Press Freedom — unchain their souls

Maybe a post script is needed to my last post on a media cabal in their defense of press hay day. (or their D-day as I’m calling it) Was it too Fake News challenged?

There were some who declined the opportunity to elaborate on the “war,” as some call it, claiming that they do it everyday. Like Seattle Times, who passed on the offer.

So maybe press is not as united as you thought? Don’t bet on it. They just don’t want to make a special national day of it, which they fear may only provide Trump with more evidence of a press conspiracy against his presidency. Surely, some of it will.

However, this sounds more like not wanting to poke Trump — or the people by extension — in the eye while he is already on a tear against the press. A successful one. Not that they are not actively engaged in an effort to undermine and question his legitimacy in every way they can. They are. Just that they do that anyway without a designated day for it.

On the other hand, some are fully engaged in this “war” but they also want to throw ‘shout outs’ to local media for tireless efforts in the press. Lean on the locals for a defense. Yes, noble as local press are, they are not the real issue or problem. That the local media still covers local news and provides a good service never was the problem at the heart of the matter. But should that case even have to be made? Then we have come a long way. So they can wax on their local accomplishments all they want.

Maybe it is a time, though, for press to do a little navel gazing of its own on what their real priorities and goals are. Maybe? But don’t bet there will be lessons learned. They seem far too arrogant for that.

Just as the Seventh Floor was corrupting the greater FBI’s institutional reputation, so is the national press and media diminishing its own credibility. Like the FBI, it was not field agents who did all that, who were the problem. It was leadership. Though the attitudes of leadership do trickle down to rank and file. So too is the case in the national press — all chasing a few stories they consider important. (damn whatever we care about)

We know the stories they want to report, and eventually we know the ones they do not. So do reporters and journalists at large. There are a few good journalists functioning in an against-the-tide way, almost battling against the national media at large. Are they wining? No. They are frowned on or mocked. (as out of line) Their efforts are diminished en masse by their fellow press piers. It’s a shame. The loudest barking dogs get the attention.

Yet with all that said, media wanted a special day to pat themselves on the back for their biases and efforts. Of course they want to broaden the problem and criticism of the press. And they want all members of it to be forced to defend press’s greater national agenda.

Why is it that Republicans always seem to have an active campaign against press, media? Is it good politics? You could turn that around as well, to “why does press always seem to be actively campaigning against Republicans?” And both would be correct. There are decades of mistrust built up on the Republican side. Best to know who your biggest opponents or critics are if you are a politician. Enemies? You’d be a fool to believe press is actively, overtly on your side or even that you will get “fair” coverage. John McCain would be Exhibit A. He wanted to believe it, which only says something about him.

For today’s defense of press day, cue the choruses of anecdotal stories about humanity, drinking water, local crime investigations, or school board decisions. All important, but they were not really the issue. And great as those stories may be — cite them all day — they still do not deal with a collective issue of bias in the news media.

When the local news reports a crime, it can intentionally not mention the race, religion of immigration status of the alleged criminal. Sometimes it matters, yet is suspiciously omitted. Sure press did report the story, but did they reveal all pertinent facts? So we are talking about the editorial positions and control of media, which more often is the problem. In other words, what we don’t see is withheld, or accounts of the story that don’t mesh with events. Citing good local stories can cover some of that but not the volumes of accounts where bias is a problem. How about when there is an error? They stick it in the reserved corrections section later But don’t mention it. Where is the honesty or integrity, or for that matter responsibility, in that?

No, what really got their collective goats in the press were the unfavorable public opinion polls showing lack of credibility in the press. Thus, reporting the great local stories is not the real issue here. Their need to be instinctively believed is the whole issue. Their mission and goal depends on that. So press is even dishonest in framing what this is all about. But the people have known for some time what it is about, being fed a steady diet of deceptive or biased coverage that lacked the integrity or scrutiny of a real free press. Would the founders be happy with what the national, collective media has turned into?

And if those local stories are really the issue here, then let’s have them. I mean tell them instead of drowning them out and spoon-feeding us national interests — and those controlling political interests — by the mainstream collective media. We don’t call it Mainstream Media for nothing. Another term they despise. Tell them all, unedited.

Columbia Journalism Review makes the press defense with a potpourri of snippets.

Washington Post book critic Carlos Lozada read half a dozen “hagiographies” of the president, finding that “some are born Trump sycophants. Some achieve Trump sycophancy. And some have Trump sycophancy thrust upon them—since he’s a star, they let him do that.”

Is that what you got? Better, is that what you really believe? And what are the stages of press degradation? Do we have to diagram that for you?

IPSOS Polls

Returning to President Trump’s views on the press, almost a third of the American people (29%) agree with the idea that “the news media is the enemy of the American people,” including a plurality of Republicans (48%).

I don’t want to tell them what the trend is.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Advertisements

Meanwhile Press and Media Whine

I’m going to put up this piece from the news association, not because it deserves to be but because it needs to be called out for what it is. I am mean for picking on the press.

They are calling on all press to use their prestigious space to defend the “free press.”
A few hundred have agreed, like a solidarity thing.

RTDNA calls on members to join campaign defending press freedom

August 13, 2018 | RTDNA [*emphasis mine]

The Radio Television Digital News Association and its Voice of the First Amendment Task Force are calling on our more than 1,200 members and their broadcast and digital news outlets to join the Boston Globe and more than 100 other local newspapers across the country on Aug. 16 in a coordinated editorial response to attacks from the President on the media.

