Dana Mathewson

But the media will never tell you about it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/18/mueller-comey-have-had-long-close-relationship.html

The men were memorably cast – mostly via Comey’s 2007 testimony – as honorable men standing against government overreach when they talked former President George W. Bush out of pushing ahead the renewal of a controversial surveillance program. That episode included a supposedly dramatic hospital bedside encounter when Bush aides tried to get ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft to sign off on the program’s renewal. But Ashcroft, and in Comey’s telling, Comey himself, stood firmly athwart the pressure and prevailed.

Mueller was a confidante of Comey during the initial incident, backing him up and reportedly offering to resign alongside him should the need arise. After Comey’s testimony in 2007, Mueller’s notes were subpoenaed by Congress as a way of verifying the account (which Bush and then-White House Counsel Alberto Gonzalez offer a differing version of).

"I hung up, called Director Mueller, with whom I'd been discussing this particular matter and had been a great help to me over that week -- and told him what was happening," Comey testified. "He said, 'I'll meet you at the hospital right now.'"

He later told senators of Mueller: "He’s one of the finest people I’ve ever met.”

According to a lengthy Washingtonian article published on the eve of Comey succeeding Mueller as FBI head, Mueller was the "one person in government in whom [Comey] could confide in and trust.”
Read the rest!

FOR MORE ON THIS ISSUE SEE http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/robert_mueller_appointment_another_charlie_brown_football_moment

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/minnesota-retreats-from-ban-on-female-genital-mutilation/
WND Exclusive

Minnesota retreats from ban on female genital mutilation
Refugee advocates say bill is 'overly harsh'

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Wil Wirtanen

As usual Newt nails it.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/05/18/gingrich-surrender-or-fight-our-country-is-at-stake.html

"Republicans, in particular the Trump administration, are approaching a historic decision that will shape America for generations to come.

The endless hostility of the Left, exemplified by violent fascists on college campuses, thugs in the streets, determined disrupters at town hall meetings, and the dishonest elite media are all part of their efforts to defeat the reforms and changes that President Trump was elected to implement.

The constant, anonymous leaks from disgruntled federal bureaucrats aim to provide ammunition for the propaganda news media to press the attack.

The Left’s dance of destruction is stunningly choreographed.

I have been overseas for the last three days, and it has been sickening to see so many foreigners terrified because they unknowingly believe the news media’s false reports and vicious attacks. The only version of President Trump they know is the one portrayed in the 24-hour cesspool of CNN and the daily acrimony of the New York Times. Sadly, our own nation’s news media is doing more to undermine America's image than Al Jazeera or Pravda combined. "

Read the rest!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

Wil Wirtanen

https://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2017/05/20/the-5-biggest-things-liberals-get-wrong-about-themselves-n2329574?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:19 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 7 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Mueller is the kind of straight-shooter who will do the proper job, and won't go into mission creep to try to destroy the president.

How awful, says -- or feels -- the Left!

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/05/18/after-mueller-trump-critics-worry-maybe-theres-no-scandal/

.... the responses from Trump’s most dogged critics on the Russia question betray a kind of anxiety about the Mueller appointment—an anxiety that the no-nonsense law enforcement wise man will lower the temperature in Washington without actually uncovering enough damaging material to bring down the President.

Take, for example, Josh Marshall declaring that while he has confidence in Mueller to identify and expose any criminal activities undertaken by Trump or his associates, he won’t be able to prosecute the real Trump-Russia wrongdoing: a labyrinthian "conspiracy” which may not even involve any illegal behavior.

It is critical to understand that the most important details we need to know about the Russian disruption campaign and the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with it may not be crimes. Indeed, I would say that the crimes we’re likely to discover will likely be incidental or secondary to the broader actions and activities we’re trying to uncover. Just hypothetically, what if Russia had a disruption campaign, Trump campaign officials gave winks and nods to nudge it forward but violated no laws? That’s hard to figure but by no means impossible. (Our criminal laws are not really designed for this set of facts.) The simple point is that the most important ‘bad acts’ may well not be crimes. That means not only is no one punished but far, far more important, we would never know what happened.

End excerpt.

It's obvious, folks, they want him GONE, no matter how or why it's done. Well, I want people like this Josh Marshall GONE! He's dangerous.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 299 words, total size 2 kb.

Dana Mathewson

if you have young liberal friends, you might forward this video game to them. It's called Getting Out Of Your Parents' Basement, and it might open their eyes.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/05/getting-out-of-your-parents-basement-how-liberal-policies-hurt-young-people.php

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Does anyone else suspect the GOP has fallen into a trap with this appointment of a special prosecutor? Especially former FBI head Robert Mueller? I sure do.

