Winners and Losers of the week

Fox heavyweight Charles Krauthammer has interestingly called special counsel, Robert Mueller the winner of the week. His loser was McMaster. It’s all in how you see it.

NRO – National Review – had the story:

Charles Krauthammer named H. R. McMaster his “loser of the week” due to his damaged reputation, and then he explained why the winner of the week was Robert Mueller:

My loser: H. R. McMaster, the national-security adviser. On the night of the report of Trump spilling secrets to the Russians, he was one of several trotted out to say the story was false. The next day, he is contradicted by Trump who said he was within his rights to say what he said, implying that he did say it and the story was true. McMaster holds a press conference the next day, where he had to reconcile the irreconcilables. It was a sad sight for a man who spent decades establishing a reputation for integrity and consistency.

My winner is Robert Mueller, who is going to be the chief investigator for the Russia probe. He is now the man who is in charge who has a mandate to investigate essentially anything and is politically untouchable, cannot be fired. Technically he can; politically he can’t. He’s the most powerful man in Washington.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/447818/robert-mueller-russian-probe-special-counsel-most-powerful-man-washington

 

If Mueller is the latest standard, allow me to write the new definition for Webster’s:
Winner in that you get an unlimited appointment with an unlimited mandate, and then get get to move your entire law firm into it. – Winning.

And winning is when your own conflict of interest is irrelevant or ignored unanimously by your peers.

My loser of the week has to be Obama, who was instantly driven further into exile by Trump’s new trip to Saudi Arabia. The country that could not be bothered to roll out the red carpet treatment for Obama is quite relieved that he is gone, and definitely not missed by the Saudi government.

It became even more clear after the arrival how much Obama was despised, a bright red carpet and reception for Trump. It seems to take a real bad thing to recognize a good thing.

Also big losers are those Democrats, media, race baiters and haters who are left in Obama’s vacuum to defend his lousy legacy of lies. Losing.

Obama: Profiles In Lies

Let’s get this straight: the guy who lied about Bengazi, lied about Obamacare — just to get it passed — who promised Putin and Russia more flexibility after his last election, (when he’d no longer be accountable to voters), who rejected accountability, the guy who voted present in Illinois on all the tough votes — Obama.

That guy deserves a Profiles in Courage award?

“It is my fervent hope, and the hope of millions, that regardless of Party such courage is still possible. That today’s members of Congress regardless of party are willing to look at the facts and speak the truth, even when it contradicts party positions.

I hope current members of Congress recall that it actually doesn’t take a lot of courage to aid those who are already powerful, already comfortable, already influential; but it does require some courage to champion the vulnerable.”

The “vulnerable” – unless, of course, it is babies or life in the womb who deserve abortion. And call that “social justice.” too. You channel that courage so well, Obama.

Was it for courageously meddling and intervening in Israel’s election, in Egypt’s election, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, refusing to call it Radical Islamic Terrorism?

Obama, the guy who lacked a strategy to deal with ISIS, who called them a JV team. The guy who drew a red line and ran away from it. The guy who wore the race card on his lapel to provide immunity from criticism. The guy who only wanted positive reports back from our military operations. Courage, expedience… he lectures Congress?

Those courageous feats, and more, earn him the Profiles in Courage Award from the JFK Library. The words Obama and courage do not belong in the same paragraph.

H/T to the Guardian

Cooper illustates the Russian debacle

I have sadly fallen into an alternative reality. It is not by choice. I watched a CNN segment on Anderson Cooper that illustrates a huge political problem in America.

However, this confirmation of the problem comes ironically from two different players, in almost reversed positions from their respective sides. An irony of juxtaposition.

Stephen Cohen —

“American scholar and professor emeritus of Russian studies at Princeton University and New York University”…”During the 2014 unrest in Ukraine, Cohen drew criticism for his “pro-Russian” views with sources describing him as an apologist for Putin and the Russian government. Cohen personally describes himself as an American “dissenter” and argues that the media stifle anyone who even tries to understand the situation from the Kremlin’s perspective while stigmatizing them as Putin apologists for doing so. [Wikipedia]

In an article in The Nation, Cohen stated that the US political-media establishment was silent about “Kiev’s atrocities” in the Donbass region. His article was, in turn, criticized by Cathy Young as “error-riddled” narrative and “embarrassing” repetition of Kremlin propaganda.

Gary Kasparov — Most people know Kasparov as the famous chess champion but recently as a great authority on all things Russia. His new book is “Winter is coming”.

On the eve of Secretary Tillerson’s visit to Russia, after the Syria missile message, Cohen takes the side of questioning everything about the missile strike to questioning the intentions of Trump. Never mind the intentions of one Vladimir Putin.

He claims tensions have never been higher between US and Russia that we were never so close to war and that this is a new cold war high in the relationship. That mantra should sound familiar. But everyone emphasizes Cohen’s foremost expertise on Russia.

That’s exactly where Kasparov comes in. He was astonished how this mantra leaves Putin’s intentions unchallenged — by intent or not. He was visibly offended. Knowing full well some of the limits and trail of dead bodies in Putin’s wake, he unloaded on Cohen’s reasoning ability. Ah, and that is exactly where liberals hate being challenged. Because emotion and politics are a driving force, it replaces their reasoning ability. He called Cohen’s brand of politics towing the Kremlin line.

Of course, to his pedigree, Cohen goes on the offensive against the Trump administration and Tillerson, for his ties to Russia. Okay Tillerson, or Trump for that matter, are compromised by Russia but he is not. Then he took the Russian perspective that he sees no evidence or proof that either Syria or Russia was involved in the chemical attack.

