Lieutenant General Flynn Hires Firebrand Attorney Sidney Powell

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.  Frederic Bastiat

There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice. Montesquieu

The fight for justice against corruption is never easy. It never has been and never will be. It exacts a toll on our self, our families, our friends, and especially our children. In the end, I believe, as in my case, the price we pay is well worth holding on to our dignity. Frank Serpico


A huge hallelujah and a big sigh of relief went up across the country when those who love justice and the “rule of law” heard who General Michael T. Flynn had hired to represent him.  My phone rang off the hook for two days…the General’s supporters are thrilled!

Attorney Sidney Powell

General Flynn has hired a brilliant powerhouse attorney who knows and understands the corruption in DC.  Sidney Powell served in the Department of Justice (DOJ) for ten years in both Texas and Virginia and for the past twenty years has devoted her private practice to federal appeals where she was lead counsel in more than 500 appellate cases.

Ms. Powell has been an outspoken critic of the Enron Task Force prosecutions and accused prosecutor Andrew Weissmann in particular of overreach.  Weissmann was a prominent member of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating the bogus Russia interference in the 2016 presidential election and any obstruction of the probe by President Donald Trump. Here is the full transcript of Powell’s interview with Mark Levin, but watch the following twelve minutes on Weissmann.

In Powell’s book, Licensed to Lie, William Hodes, Professor of Law Emeritus, Indiana University stated, “that a coterie of vicious and unethical prosecutors who are unfit to practice law has been harbored within and enabled by the now ironically named Department of Justice.”  Ms. Powell had to self-publish her first edition because houses feared the content. The second edition is stunning and frightening.

Powell documents the prosecutorial misconduct of the U.S. Attorneys in the Enron trials. All of the convictions except for three were overturned.  Unfortunately, none of the attorneys mentioned in Ms. Powell’s amazing tome were ever disbarred, and they went on to continue their nefarious activities.

Many innocent people were ruined because the justice department lawyers apparently valued their own upward career mobility over the very reason for their existence in their positions…Justice.

Some of the same lawyers involved in the Enron miscarriage of justice were on the Mueller team going after President Trump and his supporters. Do Americans want anyone being targeted by attorneys so unethical their convictions are overturned because of their blatant disregard for the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution?  Well, it happened, and General Michael T. Flynn is a prime example.

In a recent interview with The Epoch Times Sidney Powell blasted the appalling two-tiered judicial system in America today where General Michael Flynn can get set up and prosecuted by deep state operatives while Peter Strzok can leak and lie and get off scot free.

In December 2018 Powell accused the Mueller team of destroying evidence and obstructing justice in the Flynn case. Mueller’s team wiped all of the data off of Peter Strzok’s and Lisa Page’s iPhones after determining “they contained no substantive text messages.”  Powell said until the Mueller investigation is probed, no one can have faith or trust in the Department of Justice or the FBI.

As for the bogus Russia investigation, what Mueller pulled in his eight-minute press conference was subterfuge.  Powell commented that if Mueller couldn’t decide whether or not President Trump obstructed justice in a two-year investigation, then it is evident there is no violation. She said, “the entire Russia collusion narrative was made up by anti-Trump political partisans in the FBI and DOJ.”

“It couldn’t have been more divisive,” Powell said of Mueller’s press conference. “What we’ve witnessed in the last, I don’t know, 15, 20 years, is an extraordinary rise of double standards where people who are Democrats are given passes on clear offenses, and Republicans are literally targeted and prosecuted and their lives destroyed on things that are even made up.”  Powell said Mueller knew there was no conspiracy even before he started to investigate.

Please help General Flynn and Sidney Powell by donating to the Michael Flynn Legal Defense Fund.  Attorney Powell asked for 90 days to review the massive Flynn case, and Judge Emmet Sullivan gave her 60 days.

General Michael T. Flynn

President Donald Trump told Fox News that Vice President Mike Pence doesn’t automatically have his backing should he mount his own run for the White House in 2024.  Perhaps the President has gleaned some awareness of the real Mike Pence.

By now, many of General Flynn’s supporters understand that VP Pence was involved in his removal as National Security Adviser.  Allegedly, the February meeting between Pence and McCabe about General Flynn was set up by Peter Strzok using an unofficial backchannel, a Pence staffer’s wife who worked for Strzok.  VP Pence’s Chief of Staff, Joshua Pitcock’s wife, was working as an analyst for Peter Strzok on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server.

There are many more Deep State players, all of whom were not only terror-stricken but were absolutely frantic to be rid of the man they feared knew too much about them.

To this day, many of their ilk are still in charge, including the new Trump appointed FBI Director Christopher Wray who was most likely suggested by former Governor and transition head, Chris Christie who many called Abu Christie because he had appointed a Muslim to the New Jersey Supreme Court.  Wray was Christie’s lawyer during Bridgegate.  Wray’s corrupt FBI actually lost the notes from the meeting where crooked cop, Peter Strzok was told that China was hacking Hillary’s email in real time.

Back in December of 2018, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team released key documents relating to the FBI’s questioning of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, confirming agents did not believe at the time Flynn intentionally lied to them — though he was later charged with making false statements in that interview.  These were the heavily redacted FD-302 reports of FBI Agents, Strzok and Pientka who interviewed the General.  The documents also included disgraced and fired former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s notes after talking with Flynn to arrange his interview with the FBI.  Many sources believe McCabe edited the FD-302s to target the General.

Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein refused to allow Agent Pientka to testify despite his reported willingness to defend Michael Flynn.  Mueller redacted Joe Pientka’s name in the 302 reports.

Judge Emmet Sullivan

In May 2019, Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the release of the transcripts of General Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak along with the transcript of a voicemail recording by Trump’s personal attorney, John Dowd, left with Robert Kelner, defense lawyer for Flynn.

The Feds did release the transcript of a voice mail left in November 2017 by John Dowd to Kelner, but the DOJ refused to comply with the court order to release the transcript of the General’s conversation with Ambassador Kislyak. Sources close to the General tell me that he wanted these documents released to the public.

Judge Sullivan, a Clinton appointee, in a two-sentence order said he’d decided not to require the public release of transcripts after considering prosecutors’ response.  Prosecutors claimed they were not relying on that conversation to establish his guilt or to determine his sentence.  Then why not release it?  Perhaps they haven’t had time to properly edit it for weaponization against the General, when we know those transcripts would prove General Flynn’s complete innocence.

Flynn’s phone calls with Ambassador Kislyak during the Trump Transition were perfectly legal and only portions of his calls have been selectively leaked to the media.  One has to wonder how many of those leaked portions were edited.   Every time there’s a leak, AG Barr needs to release the truth to the public.

The Joint Defense Agreement

Republicans allege that a separate court-ordered transcript release in the case showed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller‘s report contained a conspicuously — and allegedly deceptive — edited version of the voicemail message from former Trump lawyer John Dowd to Flynn’s lawyer, Rob Kelner.

