We are the drain the swamp people

Leading up to the 2018 mid-terms, otherwise informed voters and the Republican establishment were warned what a victory for Democrats in Congress would mean.

Efforts by the left, now in virtually complete control of the Democratic party would continue, in the most vicious, dishonest, and, yes, treasonous way, to try to overturn the 2016 presidential election. For the best informed among us, it was seen for what it was…a necessity for the Democrats to keep the American people from learning how extreme the abuse of power had been exercised by the 8 years of the Obama administration.

A majority in both Houses of Congress, or even just the Lower house would result, not only in a continuation of the Democratic party’s lies and abuses but also a never-ending series of phony hearings, maximum effort to keep the public unaware of the frightening criminality of the 8 year Obama reign of incompetence, disingenuousness, and unconstitutional behavior. It would mean daily appearances on various media by the sleaziesat politicians the Democrat party has to offer…Maxine Waters, Adam Schiff, Jerry Nadler, the “ugh!” list goes on.

So, what happened? Voters nonchalantly ignored the reality of what the nation would face, the Republican Party took a nap…no one will ever convince me that the GOP establishment did not want the Democrats to gain full control of congress. For the establishment…leadership is hard, especially when it means doing the right thing, not the politically expedient thing!

So where are we now. Hopefully not in the same mood and place. We’re seeing that all those dire prediction were not exaggerations!

To allow any one of the Democrats now vying for the presidential nomination to actually win the office, quite simply will mean that this nation, as the cradle of freedom, genuine Constitutional government, the rule of law, etc, is gone.

Get right down to it. The radical left now owns the Democratic party. Any candidate from that party who could win the presidency will be required, directed, and monitored to insure his or her rule is part of a communist trajectory.

If there is one American value that will be irretrievably lost (there will be many), it will be the concept of private property. As an American you will have no ownership of anything to do with as you choose.

Think about it!     DLH

When Normality Became Abnormal
By Victor Davis Hanson| June 16th, 2019  Center for American Greatness

No one wished to say that. Trump did. He canceled the flawed deal without a second thought.

Iran is furious, but in a far weaker—and eroding—strategic position with no serious means of escaping devastating sanctions, general impoverishment, and social unrest. So a desperate Tehran knows that it must make some show of defiance. Yet it accepts that if it were to launch a missile at a U.S. ship, hijack an American boat, or shoot down an American plane, the ensuing tit-for-tat retaliation might target the point of Iranian origin (the port that launched the ship, the airbase from which the plane took off, the silo from which the missile was launched) rather than the mere point of contact—and signal a serial stand-off 10-1 disproportionate response to every Iranian attack without ever causing a Persian Gulf war.

Everyone realized the Paris Climate Accord was a way for elites to virtual signal their green bona fides while making no adjustments in their global managerial lifestyles—at best. At worst, it was a shake-down both to transfer assets from the industrialized West to the “developing world” and to dull Western competitiveness with ascending rivals like India and China. Not now. Trump withdrew from the agreement, met or exceeded the carbon emissions reductions of the deal anyway, and has never looked back at the flawed convention. The remaining signatories have little response to the U.S. departure, and none at all to de facto American compliance to their own targeted goals.

Rich NATO allies either could not or would not pay their promised defense commitments to the alliance. To embarrass them into doing so was seen as heretical. No more.

Trump jawboned and ranted about the asymmetries. And more nations are increasing rather than decreasing their defense budgets. The private consensus is that the NATO allies knew all along that they were exactly what Barack Obama once called “free riders” and justified that subsidization by ankle-biting the foreign policies of the United States—as if an uncouth America was lucky to underwrite such principled members. Again, no more fantasies.

China was fated to rule the world. Period. Whining about its systematic commercial cheating was supposedly merely delaying the inevitable or would have bad repercussions later on. Progressives knew the Communists put tens of thousands of people in camps, rounded up Muslims, and destroyed civil liberties, and yet in “woke” fashion tip-toed around criticizing the Other.
Trump then destroyed the mirage of China as a Westernizing aspirant to the family of nations. In a protracted tariff struggle, there are lots of countries in Asia that could produce cheap goods as readily as China, but far fewer countries like the United States that have money to be siphoned off in mercantilist trade deals, or the technology to steal, or the preferred homes and universities in which to invest.

The Palestinians were canonized as permanent refugees. The U.S. embassy could never safely move to the Israeli capital in Jerusalem. The Golan Heights were Syrian. Only a two-state solution requiring Israel to give back all the strategic border land it inherited when its defeated enemies sought to destroy it in five prior losing wars would bring peace. Not now.

The Palestinians for the last 50 years were always about as much refugees as the East Prussian Germans or the Egyptian Jews and Greeks that were cleansed from their ancestral homelands in the Middle East in the same period of turbulence as the birth of Israel. “Occupied” land more likely conjures up Tibet and Cyprus not the West Bank, and persecuted Muslims are not found in Israel, but in China.

