Heartbreaking and honest. Read the article, but watch the video first.
Heartbreaking and honest. Read the article, but watch the video first.
There is a saying, people vote their wallets (look at Congress and the Soros connection for example).
However, I think good Americans voted for something else, a chance to give their kids a better world, like their parents had given them. The voters now realize they squandered that gift by allowing morons and liberals to run amok, and are trying to make it right. There was no way Trump should have won except by the outright revolt of people who have had enough abuse. Here, the Commentary magazine explains what exactly that abuse looks like from the perspective of being down in the trenches.
Whatever else it may or may not have accomplished, the 2016 election was a sort of shock therapy for Americans living within what Charles Murray famously termed “the bubble” (the protective barrier of prosperity and self-selected associations that increasingly shield our best and brightest from contact with the rest of their society). The very fact of Trump’s election served as a truth broadcast about a reality that could no longer be denied: Things out there in America are a whole lot different from what you thought.
Yes, things are very different indeed these days in the “real America” outside the bubble. In fact, things have been going badly wrong in America since the beginning of the 21st century.
It turns out that the year 2000 marks a grim historical milestone of sorts for our nation. For whatever reasons, the Great American Escalator, which had lifted successive generations of Americans to ever higher standards of living and levels of social well-being, broke down around then—and broke down very badly.
The warning lights have been flashing, and the klaxons sounding, for more than a decade and a half. But our pundits and prognosticators and professors and policymakers, ensconced as they generally are deep within the bubble, were for the most part too distant from the distress of the general population to see or hear it. (So much for the vaunted “information era” and “big-data revolution.”) Now that those signals are no longer possible to ignore, it is high time for experts and intellectuals to reacquaint themselves with the country in which they live and to begin the task of describing what has befallen the country in which we have lived since the dawn of the new century.
The author of the piece,
Eberstadt hits the “Trump button”.
The reasons for America’s newly fitful and halting macroeconomic performance are still a puzzlement to economists and a subject of considerable contention and debate.1Economists are generally in consensus, however, in one area: They have begun redefining the growth potential of the U.S. economy downwards. The U.S. Congressional Budget Office (CBO), for example, suggests that the “potential growth” rate for the U.S. economy at full employment of factors of production has now dropped below 1.7 percent a year, implying a sustainable long-term annual per capita economic growth rate for America today of well under 1 percent.
Then there is the employment situation. If 21st-century America’s GDP trends have been disappointing, labor-force trends have been utterly dismal. Work rates have fallen off a cliff since the year 2000 and are at their lowest levels in decades. We can see this by looking at the estimates by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for the civilian employment rate, the jobs-to-population ratio for adult civilian men and women. (SEE FIGURE 3.) Between early 2000 and late 2016, America’s overall work rate for Americans age 20 and older underwent a drastic decline. It plunged by almost 5 percentage points (from 64.6 to 59.7). Unless you are a labor economist, you may not appreciate just how severe a falloff in employment such numbers attest to. Postwar America never experienced anything comparable.
From peak to trough, the collapse in work rates for U.S. adults between 2008 and 2010 was roughly twice the amplitude of what had previously been the country’s worst postwar recession, back in the early 1980s. In that previous steep recession, it took America five years to re-attain the adult work rates recorded at the start of 1980. This time, the U.S. job market has as yet, in early 2017, scarcely begun to claw its way back up to the work rates of 2007—much less back to the work rates from early 2000.
As may be seen in Figure 3, U.S. adult work rates never recovered entirely from the recession of 2001—much less the crash of ’08. And the work rates being measured here include people who are engaged in any paid employment—any job, at any wage, for any number of hours of work at all.
On Wall Street and in some parts of Washington these days, one hears that America has gotten back to “near full employment.” For Americans outside the bubble, such talk must seem nonsensical. It is true that the oft-cited “civilian unemployment rate” looked pretty good by the end of the Obama era—in December 2016, it was down to 4.7 percent, about the same as it had been back in 1965, at a time of genuine full employment. The problem here is that the unemployment rate only tracks joblessness for those still in the labor force; it takes no account of workforce dropouts. Alas, the exodus out of the workforce has been the big labor-market story for America’s new century. (At this writing, for every unemployed American man between 25 and 55 years of age, there are another three who are neither working nor looking for work.) Thus the “unemployment rate” increasingly looks like an antique index devised for some earlier and increasingly distant war: the economic equivalent of a musket inventory or a cavalry count.
By the criterion of adult work rates, by contrast, employment conditions in America remain remarkably bleak. From late 2009 through early 2014, the country’s work rates more or less flatlined. So far as can be told, this is the only “recovery” in U.S. economic history in which that basic labor-market indicator almost completely failed to respond.