Here is the edited version of Dowd’s phone call:

I understand your situation, but let me see if I can’t state it in starker terms. . . [I]t wouldn’t surprise me if you’ve gone on to make a deal with … the government. … [I]f… there’s information that implicates the President, then we’ve got a national security issue, . . . so, you know, . . . we need some kind of heads up. Um, just for the sake of protecting all our interests if we can …. Remember what we’ve always said about the ‘President and his feelings toward Flynn and, that still remains ….

And here is the full text of the message, which Mueller’s gang did not want seen:

Hey, Rob, uhm, this is John again. Uh, maybe, I-I-I‘m-I’m sympathetic; I understand your situation, but let me see if I can’t … state it in … starker terms. If you have … and it wouldn’t surprise me if you’ve gone on to make a deal with, and, uh, work with the government, uh … I understand that you can’t join the joint defense; so that’s one thing. If, on the other hand, we have, there’s information that … implicates the President, then we’ve got a national security issue, or maybe a national security issue, I don’t know … some issue, we got to-we got to deal with, not only for the President, but for the country. So … uh … you know, then-then, you know, we need some kind of heads up. Um, just for the sake of … protecting all our interests, if we can, without you having to give up any … confidential information. So, uhm, and if it’s the former, then, you know, remember what we’ve always said about the President and his feelings toward Flynn and, that still remains, but — Well, in any event, uhm, let me know, and, uh, I appreciate your listening and taking the time. Thanks, Pal.

Do you see?  If you look at the full transcript, Dowd is very specific about not wanting any information he should not have, not wanting any “confidential information.”  Mueller left out that one very important exculpatory evidence in his edited transcript… “without you having to give up any … confidential information.”  There was only one reason for Mueller to remove it…to further his attempt to frame Trump via manufactured evidence or by hiding exculpatory evidence.

Mr. Dowd left the voice mail not long after Mr. Flynn left the joint defense agreement with Mr. Trump to cooperate with the Special Counsel.  (Remember Mueller’s 30-year modus operandi.  Link and Link) Of course, the Mueller report cites the voice mail as scrutiny into possible obstruction by the President even thought Mr. Kelner had already told Dowd “that Flynn could no longer have confidential communications with the White House or the President.”

Dowd told Sean Hannity, “Well, I had an obligation as counsel to the president to find out what was going on. And I’m so glad Judge Sullivan ordered the transcript because they now know the truth. And we also know that this entire report by Mueller is a fraud, and we’re going to find more of these things.  Isn’t it ironic that this man who kept indicting and prosecuting people for process crimes committed a false statement in his own report? By taking out half my words, they changed the tenor and the contents of that conversation with Robert Kelner. And it’s an outrage. And there’s probably more of it.”

Conclusion

George Washington said, “Truth will ultimately prevail where there are pains to bring it to light.”  Sidney Powell, knows all about the lies and the pervasive decay in our intelligence community, and she is the finest legal mind General Flynn could have chosen, and yes, she will bring the truth to light.

Please help this great patriot, General Michael T. Flynn and Sidney Powell by donating to the Michael Flynn Legal Defense Fund.  Truth is our cause!

PODCAST: Getting Ready for Round #1 with the Democrats

Well, it is finally show time, the first round of debates for Democrats seeking to become the party’s presidential candidate. As of now there are 23 officially declared as candidates, with possibly two more waiting in the wings. This is bigger than the 17 Republican candidates who ran in 2016.

In a way, this race among the Democrats reminds me of the Triple Crown in horse-racing. The first race, the Kentucky Derby, historically supports a full field, crowded at the gate. This is greatly reduced over the remaining races, the Preakness and Belmont Stakes. I suspect we’ll see the same in the Democrat debates.

NBC will host the first debate at Miami’s Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts, next Wednesday and Thursday, June 26th and 27th, accompanied by their sister networks MSNBC and Telemundo. This makes sense as NBC has long been the media outlet for the party for quite some time. It will be hosted by five NBC personalities: Lester Holt, Savannah Guthrie, Chuck Todd, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, and José Díaz-Balart of Telemundo.

No more than ten candidates will appear each night. In simple terms, in order to qualify, candidates must either have received more than 65K donations, or a minimum of 1% in a qualified national poll. There will likely be twenty candidates qualified for the first round of debates.

So, what can viewers expect? There will, of course, be the ceremonial bashing of President Trump and the Republicans. They will be accused to mishandling everything from the economy, to immigration, to trade, defense, etc. It will be interesting to see how the moderators address the subject of presidential impeachment which will inevitably come up when the Mueller investigation is mentioned. All of this is to be expected.

Beyond this, the most interesting part of the debate will be how the other candidates will try to take down the front-runner, former VP Joe Biden. This will likely be led by Rep. Beto O’Rourke, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Corey Booker, and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, all of whom need to take Mr. Biden down in order to further their candidacy. Sen. Bernie Sanders won’t be bashful either, but he will likely leave the main attacks to the others and extol the virtues of his socialist agenda.

Look for Mr. Biden to take a lot of heat for reversing his position on the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds to subsidize abortions except for special circumstances (e.g., rape, incest, life threatening). Mr. Biden originally supported the amendment back when he was a U.S. Senator, but recently reversed himself to gain political favor from abortion advocates. Look for this issue to ignite an ugly squabble between the candidates, leading to other issues where the candidates differ.

As I have reported, the Democrats have turned decisively to the left. This is most certainly, NOT your father’s party. As such, they desperately do not want to hang on to the past, and why they no longer want Joe Biden. At 76 years of age, the former vice president will be portrayed as past his prime and essentially no different than Hillary Clinton, which the left has long deserted following her defeat in 2016. The far left of the party wants something new and refreshing, which certainly is not Mr. Biden. It may also not be Sen. Bernie Sanders, who will turn 78 in the Fall.

So, in terms of Round 1 of the debates, Yes, we will hear the usual bashing of the Republicans and the President, but the real story will be how the party turns on one of their own. They may preach unity during the debate, but watch them swarm against the front-runner.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Don’t forget my new book, “Tim’s Senior Moments” now available in Printed and eBook form.

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right column is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

The Last Line of Defense Shielding Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar is arguably the most provocative Muslim public figure in the United States, giving the American public a steady stream of controversy since her arrival on the political stage.

However, to understand the impact she has on the public it’s important to look at the wider circle surrounding the freshman congresswoman. The fanfare uplifting her is worthy of an anthropological study in how cultures are crafted, and what values a culture exalts at the expense of another. 

As a vocal critic of Ilhan Omar — and given that I’m also a conservative Muslim woman — my own reflections as a public figure are sharply scrutinized by Ilhan Omar defenders. What I’m noticing in that I’m often told by Ilhan Omar supporters, “She’s more successful than you.

This is said as an attack, said to shame and silence me. While I certainly don’t feel shame, what I do feel is total bewilderment. These sorts of messages tell me two things:

  • Success is still being measured by new markers
    The more visibility, public support and “space” one occupies (even in traditional spaces of power), the more “success” they’re attributed by the public.
  • Success is being used as currency to silence speech
    Greater “success” implies that one is somehow entitled to insulation from inquiry or critique because they are perceived to carry more value as a human being. 

If this is my experience, what chance does the average person have who doesn’t have two decades of experience in these conversations?

