VIDEO: What the FBI Knew about Spygate Conspirator Bruce Ohr

Bruce Ohr was removed from his post of associate deputy attorney general on December 6, 2017, when it was discovered that he was actively conspiring against President Trump with others (including his wife Nellie Ohr) in and out of the Justice Department.

Ohr was corruptly used by the FBI as a conduit to Clinton spy Christopher Steele and the Clinton-DNC spy ring at Fusion, and we now have received 34 pages of “302” report material from the FBI interviews of Ohr – documents that Congress has been seeking but have been unable to get for over a year. (FBI agents use a Form 302 to summarize interviews and record notes taken during an interview.)

We obtained these documents in response to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit we filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to an August 6, 2018, FOIA request seeking Form 302s for a number of interviews with Ohr concerning his interactions with former British spy Christopher Steele (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-02107)).

  • On November 22, 2016, Bruce Ohr said that  “reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia were going to the Clinton Campaign, Jon Winer at the U.S. State Department and the FBI.”
In late September 2016, Ohr describes a person (likely Christopher Steele) as “desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being the U.S. President.”
“Ohr knew that [Fusion GPS’s] Glen Simpson and others were talking to Victoria Nuland at the U.S. State Department.”
  • Glenn Simpson directed a person whose is redacted to speak to the press. It appears as if the press that person went to was the far left leaning Mother Jones.
On December 5, 2016, Ohr promised to “voluntarily” give his wife Nellie Ohr’s Fusion GPS research to the FBI. He also provided the FBI with a report on Paul Manafort titled, “Manafort Chronology.”
  • On December 12, 2016 Simpson gave Ohr a thumb drive with Fusion GPS research on it. Ohr claims to not know what is on that drive. During the meeting Simpson, based evidently on a meeting with Glenn Simpson, identified Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former personal lawyer as having “many Russian clients.” Simpson also told Ohr that Cohen, “may have” attended a meeting in Prague.
Ohr describes Simpson directing someone to talk to the Mother Jones reporter “as it was Simpson’s Hail Mary attempt.”
  • On December 20, 2016, Ohr provided the FBI with his wife’s Nellie Ohr’s Fusion GPS research, “which contained the totality” of her work “but the Fusion GPS header was stripped.”
  • On January 23, 2017, Ohr tells the FBI that Steele told him that Steele “spoke with a staff member of Senator John McCain’s office sometime prior to October 2016.”
  • The FBI interviews show that Ohr texted and talked to Christopher Steele using the WhatsApp application.
  • On February 2, 2017, the FBI tells Ohr to see if Steele would be “comfortable getting the name of an FBI agent” as a contact. Ohr tells the agents that State Department official Kathleen Kavalec spoke with “Steele several times prior to the U.S. Presidential election and believed Steele’s reporting to have [been] generated mainly from [REDACTED].
  • On February 14, 2017, Ohr tells the FBI that Steele communicated with him via Facetime that Steele was “beginning to worry about his business.” Steele discussed brokering new business with the FBI and told Ohr, “You may see me re-emerge in a couple of weeks.”
  • On May 3, 2017, Steele called Ohr to tell him that he “had been worried about Director Comey’s upcoming testimony to Congress, especially his response to questions that would be raised by (Senator) Grassley.” Although what he was specifically worried about is redacted, Steele was “happy with Director Comey’s response.”
Steele also stated that he was limited in “his ability to testify before Congress” because of disclosure laws in the UK being more narrow than the United States.
  • On May 12, 2017, Steele called Ohr to discuss a letter the Senate Intelligence Committee sent him. According to Ohr, “The letter requested answers to the following questions:

Had Steele provided information to the US Government?

What was the scope of Steele’s investigation?

Did Steele have any additional information to provide? In May, 2017, Ohr was asked by the FBI to ask “Steele if he would be willing to have a conversation with FBI agents in the UK.” Steele responded that he would, but he would need to check with a redacted name.

These new Bruce Ohr FBI 302s show an unprecedented and irregular effort by the FBI, DOJ, and State Department to dig up dirt on President Trump using the conflicted Bruce Ohr, his wife, and the Clinton/DNC spies at Fusion GPS. The FISA courts weren’t informed of this corrupted process when they were asked to approve and reapprove extraordinary spy warrants targeting President Trump.

Here is some more important background on Ohr, Steele and the Spygate affair.

In June, we uncovered documents showing in the removal of Bruce Ohr November 13, 2016, Ohr was given a performance award of $28,000. This was during the time of his deep involvement in the highly controversial Justice Department surveillance of the Trump presidential campaign. The bonus was nearly double the $14,250 performance award he was given on November 29, 2015.