Suddenly Redeemable

An aging population, the veritable end to U.S. manufacturing and heavy industry, and an opioid epidemic meant that America needed to get used to stagnant 1 percent growth, a declining standard of living, a permanent large pool of the unemployed, an annual increasing labor non-participation rate, and a lasting rust belt of deplorables, irredeemables, clingers and “crazies” who needed to be analyzed by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. At best, a middle-aged deplorable was supposed to learn to code or relocate to the Texas fracking fields. Perhaps not now.

In the last 30 months, the question of the Rust Belt has been reframed to why, with a great workforce, cheap energy, good administrative talent, and a business-friendly administration, cannot the United States make more of what it needs? Why, if trade deficits are irrelevant, do Germany, China, Japan, and Mexico find them so unpleasant? If unfettered trade is so essential, why do so many of our enemies and friends insist that we almost alone trade “fairly,” while they trade freely and unfairly? Why do not Germany and China argue that their vast global account surpluses are largely irrelevant?

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) assured us that the world would be suffocating under greenhouse gases within 12 years. Doom-and-gloom prophecies of “peak” oil warned us that our oil reserves would dry up by the early 21st century. Former Vice President Al Gore warned us that our port cities would soon be underwater. Economists claimed Saudi Arabia or Russia would one day control the world by opening and closing their oil spigots. Not now.

Three million more barrels of American oil are being produced per day just since Trump took office. New pipelines will ensure that the United States is not just the world’s greatest producer of natural gas but perhaps its largest exporter as well.

Trump blew up those prognostications and replaced them with an optimistic agenda that the working- and middle classes deserve affordable energy, that the United States could produce fossil fuels more cleanly, wisely, and efficiently than the Middle East, and that ensuring increased energy could revive places in the United States that were supposedly fossilized and irrelevant. Normal is utilizing to the fullest extent a resource that can discourage military adventurism in the Middle East, provide jobs to the unemployed, and reduce the cost of living for the middle class; abnormal is listening to the progressive elite for whom spiking gasoline and power bills were a very minor nuisance.

Changing Roles

Open borders were our unspoken future. The best of the Chamber of Commerce Republicans felt that millions of illegal aliens might eventually break faith with the progressive party of entitlements; the worst of the open borders lot argued that cheap labor was more important than sovereignty and certainly more in their interests than any worry over the poor working classes of their own country. And so Republicans for the last 40 years joined progressives in ensuring that illegal immigration was mostly not measured, meritocratic, diverse, or lawful, but instead a means to serve a number of political agendas.

Most Americans demurred, but kept silent given the barrage of “racist,” “xenophobe,” and “nativist” cries that met any measured objection. Not so much now. Few any longer claim that the southern border is not being overrun, much less that allowing a non-diverse million illegal aliens in six months to flood into the United States without audit is proof that “diversity is our strength.”

The Republican Party’s prior role was to slow down the inevitable trajectory to European socialism, the end of American exceptionalism, and homogenized globalized culture. Losing nobly in national elections was one way of keeping one’s dignity, weepy wounded-fawn style, while the progressive historical arc kept bending to our collective future. Rolling one’s eyes on Sunday talk shows as a progressive outlined the next unhinged agenda was proof of tough resistance.

Like it or not, now lines are drawn. Trump so unhinged the Left that it finally tore off its occasional veneer of moderation, and showed us what progressives had in store for America.

On one side in 2020 is socialism, “Medicare for All,” wealth taxes, top income tax rates of 70 or 80 or 90 percent, a desire for a Supreme Court of full of “wise Latinas” like Sonia Sotomayor, insidious curtailment of the First and Second Amendments, open borders, blanket amnesties, reparations, judges as progressive legislators, permissible infanticide, abolition of student debt, elimination of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau and the Electoral College, voting rights for 16-year-olds and felons, and free college tuition.

On the other side is free-market capitalism but within a framework of fair rather than unfettered international trade, a smaller administrative state, less taxation and regulation, constitutionalist judges, more gas and oil, record low unemployment, 3-4 percent economic growth, and pressure on colleges to honor the Bill of Rights.

The New, New Normal

The choices are at least starker now. The strategy is not, as in 2008 and 2012, to offer a moderate slow-down of progressivism, but rather a complete repudiation of it.

One way is to see this as a collision between Trump, the proverbial bull, and the administrative state as a targeted precious china shop—with all the inevitable nihilistic mix-up of horns, hooves, and flying porcelain shards. But quite another is to conclude that what we recently used to think was abjectly abnormal twenty years ago had become not just “normal,” but so orthodoxly normal that even suggesting it was not was judged to be heretical and deserving of censure and worse.

The current normal correctives were denounced as abnormal—as if living in a sovereign state with secure borders, assuming that the law was enforced equally among all Americans, demanding that citizenship was something more than mere residence, and remembering that successful Americans, not their government, built their own businesses and lives is now somehow aberrant or perverse.

Trump’s political problem, then, may be that the accelerating aberration of 2009-2016 was of such magnitude that normalcy is now seen as sacrilege.
Weaponizing the IRS, unleashing the FBI to spy on political enemies and to plot the removal of an elected president, politicizing the CIA to help to warp U.S. politics, allying the Justice Department with the Democratic National Committee, and reducing FISA courts to rubber stamps for pursuing administration enemies became the new normal. Calling all that a near coup was abnormal.

Let us hope that most Americans still prefer the abnormal remedy to the normal pathology.