Kasparov pointed out that Cohen’s were the same talking points the Kremlin and Putin are using, to point blame everywhere else, to us and terrorists, rather than at Assad. Then he asserted the same thing Putin said, that this chemical was possibly a terrorist stockpile hit during a bombing run. Well, but days after Russia and Syria planes were trying to destroy evidence by more bombing. So why would they be trying to cover it up and destroy evidence, even bombing the hospital after 5 hours — if terrorists or rebels were responsible for the gas attack?

Kasparov seems to nail the box of Cohen’s positioning shut. He tells Cohen that Russia has long used anti-American dissent as a core in their propaganda.

There you have it — if it is not obvious — here is an American skeptic, dissenter, professor, academic and expert representing the Russia side of things and a Russian representing the US side of things. Striking irony.

RightRing | Bullright

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.

Defending the Indefensible

I’m almost amused by the political dialogue — to use the term loosely — of the left these days but if one thing sums it up, it would be defending the indefensible.

They apply those talents to Obamacare. What is there to defend? It is a total mess even for doctors and healthcare professionals, and prices are going through the roof. But if anyone can defend that it would be Democrats or the liberal left. Calling that a success is sort of like calling the burnig of Rome a strategic victory.

It isn’t the only place they’ve applied their expertise.They defend Obama’s sham legacy, his leading from behind foreign policy. He doubled the national debt….. “winning!”

Finally, Trump has taken the opportunity to say he was left a big mess all over. That was a strange way of securing Obama’s legacy. Now that Trump elegantly points that out, shrieks come from thhe heckler section. Dare he say that? Mess is an understatement.

Remember Obama’s doctrine was “don’t do stupid shit!” Apparently they didn’t follow their own doctrine. Unless fertilized evil was their idea of smart?

The Democrat party is in a scorched-earth campaign to deny the effects of the last 8 years, and to defend the entire scandalous, evil hole called Obama’s legacy. But it was a pretty big giveaway how bad it is when their biggest claim was Obama had a scandal-free administration for eight years. And Valerie Jarrett echoed that across liberaldom.

Leading from behind and “don’t do stupid shit” being pillars of that tenure. If it looks like and quacks like a duck, guess what? It ain’t a pig. Besides, there isn’t enough lipstick to cover this mess. But who’s trying? How quick their perspective changed from a yellow brick road under a rainbow; to a black plague in every corner with red-alert problems everywhere, just as he leaves. They can complain about leadership now.

On one hand they’ll be defending, on the other they’ll be condemning everything, everywhere. Their hope and change turned to Mope and Complain.

RightRing | Bullright

Hidden Problems and National Diversions

How come no one in the media ever talks about the real problem? Press is supposed to be our fourth estate, what keeps the public informed and the national conversation honest. (I know, but that’s the ideal you hear)

The poster child of this is the travel ban that got so much media attention. They decry it as a Muslim ban for one thing. It isn’t. How many Muslims have freely come and gone through America while this supposed Muslim ban was enacted?

Delta also has a major computer malfunction meltdown causing chaos and confusion. No, no one said that, media hardly paid attention to it. Instead, they only called Trump’s Executive Order “chaos and confusion.” So a major airline grounds itself but they are worried about 109 people scrutinized in their travel, from seven selected countries — now that is real chaos and confusion.

Protesters swarm airports causing chaos and confusion while protesting, you guessed it, the “chaos and confusion.” The protests that have gotten all too common. At the drop of a hat, Soros protesters descend. Please, anyone care about the real problems?

I have a suggestion for media and people from these affected countries. If you have a ISIS caliphate operating within your borders, you might need to be on a travel bad. Just saying.

Start with the real problem. Rather than anyone blaming America or the Executive Order; why not blame the real source of the problem? Why can’t they blame the root cause? Islamists, a caliphate and terrorism are the reasons such an order was necessary. They are the source of all the trouble. But they cannot address the fundamental problem.

And the people who are affected by this travel ban should look at the real source of their problem. If we were honest and faced the problem that way, we would realize what the real problem is. We must blame and aim at the radical Islamic terrorists and the terrorist, ISIS caliphate. To blame anything else is just a diversion from the truth. Deal with that problem and the other ones go away. But the left cannot seem to wrap it’s collective mind around that.

How about they go protest ISIS, terrorists, Islamists and Sharia-pushing clerics who created the reason for wide concerns? No, they’d rather blame a plan, they’d rather blame President Trump, blame racism, blame America….or anything but the real cause.

Listen to one of our own about how it is in one of those so-called “banned” countries.

That’s the way it is there. And they have problems with what we are doing in the USA?

Obama made good on his anti-Israel threats

Back in March this year, escaping much attention in the heat of the election, Dennis McDonough described the White House’s change in policy toward Israel. That was also after the Dems boycotted Netanyahu’s joint session address to Congress. So the radical Left is finishing off the year the way they started it, opposing Israel.

Today they followed through on their threats by refusing to veto the UN resolution on Israeli settlements.

Approved by 14-0, with US abstaining, text seeks action ‘to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-state solution’

In March McDonough spoke to the Left-leaning J-Street lobby:(I wrote about it)

Huffington Post — 3/24

“We cannot simply pretend that those comments were never made, or that they don’t raise questions about the prime minister’s commitment to achieving peace through direct negotiations,” McDonough added, saying that the Obama administration plans to reevaluate its policy toward Israel and the Palestinian territories.

Though McDonough did not elaborate on what a revamped policy would look like, the White House has suggested that its opposition to Palestinian attempts to secure statehood at the United Nations may soften. On Thursday, White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters, “Steps that the United States has taken at the United Nations have been predicated on this idea that the two-state solution is the best outcome. Now our ally in these talks has said that they are no longer committed to that solution. That means that we need to reevaluate our position in this matter, and that is what we will do moving forward,” referring to past down-votes by the U.S. on Palestinian statehood initiatives. ( more)

So he waited till December just before leaving office to stick it to Israel. Well, it cannot hurt Hillary. They did what they wanted to do — make good on their threat.