“We urge our members to join the effort on Thursday, Aug. 16 by dedicating airtime, publishing an online editorial or sharing information via social media platforms that speaks to your viewers and listeners about the role we play in preserving the public’s right and need to know, in a government for and by the people,” said Dan Shelley, RTDNA’s executive director.

“The President has ratcheted up his anti-press contempt. Journalists are now the ‘disgusting fake news,’ and according to one presidential tweet, we also ‘cause Wars [sic].’ This rhetoric has contributed to many of the president’s supporters lashing out harshly against members of the White House press corps and other journalists. It must stop before more journalists are hurt or worse,” states Shelley.

Today, RTDNA, its members and the other broadcast and digital journalists it represents stand in solidarity with the dozens of American newspapers that have joined the Boston Globe campaign to publish editorials pushing back against the notion that responsible journalism is “fake news” and that journalists are the “enemy of the American people.”

Please contact RTDNA at pressfreedom@rtdna.org if your station plans to participate. For more information on how to explain the public service your news organization regularly provides, please see this list of resources for rebuilding trust with news consumers and this list of questions to consider as a newsroom.

About the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force
RTDNA formed the Voice of the First Amendment Task Force to defend against threats to the First Amendment and news media access, and to bridge the divide between responsible journalists and those who don’t like, or don’t understand, the news media. People wishing to support RTDNA’s efforts may reach out to the task force by emailing pressfreedom@rtdna.org.

About RTDNA
RTDNA is the world’s largest professional organization devoted exclusively to broadcast and digital journalism. Founded as a grassroots organization in 1946, RTDNA works to protect the rights of electronic journalists throughout the country, promotes ethical standards in the industry, provides members with training and education and honors outstanding work in the profession through the Edward R. Murrow Awards.”

Original source

So it is a campaign defending press freedom. Oh goody, a special day for that.

Instead of what they claim, this is a dedicated day to attack Trump, feel free as if they do not already do so daily. So what is the special occasion about this day? That’s what they have done since Trump won.

But my personal issue with this goes much deeper. First of all, when press refers to the First Amendment, they liberally mean “freedom of press.” However, there are other freedoms in the first amendment. Just that to press, this freedom is the only one they really give a damn about. Secondly, it is offensive that they lay claim to the First Amendment as their own. But that is the only part they want people to care about and keep beating us over the head about.

Yes, I understand the need for a Free Press. It is absurd I have to make that disclaimer.

I will take the opportunity to mention another favorite talking point of theirs — meaning the press in general. The claim is Trump declared war on the first amendment. Again, by first amendment they are referring to press. (misleading to say the least.) Or some even say he declared war on the “free press.” What nonsense. I have never seen another president more media friendly than Trump.

This bothers me why? It is mostly this “war on or against the first amendment” mantra that gets me. As the old line goes: “what we have here is a failure to communicate.” With all that is going on, there is not a war on the press or first amendment. It is a battle within the First Amendment. But it has always been there. There has always been some friction within the 1st Amend. The press is only one of 5 freedoms contained therein: Freedom of religion, speech, press, petition of grievance, and assembly. I see press is only one fifth of that. Technically, you can say press may have some tangential influence in others.

As to the “war” as they call it within the first amendment; it is press declaring war on the people’s freedoms. Press has no ownership of or control over the First Amendment.

Despite how I really feel about this brouhaha over the press, I will give them this honored day…… to make a joke out of themselves, as they have done for over 10 years.

What an idea!

We could have had special “defense of the first amendment days” back in 2009-2010. Remember the Tea Parties? But we did not get “special day” kudos for defending free speech. We got the royal condemnation for it, and viciously attacked. For all of our organizing skill and peaceful efforts, we had the long arm of the IRS attack dogs sicked on us. It was labeled traitorous to the US Constitution in media. Talk about Orwellian.

Did we get a special assist or atta-boy from the media/press for standing up and defending the First Amendment? Just the opposite. We were attacked for “hiding behind the first amendment.” But it was press that was doing the attacking. They declared war on free speech and dissent, from both ends of Pennsylvania Ave. and in press and media.

So what does that tell us, other than the fact that the “press” doesn’t give a damn about the first amendment? It tells us they have chosen sides. And they chose to go to war against the American people, just for standing up for their first amendment rights.

So for this dedicated “defending press day” I offer them a peace sign minus the index finger. Of course they really don’t need me or anyone else to stand up for them, they have the power of the press. And chose to use that power against the American people. What were they “standing up” for back then? Oh, it was for big-government, for the power of the White House, the power in Congress. Remember their stories of outrage that people yelled at Congressmen, especially black members, when the Democrat caucus paraded in front of Tea Parties to fabricate fake news about us. Then press ran that narrative lie into the ground. We were also labeled racists then. Media assisted.

Excuse me for not having any outrage that the press is victimized. Give me a break. Again, press made huge choices long ago and declared war within the first amendment, against the people. You didn’t just stand idly by, you were the enforcers. Even Ben Rhodes admitted the Obama administration had media, press eating out of their hand. Because, at that point, free press sycophants, you were no longer a “free press.”

Is it time for a ‘voice of free speech task force’? — at least I’m being honest.
See what they did there: “Voice of the First Amendment Task Force”?

