Russia, Obama: what we knew

But what media won’t talk about. Yet at a hearing with Peter Strzock, for proof of the conspiracy, media were forced to talk about what they have ignored for about a year.

Obama’s cybersecurity coordinator confirms Susan Rice ordered him to ‘stand down’ on Russian meddling

by Christian Datoc | June 20, 2018 | Washington Examiner

Michael Daniel confirmed Wednesday that former national security adviser Susan Rice ordered him and his staff to “stand down” in 2016 in regard to Russian attempts to meddle in the 2016 election.

Daniel, special assistant to former President Barack Obama and White House cybersecurity coordinator, told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that quotes attributed to him in the book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, were an “accurate rendering of the conversation” he had with Rice and his staff.

Daniel’s staff reportedly responded to the order in “disbelief.”

Over the past year, the Obama administration has been criticized for allegedly being aware of Russian attempts to influence the election yet primarily remaining silent on the subject.

The Washington Post reported that Obama himself — along with three top aides — was given direct evidence from the CIA of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s cyber campaign to influence the election.

The Obama administration reportedly knew of Russia’s actions for months ahead of the 2016 election, but failed to take retaliatory action until December.

“It is the hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend,” a former senior Obama administration official involved in White House deliberations on Russia said of the administration’s inaction. “I feel like we sort of choked.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/obamas-cybersecurity-coordinator-confirms-susan-rice-ordered-stand-down-russian-meddling-2016-election

I don’t know, but there are words so much more fitting than “choking.” How about dereliction of duty; or treason; or maybe just fulfilling that super-flexibility role, like President Gumby had promised Putin? Media has been busy ignoring it all.

I remember another distant place where standing down was an issue. Oh yeah, Benghazi.

Advertisements

Lawless Left

Did you miss it all evolving? Maybe you could have, if you were not paying attention this week. Within a day of an unknown candidate winning a primary race in Queens, NY, over Joseph Crowley, Democrats solidified their “abolish ICE” position. Three days later they were in the streets protesting to demonstrate their newfound position. Mainsteaming it complete. Within days, NY’s junior Senator was wholeheartedly sporting the position.

But no one saw that one coming. They could be excused for a host of reasons. But no one heard of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez before that either, the 28 year-old Bernie socialist.

It was like a meteor hitting. By Saturday, media reported 750 marches of protest across the country. It was so quick; evolution is now lightning speed with Democrats.

It normally starts with the same line.

Let’s be crystal clear, when Democrats say “this is not who we are,” what they are really saying is that we are not a country that respects the rule of law. We are not a country that should protect its borders from invasion. And finally, what they are saying is that we are a lawless people….or should be. That’s the way, uh-huh uh-huh. they like it.

Yes, I know that is a radical statement but it is not hyperbole. At least it represents the Democrats and their party to a tee. Lawlessness is key in their agenda.

But I know people disagree. Somehow I am being dishonest. Though the facts stand contrary to that argument. They only “respect” the rule of law when it fits their political agenda, and only for as long as it does.

So Democrats are lawless, like those people they “stand up” for and encourage.

Obama pipes up, as the latest push of the illegal invasion spawns media stories about children being separated from parents and families. Washington Examiner:

Obama added Americas hold the common ideal “that all of us are created equal, and all of us deserve the chance to become something better.”

“That’s the legacy our parents and grandparents and generations before created for us, and it’s something we have to protect for the generations to come,” he continued. “But we have to do more than say ‘this isn’t who we are.’ We have to prove it – through our policies, our laws, our actions, and our votes.” — Obama commenting on World Refugee Day.

Here we go with the same code words again, ‘this is not who we are.’ They said it on preventing terrorists from coming to America, or getting tough on Islamists. The travel ban was the latest. But thankfully that power has remained within the president.

Look, they have no respect for law really. When in their favor, they say “that’s the law, period.” But otherwise, if you don’t like the law, or don’t believe it is right, then civil disobedience is the answer. Defy the law, and protest it. But respect it? No chance. So there is no illusion Democrats respect the law. If they don’t like it, they simply ignore it as their right. And they will go to battle against the rule of law.

Another great line for Democrats in prime time talking points.

Their other favorite words to repeat, “we are better then that.” But no, Democrats are not better than that. They only use words like a lemon meringue pie in your face. They are revealing the truth, they have no respect for the rule of law — only the politics of activism. The more radical the position the better it sells.

They want open borders and lawlessness. What is next, you might ask? They already called for abolishing local police forces. That seemed radical even for them, but maybe no more. Basically anything that stands in the way of lawlessness could be a target. Or anything that stands in the way of chaos and anarchy. (their other best friend)

It is a hard case to make that progressives want vast government control over every element in your lives, where the nanny state rules, and yet want people to be lawless. I guess that is what happens in “evolution,” sometimes it missfires. If you have people that don’t care about consistency or hypocrisy, or even decency, and grounded by nothing larger than themselves, then this is the inevitable result. A collision of forces.

Desperation can do dangerous things. The left will cling to any new – hopefully radical — idea now that might be popular with their radical, angry base. All at an alarming speed. What is the next new thing? Who could predict? But it is not pretty.

The central rule is Republicans and conservatives, their enemies, should follow and be saddled by the law but Leftists? Not so much.

Right Ring | Bullright

Russian Election Meddling

Democrats want us to know that Russians tried to and meddled in our 2016 election. Gasp, “Holy Cow, Batman!” … feigned outrage wearing my best Casablanca face, “Shocked!”