But this was clear in Israel’s last election. Obama operatives ran a campaign to interfere and oppose Netanyahu. Then they were ticked off at his reelection. Now it is payback, revenge time. Of course this goes over well with their anti-Israel base. It’s a political win. They can grandstand on opposing Israel and Netanyahu.

It is not about settlements either, it is about ’67 borders that are indefensible. Now the Obama administration is going out on their high note: opposing Israel. Then they can try to blame Israel for their actions. Mission accomplished before Obummer leaves office.
(if they only had more time)

The Left: hypocrisy is thy name

I always stand prepared to be outraged at the depth of hypocrisy on the left. Then I am not really. But this issue is deeper than that. I’ve come to believe there are two kinds of hypocrisy at work. There is a standard blatant hypocrisy and then there is a more sinister, fundamental hypocrisy. The latter is what I see more and more of.

The election highlighted it. During the debates before the election, there were all the calls of Trump to accept the results of the election. All those now discredited polls had showed Trump losing and Hillary the unchallenged winner. It was obvious they said. Media had pointed out daily that there was no chance for Trump to win. They asserted that the election was not based on a popular vote, whether you like it or not, but on the electoral system. That system favors Clinton, they said. They told us it was all about getting over 270 in the electoral college.Again, that would put Hillary in the White House and makes it albeit impossible for Trump to meet that daunting uphill task.

Then there was Larry Sabato going from network to network telling us there really was no way for Trump to win. He would not say zero chance but he gave him very little chance. There were all those polls, which never seem to put Hillary down by much. They mostly had her with around a six point lead in states. Closer to election it was 3 or 4 points. (I know I am generalizing but it doesn’t matter — they gave her a heavy advantage)

So everywhere they could, they were looking for concessions from Trump. “Will you accept the results of election” system? Trump just refused to play their submission game. Hillary even said she was outraged saying that, for the first time in history, we have someone unwilling to say he would accept the results. At the time, I thought it would be ironic if he won and Dems refused to accept the results. But they kept repeating it was Trump who would not accept results and the rules, as they were laid out.

Then we had the election and people were surprised. First, surprised by the results; then by the denial and refusal to accept the results as they happened. Media did report it because they really had no choice. When AP declared the winner, they could not disagree. But almost immediately it became about the popular vote.

Democrats said we don’t know the final tally of the popular vote, and it went from there. They became obsessed with the popular vote count. Before the election, they said that regardless of popular vote count the results would be determined by the electoral college. So much for that.

Now that we have the results, this fits with all their other hypocrisy. They really don’t care about that; it doesn’t bother them. However, when you notice how rooted hypocrisy is in their DNA, you see the bigger problem. It is who they are, say one thing do another.

They make a big issue about something — digging in their heels — until it is inconvenient for them to hold that position. Then they turn on a dime to support the opposite position. That’s just the way it is with the left. They are always prepared to be hypocrites because it doesn’t matter to them. Their blatant hypocrisy means nothing to them because it is a fundamental tenant of their ideology, politics rules to the left. They will do and say anything to justify their political position at the time. (subject to revision)

This is the same type of fundamental hypocrisy we see in their foreign policy positioning. They were against warring mentality. Democrats stood for Libyan intervention and then Benghazi, right up to the minute they had to take responsibility for it. Then they were AWOL about it.

All along, Democrats played with the notion of Russian involvement and sorted ties to Russia. We heard these claims from everywhere. Hillary supporter. and confident, Mike Morell took to the editorial page calling Trump an unwitting agent of the Russia federation. Charges were fierce. They even accused Trump of encouraging espionage.

“It’s pretty clear you won’t admit that the Russians have engaged in cyberattacks against the United States of America, that you encouraged espionage against our people, that you are willing to spout the Putin line, sign up for his wish list, break up NATO, do whatever he wants to do, and that you continue to get help from him, because he has a very clear favorite in this race,” Clinton said to Trump at the third presidential debate in October. — Politifact

Putin had also blamed Hillary for intervening in their election and stirring dissent afterward, a subject completely lost in the media. Yet Obama and his cohorts had been dabbling in other countries’ elections throughout both his terms, even in Israeli.

They went all-in behind the rise of Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere. Has Obama even visited Egypt since the coupe stabilized the situation? No, sort of odd considering he started out his apology tour with a Cairo speech.

Here starts the big story: blame Russia for the election results. Which is really funny because Dems claim Russians’ objective was to influence the election and undermine the integrity of our system. Mission accomplished. Democrats certify that Russia did influence the outcome, despite lack of proof. Since the election is over, given the results, Dems claim our electoral college system is not so great. Undermine the integrity of our election? Mission accomplished. How many ways can one challenge an election?

The very thing Dems accused Russia of trying to do, they willingly did themselves. No one can undermine our process as well as Democrats, when they set their minds to it. They embarked on a recount program and questioned the legitimacy of the electoral college. They tried to undermine that system by influencing the electorates, to get them to switch allegiance from Trump.

But Obama previously mocked the Russian geopolitical threat. Obama promised Russia and Putin he would be more “flexible” after his last election. Putin is still collecting.

If all Russia was trying to do was undermine the integrity of the process, then count Democrats in for that. But earlier they stood on the platform of integrity, declaring our example to the world of peaceful power transfer and our long established history of accepting election results — whether we like them or not. Scratch that!

First NYT reported:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration said on Friday that despite Russian attempts to undermine the presidential election, it has concluded that the results “accurately reflect the will of the American people.”

The statement came as liberal opponents of Donald J. Trump, some citing fears of vote hacking, are seeking recounts in three states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania — where his margin of victory was extremely thin.