 

Related Ref:
Boston Globe: “200 newspapers join Globe effort on freedom of the press editorials”

[Globe]- The Globe initiative comes amid the president’s repeated verbal attacks on journalists, calling mainstream press organizations “fake news” and “the enemy of the American people.” Tensions came to a boil in early August when CNN reporter Jim Acosta walked out of a press briefing after White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders refused to refute Trump’s “enemy of the people” comments.

‘‘We are not the enemy of the people,’’ Marjorie Pritchard, deputy managing editor of the Globe’s opinion page, told the AP last week.

 
Right Ring | Bullright

Crooked Hillary and the Cabal

Well, someone is doing some writing and reporting of the accumulative events.

2016 Trump Tower Meeting Looks Increasingly Like a Setup by Russian and Clinton Operatives

By Lee Smith, RealClearInvestigations
August 13, 2018

The June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between high-ranking members of the Republican presidential campaign staff and a Russian lawyer with Kremlin ties remains the cornerstone of claims that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election.

A growing body of evidence, however, indicates that the meeting may have been a setup — part of a broad effort to tarnish the Trump campaign involving Hillary Clinton operatives employed by Kremlin-linked figures and Department of Justice officials. This view, that the real collusion may have taken place among those who arranged the meeting rather than the Trump officials who agreed to attend it, is supported by two disparate lines of evidence pulled together for the first time here: newly released records and a pattern of efforts to connect the Trump campaign to Russia. …/

Continue Reading the damning evidence: https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/08/13/trump_tower_meeting_looks_increasingly_like_a_setup.html

 

But Mueller could never stumble across that pertinent information. Or the fact that Fusion was working with the Kremlin to overturn sanctions — against the Magnitsky Act. It would be too damning to the Democrats and DNC. ‘Quick, we need a diversion’….. this week if possible. After all, Mueller is tied to this cabal.

In case anyone is still keeping Russia collusion score: that puts intel ops, FBI, DOJ, Mueller, Clinton, GPS, Steele, DNC et al on the same side as …..the Kremlin and Putin. Collusion Party anyone? 😎 And I’ll just leave out McCain for now.

With all this known, just what would Hillary have done had she won the election? I don’t think there is much of a question about it, given her character and past.

This was never a Trump issue or scandal, but is yet another Hillary Clinton scandal that she had a whole lot of help with.

What Do Antifa Protestors Say?

‘Do Him Like Gaddafi’ — Antifa Protesters Caught On Video Threatening To Kill The President

08/13/2018
Benny Johnson | Reporter At Large | Daily Caller

One year ago, President Trump told the American people that there was “violence on both sides” during the Charlottesville riots.

Those riots pitted neo-Nazis marching in the city against Antifa and other progressive groups. The powder keg was lit and both sides committed acts of violence against each other. The riots left many injured and one activist lost her life when awhite supremacists rammed his car into a crowd. Trump was attacked for the “both sides” comment in the wake of the violence.

However, in the year since, the Left’s violent tactics have been on full display in multiple arenas across the country. Riots and death threats have targeted Trump officials, ICE agents, police officers and children. A former Bernie Sanders staffer opened fire on a group of Republican congressmen practicing baseball, seriously wounding House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

See comments at: http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/13/i-asked-leftists-protesters-what-they-would-do-if-they-met-trump-their-answers-horrified-me/

What do College Students Think of Socialist Agenda?

Some views really need to be heard.

College Student Tears Apart Own Socialist Generation, Pushes Plan To Turn Them Around

Matthew Pinna — August 13th 2018 | Western Journal

Conservatives often wonder why more and more young people consider themselves democratic socialists despite overwhelming evidence against the rosy claims of that political philosophy. The truth is that unless we understand why they believe what they do, our critiques will fall upon deaf ears.

There are two ways in which generations are defined: by how the world has developed around them, and by their educational system, which influences how they understand those happenings.

From the previously unimaginable violence of World War I to the broken rubble and thick smoke of the fallen Twin Towers, Americans took away the same persevering and exceptionalistic attitude: that despite seemingly insurmountable odds, for Americans, anything is achievable.

What I and others my age experienced, however, is what has since come to be known as the Great Recession. For the youth of today, their understanding of the world is entirely contextualized through what their families and friends went through because of it and, in short, they believe that no matter how deeply they struggle, our capitalist system is always doomed to fail in the same the way they perceived it to have in 2008.

Such logic is, of course, faulty — the reason why it is called the “Great” Recession is because it truly is an exception; it is just as ridiculous to assume that capitalism will always end that way as it is to think that Alexander the “Great” was simply an ordinary general.

In previous years, our educational system would have empowered students to recognize facts like that, but for a generation of youth that has found itself forced through Obama-era “Race to the Top” Common Core testing — standards that even many Democrats found themselves rallying against — this reasoning seems foreign.

Education has been the primary means of social mobility for millions of Americans throughout our history, fostering the uniquely American optimism and entrepreneurial ability that has positively impacted both our country and the world. Schoolchildren were imbued with passion by their teachers and rightfully believed that by focus and hard work, they could live a fulfilling and promising life.

This is no longer the case.

As opposed to being taught what they need to succeed in their careers, students are taught how to best take a test. They are then funneled into a university system that feeds them theoretical, rather than practical, information, teaching them how to critique a world that they have not yet experienced — and because of their previous education, do not even know how to start experiencing.

I am not criticizing the teaching of theory to students like myself — it is extremely valuable knowledge (and I greatly enjoy it). What those who have come before us better understood, however, is that theory must be buttressed by practice. Evidence of this can be seen in our Constitution, a document that is a healthy combination between liberal French Enlightenment theory and provisions based on what our Founders had personally experienced under tyranny and oppression.