Another point: The more the average person is silenced in dialogue, the more chance that they’ll be pushed into fringe groups. The more they’re pushed into the fringe, the more they’ll resonate with outlier personalities, including extremists.

The emphasis on success in our day measured by visibility is deeply disturbing because of how it dehumanizes and devalues a human being. In the case of Ilhan Omar supporters, when they can’t defend her based on her track record or character — because it is often indefensible — they resort to personal attacks rooted in perverse value systems.

Unfortunately, there is no point in engaging pro-Ilhan Omar trolls or any other online accounts seeking bad faith conversations. They don’t understand that occupying a space in government isn’t the same as mastering that space and using it as an instrument for the betterment of all mankind. 

How we define success is a red flag for our culture at this hour. Take the interview Ben Shapiro gave with BBC’s Andrew Neil. Caught on a bad day with an uncharacteristically poor temperament, Shapiro stormed off the set but not before saying that he was more successful than Neil. Besides the fact that Neil is widely respected, the point here is that the assumption was that being more well recognized meant one was more successful, which implies a higher value. Shapiro implied he was entitled to the immature behavior he exhibited and reserved the right to silence Neil. Shapiro has since apologized. 

Whether we look at this issue from the lens of an individual or from the lens of simply a group of people who need to co-exist in a space, the fact remains this: As long as we continue to determine success and worth based on popularity, reach and access — we as a culture will all fail.  

COLUMN BY

RELATED STORIES:

Ilhan Omar: Is She Practicing Taqiyya?

Ilhan Omar Forces New Conversation on Somali Refugees

Ilhan Omar Controversy: Where Does She Get Her Views?

EXCLUSIVE VIDEOS: Interview with a Convicted ISIS Terrorist — Justified!

Part 1:

Younes Delefortrie is a convicted terrorist. Is revenge ever justifiable? He seems to think so. Younes Delefortrie, who will feature in Clarion’s upcoming film, expounds on the extremist call for revenge. Michael “Younnes” Delefortrie is a Belgian jihadi and former ISIS fighter currently in jail in Belgium. We interviewed him days before he was incarcerated. Delefortrie was interviewed by Shoshana Palatnik and Wayne Kopping.

Part 2:

Younes Delefortrie justifies extremist’s use of children- “If you kill us…it doesn’t matter because there’s a next generation.” This powerful clip highlights the cynical abuse of kids by jihadi groups.

Part 3:

RELATED VIDEO: Coming soon Kids: Chasing Paradise – Official Trailer – Spring 2019.

RELATED ARTICLE: Syrian Refugee Arrested Yesterday in Plot to Bomb Pittsburgh Church

EDITORS NOTE: These Clarion Project videos are republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Trump’s Orlando Speech: Unprecedented and Remarkable

Watching live TV coverage of President Trump at his Orlando rally announcing his reelection campaign, I was blown away by Trump’s unprecedented straightforward honesty. With no-holds-barred, Trump told the American people the truth about numerous important issues which have been lied about or hidden by fake news media. I thought, “My goodness, the president just gave the American people a year’s worth of truthful news in one speech.” I guarantee that Americans who only watch fake news media heard for the first time during Trump’s speech that the Muller investigation of Trump did not find any collusion with Russia. Trump’s speech was probably the first time many heard about Hillary Clinton’s corrupt illegal behavior before, during and after her failed run for the White House. Trump’s speech was probably the first time many Americans learned that Democrats shockingly passed legislation to kill babies on their birthday and seek to pass legislation to kill babies even after they are born.

Trump touted his remarkable long list of economic, cultural and freedom enhancing achievements for We the People. Folks, I am telling you, many Americans were hearing all the great things Trump has done for America for the first time.

Enjoying my cup of Red Rooibos tea, I internally cheered every time Trump told his huge audience another truth about the evils Democrats, the deep state and fake news media are perpetrating upon America and their traitorous attempts to undermine his presidency. Republicans typically do not push back the way Trump does in public speeches and social media. Democrats and fake news media routinely kick our butts in the court of public opinion by attacking Republicans with lies and every gutter, low-life and dirty trick in their playbook. In response, Republican consultants and advisers always say, “play nice”, “take the high ground” and “remain presidential”. Such advice drives me nuts. We (Republicans) always stupidly bring an olive branch to a gun fight. Trump understands the battle in which we are engaged for the heart and soul of America. He fights back with the appropriate weapons and intensity.

While I watched Trump’s speech, I chuckled thinking about the reaction of Democrats, fake news media and the deep state. Trump exposed their lies, hypocrisy, and illegal silent coup to reverse the 2016 election. I wonder how many of them have to replace their TV after throwing a brick through it.

I suspect many Republicans were uncomfortable watching Trump’s speech. He simply does not play by standard so-called “dignified” Washington DC rules. Trump is one of a kind. He follows his instincts; a man of and for the people. Only an outsider like Trump could break through the Washington DC walls of insider corruption to stack up unprecedented wins for We the People.

Born in 1927, Sidney Poitier was the first black actor to win an Academy Award for Best Actor. When he went to Hollywood, Poitier’s brain was not infected with limitations on what blacks were allowed to do. Poitier simply pursued his dream. I see Trump in a similar light. Trump arrived in Washington D.C. not limited by how he as a Republican was expected to behave. Trump simply set out to fulfill his campaign promise to make America great again.

Thank God that despite all of his advisers and despite deep state, Democrat and fake news media political assassins laser-focused on undermining his presidency, Trump has remained “Trump”. He is the same guy we sent to the Oval Office. Folks, that is incredible.

Trump’s speech revealed a far more ideologically conservative Trump than he was is 2016. When Trump ran for the presidency, he was not ideological. His leanings appeared to be towards the left. He probably thought conservatives were a bit paranoid and over-the-top sounding the alarm about how Democrats seek to undermine our country’s best interests. But when the American left responded with furious wrath and anger against Trump for his “Make America Great Again” campaign slogan, Trump’s eyes were opened. Incredibly, the American left’s vitriolic insane 24/7 relentless rebuke and hatred for everything Trump does good for America has pushed Trump further to the right.

In the Bible, Joseph’s brothers’ hatred for him caused them to sell him into slavery. Amazingly, it led to Joseph becoming a mega-powerful government official. The Bible said while Joseph’s brothers meant it for evil, God meant it for good.

Leftists meant their ever-increasing deranged hatred for Trump and attempts to stop him for evil. God meant it for good. Trump is closer to the ideals and values of the American people than ever.

Trump’s speech included a few other things which had Democrats and fake news media falling to the floor, groaning in great pain, like Dracula shown the cross. In defense of the unborn, Trump boldly said Republicans believe every life is a sacred gift from God. Trump unapologetic proclaimed that we will live by the words of our national motto, “In God We Trust”. Remember when Obama decreed that America is not a Christian nation? Democrats and fake news media are relentless in their mission to remove the God of Christianity from our government and culture. Democrats’ latest attempt to make God illegal is their falsely titled, “Equality Act”. 

Concluding his speech, Trump said, “A vote for any Democrat in 2020 is a vote for the rise of radical socialism and the destruction of the American dream.”

I say, “Amen brother!”