In its statement, the administration said, “The Kremlin probably expected that publicity surrounding the disclosures that followed the Russian government-directed compromises of emails from U.S. persons and institutions, including from U.S. political organizations, would raise questions about the integrity of the election process that could have undermined the legitimacy of the president-elect.”

But wait, Democrats were all about undermining the legitimacy of Trump even as a candidate. It was a personal thing to Obama, who declared Trump was unqualified from the presidential podium. Hillary and her operatives questioned Trump on nuclear codes.

“Nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people,” it added.

They “stand behind the results?” Well, that is until they don’t. Democrats started a hashtag #AuditTheVote. Which is it, they stand behind the resuts or they don’t?

Independent Journal Review

Obama’s counterterrorism and homeland security adviser Lisa Monaco told reporters on Friday:

“We may have crossed into a new threshold and it is incumbent upon us to take stock of that, to review, to conduct some after-action, to understand what has happened and to impart some lessons learned.”

Added White House spokesman Eric Schultz at the daily press briefing:

“This will be a review that is both broad and deep at the same time.”

“Obviously, you can imagine a report like this is gonna contain highly, you know, sensitive and even classified information….[We’ll] make public as much as we can.”

So now they aren’t sure they will disclose the results. But isn’t doing an investigation an attempt to reassure the public and restore credibility in our system? Yet they let it be known, beforehand, that they are going to selectively report the results. Uh?

First Obama had claimed that he did not want to get involved in presidential election politics. Now he goes all in to investigate presidential election, questioning foreign involvement in our election process. See how this Hypocrisy thing works? First Obama lectured, and mocked, Trump on questioning our rigged system or the outcome of our election as ridiculous. Now he is the chief tin-foil hat in the process questioning the integrity of our election.

But then this is the same president who is claiming his administration is scandal free, too. I guess there is time enough to start one more scandal over the results of the election.

Funny how before the election, who cared? But we had how many hackings all over our government. One report is anyone who ever worked in government has had their personal information stolen. Did we hear Obama’s outrage about that? How about Democrats’ outrage calling for us to do something about it? We do know nothing stopped Obama, who could have taken action on any one of these hacks. But yet, he hasn’t. (at least that we know of, and we probably would know if they did)

Obama now tees up a Russia conflict for Trump, when he would do nothing on cyber warfare before. And he now warns Trump about the immediate “near term” North Korea threat. So all problems become elevated to red alert when Trump is sworn in. Media to follow suite. But hypocrisy? — Not a problem.

RightRing | Bullright

Fake News Is Obama’s Legacy

Fake news is the new code word, wolf whistle for Liberals. Media have made a cottage industry of naming anything remotely foreign to them a #FakeNews story.

So naturally the story of Pizzagate is now considered Fake News. Who really propels fake news stories? That would be the liberal Democrats. Lie whenever you have to; make it up to fit the purpose.

Well, we had an entire fake news construction of the disinformation campaign on Benghazi. Remember the video cause of Benghazi? Remember how it was up to us to prove that video narrative wrong? They withheld any evidence. Then they wrote the narrative that Benghazi was a manufactured story. Everything was a manufactured, fake story to them.

Before Benghazi, they wrote the fake news story ‘GM is alive and terrorism is dead’ — certainly no threat. So they went to any lengths to call Benghazi attack, even on 9/11, anything else but terrorism. Fort Hood was workplace violence. The fake news story of “hands up don’t shoot” went all across the media and is still repeated.

We had Solyndra and all those fake stories in their green agenda. Later, they went under and taxpayers money was lost. They lied about those.

But it was more than that. The whole Obamacare concept was designed, built and sold on lies. Constructed on deception. We call that fraud. If it was a private business it would be called false advertising. It would be labeled fraud or bait and switch marketing.

Speaking of fake news stories, Obama keeps saying he had a scandal-free administration. No media challenged him. Some things are so outrageous you know it’s a lie. But no one tells POTUS. I can already see the number one word in Trump’s presidency will be “lie.” Yet the word was banned under Obama’s reign.

Obama has a knack for lying. So virtually every time he addresses people he’s pushing fake news. Remember the JV team for ISIS? Remember terrorism has nothing to do with Islam? We found the intelligence was manipulated to deceive and paint a rosier picture. He didn’t want to hear bad news.

Then Obama always claimed to know nothing until he saw it in the media. Even though that would make him incompetent. But saying his administration was — until his last day — scandal-free is utter bullshit practically no one can believe. Still he repeats it. Reality has no impact on Obama. A fiction writer is his top foreign policy adviser.

He lied about Iran. He lied about the TPP trade deal. He lied that the Iran deal was not a treaty, to circumvent the Senate. Iran was fake news. He said there was no ransom for hostages. He said there was not a smidgen of corruption in the IRS. And that was a huge scandal. Scandal-free? Now he touts his great legacy which is fake news on steroids.

RightRing | Bullright

No-cred Morrell hallucinates in interview on Benghazi

What a stooge, Mike Morrell. Or as Red State so eloquently put it:

“Why Morrell chose to set his credibility on fire and masturbate while dancing around it over this [Benghazi video] issue is a mystery that I’ll leave to psychiatrists to sort out. “

More: http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/08/07/former-cia-director-mike-morrell-lying-liar-video/

Well, that about sums up Mike-the super CIA director-Morrell in his supporting role for Hillary Clinton. Morrell is just a shill for Hillary, seems to be a lot of that going around.

Sickening!

H/T to Red State

Hungary to rescue Christians

The First Country to Officially Defend Christians Persecuted by ISIS

Hungary has drawn criticism for favoring Christian over Muslim refugees from Syria and Iraq.
Christianity Today

This week, Hungary, which has during the past year come under pressure for its handling of Europe’s mass migration crisis, has become the first government to open an office specifically to address the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and Europe.

