New York Times writer arrested as Iran agent, accused of writing ‘propaganda’ pieces

/in , , , , , /by

This is the “gold standard” of American journalism.

New York Times opinion writer arrested as alleged Iran agent, accused of writing ‘propaganda’ pieces

By: Annaliese Levy, Sara Carter, Jan 28, 2021

A New York Times opinion writer was arrested and charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent of the Iranian government last week, The Algemeiner reported.

Kaveh Afrasiabi, a former political science professor and former adviser to Iran’s nuclear negotiation team, has been accused of violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

According to a press release from the Department of Justice, “Afrasiabi allegedly sought to influence the American public and American policymakers for the benefit of his employer, the Iranian government, by disguising propaganda as objective policy analysis and expertise,” Acting U.S. Attorney DuCharme said.

The press release states that Afrasiabi has a PhD and frequently publishes books and articles. He also appears on American television programs discussing foreign relations matters, particularly Iran’s relations with the United States.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office now accuses him of pushing propaganda.

Afrasiabi was allegedly paid, directed and controlled by the Government of Iran to lobby U.S. government officials and to create and disseminate information favorable to the Iranian government for over a decade.

“For over a decade, Kaveh Afrasiabi pitched himself to Congress, journalists, and the American public as a neutral and objective expert on Iran,” stated Assistant Attorney General Demers.

“However, all the while, Afrasiabi was actually a secret employee of the Government of Iran and the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations (IMUN) who was being paid to spread their propaganda. In doing so, he intentionally avoided registering with Department of Justice as the Foreign Agents Registration Act required.”

The Times published an opinion article co-written by Afrasiabi in 2018 that called for a meeting between former President Trump and President Hassan Rouhani of Iran.

“Mr. Trump and Mr. Rouhani should listen to reason and take the opportunity this month to sit down for a face-to-face conversation. It would be the truly bold thing to do,” the article states.

In 2012, The Times published an article by Afrasiabi which claimed world leaders gathering in Tehran for a summit would “elevate Iran as the movement’s new president for three years and enhance Tehran’s regional and international clout” but “unfortunately, the United States … adopted a purely negative approach toward the Tehran summit.”

In a statement to The Algemeiner, Afrasiabi called the government’s claim that he was a secret Iranian agent “absurd” and “wild.”

“Whatever I did was perfectly legal and fully transparent,” Afrasiabi said.

“My conscience is clear, and if the U.S. government had an iota of sense of appreciation, they would thank me for all my tireless activities for the cause of detente, non-proliferation, human rights, inter-religious dialogue and understanding.”

Afrasiabi acknowledged that he was paid by the Iranian mission at the United Nations.

“I received checks from the Mission’s UN account and it never occurred to me that I was doing anything illegal,” he said.

Afrasiabi said that he was not lobbying America on behalf of Iran, but rather lobbying Iran on behalf of America.

Afrasiabi was ordered released Friday, on the condition that he have no contact with any known, current, or former members of the Iranian government unless in the presence of his lawyer. He was also required to post a $250,000 unsecured bond, and family members posted an additional $325,000 in unsecured bonds.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Biden ☭ Team Backs Censorship of Trump and “Hate Speech”

/in , , , , , /by

Who decides what’s good and what’s forbidden? What’s hate or love? The same people who called the burning looting, and destroying of American cities the ‘summer of love”?

America’s intellectual leadership has collapsed.

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced. Putting up with speech that offends is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not bear being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed while everyone else lives in fear, while other groups curtail their activities to appease the violent group. This results in the violent group being able to tyrannize the others.

If speech that offends a group is outlawed, that group has absolute power, and a free society is destroyed. A group that cannot be criticized cannot be opposed. It can work its will no matter what it is, and no one will be able to say anything to stop it.

Inoffensive speech needs no protection. The First Amendment was developed precisely in order to protect speech that was offensive to some, in order to prevent those who had power from claiming they were offended by speech opposing them and silencing the powerless.

A FREE SOCIETY IS BY ITS NATURE ONE IN WHICH PEOPLE PUT UP WITH OTHERS BEING UNCIVIL AND OFFENSIVE. THE ALTERNATIVE IS A QUIET AUTHORITARIAN SOCIETY IN WHICH ONLY ONE OPINION IS ALLOWED AND THE OTHERS ARE SILENCED, AND ULTIMATELY SENT TO THE CAMPS.

White House Press Secretary: Biden Backs Censorship of Trump

Daybreak Insider: The press secretary said “We’ve spoken to him and he’s spoken to the need for social media platforms to continue to take steps to reduce hate speech.”  The video is here (Twitter). From Dave Rubin: This is extraordinarily dangerous and shows you how big tech is just an extension of the government. 1at amendment stops govt from silencing you, so the government wants to outsource that to the tech companies. (Also, as per Supreme Court there is no such thing as hate speech.) (Twitter).

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

BRILLIANT: President Trump’s Answer to Article of Impeachment

/in , , , , , /by

Schooling the destroyers in American freedom.

CLICK HERE TO READ President Donald J. Trump’s Answer to Article of Impeachment

Trump legal team argues impeachment article is in ‘violation’ of Constitution, calls on Senate to acquit

Trump legal team denies that the former president violated the oath of office

By Tyler Olson | Fox News

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team on Tuesday filed its response to the House article of impeachment ahead of next week’s trial, denying wrongdoing and calling for the Senate to acquit Trump of the charge.

The answer denies that Trump violated his oath of office while also saying that he was protected by the First Amendment in response to claims he incited an insurrection.

