea before a federal judge in Washington, D.C. Manafort's guilty plea is unique and extraordinary. In the plea, Manafort, who only pleaded guilty to two federal crimes -- witness tampering and conspiracy to defraud the government -- also admitted that he committed dozens of other federal and state crimes.
This was intentionally maneuvered by dirty cop-Mueller as part of the plea agreement so as to make it bulletproof from a presidential pardon. I have never seen this before. The president can only pardon federal crimes. Should he do so for Manafort, state prosecutors in New York, Virginia and California -- the states where these crimes mainly bank fraud to which Manafort admitted under oath actually took place -- can seek indictments immediately. It will be easy to indict and easy to convict Manafort because of his public admissions last Friday.
The pattern of crimes to which Manafort admitted but for which he did not plead guilty is breathtaking. It involves tens of millions of dollars, the highest-ranking former government officials in the Ukraine, an unnamed scumbag/liar-nObama Cabinet member and a few Russian oligarchs. The only good news for Trump in all this is that he and his Republican congressional colleagues will be spared the daily barrage of negative headlines from a second Manafort trial, which was scheduled to start this week and which would have led up to the midterm elections, had it not been aborted by the guilty plea. But the president surely fears a beast in the night in the form of whatever Manafort privately tells dirty cop-Mueller.
The plea agreement -- all 117 pages of it -- does not spell out what evidence Manafort gave dirty cop-Mueller to persuade him to agree to cap Manafort's prison time exposure at 10 years when he could have gotten 60. But it does spell out Manafort's willingness and now legal obligation to assist dirty cop-Mueller.
We know that Manafort's personal offer of assistance todirty cop-Mueller took place over the course of two days of negotiations on Monday and Tuesday of last week. That type of meeting, during which Manafort tipped his hand as to what evidence he could give dirty cop-Mueller about Trump, has been called a "Queen for a Day" by federal prosecutors and FBI agents because the defendant gets to say whatever he wants and if the negotiations fail to produce a deal the feds cannot use what the defendant has told them. The meeting obviously intrigued and excited dirty cop-Mueller's team, and hence a deal was struck.
What did he tell them?
Manafort was present at the July 2016 Trump Tower meeting between campaign officials and Russian intelligence agents, and he made notes. He was present at the preparatory meeting for that Trump Tower meeting. He can probably explain the circuitous and mysterious route of Russian money transfers that followed the Trump Tower meeting. He can explain the 80 times the campaign was in contact with the Russians while he was the campaign chair, and he probably knows if Trump personally knew of the Trump Tower meeting in advance and of any agreements made there.
Stated differently, Manafort can help dirty cop-Mueller paint the Trump Tower meeting and whatever followed it as an agreement by the campaign to accept something of value from a foreign entity, even if the thing of value never arrived: That would be a criminal conspiracy, which my media colleagues call "collusion," a non-legal term. Manafort can also inform dirty cop-Mueller of his financial deals with Trump that preceded Trump's candidacy, at least one of which involved Russian money.
The president's lawyers have shrugged off the Manafort guilty plea as unrelated to the president. This is false bravado for public consumption only, and I don't blame them for it when their client is the president. But if their client has been candid with them, then they can prepare for the Manafort bombshells that are coming.
{ conservativeinstitute.org } ~ We’ve long known that unelected leftist bureaucrats embedded in the bowels of the federal government have been lawlessly targeting conservatives and abusing their power to thwart the agenda of duly elected Republican policymakers. The proof keeps pouring in.
The scumbag/liar-nObama administration’s IRS deliberately discriminated against conservative groups in their applications for tax-exempt status. This isn’t an empty partisan allegation from an imaginary “right-wing conspiracy.”
In 2013, an IRS official admitted scrutinizing groups with right wing identifying names, such as “Tea Party” and “patriots.” An inspector general’s report that year confirmed this nefarious practice.
At least two groups of cases were settled in 2017 with the IRS agreeing to a “substantial financial settlement” in one and expressing “its sincere apology” in another. This is the kind of tyrannical behavior that liberals used to care about.
In a case involving the Linchpins of Liberty and some 40 other conservative organizations, the IRS confessed that it used “heighted scrutiny and inordinate delays” and required unnecessary information in its review of applications for tax-exemptions.
In the NorCal Tea Party Patriots case, involving more than 400 groups, plaintiffs contended the IRS used their tax information for improper purposes.