In today’s public education, where words like “democratic socialism” and “Marxism” are too often portrayed as alternatives to evil capitalism, there is another philosophy nearly as prominent and just as misunderstood: nihilism. Nihilism is the philosophy of meaninglessness, and one that is often reflected in today’s youth culture and politics.

The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezes and the Bernie Sanderses of the country play off of that philosophy, preaching that it is meaningless to try to succeed in the world, as systemic odds — reinforced by those better off than ourselves — will prevent us from doing so. Overtaken by the same nihilistic despair that Friedrich Nietzsche warned about when he proclaimed that “God is dead,” these politicians have gathered people under a new rallying cry: “The American Dream is dead!”

Democratic socialism is, in essence, a political justification of mediocrity and failure; because many of its supporters lack purpose in an economic system based on empowering human motivation, they instead propose one based on impossible and inhuman characteristics.

I cannot fault those who have been tempted by this siren song — I recognize that they badly want to play a part in defeating something they think has wronged them and those whom they love. They have been told that if they don’t, they lack compassion for what their friends and family have gone through. They are told to see fellow Americans as dollar signs and measure the intrinsic value of someone by his net worth; the more they have, the less human they are.

Anybody who doesn’t see the world in this narrow, defeatist way is tossed aside and — in a cruel twist of irony — “otherized” by the same people who claim to be victims of such thinking.

These insidious practices end up polarizing young adults — you have to have a strong opinion on politics, regardless of whether or not you actually care. Coerced into becoming activists, they have no actual desire to learn much about what they are protesting for beyond a few talking points; hence, the hostility.

Democratic socialism is not a movement with passion and purpose, but rather one that is lacking entirely in both regards. Schools need to return to teaching the skills that students need to actually transcend barriers, so that a sense of purpose can once again be felt by our youth, enabling them to succeed in the American Dream.

Matthew Pinna is a student at the University of Chicago studying political science and English. His writing has appeared in numerous publications, including the Chicago Tribune and American Thinker. Matt lives — depending on the time of the year — in either his hometown of Farmingdale, New York, or in Hyde Park, Chicago.

Hillary and Obama employed the same strategic tactic

What do Hillary and Obama have in common? Among other things, they both used the heck out of Trump. How?

Well, seems Hillary was lucky enough to have her server scandal investigation turned into a Trump counterintelligence investigation, at the urging of her op-research team. That must have made her very happy to substitute a Trump investigation for her own. No wonder she was so confident in those latter days. She knew she had lots of help.

Obama, well, he found use for Trump as a scapegoat for his lack of doing anything about the Russia meddling. (as I said in May) Finally he found use for Trump as the blame for a Russian problem. He used the Russian problem for a pretext against Trump, for an investigation. Redirect the blame on Trump, for what was a problem since at least 2014.

It worked better than could be expected. No one was asking why he did nothing for years or about Susan Rice telling cybersecurity to stand down on any response to Russia. To which media sighed and ignored with Obama’s failure to act. Just pin Obama’s Russia problem on Trump to avoid accountability. A made to order investigation did that.

Both were using Trump for political expedience to cover their own scandalous records.

Right Ring | Bullright

Fusion, FBI, Steele, Money and a Dirty Dossier

It turns out, as no surprise, that just a few days before Comey’s infamous press conference to clear Hilary’s server scandal, a top DOJ official was in touch with Christopher Steele and laying the groundwork for a counterintelligence investigation against Trump.

Well, that is the sequence of events when you look at it objectively and plug in the facts. So this strongly suggests that while the same people who worked on the Hillary server investigation (or lack of one) had the impetus to ditch it and go after Trump in a full blown counterintelligence investigation. A project that led to working not only with Steele but also with Fusion, the subcontractor for Hillary’s dirt-digging operation on Trump.

See John Solomon’s article on the tie of FBI to Fusion and Steele. What a tangled web.
Opinion: How a senior DOJ official helped Dem researchers on Trump-Russia case — The Hill

This is not a Trump scandal, and never was. It is yet another Hillary Clinton and DOJ scandal. How does Mueller ignore it all? Better yet, how can he write a report void of all the pertinent facts? But see how the Hillary Obama lapdog media ignore this story while chatting up the old Manafort trial. A case which could have been handled by US attorneys, not a Special Counsel.

Kavanaugh and the NYT editorial board

A little comparison experiment: a new commercial calls Kavanaugh a “grand slam for conservatives.” Imagine if Democrats tried doing an honest ad for their nominee. It would be like “he will stretch that Constitution into play-doh. An experienced activist. He’ll assist in rewriting the Constitution. The perfect candidate for Marxists.” No, that doesn’t work the same way. So Dems have to lie: that’s why they can’t be honest. If they told the truth people would be repulsed. Can you picture an honest ad for their agenda?

For a couple years, NYT’s editorial page has tryied to call Trump everything from racist to crazy and unfit. So now their editorial board hires a crazy racist, Sarah Jeong, as a card carrying board member. But they dig in to defend their decision. It is a good fit. No, it was not a slip or something they did not know. It is the reason they hired her.

That is how the Democrats operate. If it were not for deception, they wouldn’t be able to sell anything. So the lie is everything; it’s the bomb.