0

0

• Court Finds Gross Violations Of Emoluments Act
• Calls for Trump to Resign ; Will Impoverish Trump and Family!

How about these for headlines by major national media ?

True?

Well, yeah, could be…if the “Chief Justice” was the title that a non-government, non-judicial, entity gives to its executive director, and whose name and title appears on any news release issued by the organization.

And, what if it turned out that “the Court” is just the title of the organization…an acronym for Council of Uncompromising Righteousness and Truth…a devotedly partisan “watchdog” group founded by several dozen former legal professionals, all major liberal Democrat donors and activists and rabid anti-Trumpists, and former Obama and Hillary staffers.

Would anybody, right or left, point out the obvious?

The executive director’s “official” title, “Chief Justice” is intended for the very purpose achieved in such a story… its unquestioned use by the media to give the average person the impression that the US Supreme Court has issued a major ruling against Donald Trump.

Is this too silly to suggest as a possibility?

Well, folks, you have just seen it done this past week!

WHAT DID WE MISS?

Last week the media exploded with news that the “Office of the Special Counsel” has found that Kellyanne Conway, one of President Trump’s most effective spokespersons was guilty of violating the Hatch Act and was calling for her dismissal from government service!:   Even The Washington Times!

Office of Special Counsel: Conway violated Hatch Act
Washington (CNN)

The US Office of Special Counsel announced Tuesday that White House aide Kellyanne Conway violated the Hatch Act on two occasions by “advocating for and against candidates” in last year’s Alabama Senate special election.
In a new report, the OSC, special counsel, Henry Kerner, pointed to Conway’s TV interviews conducted in her “official capacity” in November and December of last year. The agency said Conway “impermissibly mixed official government business with political views about candidates in the Alabama special election.” ————————-

Wow! And we thought the Special Counsel’s Office was shut down and found nothing criminal or in violation of federal statutes.

Well folks, that’s still true. This past week’s “news” strongly implying the ‘startling’ finding by Bob Mueller of violation of federal law by a close Trump aide is flat out false…or perhaps more accurately, deliberate misrepresentation!

The “Office of the Special Counsel” has no connection whatever to the ‘Mueller Special Counsel’!

But, tell me, how many people who heard the initial reports that Kellyanne Conway had been found guilty of violating the federal Hatch act governing political activity by government officials, and she must be fired by President Trump, took that as legitimate and accurate “breaking news’?

Regardless of which side of that wide ideological divide in today’s America you might be on, did you take this report as either great news or extremely troubling and disappointing?

I know I took it as the latter… initially.

But then, those of us, out of deep concern, looked into this report more closely, learned that, once again, our ‘free press’, the ‘friend of the people’, have once again completely misrepresented and distorted a true “nothing burger” to try to turn more voters against the president and further undermine his legitimately elected presidency.

Just who is this “Office of the Special Counsel”?

The “Special Counsel”, in this hysterical “news” report is actually a liberal Democrat “federal watchdog” organization, more commonly known as the “Citizens for Responsibility in Washington” (“CREW”). It is like any other partisan liberal, progressive “watchdog” group…”MoveOn.org, the “League of Women Voters”, the ACLU, Emily’s List, the “Progressive Majority”, etc.

CREW’s founders were all liberal Democrats. The group was founded to counter conservative groups like Judicial Watch, which I contend would never stoop to such lowlife tactics…they neither need to nor are of such low character and mean spiritedness.

Who’s Who at CREW
The idea for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) was conceived by Norman Eisen and Louis Mayberg, two lawyers who often donated to Democrat causes. Eisen and Mayberg decided they needed a government watchdog to mirror the conservative ethics groups that successfully battled Bill Clinton during the 1990s. Their idea blossomed into CREW, which was born in 2003.

They tapped former Democrat Senate aide Melanie Sloan to run the new organization. Sloan built the group into a major player in the progressive movement, filing numerous charges against the George W. Bush administration and Republicans in Congress. In 2015, she yielded control of CREW to another former Senate Democrat aide, Noah Bookbinder.
In 2014, Clinton machine fixer David Brock was elected chair of the CREW board. Brock runs several SuperPACs and 527 groups with close ties to Hillary Clinton. After the 2016 election cycle, Brock ceded control of the board to Norman Eisen, ostensibly to “ensure [CREW’s] public reputation for non-partisanship.” But a leaked memo published in the Washington Free Beacon detailed Brock’s continued influence over the organization and its role in his network of liberal attack organizations.

One Republican that often signs his name to CREW actions is Vice Chair Richard Painter. However, in August of 2016, he endorsed Hillary Clinton in a much-touted New York Times op-ed.

CREW’s founders were wealthy Democrats (here are just some of them)

Norman Eisen, attorneyNorman Eisen is an attorney and a former partner in the law firm Zuckerman Spaeder. After serving as Deputy General Counsel to Barack Obama’s transition team in 2008, he was appointed special advisor to the president for ethics, and then Ambassador to the Czech Republic. Eisen has donated at least $67,500 to Democrat causes since 1999. He also “bundled” (rounded up money from other individuals) between $200,000 and $500,000 for Obama in 2008. In December of 2017, it was announced that he would assume the chairmanship of the CREW board.