First, let us ask ourselves why was a special prosecutor appointed at all? There is no actual allegation of illegality, despite media hysteria. Comey has not even been deposed about the supposed "memo" which was read to the Washington Post over the telephone by a leaker; there is no evidence Comey even wrote it. He has declined to testify before Congress. So why appoint a special prosecutor when we have yet to have any suggestion fo a crime - or have heard from the parties involved.

The reality is that Chuck Schumer demanded this and was threatening to hold the Senate hostage. He also demanded a private, closed door meeting. Now why would he do that?

As I see it,he either a.had information not known to the Senate at large, information that had to be kept secret for security purposes or b. he wanted to speak frankly, too frankly for the general public. The former is dubious on the face of it; why would Schumer have undisclosed information when he is not the Senate Majority Leader? If he had such information wouldn't he have gone privately to Mitch McConnell first? That Schumer resorted to threats to get a closed door session speaks volumes about the matter; he had no secret information. He wanted to speak frankly.

About what? What was it he couldn't say publicly?

I think we all know; Schumer wanted to threaten the GOP in private. What did he have to use? Not sure. But I suspect he blackmailed and cajoled, pointed out that the Senators didn't like trump either, an outsider who was coming in and upsetting the all-you-can-eat buffet. Was there more? I suspect so. In point of fact, I suspect some sort of blackmail occured behind those closed doors.

But that is not provable without actually hearing the conversation. But, as always, the GOP caved to the pressure.

And so Robert Mueller, former FBI director, has been appointed as Special Counsel. The democrats largely cheered the move. Why?

If a person is respected by both sides in Washington you can bet he is a duplicitous weasle. Comey was such. Former "plamegate" counsel Patrick Fitzgerald was another. If you are a Conservative you had better grab your socks, because you are going to have them knocked off, and not in a good way.

Robert Mueller is entirely a creature of the Establishment. He started his legal career working for a law firm in San Francisco, the leftist capital of America. He moved to the Northern District of California where he worked as a U.S. attorney in the home of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. This alone should make the man suspect. He moved from Frisco to Boston, the other citadel of Satan, where he made a name for himself as a prosecutor. Like all Establishment elitists, he moved in and out of government, taking jobs as partners of law firms between government gigs.

In Boston he worked for Hill and Barlow, venerable law firm that defended the communists Sacco and Vanzetti. Three former Massachussetts Governors - Endicott Peabody, Michael Dukakis and William Weld; = worked for Hill and Barlow, as did Deval Patrick, so it is a jumping off spot for political careers. Mueller also worked for Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, Senior partner William Weld chaired Michael Dukakis' presidential campaign. The law firm defended pro-bono the U.S. Army in the McCarthy-Army hearings (where Sen. McCarthy was investigating communist infiltration into the military.)

Mueller was also pay master on the Volkswagon settlement. Certainly nobody of a conservative - or even impartial - bent would take such a job as the settlement was solely an attck on Volkswagon because they tried to buck Obama's radical EPA regulations. Mueller also defended the government's massacre at Ruby Ridge.

Now, I know that an upwardly mobile man will likely have associations with leftist supporting law firms, but one must wonder how much of this rubbed off. Mueller was unquestionably an insider, and one who was not one bit offensive to these types.

George Bush appointed Mueller in 2001, shortly after taking office after the bitterly contested election of 2000. Naturally the RINO Bush would choose someone the Democrats would not object to, and he was so pleasing to them that Barack Hussein Obama (Peace be upon him!) kept Mueller on for two years after taking office. Clearly he is a man the Left finds pleasing. But nothing comes free from liberals or Democrats, and I suspect the bill is now due.

When Bush appointed Mueller no less a partisan hack than Patrick Leahy sang his praises:

"But Leahy said Mueller, a veteran prosecutor credited with turning around the U.S. attorney's office in San Francisco after his appointment there in 1998, is the right man for the job. "I applaud President Bush for his appointment," the senator said.

Leahy's committee gave Mueller a unanimous vote of approval Thursday after two days of hearings earlier in the week that were marked by unstinting praise for Mueller and widespread condemnation of the FBI. Hours after the committee vote, the full Senate approved Mueller for the job on a 98-0 vote."

There are other points to ponder here; Mueller is an old friend of James Comey, the man who started this whole ball rolling.

The media is quite pleased; Time called it a "smart pick". CNN is singing his praises too. Ditto Politico. And Republicans like Jason Chavetz cheered the move "Mueller is a great selection" even though he was chosen by the Deputy AG, a Democrat. And, as with Patrick Fitzgerald and James Comey, the latest special counsel is the return of Ashley Wilkes, the man whose honor is above reproach (until he rules against the liberals.)