This report article is excellent reading and a good resource.

Russia Meddled and Almost Nobody Cared, Until . .

By Steven J. Allen | June 23rd, 2018

Political leaders and journalists are deeply concerned about Russian meddling in U.S. elections. Took ’em long enough.

The Russians have been meddling in U.S. elections for at least 70 years. see

https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/23/russia-meddled-and-almost-nobody-cared-until/

Serving up a heaping helping of care for anyone interested. And the Dems have been in on, colluding in, the meddling about as long. Their cohorts in the media have been right there with them as long.

Which is why Ted Kennedy could have promised the US media’s help to Andropov, leader of the Communist Party, so they could speak directly to the American people in hopes of undermining Reagan. They demurred. But accepted Obama’s flexibility pledge.

That’s another thing that is not new with the left: the traitorous schemes of their commie roots. Now they are outraged? The Left suffers from a severe case of exposure.

Stranger In My Country

How people feel outcasts in their own homeland.

Democrats, and progressives and academics of the left, love to trot out the analogous poem on the statue of liberty. In fact, they like to use the statue as an arbiter of the immigration debacle. Of course that fits with their whole imagery campaign, closely aligned with their propaganda about America. It was just a poem, after all, not a law as they suggest. Law is too much for Leftists to grasp. We know not everyone has innocent or righteous motives. People cannot afford to be that naïve. Believing that all people, even immigrants, should follow the parameters of US law is disconcerting to the Left.

The problem I have with it is the disingenuous lie of it all. “Progressives” stand on that premise that this borderless, open-door policy disguised as a statue in the harbor makes America into some ideal, altruistic society. That actually makes me sick. You know, with the rhetoric that securing the border is unAmerican,

I wonder why it is that we as civil law-abiding people, with generally good aspirations and dreams, are turned into second-class citizens in our own country right before our eyes? It does not seem fair or right. Increasingly, it is clear that their great admiration for those ideals interpreted from the Stature of Liberty do not apply to the citizens who are already here residing all across America. That would be crazy if it were not so.

Think of all the ways conservatives or apolitical people are told that their desires or opinions don’t matter. We are the problem not the solution. Our yearnings are dismissed as irrelevant. But if you are one of the swashbuckling invaders of the US, you are suddenly the intended target of the Statue’s message. You are the new chosen, even though you or I have no choice about it.

That is the idea. Progressives are turning these “immigrants,” or whatever term you want to use, into the privileged class. Then, the only question would be is if it is intentional or not? Naturally, I happen to believe it is.

But if regular American citizens want to internalize those ideals, why do those aspirations stop at waters edge – right at border’s edge? Why do noble attributes about downtrodden and huddled masses only apply to incoming, however they get here?

Maybe someone should inform any real immigrants, perhaps sometime during their naturalization studies, that those perks or aspirations end when you become a US citizen — i.e. an American. So that point at immigrating or transition (illegal status) is as good as it gets. After that you become the problem, the toxic US citizenry. Soon we may no longer be the American dream, we might be dreaming of America.,

Right Ring | Bullright

Trump’s America: down is up and right is wrong, hate is the rage

I thought it would be fun to list some of the many ways things are now reversed or running backward from the previous 8 years. Maybe it’s upside down in general.

    • The stock market goes up and causes major panic in mainstream media.
    • Any good news is now considered toxic. Bad news is good news and rewarded. Thus leaks of any spec of bad. Progress is undermining gov’t or the Trump administration.
    • Anyone who supports, compliments, or credits Trump for anything is a default target of the Left. Anyone who condemns him in the most vile terms is celebrated.
    • If MSM has to report statistical good news, unemployment, jobs, etc., they must trace it to Obama. Credit Trump with nothing and Obama for everything.
    • The Left credits Obama with teeing up the economy. Well, if teeing up means standing on the throat of the economy. He set us up for growth nicely.
    • They credit Obama for good news when he’s been out of office for a year and half. Look, he had eight years. So why wasn’t he hitting these numbers?
    • Everyone should now, collectively, disrespect the office of the President — or anyone in his administration. Any respect for the office is punished.
    • We went from how could anyone say “no” to a job in the administration to how could anyone say “yes” to taking a job?
    • Being happy about the direction of the country is suddenly a bad thing.
    • Nazi comparisons are very in vogue now. Yes, after years of being taboo, everything in the US suddenly has a Nazi parallel.
    • You get punished or blacklisted for talking well about Trump.
    • Being in the state of resistance or sedition is the only acceptable position.
    • Democrats are resisting democracy.
    • You cannot impeach Obama on any grounds. The first Unimpeachable President. But now you can impeach Trump as soon as he enters office.
    • AG’s now have to be recused from everything; as opposed to being the private partisan wingman for the president and accountable for nothing.
    • The seditious cult of Resistance says Repubs supporting Trump are cult-like.

But you cannot bullet point this:

The Left started this narrative that Trump should be on trial, for what? Special Counsel hasn’t told us. Yet Hillary Clinton was given a pass on clear criminal corruption, and her investigation was a subversion of justice. Self defense became obstruction of justice.

Now the Left’s narrative is that we cannot go after Obama, the Clintons, or any of their loyalist corruptibles because they are no longer in office. They are private citizens, immune from suspicion. But they started the Trump investigation, or inquisition, when Trump was only a private citizen, a businessman and never before held office. Then they want to impeach him for the same trumped up, pre-office reasons.

Foreign relations changed too.