Louis MaybergLouis Mayberg is co-founder and current president of ProFund Advisors LLC, a prominent mutual fund management firm. He’s also a donor to the Democrat Party. Mayberg has donated at least $25,850 to Democrats (and to independent Sen. Joe Lieberman) since 1992.

Daniel BergerDaniel Berger is one of CREW’s founding directors. He’s a Philadelphia lawyer with the firm Berger and Montague and a deep-pocketed donor who has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Democrats over the years.

Mark PennMark Penn is a longtime Democrat pollster and strategist with close ties to Bill and Hillary Clinton. Penn served as Bill Clinton’s pollster for most of his presidency where he became closely involved in policymaking. He also advised Hillary.

———
WE HAVE JUST ONE QUESTION WE ARE LIKELY TO NEVER GET ANSWERED:

Where is the RNC, conservative pundits, Trump supporters coming out to communicate exactly what we are doing in this piece?

We realize this story only dominated 2 or 3 news cycles and is now “old news”. But the impression must be out there, as intended by the media, that, once again, Trump simply rejected the “Special Counsel’s ” demand and refused to fire Kellyanne Conway. The “Hatch Act accusation” will now be added to all the other “serious sins” of Donald Trump as part of coming impeachment charges.

And, many, if not most, voters will never know they have filed something away in their memory banks which will shape their future voting decisions without ever knowing they were again conned big time by the dishonest media and the lazy GOP!!!      DLH

0

0

HOWEVER MUCH FUN IT IS TO LOOK BACK AT THE HYSTERICAL  AND DIRE PREDICTIONS  (AND QUITE LAUGHABLE) REGARDING “CLIMATE CHANGE” AND “GLOBAL WARMING” BY “RENOWNED SCIENTISTS”, IT IS ALSO RATHER QUITE DISTURBING.

ARE THEY REALLY THAT DISINGENUOUS AND/OR GULLIBLE? OR ARE THEY SO DREADFULLY INCOMPETENT AND/OR IGNORANT ?

When the current pope and  politicians jump on a scientific “dogma”, you have neither religion nor science. “Manmade Climate Change” falls in line with both Pope Francis’s affection for Communism and the Democratic Party’s desire for power through Socialism. (‘Scientists’  just like the grant money!).        DLH

FLASHBACK: ABC’s ’08 Prediction: NYC Under Water from Climate Change By June 2015

New York City underwater? Gas over $9 a gallon? A carton of milk costs almost $13? Remember when that happened on June 12, 2015? No? This was the wildly-inaccurate world of 2015 predicted by ABC News 11 years ago this week. Appearing on Good Morning America in 2008, Bob Woodruff hyped Earth 2100, a special that pushed apocalyptic predictions of the then-futuristic 2015.

The segment included supposedly prophetic videos, such as a teenager declaring, “It’s June 8th, 2015. One carton of milk is $12.99.” (On the actual June 8, 2015, a gallon of milk cost, on average, $3.39.) Another clip featured this prediction for 2015 “Gas reached over $9 a gallon.” (In reality, gas cost an average of $2.75 four years ago.)

*Thanks to RD for title line and for this related forward:

https://www.prageru.com/video/ep-86-beware-of-leftist-hysteria/

0

0

Oh on some of our posts we try to be a bit acerbic  and even pretend hilarity (occasionally ribald) in the manner of Stilton Jarlsberg at Stilton’s Place. But there is no substitute for consistent mastery present at his site as it is set out a few times a week.  Here he pays tribute to Sarah Huckabee now departing as Trump’s Press Secretary.  Visit his site for accompanying graphics and more delightful skewering of the left.  The Bad Lip Reading insert (below tribute) was also something we found there.

Power Press

White House Spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders has announced that she’s leaving her position at the end of the month, and she will be sorely missed. Or at least, she’ll be sorely missed by those of us who appreciated her strength, her humor, her intelligence, and her mastery of facts. And more than that, her delectable ability and willingness to rip new superhighway-sized buttholes in the many aggressively ignorant poltroons in the Press Room.

Which is why the mainstream media is unsurprisingly doing their best to savage this fine woman on her way out. A quick check of “news” related to her departure offers up nice, neutral headlines like these: “Sarah Sanders was the disdainful Queen of Gaslighting (Washington Post),” “With Sarah Sanders Leaving, Trump Now Lies Along (USA Today),” “As Sarah Sanders Signs Off, a Look Back at Her Biggest Lies (Vanity Fair),” “Sarah Sanders’ Legacy: The Death of the White House Press Briefing (CNN).”

During her tenure, many on the supposedly pro-women Left decided if they couldn’t match wits with her, they’d attack her personally. Her weight, her makeup, her clothing choices, and her Arkansas roots were all mocked viciously and repeatedly, clearly demonstrating the hypocrisy and snobbishness of the Progressive Left. And Sarah handled it all with unflappable style and wit.

It’s hard to conceive of a tougher job than that which Ms. Sanders has handled so impressively, and hard to imagine who can now do the job as capably. There are fun speculations out there: not only our own Busty Ross, but names like James Woods, Mark Steyn, Diamond and Silk, Greg Gutfeld, Jordan Peterson, Gilbert Gottfried, Roseanne Barr, ventriloquist Jeff Dunham and “Walter,” and (our personal favorite) Deadpool.