I know opponents of President Donald Trump roll their eyes in ridicule at the mere suggestion of a deep state committed to undermining Trump’s agenda. That’s the stuff of paranoid conspiracy theorists or unhinged Trumpublican tribalists, they say.
Well, James O’Keefe, and his Project Veritas, has shown, again, that there is a “there” there.
O’Keefe recently released secret videotapes in which some of these boorish bureaucrats brazenly admit their chicanery, and even brag about it. On Tuesday, Project Veritas released the first of its tapes unmasking these proud pinheads boasting of sabotaging the Trump agenda.
The video features State Department employee Stuart Karaffa, a smarmy, self-proclaimed socialist using his government position to resist official Trump administration policies. Karaffa is a member of the Metro DC dummycrats-Democratic Socialists of America, bless his heart.
He admits to drafting DSA communications at his worksite.
“I’m careful about it,” says Karaffa. “I don’t leave a paper trail, like I leave emails, and like any press s— that comes up, I leave that until after 5:30. But as soon as 5:31 hits, got my like draft messages ready to send out.”
Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen from a D.C.-area restaurant. That was beyond despicable. Hrabar allegedly uses the LexisNexis search engine on her work computer to find home addresses for dummycrats-DSA protests, such as that of D.C. lobbyist Jeremy Wiley.
She reportedly ran his license plate to help locate his home. Hrabar smugly brags that as an employee of the DOJ, “We can’t like get fired.”
Hrabar also reveals that one of her dummycrats-DSA colleagues, who works in the U.S. Department of Agriculture, slows down the process to help people stay on food stamps longer.
Schubel admits on the tape to the existence of “a little resistance movement” within the federal government, and says that her friends at the Department of Health and Human Services give her confidential information before it is officially released.
“Yeah. It’s kind of like the Nixon, deep throat type of thing,” she gloats. She further admits, “There’s a lot of talk about how we can like, resist from inside the Justice Department.”
Isn’t it cute when leftists virtue signal their feigned concern for the integrity of our democratic process? When you hear a leftist complaining about interference with our elections — or corruption of “our democracy” — just remember that they are ends-justifies-the-means progressives who care not a whit about lawful elections, only advancing their agenda.
With their persistent lawlessness and overreach, the mavens of the “resistance” have awakened a sleeping giant in grassroots conservatives throughout the nation, and they will come to regret it.
by Katie Pavlich
{ townhall.com } ~ In the era of the #MeToo movement, we are expected to automatically believe claims made by women about sexual abuse. Anyone who dares to ask simple questions about the situation, like who, what, when, where, why and how, is automatically characterized as “doubting the story of a survivor.”
Sexual assault is one of the most sensitive areas of criminal misconduct in American society. Allegations of sexual assault are very serious for all parties involved and they should be treated as such. Women who are victimized should be taken seriously as they seek justice. Men who are accused of sexual misconduct have the right to face their accusers, in addition to being presumed innocent until proven guilty.
While the majority of women who make sexual abuse allegations tell the truth, ugly history of high profile cases show some don’t.
In March of 2006, Crystal Mangum accused white members of the Duke lacrosse team of gang raping her at a party. Before any evidence was provided to a court or to the public, the lives of the players were turned upside down. Their season was cancelled, the coach resigned, Duke faculty upheld the players as examples of racism in America and the New York Times smeared the players on a national level. The players were deemed guilty from the beginning.
When DNA evidence from all 46 eligible members of the team came back as negative, over zealous District Attorney Mike Nifong pressed on. Three young men, Collin Finnerty, David Evans, and Reade Seligmann, were arrested and charged.
“These allegations are lies. Fabricated and they will be proven wrong,” Evans, who served as team captain, said at the time.
Eventually the case fell apart and the charges were dropped. The players were declared innocent, just as they had argued and the evidence proved all along. Their reputations, however, were tarnished forever. Years later, Mangum was found guilty of murdering her boyfriend.
In 2014 Columbia University student Emma Sulkowitz claimed fellow student Paul Nungesser violently raped her. The police and university investigated and found no wrongdoing. Nungesser denied the allegations.
In her pursuit of justice and in order to “prove” her allegation, Sulkowitz carried a mattress around campus and vowed to do so until Nungesser was kicked off campus or put behind bars. In her mind he was a rapist and she wanted everyone to know it.