For reasons beyond me, our side is forever falling for the same tricks. Like Charlie Brown going after that football, every time the liberals promise to play fair we believe them and wind up falling on our backsides. I suspect it will be no different with this Mueller investigation. And furthermore, I suspect Robert Mueller knows that if he fails to produce for the enemies of the President his career prospects will be zilch. Mueller isn't stupid.

Why are we?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1073 words, total size 7 kb.

Daren Jonescu

This first appeared at American Thinker:

Toronto Blue Jays outfielder Kevin Pillar has been suspended for two games for shouting an "anti-gay slur" at Atlanta Braves pitcher Jason Motte during an angry outburst. http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/19412327/kevin-pillar-toronto-blue-jays-suspended-2-games-anti-gay-slur In other words, he used a word -- which apparently is now officially and for all progressive time "the f-word," equivalent to "the n-word" -- to attack the masculinity of another player, on the implicit grounds that being an "f" is less masculine than being a non-"f."

That is to say, he has been suspended because he shouted a word that men and boys have long used in heated arguments to demean the manliness of a rival -- one which, like all such words in this age of enlightened hypersensitivity, must remain unspoken, even in news reports of stories hinging upon its very use. And to top it off, Pillar has been fed a Major League Baseball-approved apology to the universe for having used language disturbing to LGBTQ hearts everywhere (or rather, to their liberal guilt-monger defenders everywhere).

Let us be clear about this. Pillar was not suspended for actually questioning an opposing player's sexuality -- which might have been called slander once, but which political correctness has redefined as flattery -- but merely for flinging at him a common, low-minded epithet indicating "unmanliness."

Oh dear, we can't have professional he-men challenging one another's manliness, now can we? For that would imply that manliness is some kind of special virtue of men, and unmanliness some kind of deficiency. And where would that leave the hallowed and long-suffering LGBTQ community, which, somewhere among its unwieldy initials, includes biological men who are decidedly unmanly?

Wait! We can't say that either -- that Gs, Bs, Ts, or Qs are unmanly -- for that would suggest that there is a specific set of characteristics that may be designated as manly, to the exclusion of their opposites. But then wouldn't that mean that a person who is biologically a man, but who lacks those manly characteristics, is somehow a less complete man than one who possesses those characteristics? Mustn't we, in the name of progress and inclusion, admit that any and all characteristics are manly which are displayed by any biological man -- including, presumably, those men transitioning into womanhood who haven't crossed the halfway point in their transition yet?

Furthermore, since many of the characteristics of this new, progressively-defined "manliness" would actually be characteristics hitherto understood as unmanly, which is to say womanly, mustn't we accept that any woman who possesses any of said characteristics may also (if she so wishes) be accurately described as manly? In which case, doesn't this make everyone, in principle, manly?

But herein lies the problem. "Manly" is an adjective that implies a definition of "man," and a definition must not be inherently contradictory. Therefore, since all characteristics hitherto identified as unmanly or womanly are now to be included in the definition of manliness, it follows that any characteristic fundamentally inconsistent with this new definition should be excluded from the definition, in the name of conceptual coherence. But the characteristics of traditional manliness, which used to lead men to regard women and womanly types as unmanly, and hence to use rude epithets indicating womanliness to demean the manliness of other men, are clearly inconsistent with our new, inclusive notion of manliness. It follows that these traditional characteristics are precisely the ones which must be excluded from the new concept of man.

Hence, and henceforth, "manly" must be understood to mean the complete collection of all human characteristics, predilections, and preferences, except those characteristics which used to be regarded as manly before the dictionary of human nature was rewritten by the wise Websters of the LGBTQ community, along with their neutered -- er, I mean gender-neutral -- friends in professional sports, academia, and the media.

Isn't progressive thought grand? Confusing at times, to be sure, but thank goodness the world has Major League Baseball to keep us all straight -- oops, um, I mean compliant.

Toronto Blue Jays outfielder Kevin Pillar has been suspended for two games for shouting an "anti-gay slur" at Atlanta Braves pitcher Jason Motte during an angry outburst. In other words, he used a word -- which apparently is now officially and for all progressive time "the f-word," equivalent to "the n-word" -- to attack the masculinity of another player, on the implicit grounds that being an "f" is less masculine than being a non-"f."

That is to say, he has been suspended because he shouted a word that men and boys have long used in heated arguments to demean the manliness of a rival -- one which, like all such words in this age of enlightened hypersensitivity, must remain unspoken, even in news reports of stories hinging upon its very use. And to top it off, Pillar has been fed a Major League Baseball-approved apology to the universe for having used language disturbing to LGBTQ hearts everywhere (or rather, to their liberal guilt-monger defenders everywhere).