Whoever gets the job, we hope they’re as willing to bring the fight to a combative Press Corps as was Sarah Huckabee Sanders. She should be proud of her service, and we eagerly look forward to seeing how she will dumbfound and torture those on the Left in the future.

0

0

• Apparently it means being everything to everybody for money

GOOD OLD CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY, GEORGETOWN, HOME OF SANDRA FLUKE (RHYMES WITH “DUCK”) AND INSTITUTIONALLY, TOADIES FOR OBAMA’S ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY  (“cover up those ‘religious symbols’*…see below).

This is a Jesuit university American Catholics can take real pride in…THAT IS if you’re anti-American, embarrassed by Catholicism and admire religious racketeering!

The implications are serious, wide and deep — research access (civilian and defense)   propaganda and outright disinformation taught as objective truth, politcal influence.

Via daily Caller News Foundation:  (excerpt) Read the entire article for the astounding extent of the subterfuge and influence peddling. Below this excerpt we remind you of the Georgetown massacre of its religious identity at Obama’s request. *      DLH

FOREIGN MEDDLING: Department Of Education Going After Elite Colleges For Allegedly Taking And Hiding Foreign Cash

• The Department of Education has launched an investigation into foreign cash secretly flowing into U.S. universities and sent letters to Georgetown University and Texas A&M Thursday.
• A Senate report found that 70 percent of colleges that took money from a Chinese propaganda program broke the law by not disclosing it.
• Almost all of the colleges contracted to shape U.S. textbooks on the Middle East received massive funding from countries in the region.

The Department of Education is going after U.S universities over supposed ties to foreign governments, after some allegedly took huge quantities of foreign cash and hid it from regulators.

At the top of the list are Georgetown University and Texas A&M, which have taken hundreds of millions of dollars from the government of Qatar, a middle eastern nation with suspected links to international terrorism.

Both schools received letters from the Department of Education Thursday saying they should have disclosed that funding but their filings “may not fully capture” the activity, the Associated Press reported. The letter warned that they could be referred to the attorney general to “compel compliance.”

Georgetown was also asked about possible ties to Russian cybersecurity firm Kaspersky Lab, as well as Saudi Arabian money. Both schools were ordered to disclose funding from Huawei and ZTE, Chinese firms suspected of spying.

China

In February, a Senate investigative subcommittee released a bipartisan, 100-page report that found that not only had China been pouring money into the U.S. for a program linked to propaganda efforts, a huge percentage of U.S. colleges had violated the law by hiding the money.

“Since 2006, the Subcommittee determined China directly provided over $158 million in funding to U.S. schools for Confucius Institutes,” the report said. “The Department of Education requires all post-secondary schools to report foreign gifts of $250,000 or more from a single source within a calendar year of receiving them. Despite that legal requirement, nearly 70 percent of U.S. schools that received more than $250,000 from Hanban failed to properly report that amount,” it continued.

Yet the Department of Justice told Senate investigators it had no indication that the Department of Education has ever tried to take U.S. colleges to court for allegedly violating the law.

So-called “Confucius Classrooms” funded by China have grown rapidly even though they were touted as a weapon by China’s former minister of propaganda. Teachers also committed rampant visa fraud, and China blocked the U.S. from creating a reciprocal program in that country, the report said.

During a 2018 congressional hearing on China’s activities in U.S. universities, FBI Director Christopher Wray said “I think the level of naïveté on the part of the academic sector about this creates its own issues.”

In March, security experts said that Chinese hackers had infiltrated a web of U.S. universities and stolen military research from them. “They are a full-fledged operation,” an expert told the Wall Street Journal. “And they are not going anywhere.”   . . .

Qatar

Georgetown is cooperating with the investigation and “takes seriously its reporting obligations and provides all information as required by the Department of Education every six months,” the school told the Associated Press.

The Daily Caller News Foundation asked the school for information about its foreign funding and how it might give other countries influence over the curriculum several times in recent months, but the school refused to answer.

In Texas, even though information about donors to the public university is supposed to be public, when a lawyer filed a Freedom of Information Act request, Texas A&M refused to turn over the records. Instead, the school alerted Qatar, which hired a politically-connected law firm that took legal action to tie up the request, documents reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation show.   . . .

Obama at Georgetown in 09

Obama White House ordered coverup of religious symbols for Georgetown speech  L A Times, APRIL 16, 2009  (excerpt)

Surprising word today that President Barack Obama’s White House asked Georgetown University to cover all religious symbols at the scene of the president’s economic speech at the Roman Catholic institution Wednesday.
And the prestigious Jesuit university agreed. . . .

*We note that this was not an effort on Georgetown’s part at the avoidance of confusion of Obama with Georgetown,  after all he was invited/ accepted, nor avoidance of any scandal over religious symbolism as the next time Obama appeared their Georgetown made no such effort or agreement.  It was pure in the bag toadyism.