Half the populations of Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, Venezuela, and a good part of Mexico, woke up one morning and decided that they all have a guaranteed right to asylum status in America. An epidemic? All these people are hardly persecuted in their own country, with no viable options.

The Left all claims separating children from their families for their own safety, security and protection is inhumane. CPS and social service agencies across America have been doing exactly that to American citizens for decades and decades. The left called it protection.

I’m all for real solutions. So maybe the US should just annex the whole of Latin America and take over. Sound crazy? What’s crazier, having half their population showing up at our border claiming asylum or that? There is a sanctuary status for everyone in America but Americans. Americans are now second class citizens — at the bottom of the pecking order.

We would be called the evil “US empire” if we invaded Latin America and took over. They invade here and it is some guaranteed right. (which no one can quite explain) And when they do come, we have some moral and legal obligation to support, educate and employ them. So why not go down there and claim it? Might as well; they all want to come here.

Either peace out….or pissed off.

Right Ring | Bullright

Gen. Hayden sees DHS as Nazis

So here we go. let the Nazi comparisons begin. But they are done by Obama VIPs and the calcified left.

Gateway Pundit

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden just compared the US to Nazis.

Jim Hoft

Hayden is outraged that immigrants are separated from their children when they come into the country illegally.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/06/former-cia-director-compares-united-states-to-nazi-germany/

It doesn’t get any lower or worse than that.

I would add, or how many Jews willingly and gleefully jumped on trains to “camps” to try to improve their lives? (or gladly went unaccompanied)

Why should walking through the Resistance portal guarantee the validity of the absurd?

In November, what will we remember?

The strategy for Republicans to win in November amounts to one thing at the top of everything. National issues win. On the fly in less than 800 words.

What the public cares most about are the national issues, which is why Trump won the way he did. That didn’t change. The big picture is now optimistic but needs more clarity.

National issues simply means broad popular issues. The same as 2016. This is not to say that local issues are irrelevant, but the same national issues do affect people locally. It is like a template: budgets, tax cuts, strong military, security, illegal immigration, border enforcement, the wall, jobs and a cadre of others as part of the local mix. Add to that the rise of Sanctuary Cities, pols who support them, and Leftists’ attempts to usurp power.

But face it, local school budgets and zoning ordinances are not the stuff of a national election. Though notice how Democrats try to nationalize them? No, voters go to polls to vote on their congressional reps and, yes, now senators. (17th amend did that) See, Democrats try to nationalize everything to suit their agenda.

We, on the other hand, as conservatives and Republicans, have a great basket of issues people care about, including the blue collar workforce. The fact that unions haven’t caught on should not effect it. There is no one else standing up for people. And those people are still fed up, and now at all the Democrats’ obstruction.

And Democrats are flush with cultural and divisive issues which are not the people’s agenda. Of course, their identity politics requires they play that game. But it is a huge turnoff to voters. Why favor a segment of people when you can appeal to all people?

When people look at their finances, of course they are concerned about jobs, growth, the GDP and spending. Promising someone a free college education doesn’t solve problems, it creates them. Appealing to black lives matter rhetoric doesn’t help anyone. They are identity issues. Screaming racism solves what? Notice how Democrats, to their credit, try to identify with what are now Trump voters. They can’t, yet want to sound Trumpian. But that is the guy they want to impeach as soon as they get their chance.

Republicans cannot be naval gazing, just fighting with themselves, handing Democrats ammunition. Bob Corker went off his little rocker, again, to attack any Trump supporters. He called them “cult-like.” I have a real cult to introduce Corker to. The mirror.

Recently, former Congressman Bob Barr wrote a column explaining the threat this election poses to Republicans and Trump. Impeachment was a big part of it. Understanding that, and impeachment itself, should be a part of this election process. He said much the same thing about national issues. A clarion warning, it offers some inspiration.

Here is the only conclusion I come to: just take all those big, important issues people care about and put them up against the only major issue to Democrats, impeachment.

After all, what would Democrats say, if they were honestly nuanced: (for a sampler)

1) We are going to make you less safe.
2)We’ll make the border less secure — open it up to everyone!
3)We’re going to raise your taxes and explode the budget, at the same time.
4)We are going to tar and feather Trump, first, then Impeach him.
5)We want to roll back your tax cuts and the last election.
6)We want to make America sorry for electing Trump — revenge, payback.
7)We want more sanctuary cities, more ‘sanctuary dances’ like the Philly Mayor’s.
8)We want your guns too, what good is a majority if we can’t take people’s freedoms?
9)We want to stop investigating DOJ, and cover up the Deep State agenda.
10)We will take the abuse of power and obstruction to a whole new level.
11)We will ram our Obamacare back onto the front burner for the 11th year.
12)We would like to turn California into about 5 new Liberal states too — like the way we gerrymander districts. Eric Holder probably has a plan for that.

 Yet that is only for starters. We will just be rehearsing and warming up for phase two, our 2020 takeover. I think we’ve proven our electioneering prowess and capabilities.

 

Not much of a choice when you look at it that way.
We need to finish what we started. Let the Red Tide roll.

Right Ring | Bullright

A Paradox in Singapore

So there is the “deal” that this Singapore Summit is supposed to be about — yet to be fully defined and seen, if it is in the near future. Then there is the message that even this formal meeting sends to any other country. It seems to be a paradox

On one hand the attempt is to do something good toward eliminating a nuclear threat, while on the other the unavoidable message of what brought it about. Nuclear weapons. Are there benefits to threatening the US and our allies? At first blush, maybe there are.