Just throw in a few more: Obama’s record on the economy. It was abysmal. But now if the Obama economy was that good as they claim, then how come Obama has been out of office for a year and half and the Democrats are still trying to sell Obama’s economic failures? Why is that? But the people would know if it was good, and Democrats wouldn’t have to sell it. It sucked and people knew it did. So now the people have become the problem because they know it. But do you think Obama actually really cared about the economy?

And then Senate intelligence darling, Diane Feinstein has a commie spy chauffeur for 20 years. And Donald Trump’s election was the problem?

While we are at it, Pastor Darrell Scott was called every name and racial slur you can think of. His crime? He went to the White House with other clergy to work on problems affecting justice and the black community, to help people. For that he was attacked. But he was not attacked by nasty Trump supporters, the president, or conservatives and Republicans. He was attacked by blacks and Democrats as an Uncle Tom and traitor to blacks.

This at the same time blacks in Chicago are calling on Rahm Emanuel to resign. Fed up is an understatement. But Democrats and blacks lash out at Scott. It makes no sense, except to the Marxist, increasingly socialist, Left and their plantation police.

Right Ring | Bullright

Shove It and Shove Off Casey Tour

Tell me this: what politician would ever go into Wilkes Barre, Pa to Casey Plaza and take a broad axe to Sen. Bob Casey Jr., with no exceptions or apologies — only to be cheered and applauded? Who? Who dares to do that? Donald Trump, that’s who.

Pa Blitzkrieg. He’s not of Washington, he’s not of normal fare. Even in the WH, he is still “The Donald.” No one does it like him.

Someone’s got a bad case of heartburn in Scranton. “Sleeping Bob.”

 

Lou Barletta is coming.

1831 US Senate Seal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right Ring | Bullright

Crazies Want Their Power

On Socialism Is Not The Answer, he had a good article, by Daniel Greenfield, describing the left as crazies more than they are socialists. I had to agree. Perfect case.

Trump’s victory tore the mask from the Democrats leaving them nothing but rage. Formerly mainstream Democrats are quick to embrace every insane lefty position from abolishing borders to supporting Hamas, not because they understand or believe in them, but because they’re “resisting” Trump.

The socialists think they’re winning. But they’re just the guys shouting things at a crazy mob. And the mob is not really for anything, it’s just enraged. It doesn’t want to build, it wants to tear down. [Read More]

So that put me in a contemplative commenting mode to summarize it in metaphors.

Indeed, it’s not the means it’s the ends. Their euphoric socialism is the illusive Unicorn that always escapes them by running 3 steps ahead of them all the time. The scene will switch to the Wizard of Oz, and that little man behind the curtain, if they actually ever do catch it. But by that time, they all should have known what the scorpion really was all along. And there can be no complaints about it then.

There is no doubt now that they are crazies. In fact, it is their primary objective driving everyone into a psycho frenzy and using that display of it as proof of their blue wave momentum. They want us to believe a Blue Wave is coming when they haven’t even accepted the results of the last election yet.

But the secret is they really are that crazy and been so for a log time. They’ve come to depend on living on the rage juice. There is nothing left but that. TDS is all the rage.

Happy Anniversary

Congratulations to myself.

My reclusive and obscure voice on WordPress is now 7 years old, today. How time flies.

Moral of the story: Not all pebbles make a ripple in the water, it depends on the surface conditions and size of the stone. Choose wisely, grasshopper.

Well, at least WordPress is keeping track…….. of something besides cookies.

Right Ring | Bullright

Now we are getting somewhere, Obama

Obama’s Treason: Even Worse Than We Thought

But Leftist Privilege will prevent him from ever being held accountable.

June 7, 2018 — Robert Spencer | Frontpage Mag

The Washington Free Beacon reported Wednesday that “the Obama administration skirted key U.S. sanctions to grant Iran access to billions in hard currency despite public assurances the administration was engaged in no such action, according to a new congressional investigation.”

And it gets even worse: “The investigation, published Wednesday by the House Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, further discloses secret efforts by top Obama administration officials to assure European countries they would receive a pass from U.S. sanctions if they engaged in business with Iran.”

This revelation comes after the news that came to light in February, that, according to Bill Gertz in the Washington Times, “the U.S. government has traced some of the $1.7 billion released to Iran by the Obama administration to Iranian-backed terrorists in the two years since the cash was transferred.”

There is a law that applies to this situation. U.S. Code 2381 says:

“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

More: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270378/obamas-treason-even-worse-we-thought-robert-spencer

Let the trail of history begin. We have time….’Popcorn, peanuts, treason trial!’

Obama, Treasonous Traitor

July 16, 2018 — Daniel Greenfield | Frontpage Mag

In the media’s frantic downhill race to out-rage each other over Trump, there’s no bottom. Charles M. Blow, the Cory Booker of media columnists, desperately tried to justify his job with this ridiculous column aimed right at the nerve center of the resistance’s id.

Its subtle title is, “Trump, Treasonous Traitor”.

That’s like a parody of a column like this. In it, Blow declares, “Whether or not Trump himself or anyone in his orbit personally colluded or conspired with the Russians about their interference is something Mueller will no doubt disclose at some point, but there remains one incontrovertible truth: In 2016, Russia, a hostile foreign adversary, attacked the United States of America.”

“Trump should be directing all resources at his disposal to punish Russia for the attacks and prevent future ones. But he is not. America’s commander wants to be chummy with the enemy who committed the crime. Trump is more concerned with protecting his presidency and validating his election than he is in protecting this country.