RELATED VIDEO: Rod Thomson On ABC: Trump Nails Speech, Democrats Pull Hair.

U.S. schools achieve high Marx

Vladimir Lenin said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

To understand a culture, one must look to its treatment of the children.  In Africa, for instance, there are countries such as Sudan, Libya, Mali, Chad, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Liberia, Mozambique and Uganda, where war profiteers use child soldiers to battle their government.  They may be recruited or kidnapped, some forced to kill family members so that they may never return to their homes.  Most are boys but as many as 40% may be girls who are also used as sex slaves for the military.  These are majority- or significantly-Muslim countries.

In Islam, military might is the rock upon which the faithful community is instituted.  Whereas the religious message of Judaism and Christianity promotes the faith, it is the political and military strength that promote the Islamic religious message.  Violent jihad is not a secondary concept in Islam’s development, but exists in the very origin of Islam, the sine qua non of the faith, which is why the Islamic culture cannot and must not adapt and accept modernity or embrace tolerance.  The children are taught to carry out violence and terror, to slaughter Jews and work towards the extermination of Israel, to kill all infidels who prevent their seizure of land, and to welcome martyrdom as needed to discharge their duty.  The Internet has disturbing footage of young Muslim children wearing jihadi scarves, singing about killing [Jews] for Allah, and capturing “Palestine” – in Philadelphia.  Boy & Girl Scouts in Michigan are learning to support terror.

Under Nazism, all youth groups were banned and replaced by the Hitler Youth, which took millions of children away from parental influence, indoctrinated them into Hitler’s ideology, and trained them for the paramilitary.  They numbered 50,000 in January 1933, and in June, Hitler warned, “If the older generation cannot get accustomed to us, we shall take their children away from them and rear them as needful to the Fatherland.”  By that year’s end, they numbered two million and formed the nucleus of a dedicated and fanatic Nazi force.

Stalin was another who understood the value of child indoctrination.  For the Marxist Revolution to succeed, the youth had to be treated well and educated politically. The Communist Party formalized a cult that idealized Soviet childhood beginning with kindergarten, and in youth organizationsBearing the chilling name of “Child Science,” children were viewed as mere resources for use by the State.  As parents went to work or “disappeared,” the children were kept from their family structure, taught loyalty to the state through heroic tales, and were ideologically manipulated for political gain.

And now, let’s consider our country.  American patriotism is defined as a cultural attachment to the United States of America.  Despite many diverse ethnic backgrounds, American nationalism is the American way of life common among its citizens, with the US Constitution at the center of this national pride.   Our culture emphasizes basic human rights, that “all men are created equal,” that people have “unalienable rights,” and the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Included is the privilege of education in a system of free public schools and libraries; and religion, morality and knowledge guarded by good government.

There is now a major attack, a war, against morality, focused on and raging against our children, systematized by the Red/Green (Communist/Islamic) Axis and globalists.  Notwithstanding our western ideals and the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child, our children’s rights are being replaced at every level.  Common Core was never implemented to raise students’ academic success, but to crush American exceptionalism, to reduce scholastic achievement so as to imbue the children with the social justice agenda.  Educator Donna Garner said on August 7, 2013, “If a person wanted to destroy our American culture, keep this generation from communicating effectively with older generations, and make sure today’s children grow up detesting America instead of valuing our nation’s American exceptionalism, the best plan would be to implement the Common Core Standards (CCS) into every school in America.”  And so public education was weaponized to change our nation.

Think: Child Science.

Other objectives include disrespecting the family unit, discouraging births and encouraging abortions (doomed to evolve into euthanasia for the elderly), promoting victimhood (encouraging anger and cruelty), endorsing the LGBTQ community and inciting inappropriate and toxic sex education (including emotionally and physically damaging sex-reassignment surgeries), portraying Israel and America as the enemy (to support terrorism), and lobbying for gun control (for an unarmed, defenseless population).  By allowing ourselves to be overwhelmed by migrants with ethics antithetical to our own, we welcome a perilous environment for our children, severely strained resources, reduced academic levels, and an exploitable labor force.  It should be glaringly obvious to all that the ultimate purposes of this is the destruction of traditional America and its rebirth as a collectivist State.

A recently introduced assault on our children, couched in new reading and speaking techniques, is “Flocabulary,” a digitized, Common Core-aligned tool to continue the Bill and Melinda Gates leftist plan, using clever animation, hip-hop/rap lyrics, misspelled words and incorrect grammar, designed for K-12 grades.   The company’s self-acclaimed “nontraditional approach” overrides the knowledge and skills that brought success and happiness to our forebears, and subtly appropriates our freedom of speech.  The children are being trained to ridicule the “old white men” who created our Constitutional Republic; to violently denounce and disrespect differing political opinions; to waive achievement for wealth redistribution; to ignore science for the globalist distraction of climate change; and to hate straight white males, Christians and Jews.  No longer judged on the merit system, students are graded on how well they adapt to the disunity and envy, based on race, heritage and political party.  For comprehensive clarification, read Donna Garner’s educationview.org.

Wars, by their very nature, are meant to reduce population, and although Communists and Islamists are waging recognizable wars against groups worldwide, using familiar weaponry, the situations herein are meant to produce the same results.  As the masses are promoting the devaluation of life with advocates of abortion, or discouraging marriage and procreation by promoting gender dysphoria, statistics show that our young are more despairing than before, more inclined to seek suicide as an escape from their emotional and physical pain. A callousness about life is now coming out of some US states, as well as from Iceland, the Netherlands, Belgium and other countries, and the fact that that we are being moved toward the cultures of death is becoming more evident.  The Black Book of Communism estimates 100 million deaths at the hands of the communist ideology, considered the greatest criminal system.  The Islamic ideology is estimated to have caused 900 million deaths (600 million Hindus alone) over 14 centuries.

These indicators clarify the overall intent.  A war is being conducted against Israel, America and Europe with the purpose of destroying our morality and way of life, of reducing our population before some “old white men” can seize the opportunity to save our republic, and before our enemy manages to establish a tyrannical regime over all the globe  — under which, from birth to death, we will be nothing more than a serfdom ruled by a One World Order.   The stakes couldn’t be higher: winner takes all.

RELATED ARTICLE: People in Bradford arrested in historic child sex abuse investigation

RELATED VIDEO: The sick pedophile agenda at the heart of ‘sex education.’ Discretion advised. Deeply disturbing.

PODCAST: Senator Rand Paul speaks about ‘American Exceptionalism’!

GUESTS:

Senator Rand Paul physician serving as the junior United States Senator from Kentucky since 2011, alongside Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. … Paul was a candidate for the Republican nomination at the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

TOPIC…American Exceptionalism!

Jim Phillips, Chairman and CEO of Covenant Ventures. Jim has founded and co-founded many successful corporations and earning prominent leadership positions with Motorola, SkyTel, iPix, Telular, and The FedEx Institute of Technology, while inventing and introducing many products used by millions worldwide. His innovative contributions and business leadership have been chronicled in many national publications including Forbes, Fortune, Business Week, The Standard, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and USA Today. He has made numerous appearances on Fox News, CNN, CNBC, the BBC, and CBS Morning News.

