Sanders Burns the 2020 Democratic Primary Gun Control Agenda

/in , , , , /by

As anti-gun as the 2020 Democratic presidential contenders have exposed themselves to be, much of the field still gives lip-service to the Second Amendment and the Constitution. Take for instance Joe Biden. The leading candidate’s campaign has said that Biden will seek to “respect the Second Amendment” and that “as president, Biden will pursue constitutional, common-sense gun safety policies.” However, take a critical look at the vast majority of the Democratic field for any limiting principle that would preclude even the most severe forms of gun control (like gun confiscation) and you will come up wanting.

To his credit, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has once again injected some much-needed sanity into a Democratic presidential primary. Speaking at a November 10 campaign rally in Charles City, Iowa, the candidate was asked about his opinion on a “mandatory buyback” (properly understood as confiscation) of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms like AR-15s. Sanders responded by stating, “I don’t support, a mandatory buyback is essentially confiscation, which I think is unconstitutional.” The senator went on to add, “It means that I am going to walk into your house and take something whether you like it or not. I don’t think that stands up to constitutional scrutiny.”

Unfortunately, Sanders’s moment of lucidity was brief. The candidate went on to express his support for the criminalization of private firearms transfers and a ban on the sale of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

The senator also provided unwitting attendees with a misimpression of current law by suggesting an individual could “buy a dozen guns legally” and sell them to criminals without facing legal repercussions. Of course, 18 U.S.C. 922(d) makes it unlawful for “any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person” is prohibited from possessing firearms. A violation of this provision is punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment.

However wrong Sanders might be about a slew of gun control measures, he is right about the confiscation of commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.

In the landmark case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court concluded that the Second Amendment protected ownership of the type of firearms “in common use at the time” for “lawful purposes like self-defense.” The National Shooting Sports Foundation estimates that there are more than 16 million commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms possessed by law-abiding Americans. The AR-15 is the most popular rifle in America, and therefore is in “common use.” Gun control advocates seem to agree that such semi-automatic rifles are common, considering they routinely complain about the “proliferation” of these firearms.

Heller opinion author Justice Antonin Scalia later reiterated the fact that the decision precluded bans on commonly-owned semi-automatics when he signed onto a dissent from denial of certiorari in the case of Friedman v. Highland Park. The dissent, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, couldn’t have been clearer:

Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons.

Further, as Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted during his time on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in a dissent in District of Columbia v. Heller, U.S. Supreme Court precedent required gun control measures to be scrutinized in the context of the Second Amendment’s “text, history, and tradition.” A confiscation effort the likes of which has been backed by several of the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates has no validity when examined under this framework.

This wasn’t the first time Sanders has brought a measure of reason to a Democratic presidential primary. During a 2016 Democratic primary debate, Sanders was challenged on his vote for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The PLCAA was enacted to protect the firearms industry from frivolous lawsuits resulting from a third party’s criminal misuse of a firearm. The act codified long-standing principles of tort law.

During the debate, Sanders stated,

Well, this is what I say, if I understand it — and correct me if I’m wrong. If you go to a gun store and you legally purchase a gun, and then, three days later, if you go out and start killing people, is the point of this lawsuit to hold the gun shop owner or the manufacturer of that gun liable? If that is the point, I have to tell you I disagree…. what you’re really talking about is ending gun manufacturing in America. I don’t agree with that.

According to USA Today, the Senator later told reporters that permitting frivolous suits against the gun industry could result in “shutting down the entire industry.” Sanders added, “If Secretary Clinton’s position is that there should not be any more guns in America, fine… She should be honest and say that, because that is really what that means.”

Sanders is not a champion of gun rights. The senator merely appears to understand that there is some limit to the government’s power to trample upon the Constitutional rights of the American people. The fact that his comment stands out in the 2020 Democratic race is more a testament to his deranged opponents than his love of liberty. It’s a bizarre season when the “Democratic Socialist” is the most centrist Democratic presidential candidate on guns.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Joe Biden and His Gift for Gaffes

No Protection for the Law that Protects the Firearm Industry: Supreme Court Passes on PLCAA Case

Trading Freedom for Safety

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Psychiatrists, Impeachment, and Justice

/in , , , , , /by

After a period of silence, Dr. Bandy Lee and her committee of mental-health “experts” have again burst onto the scene, angling to participate in the impeachment of President Trump. They are defying the Goldwater Rule, which holds that it is unethical for physicians to diagnose patients they have not personally examined. They claim that President Trump is a such a serious threat to the nation that they are allowed to violate rules.

“We don’t believe there is the need for any further evaluation, and we are making ourselves available for the impeachment hearing because we believe that mental health issues will become critical as pressures from the impeachment hearings mount,” Dr. Lee told the Washington Examiner. “In other words, the more successful the impeachment proceedings become, the more dangerous the psychological factors of the president will become.”

Obviously, the thing to do is to increase the psychological pressure on a person you declare to be unstable.

Dr. Lee’s “medical assessment” of the President’s “mental capacity to fulfill the duties of his office” includes the examination of tweets, public appearances, and the 448-page Mueller report. “There is very little that a personal examination will add,” Lee said.

She denies that she is actually making a diagnosis. Indeed, “unfitness for office” is an opinion, a conclusion that is not in the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of currently defined psychiatric diagnoses.

Regardless of one’s opinion about President Trump, this self-appointed “Independent Expert Panel for Presidential Fitness” should concern all Americans. Where does a group of academic experts get the ability or the authority to determine whether the President is “capable of keeping the country safe”?

The U.S. Constitution provides several methods of “regime change,” which is what Congressional Democrats, the mainstream news media, and this Panel seem

determined to achieve. The first is elections. In 2016, Americans voted for a change from the policies of Obama and Clinton and the imbedded bureaucracy. Ever since then, the losers have been seeking to nullify this result. Attacks on the President by the press have been unrelenting. Unlike Abraham Lincoln or Woodrow Wilson, this President has not imprisoned any journalists or shut down any newspapers. But he does make sarcastic remarks—and his opponents would like to deny him the forum of social media.

Second is the 25th Amendment, which provides for the removal of a President for incapacity. This might have removed Woodrow Wilson after a devastating stroke had it been in existence at the time. It requires action by the Vice President and a majority of executive officers or a body appointed by Congress—not a few activist academics. This has so far been a non-starter.

Finally, there is impeachment, for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” In American jurisprudence, proceedings are supposed to be triggered by a crime—not by the Soviet KGB method of “show me the man, and I will name his crime.” Or worse, “KGB Plus”—show me the man, and I will invent his crime.

In a world where there are so many ever-changing rules that everyone might be inadvertently committing “three felonies a day,” anyone could be prosecuted. But one is at least supposed to have certain rights: confronting the accuser, assistance of counsel, access to all the evidence, the right to call and cross-examine witnesses. And knowing exactly what the charges are.

Why should psychiatrists be intruding themselves into this legal process? Are there Thought Crimes that they have a special ability to discern?

Ordinary Americans should be very concerned. If this can happen to the President, it can happen to them. And it does.