0

0

THE SWAMP DENIZENS BUY REDACTION INK BY THE BARREL

If ever there was a ‘no-brainer’, it’s this one:

This Justice Dept. and FBI will never turn over information incriminating personnel in either entity.

That’s been proven by the stonewalling, slow-walking, and lying that has been their hallmark in any investigation of their actions in the last administration.

It is ludicrous to expect cooperation from Christopher Wray or any underlings reporting to William Barr (same for those agencies headed by Dan Coats and Gina Haspel, either due to intimidation from their subordinates, or their own participation in the illegal matters under investigation.). This has been proven in past attempts by Congress when led by Republicans.

Chuck Schumer was mistaken. There are more than 6 ways from Sunday that these agencies will protect themselves…this is the 7th!

(We are constantly told that all the wrongdoing by DOJ, National Security, the FBI that went on during the Obama years was confined to just a ‘few people at the top’, “true believers” in the Obama/Hillary way …all other employees of these bureaus and agrencies are “pure as the driven snow”…hard working, committed to justice, blah, blah, and, of course, blah. A question we have is, exactly how far down do those “top levels go?” And who promoted those people occupying top and “semi-top” levels? And who hired over the past 10 years or so the ‘hardworking, committed’ people at the lower levels?)

We could add if anyone recalls, the cell phones of Strzok and Page were ‘mysteriously’ wiped clean!…remember? YOUR FBI, IN PEACE AND WAR!

DLH

At Conservative Tree House

23 House Republicans Suspect DOJ Cover-up in Progress? – Request “Prompt” Declassification from President Trump…

Twenty-three House republicans request declassification of documents directly from President Trump as soon as possible. Despite the executive office directive to AG Bill Barr, the republican group seemingly do not trust the DOJ and FBI institutional interests.

It’s a smart move to keep the pressure on.

We could add if anyone recalls, the cell phones of Strzok and Page were ‘mysteriously’ wiped clean!…remember? YOUR FBI, IN PEACE AND WAR!

0

0

• It won’t be like last year says Alan, no more hanging with the hoi poloi
• This year he’s back with the Israel blaming Martha crowd
• However, having done the unmentionable, the bridge back to the Catskills is one too far

WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THAT THE COCKTAIL PARTIES ON THE VINEYARD MEANT SO MUCH TO THE HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR EMERITUS?

SAME AS THE OLD GROUP, JUST SHORT HARVEY FOR NOW*

Liberal bonds are strong. A drink, some canapés, and ‘stimulating conversation’ with the ‘brightest people in the world’…progressives…are everything, it seems, even to the nation’s most respected elites.

Professor Dershowitz’ late endorsement of “The Democrats’ Biggest Buffoon”, however, may not be enough.

But poor Alan had to make a decision and it had to be an agonizing choice. There was only one among 25 from which to choose…each is a doozie!

The initial winnowing was probably easy. Faculty jealousies and feuds are part of the culture of academia. So fellow Harvard professor, Liz Warren, was likely one of the first to go.

The “Professor” actually doesn’t like communists, so DeBlasio and Bernie and many of the other ‘rose-tinted’ wannabes were easy to jettison.

But how it got down to “good ol’ Joe” is, at first, a real mystery to us.

Why the esteemed Professor Alan Dershowitz would ever want to be associated in any way with this clumsy, arrogant, nasty little man of sub-par intelligence is something to ponder.

Dershowitz could not possibly respect this idiot!

Our guess? Professor Alan Dershowitz, thought to be one of the shrewdest, brightest, observers of the modern political scene, and certainly a progressive to the core, thinks that “Sleepy Joe” Biden has the best chance to beat Donald J. Trump!     DLH

Alan Howitzer Declares He Would Support Biden Over Trump in 2020
By Aidan McLaughlin Jun 13th, 2019,

Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard Law professor emeritus renowned, as of late, for his legal defenses of President Donald Trump throughout the special counsel investigation, said Thursday that he would support Joe Biden in 2020 in a matchup with the current president.

Dershowitz, appearing on the SiriusXM radio show of Mediaite founder Dan Abrams, spoke at length about the investigation into Trump and his campaign’s ties

to Russia, and said he will vote in 2020 based on the entirety of Trump’s record.

“You’re not going to vote for Donald Trump, are you?” Abrams asked in response.
“It depends who runs against him,” Dershowitz said. “If Bernie Sanders is nominated, that would present a real dilemma for me. I don’t think under any circumstances I could vote for a man who went to England and campaigned for a bigot and anti-Semite like Jeremy Corbin. I don’t think I could do it, I couldn’t pull that lever.”

“And what if the candidate is Joe Biden?” Abrams asked.

“I’m a strong supporter of Joe Biden,” Dershowitz said. “I like Joe Biden. I’ve liked him for a long time and I could enthusiastically support Joe Biden.”

“Over Donald Trump?” Abrams asked.

“Over Donald Trump, yeah,” the law prof said.

Remembering about this time last year:

Alan Dershowitz Says He’s Shunned by liberals on Martha’s Vineyard for Defending Trump   By Niraj Chokshi , NY Times  July 3, 2018

It was not the sort of complaint likely to draw public sympathy, and it did not.