Her actions received praise from Democrat Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, she was invited to President Obama’s State of the Union address as a guest and was given glowing profiles in a number of major media outlets, including the New York Times. Her depiction of Nungesser was a success, with students and professors shunning him. This prompted Nugesser to file a lawsuit against the university and eventually officials issued an apology.
“Columbia recognizes that after the conclusion of the investigation, Paul’s remaining time at Columbia became very difficult for him and not what Columbia would want any of its students to experience,” the university released in a statement. “Columbia will continue to review and update its policies toward ensuring that every student — accuser and accused, including those like Paul who are found not responsible — is treated respectfully and as a full member of the Columbia community.”
That same year, Rolling Stone published a story titled, “A Rape on Campus.” The story alleged members of a fraternity repeatedly raped a woman named “Jackie.” The story wasn’t true, the rape didn’t happen and the magazine eventually paid the fraternity nearly $2 million after losing a defamation lawsuit.
"The article, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, was retracted in April 2015 after a police investigation found no evidence to back up Jackie's account," NBC News reported in 2017, when the lawsuit was settled. "In their complaint, the fraternity claimed the magazine knew that Jackie was not a reliable source but proceeded to publish her story without verifying all of her facts. The writer did not attempt to reach out to the alleged ringleader of the supposed attack or contact any others who could have debunked the story, the suit claimed."
In America, it is our duty to avoid the conviction of innocent men. Our system of justice, although flawed at times, is set up to prevent false convictions through due process. A system of due process allows for an equal, unbiased playing field between the accuser and the accused. In the court of public opinion, like in a court of law, we should base judgment on the evidence, rather than automatically condemning men who are accused by women. This isn’t an assumption that a woman making an accusation is lying, rather, it’s the best way to provide true justice and credibility to both parties.
This of course brings us to the current accusation against Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Christine Blasey Ford, a professor at Stanford University, alleges Kavanaugh attempted to rape her while drunk at a party in high school.
“While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth,” the Washington Post reported. “’I thought he might inadvertently kill me,’ said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. ‘He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.’”
Crucial details surrounding Ford’s allegation are still missing. Where was the party? When did the party occur? She’s also been unclear about how many people were in the room. First it was four and then it was two.
Kavanaugh completely rejects the allegation and has vehemently argued he has never engaged in the type of behavior alleged toward anyone.
“This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes—to her or to anyone," Kavanaugh released in a statement. "Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday.”
"I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the Committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity,” he continued. “Sixty-five women who knew Kavanaugh in high school, including two who dated him, have backed his integrity, behavior and character. “
In order for true justice for either party to be achieved, judgment should be rendered on the facts, not on gender. No two sexual assault cases are the same and each should be viewed and analyzed individually. The claims of both parties should be taken seriously, investigated and truthfulness determined on evidence.
July 30 2018 CONFIDENTIALSenator Dianne Fein-steinDear Senator Fein-stein;I am writing with information relevant in evaluating the current nominee to the Supreme Court. As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak. Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in the early 1980's. He conducted these acts with the assistance of REDACTED. Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school.The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others. Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a short stair well [sic] from the living room. They locked the door and played loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help. Kavanaugh was on top of me while laughing with REDACTED, who periodically jumped onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth I feared he may inadvertently kill me. From across the room a very drunken REDACTED said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from "go for it" to "stop."At one point when REDACTED jumped onto the bed the weight on me was substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other. After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home. I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see REDACTED once at the REDACTED where he was extremely uncomfortable seeing me.I have received medical treatment regarding the assault. On July 6 I notified my local government representative to ask them [sic] how to proceed with sharing this information. It is upsetting to discuss sexual assault and its repercussions, yet I felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything.I am available to speak further should you wish to discuss. I am currently REDACTED and will be in REDACTED.In confidence, REDACTED.
by Kay S. Hymowitz
{ city-journal.org } ~ Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has been accused of sexually assaulting a woman. According to the accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, during a party Kavanaugh and a friend, both heavily intoxicated, pulled her into a bedroom, closed the door, and pushed her onto a bed. Kavanaugh got on top of her, and, placing a hand over her mouth to muffle her screams, groped her and tried to remove her clothing. Terrified, she was able to escape and hide in a bathroom before fleeing the house.
This happened 36 years ago, Ford says. Kavanaugh was 17 years old at the time and Ford, 15. Kavanaugh firmly denies the story.
These last facts should make all those determined to use the charge as the poison pill to kill the judge’s nomination nervous. They’re on the verge of setting a dangerous precedent that will inevitably come back to bite them.