One of our FOIA lawsuits recently produced information from the DOJ showing a conversation between former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Kathleen Kavalec and Bruce Ohr, discussing the targeting of Donald Trump with Steele dossier material. In discussing a meeting with the potential source for a Mother Jones article accusing the Trump campaign of taking money from a Russian-American oil magnate, as well as Christopher Steele’s connection to that source, Kavalec emails Ohr citing the accusatory Mother Jones article. Ohr says, “I really hope we can get something going here.”

We also obtained an email revealing that Nellie Ohr, wife of Bruce Ohr, informed him that she was deleting emails sent from his DOJ email account. The full email exchange is between Bruce Ohr, Lisa Holtyn, Nellie Ohr, and Stefan Bress, a first secretary at the German Embassy, and is part of 339 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Justice.

We also uncovered emails from Ohr showing that he remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant. The records show that Ohr served as a go-between for Steele by passing along information to “his colleagues” on matters relating to Steele’s activities.

Ohr also set up meetings with Steele, regularly talked to him on the telephone and provided him assistance in dealing with situations Steele was confronting with the media.

We are suing the DOJ for communications between two of the pivotal players in the Deep State, anti-Trump collusion – former FBI official Peter Strzok and Ohr (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-01082)). We are challenging the Justice Department’s extraordinary claim that there are no records of communications between Strzok and Ohr in light of the preeminent role both individuals played in the Deep State effort to undermine the Trump campaign and administration. In addition, Ohr himself testified before Congress that he did, in fact, meet and communicate with Strzok.

We also seek records about the agency’s involvement in persuading President Trump to defer his September 2018 decision to declassify DOJ documents related to the Russia investigation (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00507)). Our lawsuit is also seeking Ohr’s records of communications around the time of Trump’s declassification announcement.

And I can tell you that more is coming as a result of our investigations of the biggest corruption scandal in American history….

FBI Leakers Exposed by Judicial Watch

Fourteen FBI employees were referred to the organization’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive or classified information, and we now have the records of those referrals.

This comes on the heels of our uncovering an FBI report revealing that fired FBI Director James Comey kept FBI documents on President Trump at his house. Comey also admitted to leaking those documents.

Although the FBI’s OPR does not have its own website, according to the DOJ’s OPR, leak allegations may come, “from a variety of sources, including U.S. Attorney’s offices and other Department components, courts, Congress, media reports, other federal agencies, state and local government agencies, private citizens, private attorneys, criminal defendants, civil litigants, and self-referrals. OPR also regularly conducts its own searches to identify judicial findings of misconduct against Department attorneys.”

According to the DOJ’s OPR, it “investigates certain misconduct allegations involving federal law enforcement agents when they relate to a Department attorney’s alleged professional misconduct, as well as claims of reprisal against FBI whistleblowers.” “If OPR finds professional misconduct in a particular case, a different office—the Professional Misconduct Review Unit—reviews OPR’s findings and determines the appropriate discipline.” Final recommendations are given to “the appropriate office.”

We obtained the records through a January 2019 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking:

  • All complaints, referrals, or other reports received by the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility related to the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and/or classified information by any employee of the FBI.
  • Any records documenting the closure or other final disposition of any complaint, referral, or other report described in part one of this request.

One referral we obtained appears to refer to former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe was closed on March 20, 2018 and states as a mitigating factor that the “Employee was facing unprecedented challengers and pressures.”

(Name redacted) (DOJ/O&R)  Closed: 3/20/2018  References: 2.5, 2.6, 4.10

SES [Senior Executive Service] employee released the FBI Sensitive information to a reporter and lacked candor not under oath and under oath when questioned about it, in violation of Offense Codes 4.10 (Unauthorized Disclosure – Sensitive Information); 2.5 (Lack of Candor- No Oath); and 2.6 (Lack of Candor – Under Oath).

The proposed decision in this matter was made by the AD, OPR. The final decision was made by Attorney General Jeff Sessions. DOK retains final decision-making authority for certain high-ranking FBI officials.

MITIGATION: Employee as (redacted) years of FBI service and a remarkable performance record. Employee was facing unprecedented challengers and pressures.

AGGRAVATION: Employee held an extremely high position and was expected to comport himself with the utmost integrity. Lack of candor is incompatible with the FBI’s Core Values.



McCabe was fired from the FBI on March 16, 2018, for leaking to the media and lacking “candor.” Then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a statement said:

After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).

The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.

Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”

The records show that penalties for unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and/or classified information ranged from no action (due to administrative closure) to, as in the case of McCabe, dismissal. Other FBI employees’ offenses reported in the documents list several cases in which the final action was less severe than OPR’s proposal:
  1. An unidentified employee was fired. The case was closed in July 2016.
  2. An unidentified employee was given a one-day suspension without pay. The case was closed in April 2016.
  3. The following year an unidentified employee received a five-day suspension without pay, and the case was closed administratively in April 2017.
  4. An SES agent who “misused an FBI database, and provided sensitive information to a former FBI employee” was reported to have had as mitigation that he felt he “had the support of his Division to use his discretion.” OPR proposed a 15-day suspension, but the final decision was to give a letter of censure. This case was closed in June 2017.
  5. An unidentified employee was fired. The case was closed in May 2018.
  6. An unidentified employee was recommended for dismissal but received a 45-day suspension. The case was closed in October 2017.
  7. An unidentified employee was given a 14-day suspension. The case was closed in March 2016.
  8. An unidentified employee, who was cited for misuse of an FBI database and unauthorized disclosure of classified/law-enforcement sensitive/grand jury information, was given a 12-day suspension. The case was closed in January 2016.
  9. An unidentified employee received a letter of censure. The case was closed in August 2016.
  10. An unidentified employee was given a letter of censure. The case was closed in October 2016.
  11. An unidentified employee was accused of “Investigative deficiency – improper handling of documents or property in the care, custody or control of the government; unauthorized disclosure – classified/law enforcement sensitive/grand jury information” and “failure to report – administrative.” It was proposed that they be given a 30-calendar day suspension without pay; the final decision from OPR was that they were given a 10-calendar day suspension without pay. This case was closed in February 2018.
  12. An unidentified employee was fired. This case was closed in October 2017.
  13. An unidentified employee was given a letter of censure. It was proposed that they be fired, but the final decision was a 60-day suspension without pay. The case was closed in January 2019.

This is just a mess. No wonder the FBI was leaking so profusely. These documents show lenient treatment for evident criminal activity. Only four of the 14 employees found to have made an unauthorized disclosure were fired. And even though Andrew McCabe was fired and referred for a criminal investigation for his leak, he hasn’t been prosecuted.

Judicial Watch Challenges Mayor Buttigieg’s Cover-Up on Illegal Alien ID Cards

Sanctuary policies that protect illegal aliens undermine the rule of law – and they are not just in cities such as San Francisco and New York.

We just filed an Access to Public Records Act (APRA) open records lawsuit against the City of South Bend, Indiana, for records of communications of Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s office related to the creation of a municipal ID card for illegal aliens. The card was created by La Casa de Amistad, a local nonprofit corporation (Judicial Watch v. City of South Bend (No. 71C01-1908-Ml-000389)).

On December 16, 2016, the South Bend Tribune reported that, “A nonprofit Latino advocacy group … unveiled a new identification card it hopes will make life easier for undocumented immigrants who live in [South Bend].” La Casa de Amistad Inc. are the creators of this “SB ID.” Mayor Pete Buttigieg reportedly worked “closely with La Casa de Amistad, South Bend’s main Latino outreach center … and the nonprofit’s executive director, Sam Centellas,” to create a “Community Resident Card … created and distributed by the group — a private organization — not the city.”  “Buttigieg’s part to make it all work was to sign an executive order requiring local services and institutions — like law enforcement, schools, the water utility and libraries — to accept the card as a valid form of identification.”

We sued after the City of South Bend failed to respond as required by law to open records requests on June 22, 2019, seeking emails between Buttigieg, members of his staff and officials of La Casa de Amistad regarding the Community Resident Card program.

Mayor Buttigieg’s city administration in South Bend is in cover-up mode on his work for special ID cards to make it easier for illegal aliens to stay in the United States contrary to law. We made simple open records requests and have faced nothing but games from the Buttigieg administration – which is why we had to sue.

Anti-Trump California Tries to Unconstitutionally Mess with Presidential Election – Judicial Watch Sues

Across the country local politicians, prosecutors and judges are abusing their powers to target President Trump. The latest – no surprise – is the State of California, which unconstitutionally demands to see his tax returns before allowing him to appear on the presidential primary ballot.

We just filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of four California voters to prevent the California secretary of state from implementing a new state law requiring all presidential candidates who wish to appear on California’s primary ballot to publicly disclose their personal tax returns from the past five years (Jerry Griffin et al. v. Alex Padilla (No. 2:19-cv-01477).

The suit argues that the law unconstitutionally adds a new qualification for candidates for president. Our clients include a registered Independent, Republican, and Democrat California voter.