Since 2014, there has finally been a measure of improvement in the work rate—but it would be unwise to exaggerate the dimensions of that turnaround. As of late 2016, the adult work rate in America was still at its lowest level in more than 30 years. To put things another way: If our nation’s work rate today were back up to its start-of-the-century highs, well over 10 million more Americans would currently have paying jobs. (bold face mine)
That’s the Trump effect. People want to work. Good people do at least. They don’t want handouts, something the Obama types don’t get. They have history in getting free rides, so think everyone wants a free ride. Truth is people need purpose and value to feel worthy. If nobody cares what you do, you’ll eventually stop doing it and slink away feeling unworthy. Self esteem, real self esteem, is valuable only if it earned.
The Left argues from their lofty perch all is well. I point out if things were going so swimmingly, why do we see job fairs across the country swamped with THOUSANDS of people looking for steady jobs?
And it isn’t all about male workers. Females are starting to get hit too.
It is not only that work rates for prime-age males have fallen since the year 2000—they have, but the collapse of work for American men is a tale that goes back at least half a century. (I wrote a short book last year about this sad saga.2) What is perhaps more startling is the unexpected and largely unnoticed fall-off in work rates for prime-age women. In the U.S. and all other Western societies, postwar labor markets underwent an epochal transformation. After World War II, work rates for prime women surged, and continued to rise—until the year 2000. Since then, they too have declined. Current work rates for prime-age women are back to where they were a generation ago, in the late 1980s. The 21st-century U.S. economy has been brutal for male and female laborers alike—and the wreckage in the labor market has been sufficiently powerful to cancel, and even reverse, one of our society’s most distinctive postwar trends: the rise of paid work for women outside the household.
Then there is the odd stat that is bothering everyone- middle class white people are dying.
American health conditions seem to have taken a seriously wrong turn in the new century. It is not just that overall health progress has been shockingly slow, despite the trillions we devote to medical services each year. (Which “Cold War babies” among us would have predicted we’d live to see the day when life expectancy in East Germany was higher than in the United States, as is the case today?)
Alas, the problem is not just slowdowns in health progress—there also appears to have been positive retrogression for broad and heretofore seemingly untroubled segments of the national population. A short but electrifying 2015 paper by Anne Case and Nobel Economics Laureate Angus Deaton talked about a mortality trend that had gone almost unnoticed until then: rising death rates for middle-aged U.S. whites. By Case and Deaton’s reckoning, death rates rose somewhat slightly over the 1999–2013 period for all non-Hispanic white men and women 45–54 years of age—but they rose sharply for those with high-school degrees or less, and for this less-educated grouping most of the rise in death rates was accounted for by suicides, chronic liver cirrhosis, and poisonings (including drug overdoses).
Though some researchers, for highly technical reasons, suggested that the mortality spike might not have been quite as sharp as Case and Deaton reckoned, there is little doubt that the spike itself has taken place. Health has been deteriorating for a significant swath of white America in our new century, thanks in large part to drug and alcohol abuse. All this sounds a little too close for comfort to the story of modern Russia, with its devastating vodka- and drug-binging health setbacks. Yes: It can happen here, and it has. Welcome to our new America.
Read the whole thing. It explains the spasm of votes that brought America Trump. The elites better being paying attention. Marches with vaginas on your heads isn’t going to offset these issues.
I don’t think it’s Trump’s policies, which seem to be more popular than he is. And though many of his pronouncements are portrayed as extreme, his statements on, say, immigration seem eerily like what former presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton were saying not all that long ago. So why all the anger over Trump?
As I’ve pondered this, I’ve gone back to Tyler Cowen’s statement: “Occasionally the real force behind a political ideology is the subconsciously held desire that a certain group of people should not be allowed to rise in relative status.”
I think that a lot of the elite hatred for Trump, and for his supporters, stems from just such a sentiment. For decades now, the educated meritocrats who ran America — the “Best and the Brightest,” in David Halberstam’s not-actually-complimentary term — have enjoyed tremendous status, regardless of election results.
An election’s turn might see some moving to the private sector — say as K street lobbyists or high-priced lawyers or consultants — while a different batch of meritocrats take their positions in government. But even so, their status remained unchallenged: They were always the insiders, the elite, the winners, regardless of which team came out ahead in the elections.
But as Nicholas Ebserstadt notes, that changed in November. To the privileged and well-educated Americans living in their “bicoastal bastions,” things seemed to be going quite well, even as the rest of the country fell farther and farther behind. But, writes Eberstadt: “It turns out that the year 2000 marks a grim historical milestone of sorts for our nation. For whatever reasons, the Great American Escalator, which had lifted successive generations of Americans to ever higher standards of living and levels of social well-being, broke down around then — and broke down very badly.
“The warning lights have been flashing, and the klaxons sounding, for more than a decade and a half. But our pundits and prognosticators and professors and policymakers, ensconced as they generally are deep within the bubble, were for the most part too distant from the distress of the general population to see or hear it.”