TDS Outbreak: ACLU Issues Florida ‘Travel Alert’ After Sanctuary Cities Ban

Is there a leftist organization that has not gone nutty as a fruitcake in the Age of Trump?

The latest to evince TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome) is the American Civil Liberties Union. The group has always been well left of center and trending further left. They’ve long not been fans of protecting, say, religious liberties when conflicting with the gay agenda.

But their reaction to Florida’s strong, new anti-sanctuary cities law is just precious in its nuttiness. It doesn’t even really attempt to make a legal or ethical case.

For Florida Republicans and Gov. Ron DeSantis, it’s simply a promise made and a promise kept. He tweeted:

“Earlier this year, I made a promise that we would ban sanctuary cities in Florida and today we are delivering on that promise. I am proud to sign the bill presented to me by the FL Legislature to uphold the rule of law and ensure that our communities are safe.”

First, the ACLU of Florida issued a “travel advisory” regarding Florida following the enactment of the law when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed it last week. A travel advisory! Like, don’t travel to Venezuela or North Korea. If you travel to those countries, you may be killed. If you travel to Florida…they may follow federal law? They might cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials? Alert!

But that was not the full extent of their radical response to a law that shouldn’t even be necessary except that the American left has tipped off a cliff.

Here’s the tweet that the national ACLU sent out regarding Florida following the law regarding cooperating with immigration authorities:

“Today, Gov. DeSantis signed the un-American SB 168 bill into law, a reckless expansion of state government and an affront to the democratic values we share. The law is anti-immigrant, unconstitutional, inhumane, and hurts our families and communities.”

Remember, this bill merely says that municipalities have to work with federal immigration authorities to enforce federal law. For 90 percent of American history it was a given that would be the case (excluding the Civil War, but kind of a different thing there.)

But now we need laws telling Democrat-run municipalities they are not allowed to openly disobey federal law. It’s still a little hard to imagine this is necessary, let alone that it could ever be controversial.

But now it’s unconstitutional? It’s unconstitutional to require that federal law be followed? It’s anti-immigrant to say that local authorities can’t shelter people living here illegally who have been arrested for a different crime? It hurts “our” families and communities to follow the law? It’s inhumane?!?!

It’s impossible to take the ACLU seriously anymore with such wild hyperbole. Too bad. Because I personally know there are at least a few reasonable people in the Florida ACLU who have tried to keep the organization from going full-blown radical partisan.

Obviously they’ve lost the battle.

Just go ahead and categorize the ACLU with the Southern Poverty Law Center and so many other groups that played some sort of honest roll at one point, but are now just Democratic Party hacks.

RELATED ARTICLE: It’s Not Just Central America: Where Illegal Immigrants on the Border Come From

RELATED VIDEO: Federation for American Immigration Reform’s RJ Hauman and Preston Huennekens discuss Congress’ approach to addressing the immigration crisis.

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

World War Won: Cross Memorial Stays, Court Rules

They were farmers, surgeons, a professor, even the president of the Marine Corps baseball team. One was a man in his 50s, already wounded, who had “no business being on the front lines.” They were 49 men with one thing in common: they never came home. Today, most Marylanders couldn’t tell you their stories. That’s because 100 years after the war ended, we’re too busy fighting for what those heroes died to give us: freedom.

It’s been 94 years since a grieving mom pulled the flag away from the base of a 40-foot cross, revealing the names of almost 50 soldiers — mostly boys — who gave their lives in World War 1. For almost a century, the cross has stood against the sky, one mile from the D.C. line, a fixture against an ever-changing landscape. It’s survived a second world war, Korea, the Cuban missile crisis, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, 9/11, and now — thanks to the Supreme Court — its biggest battle: radical extremists, bent on tearing the memorial down because it was in the shape of a cross.

Alvergia Guyton is one of the few people left with a personal connection to the cross. “It’s been there all my life,” she said. Her great uncle had been one of those brave teenagers, marching off to join the Army in an all-African American unit. She’s shocked anyone would even think of challenging it. “It’s history,” she insisted. This morning, seven justices of America’s highest court agreed, leaving John Seaburn’s sacrifice — and the sacrifices of Prince George’s County’s sons intact.

By a 7-2 vote, the justices were clear,

“The cross is undoubtedly a Christian symbol, but that fact should not blind us to everything else that the Bladensburg Cross has come to represent. For some, that monument is a symbolic resting place for ancestors who never returned home. For others, it is a place… to gather and honor all veterans and their sacrifices for our Nation. For others still, it is a historical landmark.” At its core, they insist, it’s “part of the community.” In fact, the justices argued, “its removal or radical alteration at this date would be seen by many not as a neutral act but as the manifestation of a hostility toward religion that has no place in our Establishment Clause traditions.”

When the American Humanist Association (AHA) argued that the cross was somehow an official endorsement of religion, Justice Samuel Alito couldn’t have disagreed more. The whole point of the “religious clauses of the Constitution” are to “foster a society in which people of all beliefs can live together harmoniously…[T]he presence of the Bladensburg Cross on the land where it has stood for so many years is fully consistent with that aim.”

Would the activists at the AHA say that California is trying to “convey a religious message” by keeping city names like Los Angeles and San Diego,” the justices asked? Of course not. “Much the same is true about monuments to soldiers who sacrificed their lives for this country more than a century ago.” If the court struck down this cross, there’d be no end to the absurdity. What about the Red Cross, the justices asked? How could it keep its name? Or the military’s medals — like the Navy Cross and Distinguished Service Cross?

In a concurring opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch talked about how tired he is of this “I-take-offense” threshold for suing. “In a large and diverse country, offense can be easily found. Really, most every governmental action probably offends somebody. No doubt, too, that offense can be sincere, sometimes well taken, even wise. But recourse for disagreement and offense does not lie in federal litigation. Instead, in a society that holds among its most cherished ambitions mutual respect, tolerance, self-rule, and democratic responsibility, an ‘offended viewer’ may ‘avert his eyes’…or pursue a political solution.” In other words, Gorsuch insisted, if secularists are this upset about the memorial, take it up with the legislature! After all, Justice Kavanaugh added, “This court is not the only guardian of individual rights in America.”

As grateful as we are for the victory, there are many — FRC included — who were hoping the justices would take the opportunity to overhaul the mess our courts have made of the Establishment Clause. Protecting war memorials is important, but these issues will continue to bubble up if the Supreme Court doesn’t scrap the “Lemon test” that’s driven the attacks on other faith-based monuments and displays. Justice Thomas was certainly more than ready to.

“Nearly half a century after Lemon,” Thomas writes, “and, the truth is, no one has any idea about the answers to these questions. As the plurality documents, our ‘doctrine [is] in such chaos’ that lower courts have been ‘free to reach almost any result in almost any case.’ Scores of judges have pleaded with us to retire Lemon, scholars of all stripes have criticized the doctrine, and a majority of this Court has long done the same. Today, not a single Member of the Court even tries to defend Lemon against these criticisms — and they don’t because they can’t… It is our job to say what the law is, and because the Lemon test is not good law, we ought to say so.”

