The Trauma From Obama

As the media is all about analyzing Trump’s first hundred days with an accusatory eye, I thought it was time to take the temperature of the country. That’s putting it mildly.

I like the medical analogy with America as the patient. So we elected Obama, whether you want to look at that like contracting a chronic illness or severe injury is beside the point.

It’s more like we suffered some ailment that grew progressively worse over the 8 years Obama was in office. Not enough care or attention was given it; in fact it got none. Then, since the election, and more recently, we were treated to a parade of opposition.

I finally diagnosed into his second term that it seemed America was in Trauma — becoming a slave to its condition. You knew it wasn’t getting any better and watched it get worse. After the shock wore off there was still a lot of trauma. So “no drama Obama” caused a whole lot of trauma.

Right into Trump’s inauguration that Obama trauma continued. One thing I’ve learned from people who studied the subject is the body does not heal itself fully while it is in trauma. And if you know anything about x-rays, they cannot get real clear pictures of something with so much trauma around it.

So we had to shake off that trauma from Obama. Not easy. He had infected every part of the nation, from one end to the other, and divided the country by every measure possible. He also politicized about every part of government. No wonder we were in that state.

Even when Trump came into office, it was immediately obvious there were Obama loyalists, hangers on, and Deep State opposition almost everywhere. Leftists began a stampede of protests. Democrats promised to oppose anything and everything.

Yet here we were still a traumatized nation. reluctant to provide us any relief. Obama’s loyalists came out kicking the injury, reviving the pain at every opportunity. It’s hard for one to deny the state we were in under Obama. The first step would be to rid ourselves of the trauma to let healing begin.

However, can you really ever heal from something as traumatic as Obama’s legacy? I guess you would also have to talk to abuse victims to examine that part. And yes, it is possible to be in trauma while also being abused.

RightRing | Bullright

Let’s just call her ‘Spreadsheet Suzie’

Report: Susan Rice Ordered ‘Spreadsheets’ of Trump Campaign Calls

by Joel B. Pollak4 Apr 2017 | Breitbart

President Barack Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, allegedly ordered surveillance of Donald Trump’s campaign aides during the last election, and maintained spreadsheets of their telephone calls, the Daily Caller reports.

The alleged spreadsheets add a new dimension to reports on Sunday and Monday by blogger Mike Cernovich and Eli Lake of Bloomberg News that Rice had asked for Trump aides’ names to be “unmasked” in intelligence reports. The alleged “unmasking” may have been legal, but may also have been part of an alleged political intelligence operation to disseminate reports on the Trump campaign widely throughout government with the aim of leaking them to the press.

At the time that radio host Mark Levin and Breitbart News compiled the evidence of surveillance, dissemination, and leaking — all based on mainstream media reports — the mainstream media dismissed the story as a “conspiracy theory.”

Now, however, Democrats are backing away from that allegation, and from broader allegations of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, as additional details of the Obama administration’s alleged surveillance continue to emerge.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/04/report-susan-rice-ordered-spreadsheets-trump-campaign-calls/

Oh no, nothing to see here, media can go back to sleep. Spreadsheet Suzie’s got this!

More on another Breitbart article on Rice’s interview with Andrea Mitchel (lovefest)

“I leaked nothing to nobody, and never have, and never would.”

Rice: “I can’t get into any specific reports … what I can say is there is an established process.”

Well, so there’s an “established process” for surveillance, I take it?
And Spreadsheet Suzie was right on it.

Susan Rice center of Unmasking-gate

Washington Free Beacon

Susan Rice, former President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, reportedly requested on several occasions the identities of “masked” U.S. persons in intelligence reports linked to President Trump’s transition and campaign. The revelation contradicts Rice’s past comments on March 22, when she claimed she knew “nothing” about the intelligence reports.

White House lawyers discovered Rice’s dozens of requests last month, during a National Security Council review of the “government’s policy on ‘unmasking’ the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally,” Eli Lake of Bloomberg reported Monday, citing U.S. officials.

But Rice, who Newsweek once called Obama’s “right-hand woman,” denied during a PBS interview last month having any knowledge of the intelligence community’s alleged incidental surveillance of Trump’s transition team.

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/flashback-susan-rice-said-i-know-nothing-unmasking-trump-officials/

Why does that make perfect sense?

The person who in 2012 told every major news network that a video caused the Benghazi attack. Obama’s Legacy of Lies’ right-hand deceiver.