Let us be clear about this. Pillar was not suspended for actually questioning an opposing player's sexuality -- which might have been called slander once, but which political correctness has redefined as flattery -- but merely for flinging at him a common, low-minded epithet indicating "unmanliness."

Oh dear, we can't have professional he-men challenging one another's manliness, now can we? For that would imply that manliness is some kind of special virtue of men, and unmanliness some kind of deficiency. And where would that leave the hallowed and long-suffering LGBTQ community, which, somewhere among its unwieldy initials, includes biological men who are decidedly unmanly?

Wait! We can't say that either -- that Gs, Bs, Ts, or Qs are unmanly -- for that would suggest that there is a specific set of characteristics that may be designated as manly, to the exclusion of their opposites. But then wouldn't that mean that a person who is biologically a man, but who lacks those manly characteristics, is somehow a less complete man than one who possesses those characteristics? Mustn't we, in the name of progress and inclusion, admit that any and all characteristics are manly which are displayed by any biological man -- including, presumably, those men transitioning into womanhood who haven't crossed the halfway point in their transition yet?

Furthermore, since many of the characteristics of this new, progressively-defined "manliness" would actually be characteristics hitherto understood as unmanly, which is to say womanly, mustn't we accept that any woman who possesses any of said characteristics may also (if she so wishes) be accurately described as manly? In which case, doesn't this make everyone, in principle, manly?

But herein lies the problem. "Manly" is an adjective that implies a definition of "man," and a definition must not be inherently contradictory. Therefore, since all characteristics hitherto identified as unmanly or womanly are now to be included in the definition of manliness, it follows that any characteristic fundamentally inconsistent with this new definition should be excluded from the definition, in the name of conceptual coherence. But the characteristics of traditional manliness, which used to lead men to regard women and womanly types as unmanly, and hence to use rude epithets indicating womanliness to demean the manliness of other men, are clearly inconsistent with our new, inclusive notion of manliness. It follows that these traditional characteristics are precisely the ones which must be excluded from the new concept of man.

Hence, and henceforth, "manly" must be understood to mean the complete collection of all human characteristics, predilections, and preferences, except those characteristics which used to be regarded as manly before the dictionary of human nature was rewritten by the wise Websters of the LGBTQ community, along with their neutered -- er, I mean gender-neutral -- friends in professional sports, academia, and the media.

Isn't progressive thought grand? Confusing at times, to be sure, but thank goodness the world has Major League Baseball to keep us all straight -- oops, um, I mean compliant.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1340 words, total size 9 kb.

Jack Kemp

Yes! And he has other supporters in the Senate...

Jack

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/05/18/republican-senators-introduce-resolution-to-move-us-embassy-to-jerusalem-n2328759?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=

Republican Senators Introduce Resolution to Move U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem

Katie Pavlich
|
While the White House backs away from moving the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, breaking a repeatedly stated campaign promise, a group of Republican Senators introduced a resolution this week to eventually get the job done.

"I am proud to join my colleagues in introducing this resolution,” Texas Senator Ted Cruz released in a statement. "It is time for the United States to implement a law that Congress passed more than two decades ago, formally recognize Jerusalem as the eternal and undivided capital of Israel, and move our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.”

The resolution, introduced by Senators Cruz, Graham, Rubio and Heller, formally declares Jerusalem the capitol of Israel.

You can read the rest at Townhall.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 152 words, total size 1 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Guess he's staying near law enforcement. Good. This is one tough hombre! One day he'll be running the Department, I hope.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/18/sheriff-clarke-says-is-taking-homeland-security-post.html


Sheriff Clarke says he is taking Homeland Security post.
Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke said in an interview Wednesday that he has taken a job as an assistant secretary in the Department of Homeland Security.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:37 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 65 words, total size 1 kb.

Timmothy Birdnow

A quick point to ponder; with an endless drumbeat of innuendo and claims of scandal, the politics of personal destruction seem destined to bring down the Trump Administration, or so many in the rickety-kneed GOP seem to believe. But one must ask, why do we assume that this is the end for Trump? Let me take everyone on a stroll down memory lane:

Bill Clinton was one of the most scandal ridden Presidents in history. He was investigated for