The good side is that this is US and North Korea talking. Well, that is it is not Russia and China or six party talks. Who would want two of NK’s biggest allies in the talk of a deal?

Dennis Rodman made a surprise appearance in Singapore. He explained his speaking to Kim Jong Un years ago, relating the story he came back with a message for then President Obama. Rodman delivered the message and Obama would “not give him the time of day.” He said he was “brushed off”. Rodman was pissed off at Obama and wore a Make America Great Again hat on CNN. He had to go in hiding from all the death threats.

Right Ring | Bullright

Swamp Economy of Politics

Many people laughed at Bill Maher wanting the economy to crash, but it does show something more sinister.

Let’s not forget that the left politicized every department of government under Obama. Let’s not forget he weaponized much of it against his political opponents. Isn’t that what the Left wants government for?

So is it such a leap then that they are wishing for economic collapse to hurt Trump or drive him out, and hurt those supporting him? Not at all.

However, it says a modicum of truth about the left today. Forget all what liberals say they are about and care about. Like everything else, they want an economy politicized and weaponized against their political opponents. That is the economy they have in mind.

The next time they lecture us that they would be better stewards of the economy, they have revealed what they mean — an economy subservient to their political agenda.

They already showed us in all their protests and boycotts how they want to use the economy, to hurt their political enemies or reward their friends and allies. Just that Maher makes it clear. That is what the social justice warriors mean. It is only another extension of their ideological core and lust for power. Goal: a fully politicized, weaponized economy.

Right Ring | Bullright

After Action Report: Russia

One issue of a blog is you can tend to repeat things. But there are times and things that need repeated, maybe often. Such is the case with motives for the Russia, Trump investigation. Subversives have been very, very busy.

I said it before but the profound factor that sticks in my craw is the cause of the Trump investigation. To call it a Russia investigation is really pathetic. They talk about obstruction of justice. That ain’t a Russia issue. In my younger days, one of my most important lessons was it was not enough to know the how but you have to know the why, too.

In this Russia and Trump thing, we are hearing more and more about the how. I think we know most of it. But I notice they stay pretty silent on the why. We have seen the deep dark ways Obamafiles went about things, with dirty hands, and yet the media stays away from discussing why. Well, they speculated on every other related thing. How come they can’t come to grips to question that? At least Joe DiGenova has reminded us that they framed Trump in this entire thing in retaliation for the election. They try to diminish his integrity by calling it conspiracy theory. Oh, but it was a conspiracy, after all.

Obama had a Russia problem, which he could no longer cover up or just ignore. Even his underlings were prodding him to do something. Ala, along came Trump. He made the perfect scapegoat. Use the Russia problem as the reason to investigate Trump. And use it they did. That is the thing, the big lie, that hangs over this whole smoke cloud. The problem was the genesis for investigating Trump. It makes no sense to most people. That didn’t seem to matter. Push a narrative hard enough and it becomes a fact.

But it served the purpose. It got Obama out of the huge hole he had — an action deficit — to do something about Russia. It appeared like the Obama administration was doing something about Russia when its motives were clearly on Trump. It would bury the truth that he failed to respond, some say was complicit, in the Russia problem. It would alter his historical legacy by substituting Trump for the Russia problem. And it would be the perfect cover for investigating Trump and his entire campaign. Bad enough that it was not a last minute thought. It had been built over months. But the time came when he could formerly merge the two, supposedly seamlessly, so you couldn’t see where one ended and the other started — or where his complicit incompetence started or ended. Or where his malfeasance started because it never ended.

Now what we have is the Deep State running things, in the absence of Obama officials. And the Deep State has surfaced at their pinnacle of power in the DOJ. Sure they have ties throughout but where would their power be at its zenith? Of course when in control in the DOJ. Which is all why now Holder is calling on DOJ employees to defy the Trump administration as well as refuse to cooperate with Congress. As Holder explained in a telegraphed statement tailored directly to them, there have to be times when you just “say no” — to requests from outside the department. This of course would render the DOJ a sovereign power answerable and accountable to no one.

This does make it the most powerful department of the government. It will solidify the control of the Deep State and prevent it from being contested or routed out. But that is precisely why it is so important to challenge the DOJ, even if it is not desirable or popular. It was made to order to cover a multitude of sins of Obama’s. And it didn’t take much for the public to follow their (Obama’s and his lieutenants’) lead. People had been led by the string of mainstream media for years. And Media would do Deep State’s dirty work for them. Media had built up suspicion of Trump from the beginning. It was simply a matter of bringing all sides together: the media’s disdain for Trump, the left’s dissatisfaction and grief over the election, FBI and intelligence’s campaign of investigation and a plot against him, with a good old time-honored strategy or plot against their political opponents. It wouldn’t take much to unite them all in a choreographed coup even once Trump took power.

At the point Trump won the election, all efforts had to be shifted to resistance. Russia looked like even a better cover for that purpose. But the real point was that once the dubious Trump investigation began, right on through with their best efforts of broadening it into a huge counterintelligence investigation, along with Obama’s intentional urging, all was set firmly in place to take on a mind of its own. Especially with the absence of Obama officials after inauguration. Obama knew it would go on and on like they always do. The best part is Trump would be enshrined in one of Obama’s greatest failures — to respond to Russia with any substantial credibility. They wanted to saddle then bury Trump with Obama’s treasonous incompetence.