“It is denied that the 45th President of the United States ever engaged in a violation of his oath of office,” the Trump legal team brief says. “To the contrary, at all times, Donald J. Trump fully and faithfully executed his duties as President of the United States, and at all times acted to the best of his ability to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, while never engaging in any high Crimes or Misdemeanors.”
placeholder

Trump’s legal team also argues that a Senate trial against him would be unconstitutional.

“Donald John Trump, 45th President of the United States, respectfully requests the Honorable Members of the Senate of the United States dismiss Article I: Incitement of Insurrection against him as moot, and thus in violation of the Constitution, because the Senate lacks jurisdiction to remove from office a man who does not hold office,” the brief says.

The argument from Trump’s counsel that the trial is constitutionally impermissible is one that is supported by the vast majority of the Republicans in the Senate. Last week Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., raised a point of order, claiming that it is unconstitutional for the Senate to hold an impeachment trial of a former president.

It was defeated by a 55-45 vote, with five Republicans joining all 50 Senate Democrats in what is likely to be the final word on whether or not the trial may proceed – it’s highly unlikely any court would step in and tell the Senate how to run the trial.

But it would take 17 Republicans joining all 50 Senate Democrats to convict Trump on the impeachment article, meaning a dozen Senate Republicans would have to change their mind about the trial’s constitutionality for Democrats to even have a chance of convicting the former president.
Former President Donald Trump speaks to the crowd before boarding Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2021. Trump’s second impeachment trial begins next Tuesday. (AP Photo/Luis M. Alvarez)

Former President Donald Trump speaks to the crowd before boarding Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., Wednesday, Jan. 20, 2021. Trump’s second impeachment trial begins next Tuesday. (AP Photo/Luis M. Alvarez)

RAND PAUL CALLS TRUMP IMPEACHMENT TRIAL ‘DEAD ON ARRIVAL’ AFTER 45 GOP SENATORS VOTE AGAINST IT

The brief also doubles down on the false claims that Trump won the election.

“To the extent Averment 5 alleges his opinion is factually in error, the 45th President denies this allegation,” the brief reads, referencing the House’s allegation that Trump at his Jan. 6 rally “reiterated false claims that ‘we won this election, and we won it by a landslide.’”

“Insufficient evidence exists upon which a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th President’s statements were accurate or not, and he therefore denies they were false,” the brief also says.

Trump’s previous legal team quit over his demand that they make an election fraud case, Fox News was told. Trump’s new legal team of Bruce Castor Jr. and David Schoen were the only two lawyers signed onto the document that was submitted to the Senate on Tuesday.

Earlier Tuesday, the House impeachment managers filed their pre-trial brief, essentially previewing their argument against Trump in the trial that’s set to start next Tuesday.

“In a grievous betrayal of his Oath of Office, President Trump incited a violent mob to attack the United States Capitol during the Joint Session, thus impeding Congress’s confirmation of Joseph R. Biden Jr. as the winner of the presidential election,” the impeachment managers, led by Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., wrote. “As it stormed the Capitol, the mob yelled out ‘President Trump Sent Us,’ ‘Hang Mike Pence,’ and ‘Traitor Traitor Traitor.’”

They added: “This is not a case where elections alone are a sufficient safeguard against future abuse; it is the electoral process itself that President Trump attacked and that must be protected from him and anyone else who would seek to mimic his behavior.”

Trump’s second impeachment trial will be ‘grand political theater’: Howard Kurtz Video

But the Trump team brief on Tuesday directly addresses the allegation that the former president incited the riot.

“It is denied that the phrase ‘if you don’t fight like hell you’re not going to have a country anymore’ had anything to do with the action at the Capitol as it was clearly about the need to fight for election security in general, as evidenced by the recording of the speech,” the Trump team brief reads. “It is denied that President Trump intended to interfere with the counting of Electoral votes.”

It adds: “The purpose of the Joint Sessions of Congress in 2017 and on Jan. 6, 2021, was for Members of Congress to fulfill their duty to be certain the Electoral College votes were properly submitted, and any challenges thereto properly addressed under Congressional rules. Congress’ duty, therefore, was not just to certify the presidential election. Its duty was to first determine whether certification of the presidential election vote was warranted and permissible under its rules.”

Outside of a range of answers to the specific allegations from the House impeachment managers, the Trump team brief also previews a menu of legal arguments it says support the argument that the Senate should not convict Trump.

These include the Senate lacking jurisdiction to hear a trial of a former president; that Trump’s speech was protected by the First Amendment; that the House ignored due process in “rushing to issue an Article of Impeachment”; that Chief Justice John Roberts will not oversee the trial, and that the House weaves together a plethora of independent allegations into a single article of impeachment.

Trump’s team and the House impeachment managers will submit another round of briefs next Monday. These will be the House managers’ reply to Trump’s answer today, and the Trump team’s pre-trial brief.

The impeachment trial will then start in earnest next Tuesday.

RELATED ARTICLE: INSANE! Compromised House ‘impeachment managers’ say Trump “singularly responsible” for Capitol attack

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Business partner of HUNTER BIDEN’s crack/sex/criminal attorney picked for top Justice Department position

/in , , , , /by

Joe Biden’s son, Hunter Biden, is facing a federal investigation into his tax affairs after his foreign business dealings became a flash point in the 2020 presidential campaign ‘Orange girl bad’ Jen Psaki, who Joe Biden has selected to serve as his press secretary, said during an interview on Fox News Sunday that Joe Biden will not discuss the federal investigation of his son Hunter with attorney general candidates.