“This is an incredible, unprecedented moment. America is being betrayed by its own president. America is under attack and its president absolutely refuses to defend it.

“Simply put, Trump is a traitor and may well be treasonous.”

Remember when the New York Times wasn’t a complete joke? Still is this what the left wants as the new metric?

It’s incontrovertible that Islamic terrorists attacked America, but Obama insisted on being chummy with Iran, the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood: all of whom had plenty of American blood on their hands.

“This is an incredible, unprecedented moment. America is being betrayed by its own president. America is under attack and its president absolutely refuses to defend it.

“Simply put, Obama is a traitor and may well be treasonous.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/270751/obama-treasonous-traitor-daniel-greenfield

If only they would have opened their eyes: Obama, Holder, Lynch. Clapper, Brennan, Hayden, Rice, Rhodes, Kerry, Hillary, what a cabal. A caldron of incestuous treason.

All The President’s Hacks: Media Fake News Fueled Obama’s Watergate

Socialism is not the Answer

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.

Frontpage Mag

Daniel Greenfield

When Hillary Clinton cites the “intelligence community assessment” to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the presidential election, she’s really repeating her own lie, that her campaign created, rolled through the media and the government, which used it to spy on the Trump campaign, and then finally became an “assessment” under orders from Obama carried out by political allies like Clapper and Brennan.

The media, which once boasted of exposing Watergate, had played a key role in Obama’s Watergate.

The release of a redacted FISA warrant application exposes the fact that the spying on Carter Page, a figure associated with the Trump campaign, relied on no sources other than Democrats and media allies.

In 2016, an arm of the Clinton campaign…

View original post 1,160 more words

Marc Lamont Hill gushes over terrorist cop-killer

Marc Lamont Hill demonstrates just what is wrong with the Left — or Marxists in general. They leave an ugly trail of death and hatred wherever they go.

Temple Prof & CNN Commentator Marc Lamont Hill Touts Cop-Killing Terrorist as ‘Freedom Fighter’

Breitbart | Tom Ciccotta 07-18-2018

Temple University Professor and CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill published a glowing Instagram post this week for cop-killing terrorist Assata Shakur.

 

Temple University Professor Marc Lamont Hill, who is also a CNN commentator, published a bizarre tribute to convicted cop-killer Assata Shakur, a member of the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist list, this week. Shakur, a former member of the Black Liberation Army, was convicted of first-degree murder of State Trooper Werner Foerster during a shootout in New Jersey in 1973.

Thinking about Assata Shakur on her 71st birthday. She wrote the second book that changed (and saved) my life. She taught me about the value and power of Freedom Dreams. She showed me the beauty of struggle. And she proved that “a wall is just a wall. and nothing more at all. It can be broken down.” I pray for her continued safety and protection. I continue to work to demonstrate her innocence. And I implore the State to stop prosecuting an unjust and unfair campaign against one of our most treasured Freedom Fighters. Thank you Mama Assata. Wishing you 100 more years!

Shakur has lived in Cuba since 1984, despite multiple attempts by the US government to bring her back.

Marc Lamont Hill is a Professor of Media Studies and Urban Education at Temple University. He has worked in media with BET News and CNN. In 2016, Marc Lamont Hill expressed support for the Green Party, adding that he would prefer a Donald Trump presidency to a Hillary Clinton one so that the left could build a “real” movement.

“I would rather have Trump be president for four years and build a real left-wing movement that can get us what we deserve as a people, than to let Hillary be president and we stay locked in the same space where we don’t get what we want,” he said.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/07/18/temple-prof-cnn-commentator-marc-lamont-hill-touts-cop-killing-terrorist-as-freedom-fighter/

He drew so much inspiration from this cop-killer. Yeah, hard to romanticize cop-killers. Freedom Fighters? They are eating on the wrong side of the mushroom again.

Screw his position about Trump, just watch all the Lefties come out of the sewer to defend this. Judging by his following and number of likes, he is not alone. He has lots of company.

According to one of his hashtags, he seems to think of her as a political prisoner. Talking about her birthday is so touching. Hill said “She showed me the beauty of struggle.” There’s that wrong side of the mushroom thing again.

Hillary in Supreme denial with AFT pals

Hillary Clinton Implies Kavanaugh Will Lead America Back To Times Of Slavery

Mike Brest | Contributor | Daily Caller

Former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton implied that the potential confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court would bring the United States back to the times of slavery during a speech on Friday.

“I used to worry that they wanted to turn the clock back to the 1950s. Now, I worry they want to turn it back to the 1850s. These will be urgent fights. Stakes could not be higher,” she said during her speech at the American Federation of Teachers.

“This nomination holds out the threat of devastating consequences for workers’ rights, civil rights, LGBT rights, women’s rights, including those to make our own health decisions,” Clinton continued. “It is a blatant attempt by this administration to shift the balance of the Court for decades and to reverse decades of progress.”

President Trump announced Kavanaugh as his nominee to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy last Monday.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/13/hillary-clinton-kavanaugh-slavery/

Hillary: ‘Look, here I am! I’m over here, pay attention to me!’ The shadow campaign of Hillary continues. Medication is failing. It looks like it is time for the IV-drip, Hillary.

Plus, here’s an extra example for the Democrat dumpster fire.
Former CO congressional candidate. “Intersectional feminist” – whatever that is.

Of course the simple answer has to be “yes”…. what other option is there?
If Crazy had a political Party, it would have to be the Democrats.

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.