1. Whitewater
2. the firing and subsequent bogus prosecution of the White House Travel Office.
3. The, uh, disturbing death of Vince Foster (who apparently shot himself in the head with his non-dominant hand and then dragged himself a ways with his head bleeding out.)
4. Kathleen Willey's accusations against Clinton of groping her.
5. Juanita Broderick's very credible assertion that Clinton forcibly raped her (Hey, you better put some ice on that!")
6. Eileen Wellstone alleged she was sexually assaulted by Clinton at an Oxford pub when he was 23. in fact, there have been repeated accusations of sexual assault against Bill over the years, starting when he was NOT famous.
7. Credible accusations of drug use by Bill, including his "I smoked a joint but did not inhale" claim and his brother Roger, who described Bill's drug habit "he has a nose like a vaccuum cleaner."
8. Bill Clinton used the IRS to audit political rivals and conservative opposition. The Heritage Foundation, the National Rifle Association, Concerned Women of America, Citizens Against Government Waste, National Review, American Spectator (which was burglarized three times), the National Center for Public Policy Research, the American Policy Center, American Cause, Citizens for Honest Government, Progress and Freedom Foundation, David Horowitz’s Center for the Study of Popular Culture and the Western Journalism Center were all audited. See here.
9. Over 900 raw F.B.I. files wound up in the possession of a shady private investigator in the employ of the Clintons, and despite demands by Congress the Administration kept them for several years.They were clearly intended for blackmail.
10. Clinton, after receiving campaign funds, allowed classified American technology to be sold to the Chinese. A waiver was issued to Loral Aerospace so the firm could help china launch satellites - thus giving them the knowledge to make ICBM's which could strike the U.S.
11. Hillary's Rose Law Firm billing records went AWOL after being subpeonaed and turned up in the trunk of a car in a junkyard in Arkansas.
12. Clinton pardoned people who donated money to him.
13. Bill, not wanting to pay a settlement to Paula Jones, attempted to rig the trial by subborning perjury and obstructing justice. He would be impeached for this but not convicted. Later he would be found guilty by a judge he himself had appointed and given a slap on the rist - a fine and a five year suspension on his law licence.
14. When he left, Clinton stole furniture and china. His staff vandalized the offices, including removing the W's from keypads and whatnot.
15. Clinton signed the Executive Order creating the Escalante Grand Staircase National Park - on land containing some of the best low sulfur coal in America. He had received illegal donations from James Riady, who happened to own the world's other main source of such coal and would LOVE to make Americas off limits.
16. Bill Clinton had ties to Don Lassiter, the Don of the Dixie Mafia.
17. There was a strange number of deaths surrounding Clinton. See here and here.

These are just fifteen off the top of my head, and no doubt I have forgotten many. This is only counting the scandals of the Clinton Administration and not the many scandals since.

The point is, Clinton survived them easily and his wife was a hairsbreath from becoming President of the United States despite a whole new crop of scandals. Why are Republicans so terrified of these non-scandals that the fake media are promoting against Trump?

Republicans need to grow a spine, or some other, more peripheral body organs.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:50 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 692 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Here is a fascinating tidbit about the black ops being run on President trump and their leakage from the Washington Post. Turns out that Amazon chief Jeff Bezos also owns WaPo - and won the contract to build the mega cloud storage system for the u.S. intelligence community. What does htat mean? it means he probably has access to our intel.

From Conservative HQ:

"As Richard Pollock, writing for The Daily Caller News Foundation recently explained, former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper’s creation of a cloud-computing platform in 2013 made it far easier for officials to access raw intelligence information."

End excerpt.

Bezos is a huge Liberal who has donated vast sums of money to Obama and Clinton. He now has raw intelligence data to use against the President and anyone else he may need to blackmail. And don't tell me Bezos doesn't have access; it is customary for computer people to leave backdoors in for their own access, and even if they did not Bezos has made contacts with people who have easier access to this data. In other words, the real hack was not of the election by the Russians but of the United States by Amazon.

The article continues:

"According to Richard Pollock’s reporting the number of American citizen "targets” since Clapper’s system began in 2013 has surged from 89,000 to 106,000 in 2016, a 19 percent increase according to a 2016 report from the former DNI’s office.

Similarly, the number of intelligence community employees who share information now exceeds 50,000, compared to only 9,000 in 2014, according to Kendrea DeLauter, IC Desktop Environment Joint Program Manager at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

An unknown number of these 50,000 individuals are now actively betraying their country by feeding classified information to outsiders, include President Trump’s political opponents in the media and anti-Trump networks.

Setting aside the perfectly rational concern about the same company that owns The Washington Post, a news outlet that breaks a lot of intelligence-related news, actually holding the keys to America’s national intelligence database."

End excerpt.

Sooo...

A cadre of individuals have the power to leak classified information if they wish, and strangely we have been treated to an endless paradeof unsourced leaks. Coincidence?

"When one begins to analyze how these stories begin and propagate it is clear that, as The Washington Post put it, "current and former U.S. officials” in the intelligence agencies are engaged in what amounts to a seditious conspiracy to cripple and eventually bring down President Trump.