One alarming example is the “fitness for duty” evaluations to which physicians may be subjected by people who for some reason want to destroy them. There are virtually no due-process rights. The examiner has the status of a physician, but no obligation to act in the “patient’s” (target’s) best interest. Some psychiatrists may presume to have god-like power to judge a person’s emotions, intentions, and capacity—asserted in the name of safety or “security.” “Red flag” laws are another example.

President Trump may be right in saying: “They’re not coming for me. They are coming for you. I’m just in the way.”

Bandy Lee and associates are showing us a method to remove undesirables if legal process fails.

© All rights reserved.

Soviet Style Impeachment in America!

/in , , , , , /by

“You bring me the man and I’ll show you the crime.” – Laverty Beria, Chairman of the secret police in the USSR.

Only those people who know Evil can understand and appreciate Goodness. We the former citizens from the Socialist countries know what Evil means, we lived under the “Evil Regime” half of our life. In considering Ukraine you have to know that “Evil Regime.” I sat in courtrooms of the USSR for 25 years and Adam Schiff in his impeachment inquiry has brought me back to the Soviet court in America. Like in the Mueller Report the main principle of American justice system, the presumption of innocent is missing in action. Adam Schiff is forming the narrative: extortion, bribery, shredding the norm, and undermining the rule of law. It is a partisan, political exercise masked by the impeachment inquiry to affect public opinion…

The Tragedy of Ukraine

Ukraine is a wonderful country of a magnificently fertile land and hard-working people and three generations of Ukrainians have lived under the “Evil-Regime” of the Soviet Socialist system. A normal human being from the West can’t perceive the depth of the corruption the system has created. And nobody in the Dems’ impeachment inquiry debating Ukraine, including Maria Yovanovich could understand the tragedy of the country created by the Socialist mafia. As the Dems proceed further in their inquiry, the more and more their incompetence will be exposed…  The American people haven’t the remotest idea of what is happening in Ukraine.

To grasp the extent of corruption in Ukraine you have to know the Soviet Socialist system—the system of total corruption from the bottom to the top, regardless of race, class, or nationality. The system existed, lived and breathed corruption. The Socialist mob in Ukraine includes a large portion of Russians in the population and many oligarchs collaborating with Russia. That segment of the population helped to elect President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych 2010-2914 and thereafter Soviet corruption continued to flourish: President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych had a Gold Toilet bowl in his castle, when many Ukrainians did not have enough food to survive.

The corruption in Ukraine continued with President Peter Poroshenko and the election in 2019 exposed the human outrage of Ukrainians, voting 75% for President Zelensky. For your information, the hero of the radical left, former U.S. ambassador Maria Yovanovich had supported Peter Poroshenko, a man who collaborated with Putin. This was her understanding of events in Ukraine. Please read about two real events:

Late last month OANN investigative journalist and author Jack Posobiec posted a series of tweets detailing Rep. Adam Schiff’s actions this past month after receiving the CIA ‘whistleblower’ report on President Trump’s phone call with the newly elected Ukrainian President. Schiff sent a staffer to Ukraine to meet with the former President Poroshenko after receiving the ‘whistleblower’ report. This trip was sponsored by a think tank that receives funding from a program of left-wing billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundation called “Open Society Initiative for Europe”

Breaking: Ukrainian Government Ready to Cooperate with FBI on Laundering Hundreds of Millions of IMF Aid Money, American Truth Today

I was very suspicious of Yovanovich and suddenly Ukraine gave me another reason to talk about the Obama/Putin conspiracy. Writing about the Obama/Putin conspiracy for the last 8-10 years, I considered Obama a Socialist in the worse sense of the word, but I didn’t know about Ukraine. The quote above tells me even more. We are dealing with a syndicate of the Deep State, liar Schiff, Socialist mafia, and the KGB political operative George Soros. I wrote about Soros for many years: he has undermined and harmed America for thirty years. This syndicate is following and serving the ideology of Soviet Fascism…

The Ideology of Soviet Fascism

In 1991 Soviet Socialism collapsed in Russia—it was the Socialist economy, unable to produce that collapsed, but another part of the system of “the Evil Regime,” all punitive agencies survived and brought to the Russian presidency their guy, Vladimir Putin. I use the term KGB talking about them. All the agencies, coordinated by the KGB, helped the Socialist system to survive for many years, yet now Socialism ended in the country where it was born. But the KGB continued using the ideology of Communism/Socialism to prolong its life. The war against Western civilization is intact and history can determine the new term identifying the system based on militant, aggressive and expansionist force in Russia. I did it many years ago calling it Soviet fascism and knowledge of Stalinism had provided me with the adequate definition of the ideology:

Using the militant force of the KGB, Stalin combined and unified the concept of “aggressive oriental despotism” with the ideology of Soviet Socialism. Then Stalinists infiltrated and used Islam to benefit Stalin’s ideological agenda to conquer Western civilization and the world. That was one of the reasons, I began calling Soviet Socialism, Soviet Fascism. I wouldn’t be surprised by an assassination attempts on Donald J. Trump.

I know Soviet fascism, they had tried to poison Chairman Mao Zedong…

Regrettably, our Intel and academia missed the significance of the year 1991, the death of Socialist economy and they gave an additional time to Putin and his KGB to proceed. Today we are dealing with the countries of “the Axis of Evil” who adhere to the ideology of Soviet Fascism confronting Western civilization globally in the 21st century. I identified this ideology years ago. To grasp the events in Ukraine, you have to know ideology of Soviet fascism, and Obama/Putin conspiracy, described in my two books: What is Happening to America? Xlibris, 2012, and Socialist Lies: From Stalin to the Clintons, Obamas, and Sanders, Xlibris, 2016.

Ukraine and the Biden Father and Son

The year 2014 was a taut and crucial year for Ukraine: Russia invaded and occupied Crimea, Russia directed the Ukrainian Socialist mob to attack the Ukrainian territory in Donbas and Lugansk—the war against Ukrainian people had begun. And the tragedy is that Ukraine wasn’t ready to fight—the country didn’t have an army, weaponry and ammunition—Ukraine was naked due to the policy of Russian crony President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych. Thousands of Ukrainians were killed, a lot of territory was lost. Yanukovych fled to Russia to escape the wrath of the Ukrainian people and President Obama sent Joe Biden to Ukraine as a point man in 2014.

Vice-President Biden did not bring arms, ammunition or weaponry Ukraine desperately needed, Biden brought his son—Hunter Biden. And America’s Socialist mafia very easily found a common language with the Ukrainian Socialist mob—their common denomination was corruption. It was then that the Ukrainian people lost respect for the government of the U.S. It was then in 2014 the Ukrainian people took their destiny in their own hands.  Volunteers with hunting rifles, some with knifes went to defend their country and died in the thousands, they sacrificed for their children to live in an Independent Ukraine. Books and movies will be produced about that tragic and heroic time in Ukraine and… America’s betrayal of Ukraine in 2014.