Injustice of Injustice

I could just as easily call it Injustice of Social Justice, but that might be too ironic. Though it is pretty much the same thing.

It is my rantzilla for the week. Why have we allowed the left, or anyone, to hijack the word injustice? I’m not sure but it is clear they have. They also redefine social justice.

First, I believe injustice is a problem too. As just a few examples: I think injustice is protests turning violent, destroying property or hurting people; and cop killing. They certainly are not justice. Shutting down highways is injustice; shutting down government for vengeance because you lost the election is injustice; opening a counterintelligence investigation on a political opponent because he threatens your election is injustice; voter fraud or trying to rig elections is injustice; labeling people Nazis because they don’t agree with you is an injustice; I believe taking a knee to disrespect the Anthem or the flag is injustice. I think fighting for the right to abortion on demand is injustice. Labeling abortion safe is an injustice. Finally, defending the indefensible is injustice.

I see lawlessness as injustice – not as some puritanical civil disobedience redefined as social justice. And many of those things could be called immoral too. Breaking the law is injustice. I don’t accept some of the common, trivial interpretations as injustice. Modern definitions of the Left would say anything is injustice that doesn’t agree with their agenda. Injustice, as the Left uses it, is politically charged — like everything else they touch.

If this is what they consider winning, what is losing?

On the other hand, I also believe in social justice. I think government has a moral obligation in the law. I think a deterrent is part of the motivation for a law. I don’t think social justice gives you some right to commit injustice. I don’t think sensing an injustice gives you the sovereign right to break the peace, or disrupt another innocent person because you have a grievance. I think self-governing is a form of social justice. Free markets and economics are a kind of social justice. Humanitarian activism can be a type of social justice.

Social justice, to the left, is the kind of thing that can lead a person to believe they have the right to set off bombs to kill innocent people because they think government is acting immorally. Or to gun down Republicans on a ball field because they are political enemies. That is how the left sees social justice – you define it. And if you happen to be in the way of their social justice, you are not supposed to be offended if you are injured or someone is killed in their path to social justice. That’s the breaks.

But I do feel very offended.

I am offended by an illegal alien who was deported 5 times only to come back again and kill a fellow citizen. I am offended by lawlessness. I don’t believe “social justice” should be encouraging more lawlessness. I don not believe social justice is preventing hundreds of people to see a ball game, or keeping people from a store or restaurant. I do not think publishing people’s phone numbers to harass them is an act of social justice. A case can be made it is injustice. I don’t believe breaking the law, particularly when it hurts someone or destroys their property or livelihood, can be spun as “social justice.”

But in the words of the left, their slogan is no justice no peace.” Do you notice the implication buried in that? You shall not have peace as long as I have a grievance. Because I feel a grievance, I have the right to do whatever I want including to disturb the peace – and brand it social justice. They feel they have a moral ground that whenever they claim or perceive something unjust, then they have a right to commit injustice.

I read a call to action from a Bishop. It encouraged people to ‘do something’ in view of separated children on the border. Whatever you are motivated personally to do, in the name of the children, is acceptable. That usually means good deeds. But what if someone’s idea of social justice is revenge? What if it is civil disobedience? It does not say. (I’m not saying all civil disobedience is wrong. The reason it is done is a determining factor.)

Those church clergy also want you to send money to a legal fund to help parents or children. Why, to defend them for breaking the law? But they need our help. What are we helping? If you are doing that, are you encouraging more of that behavior, more lawlessness? At what point do you become complicit in their behavior? What about the consequences of your social actions; are you responsible for the consequences?

Every time I hear no justice no peace, I cringe. Selfishness seems like their real motivation. Now there are people who feel as long as they are not content, nor should you be. In other words: you have no rights as long as I /we claim to be victims.

Is that their idea of social justice? Yes. Social justice is all about getting what one wants. But the dirty little secret is the Left can never be satisfied. That is their whole game plan, not being satisfied and always claiming to be a grieved victim.

Here is my other problem. I mentioned different ways I am offended. Those are serious things I think justifiable. But when I hear the left complain about being offended, often they are outraged by things conservatives say. That is enough to send them over the cliff. Think about the contrast.

Roseanne said something on Twitter, wham, she loses her top-rated TV show. Someone on Fox says something they don’t like, even if true, and they demand a list of his/her sponsors to get the person off the air. See how this really works? Your freedom of speech is the chief offense here. Shutting down that freedom is their chief objective. You would think freedom of speech would be a cause worth defending. Peter Fonda says something outrageous on Twitter and it is just outrageous, but no consequences. The left will defend that as freedom.

I have legitimate social concerns and they trivialize being victimized to what someone says or thinks about them. Thought crimes. Then they use the cover and camouflage of words like “injustices” and Social Justice to disguise what they are doing. Social Justice today is defined by the Left and normally means what they want it to mean.

What does Social Justice mean? According to Heritage: (see)

Abstract: For its proponents, “social justice” is usually undefined. Originally a Catholic term, first used about 1840 for a new kind of virtue (or habit) necessary for post-agrarian societies, the term has been bent by secular “progressive” thinkers to mean uniform state distribution of society’s advantages and disadvantages. Social justice is really the capacity to organize with others to accomplish ends that benefit the whole community. If people are to live free of state control, they must possess this new virtue of cooperation and association. This is one of the great skills of Americans and, ultimately, the best defense against statism.