Ying and Yang on Obama vs. Trump

At this point, all reporting by mainstream media must be questioned. There is no benefit of belief. Disbelief is the instinctive reaction for much of the public.

No wonder Trump took a pass on the WH Correspondents’ Dinner. Good move.

Just over a week ago McCabe told Reince Priebus that reporting on Russia was wrong. Remember they raised questions about Priebus even asking the FBI or Comey to help correct the record about the claims.

But James Comey and the FBI said they could not or would not do anything to correct those reports. And they said they would have no comment about it.

Here is a subsequent NYT report (Feb 23) on the details

WASHINGTON — White House chief of staff Reince Priebus asked a top FBI official to dispute media reports that President Donald Trump’s campaign advisers were frequently in touch with Russian intelligence agents during the election, a White House official said late Thursday.

The official said Priebus’ request came after the FBI told the White House it believed a New York Times report last week describing those contacts was not accurate. As of Thursday, the FBI had not stated that position publicly and there was no indication it planned to.

The New York Times reported that U.S. agencies had intercepted phone calls last year between Russian intelligence officials and members of Trump’s 2016 campaign team.

Priebus’ discussion with FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe sparked outrage among some Democrats, who said he was violating policies intended to limit communications between the law enforcement agency and the White House on pending investigations.

“The White House is simply not permitted to pressure the FBI to make public statements about a pending investigation of the president and his advisers,” said Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. …/

The FBI would not say whether it had contacted the White House about the veracity of the Times report.

Forward to Trump’s accusations of Obama’s administration wiretapping the Trump Tower. The president suggests it, then they demand proof in unison. Yawn.

So they have no proof of collusion with Russia over hacking into emails, ostensibly to “influence our election.” But they go on talking about it as if it were so.

Then we have these reports on the surveillance and investigation of Trump over many months now. Yet as soon as Trump questions that it is dismissed as if there is nothing there. We know it was going on. There was an ongoing investigation, right?

For media, how can they complain that there is no wiretapping surveillance issue at the very time they don’t question the existence on the Russian claims. Now Clapper goes out to say there was no FISA warrant and no evidence of collusion, of Trump’s campaign, with the Russians. Why are we still investigating and taking the collusion as if it were established? Yet they decline to take seriously the wiretap, surveillance claims. Really?

As to Comey, he cannot correct media reports about the collusion claims. But as soon as wiretap claims were leveled, he demands DOJ correct them, then does it himself. His reason was to protect the integrity of the FBI. Again, really? He says he is “incredulous” at the accusation. Within weeks he does two completely opposite things.

Apparently he doesn’t care about the integrity of the presidency. I can’t imagine that going on under Obama. I suppose, in that case, the public would have a right to know. He did come out to make statements clearing Hillary. Now, we don’t have a reason to know that a presidential campaign or members of it were under surveillance. When is it illegal to speak to Russians or their diplomat anyway?

In NRO Andrew McCarthy states about wiretaps that:

A traditional wiretap requires evidence amounting to probable cause of commission of a crime. A FISA wiretap requires no showing of a crime, just evidence amounting to probable cause that the target of the wiretap is an agent of a foreign power. (A foreign power can be another country or a foreign terrorist organization.) Read more

All right, how would they investigate the Russian connections (or lack thereof) without some sort of surveillance? Couple that with a former CIA chief back in August endorsing Hillary Clinton. He used his intelligence credentials to brandish this op-ed claim:

“In the intelligence business, we would say that Mr. Putin had recruited Mr. Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.”

Coincidentally, that is the same definition used in a FISA court that a person is either a foreign power or agent of a foreign power.

He closed with this prescient note: “My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the C.I.A. This is what I am doing now.”

He lent his expertise and experience as the justification for saying this about Trump and endorsing Hillary. Using that word “agent” of Russian Federation is significant. When have you ever heard a candidate called that, with no proof? All based on his professional career, so he claimed. That was a few months before the supposed wiretap.

They use the bio: “Michael J. Morell was the acting director and deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013.”

The same Mike Morell equated the Russian hacking with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. And as Breitbart reported, he now works for Philip Reines, longtime Clinton aide and loyalist. Let’s also remember that Morell was involved in the writing of the Benghazi talking points.

The investigation report on Benghazi determined, in contradiction to Morell’s and Obama officials’ claims, “the talking points were “deliberately” edited to “protect the State Department” — whatever Morell claimed.

“These allegations accuse me of taking these actions for the political benefit of President Obama and then secretary of state Clinton. These allegations are false,” Morell said.