Knowing this in 2019, I believe that Obama had in mind to use Biden and his son in Ukraine. There was no more Putin’s crony, Yanukovych, and Obama needed a conduit to Putin there in Ukraine to continue to undermine the country. As I understand it today, Obama and Poroshenko worked like hand and glove—Obama found a conduit in Ukraine and the action against the American republic to help Russia begun. When Trump had announced his candidacy the entire focus and emphasis has been aimed at Trump—the plot against him has preoccupied the conspirators… The plotters had a solid foundation—President of Ukraine Peter Poroshenko. I hope politicians will find the Truth…

I am interested in the Biden Father and Son. The Ukrainian scandal is the same Russian attempt to oust President Trump. In reality it was a predicate of Trump/Russia collusion, which started in 2014 by Biden, assigned to Ukraine by Obama. So, how is it possible that a foreigner, Hunter, in Ukraine with no knowledge of Ukrainian or Russian, among  thousands of firms, could latch onto the board of Burisma, the energy firm owned by the Russian-crony, a friend of another Russian crony former President Victor Yanukovych? This is my guess: the war on America and Obama/Putin conspiracy is much deeper than we know and a lot of bad actors are still walking free…

The Trump impeachment will be a victory for Vladimir Putin, a mortal enemy of President Trump. The fraudulent impeachment is also aimed at changing public opinion by fraud and sham. The GOP is missing the elephant in the room: the international syndicate of the Socialist mafia. I can see its action—The Brain-Washing War on America’s Mind and Soul is going on. We are dealing with the aggressive force of the Dems’ Socialist mafia fighting the Constitutional American Republic. The Dems are fighting for power by impeachment proceeding to cover-up the sinister crime of TREASON against the American Republic they have committed over several decades. This crime committed by the leadership of Dems’ Socialist mafia, and DNC should be a major topic in the November 2020 election.

President Trump is right—our democracy is at stake!

To be continued www.simonapipko1.com and at www.drrichswier.com/author/spipko/.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

WATCH: Dana Bash Falls Flat on Her Face When Trying to Defend Dems Changing Their ‘Quid Pro Quo’ Messaging

Why Democrats Don’t Want Public to Know Origins of Ukraine Probe

The Impeachment-Promoting Press Bores the Public

6 Reasons to Believe Left Hates America

/in , , , , , , /by

Whenever leftists are charged with not loving or even with hating America, they respond angrily, labeling the question absurd, mean-spirited, and an example of right-wing McCarthyism.

But there can be little doubt that the left has no love for America, just as there can be little doubt that liberals and conservatives love America. Love of America is one of the many dividing lines between liberalism and leftism. (For a description of six differences between liberalism and leftism, please see my PragerU video “Left or Liberal?”)

Here are six reasons to believe the left hates America:

1. No one denies that the international left—the left in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and elsewhere—hates America. Therefore, in order to argue that American leftists do not hate America, one would have to argue that on one of the most fundamental principles of international leftism—hatred of America—American leftists differ with fellow leftists around the world: All the world’s left hates the U.S., but the American left loves it.

Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>

This, of course, makes no sense. Leftists around the world agree on every important issue. Why, then, would they differ with regard to America? Has any leftist at The New York Times, for example, written one column critical of the international left’s anti-Americanism?

2. Leftists want to “fundamentally transform” the United States. Five days before the 2008 presidential election, candidate Barack Obama told a huge audience in Columbia, Missouri, “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

More recently, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced that she plans to “fundamentally transform our government,” that America needs “big, structural change,” and that her proposed Accountable Capitalism Act would bring about “fundamental change.”

Likewise, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said earlier this year, “We’re going to try to transform the United States of America,” and last month he said, “This campaign is about fundamental change.”

Examples are legion.

So, here’s a question: How can one claim to love what one wishes to fundamentally transform?

The answer is obvious: It isn’t possible.

If a man were to confide to you that he wants to fundamentally transform his wife, would you assume he loves his wife? If a woman were to tell you she wants to fundamentally transform her husband, would you assume she loves him? Of course not.

3. Leftists have contempt for the American flag.

I am unaware of a single left-wing individual or organization that has condemned NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick for refusing to stand for the flag during the playing or singing of the national anthem that precedes NFL games. To the contrary, on the left, he is universally regarded as a hero. Indeed, Nike anointed him as one, making him its brand model.

Leftists might respond that Kaepernick’s public refusal to stand for the flag and national anthem says nothing about his love for America, as it is only a form of protest against racial injustice. But that is nonsense. Would leftists argue that anyone who publicly refuses to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day really loves Dr. King?

4. Leftists routinely describe America as racist, sexist, xenophobic, imperialist, genocidal, homophobic, obsessed with money, and morally inferior to most Western European countries. No moral person could love such a place. As one person commenting on a Paul Krugman column wrote, “Does loving your country mean you love or ignore the fact that we destroyed Iraq, shot down an Iranian commercial airliner, and waged a brutal war in Asia for reasons that today make no sense?”

5. America is the most successful country in world history—while being the most committed to capitalism and remaining the most religious of all the industrialized democracies. To the extent that America is great, that means two of the institutions the left most loathes—Christianity and capitalism—are also great.

6. Love is, among other things, an emotion. So, here is a question about leftists’ emotions: Do any leftists get the chills when the national anthem is played or when they see the American flag waving as the anthem is played? Given their rhetoric, it is most unlikely. Yet, every person I know who loves America does get a chill at such moments. Do leftists, as opposed to some liberals and conservatives, display the flag on any national holiday? How many leftists even own a flag?

Finally, if leftists do not love America, what do they love?

According to their own rhetoric, they love the planet—Mother Earth, as they frequently refer to it. And they love animals.

They really love power, and they claim to love material equality.

They don’t love Western culture—and they now dismiss praise for it as a euphemism for white supremacy.

Interestingly, while they often claim to love humanity, many don’t seem to love people. They give less charity and volunteer less time to the downtrodden than conservatives, for example. They have much less interest in having children and making families. They are far more likely than conservatives to cut off relations with friends or relatives with whom they differ politically. And if they really loved people, they would love capitalism because only capitalism has lifted billions of people from poverty.

But most of all, they love … themselves.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Dennis Prager

Dennis Prager is a columnist for The Daily Signal, nationally syndicated radio host, and creator of PragerU. Twitter: .

RELATED ARTICLES:

Illinois School District Gives Transgender Students Unrestricted Access to Bathrooms

Whatever Happened to Teaching History?

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Chilling Ignorance of History

A Note for our Readers:

As we speak, Congress is moving to impeach the president.

We do not have all the facts yet, but based on what we know now, there does not seem to be an impeachable offense.

The questions stand: In drafting the Constitution, how did America’s founders intend for impeachment to be used? How does the impeachment process work, and what can history tell us about whether or not President Trump faces the real threat of being removed from office?

The Heritage Foundation is making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

3 must-see moments from Impeachment, Day 1,033

/in , , , , , , /by

The Washington Swamp often likes to think they alone run our country, with input from voters serving, at most, as a pesky inconvenience. That’s why House Democrats and their “star witnesses” keep claiming, day after day, that President Donald J. Trump is somehow at odds with America’s “stated foreign policy.” By America’s, they mean their own.

Let’s be clear: The President, duly elected by the American people, is the one who sets the foreign policy of the United States. Career bureaucrats and political appointees, while entitled to their own opinions, do not. That’s how constitutional democracies work.