Under the law, known as the Presidential Tax Transparency and Accountability Act, candidates who do not publicly disclose their tax returns are barred from having their names printed on California’s primary ballots. We argue that SB 27 imposes candidate qualifications beyond those allowed by the U.S. Constitution and impermissibly burdens a voters’ expressive constitutional and statutory rights. The lawsuit claims violations of the U.S. Constitution’s Qualifications Clause, the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1988.

During the 2017-2018 legislative session, then-Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a previous version of this law, which California’s Legislative Counsel concluded “would be unconstitutional if enacted.” In vetoing the 2017-18 tax return law, Brown noted:

First, it may not be constitutional. Second, it sets a “slippery slope” precedent. Today we require tax returns, but what would be next? Five years of health records? A certified birth certificate? High school report cards? And will these requirements vary depending on which political party is in power? A qualified candidate’s ability to appear on the ballot is fundamental to our democratic system. For that reason, I hesitate to start down a road that well might lead to an ever escalating set of differing state requirements for presidential candidates.

Our complaint further alleges the political nature of the law, which is totally divorced from the states’ legitimate constitutional role in administering and establishing procedures for conducting federal elections:

None of the interests proffered by the California legislature for requiring the disclosure of candidates’ tax returns is related to election procedure or administration. Rather, the stated interests incorporate particular, substantive judgments about what is most important for voters to know when considering a candidate, how voters should go about “estimate[ing] the risk” of a candidate “engaging in corruption,” and what might assist law enforcement in detecting violations of the Emoluments Clause and crimes “such as insider trading.”

Unless SB 27 is enjoined, states will assume the power to create their own qualifications for national candidates seeking to obtain a party’s nomination for president. This could lead to as many as 50 distinct and possibly inconsistent sets of qualifications regarding the only national election in the United States. Using rationales similar to California’s, states might come to demand medical records, mental health records, sealed juvenile records, driving records, results of intelligence, aptitude, or personality tests, college applications, Amazon purchases, Google search histories, browsing histories, or Facebook friends.

In their zeal to attack President Trump, California politicians passed a law that unconstitutionally victimizes California voters. A state can’t amend the U.S. Constitution by adding qualifications to run for president, and the courts can’t stop this abusive law fast enough.

VIDEO: ‘China Uncensored’ now grey listed by YouTube

Posted by Eeyore

These guys are very good on all things China. Videos are very worth watching for those interested in the disposition and inner workings and geopolitics of China. It is as shocking in the same way that it is sticking that YouTube shadow banned Dennis Prager because his video on the 10 commandments mentions the word “murder”, that they also shadow ban China uncensored. To borrow a stylistic device of CU, that would be, shocking if you assume that Google and YouTube acts in accordance with the values and sense of fairness and reasonableness that they say they do, and that we want to believe they do.

Once you understand their real ethic and values, they become very predictable and the fact that CU is shadow banned becomes sort of satisfying to your understanding while nauseating as proof that Alphabet/Google/Youtube is in fact so evil, that at least, is a miniature spark of last-gasp integrity, they recently dropped their slogan of,”Don’t be evil”.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

So far the ONLY analysis from a YouTuber on the Democratic Socialists of America 2019 National Convention that hits the damn target at all

Posted by Eeyore

EDITORS NOTE: In “The Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution”, Ayn Rand wrote:

The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.

Now watch this video.


Chicago Born Democrat Socialist Ayanna Pressley

Ilhan Omar, Jihadi Squad Islamic Socialist

Rashida Tlaib, the Pro-Hezbollah, Pro-Hamas Jihadi Jane

The Jihad Squad now runs the Democratic Party

PODCAST: The Big Lie About Political Parties and Family Values is Exposed


Dana Allen is the leader of a new television network, “American Uncensored News Network”!! Dana was the Co-Founder and Chairman of from 1998 to 2000. He was President of American Investigator Television from 2000 to 2001. Dana Allen was Founder, CEO, President and Chairman of Sequoia Data Corporation from 1987 to 1996, where he founded the first pure E-commerce company which went to market in 1989 with CompuMarket®, a product quite similar to today’s eBay.

TOPICThe Big Lie About Political Parties And Family Values Is Exposed

Paul Driessen, senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and author of articles and books on energy, environmental and human rights issues.

TOPICFraud and corruption bring big payoffs!!

Karen Kataline is a frequent guest host on AM Talk Radio. She is the producer and host of Spouting Off, a live, Internet call-in talk show covering politics, pop culture and a little psychology thrown in. Her Op Eds can be seen in Investor’s Business Daily, Western Journal, Town Hall, The Daily Caller and The American Thinker. She is the author of an award-winning memoir, FATLASH! Food Police & the Fear of Thin, a personal account and analysis of her experience with child beauty pageants, food restriction and her “stage mother on steroids.”