For one thing, they are setting the stage for condemning to reputation-death not just a Roe v. Wade-threatening Supreme Court nominee but any person, man or woman, Bible-thumper or dummycrats-Democratic socialist, by accusation alone. Ford’s story is almost impossible to investigate, much less to corroborate. It happened either in 1982 or 1983; it was either in June or August; it was a house, but she doesn’t know whose; she can’t recall how she got home.
Despite the hazy details, many find Ford’s story is credible, and for good reason: there’s nothing extraordinary about the events she describes, unfortunately, and over the years she told two therapists about them, though it’s not clear that she ever named Kavanaugh. Still, those who caution that human memory is unreliable, especially after more than three decades, are indisputably right. Is she certain that it was Brett Kavanaugh who was on top of her during those dreadful minutes? She had reason to fear that he was going to rape her, but do we know that that’s what he was intending, and does that make a difference? Kavanaugh himself might not know the answer. Multiply 35 years by large quantities of alcohol—Ford described Kavanaugh and his buddy as “stumbling drunk”—and you’ve got a terrible formula for truth-seeking.
Even with corroborating evidence, the case raises difficult questions about what constitutes disqualifying behavior. Attempted rape? No senator, even in the motley crew that now inhabits our upper chamber, would be willing to give a thumbs-up to a Supreme Court nominee with a felony on his or her record. Such a candidate would never be nominated to begin with.
But how about if this was a single instance of drunken groping by a minor? Keep in mind that all modern societies use different standards for judging and punishing minors than they do for adults. These days, people point to brain science to prove that adolescents have poor impulse control and social-emotional awareness, but you don’t need neural imaging to know that adolescents can be dumb risk-takers. That’s why we seal juvenile records. That’s why we have juvenile facilities and diversion programs. That’s why the goal in juvenile proceedings is not so much punishment as deterrence and rehabilitation. Kids grow up; they change; often, they straighten out.
Just about all the liberal commentary on the Kavanaugh–Ford affair thus far has trivialized this distinction between juvenile and adult by referring to it as a “boys will be boys” excuse. “Boys Will Be Supreme Court Justices” was the title New York Times editors gave to Michelle Goldberg’s Tuesday column. “Much of defensive reaction I’m seeing around Kavanaugh & not just from the right suggests that lots of people think a regular part of male development is the stage where boys drunkenly pin down young women & try to assault them,” New York columnist Rebecca Traister tweeted. Another tweet by popular progressive writer Jeet Heer continues in that vein: “I’m fascinated by the ‘teenage rapists deserve a pass’ strand of conservatism that is emerging.”
They are missing the point. No one—or at least no one outside the lunatic fringes of social media—is arguing that rapey behavior by teenaged boys is okay because, hormones. What they are suggesting is that the cruel and aggressive actions of an adolescent don’t deserve the same level of scrutiny and punishment as those of an adult. The perpetrators of such actions are more likely to be boys because hormones, but both sexes deserve a lighter touch when they’re underage.
That Kavanaugh’s fiercest opponents are now using a (tenuously recalled) adolescent crime as proof of his unfitness is an irony worth considering. The Left has always been at the forefront of the fight for leniency for minors. Progressives founded the juvenile court in 1899. Liberals fought “law and order” conservative attempts to try juveniles as adults initiated during the crime wave of the 1970s through 1990s. They pointed out, accurately, that those policies affected black kids far more than white. They were rightfully indignant that prepubescent children could be labelled sex offenders. “Children are regularly put on sex offender registries, sometimes for their entire lives, for conduct less serious than what Kavanaugh is accused of,” writes Goldberg. Well, yes. That’s exactly the tough-on-juvenile-crime approach that has five times as many black as white juveniles in prison and that Goldberg herself would justify against Kavanaugh.
Now, you could still argue, reasonably enough, that the bar should be set higher for a Supreme Court justice than for many other official positions; that 17 is old enough to justify severe lifelong consequences; that Kavanaugh, assuming that he is guilty, would have deserved a pass if only he would admit and apologize for his transgression. But these arguments need to be made as a matter of considered, consistent principle, and far away from the political war zone.
Men and women are not angels. Someday a brilliant, highly experienced, well-regarded woman may well be sitting in Kavanaugh’s seat and be accused at the zero hour and after interminable vetting of, say, stalking a former boyfriend or snorting cocaine when she was going through a bad stretch in high school. Then what?