As we explained in FRC’s amicus brief, religion has a natural, proper, and even essential role in our public life and the life of our military. We’re grateful for the result the Supreme Court delivered today — but we’ll continue to push the court to correct the confusion that’s been used to scrub religious messages, signs, and symbols from public life.


Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.


RELATED ARTICLES:

Civic Religion and the Peace Cross

What’s Life Got to Do with It?

A Minor Problem: Taxpayers to Fund Gender Surgery for Kids

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

VIDEO: The Vortex — Cardinal Cupich Under Investigation

Closing in on corruption and cover-up.

Today exactly marks the one-year anniversary of the revelations about Theodore McCarrick being a serial homopredator, and on this one-year anniversary, we are bringing you this exclusive investigative report.

Church Militant has been handed documents from personnel in the archdiocese of Chicago who are fed up with the lies and cover-ups.

The papers were kept in the secret vault in the Chicago archdiocese and detail allegations of sexual abuse of a minor by former Cardinal Joseph Bernardin.

Church Militant has also learned that Cardinal Blase Cupich is now under scrutiny by state and federal law enforcement agencies for failing to report.

These documents obtained by Church Militant are just a small sampling of various letters, correspondence, court records and emails we have been given revealing what has been rumored for decades — that Joseph Bernardin was a sexual abuser of both minors as well as adult males.

These specific papers are from 1993–1995 and provide explicit details of accusations against Bernardin stemming from a 1957 sexual assault, including rape of a minor, while he was a priest in Charleston, South Carolina, five years after his ordination.

The documents reveal that the archdiocese of Chicago, the U.S. papal nuncio, the Vatican Secretariat of State and even the papal household all knew of the allegations and yet failed to act on them.

According to the documentation, the sexual assault happened on the property of St. Mary’s parish in Greenville, South Carolina and involved both then-Fr. Bernardin and Bishop John J. Russell and was part of a satanic ritual involving desecration of the Holy Eucharist.

The victim eventually contacted the archdiocese in April of 1993, first by phone and later in writing, to report the rape by Bernardin.

As can be seen in this document, the victim had ongoing communication with archdiocese of Chicago Professional Fitness Review Administrator Steve Sidlowski.

The victim even signed and sent a registered letter written directly to Bernardin making the serious accusations and asking him to go public and repent.

A copy of the registered mail receipt, along with the original letter, was also provided to Church Militant. The receipt is signed for by Cardinal Bernardin’s office and dated April 8, 1993.

According to the cache of secret documents provided to Church Militant, the victim even twice wrote directly to Pope John Paul II, a fact acknowledged in a letter from Monsignor Leonardo Sandri from the Vatican Secretariat of State to the victim dated Sept. 4, 1993.

It is not known if the letters were ever actually presented to the Pope, but the official letter acknowledging receipt is part of the record.

Having received what could be best described as the professional runaround from Chicago for close to two years, and no substantial response from the Holy See, the victim actually traveled to Rome in 1995 and appeared in person at the Vatican Congregation for Bishops after having written them twice and received no satisfactory response.

As can be seen in this April 3, 1995 letter to the victim from then-U.S. Papal Nuncio Archbishop Agostino Cacciavillan, the correspondence with the charges against Bernardin was even assigned a case number by the nunciature — N. 17. 598.

Like when the victim reported to Chicago and Rome, nothing was ever officially pursued by the nuncio.

Officials from the time that Church Militant spoke with say the charges were viewed as not credible, but no records or notes of any investigation appear to exist. Nothing in the file indicates that any formal investigation was ever begun.

Additionally, the existence of any formal investigation seems extremely unlikely because, as the victim points out to Sidlowski in this 1993 letter, members of any investigative board “are not competent or permitted to” investigate such charges against a cardinal.

Church law restricts the convening of such investigations solely to the pope, and no record anywhere exists suggesting any such investigation was ever convened by Pope John Paul.

What the archdiocese of Chicago tried to do was to trick the victim into revealing all relevant facts so they could discover exactly what the victim knew and then provide the information to Bernardin — an accusation leveled by the victim in the same letter.

All of this documentation was in the secret files of the archdiocese and yet was not reported to then-Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan despite Cupich’s claim that the archdiocese was fully cooperating with the state investigation.

In December of last year, Madigan’s office stunned the investigative world by reporting that bishops in Illinois — including Cupich — had deliberately failed to hand over the files and names of more than 500 accused priests.

Officials are now looking into charges directly related to Cupich’s tenure in Chicago involving financial misappropriation and corruption.

The excuse from Cupich and brother bishops was that names were withheld because the allegations had not been investigated.

Madigan charged the bishops with duplicity:

By choosing not to thoroughly investigate allegations, the Catholic Church has failed in its moral obligation to provide survivors, parishioners and the public a complete and accurate accounting of all sexually inappropriate behavior involving priests in Illinois.

The failure to investigate also means that the Catholic Church has never made an effort to determine whether the conduct of the accused priests was ignored or covered up.

The dilemma now facing Cardinal Blase Cupich is clear: Either produce these documents of which Church Militant was given copies or be charged with destruction of evidence because the documents did, at least at one time, exist.

Additionally, last month, Church Militant sent a media inquiry directly to Cardinal Cupich and multiple staffers asking for a response to what we knew. We received no response.

Law enforcement officials now tell Church Militant that what certainly appears to be a cover-up by Cupich and the archdiocese to protect America’s most prominent homosexualist cardinal is only the tip of the iceberg.

In addition to abuse of minors, failure to internally investigate and covering up Bernardin’s deeds, officials are now looking into charges directly related to Cupich’s tenure in Chicago involving financial misappropriation and corruption.

And while those possible criminal actions are being pursued, as we said at the top of the report, Church Militant has come into possession of much more damning information about Cardinal Joseph Bernardin and accusations against him involving sexual crimes.

On this one-year anniversary, to the day, of the McCarrick revelations, what is now coming into sharp focus is that the Church in America as now constituted was engineered and designed and brought into existence by not one, but two homosexual predators who advanced the careers of multiple bishops who are are still currently serving in senior posts.

We will be rolling all that out in upcoming special reports.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Disgraced Ex-Cardinal ‘Mr. McCarrick’ Remains at Kansas Friary, One Year Later

Indianapolis archbishop revokes Jesuit prep school’s Catholic identity

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video and column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: #WalkAway’s Brandon Straka Explains His Lawsuit against NYC’s LGBT Center

Brandon Straka, The Unsilent Minority posted the below video:

Brandon Straka releases a statement regarding the defamation lawsuit against the New York City LGBT Center and co-defendants with attorneys Manny Alicandro and Richard Zarco on 6/18/19.

VIDEO: Iran Shoots Down High Altitude Drone in what is Clearly a New Level of Weapons for Iran

Posted by Eeyore.

Matt bracken has a killer 10 minute segment on this incident from today’s Infowars. When found, it will be posted.

RELATED ARTICLES:

What Was Iran Thinking in Shooting Down a US Drone?