He has not said if he’ll recuse himself. Anyone who believes ☭ Biden’s DoJ will investigate is smoking Hunter’s crack.

Former Business Partner of Hunter Biden’s Criminal Defense Attorney Is Picked for a Top Justice Department Position

By: Joe Hoft, Gateway Pundit, February 1, 2021:

The former business partner of Hunter Biden’s attorney has been picked as a top Justice Department official by the Biden Administration.

The news came out last week:

Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported a former business partner of Hunter Biden’s criminal defense attorney has been picked as a top Justice Department official in President Biden’s new administration.

It has already been revealed that Nicholas McQuaid, a former federal prosecutor, was picked as acting chief of the Justice Department’s criminal division. Hunter Biden confirmed in early December, after his father won the 2020 election, that he was under federal investigation.

Carlson said on his show Friday night that McQuaid worked with Christopher Clark as partners at Latham & Watkins and worked on cases together right until McQuaid took the job at the Justice Department.

“On Jan. 21 of this year, the same day Nicholas McQuaid was featured in the Justice Department press release, Latham & Watkins filed a motion in court to withdraw McQuaid as an attorney [in a case] he was working on with Christopher Clark. So that means Joe Biden put at the head of the criminal division the partner of the guy his son had hired to defend him against the criminal division. Whoa,” Carlson said.

“We reached out to the Justice Department for a comment on this,” Carlson added. “They refused to say whether McQuaid would recuse himself for matters involving Hunter Biden and his former partner, who is representing Hunter Biden. It’s all pretty amazing. Another reminder, there’s a lot going on within the Biden family.”

Law.com refers to the new position as follows:

Nicholas McQuaid, a former federal prosecutor in Manhattan who served as a White House lawyer during the Obama presidency, has been named the acting leader of the U.S. Justice Department’s criminal division, a role that will come with oversight of the Biden administration’s early white-collar enforcement efforts and the ongoing crackdown on coronavirus-related fraud, according to people familiar with the move.

For some reason the Law.com site omitted the fact that McQuaid worked with Hunter Biden’s attorney in the past.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

NYPD shifts focus from jihad terror groups to ‘far-right and extremist hate groups’

/in , , , , , /by

The NYPD is adjusting its focus to fit the Left’s narrative, not reality. Remember: It wasn’t “far-right extremists” who rioted all summer in Portland, Seattle, Kenosha, Wisconsin, New York, Atlanta, Washington, DC, and numerous other cities that I have already forgotten. It was Leftists: Antifa and Black Lives Matter, who have also been found to have been among those storming the Capitol that is being used as a Reichstag Fire pretext to shut down dissent from the Leftist agenda. When the NYPD talks about “far-right and extremist hate groups,” it likely really means ordinary citizens who oppose the dominant political philosophy, including those who have already been defamed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as “hate groups.” Lies such as what the NYPD is spreading here are in service of solidifying the hegemony of that philosophy.

“NYPD’s focus on terror shifts to local extremist groups”

by Rocco Parascandola, New York Daily News, January 30, 2021:

The NYPD has spent the past 20 years adapting to the ever-changing landscape of terrorism, focused first on large jihadist groups, then lone wolves who emerge out of nowhere, and now far-right and extremist hate groups.

In late 2019, the nation’s largest police department created a new unit within the Intelligence Bureau called REME, which stands for Racially and Ethnically Motivated Extremism. It was formed a year after a brawl on the Upper East Side between anti-fascists believed to be connected to Antifa and members of the Proud Boys, one of the more prominent far-right groups.

REME works similarly to its’ umbrella unit, with two dozen investigators and analysts applying the same intelligence gathering techniques used to build cases against members of ISIS and al Qaeda.

But there are differences, notably the laws that make it easier to charge someone linked to a designated foreign terrorist organization….

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Media’s Oh-So-Devout Catholic Joe Biden Has Run Into a Little Trouble With the Bishops…

If Biden reopens PLO’s DC office, ‘Palestinians’ would be liable for $655,500,000 for jihad terror victims

Uganda: Muslims assault wife and children of pastor who is still in hospital for injuries from their last assault

Mahmoud Abbas is threatening to kill anyone who might oppose him

Somalia: Muslims crash explosive-filled vehicle into hotel, then open fire on staff and patrons

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BREAKING: New Facebook Insider Leaks Video of Zuckerberg and Executives

/in , , , , , /by

Project Veritas released a new video today leaked by a Brave Facebook Insider exposing CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitting to the company’s willingness to promote a partisan political agenda.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s videos:

  • Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO: “I know this is just a very difficult moment for a lot of us here [at Facebook], and especially our black colleagues. It was troubling to see how people in this [Capitol] mob were treated compared to the stark contrast we saw during [Black Lives Matter] protests earlier this [past] year.”
  • Zuckerberg: “President Biden already issued a number of Executive Orders on areas that we as a company care quite deeply about and have for some time.”
  • Zuckerberg: “The swearing in of Vice President Harris really stands as a reminder that despite the challenges that we are facing as a country, we all have so much to be proud of.”
  • Roy Austin, Facebook VP of Civil Rights: “I want every major decision to run through a civil rights lens.”
  • Nick Clegg, Facebook Head of Global Affairs: “There has been quite a lot of disquiet expressed by many leaders around the world…ideally we wouldn’t be making these [censorship] decisions on our own, we would be making these decisions in line with our own conformity, with democratically agreed rules and principles. At the moment, those democratically agreed rules don’t exist. We still have to make decisions in real-time.”