Yet during hours and hours of hearings that have effectively shut down Congress this month, Americans are being treated to just that: opinions. Every single time House Republicans ask the witnesses for any actual evidence of crimes or impeachable offenses committed by the President, none is offered. That’s because those crimes don’t exist.

Today’s hearing followed the same script. Alexander Vindman—who testified for hours on national TV—has never met the President, said that he has no way of knowing what the President was thinking on Ukraine, and admitted that his testimony was based on nothing more than his own personal opinions and feelings.

America learned nothing new. A few witnesses, Vindman included, actually confirmed the accuracy of the White House call transcript between President Trump and President Zelensky. Vindman even acknowledged the corruption surrounding Burisma and that Hunter Biden didn’t appear qualified to serve on the company’s board, leaving the door open for a potential conflict of interest.

Most important for Americans outside the Beltway Swamp, it’s been more than 1,000 days of Democrats’ nonstop impeachment and investigations. Every hour wasted staging TV infomercials for the left is another hour that Congress isn’t passing a budget, isn’t approving USMCA to fix NAFTA for American workers, isn’t addressing our broken immigration system, isn’t working to lower medicine prices, and isn’t working for you.

With that in mind, here are 3 moments that tell you everything you need to know:

Rep. Adam Schiff invents fake quotes from President Trump—again!

Reminder: The President sets foreign policy, not unelected staff.

President Trump: While Democrats did nothing, America created $11 trillion.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Approval Holds Steady in Face of Impeachment Probe

Everything You Missed From The Third Day Of Public Impeachment Hearings – Highlights

Impeachment Witness Debunks Daily Mail Headline About His Own Testimony

‘Go For A Walk’: Greg Gutfeld And CNN’s Oliver Darcy Lock Horns Over ‘The Five’ Impeachment Hearing Commentary

Memo Given To Fusion GPS Described Ukrainian Lawmaker As Potential ‘Conduit’ For Publicizing Information

VIDEO: Did ABC News protect pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s accomplices?

/in , , , , , , /by

About three years ago ABC News buried a blockbuster story about Jeffrey Epstein, referred to by Attorney Brad Edwards as “…the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known.”

The United States Congress is now asking questions.

It’s time for ABC News President James Goldston to tell the American public and members of Congress why ABC quashed the Epstein story.

A few weeks ago Project Veritas confronted Goldston for comment, you can view the video here.

https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1191795956397813763?s=20

He needs to explain why ABC News hasn’t published a follow-up story.

Information including leads and potential accomplices as identified in the report compiled by Amy Robach would prove invaluable to law enforcement.

James Goldston, an award-winning producer for news and documentary programming in Great Britain and whose wife is an anchor/correspondent for the BBC network, needs to come clean.

Page Six reported on June 4, 2019 that Goldston – who has dual American and British citizenship – and his wife attended a dinner in London to honor Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall.

James Goldston, who are you protecting?

From our video exposing ABC News, Amy Robach stated that when Prince Andrew was implicated, “the Palace…threatened us a million different ways.”

Could the loss of interviews with the Royal Family on the eve of a Royal wedding be justification for protecting a pedophile and his accomplices?

ABC News, owned by Disney Corporation, may have jeopardized the safety and lifelong wellbeing of many young girls in the intervening years by “quashing” this story.

CNN, NBC, CNBC, CBS: your collective silence about a rival network spiking the story of, “…the most prolific pedophile this country has ever known” is deafening.

Parade Of The Obvious — You’re Not The Radical

/in , , , , /by

The media and cavalcade of leftist organizations in the country are continually trying to tell traditional Americans that they are actually extremists. Being patriotic, believing in capitalism, thinking that men are men and not women, that there is a God and that America is an exceptional nation are among the beliefs that will get one branded as an extremist hater and dangerous.

If you’re on social media, you already understand this and how the guardians of RightSpeak will stomp you for saying the wrong thing, i.e., a man cannot be a woman.

So herewith is a quick list of truisms that are obvious, but which can get you branded in the most appalling terms.

• Obviously capitalism is the best economic system ever implemented to benefit the most people and provide the greatest freedoms. Full on socialism has caused misery, tragedy and death everywhere it is implemented. History and data is witness to this.

• Obviously racism exists. It always will because of fallen human nature. This afflicts white, black and brown people — all people on earth, or in orbit — because all people are the same in nature. And it exists in every country, always has and unfortunately always will. This is not an excuse to be racist, simply an understanding of reality.

• Obviously racial and ethnic minorities in America have equal rights with the majority, and thrive here more than any diverse country on earth. This is shown in income and freedom index data, along with population migration patterns as minorities from every corner of the world seek to immigrate to America. People try anything, legal and illegal, to get into America. Obviously we can’t be that racist.

• Obviously a man is a man and a woman is a woman. There are only two sexes and you can’t change your’s. A man merely “feeling” like a woman does not make him a woman, and vice versa. Science in the form of DNA irrefutably proclaims this. Gender dysphoria is real, but afflicts only a tiny portion of the population and even there, often works itself out by adulthood. Until a year or two ago, it was understood to be a mental disorder. And it obviously is.

• Obviously unborn human babies are human babies. Geographic location — before exiting the birth canal versus after exiting the birth canal — is not what defines a human. As humans, they should be afforded the same protections as born humans. This also is science, and not just a little common sense.

• Obviously animals are not the same as humans and do not have the same rights as humans, because humans have greater — far greater — intrinsic value than animals. Nothing excuses animal cruelty, it’s rightly illegal. And we can have strong affections for animals. But there is no equivalence in the value of life between people and animals.

• Obviously the United States is an exceptional nation. History tells us there has never been another nation created solely upon a set of ideals, opened wide for immigrants from around the world, is not defined by ethnicity or race, has liberated many countries, helped put our enemies back on their feet after defeating them through billions of dollars in aid, and has created the greatest economic and innovative engine ever known. This is an obvious exception to the rule of nations.

• And maybe ending with what should be the lead, obviously God exists because something cannot come from nothing. Nothing cannot be the cause or beginning. It must come from that which by definition always has been. The Big Bang — the beginning of all time and space, everything that is and however it functionally came about — cannot erupt from nothing. Nor can it exist within nothing. It must spring from something which is eternal, has no beginning, or definitionally, it is not the beginning. This is obvious, and also happens to be a definition of the God of the Bible.

For everyone out there who generally agrees with these obvious observations, you are not radicals or haters or racists or sexists or whatever other brickbats are thrown at you. You are mainstream Americans. Do not allow yourselves to be persuaded that your views on these things make you the extremist.

It is those who argue against these obvious truisms that are extreme.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The DOW’s High Record Numbers: What Does It Mean for Business Owners

/in , , , , , , /by

The Dow Jones Industrial Average hits a record high at 182.24 points. This came after two of the world’s largest economies (U.S. and China) agreed to remove existing trade tariffs.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average, with 123 years of history, is a stock market index that measures the stock prices of the top 30 companies in the U.S. It is used by experts to assess the overall health of the stock market and the investors’ level of confidence in those companies.