A solution to the Russia problem. It would no longer be his failure but a problem hung around Trump’s neck. It was also a political solution, the kind Obama liked. Better still it would continue on long after he left office. People would no longer complain or point to Obama as a weak link in one of the biggest elections and greatest upsets in history. They would blame Trump. This is how sinister these people are. The Deep State would cooperate without urging, because they would protect their radical czar.

In the process, Obama destroyed the credibility of the DOJ and FBI in his swamp of subversion. But who cares? Which is more valuable, saving Obama’s legacy or the FBI’s? We know which wins and it isn’t even close. Besides. the DOJ and FBI have their advocates to defend their reputations, at all costs, and they will. Mueller and Rosenstein will creatively defend the assault on the country and election by DOJ and intelligence. They can be counted on for that purpose. As usual, if successful, Obama would get away with offloading the entire blame for his treason and sedition onto Trump.

Obama and his vast number of cohorts throughout government suffered no accountability, at least so far. Can history ignore this choreographed corruption? How do you delete this treason, and now sedition, from the record?

Right Ring | Bullright

Motivegate: evil personified

It seems a lot of people are disturbed about the questions of motives, or lack of, surrounding the last 3 or so terror-styled events. I call them that because there are questions about calling them terrorism. I.e. Parkland, Las Vegas, Austin.

The second question has to be does it kelp to know the motive? I’m not sure it does. But I can see where motive matters legally when prosecuting criminals. There is still the matter of what they did, not just why.

Concentrating on motive can take our eye off of what they did. We have a need, it seems, to explain why. That can also create lots of conspiracy theories.

In Las Vegas, it leaves room for all kinds of speculation or theories. And there is a niche for conspiracies in this country. There may not be as many motive questions about Parkland since some vengeance or mental characteristics appear to apply. Austin is unique, at least so far, on motives. We don’t know yet or may not know.

But this not knowing seems unsettling to a lot of people. Again, does it change the events, or what happened? I don’t think so.

Another question is: was motive a major consideration to the perpetrator in these cases? I’m not sure, or don’t see it. And if there is no political motive, officials are reluctant to call it terrorism. Yet perps still do these things to instill fear in people by the act itself.

I am coming to the conclusion that maybe the why doesn’t matter all that much. I have to be content that we may never know for sure. Or it could be that they wanted their 15 minutes of fame. I am willing to accept not knowing, though it would be nice to know.

The conclusion though is what if — other than vain fame — there is no clear motive? What if they just did it because they could and because they wanted to? Obviously they could not talk themselves out of it. So it would have been up to someone or something else to intervene to stop it. Two of them had a suicidal pact in the end, Las Vegas and Austin. So they would not really be held accountable.

I am convinced that some people do things just because they can, or because they are fascinated by it. Or maybe it is fantasy they want to carry out? Never mind that it effects so many other lives of innocent people. They overlook that or don’t care.

In the end, I have to be comfortable with not knowing. There is another possibility the person wanted it to be a mystery that everyone is left to solve. Sort of a ha ha, figure it out. To me that can be dangerous. I don’t have to play that game. Then again, maybe these madman killers just want events to speak for themselves? Maybe that is the point.

On the other hand, people sometimes do what they do simply because they can. Maybe there is a void conscience, whatever. I can look at it that they simply had enough drive or ambition to commit the atrocities. Maybe they want to find out if they are really capable of carrying it out in some twisted plan? One possibility is as bad as the next.

Closure should not require knowing a motive. That can be a game. We know what they did.

When asked about the Austin bomber, the family said they could not believe it. “He was a nice kid.” The brother of the Las Vegas shooter said he was a caring guy, it was a total shock — that could be a motive itself. It is a symptom of terrorism. In the Parkland case, you could say it looked like a foregone conclusion that too many people ignored. Seems it is either beyond belief that the person did it or completely predictable.

What about pure evil? I think that is an explanation in itself. People who do evil acts are evil. The acts define thems. Maybe they don’t need a reason? It is self-definition.

We are left to dig through all the evidence and clues to make some theory plausible. Some people get hung up on the why as if there is, or must be, some explanation. Still the rest of us just sit disturbed and offended by the events.

However, these events do raise collateral questions about law enforcement or botched warnings, missed clues. Many more questions than there are answers.

Right Ring | Bullright

The leakers get leaked on

The guys who normally do the leaking get leaked on, then cry fowl.

House Intel Committee Republicans leaked texts between Mark Warner, lobbyist for Russian oligarch to media: Report

by Melissa Quinn | March 1, 2018 | Washington Examiner

Text messages exchanged by Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., and a lobbyist for a Russian oligarch were reportedly leaked to Fox News by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee, the Senate Intelligence Committee found.

Two congressional offices told the New York Times the Senate Intelligence Committee’s leaders, Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Warner, raised the issue of the leak with House Speaker Paul Ryan during a rare meeting.

As is usual, Democrats only problem is you knowing what they don’t want you to know.

Warner and Adam Waldman, the lobbyist, exchanged messages for several months in 2017 via a secure messaging app. During their conversations, Warner tried to set up a meeting with Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer who wrote the salacious dossier about President Trump.

Other than that, they want to leak everything they can.

Burr and Warner denounced the leak of the texts in a joint statement last month, saying they were based on “incomplete information.” More

Isn’t that what they always say after something they don’t like? It’s what they said about the Nunes Memo that it was based on incomplete information. They want you to think there is more information — which you aren’t privy to or cannot know — that aquits their conduct. You just do not and cannot know it. (trust us)

Similar to saying “you don’t know the full story,” when the entire story does not change the fact of what they did. It just muddies up the waters. That’s something all Clintonistas learned well. I’m trying to avoid the mental picture of golden showers in the Capitol.