Alan Dershowitz, the lawyer and professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, argued in an op-ed last week for The Hill that Americans have grown increasingly intolerant of opposing political views, focusing on a call by Representative Maxine Waters to harass Trump administration officials wherever they go.

But it was a personal note in the column that soon grabbed attention.

“I never thought I would see McCarthyism come to Martha’s Vineyard, but I have,” he wrote, of the elite island enclave off Cape Cod where he is a fixture.

Mr. Dershowitz, a self-professed “liberal Democrat,” said that friends on the Vineyard had snubbed him for publicly arguing against impeaching President Trump on television talk shows and in a forthcoming book.

“For them, it is enough that what I have said about the Constitution might help Trump,” said the lawyer, known for his fierce advocacy for civil liberties and his defense of famous clients like O.J. Simpson and Claus von Bulow. “So they are shunning me and trying to ban me from their social life on Martha’s Vineyard.”

This claim only seemed to draw a wave of mockery online that crested just as many of the nation’s media and political elites headed to the Cape for the Fourth of July.
“It is outrageous that people are now shunning Alan Dershowitz in their social lives,” one Twitter user wrote. “Really, what the heck took so long?

Many rejected the comparison to McCarthyism, with its blacklists and smears that ruined careers. Countless people offered Mr. Dershowitz their thoughts and prayers. One enterprising troll even set up a crowdfunding campaign with a $5 million goal to “buy Alan some new friends.” But friends and acquaintances on the Vineyard confirmed that his outspoken defenses of President Trump had not been well received.

His name and the name of the resort were both trending on social media. There were jokes about fine “Vineyard whine.”

*https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/386142-dershowitz-joins-harvey-weinstein-defense-team

0

0

• Pope Francis tells top energy executives to act now AND REPENT
• And by golly, Il Papa means it!
• YE DENIERS ARE THE ANTI-CHRIST !
• He might as well be named Pope Fidel, his advocacy is nothing short of one-world-government Marxism
• Marx wished he had dreamed up climate change — what a tool for getting the masses on board!
• And he never had such world-wide useful idiots in leadership positions
• Pope F seems to have signed on to AOC’s twelve years doomsday scenario.
• AOC may be too optimistic by the Pope’s lights
• Two things are predictable about the weather: Change and that Pope F’s response to what in scientific reality is an overwhelmingly natural phenomenon will kill many people, because of the economics, the politics and the psychosis of it

Pope backs carbon pricing to stem global warming and appeals to deniers
by Philip Pullella at Reuters

VATICAN CITY, June 14 (Reuters) – Pope Francis said on Friday that carbon pricing is “essential” to stem global warming – his clearest statement yet in support of penalising polluters – and appealed to climate change deniers to listen to science.
In an address to energy executives at the end of a two-day meeting, he also called for “open, transparent, science-based and standardised” reporting of climate risk and a “radical energy transition” away from carbon to save the planet.
Carbon pricing, via taxes or emissions trading schemes, is used by many governments to make energy consumers pay for the costs of using the fossil fuels that contribute to global warming, and to spur investment in low-carbon technology.

The Vatican said attendees of the closed-door meeting at its Academy of Sciences, a follow-up to one a year ago, included the CEOs of Royal Dutch Shell, Eni, BP, Repsol, Conoco Phillips, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and executives of investment funds.
“Collectively, these leaders will influence the planet’s future, perhaps more than any in the world,” said Father John Jenkins, president of the U.S. University of Notre Dame, which organised the meeting.

A small group of demonstrators gathered outside a Vatican gate. One held a sign reading “Dear Oil CEOs – Think of Your Children”.

Francis, who has made many calls for environmental protection and has clashed over climate change with leaders such as U.S. President Donald Trump, said the ecological crisis “threatens the very future of the human family”.
“WE HAVE FAILED TO LISTEN”

He criticised those who, like Trump, doubt the science that shows human activity is causing the earth to heat up.

“For too long we have collectively failed to listen to the fruits of scientific analysis, and doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain,” Francis said. Discussion of climate change and energy transition must be rooted in “the best scientific research available today”.

Trump, asked in an interview if he accepted climate science, said last week: “I believe there’s a change in weather, and I think it changes both ways.”
He has said the United States will withdraw from the Paris accord, a 2016 global agreement to fight climate change.

Francis, who wrote an encyclical – a significant document on Church teaching – in 2015 on protection of the environment, and strongly supports the Paris accord, said time was running out to meet its goals.

“Faced with a climate emergency, we must take action accordingly, in order to avoid perpetrating a brutal act of injustice towards the poor and future generations,” he said.

“We do not have the luxury of waiting for others to step forward, or of prioritising short-term economic benefits.”

Oil companies have come under growing pressure from investors and activists to meet the Paris goals.

Companies including Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Total have laid out plans to expand their renewable energy business and reduce emissions. Critics say such gestures are minor parts of businesses that overwhelmingly depend on an economy that continues to pollute.