“Today, Christianity has become the most persecuted religion, where out of five people killed [for] religious reasons, four of them are Christians,” Catholic News Agency (CNA) quoted Hungary’s Minister for Human Resources, Zoltan Balog, as saying. “In 81 countries around the world, Christians are persecuted, and 200 million Christians live in areas where they are discriminated against. Millions of Christian lives are threatened by followers of radical religious ideologies.”

Read more: http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2016/september/first-country-to-officially-defend-christians-persecuted-by.html?visit_source=twitter

Yet at the same time, many of our leaders like Obama and Hillary Clinton, along with countless subordinate officials, refuse to call them Radical Islamic Terrorists.

But they have seen fit to condemn the Crusades or criticize Christians whenever possible. And they do throw around words like Islamaphobia to describe their own political critics.

Faced with confronting ethnic or religious cleansing, they cannot be forced to utter the words radical Islamic terrorists. That could offend Muslims. But they can call out critics of their refugee policy that caters to Muslims as bigots. These leaders and officials worry about families of illegal immigrants or Muslims being ripped apart byt the rule of law, yet cannot condemn the slaughter of Christian families and cleansing in Iraq and Syria.

At least Hungary can call it out and recognize it — for the human rights catastrophe it is.

Backfire: first 2016 prez debate

Sure no matter what, everyone seems to think Trump didn’t do as well as he should have. Fair criticism. He did leave an awful lot on the table — more like a smorgasbord. I think there is more than enough room for a backfire, or blow back as it may be.

Well, so much material to work with on Hillary. What was up for grabs on the table?

Travelgate
Email Server
Benghazi
Senate run 2000 fundraising
Wall St speeches
Pay to play
Foundation connections
Ethics.
Clinton Foundation — her home away from home. Shutdown issues and ethics.
Whitewater — their premier scandal
Cattle futures were very, very good to her
FBI Background Scandal — collecting and using information on opponents.
Hillary speeches were anything but free – follow the money — 11 mil in one year.
Broken promises and shattered ceilings
DNC scandal — leading to firing DWS and resignations. Politics of no choice.
Above the law
Norman Hsu Scandal and Jorge Cabrera Scandal
Damagegate to the White House — returning many things.
Records — always, the continual cover-up of her records… and her Record
Iraq vote — she actually had one, which she promptly ran away from thereafter and in her first presidential bid.
Russian reset — failure and her central focus. Getting translation wrong was not the only failure.
Reset to Red Scare
Libya and her failed mission in Benghazi.
Failed state policy on Libya
Egypt — walk like a Mo-Bro Egyptian.
Judgement disaster – this one could be disastergate.
Support Iran Deal — touts it as one of her signature achievements
TPP — she can run but she cannot hide her glowing endorsement for it.
Refusal to label Boko Haram
Her cozy partnership with Muslim Brotherhood.
Support for Refugee increases
Many lies of Hillary — she was within the law while breaking it.
Her passivity on Terrorism
Her attack on women — more like war on women. Failure to stand up for women.
Foreign Clinton Foundation donors while she endorsed beneficial policies.
Her responsibility Deficit — always claims to take responsibility, then never does.
A history of scandal and corruption — unfit and unqualified, lawfully prevented

 

Even Germany’s Angela Merkel says she wishes she could roll back time.– in regret for the refugee policy and problems. Hillary never learns, she’s irredeemable and incorrigible.

But then 11 hours of testimony to Congress on Benghazi couldn’t even put a dent in Hillary’s contemptible Libyan legacy. Nothing covers her server emailgate either.

Now the debate of so many missed opportunities. However, nothing made the Clinton record go away. She cannot delete that. Bleach-It cannot remove that stain. So it’s all still hanging like a cloud over Hillary Clinton. They did not disappear.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary can’t hide from the truth

Hillary is like the first female ambassador of ISIS. She aided in creating ISIS. Now she claims they are rooting for Trump to win. Why would they do that, when no one did more for their efforts than Obama and Hillary?

Counter Jihad

The result was that the western part of Iraq once again became fertile ground for an Islamist insurgency. ISIS swept western Iraq because of the failures of Hillary Clinton and her boss, President Barack Obama.

But that is only half the story. ISIS also exists in Syria. How is it that the United States allowed it to survive there? Lee Smith, at Tablet magazine, points out that letting Syria fester was the intentional policy of the Obama administration — in order to cosy up to Iran.

Audacity: Clinton Claims ISIS ‘Praying to Allah’ to Elect Trump

Probably the scariest part is that she falls for propaganda and apparently gave up critical thinking some years ago. Now she says trust her to protect America’s interests.

For someone who will not say ISIS terrorists are Muslim or Islamic, she claims they are praying to Allah over Trump. I bet they are secretly hoping for Hillary — in their Islamic way — who’s been very, very good for them.

Conclusion: Hillary needs to be put out to permanent pasture with her hubby, Bubba and fenced off from public service, ever.

Thugs to Saints

We saw firsthand in the last 8 years how Thugocracy really works, in real time. Examples too countless to mention but it demonstrated how much like street thugs the government has become. We can’t trust anything it does or says. Of course it was nothing new, not like we didn’t know evolution of government had a mutated gene. And then we elected Barack Obama to the White House to kick it up a couple notches.

We knew in 08 what to expect and somehow our worst expectations were not horrific enough. We assumed, incorrectly, that we the people, with the help of some Congress critters, could hold down the fort. After all, he could only be allowed to go so far, we thought. Some conservatives even laughed at the onset that this change for the worst would be the best thing for conservatives. They rationalized that it would rally conservatives and lead us to victory down the road. That was wishful thinking.

There was no will to stop the president from doing whatever he pleased. Actually, many Republicans bent over backward to give him what he wanted. He never had to pass a real budget in his first term. It was pie in the sky.And Obama went on a shopping spree to make any big spender proud. Oh, and while he did it he told us he was actually saving us money and reducing the deficit. People did not really believe it but they let him have his way. He was, after all, the nation’s first black President. What that had to do with any of it I’ll never know or understand.