PSA on Immigration

This is a friendly Public Service Announcement

Okay, sports fans: this is the USA and our immigration policy should not be designed, written and run by immigrants. And no amount of “this is not who we are” is going to change that.

 

Comprende??

Dueling Sides, Strategic Craziness and Mission of Sedition

Anything talked about now involves speculation. So this is speculative. But I don’t mind talking about it in this age of fake news and fake narratives. Why not?

Press is making a big controversy over the spending bill coming in less than four days. What’s new? That is where the fact ends and their disingenuous strategy starts.

Look, under all this radicalism liberals are foisting on America, I don’t know what Reagan would do, I don’t know what George Dubya Bush would do? I am only glad we have Trump in the White House in this situation than say a Jeb or a Mittens.

Now a government shutdown looms and Dems are playing politics as usual. They’ve tied the DACA issue to the functionality of government. When they base the entire purpose of our government on the persistent whims of illegal aliens, where are we? They have admitted that this is their only political leverage. And, like dynamite in their hands, Dems cannot let it sit idle. They have to abuse it, even to scorched-earth ends.

This is a hostage crisis where radical Democrats are blackmailing our government and our national security — be it our military, southern border, security, or daily functions — all because of their radical political agenda.. It does teach us something though. This is what we have to expect. What won’t they do? Trump exposed it. I’ve been saying for years that these are hardcore radicals, as ideologically driven as the caliphate of ISIS. They will use any means to their ends. They spent 8 years politicizing all areas of government.

So I am grateful we have Trump instead of a wet noodle. We needed a disruptor. All Dems have left is to try holding our government hostage. Including the use of Deep State to do it.

With all this in mind, I am trying to find words to describe it in the State of the Union. The State is: Radicalized dysfunction? Thermonuclearized Constitutional meltdown?

So, the speculation is wide open to what they will do, how far they will go, who all they will hurt. Yet it is just the beginning for Democrats. This is how they negotiate by using government force. Coercion and sedition do have common alliances there.

They are well down the road on their Mission of Sedition. The only speculation is how far down that road they will travel at 90 mph, without touching the brakes?

You could compare Dems to leaches. They find the most important thing or event happening, or scheduled to happen, and attach their political strategy to it like leaches. These are the people who politicize everything and anything for their agenda. Let the speculation begin, though not without a basis for it.

Here is another fact to factor into any speculation. The fake media, led by CNN, has already branded Trump’s supposed “sh*thole” comments a “scandal”. Words are now a scandal. Wouldn’t scandal more apply to holding government hostage to illegal aliens, or boycotting the State of the Union Speech? That is something actually in the Constitution, not the words he uses.

Now it comes down to words, whether or not something can be done. Of course even that is a one-way rule. It doesn’t matter what they say. In fact, the more radical their language is on the left the better they like it. But for Trump, “he shouldn’t say that”… or he is going to start a nuclear war with his rhetoric. Nonsense, actually the left has been whistling past nuclear threats for a long time. They made fun of Dubya for how he said “nuclear” and attacked his words “axis of evil” as hurtful, inflammatory rhetoric.

Yet when there was a threat of incoming missile to Hawaii this weekend, CNN didn’t even originally report it. No, they were too preoccupied with anti-Trump, words and rhetoric, to interrupt it with a missile threat in the Pacific. By Monday, they spun around to rail against this false-threat as exhibit A in their attack on Trump’s competence. They literally worried about Trump’s words over a real-time threat. Once media gets a narrative on its tongue, reality is of no consequence. Imagine what they would do in a nuclear situation?

We’ve seen enough. We know how they operate. They chose the rhetorical side of some mad-man like “rocket man” over Trump. They take Soviet-style talking points over Trump. They worried about the Trump campaign looking for dirt on Hillary, while Hillary was actually neck-deep in digging dirt about Trump from Russian spies, a foreign agent and government (politicized) intelligence. See how this works?

Not only weren’t media like CNN concerned about a hypothetical incoming missile, they don’t give a sh*t about missile defense itself. When Obama told Medvedev to tell Putin he promised to be more flexible after his last election, they didn’t even sigh. Apparently they knew he was giving up the store but, like Obama, they didn’t even care. Now the word “shithole” offends their ears? That word sends a “signal” around the world.

That isn’t speculation.

What is there really to speculate about the way Democrats would handle any situation, including the loss of an election, or the fallout from a missile or nuclear strike? Blame seems to be all that matters — political blame that is — to the left, not the real consequences of events due to their ignorance. What is worse: the speculation about what they would/will do…. or what they have already done?

What they do now? The Dems have already blown up any playbook or rulebook. This is that strange eerie place that no one ever considered before. Is taking a nuclear hit better than having Trump in office? Is making friends with enemies like Kim Jong Un preferable over giving Trump an accomplishment? Is defending the Iran deal, and whatever treason was used in getting it, easier than defending America with Trump in the White House? Is shutting down government over border security just a natural choice to protect illegal aliens, for them? But maybe it is not really speculating what Democrats do now, or what they will do in the future. Maybe the script is already written, but no one is reading it?

Moreover, exactly what is the State of the Union at the present?

Right Ring | Bullright

Perpetual deals

Department of Negotiation is officially open. And what a grand opening it was.

Trump was in full swing prodding Congress it has to do something on DACA. Of course the sticking point for Dems is border security. They want nothing to do with a wall.