The Dow average is calculated by adding all the stock prices of the companies in each index and dividing it by the number of companies.

For 2019, the top five companies that form Dow’s index are Microsoft, Apple, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Johnson & Johnson, and Walmart. Some experts still argue that the Dow is less representative of the broad stock market as it includes only 30 out of the 2,800 companies listed in the New York Stocks Exchange.

Just this year, the Dow Jones Industrial Average broke records three times. The first happened last June 11, when it hit 26,885. On July 3, The Dow hit another record, closing above 27,000. This was the time when President Trump announced that the administration would continue its negotiation with China to avert additional tariffs. And just last week, another record-breaking moment came when Dow’s numbers hit 27,492.63. This led to Dow’s year-to-date gain close to 18%.

But it’s not just the Dow that had their record-setting stock indices. Even the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite also finished theirs at the highest level on record.

What does it all mean for business owners?

Stock trading affects companies in a myriad of ways and plays a very important role in the U.S. economy.

Consumer Spending

First of all, trends in stocks influence consumer behavior. When stocks are high, people feel confident over their investment portfolios and feel empowered to spend money on big-ticket items like a home or a brand new car.

On the other hand, falling stock prices make people hold back on spending, especially in non-essential items. They are also more likely to tap on their emergency fund or get a personal loan to cover expenses. Reduced consumer spending has a huge effect on the business sector and obviously slows down economic growth.

Growth and Profitability

Stock trading allows businesses to raise capital for expansion, or to launch new products or pay off debts. For investors, stocks provide an opportunity to profit from gains in stock value.

Moreover, stock prices affect business and consumer behavior, which in turn, impacts the economy overall. This relationship can also be perceived from the other way around – economic conditions influence stock prices.

As a rule, the higher the stock prices, the better for companies. It also suggests a company’s ability to earn and grow its profits in the future.

Business Financing

Another major benefit of high stock prices is in equity financing. During the initial stages of their initial public offering (IPO), most companies receive an infusion of capital which they can use to acquire other companies, fund expansion, or pay off debt. Equity financing is the process of gaining capital by selling new shares. However, for a company to obtain equity financing, it needs to demonstrate a healthy share price that will attract potential investors.

Takeovers

An increase in stock prices also reduces the risk of company takeovers. When a company’s stock price falls, it’s market value goes down as well, which makes it vulnerable to takeovers. Furthermore, companies with high stock prices tend to attract media attention, which positively favors their brand reputation and attracts more potential investors.

While the stock market influences the economy, it’s not the only factor. Things like interest rates, consumer spending, and business spending also influence the economy as a whole. For example, when consumers spend less and invest less in businesses, the economy slows down. Meanwhile, falling interest rates can prompt economic growth. On top of these, fiscal policies, such as rate cuts and large budget deficits, can all impact the health of the business sector.

© All rights reserved.

WATCH: The Swamp is 0-3 on its Impeachment TV drama

/in , , , , , /by

https://twitter.com/i/status/1195531896433848320

Last week was supposed to be House Democrats’ big moment. It was supposed to be the week they finally, after striking out with the Russia collusion hoax, put their impeachment crusade on the map for the majority of Americans they need to persuade.

Of course, it didn’t work out that way.

Rather than make his case credible, Rep. Adam Schiff’s (D-CA) first three “star witnesses” left most Americans wondering why they were even invited to testify in the first place. After Democrats asked their guests questions such as how President Donald J. Trump made them feel, House Republicans got to the heart of the matter.

Here are the only answers that matter if a political party wants to impeach the duly elected President of the United States: Last week’s witnesses testified that they had no knowledge of any impeachable offenses, no firsthand account of President Trump’s phone call with Ukraine, and zero contact with the President at any point this year.

In fact, two of them have never even met President Trump!

House Democrats are hoping to rebound this week, introducing a whole new lineup of witnesses for Schiff’s Impeachment TV circus. They shouldn’t get their hopes up. Just like last week, each of these witnesses share something important in common: They have no actual evidence of any impeachable offense committed by the President.

The reason is simple: There was no such offense. Just like with Democrats’ 2-year, $32 million taxpayer-funded Russia collusion obsession, this “investigation” serves one real goal: keeping the far-left base happy while obstructing any meaningful bipartisan work on Capitol Hill so long as Donald Trump is President.

In other words, we have a new hoax on our hands, but it’s still the same old swamp.

“Here’s a witness Schiff doesn’t dare call in impeachment hearings.”

Memo to Dems: The President, not diplomats, sets ‘official foreign policy’

 

They can’t hide your healthcare prices any longer

While Democrats in Congress are busy doing anything they can not to help working Americans under this President, the Trump Administration unveiled a pair of new rules on Friday that will make healthcare prices simpler and clearer than ever before.

“We’re requiring price transparency in healthcare, forcing companies to compete for your business,” President Trump said from the White House. “Our goal was to give patients the knowledge they need about the real price of healthcare services.”

What does that mean for patients? “They’ll be able to check them, compare them, go to different locations—so they can shop for the highest-quality care at the lowest cost.”

The first rule compels hospitals to finally publish their prices online for all to see. For years, these prices were often all but impossible to find, leaving Americans with nasty surprise bills after a medical visit. Now, families will be able to see and compare all of these costs beforehand with the new, easy-to-read formats that will soon be available.

The next rule, newly proposed, will require health insurance providers and group health plans to give cost estimates to enrollees before care is delivered. Like it’s doing with hospitals, the Trump Administration wants to push these companies to make lists of all their pricing information available to the public.

Together, these actions represent the most aggressive steps taken by any President to put healthcare price information in the hands of patients. That’s important not just for honesty and fairness; transparent prices also lead to lower healthcare costs overall.

Powerful interest groups spent years trying to keep these rules from happening. By making the true price and quality of care a closely guarded secret, the industry giants controlled the markets—and your healthcare dollars. When President Trump came to Washington, he promised to do things differently than Beltway career insiders have done for years. “We’re taking on the bureaucrats in more ways than one,” he said Friday.

“Trump’s team delivers a big win for patients by making health costs clearer.”

MORE: Trump Administration makes health care in rural areas a priority

© All rights reserved.

Brennan and Clapper’s Secret Surveillance System

/in , , , , , , /by

“Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love.” –  Julian Assange

“Every person remembers some moment in their life where they witnessed some injustice, big or small, and looked away because the consequences of intervening seemed too intimidating. But there’s a limit to the amount of incivility and inequality and inhumanity that each individual can tolerate. I crossed that line. And I’m no longer alone.” – Edward Snowden

When injustice becomes law, resistance become duty.  Thomas Jefferson

“There may be times when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.” – Elie Wiesel

NOTE: The following information has been garnered from countless articles by Mary Fanning and Alan Jones of theAmericanreport.org.  Their reports should be read by every American, including our nation’s politicians.

Dennis Montgomery is a software designer and former CIA/NSA/DoD/DHS contractor. Montgomery built a surveillance system known as “The Hammer.” He blew the whistle on the Obama administration’s allegedly illegal use of that system to wiretap Donald Trump. (Rand Paul claims Brennan, Clapper, Comey sent spies into the Trump campaign.)