You can watch the short video here:

You can watch the long raw videos here:

How can Facebook users trust that they are using a “neutral” platform when the company’s CEO is praising a political party’s agenda?

Does Facebook as an organization stand by Zuckerberg’s partisan views?

The Brave Facebook Insider is still embedded within the organization and will keep us informed of further wrongdoing in the future.

To become an Insider, contact us via Signal: 914-653-3110

And make sure to share these videos with your friends and family!

Stay Tuned.

©Project Veritas. All rights reserved.

Media Company Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google, Facebook

/in , , , , , /by

Brilliant. It should be a class action suit including every conservative news site who have bee systematically destroy — deprived of our traffic and ad revenue by these tech tyrants.

Make no mistake, if the media darlings of tech (i.e. The NY Times et al) were shadow banned, suspended, and blocked from Facebook and Google, they would go bankrupt. Never in the history, has such immense power been in the hands of so few. And we are not talking Alexander the Great here, we are talking about social misfits nerds who couldn’t get laid in high school.

Media Company Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google, Facebook

A media company that operates several West Virginia newspapers is suing Google and Facebook for threatening the extinction of local newspapers across the country by their alleged anti-competitive business practices.

By Janita Kan, The Epoch Times, January 30, 2021:

HD Media Company this week filed a lawsuit asking a federal court to determine whether the two Silicon Valley companies had violated anti-trust laws. The lawsuit claims Google had unlawfully exercised monopoly power of the digital advertising market, which has prevented newspapers from competing in the market and losing their primary source of revenue.

It also claims that Google an

d Facebook had “unlawfully conspired to engage in anticompetitive conduct,” through an alleged secret deal nicknamed “Jedi Blue.” Details of the alleged agreement were first revealed when 10 state attorneys general sued Google for multiple violations of federal and state antitrust and consumer protection laws.

According to a redacted version of the lawsuit (pdf) filed in December, Facebook announced in 2017 that it would try a new method of selling online advertising called “header bidding,” which would act as a threat of competition for Google. The lawsuit suggested Facebook eventually “curtailed its involvement” with the project after Google gave Facebook “information, speed, and other advantages in the [redacted] auctions that Google runs for publishers’ mobile app advertising inventory each month in the United States.”

The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times, who both say they’ve reviewed an unredacted version of the complaint, reported the alleged secret deal referred to in the lawsuit was code-named “Jedi Blue” by Google.

HD Media’s lawsuit claims that as a result of Google and Facebook’s alleged anticompetitive and monopolistic practices, newspapers in West Virginia and across the country are facing “a very real existential threat to their existence.”

“Without redress, these newspapers, and hence the citizens of West Virginia, may well end up in the ‘news desert,’” the lawsuit states (pdf).

It claims that Google’s monopoly has created an uneven playing field to compete for online advertising revenue. It says Google had integrated itself through numerous mergers and acquisitions to “enable dominion over all sellers, buyers, and middlemen in the marketplace.”

“The freedom of the press is not at stake; the press itself is at stake,” the filing states.

“As a result of falling revenues, newspapers are steadily losing the ability to financially support their newsrooms, which are costly to maintain but provide immense value to their communities. A robust local newsroom requires the financial freedom to support in-depth, sometimes years-long reporting, as well as the ability to hire and retain journalists with expertise in fundamentally local issues, such as coverage of state government.”

Google and Facebook did not immediately respond to The Epoch Times’ request for comment.

HD media is seeking an order that declares Google and Facebook’s actions violated the law and blocks them from further engaging in such conduct. It also seeks damages for any injury caused.

HD media owns and operates newspaper such as The Herald-Dispatch in Huntington and Cabell County, the Charleston Gazette-Mail, The Wayne County News, The Putnam Herald, the Williamson Daily News, The Logan Banner, the Coal Valley News in Boone County, and The Independent Herald in Pineville.

RELATED ARTICLE: Zuckerberg Exposed

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

Hamas-linked CAIR sues U.S. government, claiming terrorism watchlist is unconstitutional

/in , , , , , /by

“They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.”

Yes, and often not at random: American Airlines, for one, is far more hostile to foes of jihad terror than to Sharia supremacists and advocates of Sharia-based oppression of women and others.

Anyway, this case has a good chance of succeeding given today’s political climate, but the Terrorism Screening Database is unlikely to be scrapped altogether; it will just be filled up with opponents of Biden’s handlers’ regime.

“Is the Terrorism Watchlist Legal? Appeals Court Hears Virginia Case,” Associated Press, January 27, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

FALLS CHURCH — On Tuesday, a panel of federal appellate judges expressed concerns about ordering wholesale changes to a government terrorism watchlist. A lower court previously found the list of roughly 1 million individuals was constitutionally flawed.

The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond heard arguments Tuesday on the constitutionality of the watchlist, also known as the Terrorism Screening Database.

Government lawyers urged the judges not to intervene in the executive branch’s administration of the list and its national security judgments.

Fundamentally, they said the problems encountered by those on the list, like enhanced screening at airports and delays at border crossings, were too insignificant to merit intervention on constitutional grounds. They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.

‘Far From Insignificant’
Gadeir Abbas, a lawyer with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which brought the suit on behalf of roughly two dozen Muslim clients, said the burden faced by those on the list is far from insignificant. He cited accounts from plaintiffs of being shackled and having guns pointed at them in front of their children at border crossings when agents encountered their names in the database.

“They are not just inconveniences,” Abbas said.