Well, now they’ve heard it, and they’ve also heard that a lot of Americans resent the meritocrats’ insulation from what’s happening elsewhere, especially as America’s unfortunate record over the past couple of decades, whether in economics, in politics, or in foreign policy, doesn’t suggest that the “meritocracy” is overflowing with, you know, actual merit.
In the United States, the result has been Trump. In Britain, the result was Brexit. In both cases, the allegedly elite — who are supposed to be cool, considered, and above the vulgar passions of the masses — went more or less crazy. From conspiracy theories (it was the Russians!) to bizarre escape fantasies (A Brexit vote redo! A military coup to oust Trump!) the cognitive elite suddenly didn’t seem especially elite, or for that matter particularly cognitive.
In fact, while America was losing wars abroad and jobs at home, elites seemed focused on things that were, well, faintly ridiculous. As Richard Fernandez tweeted: “The elites lost their mojo by becoming absurd. It happened on the road between cultural appropriation and transgender bathrooms.” It was fatal: “People believe from instinct. The Roman gods became ridiculous when the Roman emperors did. PC is the equivalent of Caligula’s horse.”
Yep. Thank God we have the ability to unseat those who seek permanent superiority over us, and do it in a non-violent way. The French chose another, and that option is still open to Americans, though not anyone’s first choice. If I were in charge and looked at the current landscape, I might let the masses have this victory and bide my time. Eventually, I’ll get to run things again. Because it is the nature of humans to let people control them. Weird but truth.
But the key, as pointed out in the Hunger Games series, is to give up just enough freedom to allow for people to feel they have a say, but not so much that they think they are in charge. In my opinion Reynolds’ meritocracy violated the rule and oppressed at will, openly dismissive of the people. It was really frustrating for a lot of very scared and angry people. And as President Snow learned, that ends up badly for those doing the oppressing.
Tyrants, whether large or petty are still tyrants and are a continuous irritant. For the life of me, I don’t know why they keep it up.
Trump gains strength for every day he doesn’t drop an anvil on his own foot. And even when the MSM THINKS he did, it turns out he didn’t, and they look even worse.
Here is a great point as an example. Trump makes a generalized statement about the crisis once peaceful Sweden finds itself in, the MSM jumps on him for saying there was an attack. He never said that. What he was generalizing was the entire European crisis of Muslims attacking Europeans while European governments deny it happens. Regular people are getting killed and raped and robbed by “migrants” and the elites say bring more in. THAT’S Trump’s point. I get that, regular Joes get that. However those like Don Lemon, well they just refuse.
Here’s the video Trump was referencing-
Now maybe Ami just walked into the wrong neighborhood. It happens. You can go to Chicago, end up on the Southside and think Chicago is nothing but a gang of black thugs who like killing each other. But that doesn’t remove the truth that in Chicago, abet some nice places exist, they have a problem with blacks killing blacks in HUGE numbers! One doesn’t offset the other.
In Sweden, the truth is the that Sweden was a “Swedish culture” which means basically white -European-civilized- homogeneous. Nothing wrong with that and frankly if you want to run a smooth nation having everyone be like everyone else will make it a lot easier. I knew a guy from upper Michigan who was the nicest person I ever met. I then met his family and three brothers. THEY WERE NICER! It was crazy. In a way, Sweden was like Dan’s family, just nice to the point of distraction. Then they decided to prove their niceness by importing people from a different world were “nice” isn’t the dominant virtue, if it existed at all.
Here is the video, named “Stockholm Syndrome” (cute because it fits).
So as Trump mentions this growing problem, the MSM scream he’s making up “fake news” because there is no terrorist attack in Sweden. Even Sweden, their leaders laughed at Trump through tweets.
Fate has a wicked sense of humor. As the MSM are screaming about Trump making it up and Swedish leaders are mocking him on Twitter, we get this.
Riots broke out on Monday night in the suburb of Rinkeby, where a majority of residents were born overseas, just hours after the country’s Prime Minister attacked U.S President Donald J. Trump for linking mass migration with rising violence in Sweden.
The riots, in which cars were set ablaze and shops were looted, resulted in the Stockholm suburb looking “like a warzone” according to a journalist who was at the scene.
Police retreated to a nearby gas station after being forced to fire a warning shot as a group of around 30 thugs pelted officers with stones, according to Expressen.
“Our officers were attacked by a number of people, some of them masked, who threw stones. They felt under so much pressure that a shot had to be fired”, said police spokesperson Lars Bystrom.
In the unrest, which began at around 8.30pm after a man was arrested next to Rinkeby metro station, a pedestrian on his way home was beaten and robbed and a press photographer was hospitalised after being attacked by a group of around 15 people.“I was hit with a lot of punches and kicks to the body and head, and spent the night in hospital”, the Dagens Nyheter photographer said.