Through the reporting of our friend Adam Kredo, it has been known, at least since early February, that Obama’s former Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes leads a small group of former Obama staffers and loyalists have conducted a months-long campaign to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus."

End excerpt.

We are witnessing something astonishing; a coup in plain sight by the intelligence community and the media. They aren't really even trying to hide it! There is active, open treason occuring here. Frankly, if this succeeds we will have an open civil war because half of this country wanted Donald J. Trump to be President. This isn't hte Nixon era; many Americans rightly understand the United States is in the process of dissolution as we speak. Trump was a Hail Mary pass. If the Deep State and the Establishment succeed in destroying this President they will forever alienate the people in the middle.

And that is no small thing, which is why the Democrats are pushing so hard; they know that if they can bring down Trump his successor (Mike Pence) will be an impotent and largley symbolic President. HE won't dare try to shake things up! Pence is a good man but weak, and he will never have the courage that Trump has. What's more, the threat will be obvious to Pence, who is no fool. Meanwhile, the GOP will take it in the shorts for this. It is the lifeline the Democrats desperately need, as they now realize they are seriously in the minority in America. They have been peddling socialism for some time now and the majority of Americans don't want it, so they have to tarnish the GOP to the point where nobody will ever vote Republican again. All they need is a few more years to complete the job of "remaking America" and they know it. If the Republicans allow this to happen they are bigger fools than even I believed.

We are facing political armageddon. This attempted coup truly represents the fall of the American Republic. History will weep.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 777 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night."

Rev. 12:10

"Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him."

Zachariah 3:1

"Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time."

Rev: 12:12

the attacks on Donald Trump are reaching a crescendo, and one must consider what this all means. Despite calls by the Democrats and the media (but I reiterate) for both impeachment and removal from office via the 25th Amendment (and, if they could, execution by the most painful and disgusting manner possible), nobody has presented anything with any substance whatsoever. The big thing now is this Comey memo, which was only read over the phone to the Washington Post and which, even if it was written by Comey prior to his dismissal from office, not only fails to prove any actual obstruction of justice (Obama publicly gave his opinion that Hillary's case should be dropped in order to obstruct justice in just this way, and Bill Clinton sent attack dog James Carville out to hump the leg of Special Prosecutor Ken Starr in what was clearly an attempt to stop Starr or at least hinder him) but in fact exonerates Trump for firing Comey, who had a duty to take this "obstruction of justice" to Congress but failed to do so. Why? Either he knew it was NOT obstruction or he wanted to keep it as a weapon to blackmail the President. Either way it proves Comey was corrupt and incompetent.

THAT is the best they have. The whole "Trump leaked classified information" indignity of the last week is largely forgotten, as it never had any substance - and they knew it. Hillary actually DID leak classified information, and we were told it was unintentional so she was not culpable. How can the Demo/media complex make it stick against Trump? And the Russian angle is played out.

So why are they flipping their wigs now?

Well, first off, people seem to have forgotten the calls to impeach George W. Bush. The Democrats hated Bush too, and they called him Hitler and whatnot. Of course, Bush's technique to deal with it was to lay there like a slug and to give them three quarters of what they wanted. But Trump is cut from different cloth, and he is unwilling to just roll over.

But one must ask if there is strategy involved here. I would argue yes.

Either the Democrats think they can win this thing now and force Trump from office, or they believe that he is about to steamroll them and they are desperately counter-attacking. In many wars the side losing will launch an all-out assault in a desperate effort to break free of the boot on their necks. It often fails (the German attack at the Bulge) but it sometimes succeeds (the Tet Offensive succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of North Vietnam, according to several of their generals, as they were routed by Walter Cronkite proclaimed "the War is lost" and America began pulling out. Of course, Tet was a disaster for North Vietnam and the VC; they lost 32,204 confirmed killed, and 5,803 captured, while the U.S. lost barely over a thousand and North Vietnam 2,819.) Is this desperate assault on all fronts a Bulge or Tet? I would argue it is.

I believe they have looked at the numbers and realize that the public is going to turn against them if Trump succeeds. It's do or die.

Which means that only one side will be left standing after this. Now, Trump has a mighty coalition arrayed against him. He wrestles with not just the Democrats but the universal hatred from the media, as well as the Republican Establishment. Look at John McCain, who cannot put his pettiness aside for the good of the Party or the country, and who is quick to join the Democrats in calls for investigations and whatnot. Qweeg McCain has always been like this, as has his mini-me Lindsay Graham (that cracker) but a lot of other skittish ponies in the RINO class are ready to jump ship in the hopes of being eaten last. What they fail to understand is that They are, like the U.S. after Tet, poised for victory.