I’ll give them the benefit that there may be a negotiation to be had. If only Dems will accept the wall. The people already decided on it, they want it. But why don’t the Dems want a wall? Why won’t they agree to one? I saw Jorge Ramos run out to the media afterward bitching about a wall. It’s been decided. What is the problem with a wall?

No one has told us why and they cannot explain their opposition to a wall.

Now suppose they get this negotiation done. It might solve a singular problem. What will happen is it would start a race for the next group of people in line to demand their deal or fix. You know how these illegal organizations work, they continue incessant demands.

Right Ring | Bullright

The Coup Afoot

What’s a little coup between political enemies? But when we use the term coup the Left and media get so bent out of shape. Well, they always do when you point out what they are doing.

Treat ‘Mental Health’ Talk Against Trump Like The Coup Attempt It Is

‘Many lawyer groups have actually volunteered, on their own, to file for a court paper to ensure that the security staff will cooperate with us. But we have declined, since this will really look like a coup…’

By Mollie Hemingway — January 8, 2018 | The Federalist

In the second season of the TV show “24,” President David Palmer (Dennis Haysbert) is removed from office for failing to launch a war against three Middle East countries purportedly behind a nuclear attack on U.S. soil.

Palmer has reason to doubt his intelligence agencies’ assurances of who was behind it, and it turns out the attack was orchestrated by a cabal of business and military leaders who want to launch a war for personal gain. The means by which Palmer is removed from office during the 4:00-5:00a hour on Day 2 is the 25th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, a portion of which reads:

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide… to the Senate and the…House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Palmer’s chief of staff explains, “it seems there are people, cabinet members, who question whether you’re fit to continue as chief executive.” The conniving vice president says in the cabinet meeting putting the president on trial, “What I intend to show is a pattern of erratic behavior since this crisis started.” Using half-true innuendos and rumors as well as deliberately false information, he convinces enough of the cabinet to depose Palmer. In other words, Palmer is the victim of a bloodless coup. …/

Read more: http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/08/treat-mental-health-talk-against-trump-like-the-coup-attempt-it-is/

Good article, but a coup it is. They won’t stop for lack of success. They intend to keep at it. They got this far. So the convenient book by Michael Wolff fit perfectly into their narrative. Why is that? Because Wolff knows exactly what he and they are trying to do.

Wolff plans on having a key role. To even admit what the purpose and intent is validates exactly what it is. More like a Fake News Coup. A bloodless coup, but every bit as nasty otherwise. The book, conveniently timed as it is, confirms all Leftists’ narratives up to this point. Since Obama, belief has been everything to the left. Truth is not a factor. Listen to him, Wolff goes out of his way to confirm every slanderous claim and accusation they have made, like he is leading a parade. And garbage in equals garbage out.

Radicalization in prisons

Why would anyone want to allow radicalization in prison to be any easier than it already is?

Foolishness at the BOP: Allowing a Terrorist to Radicalize Others

by *Patrick Dunleavy
IPT News
December 29, 2017

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. That saying may best describe the Federal Bureau of Prisons administrators who operate the New York City’s Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC). How foolish were they? Well, they gave the inmates there the blueprints to make a bomb. And if that wasn’t stupid enough, they also gave them radical Islamic literature by noted terrorists Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki. These were no ordinary inmates who had all this material while in custody. One was an ISIS sympathizer, one was an al-Shabaab member, and another was convicted of attacking U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan.

How did this fiasco occur you ask, as if this storyline couldn’t get any worse? The materials were distributed by convicted terrorist Ahmad Khan Rahimi, better known as the Chelsea Bomber. Rahimi was in MCC awaiting sentencing in January after he was convicted of setting off two improvised explosive devices in 2016, one in New York and one in New Jersey. A third device set by Rahimi failed to detonate. The bomb that exploded in the Chelsea neighborhood in New York City injured more than a dozen people. Luckily, no one was killed.

This egregious breach in prison security protocol was outlined last week in a letter from Acting U.S. Attorney Joon H. Kim, Southern District of New York, to U.S. District Judge Richard Berman. Among the security breaches Kim informed the court of was that Rahimi was “attempting to radicalize fellow inmates” other inmates. Investigators found the radical literature on Rahimi’s electronic devices, and he received copies back during the discovery process.

It is no surprise to learn that terrorists radicalize other inmates. …/

More: https://www.investigativeproject.org/7165/foolishness-at-the-bop-allowing-a-terrorist-to

(IPT Sr. Fellow Patrick Dunleavy is the former Deputy Inspector General for New York State Department of Corrections and author of The Fertile Soil of Jihad. He currently teaches a class on terrorism for the United States Military Special Operations School.)

Should this be any surprise? Why are the prisons allowing or looking the other way at this? You would think material like that must be strictly prohibited and impossible to get.

Radicalizing other inmates is not a new phenomena. Sounds like another dep of justice issue that should have a red flag on it. And who knew prisoners had electronic devices? What’s that about? You know MSM isn’t going to talk about it.

Rice the evil spewer

In Obama’s second term, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach argued why Rice should be kept from Sec of State, but because of Rwanda.

“But what is not arguable is that she deserves to be denied the post for a different reason [than Benghazi] altogether: Rwanda. What emerges when taken together — Rice’s weak response in Benghazi, blaming the murder of four Americans on a stupid video, and her shameful lack of action in the Rwandan genocide — is a career diplomat of singular weakness, lacking the spine or muscularity to assert American moral influence in the world.