The riots continued late into the night, with police reporting later that shops were looted, and that a number of cars were set on fire during a second violent riot.
“I’ve witnessed turmoil and civil unrest before, but this is something else. It looks like a war zone here”, said a freelance journalist working at the site of the clashes with state television outlet SVT.
The shocking scenes in Rinkeby, where 61 per cent of residents were born abroad, come after Trump told a rally in Florida over the weekend that Sweden is “having problems like they never thought possible” as a result of mass migration.
At a press conference on Monday, Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven said he was “surprised” by the U.S. president’s comments, adding: “I think also we must all take responsibility for using facts correctly, and for verifying any information that we spread.”
Worried about the nation’s image abroad, state broadcaster Sweden Radio last week aired a piece in English which claims that ‘no-go zones’ — dangerous suburbs where police fear to tread — don’t exist in the country.
However, a report last September revealed that 80 per cent of police officers were considering switching careers due to the danger they face in the field.
A point to mention here is that police in general are the “canary in the coal mine” when it comes to crime. The police are humans who don’t like watching their security disintegrate or their duty thwarted by people who are intent on doing harm to what the police officer is trying to protect. So when the police start bitching about a problem, pay attention. There is a problem.
Now, remember, Stockholm Syndrome was made popular during the Patty Hearst kidnapping, where instead of freeing herself she joined the SLA and started robbing banks. Her excuse was she had submitted to her captor’s will because she had spent so much time with them and apparently began to sympathize with their beliefs. It can be argued that far too many Europeans have become sympathetic to the migrant plight (which by and large was caused by the EU). Pay attention to the last few minutes where the Swedish people simply cannot conceive that they have made a HUGE mistake. Stunning.
Here is a post from a LONG time police officer who is now retiring. He’s had it, hanging it up, so no longer obligated to lie for his bosses or his bosses’ bosses.
The Swedish publication NyheterIdag says that the attackers were “nysvenskar,” that is, “new Swedes,” which is the establishment media euphemism for Muslim migrants.
And so here we go again. The Qur’an teaches that Infidel women can be lawfully taken for sexual use (cf. its allowance for a man to take “captives of the right hand,” 4:3, 4:24, 23:1-6, 33:50, 70:30). The Qur’an says: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (33:59) The implication there is that if women do not cover themselves adequately with their outer garments, they may be abused, and that such abuse would be justified.
A WOMAN was gang raped in Sweden by a group of men who broadcast the horrific attack on Facebook live, it has been claimed.
Disgusted witnesses who saw the footage said the men only stopped their horrendous attack when police stormed the flat and stopped the broadcast.
Swedish officers have arrested three men in connection with the attack, after a member of the public alerted police to the incident just before 8.30am this morning.
The rape is said to have taken place in an apartment in the city of Uppsala this morning.
Armed officers have cordoned off the area surrounding the home where the crime took place where scenes of crime officers are undertaking a technical examination.
Police are not revealing information about the matter, but confirmed three people have been arrested on suspicion of aggravated rape.
The three arrested were born in 1992, 1996 and 1998 after the horrific attack was apparently broadcast live on Facebook.
The officer in charge of the investigation Ivan Aslund said: “We cannot comment on anything at the moment.
“A preliminary investigation has begun and there is full confidentiality”.
Witnesses who claim to have seen the film say they saw a live broadcast that looked very alarming.
They described two men pushing down a girl on the bed and holding her against her will and subjecting her to a serious sexual assault.
One would wonder if we showed the Facebook video to those white naive, stupid Swedes they would rethink their positions…..
From the mouths of drunks and fools occasionally a serious and honest statement blurts out. Ben Rhodes made a splash after pushing through the Iranian deal by lying to the MSM about its value and it’s underlying bad deals. When interviewed, his arrogant and dismissive statement that the reporters he fooled were 27 year old and had no worldly experience shocked the 27yr year old naive reporters.
The words stung like he had slapped them with the slimy tail of a long dead fish! Did they abandon him or do their job in retaliation? No, because they were, and are, Obama lovers, true believers because they know nothing else. But you have to know it stung nevertheless.
The profile of one Ben Rhodes running in Sunday’s New York Times Magazine is not unsympathetic, which makes it all the more devastating.
Perhaps the key sentence is this: “His lack of conventional real-world experience of the kind that normally precedes responsibility for the fate of nations — like military or diplomatic service, or even a master’s degree in international relations, rather than creative writing — is still startling.”
Rhodes comes off like a real asshole. This is not a matter of politics — I have voted for Obama twice. Nor do I mind Rhodes’s contempt for many political reporters: “Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”
Imagine that moment when you thought the guy in the lead, who you thought was on your side, actually considered you nothing more than cannon fodder to be abused and thrown aside. Ouch.