But J. Harvie Wilkinson, one of three judges who heard the case, said that while some plaintiffs experienced significant issues, others experienced only minor problems. He suggested it might be better for individual plaintiffs to file suits based on their own experiences, rather than just attacking the watchlist as a whole.

He also questioned whether the judiciary branch was able or qualified to require revisions to a program that the government insists is vital to national security….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Indonesia: Gay couple whipped for Sharia-banned sex

Palestinian Supreme Fatwa Council: Calls to follow the ‘modern Abrahamic religion are tantamount to apostasy’

Iran threatens to block short-notice inspections of its nuclear facilities by UN atomic agency

Iranian military top dog: ‘If we face the smallest mistake from the Zionist regime, we will raze Haifa and Tel Aviv’

Pentagon chief may increase number of US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq

Biden’s policy towards Iran could leave Israel no choice but to use military force

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Show Trials and Purges Are Just Getting Started

/in , , , , , /by

The renowned historian H. G. Wells once said of Joseph Stalin, “I like Uncle Joe very much. He’s a great man.” That would be a terrific motto to replace the outmoded slogan of slavery and white supremacy, “In God We Trust,” that is currently emblazoned behind the podium of the Speaker of the House. Now that Stalinist show trials have come to Congress, we all like Uncle Joe very much. Or else. And you have to give them credit: this impeach-a-private-citizen-because-we-hate-him business opens up a whole universe of sparkling new possibilities. Yesterday I offered a list of five presidents who must be impeached now, but that’s just the beginning.

As fifty-five senators are now on record saying that the impeachment of a former president is perfectly constitutional, there is no reason not to extend wokeness back to 1789 and cleanse the ugly blot Leftists think of as our history. Washington? Jefferson? Slaveowners! Impeach them! Andrew Jackson? Trail of Tears. He clearly has to go, too. James K. Polk? Started a war with Mexico when he should have just opened our borders and given all non-citizens the right to vote, free housing, and a COVID-19 vaccine. As Rashida Tlaib would say, Impeach the motherf***er! Theodore Roosevelt? Imperialist! Woodrow Wilson! Racist! Impeach them all! In fact, we must impeach all previous presidents, even Saint Barack the Hussein, for none of them, none at all, were woke enough. Remember Obama’s opposition to gay marriage? They all must go, every one, or Ilhan Omar’s moral superiority will be affronted. That must not be.

Nor do we have to stop with former presidents. Trump is, remember, not president anymore. He is a private individual who holds no office, just like you and me. He is being impeached for being a dictator, telling protestors to proceed peacefully and having them disregard his words and disobey his instruction, which is how people always respond to dictators. So it’s clear that impeachment in today’s woke America is just a tool to get back at those who threaten the hegemony of those in power. We know who the threats are today, and now it’s time to stop them. Impeach Rush Limbaugh! Impeach Tucker Carlson! Impeach Thomas Sowell! Impeach Tom Paine! Impeach your Ma! Impeach your Pa! Don’t have anything on them? Make it up! It worked for Stalin. It worked for Pelosi. It will keep working.

Like the potato peeler in the old commercials that slices, dices, purees, bakes, fries, and washes your car, this new impeachment tool has a marvelous variety of uses. Imagine that you’re a Democrat facing a tough Senate race against a Trump-supporting opponent who is wildly popular with the voters, drawing massive and enthusiastic crowds just as Trump did before losing resoundingly to the old man muttering through his mask to a half-dozen supporters carefully social distanced from one another in little chalk circles. Suppose you’re rattled and think this racist, redneck yahoo you’re facing has a chance to eke out a victory even after all the 4 a.m. ballot deliveries and boarding up of windows at the places where the votes are counted.

The solution is so simple that it’s a wonder that no corrupt politicians thought of it before: impeach your opponent. Yes, he (or she, or xe) is just a candidate, not an officeholder, and not president of the United States, but hey, neither is Mr. Donald J. Trump of Mar-a-Lago. Impeach your Trumpist foe, and the populist boomlet will be nipped in the bud, courtesy of the “disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States” that impeachment and conviction bring. The same thing would work in presidential races: if you’re a Democrat who is running for president and starting to lose a little gas in the run-up to Super Tuesday, no problem! Your opponent can become an impeached president before he (or she, or ey, or ve) leaves Iowa.

We are truly blessed to live in the age of masterful constitutional scholars such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, who have taken a magnificently wrought system for guaranteeing both stable government and personal freedom and turned it into a sick joke and a cruel instrument of partisan vengeance. And those blessings from our moral superiors on high bring me to the last figure who must be impeached in order to ensure that justice flows in our unhappy, systemically racist land like a river: God.

Yes. God must be impeached. It is He (not She or Xe), after all, who is responsible for the ever-vexing fact that while all human beings are created equal in dignity, they are not remotely equal in accomplishment, ability, intelligence, strength, vigor, or anything else. It is that unfortunate reality of the human experience that Democrats are endlessly trying to obliterate with their increasing array of programs designed to ensure not just equality of opportunity, but equality of outcome. Their quarrel, ultimately, is not with Donald Trump, but with a much higher power. Impeach Him now!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Five Presidents Who Need to Be Impeached Now

Ten Reasons a Post-Presidency Impeachment of Barack Obama Should Happen

Disagreeing With Biden’s Transgender Policy Is ‘Incitement’ Now? Facebook Says So…

Will Kamala Harris Preside Over Trump’s Second Impeachment Trial?