I know, some sticklers for definitions would quibble with my loose use of social justice. My conscience could prevent posting this but I had to. You can decide. The concept of social justice is being refashioned and redefined almost weekly to suit the Left. It is what they make it. As Liberals are wont to do, they often take something and twist or redefine it to fit their objective — their agenda. Is it any wonder it appears different from what it once was, into a political tool? It is very much about economics today. The left’s. Nazifying large swaths of political enemies becomes social justice.

As much of our current culture, social justice escalated its evolution in the 60’s, assisted by some clergy, into a Marxism meld. The influence remains. Our definition became the problem. But words like “Social Justice warrior” do not convince me of pure motivations.

Right Ring | Bullright

Significance of the 4th Of July

The real significance of the 4th of July is, of course, declaring our Independence. Though that fact happened before securing our freedom in the Revolution.

That is something to ponder. Maybe the lesson is the Declaration did not accomplish the entire objective. Yet July 4th is the day and holiday we celebrate that started it all.

It would be years after the July 4th, 1776 Declaration that we finally assured our independence. We sort of glamorize it as the day independence was accomplished.

Fortunately, an alternative history has never been written. Though today we see signs that our independence is vulnerable. We see signs that it all could be squandered. And after all we have been through as a country since then, there are real threats that abound us.

Take for instance the Manchurian presidency of Barack Obama:

America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in the White House

By L. Todd Wood – Washington Times – Sunday, July 1, 2018
ANALYSIS/OPINION:

After returning from a tour of some of the war zones in the Middle East — which ended with the Free Iran Gathering 2018 in Paris — I am struck by the realization that America really did have a Manchurian Candidate in The White House for eight years.

If you look at the evidence, there really is no other conclusion. The calamitous consequences of the Obama presidency will be felt for the foreseeable future.

READ: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/1/us-really-did-have-manchurian-candidate-white-hous/

No Patriot

For the occasion, mainstream media asked some people on the street if they were proud of America? Many either said “not now” or “used to be.” It is quantified. Their pride in America seems based mostly on who is president at the time. Stunning.

How’s that Independence working for you?

Happy 4th of July.

 

Right Ring | Bullright

Hillary does UK the wrong way

If you thought you had heard everything before, this will make you question that. Hillary said a lot of things that were wrong. Now she compares herself to Winston Churchill.

Yes, this will remain about her worst attempt at relevancy. Whopper Alert!

Clinton on being a polarizing figure: ‘I’m sure they said that about Churchill between the wars’

By Adam Shaw | Fox News

Hillary Clinton, in an interview with a British newspaper this week, appeared to compare herself to wartime Prime Minister Winston Churchill while responding to a question about being a polarizing figure.

“I’m sure they said that about Churchill between the wars, didn’t they?” she told The Guardian when asked if she should withdraw from public life to help heal divisions in the U.S., given her reputation.

The 2016 Democratic presidential nominee then immediately claimed she wasn’t actually comparing herself to Churchill, before going on to elaborate on the analogy.

Churchill went into the political wilderness between the two World Wars and during that time was a key voice criticizing then-Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement toward Adolf Hitler. He would go on to become prime minister himself and help lead the Allies to victory in World War II.

The Guardian report notes that Clinton made the Churchill reference “a fraction too quickly for the line to sound spontaneous.”

Clinton continued: “I mean, I’m not comparing myself, but I’m just saying people said that, but he was right about Hitler, and a lot of people in England were wrong. And Churchill was a pain. He kept popping up all the time.”

Clinton indeed has remained a polarizing figure, with her popularity falling since the election, as she has stayed in the public eye with her book tour and media interviews.
She told the Guardian she is not going to “call it a day” anytime soon.

“It feels like a duty. It feels like patriotism, and it feels necessary. I’m not going anywhere,” she said.

Clinton also used the Guardian interview to comment on the separation of families at the border in the wake of the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance policy” that ordered that all illegal border crossers be prosecuted. Trump has ordered the separations to be stopped, but critics are still fighting the prosecutions and other detentions.

Clinton said that she is worried that some of the minors may never be reunited, saying that that question is “keeping me up at night.”

“Absolutely I worry about that. I’m worried that some children will not be reunited,” she said.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/29/clinton-on-being-polarizing-figure-im-sure-said-that-about-churchill-between-wars.html

 

There are some things you can do; some things you can barely get away with passing off. And some things you ought never to have a logical reason for even thinking about trying to pull off. She’s strong on the 3rd one.

Then there are times when you should be laughed off the stage in a straight jacket, never to be heard from again. Why is that not happening, you may ask?

Secondly, she is a like Madonna. Remember her protest bombshell?

The problem is the amount of forethought she gave that comment. They questioned the spontaneity, You know she plotted out the comparison, practiced it, and tried it out on her staff. They said “that’s good”.

Just how she did the Deplorables comment, then bounced it off people in the Hamptons. Maybe what happens in the Hamptons should stay the hell in the Hamptons. Or at least get buried in the darkest crevices of one’s last fleeting brain cell. This is one.

Let me paraphrase and sum up Hillary’s message: ‘I’m not done pissing off the last person, even people who voted for me, yet. I will not be stopped because there is an unlimited potential for hatred of me out there.’ Face it, now that she cannot demand huge amounts of money for influence anymore, that is her only motivation left.

The only thing that keeps Hillary up at night, after all that Chardonnay, is thinking up a new crazy excuse or comparison for her loss to tell people. Even if there is no market. What she is really worried about being reunited is her candidacy. Relevancy is not her friend.