Oh, I know; the RCP average of polls shows Trump in the sub basement. Karl Rove, speaking on Mike Gallagher's radio show yesterday, made that very point. So? Those polls were dead wrong when they predicted Hillary would win and the RCP is worse than many because it averages fake news media polls along with real ones. This business of polls being central to everything we do was proven a failure under Bush Jr. and Hillary was bitten by it. The only polls that should matter are the ones at the ballot box. Oh, and why listen to Karl Rove, who cost the GOP the Senate, the House, and ultimately the Presidency? Rove has been nothing but wrong his whole career.

At any rate, I believe this thing is reaching a head. Whichever way it turns, I fear we may have violence. Frankly, to directly overturn the will of the People as they are attempting to do is unquestionably an act of violence in itself.

In short, this is an attempted coup.

One need only look at the viciousness of the Demo0/media complex to see that a sea change is occurring to the Left in this country too. They were not really loyal opposition when out of power but they grudgingly accepted it. No longer. They are moving from political gangsterism into becoming monsters, the same sort of behavior we have witnessed on the Left when they are close to power. Lennon, Stalin, Che Guevera, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot, and now the modern American Left. And like the monsters of these earlier ages the Left will eventually try to implement the same policies of liquidation. Remember, Obama's buddy in Chicago was William Ayers who once said that 25 MILLION Americans would have to be eliminated if they would not accept "re-education". Ayers was once well outside the mainstream of liberal thought, but today he is the core of the Democrat Party.

They still mean to do this, folks! They had hoped to simply breed us out by bringing in endless swarms of immigrants, but since we have been bucking them on this, they may have to fall back on the good, old, reliable Death Camp.

Ridiculous, you say? I would hope so, but the people who have been running the very top of the democrat Party have been extreme radicals; Barack Obama's administration had such hard liners as Cass Sunstein, Van Jones (an avowed communist and now media guest), Valerie Jarrett, Carol Browner, Ron Bloom, Kevin Jennings, John Holdren, David Axelrod, etc. The Democrats even had an avowed socialist run for President and give Her Highness Hillary a run for her money. If one compares the platform of the Democrats of today with the CPUSA there is little difference. And, as happened in the past, the same end result will be achieved.

"And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

Rev. 6:2

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1305 words, total size 8 kb.

Helen Dyer

As Jo Nova has said umpteen times - FOLLOW THE MONEY!

Here's another "sustainability" website which has more of this economy-destroying stuff. Only problem is - this kleptomania is UNSUSTAINABLE once all the real i.e. productive jobs have been destroyed:

https://www.ceres.org/news-center/press-releases/over-200-global-investors-urge-g7-stand-paris-agreement-and-drive

If we ever needed any more evidence that Climate Change is a hoax, this news item of 8 May 2017 shown below from theInvestor Group on Climate Change is a clincher. It shows how major financial institutions are promoting Climate Change policies for financial gain ostensibly to save the world from Climate Change disaster.

http://www.igcc.org.au/news/4819502

It gives prima facie evidence of the truth of the statement by Ottman Edenhofer, Co-chair of the IPCC's Working Group III, and a lead author of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report of 2007, who said in 2010:

"But one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy. Obviously, the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore, with problems such as deforestation or the ozone hole.”

Those politicians who are pushing expensive Climate Change policies onto us to supposedly to save the world are either avariciously self-centred, gullible or outright stupid. Perhaps they are all of these.

We should all be protesting to our local Members of Parliament.

Regards

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

Snowflake Professor Resigns Over Campus Carry

https://townhall.com/notebook/stevesheldon/2017/05/17/snowflake-professor-resigns-over-campus-carry-n2325243?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=

A University of Kansas associate professor from the departments of History and of American Studies recently resigned citing concerns over campus carry in Kansas, which becomes effective July 1. Professor Jacob Dornan states in his resignation letter that "Kansas can have great universities, or it can have concealed carry in classrooms, but it cannot have both.”
Why not?
He blathers on: "In practical terms, concealed carry has proved to be a failure. Campus shootings have become all too frequent, and arming students has done nothing to quell active shooter situations because students do not have the training to effectively combat shooters and rightly fear becoming identified as a suspect themselves.”
Excuse me, Mr. Professor, are you aware that according to a Crime Prevention Research Center report, 98.4% of mass public shootings occur in gun-free zones?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

It appears that Nikki Haley understands Jewish History better than Mr. Kushner and Ivanka.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/05/17/nikki-haley-the-western-wall-is-in-israel-n2327988?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=

UN Ambassador Nikki Haley is stepping outside of the White House position on the Western Wall, telling the Christian Broadcasting Network the holy site is in Israel. Further, she reiterated the need to move the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

"I don’t know what the policy of the administration is, but I believe the Western Wall is part of Israel and I think that that is how we’ve always seen it and that’s how we should pursue it," Haley said. "We’ve always thought the Western Wall was part of Israel.”