US Sanctions Send Iranians to Northern Iraq Looking for Work and War

U.S. Holds All the Cards in Showdown With Iran

Israeli Intelligence Exposes Iranian Spy Network within Israel

WATCH: Iran’s Sick Obsession with Destroying Israel and America

Trump On Possible Iran Strike: ‘You’ll Soon Find Out’

Iran shoots down American drone, declares it’s ready for war

NEW YORK WILL PROVIDE ILLEGAL ALIENS WITH DRIVER’S LICENSES: Where is Gov. Cuomo’s MVP Award from terrorists?

On June 18, 2019 The New York Daily News reported, “Cuomo signs bill granting undocumented immigrants access to New York driver’s licenses despite 11th-hour concerns.”

Incredibly, the concerns were not about how this might impact national security, public safety or the immigration crisis on the border, but about how information in the DMV databases might help the federal government to enforce immigration laws and what needs to be done to prevent this from happening!

This is not the first time that the New York State legislature attempted to provide driver’s licenses for illegal aliens, but this time this dangerous and wrong-headed legislation has become the law of the state.

Back in 2007 then-New York State Governor Spitzer pushed for similar legislation that would have provided illegal aliens with driver’s licenses.

I testified before the New York State Senate on October 15, 2007 on that issue, in which I voiced my extreme opposition to the legislation.

When I addressed the hearing I noted that the preposterous claim made by proponents for issuing driver’s licenses, and an argument that was used during the most recent debate, is that since illegal aliens will drive “anyway” (with or without a license), a license would enable them to get insurance and they would learn to drive more safely. I told them that by this reasoning the State of New York should provide convicted felons with firearms training and carry permits since it is likely that they would also violate the laws and carry guns “anyway.” I then said that with proper training the criminals could improve their accuracy and thus would be less likely to hit innocent bystanders in a gun battle. Further, perhaps through training, they could be convinced to use trigger locks between bank robberies and drive-by shootings. With my tongue firmly embedded in my cheek I suggested that this would improve public safety immeasurably.

You can imagine their reactions!

The concerns I included in my prepared testimony then are as relevant today as they were then, with one additional critical factor: in the nearly 12 years since that hearing, while there have been no terror attacks carried out by international terrorists that involve the hijacking of airliners, there have been a string of deadly mass casualty terror attacks around the world and in the United States that involved terrorists using motor vehicles as weapons.

On June 14, 2019 the Justice Department announced the sentencing of a citizen of Yemen for his terrorist activities: “New York Man Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison for Attempting to Join ISIS in Yemen.”

The press release included this paragraph:

Following his return to the United States in September 2015, Naji continued to express his support for ISIS and violent jihad.  In July 2016, following the ISIS-inspired terrorist truck attack in Nice, France, that killed scores of innocent civilians, Naji told the CS how easy it would be to carry out a similar attack in Times Square, explaining that ISIS “want[s] an operation in Times Square” and stating that an ISIS “reconnaissance group . . . put up scenes of Times Square.”

Naji further explained, “if there is a truck, I mean a garbage truck and one drives it there to Times Square and crushes them . . . Times Square day.”

Terrorists have also used vehicles such cabs and passenger vans to conduct clandestine meetings and as a means of conducting covert surveillance on potential terror targets.

The TSA was created in the aftermath of the terror attacks of 9/11 and funded to the tune of billions of dollars. It currently employs more than 45,000 people and  maintains and uses so-called “No Fly Lists” to help prevent terrorists from gaining access to airliners.

Yet there are no “No Drive Lists” to prevent terrorists from being able to access cars and trucks.

Perhaps the efforts to enhance security in the commercial aviation sector have paid off or, perhaps the terrorists have simply shifted their methodology. In any event the use of motor vehicles as weapons has prompted cities to install numerous physical barriers to protect against such attacks but few barriers exist to prevent terrorists from gaining access to motor vehicles.

On August 20, 2018, CNN provided a synopsis of such attacks in an article, “Terrorist Attacks by Vehicle Fast Facts.”

Terrorists who have driver’s licenses don’t pose a risk only to those who live in the state where the license was issued. They can simply rent a car in New York and drive anywhere in the U.S. or travel to any other state and use their New York driver’s license to rent a car there.

Now New York, the state that by far suffered the greatest devastation on September 11, 2001 and has suffered other terror attacks, including one that involved a truck used to run down people on a bicycle path just blocks from the World Trade Center, will enthusiastically provide illegal aliens with driver’s licenses.

My dad taught me to drive. When he handed me the keys to our family car he told me that a car could be more lethal than a gun. And as we have seen all too frequently, that statement is accurate, dead accurate.

Continuing with my dad’s comparison of guns and cars, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is a federal law that prohibits certain individuals from possessing firearms that includes:

(5) who, being an alien- (A) is illegally and unlawfully in the United States; or (B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(26)))

The penalty for violation of this law is a maximum of 10 years in jail.

New York City Penal Code similarly prohibits non U.S. citizens (aliens) from possessing firearms.

Why then should illegal aliens be given the privilege of driving motor vehicles when their very presence in the United States is a violation of law and we may never know their true identities?

Drivers licenses, however, convey more than the authority to drive motor vehicles.

Illegal aliens, criminals, fugitives and terrorists seek to acquire identity documents such as driver’s licenses, particularly under false names to conceal their true identities and their movements and provide them with an illusion of legitimacy to which they are certainly not entitled.

My earlier article, “Immigration And The Unlearned Lessons Of 9/11,” included the link to an important New York Times article, “Roosevelt Avenue, a Corridor of Vice,” which reported on the nexus between illegal immigration, crime (including human trafficking, prostitution, narcotics), and the use of false identity documents, primarily by illegal aliens.

“Undocumented Immigrants” generally have no authentic and reliable means of identifying themselves. The New York Times article noted how important it was for the NYPD to shut down the fraud document vendors because of the dangers associated with providing such individuals with identity documents. However, for local officials to provide illegal aliens with authentic driver’s licenses directly violates the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission which was behind the creation of the REAL ID Act.

It is all but impossible for state or local officials to properly determine the true identifies of “undocumented” aliens. Thus illegal aliens would be able to easily game the licensing procedures to acquire an actual driver’s license under false identities making the DMV no better than the fake document vendors who ply their trades in communities across the United States as described in the New York Times article I noted above.

It is remarkable that on August 4, 2004, MSNBC published an NBC report, “9/11 report light on ID theft issues,” which included this paragraph:

But in the nation’s most comprehensive look yet at what went wrong on Sept. 11., and what can be done to prevent the next terrorist attack, identity theft gets scarce mention. Buried deep within the 9/11 commission report — on about 10 pages, starting with page 393 — are suggestions for dealing with the deeply connected problems of terrorism and identity fraud.

Then there was this disconcerting paragraph:

Terrorism and identity theft go hand in hand, experts say.  The al-Qaida training manual includes provisions for trainees to leave camp with five fake personas, says Collins, who uses a copy of the manual to train law enforcement officials. Terrorists are regularly schooled in the art of subsisting off credit card fraud while living in the United States, Collins said.

In the hands of an illegal alien, a driver’s license may well become a license to kill.