Montgomery also developed technology for analyzing surveillance video from U.S. Air Force predator drones remotely piloted from Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada.  Nellis Air Force Base is also the home of a charter school run by imam Fethullah Gulen. Clinton’s hand-picked CIA handlers, Graham Fuller and Mark Grossman, were selected to manage and direct Gulen’s cells in the U.S. and abroad.  Link

Reminiscent of the theft of Bill Hamilton’s Inslaw Promis software allegedly by the Reagan administration’s Ed Meese, this is much the same thing. The government seems to steal from private enterprises what they want for their own.

Montgomery asserts that intelligence officials John Brennan and James Clapper ran “The Hammer” surveillance system. According to CIA Vault 7 documents released by WikiLeaks on March 7, 2017, The Hammer (HAMR) is a browser exploit throwing framework that infects targeted devices and systems.  The Hammer allowed spying on Supreme Court Justices, 159 Article III judges, elected officials, and 20 million other Americans.

Mainstream Media Cover-up

CNN’s reporting indicates that CNN and The Washington Post were engaging in a multi-prong strategy to cover up the Obama administration’s illegal surveillance of Trump, including the participation of John Brennan, James Clapper, and Carl Bernstein. CNN and the Washington Post continue to ignore the fact that Montgomery turned over evidence to the FBI.

Testimony from former FBI General Counsel James Baker asserts the FBI took possession of evidence that proves that the Obama administration wiretapped Trump.  They ignored Montgomery’s claim.  James Baker asserted that, “An individual named Dennis Montgomery, who I believe, to the best of my recollection, said that he had been a U.S. Government contractor and, in the course of that work, had come across evidence of unlawful surveillance by the government, of Americans including government officials and wanted to give that information to the Bureau, which eventually did take place.”

Remember Bernstein told everything on Nixon, but he was silent on the illegal wiretapping of Donald Trump.  Obama’s surveillance hammer on Trump is far worse than Watergate.  Lt. General Thomas McInerney (Ret.), formerly the number three Air Force official at the Pentagon, also said “The Hammer” surveillance system is far worse than Watergate.

Only two days before he died, Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons (Ret.), who served as commander of the U.S. Navy Pacific Fleet, appeared less concerned about dying than about countering the coup against President Trump. Admiral Lyons was convinced that the coup was put in motion to cover up “The Hammer” and the actions of the men behind it.  Admiral Lyons was a great patriot, and spot on in his reporting. Link

The D.C. Conspiracy

There is a conspiracy underway deep within the Washington D.C. intelligence and law enforcement establishments. The cabal should have much to fear, but as of yet, not one DOJ criminal has been indicted.  U.S. Attorney John Durham is reportedly very interested in interviewing President Obama’s former intelligence chiefs, ex-CIA Director John Brennan and one-time Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.  I would hope that happens, but as of yet, those two men are still walking free.

In 2015, contractor-turned whistleblower Dennis Montgomery provided the FBI with 47 computer hard drives of illicitly-harvested domestic surveillance data and classified testimony that, according to Montgomery, proves Brennan and Clapper illegally commandeered the foreign surveillance tool known as “The Hammer.”

Montgomery contends Brennan and Clapper used “The Hammer” to conduct unlawful domestic surveillance on President Obama’s political enemies for the purpose of “blackmail” and “leverage.”

Soviet Style Surveillance

Brennan and Clapper built a Soviet style total surveillance state modeled after the Stasi of East Germany.  They did it by commandeering “The Hammer” for domestic surveillance, with greater tech capability for total control of the people.  They must long to turn America into Soviet Russia.

According to Montgomery, Brennan and Clapper used “The Hammer” to illegally wiretap Lt. General Michael Flynn (Ret.) and Donald Trump.  Oh yes, the leaders of the coup, Obama, Brennan, and Comey all have professed their allegiance to Marxism and communism at various points in their lives. See The Red Thread by Diana West.

AG Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham recently traveled to Rome, Italy, where Durham reportedly retrieved two BlackBerry smartphones that were previously used by Joseph Mifsud.  The public really didn’t understand the significance of the retrieval.  Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation portrayed Mifsud as a Russian agent. Mifsud is actually an FBI asset.  According to Dennis Montgomery, when the BlackBerry phones are used on “The Hammer” platform they are a closed secret network that is encrypted and secure and cannot be penetrated.

It is of interest that Mifsud, Hillary, Comey, President Obama and others were using BlackBerry phones.  How many others inside the Crossfire Hurricane covert FBI operation against Trump were plotting the coup d’état while also using non-government issued BlackBerry phones?  Two of Hillary’s BlackBerrys were destroyed by Clinton Foundation advisor, Justin Cooper.

Despite the fact there was no criminal reason, the Obama administration used its counterintelligence powers to investigate the opposition party’s presidential campaign.

The Fusion Center

Brennan concocted the Trump-Russia intelligence “Fusion Center” narrative as a cover story because Brennan and Clapper had illegally commandeered “The Hammer” for illegal domestic surveillance and for wiretapping Trump, in violation of the CIA’s Charter.  Fusion Center is a collaborative effort between two or more agencies.

Back in August of 2018, Brennan told Rachel Maddow, “We put together a Fusion Center at CIA that brought NSA and FBI officers together with CIA to make sure that those proverbial dots would be connected.”  He never mentioned that each of these intel agencies have separate charters and for good reason.

Whistleblower Montgomery says that on February 3, 2009, Brennan and Clapper got together to commandeer The Hammer for illicit purposes.  Montgomery designed and built the supercomputer, just as Inslaw owner Bill Hamilton designed Promis software.  The supercomputer system had served as a foreign surveillance tool and was transferred from Blxware in Washington state to a CIA facility in Ft. Washington, Maryland.  There, Brennan and Clapper transformed The Hammer into a surveillance tool to target Obama’s political enemies.

According to Military sources, the supercomputer has multiple safeguards to prevent intel personnel from using the system for unlawful domestic surveillance, but Brennan and Clapper bypassed those safeguards.  They set up a more powerful system and illegally re-purposed the computer.

Targeting Trump

Brennan and Clapper allegedly spied on Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Scalia, onetime head of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) Judge Reggie Walton, 156 Article III Judges, members of Congress, Rudy Giuliani, General Michael Flynn (Ret.), and Donald Trump.

General Michael Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell says several former officials who were involved in the CIA /FBI Crossfire Hurricane operation are in ongoing talks with Justice Department officials.

The Whistleblower tapes released by U.S. District Judge G. Murray Snow, revealed that President Obama’s intelligence officials, Brennan and Clapper, for whom Montgomery was working, used the spyware for unlawful domestic surveillance and to illegally wiretap Donald Trump “a zillion times.”

President Trump’s allegation that the Obama Administration was wiretapping him is not only supported by Montgomery’s whistleblower revelations about Brennan’s and Clapper’s computer system, The Hammer, but also by statements made in March 2017 by whistleblower William Binney, a former NSA Technical Director of the World Geopolitical and Military Analysis Reporting Group, by former CIA and State Department official Larry Johnson, and by Montgomery’s attorney Larry Klayman.