"Obviously I believe that the capital should be Jerusalem and the embassy should be moved to Jerusalem because if you look at all their government is in Jerusalem. So much of what goes on is in Jerusalem and I think we have to see that for what it is,” she continued.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

Brian takes on the Post-Dispatch again today:

Dear Mr. McDermott,
In your PD story of this morning, entitled, "Confederate Memorial Must Go, Krewson Says" you left little doubt as to where your own sympathies lie. It is a complex and emotional issue, although few on the Left will admit that this is not as simple as it may appear.

In any event, your fifth paragraph skews the argument and exposes your own bias. You state, "Critics of Confederate statues in New Orleans and other Southern cities have argued that such monuments shouldn't be displayed...because of their connection to slavery and white supremacy." You go on to state, "Opponents of their removal, including white supremacists, alt-right activists, and some Republican politicians , argue the movement amounts to a purge of a major aspect of American history."

I did not notice any mention, in the paragraph that among the critics of these statues you will find Black Lives Matter activists, politically correct liberal gadflies, and preening Democratic politicians (like Mayor Krewson). Why did you see fit to dismiss the opponents of the statue removal as "...white supremacists, alt-right activists, and some Republican politicians", while attaching no negative modifiers to the groups who push the PD agenda.

Are all of the opponents of removal of the Confederate monument closet Klansmen, secessionists, and racists? That is a serious charge coming from a newspaper that decries the loss of "civility" in our public discourse.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

Rob Schneider was right. We haven't seen Democrats this mad since we freed their slaves.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:39 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

Jack Kemp

In 2008, Hillary Clinton, while campaigning in Las Vegas, said that there were "no illegals."

But Trump disagrees with that - and has gotten some results...read this quote from Amer. Thinker:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials couldn’t immediately say how many people have been deported because of the changes, butSomalia has taken back 259 just seven months into the fiscal year. That is far more than the 198 it took back in all of 2016 and the 17 it took in 2015.

Read the whole article at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/05/more_countries_taking_back_us_deportees.html

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:30 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 96 words, total size 2 kb.

Dana Mathewson

Well, well. Interim FBI Director -- or should I say Acting FBI Director -- Andrew McCabe is the husband of

"Jill McCabe, who took $467,500 from Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s political action committee during her run for Virginia state Senate.

"She also received $207,788 from the Virginia Democratic Party, which is heavily influenced by Clinton loyalist McAuliffe.

"The funds began flowing to Jill McCabe two months after the FBI launched its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015."

End quote.

In other words, she has "a cozy relationship to Hillary Clinton operatives."

http://nypost.com/2017/05/14/former-fbi-official-says-promotion-of-interim-director-is-disgraceful/?

The New York Post article quotes former top FBI official James Kallstrom, who goes on to say:

The funds began flowing to Jill McCabe two months after the FBI launched its investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015.

At that time, Andrew McCabe was promoted from running the bureau’s Washington field office to the No. 3 position at the FBI. She [Hillary] eventually lost to her GOP opponent.

"And Comey lets all this pass. He doesn’t do a thing about it. It’s an outrage,” Kallstrom said. "Today’s he’s the acting director and I hope in two or three days he’s no longer the acting director because he has no judgment. And it just shows that Comey has no common sense.”

Kallstrom also said Trump was right in dumping the former director.

"He had to go. And I am glad he went. And I think the president did exactly what he should do,” Kallstrom said.

He said Comey did a number of "foolish things,” but the worst was announcing last July that while Hillary Clinton was "extremely careless” in her handling of classified information, she did not intend to violate the law and shouldn’t be charged criminally.

There's a lot more in the article.

A NOTE FROM JACK KEMP:

Yes, I saw some of this article. All I can say is that a lot of other people will have to rattle Trump's cage to do more of the right and smart thing. He can't take his voters for granted and get reelected - or accomplish that much in this four year term.

As Darrell Royal said about his U. of Texas team at a Cotton Bowl game decades ago, when asked if he would change his team's offense because of his opponent, Notre Dame: You dance with who brung ya" (we'll use the same methods that got us to this championship game).

"Stick with me baby, I'm the guy that you came in with" - from the song "Luck Be a Lady" in the musical "Guys and Dolls." Dana and maybe Fay already knew the source of this line.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:40 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 4 kb.