Then came the end of his first term and the 2012 election. Surely, he could not win considering the cluster f&&#@ he created. We were wrong about that too. The only way he could win, as David Plouffe put it, was to run as an insurgent candidate — with the plan of fixing the problems. So the incumbent ran like an insurgent and ran against himself.

After all, he was not responsible for any of the problems, including the dragging economy. He was never held accountable for one thing.Then we had the Benghazi attack that put the lie to his chief narrative about terrorism. If the economy was that bad, at least he could claim terrorism was on the run.It was all lies after four years of failure, but what difference at that point did it make?

The thugs reigned in government and they were not going to let it slip from their hands if they could stop it. They just lied and when that failed they lied some more. Getting Candice Crowley to lie for Obama at the debate was an added bonus.

The Art of Revision

Fast forward, one campaign and election later. Now we are treated to all the revision they can muster on how great things are. Obama and Hillary deserve the ‘credit’ for this great progress. Rome is in flames but “have no fear.” Hearing them rave about how good the economy and everything is takes some chutzpah. They got plenty of that. Then came the Democrat convention. I was curious how they’d frame Hillary especially with Obama’s dismal record.

Well, the wait was over after the first few speeches. I saw how they were turning her into Mother Teresa right in front of my eyes. Was this the same failed Sec of State and part of the scandalous Clinton duo we all know? Sure it was, but now she is a saint. Was this that scandal queen we all knew? Seems she could do no wrong and leading a party as the first Nanny in Chief. Bill Clinton declared the era of big government was over, Hillary declares it has only just begun. She promises to continue Obama’s abysmal legacy of failure and even crank up the speed.

Since the convention she has gone to ground, in deep hiding. She comes out to give a very controlled speech every so often then disappears to raise money from all her Wall Street pals and celebrity liberals. But Mother Teresa would have had a hard time living that life. But no matter, she has the integrity and honor of Mother Teresa. No matter how many lies, her web of supporters claims to stand on principle, and her vast experience.

Now comes the Clinton ad that hearkens back to the 3 am phone call ad against Obama. It claims safety or national security is her main qualification. Stay safe and elect Hillary. The entire Mid East is ablaze, while she is holding the matches, and says trust me I’ll keep you safe. Have no fear with Hillary is the subtext. As Tim Kaine puts it: it’s too risky to pick an amateur — mostly because of the danger Hillary-Obama put us in. I’ve never seen such a string of reversed lies. We find out that No lies matter. Hashtag that.

“All it would take is just ‘one wrong move'” in these dangerous times, the ad says.

Just one? So she’s the only one we can trust at this dangerous time. Mother Teresa might say you cannot get away with it. Hillary’s long train of abuse has a halo, satan smiles.

RightRing | Bullright

Hillary Clinton: the pro-choice candidate

Are you ready for Hillary Choice 10.0?

Hillary and her campaign knows how to talk to “white, college-educated suburbanites” under 30 from middle income families… or any other ssubset of voters they want to target.

But they just can’t figure out how to talk to Louisianans who lost everything, who come from almost every demographic. That’s a heartless, calculated political hack.

But she knows how to talk to people in Martha’s Vineyard, Cape Cod, Nantucket, Hollywood, or with the Rothschilds to raise money. She has that language and message down pat. Choosing between 100K dollar a plate fundraiser and visiting Louisiana…. that is a no-brainer for Hillary.

So that is the kind of person Liberals and Democrats want in the White House picking winners and losers in the economy? (what Democrats/progressives do)

Hillary’s choice is failed

See, it all comes down to choices and priorities. Hillary shows us all the time which are more important. She chose lying over the truth on Benghazi. She chose a private server she could control over the government archive system. She chose to call the Benghazi victims’ families liars.

After lying about Benghazi, she said “What difference at this point does it make?”

She chose to coordinate “pay for play” with the Clinton Fundation for official US business. She chose deleting records and emails. She chose aligning with BLM over fallen cops and threats to police. She chooses open borders and sanctuary cities over national security. She chose censorship over free speech.

She chose her Wall Street connections and hedge fund owners over the people, She chose Huma Abedin and her Saudi connections over America’s interests. She chose not labeling Boko Haram‎‎ a terrorist group. She chose the bad Iranian deal. She chose to support Muslim Brotherhood as an ally. She chooses gun control over self defense. Hillary chose putting companies and miners out of business.

Hillary chooses lying over the truth almost every time she has a choice. She chose standing up a consulate in Benghazi. She chose ignoring security requests. She chose the side of a rapist over the brutalized rape victim. She chose laughing and demonizing a 12 yr old rape victim. She chose the baby-killing agenda and defending Planned Parenthood at any cost. She chooses teachers’ unions over parents’ choice for schools and education. She chose taking and charging hundreds of thousands for speeches, even from a charitable organization that helps youth.

She chose to attack victims of Bill Clinton’s “bimbo eruptions.” She chose breaking rules and ethics at the State Dep. She chooses elite fundraisers over flood victims in Louisiana. Now she chooses to label the entire right, anyone opposing her, as racists. Hillary is just a walking, talking, choosing machine.

Hillary is the definition of the wrong choice.

RightRing | Bullright

Intell failures and media attacks on Trump

I recently posted on the cooked reports about progress on ISIS. It’s been in the news. Whether its cooked reports, cooked polls, cooked politics, cooked media reporting, seems it’s all the same. O’Reilly even said don’t trust anything coming from the media.

This week, Trump receives his first briefings sparking more media attacks. Have you ever seen one man be attacked that way? Well, the reporter asked Trump point blank if he trusted the intelligence? What would make them ask that and why? So Trump was hesitant to just accept it considering the background of what has been going on.