BP Chief Executive Bob Dudley said after the meeting that “the world needs to take urgent action to get us on a more sustainable path and it is critical that everyone plays their part – companies and investors, governments and individuals”. (Additional reporting by Ron Bousso in London and Steve Jewkes in Milan; Editing by Catherine Evans, Kevin Liffey, Raissa Kasolowsky and Peter Graff)

0

0

PURSUE A SOUND CENSUS

The Odious Elijah Cummings’ House Oversight Committee Votes To Hold Barr And Ross In Contempt

Cummings, undoubtedly, in our opinion, one of the most detestable people in Congress, and that’s saying a lot, is demanding the AG and Commerce secretary hand over documents related to the addition of the citizenship question on next year’s census.

Trump: “I think it’s totally ridiculous we would have a census without asking” about citizenship.

————

We admittedly agree with President Trump on a lot of things. But this one, in our opinion, is a real ‘no brainer’.

What’s the purpose of a census if not to determine the number of people residing in a country and what percentage of them are actually citizens?

***************************************************************************

A NOTE TO READERS: The comments which often accompany the aggregated news reports you see on Veritaspac reflect the opinion of the editors. The purpose intended for this site is to promote discussion among our readers who represent a wide variety of experiences and a  valuable source of expert knowledge of politics, government, law, military, national security, and  various other related topics, far greater than that of your editors. Consequently we believe that your input, your opinions would be of great interest and value to all of our readers. If you wish, your identity and always your email address will be confidential. We urge you to give us your opinion on the matter discussed here as well as any other post appearing on V’pac.                                                                                                                                        **************************************************************************

Why Rep. Cummings believes it is necessary for his committee to see the documents related to discussions within the Executive branch regarding the addition of the citizenship question is pretty obvious to anyone paying attention to the partisan atmosphere in Washington these days.

Cummings and his Democratic colleagues hope to find, maybe, a sentence or two in the documents that they could use to distort or misrepresent, that would give an impression, however inaccurate, that there was some politically mischievous reason for asking a person living in the US if they are a citizen.

That’s simply how the Democrats in Congress ‘roll’ these days…and Cummings is as sleazy at that game as anybody in Washington.

Now the Democrats “official” opposition to asking about citizenship in the census is no secret, nor any mystery. Their calculus has always been that the more illegal aliens that can be brought into the US, the more Democrat voters there will be. As we’ve seen, the “migrants” of today, generally, are far different than those immigrants who came before…seeking only opportunity to earn a better life, willing to accept the values, the culture of their new home, to learn the language, and to assimilate as Americans, in every way.

Many of today’s migrants are seeking not just an opportunity to earn a better life, but to be awarded a better life and to be given all the benefits and privileges of our nation’s citizens by just crossing our border illegally! Many have no intention of ‘assimilating’, of accepting the laws and culture of this nation. They intend to come here, settle into their own enclaves…they even bring the flags of their own country…live as they did in the countries they came from, countries they claimed were ‘oppressive’, ‘dangerous’, ‘inhumane’, poorly governed’…you name it. Then here, they make demands on this country for the benefits of citizenship they desire, and elect the people who bought their votes!

And the Democrats are anxious to meet their demands… in return !

The way the Democrats frame their opposition to determining who is a citizen and who is not is  as disingenuous as their rationales usually are, is that “it would intimidate people who aren’t citizens or those who live with people who aren’t citizens, from responding, bringing a distorted allocation of federal resources and congressional representation to areas with higher minority concentrations.”

THAT IS HOW THE WALL STREET JOURNAL DESCRIBES THE POSITION OF OPPONENTS OF THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION. When they say it would ‘bring a distorted allocation (of resources and representation) to areas with higher minority concentrations’, they mean that fewer congressional seats that Democrats hoped to fill and the added benefits and subsidies that would go to illegal aliens, would not be available.

We ask, why should these things be available? There is nothing inhumane about denying the benefits of citizenship to people who came here in deliberate violation of our laws, bypassing even minimum regulations, even if their claims of refugee status were valid (which many are not).

America is a generous nation. Its citizens, however, have the right to the opportunities and benefits of their status as citizens, just as the people of any sovereign nation do to theirs.

It is thus also the right of a nation to know who is in their country and whether they are here as citizens.

What’s your opinion?

0

0

Having Striven Mightily the Army of Democratic Candidates Have Finally Achieved The Ultimate…Absolute Parody!

Entering the race late has put Joe Biden at a definite disadvantage. But, look, this is Good Ol’ Joe Biden (spelled with a red “E”). Haven’t we learned? You don’t mess with Ol’ Joe!

While all the other candidates had already gotten their promises out to the voters…all the stuff each will do if you just elect them in ’20…free college, free healthcare, free abortion, all your debts forgiven, everlasting peace in the world, a carbon free galaxy, Stacy Abrams a Vice President… what’s left?

Even dedicated communists were aghast. Even the Great Helmsman, Mao, never went so far with his promises. Chairman Josef (Stalin) would have laughed at the promises of this year’s Democrat field…they make utopia look like hell on earth by comparison!

So what does Joe promise. You read it here in Veritaspac…Joe vows to Cure Cancer!

This must be it, The Political Laffer of All Time!

Joe Did it !

He exposed the Democratic party’s 2020 presidential campaign for what it is…The Greatest Self Parody in National Politics in History!

Hurry, Hurry, Get your tickets here…see the Six Feet Tall Man Eating Chicken!

DLH

0

0