So the report directly contradicts what he said in testimony.

He recently told a reporter in December that:

“To me, and this is to me not an overstatement, this [Russia hacking] is the political equivalent of 9/11. It is huge and the fact that it hasn’t gotten more attention from the Obama administration, Congress, and the mainstream media, is just shocking to me.”

Then they also injected the story about a dossier of BS that threw in all kinds of claims. That made its way into presidential briefings, of Obama and Trump, claiming it involved blackmailable info. So they back fed an unsubstantiated report (political op-research) into intelligence, with the help of McCain dropping it on FBI’s doorstep. Then it was surfaced to the top of intelligence, into the PDB.

Think, the Obama administration had wiretapped (*correction: subpoenaed phone records) James Rosen and his family’s phones. So far, many officials have said there is nothing showing proof Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians. Yet nothing prevents Democrats and some in the media from saying that Russia hacked or interfered with the election, when there is no proof of either. Then insinuating that it is connected to Trump.

RightRing | Bullright

Blocked and Rolled Media – Press

You know it’s a bad day for media when they have to report that they’ve been blocked by WH press dept.  You know,  this may be the kind of prohibition that I could get behind.

[NYT] WASHINGTON — Journalists from The New York Times and two other news organizations were prohibited from attending a briefing by President Trump’s press secretary on Friday, a highly unusual breach of relations between the White House and its press corps.

Reporters from The Times, CNN and Politico were not allowed to enter the West Wing office of the press secretary, Sean M. Spicer, for the scheduled briefing. Aides to Mr. Spicer allowed in reporters from only a handpicked group of news organizations that, the White House said, had been previously confirmed to attend.

Organizations allowed in included Breitbart News, the One America News Network and The Washington Times, all with conservative leanings. Journalists from ABC, CBS, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, and Fox News also attended.

More: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-briefing.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

Crying and whining media is offended. They ought to check their press privilege.

Get ready for Terrorists Lives Matter

Terrorists Lives Matter is now cranking up the protestors against Trump’s anti-terrorism Executive Order that bans and restricts travel from certain countries. From JFK to the Statue of Liberty, to the editorial pages, leftists take to protesting.

Gee, could it be a useable voting bloc? The professors of crisis are hard at work.

And the activist news media falls right in line to advocate for terrorism. Then they start with the “but this is a recruiting tool for ISIS” hogwash. Any hope that the left will wake up and see daylight is vastly exaggerated. At least they’ve been exposed for who they are. Don’t these people know that terrorism/terrorists have been extorting our laws for decades? No, they don’t care. But the left desperately tries to super-spin it as a gift to ISIS playing right into their hands

The people who advocated for Unconstitutional Executive Orders before, now defiantly protest legal ones. Even notable law professor Johnathon Turley said precedent of law is very much in Trump’s favor for his actions. That doesn’t stop the ACLU.

Suddenly Trump’s Executive Order causes the left to bend further for terrorists’ agenda. Yet we are the bad guys? Give me a freaking break. The word “resist” is now their slogan. Wow, instead of encouraging and welcoming terrorists into the country, the president tries to halt it and they cry resist. But we’re helping terrorists?

Hints of this came in December, when the black liberation groups honored terrorists like the one on OSU campus as victims. It seems like just name any anti-life issue or event and leftists can get behind and rally to it. And they’ll find a way to justify their support. Since everything is reversed now, they will support the tyranny of anarchy over the rule of law. Terrorists or shooters become victims and police become the problem. A border wall is offensive but illegal immigration is not. Anything opposing their agenda is called racism and condemned.

A two teir system has emerged. If you are an illegal “undocumented” alien, you qualify for special protections and immunities from the law. Whole cities now stand up and say they’ll go to any lengths to secure and protect illegals from the rule of law — even if they commit crimes. See, it is completely backwards. Problem after problem and issue after issue.

An entire city has to be inconvenienced and held hostage because of their agenda to support illegals. The hell with lawful citizens, special evolving protections need to be granted for law breakers and illegal aliens. And then they blame the root cause for their unlawful situation on the rest of America. How fair and just is that?

Before their favorite line sprouts from everywhere: as I have said over and over, it is not about “who we are” — it is all about who they (terrorists and Islamists) are.

What the heck, another week under Trump and another protest. I’d call that “winning’.

RightRing | Bullright

Game on: media goes scorched lie

It did not take media long, to uniformly do what they refused for eight years to do. I’m talking about calling the president a liar.