Donald Trump says he doesn't trust U.S. intelligence, calls it "catastrophic" https://t.co/zFIQdmdpLu https://t.co/YTXjHBLwNu

— CNN Newsroom (@CNNnewsroom) August 18, 2016

Politico:

Earhardt followed up by asking whether Trump trusts “intelligence.”

“Not so much from the people that have been doing it for our country. I mean, look what’s happened over the last 10 years. Look what’s happened over the years. It’s been catastrophic. And, in fact, I won’t use some of the people that are sort of your standards, you know, just use them, use them, use them, very easy to use them, but I won’t use them because they’ve made such bad decisions,” said Trump

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-us-intelligence-briefing-227109#ixzz4HhmYUztO

Gasp, comes the response across media. “Did you hear what he said?” What did he mean by that and why would he say such a thing? It’s outrageous.

Well, has all critical thinking been abolished now? Seems so.

Standing truth on its head for Hillary

Former CIA Dir Mike Morell put out a scathing op-ed declaring Trump is turned an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.

That happens at the same time Media and Dems (as if there were a difference) are hell bent in collaboration to demonize Trump. The intentional lying and muddying campaign continue from Hillary. That is Hillary muddying her own record and actions because she cannot explain her record of lies. Then there’s her smear campaign on Trump by any means possible, Morell being the latest attempt.

Yet it continues against Trump. Its a scary thing when the DNC media, and all the establishment and their lackeys team up on one person. Had to know it was coming but to this level I’ve never seen before. There’s a genuine, massive conspiracy for you.

Morell could have just endorsed Hillary, but he wanted to harpoon him. That’s what he should have done. But he had to try to turn him into a Russian agent.

“On Nov. 8, I will vote for Hillary Clinton. Between now and then, I will do everything I can to ensure she is elected as our 45th president,” Morell wrote.

Isn’t that wonderful? Obviously he already is doing everything he can do, including label Trump a Russian agent. Actually, it only makes me wonder more about Hillary and Morell.

But there must be something really wrong with his eyesight.

“Donald J. Trump is not only unqualified for the job, but he may well pose a threat to our national security.”

“My training as an intelligence officer taught me to call it as I see it. This is what I did for the CIA. This is what I am doing now. Our nation will be much safer with Hillary Clinton as president.”

Okay, add to that the recent statements from Obama in his official press conference. He labels Trump unfit and a risk to national security or to be trusted. What hogwash. Obama has been the greatest threat America has had. He’s done more damage than anyone too.

Now here is the problem, if there was anything in question about Trump, he shouldn’t have been putting it out that way. I doubt op-eds are the prescribed method or procedure.

It does open the can of worms though. Obama was caught on a national stage being a dupe to Putin’s henchman telling him that he would have more flexibility after his election. Where was Morell on that? Where was Morell over the past eight years as Obama compromised our security? Oh, sorry, he helped push the phony video narrative on Benghazi, which the rest of us call Lying. What about Muslim Brotherhood ties?

Now he is warning us about a threat when we’ve been living with this growing threat from within for eight years. But you can always count on Leftists to stand truth on its head. Its a natural thing to progressives.

Remember it was Obama who laughed and mocked the Russian threat. He also minimized the threat of Iran too.

“And the 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back — because the Cold War has been over for 20 years.”

But it is Obama’s failed leadership and foreign policy from Clinton through, that caused the current crisis. He more less put his stamp of approval on ISIS. He set the stage for Libya’s failed state. He encouraged mass illegal invasion on our border. Now he is engaged in bringing Syrian (and who knows from where) refugees into our country and spreading them across the states. Then sanctuary cities. Trump complains and is called an agent?

The leaked DNC memos caused a reaction from Dems. Then Trump made a simple comment about her missing emails. See how quick they jumped on Trump saying he was inviting Russia to hack? (like they need our invitation) Then they said Russia was trying to influence our elections. But when they start to put stories in media about Trump being an unwitting agent, it is they who are trying to influence the election with scare tactics, undermining our election with Russia’s help. That a former CIA director is doing it is way beyond the pale. But then there are no limits.

I used to just see the hypocrisy on a massive scale. Yes but I didn’t realize how intentional it was. It’s not that the Left doesn’t care about being hypocritical, and they don’t. It is that they have so many reasons they need to be hypocritical for their agenda. It’s part of the job. To that end, Mike Morell gladly cooperates in this charade illusion.

Of course the ones we have to watch out for are Hillary and Obama commies, with all the related DC allies, cohorts and operatives. But they don’t want us looking at them. And media doesn’t want to talk about that.

RightRing | Bullright

Benghazi Report doesn’t phase the NYT

The NYT had their piece after the release of the House Select Committee report on Benghazi, and said that:

At a news conference at the Capitol on Tuesday, Mr. Gowdy praised as heroes the Americans who died in the attacks on Sept. 11, 2012. They included Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and Sean Smith, a State Department information officer, who were killed at the main American diplomatic compound in Benghazi by a mob of militia fighters who had been incited by an American-made video deriding the Prophet Muhammad. The fighters were apparently further inflamed by news of an assault on the American Embassy in Cairo.

See article: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi.html

Are we now going in reverse, or have we been transported back in time to the original lie about the cause of the Benghazi Attack?

Framing terrorism and Muslim jihad

Muslim Writer Calls Out Palestinian Terror Glorification

by IPT News  •  Jul 1, 2016

Thursday’s shocking Palestinian terrorist murder of a 13-year-old girl prompted the usual praise from Palestinian Authority (PA) outlets. Muhammad Taraireh was hailed as a martyr for stabbing and murdering 13-year-old Hallel Ariel, a U.S. citizen, as she slept in her bed.