TOPICLeftism is Destructive to Mental Health!! 

RELATED ARTICLE: Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin Signs Bill to Ban Abortions When Unborn Baby’s Heartbeat Begins

VIDEO: How Atheism Kills

Part I: Atheism Kills: The Dangers of a World Without God – And Cause for Hope.

Part 2: Godlessness = Abortion, Eugenics and China’s One-Child Policy.

Part 3: Hitler was NO Christian

Part 4: Five Wrong Assumptions of Atheists.

EDITORS NOTE: These Glazov Gang videos are republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

YouTube removes ‘Killing Europe’ documentary, following Amazon’s lead — watch it here.

Posted by Eeyore

YouTube blacklisted Killing Europe, a documentary about Islam and mass immigration in Europe that had previously been hosted on the platform for over a year, just days after Amazon Prime made the same decision.

Unlike Amazon, which said it censored the documentary due to “quality” concerns, YouTube accused the documentary — a critical examination of immigration in Europe — of violating its “hate speech” policy.

The documentary is a mix of on-the-ground footage and interviews, including interviews with ex-Muslims, British politicians, and victims of the notorious Rotherham rape epidemic.

“This is America, not Canada and not Europe — we’re supposed to have free speech,” said director Michael Hansen in a video message to his subscribers. “So why is it that they’re working so hard to [pull] my movies down?”

Supporters of the documentary have since uploaded it to BitChute, a decentralized free-speech oriented YouTube competitor.

YouTube’s takedown message to Hansen is as follows:

Hi WeAre138 Productions,

Our team has reviewed your content, and, unfortunately, we think it violates our hate speech policy. We’ve removed the following content from YouTube:

Killing Europe (short version)

Related: Also by Michael Hansen:

You can see Killing Europe right here

RELATED VIDEO: Hansen: Killing Free Speech.

For those who wish to support Michael Hansen’s herculean efforts to preserve freedom of speech and classical thought, please consider buying a DVD of killing Europe from Michael directly, here.

VIDEO: More on Google bias by an ENGINEER at Google

Posted by Eeyore

RELATED ARTICLE: Project Veritas Re-Uploads Google Exposé Taken Down By YouTube Ahead of White House Social Media Summit.

RELATED VIDEO: Project Veritas Exposé on Google.

VIDEO: The Vortex — Amerika Magazine’s Push for Communism


Well, the gay Jesuits, which we know is rather redundant these days, they have completed the circuit and gone completely off the rails in the natural order as well — which, as an aside, is guaranteed once you have given up the supernatural life, which the Jesuits as an order did many years ago.

Now, in the pages of their rag, which editor Fr. Matt Malone projects as sophisticated and intellectual and only for the “thinking” man, critics being not sufficiently intellectual enough to grasp its profound prose, Malone has published a piece which is little else than an apology for communism.

A glossed-over attempt to get us to look at it from a different angle, a fresh perspective — in short: have a dialogue about it.

So fierce has the criticism and backlash against the original piece been that Malone felt compelled to take to the pages of his own rag and personally pen an apologetic for the original apologetic.

The original piece first offers some words from early 20th century worker Dorothy Day in saying most common people who join the Communist Party do so out of a desire for equality and fairness among the working class.

Aside from the fact that there’s not really any way to know that one way or the other, the truth remains that that is definitely not what the leaders of communism had or have in mind.

The article then includes Day’s assessment that whatever the intent of many of its adherents, “the movement is, in the final analysis, a program ‘with the distinct view of tearing down the church.'”

Most of the remainder of the article is spent tearing down Day’s assessment, which was spot on; funny that they would trot out Day’s kind analysis of the motives of rank and file party members but then assail her analysis of the movement as a whole.

Which is it, Amerika magazine? Is her assessment worth listening to or not? Or is it worth listening to when it supports your twisted position and to be discarded when it challenges your absurdity on a macro level?

The article is so indescribably lopsided, it’s hard to even take it seriously, much less analyze it.

It paints the most sympathetic view of communism possible (which admittedly is a hard thing to do) and juxtaposes that view against singular horrible examples of capitalism run amok.

In short, it takes two polar extremes and contrasts the extremes to arrive at a conclusion of “Meh, communism’s not so bad.”

Following along those lines, in his defense article of the indefensible, Fr. Malone says:

My reading of Catholic social teaching, especially the commentary of recent popes, is that it has many good things to say about capitalism while always reminding us about the bad that comes with it. At the same time, it has many bad things to say about socialism while always reminding us of the good that comes with it.