RELATED ARTICLE: Chip Roy: House Democrats Have Agreed To Vote On Trump’s Emergency $4.5 Billion Border Supplemental Request

EDITORS NOTE: This FrontPage Magazine column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

ICE Releases List of Murderers and Rapists Protected Under Sanctuary City Policies

Immigration and Customs Enforcement released a list of criminal illegal aliens who were released from jail due to sanctuary city policies, many of whom went on to commit other crimes.

Washington and Oregon, two states under Democratic Party control, have enacted some of the strongest sanctuary laws in the country that protect illegal immigrants from federal apprehension.

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, a Democrat, signed legislation in May that prohibits local jails and state prisons from honoring ICE detainers, and bars them notifying ICE when a suspected illegal immigrant is about to be released from their custody.

The newly minted law puts Washington on par with Oregon and California in terms of the level of restriction placed against federal immigration authorities. Federal law enforcement officials argue that their job becomes much more difficult with these laws, and communities are put in more danger.

“There is an inherent increase in risk to personnel and bystanders when ICE officers and agents must go out into the community to proactively locate these previously detained criminal aliens,” read a press release from the agency.

“ICE commends our local law enforcement colleagues who work to minimize that risk by cooperating with ICE to apprehend criminal aliens at the time of their release from local custody.”

In a bid to show the horrific consequences of sanctuary laws, ICE on Monday released details of some of the criminals in Washington and Oregon custody who went on to evade ICE apprehension.

Rosalio Ramos-Romas, a Honduran national, was deported from the U.S. four times before his arrest in Washington in October 2017.

However, after local authorities failed to hand him over to ICE, he was then charged in January 2018 with stabbing his cousin to death, decapitating the body, and then attempting to hide the remains in a dumpster.

A county jail in Kent, Washington, did not honor a January 2014 retainer placed on Jorge Luis Romero-Arriaga, a Honduran living illegally in the U.S., despite being held on a charge of child rape.

Local authorities instead released him into the community pending the results of his case. Romero-Arriaga was subsequently convicted in August 2015, according to ICE, and deported from the country.

The list went on to describe other examples of illegal immigrants in Washington and Oregon committing murder after local jails ignored an ICE detainer and released them into the public.

In another instances, a Washington county jail refused to honor an ICE request, despite that individual already having been convicted of rape in the state.

Oregon Republicans, long a minority in their state, have grown frustrated over Democratic support for sanctuary policies.

“Oregon Democrats are more interested in political games, at the expense of real lives, than they are at upholding the rule of law,” Jonathan Lockwood, a Republican spokesman at the Oregon Legislature, said in a statement to The Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Gov. Kate Brown is endangering Oregonians on virtually every level and has no business being in the governor’s office.”

ICE argues that not cooperating with its agents puts the community at a greater risk of danger.

“When local law enforcement decides to uphold sanctuary policies and release illegal criminal aliens without notifying ICE, it is a decision to protect and release criminals who are preying on victims in our communities. By allowing criminal aliens, particularly those with egregious criminal records, to be released, it places everyone in potential danger,” said Bryan Wilcox, an acting field operations director for ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations.

COLUMN BY

Jason Hopkins

Jason Hopkins is an energy investigator for the Daily Caller News Foundation. Twitter: @thejasonhopkins.

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

What Is This Love Affair with Socialism?

“Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it,” said Santayana. Many young people today claim to prefer socialism—and in some cases, even communism (which is socialism’s more violent form)—over capitalism.

Recently a candidate for city council in Denver declared that capitalism has failed and that socialism is the future. Candi Cdebaca said that we are in the “last phase” of capitalism—as if it is dying. In contrast, she said, “I believe in community ownership of land, labor, resources and distribution of those resources.” And she is willing to implement this agenda “by any means necessary.” Last week, she won the election.

A new poll says that out-of-the-closet socialist Bernie Sanders would beat capitalist Donald Trump for the U. S. presidency if the election were held today. By 9 points.

The problem with socialism and communism is that it must be forced in order to put it into practice. The communists built the Berlin Wall to keep the residents of East Germany from being able to flee “the worker’s paradise” into the West. Trump wants to build a border wall—not to keep people in, but to keep undocumented people out. The fact that so many want to come here is, in part, mute testimony to the success of capitalism.

Dr. Paul Kengor of Grove City College is a best-selling author of many books related to communism. One of his most recent books is called The Politically Incorrect Guide to Communism: The Killingest Idea Ever (Regnery, 2017).

In that book he mentions a joking T-shirt given to him by one of his former students. The T-shirt read, “Communism has only killed 100 million people. Why not give it another shot?”

Kengor points out that we are told repeatedly that the problem with socialism/communism, which repeatedly fails to “deliver the goods,” only because the right people have not tried it.

Writes Kengor,

“Again and again, we’re told that communist philosophy was never the problem. No, it was nasty leaders like Joe Stalin who have given communism a bad name. Stalin, you see, was an aberration. As were, presumably, Lenin, Trotsky, Latsis, Dzerzhinsky [founder of the KGB], Beria, Bulganin, Khrushchev, Voroshilov, Malenkov, Mikoyan, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Chebrikov, Ulbricht, Ceausescu, Tito, Hoxha, Dimitrov, Zhivkov, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Mengistu Mariam, Kim Il-Sun, Kim Jong Il, Kim Jong Un, Fidel, Raul, and Che….”

And, of course, this would also include Hugo Chavez and General Maduro, who have presided over Venezuela’s destruction, as it went from the best economy of Latin America to the worst—precisely because of socialism.

Kengor concludes: “You would think at least one commie, somewhere along the line, would have gotten it right. Why such ugly results if the theory is so pretty? Can’t these geniuses read?”

Capitalism does not produce an equal distribution of wealth. No system does. If you say that socialism/communism does, then you are covering over the fact that in the socialistic schemes, it is always the administration that does well, not the people.

Even Bernie Sanders prospers under capitalism, selling his book that railed against capitalism. He must have cried all the way to the bank.

For all its inequities, capitalism, free enterprise, a market-based system (whatever one might call it), delivers the goods for the most amount of people. In the words of Kengor, “The free market makes consumers sovereign.” Kengor quotes Ludwig von Mises in his 1922 book, Socialism, “The consumers patronize those shops in which they can buy what they want at the cheapest price….Their buying and their abstention from buying decides who should own and run the plants and the farms.”

Under communism, an inefficient, bloated bureaucracy makes such decisions, and the consumers have no choice—and are often forced into breadlines for inferior bread.

For all of its warts, capitalism produces much greater prosperity for the most amount of people.

What does communism produce? Ultimately, a lot of dead bodies. That was the answer from former communist Eugene Fox-Genovese, who, along with his wife Elizabeth, had been the editor of Marxist Perspectives.

When the Soviet Union finally imploded in the early 1990s, Eugene told interviewer Frederica Mathewes-Green in National Review (2/24/1997):

“When it all collapsed, the question was, After seventy years, what do we have to show for it? Especially when it became clear that, even on a basic level, the system didn’t deliver the goods, the one thing it was supposed to do. So what we had to show for it was tens of millions of corpses.”

One might ask,

“Why would God allow all the suffering that the socialists and communists have imposed on this world—not to mention the total loss of religious freedom in such places?” I would answer: “So that we don’t go down that road again.”