“Martyr (Shahid) Muhammad Taraireh, who carried out today’s operation in which one female settler was killed, and a male settler was injured,” read the post on Fatah’s Facebook page and translated by Palestinian Media Watch.

The terrorists’ mother said her son made her “proud” and called him a hero and a martyr. “Allah willing, all of them will follow this path, all the youth of Palestine,” Taraireh’s mother told a local Hebron news outlet.

This brutal murder comes shortly after Abbas’ senior advisor Sultan Abu Al-Einein called for Palestinians to decapitate innocent Israelis. “Every place you find an Israeli cut off his head,” said Al-Einein.

The terrorists’ family will now begin receiving monthly payments that the PA pays to all terrorist families.

Blatant praise for terrorists is expected from Palestinian officials and significant segments of the Palestinian population. Yet the silence emanating from the broader Muslim world following such brutal attacks is similarly disturbing.

In a blog posted by The Times of Israel, Muslim interfaith activist Nadiya Al-Noor blasts Muslim hypocrisy in the context of Palestinian terrorism.

“I have seen firsthand the casual, destructive anti-Semitism that plagues the Muslim community,” she wrote. “I have heard it from the mouths of our religious leaders, from our politicians, and even from our otherwise peaceful, liberal Muslim activists. I have witnessed in horror the desperate attempts to justify Palestinian terrorism from people who I once respected. Why? Why do we decry all other types of terrorism, but bend over backwards to legitimize violence against Israeli Jews?”

Too many Muslims seek to justify such terrorism by citing the Israeli “occupation,” relying on “anti-Semitic lies fed to us by Al-Jazeera” such the canard that Israelis seek to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque, Al-Noor wrote. Too many Muslims refuse to refer to Israel by name and proclaim that “Resistance is not a crime!“

Yet Al-Noor bravely opines “stabbing a little girl to death in the one place where she was supposed to be safe is certainly not “resistance.”

“We’ll stand up against the persecution of Christians, atheists, Hindus, Shias, Ahmadis, and anyone else who is persecuted,” she wrote. “We will sob to the heavens if a Palestinian is killed, but when it comes to Palestinian terrorism against Jews, we either turn a blind eye to it, or we twist the story to make the terrorists into the victims. This is unacceptable.”

“When you make excuses for terrorists, you support terrorism.”

Al-Noor’s observations directly relate to strategies adopted by U.S. Islamist organizations, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which routinely condemns acts of terrorism worldwide – but never when it comes to Israelis.

Article at: http://www.investigativeproject.org/5482/muslim-writer-calls-out-palestinian-terror

Well, a reminder of that other post showing Muslims sending money to the family of the Orlando terrorist shooter. It is the remaining silent part that screams out at the civilized world. How can you sit there and remain quiet while others do this in the name of your religion? (and some cheer then send money)

Even when they do speak up, it is token sympathy as if they feel obligated to just make a statement to absolve themselves. Then turn a blind eye to jihad practice by ignoring it.

If the world were waiting for the Muslims to resolve it they’d be waiting a long, long time. So-called good, peaceful Muslims leave it to the rest of the world to face or combat it and, frankly, I’m sickened by that.

Radical Islamic agenda and gun control

Eric Bolling filled in on the O’Reilly Factor. A former Obama advisor, Nayyera Haq, argued for more gun control laws. Eric laid out the Islamist problem spreading like wild fire. Well, it’s hard to deny, hard as libs try.

The terrorist was “a homophobic who clearly had mental health issues”.

She claimed we are making progress on ISIS, but that as we make gains in the ME, ISIS gets desperate calling for lone wolf attacks. “As you beat back ISIS on the ground in Syria and Iraq, they spread to Europe and US. So that’s a separate problem,” she said.

Then came the revelations of CIA Director Brennan. He tells us the are coming here and scheming to exploit the refugee program and immigration. Nayyera Haq said:

“I think a big part of the answer is: now that it’s coming to America homeland, let’s not make it easy for people to get weapons like AR-15s or any other weapons… now, absolutely.”

Did she make that loud and clear? We have to sacrifice our rights and guns because the terrorists are coming here. That might have been a Freudian slip, but it’s the ugly truth. They must crack down on our rights because of Radical Islamic Terrorists and jihadis — which they can’t even mention — are obsessed with killing. Target guns not terrorists.

Let me flush that out further. Immigrants, real immigrants, typically come here to assimilate into America. Islamic radicals come here to assimilate America to them, Islam. They don’t want any part of assimilation and if we have to sacrifice or lose things because of them coming here, all the better. That is not immigration, that’s an invasion, a hostile takeover. But Islamists already declared war on us, so it’s no surprise.

Incidentally, the Radicals and Muslims are some of the most vocal supporters of gun control, why is that? I’ve read articles by so-called moderate, liberal Muslims for gun control. Stop looking at their Islam faith, blame our gun laws, they say. Absurd.

So now for a message to our Commander and Denier:

Mr. Obama, if you really want Americans to resent Muslims, then take our rights away and demand we sacrifice our guns because the Radical Islamists’ political agenda cannot be controlled or defeated. That will make Americans respect Muslims more, won’t it?

That is not a wise trade off: making new rights and protections for Muslims while you take away our Constitutional rights. Then again, Obama will not enforce the laws there now, and scrubbed regulations for offensive words. What these radicals and terrorists are doing is treason, something like what you’ve been doing. But here is the king of deception himself.

“The reason I am careful about how I describe this threat has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism,” Obama lectured us after Orlando.

“There’s no magic to the phrase ‘radical Islam. It’s a political talking point, not a strategy.”

“It wouldn’t make us more safe, it would make us less safe, fueling ISIL’s notion that the West hates Muslims.” – NOLA

Even within that rebuttal he could only call it extremism. Obama is an extremist obfuscater of the first degree. Our greatest threat is still sitting in the Oval Office.

RightRing | Bullright