Talk about a complete gloss. The Church does not remind us of the “good” that comes with “socialism” — notice the subtle yet deliberate shift there from communism to socialism.

The Church, in the person of Pope Pius XI, says of socialism the following: “No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist” — which is almost the same year that Dorothy Day was saying her bit that the goal of communism was to destroy the Church.

And so as not to confuse or conflate terms here, socialism and communism are only very slightly different economic systems, but economics is not the major reason for the Church’s condemnation of both, a condemnation that Fr. Malone simply does not mention to you — and actually deceives you about.

The real question surrounding these evil systems is not one of economics, but one of spirituality and human dignity.

While the original article details a couple of examples of big corporation’s poor working conditions for their workers — admittedly bad and unjust and in need of reform — it completely skips over the hundreds of millions of examples of out and out murder by communist regimes — much of it aimed at people of religion.

Karl Marx despised religion, a theme carried through by the Bolsheviks when they seized power in Russia in the 1917 revolution.

They came to power through massive violence, storming the palace of Czar Nicholas in St. Petersburg, eventually not just assassinating him, but also murdering his children and wife.

These same men and their successors who came to power in Russia also through murder and violence went on to set up an institutionalized system, the gulag, where millions were sent for slave labor and eventual starvation and execution.

Methinks, given the choice of working long hours in an Amazon shipping house or being tortured, starved and beaten to death in the frozen tundra of a Siberian gulag, the Amazon warehouse might not appear so bad.

But it wasn’t enough for communism in Russia to confine itself to the borders of that nation. It drew an Iron Curtain across Europe and built a wall to keep its enslaved population from escaping to freedom in the West.

Guards, communist guards, shot and killed anyone who tried to get across the Berlin Wall.

The horror of communism — its destruction of the human soul and spirit — was what prompted the politically explosive speech by President Ronald Reagan in 1987; while standing in the shadow of the monument to tyranny, he spoke the famous words.

In 1956, the Russian Commies sent tanks into Hungary to brutally crush an uprising of ordinary people who wanted freedom.

Communism and its twin sister, socialism, is always enforced through murder and violence against the will of the people it supposedly upholds.

Who can forget the scene of Chinese Communists in Tiananmen Square with the pervasive threat again of violence and death and the lone protestor staring down their evil?

Shortly after Stalin came to power, he put on a series of show trials where political prisoners were denied due process, dragged before Communist tribunals and predetermined sentences were handed down — often capital punishment.

Millions of poor farmers were driven off their ancestral lands which were seized by the Communist government in the name of the “people.”

Murder, torture, starvation, execution, enslavement, poverty distributed equally to the masses — these are what comprise the machinery of Communism.

And enormous energy of that machine was directed at the Catholic Church, which even today is playing out in China as the Commies and socialists in the Vatican have sold out Chinese Catholics.

In Fr. Malone’s stupid assessment of this big picture, he paints this as some academic question worthy of dialogue and for thinking people to ponder and consider over martinis in libraries and classrooms.

The Jesuits have popped champagne corks all over their order about Pope Francis denouncing a border wall and the death penalty.

However, walls, guns and the death penalty are the stock in trade of communism and socialism, yet somehow, all of a sudden, these historical facts are simply ignored and not presented.

And oh yeah, by the way, when the socialist and communist systems come to power, one of the very first things they do is set about to destroy the family.

Immediately, no-fault divorce is legislated and imposed, as is abortion and contraception, in an effort to destroy the family fabric and make individuals become dependent on the state — again, not talked about it either article in Amerika magazine.

So given the vast amount of lack of information in either article, the question needs to be asked: Is the editorial staff at Amerika just that stupid or are they malicious, agitating for a political system that seeks to destroy the Catholic Church, masquerading as a better economic system?

VIDEO: Why Welfare Hasn’t Cured Poverty

More than five decades, several welfare programs, and $25 trillion later, the welfare system has utterly failed the poor.

The poverty rate remains mostly unchanged, and tens of millions of Americans are dependent on government assistance.

Currently, the United States spends about a trillion dollars a year on 80 different federal, state, and local welfare programs.

About 40 million Americans are considered poor. If we divided that $1 trillion among those 40 million people, we could give each person approximately $25,000 a year, or $100,000 a year for a family of four.

We’re clearly spending a lot of money, so why have we not ended poverty?

Our welfare system discourages work. It discourages families from staying together. And it encourages dependence on government.

In other words, welfare keeps the poor poor.

In many cases, welfare has harmed the very people it was supposed to help, especially children.

Why has this happened?

As welfare benefits grew over the years, they increasingly served as a substitute for a working parent.