However, Rhodes is right. I watched the last presser with Trump, I listen to the likes of Don Lemon and Rachael Maddow and I have realized we can put the “journalists” into about three categories. 1. The young, dumb, naive crew that loves liberalism because that’s all they know. Think of them as Maoist youngsters during the Mao reign.
2. The corrupted liberal/socialist/or WORSE types like Van Jones, Maddow, Matthews, Lemon, Pelly, et al. They are more like Walter Duranty of the New York Times who reported on Russia during Stalin’s era of mayhem and murder and kept saying “All is well, communism is utopia”, and we know he knew better. So let’s call them liars and charlatans. Jon Lovitz plays it perfectly.
You can almost hear the likes of Rather and Lemon and Olbermann shouting with a wink, “Yeah, that’s the ticket!” The Federalist article gives examples on how these more professional type act. It isn’t always a straight out attack on the person, although Trump’s presidency has encouraged that manner of attack. But what they do is less a commission as it is an omission. By using the Benghazi attack as an example, the Federalist shows the continuous soft bias of the media. It isn’t what they ask, it is they don’t ask, thus never demanding an embarrassing answer.
Buried deep beneath the Michael Flynn hysteria this week was Judicial Watch’s release of newly obtained State Department documents related to the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012. One email confirms—again—that the Obama administration knew the day after the attack it was not a random act of violence stemming from an anti-Muslim video. That was the excuse shamefully propagated by top Obama administration officials (including the president himself) and swallowed whole by a media establishment desperate to help Obama win re-election six weeks later.
According to the summary of a call on September 12, 2012 between State Department Under-Secretary Patrick Kennedy and several congressional staffers, Kennedy was asked if the attack came under cover of protest: “No this was a direct breaching attack,” he answered. Kennedy also denied the attack was coordinated with the protests in Cairo over the video: “Attack in Cairo was a demonstration. There were no weapons shown or used. A few cans of spray paint.”It’s somewhat ironic—galling?—that this email was disclosed the same day the anti-Trump universe was spinning into the stratosphere over Flynn’s resignation as President Trump’s national security advisor. It begs for a little trip down memory lane, to a kinder, gentler time when the media gave a great big pass to another national security advisor in the days after four Americans, including an ambassador, were murdered in Libya by Islamic terrorists under her watch.
Lying to Us Only Matters If We Dislike You
Fun fact: While Trump press secretary Sean Spicer fielded 55 questions on February 14 related to the Flynn debacle, Obama’s press secretary Jay Carney received only 13 questions from reporters on September 12, 2012, three of which were set-ups to blast Mitt Romney’s criticism of the administration after the attack. 55 to 13.
55 to 13. Think about that. Trump’s presser is an example of a President fighting to get his message out while the media wants to only ask him trick questions nobody cares about. Imagine had the media kept hammering over and over what was becoming quickly recognized as a cover up concerning what we were doing in Libya and what happened on 9/11/12 maybe the truth gets out, maybe Romney wins, maybe. But at least we would know what our government is doing in our name. It’s not like they didn’t know the truth.
But they didn’t.
(Washington DC)—Judicial Watch today released 54 pages of new State Department documents, including a transcript of a September 12 2012, telephone conference call with congressional staffers in which then-Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy admitted that the deadly terrorist assault on the Benghazi Consulate was not “under cover of protest,” but was, in fact, “a direct breaching attack.”
The documents were produced in response to a January 29, 2016, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to respond to an August 27, 2015, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:16-cv-00153)). The recently settled lawsuit sought:
- All records of security waivers issued for the Special Mission compound in Benghazi, Libya under the Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act (SECCA);
- All records concerning, regarding, or related to the Special Mission compound in Benghazi, Libya being “excepted from office facility standards and accountability” under SECCA as noted by the Benghazi Accountability Review Board.
From: Bulgrin, Julie K.
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 7:55 PM
To: H_Egypt; Canedo, Denese; Lang, Alan; ‘Rodriguez Miguel’; ‘Arguelles, Adam’; ‘Lundebergy, Greta’; ‘Ortiz, Michael’; ‘Lee Collin’; Pitkin, Douglas A; Maier, Christina A
Subject: Write up of U/S Kennedy Call with Hill re Libya
The call ended up starting around 6:30. Here are the raw notes.
- Rob Carter – was this an attack under the cover of a protest?
- No, this was a direct breaching attack.
- Do we have any ideas of who launched? Leads?
- Some claims from someone who has never made threat before, but everyone is looking at this closely.
- Do we believe coordinated w/Cairo?
- Attack in Cairo was a demonstration. There were no weapons shown or used. A few cans of spray paint.
The call notes also detail that Amb. Stevens got of the compound, but “collapsed” and was taken to the hospital. Kennedy also said that it was his personal opinion that the attack “was semi-complex.”