Rice was part of Bill Clinton’s National Security Team that in 1994 refused any involvement whatsoever in the Rwanda genocide, leaving more than 800,000 men, women, and children to be hacked to death by machete in the fastest genocide ever recorded.”

Both events argue against any noble-good notion, when she was involved in both.

Rice now writes in a NYT op-ed article: “Susan Rice: When America No Longer Is a Global Force for Good

“President Trump’s National Security Strategy marks a dramatic departure from the plans of his Republican and Democratic predecessors, painting a dark, almost dystopian portrait of an “extraordinarily dangerous” world characterized by hostile states and lurking threats. There is scant mention of America’s unrivaled political, military, technological and economic strength, or the opportunities to expand prosperity, freedom and security through principled leadership — the foundation of American foreign policy since World War II.

In Mr. Trump’s estimation, we live in a world where America wins only at others’ expense. There is no common good, no international community, no universal values, only American values. America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy, or a “shining city on a hill,” as in President Reagan’s vision. The new strategy enshrines a zero-sum mentality: “Protecting American interests requires that we compete continuously within and across these contests, which are being played out in regions around the world.” This is the hallmark of Mr. Trump’s nationalistic, black-and-white “America First” strategy.”#

America is no longer “a global force for good,” as in President Obama’s last strategy. So she claims Obama’s strategy, or policy, was “a global force for good.” Fancy that when it was exactly the opposite in action. It consistently stood in the face of a good legacy.

The ME and their Muslim Brotherhood obsession, then the anti-Israel platform, the Benghazi debacle — with or without the gun running — botched with mistakes and denials from the beginning, the Syrian issue of mixed messages and disappearing red lines, Russian influence throughout, the bad Iranian deal at all costs to us, ignorance on N Korea, and ISIS sprouting an official Caliphate in Syria and Iraq, reactionary spiteful withdrawal from Iraq, depleting our military, politicizing military intell and rules of engagement, not enforcing laws here in this country and politicizing the DOJ and intelligence.

Add to it the radicalization of government at home, with a war on energy, and lies about current events that were impossible to ignore. (the media really tried their best) I won’t even get into the racism for lack of space.

So we’re to infer all that was part of a “global force for good. If it was, then I’d like to know what a global force of empowering evil would look like? So all the above were part of the force for good? But now she has the arrogance and audacity to call Trump basically a force for bad. Here fellow comrades like Rhodes and Pfeiffer were on social media calling for the obituaries of current leadership. I hate to rain on her parade — or march — but the last 8 years was no picnic or vacation from evil. In fact, it was awash in it and corruption. Yet hearing her call it a force for good is hilarious.

This week we confirmed that Obama’s administration was so eager to get an Iran deal at any cost that they stood down on actions against Hezbollah’s international crime and terrorism operation. Let’s forget the Uranium deal for the moment. Politicizing and weaponizing government made it a force for good?

Now that all the skeletons are falling out of the closets (there aren’t enough closets) she is pointing fingers at the Trump administration, like her comrades. That rapid, immediate withdrawal from Iraq set off a chain of events. At home, Obama was so worried about his scummy legacy that he couldn’t have events called terrorism.

But all of that was part of some “global force for good.” What’s her definition of good?

Then back up a moment. She also called Trump’s policies a zero sum game that requires everyone else lose in order for us to win. We haven’t seen anything like that. Trump hasn’t called for that. Actually, he holds that they are winning while we are winning. But contrast that with Obama where we constantly lost on the deals and the world, or others, always won. That was more the zero-sum game. We weren’t really meant to win in Obama’s view.

She then goes for “enshrining Mr. Trump’s harsh anti-immigration policies, from the border wall to ending family preferences and limiting refugee admissions.” Again, contrast that with Obama’s mixed signals about border control, catch and release, and unconstitutional DACA program, and opening us to external threats in wartime. Refugees that were at least partly created by his own policies of complicit ignorance.

The perpetual do-gooder also made a policy of ignoring Christian persecutions while favoring Muslim refugees. He could only point to one major accomplishment of getting Osama bin Laden, but allowed a caliphate to form and spread, referring to it as JV. Yet he didn’t really take on that JV squad. Instead, he simply said it was not Islamic. Imagine that, a caliphate that is not Islamic? Oh, he banned using accurate terms to describe that caliphate of terrorism.

Enough contradictions in there to show she is shoveling more bullshit? What’s worse is they know, but have a constant need to deceive, try to control the narrative and revise Obama’s entire legacy. The people didn’t see it his way either, which showed in the election. Again, argue against the results and legitimacy of the election. Now…. they are going to lecture us on being a do-gooder? How about people just do what is right, and forget this false do-good narrative? Although I used to think that doing the right thing was being a force for good!

Right Ring | Bullright

Bombs Away… goodbye mosque

Well, in other news:

Trump Breaks Obama’s Rules And Bombs Mosque Killing the ISIS’ Entire Iraqi Leadership

Bright Stars

Obama’s old rules of Mosques being off limits is off the table. President Trump authorized an air strike on a mosque in Mosul, Iraq, which has wiped out the entire remaining Iraqi ISIS leadership. This comes as the organization collapses all around itself.

Read: http://www.brightstars.me/2017/12/18/trump-breaks-obamas-rules-bombs-mosque-killing-isis-entire-iraqi-leadership/

But think of all the IEDs and suicide missions it saved.

Rules Of Engagement = Destroy it! I’d say it was an extremely efficient use of a bomb.