As the taxpayer became the family breadwinner, that encouraged many men to stop upholding their responsibilities, leaving more and more women as heads of single-parent households.

On the other side of the coin, single mothers were discouraged from marrying the fathers of their children because that reduced their benefits.

Sadly, the cycle continues today as many children who grow up on welfare eventually follow in their parents’ footsteps when they have families of their own.

So, what do we do?

First, we have to understand that the problem with the current system is that it discourages work. Work is the fastest and most effective way to get out of poverty and become prosperous.

Welfare programs should be designed to offer temporary help while encouraging able-bodied recipients to find work and become self-reliant.

In states that have implemented time limits and welfare-to-work requirements, recipients have received job training, found jobs, and increased their incomes dramatically. They’ve also dropped off the welfare rolls.

Second, we must continue to create the jobs that help recipients transition to work.

As we’ve seen in just the past few years, cutting taxes on individuals and businesses and cutting regulations that hinder business growth are the keys to massive new job creation, high levels of employment, and increased wages for workers.

Most Americans want a social safety net that helps those who can’t help themselves and they want to help the poor find meaningful work.

We’ve learned through decades of experience that throwing more money at poverty doesn’t end it. Temporary assistance, jobs training, growing the economy, and promoting self-sufficiency do.

As we wage the war against poverty for the next generation, let’s fight smarter.


Portrait of Genevieve Wood

Genevieve Wood advances policy priorities of The Heritage Foundation as senior contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Genevieve. Twitter: .


I Know From Experience This Urban Agenda Would Lift Baltimore and Other Cities

Baltimore Blues

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.


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

VIDEO: Candace Owens interview with Steve Bannon

Candace Owens interviews Steve Bannon. They are down on our Southern border illuminating the realities of the immigration crisis, the border wall, the logistics, the economics, Trump’s efforts, private efforts, the people who live there, etc.

Please watch:

PODCAST: Are Muslims ‘Slaves’ Under Islam? Listen to the Debate

In the podcast below, former ISIS bride Tania Joya (now an ex-Muslim) and Muslim reformer Shireen Qudosi answer the question: Are Muslims slaves under Islam?

Joya and Qudosi met up on Capitol Hill where both were discussing Clarion Project’s new film, Kids: Chasing Paradise.

Joya appears in the film and Qudosi is Clarion’s national correspondent. In this provocative interview by The Hill, Qudosi is also asked to defend Clarion Project from accusations by the Southern Poverty Law Center that Clarion Project is a hate group.



Test Case for Trump: US ISIS Bride Wants to Come Home

Tania Joya: How I Was Radicalized

Muslim Reform Movement Kicks Off in Washington, D.C.

PODCAST: Dr. Andrew Bostom on Islamic antisemitism. A crushing blow to apologists for Islam

This is really very good. He covers the history of antisemitism as a central dogma of Islam from Mohammad to present day with such perfect scholarship that never again will you have to endure a dhimmi or Muslim attempt to explain that its just “extremists” or some perversion or hijacked form of Islam.

Please give it a listen. Large files like this sometimes do not play non stop on D tube but the more who try, the better it should work. If it doesn’t play well, please leave a comment and I will try another upload tomorrow hoping it will work better. Click here for a link to the video.

VIDEO: Maria Elvira Salazar running for Congress in Florida District 27

Maria Elvira Salazar has announced that she is running for Congress in Florida District 27. Ms. Salazar is running against incumbent Donna Shalala.

In an email Ms. Salazar states:

We are now seeing politicians in Washington behave like corrupt banana republic dictators.

Not only are they peddling a disturbing, socialist agenda that threatens our freedoms, they’re openly spewing hateful, anti-Semetic rhetoric against Israel, our great American ally.

And South Florida’s own Donna Shalala remains silent.

Ms. Salazar goes on to say:

Florida knows what socialism does to a country. Many of us saw first hand how it ruined the countries from which many of us escaped.

Many exiles, like my own parents who came to this great country from Cuba, know the pain of  leaving behind your life’s work and starting anew with only five dollars in your pocket. And we know how important it is to preserve the freedoms that we came to America to pursue.

I grew up hearing about the horrors and injustices of the socialist Castro regime which instilled in me a deep faith in and a desire to pursue the American Dream.

My career as a journalist has taken me all over the world – including to Latin America where socialism has run rampant for decades. There, I confronted dictators with questions they did not want to hear – and much less wanted to answer.

Despite the dangers to my own life I covered the wars in Central America because I am committed to the truth and bringing a voice to those who cannot be heard. This is a principle I stuck by when I returned to South Florida. I dedicated my tv career to providing an outlet for the voices of my community, Miami. I wanted us to be heard.