Tom Cotton Suggests It’s Unconstitutional to Impeach Trump After January 20

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Help us STOP Joe Biden’s radical agenda by becoming a PJ Media VIP member. Use promo code AMERICAFIRST to receive 25% off your VIP membership.

DHS’s Unintelligible Threat Bulletin

/in , , , , /by

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced January 27th that a heightened threat environment existed in the country due to what they described as:

“ideologically-motivated extremists with objections to the exercise of governmental authority and the presidential transition as well as other perceived grievances fueled by false narratives, could continue to mobilize to incite or commit violence.”

The bulletin goes on to say that “Domestic Violent Extremists (DVEs)” –a newly created term:

“targeted individuals with opposing views engaged in First Amendment-protected, non-violent protest activity.  DVEs motivated by a range of issues, including anger over COVID-19 restrictions, the 2020 election results, and police use of force have plotted and on occasion carried out attacks against government facilities.”

It is unclear exactly to what this refers. The term Domestic Violent Extremist (DVE) was established as a joint term by the DHS and FBI following a requirement inserted into the National Defense Authorization Act which mandated a standardized definition.

Curiously, while the Bulletin claims the definition of DVE is provided within the DHS Lexicon, in fact it does not appear at the attached link. Instead, only the phrase “domestic terrorism” appears. A note on the FBI/DHS NDAA report notes that DHS’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis uses the phrase “domestic terrorist” interchangeably with the phrase “domestic violent extremist.”

It seems unlikely the new bulletin refers to the multiple months of Antifa-led attacks against police precincts, ICE facilities, and courthouses, including attacks as recent as this week. DHS briefly utilized the term “Violent Antifa Anarchist Inspired” (VAAI) to refer to individuals responsible for attacks on Portland’s Hatfield Federal Courthouse and other federal facilities. A 2016 report from Obama-era DHS described Antifa as the primary instigators of violence at public rallies.

The bulletin may refer to claims by the FBI that incidents similar to the violent January 6th U.S. Capitol riot were likely to occur at State capitols, alleging “a huge uprising” around the country on or around Inauguration day. Over 25,000 U.S. National Guard troops were dispatched to Washington D.C. as a result of alleged threats, in a move widely panned as a political theater. No incidents occurred.

The DHS bulletin also mentions potential:

“[T]hreats of violence against critical infrastructure, including the electric, telecommunications and healthcare sectors, increased in 2020 with violent extremists citing misinformation and conspiracy theories about COVID-19 for their actions.”

This is likely a reference to the Christmas Day Nashville bombing outside an AT&T building which resulted in massive downtime for regional telecommunications and 911 systems. Some media speculated that the alleged perpetrator Anthony Quinn Warner (who died in the bombing) was motivated by popular online conspiracy theories regarding 5G networks and COVID-19. Yet Tennessee Bureau of Investigations Director David Rauch said the motivation was undetermined noting, “We may never find out the exact reasoning behind the activity that took place.”

The Nashville bombing has therefore not been classified as domestic terrorism as no motivation has been formally assigned for the attack.

Yet the bulletin would appear to be advancing the claim that irrational beliefs and delusions –such as belief in lizard people, a view Warner allegedly held—can be classified as a political motivation. This is problematic for several reason, even as we acknowledge that the Nashville bombing revealed a serious vulnerability which may be exploited by future threats.

For one thing it places DHS in the position of adjudicating what constitutes a “false narrative,” and likely into extending its search for potential terrorists into the realm of constitutionally protected speech. It also runs the risk of attempting to frame otherwise legal speech or even mere internet rumor as somehow constituting criminal incitement or support for terrorism.

Lastly the DHS bulletin contains a reference to three Homegrown Violent Extremist attacks against government officials in 2020 but the actual incidents go unidentified. Homegrown Violent Extremist (HVE) is a DHS euphemism usually meant to refer to individuals inspired by Al Qaeda or the Islamic State but who were not formally members of a foreign terrorist group.

This most recent DHS bulletin continues to fall victim to a contrived and shifting lexicon, which creates confusion and doubt about apparent threats.

U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies should speak clearly and frankly about apparent threats in ways which most accurately communicate the nature of the ideological threat, its objectives, capabilities, and intent. Until it does so, such bulletins –presumably intended to be helpful and educate about potential threats—will be interpreted as vague, overarching, and increasingly politicized.

COLUMN BY

KYLE SHIDELER

Kyle Shideler is the Director and Senior Analyst for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy. Mr. Shideler specializes in Islamist groups operating in the United States, having spent over a decade researching and writing on their history, doctrine, and impact. Read his complete bio here. Follow Shideler on Twitter at @ShidelerK. View all posts by Kyle Shideler →

©Center For Security Policy. All rights reserved.

Five Presidents Who Need to Be Impeached Now

/in , , , , /by

Now that Congressional Democrats have set the precedent that presidents who are no longer in office can be impeached, in flagrant disregard of the Constitutional provision that one of the consequences of impeachment and conviction is “removal from Office,” impeachment has become not only a weapon of partisan politics and naked vengeance, but a way to correct historical wrongs. What’s more, Trump is being tried for inciting a violent riot by telling demonstrators “to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” If that will fly, the “high crimes” don’t have to be all that high in the coming trials of former presidents, but there are plenty to go around anyway. Here are the top five presidents who, for the sake of justice and the children, must be impeached now:

  1. Barack Obama

Yes, there was the tan suit, but that would only be impeachable if Trump wore one like it. In his predecessor’s case, the “high crimes” for which he ought to be impeached are the highest of all: treason. Obama paid $1.7 billion to a regime that requires its citizens to chant “Death to America.” That regime used the money to finance jihad terrorists who want to see America’s destruction and are actively working against American interests. Treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Is there any reason in light of that, other than the Democrats’ hegemony in Washington, that Obama should not be charged with treason?