When asked why no Americans troops were inserted, Kennedy responded that “the entire thing lasted approximately 4.5 hours. No US forces within time to get there.” (This was false, troops were available and could have arrived in time to provide support during the second attack on the CIA annex, which according to Kennedy, was assaulted by 100 attackers.)
One of the reasons the Leviathan of the administrative government is panicking is that people who want to know the truth are now in charge. The people at State and the CIA were hoping for another four years to completely cover up the mistakes- or crimes- they committed.
If I were the new CIA director my first act would be to have all the Benghazi files brought to me, the RAW files. Not the smoothed over crap the CIA was peddling. Sure, it’s embarrassing, but when your people are getting killed, you have an obligation to explain why you allowed that to happen. Further, the CIA/STATE operation had nothing to do with keeping America safe, but everything to do with upsetting the balance in the Middle East. We were meddling in the Middle East trying to use force to overthrow a government. While now we complaining that Russia had the audacity to do it to us, with emails…? Sorry you don’t get a “For God and Country” for that mess.
Andrew Klavan over at PJ Media, like me no Trump fan, points out what is really happening. For YEARS our “leaders” were picked from a rarefied group of acceptable politicians, who all knew which side the real bread was buttered on by the Leviathan cooks. Now they are facing a true outsider who is wanting the truth of things, and thinks we have a right to know. They response is they will try to destroy him. You should take note of that. When given the choice between serving the American people and telling the truth- they went the other way.
Those whose opposition to Trump has overcome their dedication to the American idea support even the worst of this — appallingly enough. Never Trumper Bill Kristol tweets: “Obviously strongly prefer normal democratic and constitutional politics. But if it comes to it, prefer the deep state to the Trump state.” Leftist filmmaker Rob Reiner says hopefully: “Intelligence community will not let DT destroy democracy.” From Leftist Harvard Law Prof Lawrence Tribe: “Props to the intel officials! They’re putting their duty to protect the nation from hostile Russian acts above their loyalty to this POTUS.”
It’s ugly to accuse people of being unAmerican. But the idea that freedom is served by the CIA undermining our elected president — that’s unAmerican.
If you care about liberty, there’s really only one side here. In the fight between Donald Trump and the Deep State, I’m for Trump one hundred percent. Unconstrained bureaucrats, rogue spies, and their media fellow travelers — I hope he defeats them all.
Yep, but he will need help.
Kellyanne Conway, the first woman campaign manager who won a Presidential campaign, made the “mistake” of defending Ivanka Trump from attacks by saying buy her products on TV. Apparently, the uptight federal government which can’t find a crime in any of HRC’s/Cheryl Mills/Obama coverups, has managed to find Conway violated an ethics rule. Which the dems jumped all over like a fat kid on a donut! Truth is this guy should work on real ethic violations or be removed or transferred to the new Fairbanks Alaska branch to find “fake ethic” violations.
Federal ethics officials need more teeth in order to investigate and punish ethics violators, a nonprofit government watchdog group wrote Tuesday.
The Office of Government Ethics (OGE) “lacks the authority to investigate complaints of ethics noncompliance and to issue binding recommendations for disciplinary action,” Project On Government Oversight policy counsel Liz Hempowicz wrote.
“Currently, investigations, determinations, and disciplinary actions … are primarily left to the employing agency in noncriminal cases,” she continued. “For there to be true accountability, ethics investigations and enforcement should be conducted by an entity other than the agencies involved in the alleged violations.”
In a recent example, OGE wrote that “there is strong reason to believe” White House special counselor Kellyanne Conway “has violated the standards of conduct and that disciplinary action is warranted.”But OGE is barred from investigating and punishing Conway for using her position to promote Ivanka Trump’s clothing line last week. (RELATED: Ethics Chief Wants Conway Disciplined For Touting Ivanka’s Clothing Line)
I haven’t been blogging much lately basically because the most of the more established blogs have covered the issues quite well. However, as the guy who drifts towards the underdog, I find myself having to stand up here for….Trump. Why? Because Trump now realizes, as I did years ago, that the “leviathan” will not be killed easily and in fact will commit homicide, both by personal attacks and maybe in a physical sense, in order to survive. (And they trash Putin for his will to survive…come on guys..)
The issue people need to grasp here is if there is one breath left on this earth and the government bureaucracy has a choice whether it be them or you- it will ALWAYS be them!
Trump is now learning, painfully, that very lesson. The only way he survives is if the people strike back for him, like a high heater brushing back the overly aggressive batter. The batter in this case is the neo-con, establishment, entrenched system that people like McCain and Graham and Ryan and Schumer support. It is manned by the likes of Clapper, Brennan (and those he left behind), Obama and his crew (many also left behind intentionally to defeat Trump’s agenda. A crime? (When does a conspiracy to commit come into play?)