FBI Director Mueller

Montgomery says it was Robert Mueller’s FBI who provided the computers for The Hammer, and who also ordered an illegal FBI raid of Montgomery’s home and storage facility. Mueller’s FBI agents tied Montgomery to a tree, according to court documents.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Valerie Cooke excoriated the FBI for using falsified affidavits to obtain search warrants and forced the return of Montgomery’s property.  Obviously, the FBI hasn’t changed its stripes since they continue to operate in a rogue and illicit fashion, even under AG William Barr and Deep State FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Mueller became, by appointment of Rod Rosenstein, and because of his close friend, James Comey, the Special Counsel investigator of the Russia collusion hoax.  Montgomery claimed that Robert Mueller had been collecting information on Donald Trump for over ten years and he was the last person anyone should appoint to investigate the President and the phony Russian Collusion hoax.

The day before Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel, he had interviewed with Donald Trump to once again become the Director of the FBI and was obviously rejected, and for good reason.

FBI Director Mueller wanted to use The Hammer to find out “who knew what” about the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City and Washington D.C.  Mueller was in charge of the FBI’s investigation of the 9/11 attacks.  John Milkovich’s book, Robert Mueller: Errand Boy for the New World Order, tells of Mueller’s several cover-ups regarding the 9/11 terror attacks.  Interestingly, Mr. Trump, as a builder of skyscrapers, took a special interest in the collapse of the twin towers.

Dennis Montgomery

Dennis Montgomery became a target of the government and the media who worked to destroy his reputation.  Ultimately, he suffered a stroke.  He had filed 18 whistleblower complaints.  In D.C., Montgomery testified to DOJ’s Deborah Curtis regarding the 47 hard drives of The Hammer that contained illicitly collected domestic surveillance data, evidence that Comey buried after being turned in to Comey’s FBI.

Mary Fanning and Alan Jones write, “Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis offered Dennis Montgomery limited immunity in exchange for 47 hard drives of illegally harvested surveillance data that Montgomery claims contains proof that Brennan and Clapper wiretapped General Flynn and Donald Trump.  (This immunity was in coordination with FBI General Counsel James Baker.) Then Curtis joined Special Counsel Mueller’s team and became the lead prosecutor on General Flynn’s case before abruptly leaving the Flynn prosecution and the DOJ.”

James Baker is suspected of leaking the discredited Steele dossier to Mother Jones reporter David Corn.  Baker was also part of the group that plotted the take-down of General Flynn and President Trump.

Montgomery asserts the hard drives have information that not only proves Brennan and Clapper wiretapped General Flynn but also provides proof that the DOJ conducted illegal prosecutions of President Obama’s political enemies.

Baker later joined the Brookings Institution and its affiliate Lawfare, which acts as the political arm of the FBI and the intelligence community.  Link

Conclusion

Invented lies and corrupt actions of high officials who have abused the power of their positions for political gain must be exposed and punished.  They have sought to subvert our rules of law and undermine the Republic.  They have damaged and are still damaging the institutions of American government, all the while squandering the nation’s trust.

© All rights reserved.

Pompeo: Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) are ‘not inconsistent with international law’ [Video]

/in , , , , /by

Pompeo is right. As is explained in The Palestinian Delusion: The Catastrophic History of the Middle East Peace Process, no one but Israel has any legal right to the land known as the “West Bank.”

“Pompeo announces reversal of longstanding US policy on Israeli settlements,” by Jennifer Hansler, Nicole Gaouette and Jeremy Diamond, CNN, November 18, 2019

(CNN)US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday announced a major reversal of the US’ longstanding policy on Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, rejecting a 1978 State Department legal opinion that deemed the settlements “inconsistent with international law.”

The announcement, which breaks with international law and consensus, is the latest in a string of hardline, pro-Israeli moves that are likely to inflame tensions between the Trump administration and Palestinians and widen the divide between the Trump administration and traditional US allies in Europe.

“After carefully studying all sides of the legal debate, this administration agrees with President Reagan: the establishment of Israeli civilian settlements in the West Bank is not, per se, inconsistent with international law,” Pompeo said, citing President Ronald Reagan’s 1981 assessment that the settlements were not “inherently illegal.”

Pompeo said the US government is “expressing no view on the legal status of any individual settlement” or “addressing or prejudging the ultimate status of the West Bank.”

He said the conclusion was “based on the unique facts, history and circumstances presented by the establishment of civilian settlements in the West Bank.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Good News: Non-Muslim Mayor in Alabama Celebrates Election with Qur’an Readings

Video from Iran: Protestors chant “Mullahs must get lost, down with Islamic regime of Iran”

Chicago: Gang leader accused of trying to aid ISIS, says if anyone insults Muhammad, “his head gotta go”

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

Another Coup Bites the Dust [Video]

/in , , , , , , /by

I’m not going to invest my time and write an in depth analysis of the latest coup to bite the dust. Watch this clip below. I enter at time marker 8:45. In this interview with a former Obama Ambassador, I called it way back then. There is no whistle blower and there is nothing to whistle blow. Watch my final comments as they had a chuckle on me. I was right and I will be back and make sure they hear me again.

Watch This Clip at 8:45

On impeachment hearing eve, I joined Will Johnson on INFOWARS at Firepower. All of my views about what was to come once the impeachment hearing began are in this discussion. I nailed it. I enter at 1:06:37.

Whats Next?

This will drag on for a bit but another coup will bite the dust. Want to know what’s next? Indictments will be served against the deep state and its operatives more than likely before 2019 plays out. This process will soon begin. Read this important article titled “I Caught The Swamp”.

Clarion Call

This battle will rage on for the rest of our lives. Pray for our President and his family. No Trump-no hope. What we do right here, right now is for posterity. So when your children and grandchildren ask you “What were you doing when the global governance was being thrust down the throat of America and the world, what will your answer be? Freedom, it’s up to U.S.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: It’s democracy — not Trump — that’s on trial on Capitol Hill

FBI Data: Anti-Muslim hate crimes under Trump are below Obama levels in 2014

/in , , , , , , , , /by

The media has put out numerous pieces based on bad data and hate crime hoaxes claiming that President Trump was responsible for a rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes. Now the FBI data is out and it actually shows that anti-Muslim hate crimes under Trump are below Obama levels in 2014.

Does that mean that Obama was actually responsible for anti-Muslim hate crimes while Trump is a beacon of tolerance? If the media were logically consistent, instead of narratively consistent, then sure. But since the media is narratively consistent, that’s not the conclusion it will draw.

 By the numbers: Of 4,571 reported attacks the bureau tracked, aggravated assaults were up 4%, simple assaults up 15% and intimidation up 13%. The report also shows that assaults targeting Muslims, Arab Americans and African Americans have gone down, while violence against Latinos has risen.

The report says 485 hate crimes were reported against Latinos in 2018, compared to 43 in 2017.

270 hate crimes were reported against Muslims and Arab Americans — the lowest since 2014.

1,943 hate crimes were reported against African Americans — the lowest since 1992.

Guess which one of those numbers the media will play up and blame on President Trump?