  1. Bill Clinton

Slick Willie can and should join Trump in the double impeachment jeopardy club for getting us into the current mess with China. After the People’s Republic stole many U.S. military secrets due to lax Clinton-era security controls, Clinton gave the Chinese even more, including advanced missile technology, allegedly in return for campaign contributions. The Washington Post noted in an editorial that “in the first three quarters of 1998 nine times as many [supercomputers] were exported [to China] as during the previous seven years.”

Yet this was three years after the Chinese spying operation had been discovered, and with no indication that China would not continue to be generally hostile to American interests. That’s a much “higher crime” than telling people to protest peacefully. It was Clinton who paved the way for Beijing Joe and his henchmen.

  1. Jimmy Carter

The senescent, sanctimonious Southerner deserves his impeachment trial for many reasons, but the Department of Education alone is enough. Along with the Department of Energy that Jimmeh also established, it was another manifestation of the assumption, by now taken for granted by nearly everyone, that if the nation faced a problem, the best way to solve it was to unleash a new army of federal bureaucrats.

Neither department has any significant accomplishments to justify their existence. The Department of Education has been a massive failure, and is ultimately responsible for the miseducation of our youth over the last forty years, such that leftist indoctrination substitutes for education nearly everywhere. The federal bureaucrats who oversee the Department of Education have created national standards and curricula that are frequently tendentious and politicized, with a pronounced leftist bias. In our own day, this has taken the form of an almost manic attention to race and diversity, at the expense of giving children a basic education.

  1. Richard Nixon

Yes, he’s dead, but what does that matter anymore? Yes, he forestalled his own impeachment by resigning, but that doesn’t matter anymore either, does it? Nixon is the most likely candidate to be America’s Pope Formosus, the ninth-century pontiff whose body was dug up by his vengeful successor so that he could be tried in what has come down to us with the honorable name of the Cadaver Synod. Today’s Congressional Democrats, who are more vengeful than any group in American history, can top that with their Cadaver Impeachment Trial of Richard Milhous Nixon.

  1. Joe Biden

It’s a bit novel and unorthodox, as Old Joe is still nominally in office, but unorthodoxy is the order of the day. Biden deserves to be impeached because for the Democrats, impeachment is now no more or less than a tactic to discredit and destroy their opponents, no matter what the facts of the case are. And it’s all happening while Old Joe, and/or his handlers, are in charge. That means that he bears the ultimate responsibility for this present travesty. For the high crime of allowing the Constitution and the republic to become a sick joke, House Republicans should stage a quick trial and do their own impeachment walk to the Senate to deliver the articles of impeachment. What’s that? They don’t have a majority? Who cares?

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Don’t Let Anti-Gun Activists Weaponize the Capitol Hill Riot!

/in , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JOHN R. LOTT, JR.

John R. Lott, Jr. is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author most recently of Gun Control Myths. Up until this week, Lott was the senior advisor for research and statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy.

TOPIC: Don’t Let Anti-Gun Activists Weaponize the Capitol Hill Riot!

RICK MANNING

Rick Manning is a Conservative Commandoes and AUN-TV alumnus and the President, Americans for Limited Government. Rick also served on President Trump’s transition team. And he is also the author of the new book with Starr Parker — “Necessary Noise: How Donald Trump Inflames the Culture War and Why this is good for America!”

TOPIC: A Vote to Censure Trump Threatens Free Speech of Every American.

ROBERT CHARLES

Robert Charles is also a spokesman for AMAC, as well as former Assistant Secretary of State. He also served in the Reagan and Bush 41 White Houses, and counsel to the U.S. House National Security subcommittee for five years. Additionally, he ran a major portion of the U.S. House Oversight Committee for five years during which time he ran the joint committee in the Waco investigations.

TOPIC: Executive Overreach – Biden Signs 17 Orders.

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

Democrats introduce bill to make Washington, D.C. the 51st State

/in , , , , /by

Democrats introduce bill to make Washington D.C. the 51st State that a one party communist state is virtually assured. And mind you, it’s only week one.

Imagine if a hostile enemy state managed to hijack a U.S, Presidential election and then proceeded to reign, what would they be doing any differently than the fraudulent Biden administration?

RELATED ARTICLE: PACKING THE COURT: Biden Launches Commission On ‘Supreme Court Reform’

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Tulsi Gabbard SLAMS Adam Schiff, John Brennan, Big Tech as ‘DOMESTIC ENEMIES’ more dangerous than Capitol protesters

/in , , , , , /by

She slams Adam Schiff, John Brennan, Big Tech as “domestic enemies” more dangerous than Capitol protesters. Coming from a Democrat …..

Tulsi Gabbard slams Adam Schiff, John Brennan, and Big Tech as ‘domestic enemies’ more dangerous than Capitol rioters

By Emma Colton, Washington Examiner | January 26, 2021:

Former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard slammed Rep. Adam Schiff, Big Tech, and former CIA director John Brennan as “domestic enemies” who are more dangerous than the rioters who stormed the Capitol.

“The mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 to try to stop Congress from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities were behaving like domestic enemies of our country,” Gabbard said in a video she posted to her Twitter account Tuesday morning.