Powerlineblog has a good set of posts, you should read them. They link over to a good number of articles, not all critical of Trump, but certainly honest in the current situation. Trump is a billionaire who managed through intimidation and business savvy to gain money and fame. He has NO IDEA what a thirty dollar an hour bureaucrat can do to him, especially if that bureaucrat has access to the most powerful surveillance apparatus known to man.
Trump also didn’t get that judges, especially ninth circuit types, do not follow any law. They stipulate “facts” in order to obtain their desired outcome. I can only imagine Trump’s people going “WTF?” when reading the opinions reached by the ninth. In fact, there is a rumor that there are other judges ON THE NINTH that are saying the same thing.
Plus, and make no mistake here, the Leviathan, manned by the likes of corrupt Schumer, are intent on slapping the arrogance right out of Trump, then unseat him promptly to put in a more manageable Mike Pence. And they will use the concentrated efforts of Soros funded organizations, Hollywood, the government and the media. It’s Trump vs the world, and that’s why I find myself on the side of the Trumpster. No fan mind you, (I was a Cruz guy because, well, he’s smarter than Trump for one), but Trump won fair and square and did so by sure will and savvy, so he’s my President and anyone fucking with him, inside the country or out, is the bad guy.
The abrupt resignation Monday evening of White House national security adviser Michael Flynn is the culmination of a secret, months-long campaign by former Obama administration confidantes to handicap President Donald Trump’s national security apparatus and preserve the nuclear deal with Iran, according to multiple sources in and out of the White House who described to the Washington Free Beacon a behind-the-scenes effort by these officials to plant a series of damaging stories about Flynn in the national media.
The effort, said to include former Obama administration adviser Ben Rhodes—the architect of a separate White House effort to create what he described as a pro-Iran echo chamber—included a small task force of Obama loyalists who deluged media outlets with stories aimed at eroding Flynn’s credibility, multiple sources revealed.
The operation primarily focused on discrediting Flynn, an opponent of the Iran nuclear deal, in order to handicap the Trump administration’s efforts to disclose secret details of the nuclear deal with Iran that had been long hidden by the Obama administration.
Insiders familiar with the anti-Flynn campaign told the Free Beacon that these Obama loyalists plotted in the months before Trump’s inauguration to establish a set of roadblocks before Trump’s national security team, which includes several prominent opponents of diplomacy with Iran. The Free Beacon first reported on this effort in January.
Sources who spoke to the Free Beacon requested anonymity in order to speak freely about the situation and avoid interfering with the White House’s official narrative about Flynn, which centers on his failure to adequately inform the president about a series of phone calls with Russian officials.
Flynn took credit for his missteps regarding these phone calls in a brief statement released late Monday evening. Trump administration officials subsequently stated that Flynn’s efforts to mislead the president and vice president about his contacts with Russia could not be tolerated.
However, multiple sources closely involved in the situation pointed to a larger, more secretive campaign aimed at discrediting Flynn and undermining the Trump White House.
“It’s undeniable that the campaign to discredit Flynn was well underway before Inauguration Day, with a very troublesome and politicized series of leaks designed to undermine him,” said one veteran national security adviser with close ties to the White House team. “This pattern reminds me of the lead up to the Iran deal, and probably features the same cast of characters.”
The Free Beacon first reported in January that, until its final days in office, the Obama administration hosted several pro-Iran voices who were critical in helping to mislead the American public about the terms of the nuclear agreement. This included a former Iranian government official and the head of the National Iranian American Council, or NIAC, which has been accused of serving as Iran’s mouthpiece in Washington, D.C.
Since then, top members of the Obama administration’s national security team have launched a communications infrastructure after they left the White House, and have told reporters they are using that infrastructure to undermine Trump’s foreign policy.
“It’s actually Ben Rhodes, NIAC, and the Iranian mullahs who are celebrating today,” said one veteran foreign policy insider who is close to Flynn and the White House. “They know that the number one target is Iran … [and] they all knew their little sacred agreement with Iran was going to go off the books. So they got rid of Flynn before any of the [secret] agreements even surfaced.”
Flynn had been preparing to publicize many of the details about the nuclear deal that had been intentionally hidden by the Obama administration as part of its effort to garner support for the deal, these sources said.
I liked Mike Flynn mainly because Obama hated him. Anyone Obama hated is a friend of mine. Why? Flynn reminded of my old partner, who was just smarter than anyone else in the room. He saw things in levels and depth and was excellent in anticipating outcomes. He would often remark “You can do that if you want, but I wouldn’t” leading to our bosses to stop dead in their tracks, knowing full well they were about to step on their collective di*^s and screw up. Flynn looked at the Iranian deal and the CIA/State arming jihadis and said “You can do that, but..” and the Obama administration fired him. And much like my bosses when they ignored his warnings, they are realizing they screwed up with ISIS absorbing our weapons and “fighters” and Iran firing ballistic missiles seemingly every day.