But politicians like Donna Shalala callously continue to ignore people like us.

For that reason, I am more committed than ever to bringing our fight to Washington. I will not be invisible. I will not remain on the sidelines. I will not be silent.


Born in Miami’s Little Havana to Cuban parents, who emigrated to the United States, fleeing Cuba due to the arrival of Fidel Castro to power. With only five dollars in their pockets, the pursuit for freedom and the American dream was instilled in María Elvira Salazar at an early age by her parents. While being raised in Miami and Puerto Rico, Salazar listened as her parents told stories of the oppressive communist regime from which they escaped. Becoming American citizens at the Freedom Tower, Salazar’s parents wanted a better life for their family; they wanted freedom.


© All rights reserved.

VIDEO: When Muslims Do Not Assimilate

Even in PC Europe the leftists have noticed that Muslim immigrants self-ghettoize and do not attempt to become Europeans. The answer as to why this happens is simple–Mohammed and the Koran. Islam is a complete civilization that is superior to the European/American civilization. Islamic doctrine addresses the barrier between the Kafirs and Muslims.

VIDEO: This Lawsuit Over ‘Sex’ and ‘Gender Identity’ Will Have Sweeping Implications

“I felt like I had been punched in the stomach. I was just gasping for air.”

That’s how Nancy Rost recalls the moments after her husband, Tom, walked through the door of their home six years ago this month.

In his hand, Tom held a letter from a longtime employee. On his face, the easy confidence Nancy had seen from Tom every day since they met each other as children was missing, replaced by a palpable sense of anxiety.

Immediately, Tom and Nancy knew that the contents of the letter had the potential to devastate R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, which Tom’s grandfather had established in 1910 to serve grieving families throughout Detroit.

As it stands now, Tom’s five-generation family business is in the hands of the Supreme Court, with oral arguments scheduled for Oct. 8.

No doubt, his case will have sweeping implications across American life.

So, what was in the letter?

Anthony Stephens, a biological male employee who had agreed to and followed the funeral home’s sex-specific dress code for more than six years, intended to show up to work—as well as to the homes of grieving families—dressed as a woman.

For years, Tom’s company had required employees to agree to and abide by a sex-specific dress code that aligned with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission requirements. The regulation-consistent policy ensured that family members of a deceased loved one could focus on processing their grief, not on the funeral home or its employees.

Over the next two weeks, Tom carefully considered his situation. Tom was concerned for Stephens—a longtime, valued employee—and for Stephens’ family. He also had to consider the rest of his staff, including an 80-year-old female employee, who would be sharing the women’s restroom facility with Stephens.

Finally, Tom pondered the impact on the funeral home’s clients.

In the end, Tom decided that he could not agree to Stephens’ proposal. That decision was fully in line with federal law. Yet, in a matter of months, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the funeral home.

Later, following the commission’s urging, a federal court of appeals effectively redefined the word “sex” in federal law to mean “gender identity.”

Enacted by Congress in 1964, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act has long protected women, along with racial and religious minorities, from unjust discrimination in the workplace.

Redefining the term “sex” in that law to mean “gender identity” would create chaotic, unworkable situations and unjustly punish business owners like Tom while destroying important gains women and girls have made over the past 50 years.

Indeed, Tom Rost’s case, in which Alliance Defending Freedom represents the funeral home, is just the tip of the iceberg.

Blurring the legal differences between male and female forces women and girls to endure unequal treatment because some men and boys believe that they are women.

In Connecticut, for instance, two boys competing as girls have set state records in 15 events over the past two years, while costing girls like Selina Soule over 50 chances at next-level races.

In Anchorage, Alaska, city officials have weaponized gender ideology to argue that a women’s shelter must allow a biological male to sleep 3 feet away from women who have been victimized by rape, sex trafficking, and domestic violence.

Refusing even to discuss these and other issues that result from redefining “sex” to mean “gender identity,” Democratic lawmakers have put forward the paradoxically named Equality Act that would institutionalize these harms under federal law.

While that bill has stalled in the Senate, federal courts like the one that ruled against Harris Funeral Homes have acted to effectively change the law on their own, imposing their own policy preferences and punishing business owners who were simply acting in compliance with the law Congress actually enacted.

Tom and Nancy Rost have the right to depend on what the law says—not what judges or bureaucrats want it to be.

In R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Supreme Court has a golden opportunity to affirm that changing the law is only something Congress can do, particularly in a context as complicated as changing the meaning of “sex” itself.


John Bursch is vice president of appellate advocacy and senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom.

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.


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