The mob who stormed the capitol to try to stop Congress from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities were behaving like domestic enemies of our country. But let us be clear, the John Brennan’s, Adam Schiffs and the oligarchs in Big Tech who are… pic.twitter.com/Q3VssCiz5l
— Tulsi Gabbard 🌺 (@TulsiGabbard) January 26, 2021

“But let’s be clear, the John Brennans, Adam Schiffs, and the oligarchs in Big Tech who are trying to undermine our constitutionally protected rights and turn our country into a police state with KGB-style surveillance are also domestic enemies, and much more powerful, and therefore dangerous, than the mob that stormed the Capitol,” she added.

The former Hawaii congresswoman has repeatedly slammed a bill proposed by Schiff to combat domestic terrorism. She also has taken issue with Brennan’s comments that Biden’s nominees “are now moving in laser-like fashion to try to uncover as much as they can” on activities he says are similar to “insurgency movements.”

Gabbard broke with many in her party late last year when she said former President Donald Trump had her support in terminating Section 230, which provides liability protections to internet publishers.

“@realDonaldTrump I fully support you on this. Please don’t back down. The freedom and future of our country is at stake,” Gabbard tweeted on Dec. 3.

She also introduced a bill that would ban abortions once a baby in the womb can feel pain, as well as another anti-abortion bill that would protect babies born after an attempted abortion.

Gabbard announced last year that she wouldn’t seek reelection for her seat in Congress and would instead focus on her presidential campaign, which she ultimately lost.

In her Tuesday video, she also called upon Biden to denounce those in power who threaten to take “away our civil liberties endowed to us by our Creator.”

“I call upon you, and all members of Congress from both parties to denounce these efforts by the likes of Brennan and others to take away our civil liberties that are endowed to us by our Creator and guaranteed in our Constitution. If you don’t stand up to these people now, then our country will be in great peril,” she said.

TULSI GABBARD: DOMESTIC-TERRORISM BILL IS “A TARGETING OF ALMOST HALF OF THE COUNTRY”

By Brittany Bernstein, National review, January 23, 2021:

Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic representative from Hawaii, on Friday expressed concern that a proposed measure to combat domestic terrorism could be used to undermine civil liberties.

Gabbard’s comments came during an appearance on Fox News Primetime when host Brian Kilmeade asked her if she was “surprised they’re pushing forward with this extra surveillance on would-be domestic terror.”

“It’s so dangerous as you guys have been talking about, this is an issue that all Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians should be extremely concerned about, especially because we don’t have to guess about where this goes or how this ends,” Gabbard said.

She continued: “When you have people like former CIA Director John Brennan openly talking about how he’s spoken with or heard from appointees and nominees in the Biden administration who are already starting to look across our country for these types of movements similar to the insurgencies they’ve seen overseas, that in his words, he says make up this unholy alliance of religious extremists, racists, bigots, he lists a few others and at the end, even libertarians.”

She said her concern lies in how officials will define the characteristics they are searching for in potential threats.

“What characteristics are we looking for as we are building this profile of a potential extremist, what are we talking about? Religious extremists, are we talking about Christians, evangelical Christians, what is a religious extremist? Is it somebody who is pro-life? Where do you take this?” Gabbard said.

She said the proposed legislation could create “a very dangerous undermining of our civil liberties, our freedoms in our Constitution, and a targeting of almost half of the country.”
All Our Opinion in Your Inbox

“You start looking at obviously, have to be a white person, obviously likely male, libertarians, anyone who loves freedom, liberty, maybe has an American flag outside their house, or people who, you know, attended a Trump rally,” Gabbard said.

The Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021 was introduced in the House earlier this week in the aftermath of rioting at the U.S. Capitol earlier this month that left five dead.

“Unlike after 9/11, the threat that reared its ugly head on January 6th is from domestic terror groups and extremists, often racially-motivated violent individuals,” Representative Brad Schneider (D., Ill.) said in a statement announcing the bipartisan legislation.

“America must be vigilant to combat those radicalized to violence, and the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act gives our government the tools to identify, monitor and thwart their illegal activities. Combatting the threat of domestic terrorism and white supremacy is not a Democratic or Republican issue, not left versus right or urban versus rural. Domestic Terrorism is an American issue, a serious threat the we can and must address together,” he said.

RELATED ARTICLE: Tulsi Gabbard: Domestic-Terrorism Bill Is “TARGETING ALMOST HALF THE COUNTRY”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Facebook, Twitter, Google et al have shadowbanned, suspended and in some cases deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here— it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever.

PODCAST: Future of GOP Will Be Determined by Trump Trial!

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

JEFF CROUERE

Jeff Crouere is the host of, “Ringside Politics,” which airs weekdays on WGSO 990-AM in New Orleans. He is a political columnist, the author of America’s Last Chance and provides regular commentaries on the Jeff Crouere YouTube channel and on www.JeffCrouere.com.

TOPIC: Future of GOP Will Be Determined by Trump Trial!

WEN FA

Wen Fa is an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation’s national headquarters. He has litigated numerous direct-rep cases dealing with private property, equality under the law, school choice, economic liberty, and the First Amendment. Wen has appeared on radio over a dozen times. He has published a scholarly article in the William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal and shorter pieces in newspapers and PLF’s blog. Wen is the founder of the Sacramento Chapter of America’s Future Foundation, and a board member of the Sacramento Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society.

TOPIC: Was 2020 a turning point for identity politics?

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Two Senate Democrats Surprise America

Graham: lllegitimized impeachment process ‘danger to democracy’

Hannity: ‘Irrational psychotic rage’ driving impeachment push