Nicholas Kristof actually asked CNN’s Don Lemon “what are you calling it here?” They both agreed that the proper official term should be “lie” to describe what Trump said on the crowd size. With that it has become normalized to call the president a liar.

That’s right, we know they refused every way to use, or even allow, the term lie to be used about Obama. It not only was wrong, but unjustified then.

Remember all the lies if you like your plan you can keep it; if you like your doctor you can keep it. If you have insurance this will not affect me. Illegals will not be getting Obamacare. Remember the not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS? What about the big lie on Benghazi that a video was the cause of “protests” which caused 4 Americans to be slaughtered while our government and officials went AWOL?

Or what about the recent lie that Obama’s administration was scandal-free for eight years. But it is now normalized, and highly encouraged, to call President Trump a liar. Not just voices on the margins but mainstream news organizations.

Kristof even points to NYT having a meeting to decide to use the term. And it only took them 4 days to whip out the Lie-card. CNN pulled it out the day after inauguration. The most trusted name in news lulled it right out. Now all the media can agree.

Truth is media have been calling Trump a liar all along. Just that now as president they can call him a liar, sort of gives them a real thrill. It probably also thrills them to freely use the term now when they were so adamant against using it on Obama.

In September 2016, NYT said:

As the Times gets more comfortable with the “L” word, it will be interesting to see whether other news outlets do the same.

But then, to the media, this is war. Any means to defeat Trump are acceptable, including twisting every statement and lying about him. Of course they will excuse this saying that is how Obama was treated, but it wasn’t .And they wouldn’t stand for that treatment of Obama. Since it is Trump, they can savor every opportunity to use the “lie” word.

And, well, he was already called “illigitimate” by a sitting, senior congressman a week before he was sworn in. Lie or liar just has that extra zing to it.

Remember the good old says when liberals analyzed every use of the the term lie down to some politically correct sludge?

These were the same people propelling the “hands up, don’t shoot” lie about Brown and Ferguson. Remember they had those on location reports saying “mostly peaceful protests”.

RightRing | Bullright

First WH Press Conference under Trump

Do not attempt to adjust your TV, there is no problem with your set. This is an actual press briefing from the White House, do not be alarmed!

Since media has been so used to being spoon-fed their talking points from the Press room — speaking that liberal code language they’re all versed in — an actual, real press briefing is so out of the ordinary. The WH may add press passes for four Skype connections.

Obama’s old system will be exactly reversed: scripted talking points will come from hostile media in an attempt to put up a united front against the WH. That is backwards from the top-down flow, Obama model from the White House that successfully tried to manipulate news coverage. Just like darling sycophants, they followed in lockstep.

Obama, when leaving, left his instructions for how toughly media should cover Trump — knowing full well how his WH press corps treated him. Both Obama and press/media had gotten so used to their cozy relationship. Of course they did not want that to change. Try to imagine what a press briefing under Hillary Clinton would have looked like, complete with cake and all the party favors. And they could safely ignore their job, once again.

Darkness can’t understand the light

As the Inauguration came and went, sliding into the sunset, the media took to their standard talking points. (now as old as some redwoods in CA) “Dark.”

So they wasted no time applying their favorite term to Trump’s inaugural address, “dark”. I thought it rather uplifting and encouraging myself. Well, what does it matter what most people thought of his speech, while liberals scramble to define it? Even their adjectives are old — as old as darkness itself.

All of a sudden everything is dark. All of a sudden it is a divided nation. What has Obama done for a divided nation? He caused it then ran off the stage, only to crawl back on as the nations Chief Critic. His self-serving lectures only added to the division. Divided yes.

As the song says, “Stop Draggin’ My Heart Around.”

Baby, you keep knocking on my front door
Same old line you used to use before

But the left has it exactly the other way around. Darkness is their cause.

How about that darkness?

John 1:4- (KJ21)4 “In Him was life, and that life was the Light of men. 5 And the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.”

Is it any wonder we have division in the world?

John 3:1 “9And this is the verdict: The Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness more than light, because their deeds were evil.”

Job 24:13 “Others have been with those who rebel against the light; They do not want to know its ways Nor abide in its paths.”

Darkness does not comprehend, but dark is an epidemic on the left. What has been pretty dark is the last eight years of ignorance and failed leadership. It became a dark reality.

When anyone talks about Obama’s Presidency, we are called dark. Supreme irony.

And what’s been dark is the media. They did their best to paper over a dark reality. Media became a tool to justify that dark reality. And now they portray darkness everywhere.

RightRing | Bullright