Hint: It’s the negative one of the three.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Inside Mosques: Savannah and Statesboro, Georgia

New York Times called Baghdadi a “terrorist,” but scrubs “terror” from article about killing of “Palestinian” jihadi

RELATED VIDEO: Subtitled video of the Koran burn in Norway.

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

7 Things to Know About Rep. Jim Jordan as He Leads GOP’s Defense of Trump

/in , , , , , , /by

As impeachment hearings took the spotlight on Capitol Hill, Rep. Jim Jordan, one of President Donald Trump’s fiercest defenders, is temporarily reassigned to the House committee driving the process, where the Ohio Republican already is questioning witnesses sharply and voicing his party’s frustration with the partisan process.

As recently as a week ago, Jordan was the top Republican on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, where he took part in closed-door depositions of witnesses before this week’s public hearings.

The change that placed Jordan on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence signals congressional Republicans’ faith in him as a capable communicator tasked with combating the attack strategy of Democratic lawmakers.

That’s exactly what Jordan sought to do during the first public impeachment hearing Wednesday with initial witnesses William Taylor, acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, and George Kent, deputy assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs.

Congress is moving to impeach the president. But will their plan to remove him from office succeed? Find out more now >>

Here are seven things to know about the fiery Ohio lawmaker as he takes a leading role in the Republicans’ defense strategy for Trump in the impeachment inquiry.

1. He was founding chairman of the House Freedom Caucus.

As a staunch conservative who often butted heads with Republican Party leadership in Congress, Jordan helped to found the House Freedom Caucus in 2015.

Jordan, together with several other prominent congressional conservatives sympathetic to the tea party movement, started the caucus to consolidate support for strongly conservative policies and pressure then-House Speaker John Boehner, a fellow Ohio Republican, to take up more conservative legislation.

The Freedom Caucus was instrumental in Boehner’s resignation as House speaker when several members withdrew their support, and Boehner found it increasingly difficult to unify the right wing of the party with more moderate lawmakers.

Jordan served as the first chairman of the caucus from 2015 to 2017, and the group now has more than 30 members, all Republicans, in the House.

2. Boehner called him a “legislative terrorist.”

In case it wasn’t already clear, Jordan isn’t shy about undermining Republican leadership.

In an interview with Politico in 2017, Boehner recalled Jordan’s role in resisting his more moderate agenda.

“Jordan was a terrorist as a legislator going back to his days in the Ohio House and Senate,” Boehner said. “A terrorist. A legislative terrorist.”

3. He was a collegiate championship wrestler.

Jordan competed as a wrestler while attending the University of Wisconsin at Madison, winning two NCAA Division I championships in 1985 and 1986.

Even though he’s left his athletic career behind, Jordan still has a reputation as a fierce combatant, only this time it’s in the House instead of the gym.

4. He faced criticism surrounding his time as a wrestling coach.

Jordan was an assistant wrestling coach at Ohio State University from 1987 to 1995.

After numerous male athletes accused a team physician, Dr. Richard Strauss, of sexual abuse, Jordan came under fire for doing nothing to protect students at the time. He has said he was unaware of the abuse.

“The idea I’m not going to defend our athletes when I think they’re being harmed is ridiculous,” Jordan said on Monday, when asked about a college wrestling referee who claimed he told Jordan about allegations against Strauss, according to LimaOhio.com.

“This is just, this is someone making a false statement,” he added.

Democrats will likely continue to accuse Jordan of wrongdoing, especially as he takes a more visible role in the impeachment proceedings.

5. He argued for opening a special counsel probe (just not the Russia one).

In 2014, Jordan introduced a resolution calling on then-Attorney General Eric Holder to open a special counsel investigation into revelations that the IRS targeted the tax-exempt status of a number of conservative nonprofits.

Holder ordered an FBI investigation into the issue, and what was then called the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, on which  Jordan served, found that conservative groups were targeted more often than liberal ones.

But with the appointment of a special counsel into Russian interference in the 2016 election, Jordan gained a new reputation as a fierce opponent of the investigation. He worked to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein by questioning their impartiality, defining himself as a staunch defender of Trump in the process.

6. He ran for House speaker after Paul Ryan’s resignation.

Jordan took advantage of his position as one of the president’s closest allies to run for House speaker in 2018, when Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who had succeeded Boehner, retired.

Although House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., ultimately won the GOP conference’s vote, he didn’t become House speaker because Democrats recaptured the majority in the 2018 elections.

Jordan’s attempted push into party leadership in the House, however, secured his name among the upper echelons of Trump-era Republican power brokers.

McCarthy is now House minority leader, and put Jordan on the Intelligence Committee for the impeachment inquiry.

7. He has a 100% rating from the American Conservative Union.

Jordan is one of only three current lawmakers with a perfect lifetime score from the American Conservative Union, an organization that ranks members of Congress based on their voting records on conservative issues.

It should come as little surprise that Jordan has a perfect 100 rating. As a leading conservative in the House, he’s driven the conversation about conservative policies for years.

Now that he’s front and center for the impeachment hearings, Jordan is getting the chance to bring his fiery brand of conservatism to bear on witnesses in the inquiry.

COLUMN BY

Aaron Credeur

Aaron Credeur is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

RELATED ARTICLES:

7 Big Moments From Day 3 of the Public Impeachment Hearings

What You Need to Know About Impeachment

Jim Jordan: ‘No One Has Testified That There Has Been a Quid Pro Quo’

What If They Gave an Impeachment and Nobody Came?

You’ll Be Surprised Who Is Trying to Empower the Deep State at EPA

This Web Designer Shouldn’t Have to Wait to Be Free to Create

New Program Aims to Help Young Adults Grow in Faith, Maturity Before College

A Note for our Readers:

As we speak, Congress is moving to impeach the president.

We do not have all the facts yet, but based on what we know now, there does not seem to be an impeachable offense.

The questions stand: In drafting the Constitution, how did America’s founders intend for impeachment to be used? How does the impeachment process work, and what can history tell us about whether or not President Trump faces the real threat of being removed from office?

The Heritage Foundation is making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Brad Johnson summarizes the impeachment proceedings so far and predicts the near future

/in , , , , /by

Posted by Eeyore

Direct link

Brad Johnson

Brad Johnson retired as a Senior Operations Officer and Chief of Station with the Central Intelligence Agency’s Directorate of Operations. He has served domestically and abroad with numerous assignments often during periods of armed conflict. He has served overseas in direct support of the War against Terrorism. Mr. Johnson is a certified senior expert in Counterintelligence issues with extensive direct experience in the field. He is a senior expert in surveillance and surveillance detection issues. He has proven expertise in dangerous operational environments with the highest level of training and extensive direct experience in tradecraft for dangerous areas. His proven expertise also extends to denied operational environments (most difficult and restrictive) with the highest levels of training offered anywhere in the USG or the world and extensive direct experience. Mr. Johnson managed the overseas portion of the Persons Indicated For War Crimes (PIFWC) program and has served overseas as Chief of Station multiple times. He is an enrolled member of The Cherokee Nation, a Federally Recognized Tribe. Since his retirement from the CIA, Mr. Johnson has run a successful intelligence related training company.