If I were Flynn I would go to Congress, with every file I had on those in power, and sit down and do a “James Comey” for eight hours, outlining the Iranian deal, outlining the error the CIA made by backing ISIS fighters and at the end of the day move the Trump agenda ahead a year by bitch slapping the CIA/DIA/NSA/McCain- neocon cabal until they cried for mercy.
First, I’m calling it an “ouster” because it appears to be the result of a campaign against him. Indeed, Eli Lake calls it a “political assassination.”
Lake quotes Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House intelligence committee, as follows: “”First it’s Flynn, next it will be Kellyanne Conway, then it will be Steve Bannon, then it will be Reince Priebus.” “Put another way,” Lake adds (melodramatically?), “Flynn is only the appetizer; Trump is the entree.”
This doesn’t mean Flynn didn’t deserve to go. If there was substantial reason to believe that he intentionally misled the administration about his conversation with the Russian ambassador, this was sufficient reason to oust him.
Second, when Flynn was appointed national security adviser, I wrote:
Is Flynn an ideal national security adviser? Not in my view. However, he’s the voice Trump wants most to hear on national security issues. I believe that most of what Trump hears from Flynn will be sound.
I stand by both prongs of that assessment. The questions now are whose voice will replace Flynn’s and will the advice President Trump receives be mostly sound.
As Scott says, the frontrunner for the job is believed to be Vice Admiral Robert Harward, a protege of Secretary of Defense James Mattis. I know nothing about Harward, but having a Mattis protege in the position sounds like a good thing. So does having Mike Pence heavily involved in the selection process.
Ret. Gen. David Petraeus is also said to be in the running. The nation is greatly indebted to Petraeus for the Iraq surge and for his military service generally. But after his service to the Obama administration, it’s unclear to me that he would provide mostly sound advice to President Trump. It may be that he would serve up mostly the conventional wisdom of the Obama-era CIA, which Petraeus headed for a time.
Third, in his article on the “political assassination” of Flynn, Eli Lake observes: “It’s very rare that reporters are ever told about government-monitored communications of U.S. citizens.” Trump himself has tweeted:
The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington? Will these leaks be happening as I deal on N.Korea etc?
The Post says the recording of Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador was obtained by monitoring the ambassador, not Flynn. According to its reporters:
Intelligence analysts began to search for clues that could help explain Putin’s move [his announcement on December 30 of last year not to respond to the Obama administration’s sanctions]. The search turned up Kislyak’s communications, which the FBI routinely monitors, and the phone call in question with Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general with years of intelligence experience.
Whether the contents of the phone call were obtained by monitoring the ambassador or by monitoring Flynn, I think Trump is right. The leaking of those contents is a big part of the story, and a disturbing one.
The media-intelligence community pipeline is a swamp that needs to be drained. But can it be?
That is a good question. It is big and powerful. The Left made fun of and complained about J Edgar Hoover for having files on everyone in Washington which protected Hoover from dismissal. Yet, here we have even a bigger threat to privacy, the threat of a machine scattered across the nation and numbering into the thousands, instead of one man. In Hoover’s defense he was set on protecting America along with himself. These guys inside the leviathan are only interested in protecting themselves. Think about it. If the new CIA director asks for the real Benghazi file, does a phone conversation he had a year ago with someone, that might be embarrassing to him, show up with a note saying “You don’t want everyone to see this do you?”
Thomas Lifson over at the American Thinker blog is pulling no punches. It was a coup by insiders.
Make no mistake: we have just witnessed an operation by members of the CIA to take out a high official of our own government. An agency widely believed to have brought down democratically elected governments overseas is now practicing the same dark arts in domestic American politics. Almost certainly, its new head, Mike Pompeo, was not consulted.
Senator Chuck Schumer, of all people, laid out on January 2 what was going to happen to the Trump administration if it dared take on the deep state – the permanent bureaucracy that has contempt for the will of the voters and feels entitled to run the government for its own benefit:
New Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday that President-elect Donald Trump is “being really dumb” by taking on the intelligence community and its assessments on Russia’s cyber activities.
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.
“So even for a practical, supposedly hard-nosed businessman, he’s being really dumb to do this.”
Or, as the old rueful saying has it, “you’ve got to go along to get along.” This means that we the people had better acknowledge that the bureaucrats have turned into our masters, and the old expression “public servant” is as ironic as anything Orwell came up with. Schumer knows this and likes it, because the deep state wants a bigger, more powerful government, just as he does.
Note that the law was broken by whoever leaked the transcripts to the media. Not only is the crime underlying the “scandal” being ignored, but the criminals are being hailed. On Morning Joe‘s first hour today, the host, a former congressman (i.e., a lawmaker) himself, called the leakers “heroes.”
This interference in domestic politics by the CIA should be regarded as a major threat to our democracy, but of course our Trump-hating domestic media are reveling in a major point scored against the new president.
Let me remind you of some history as it pertains to this. During the transition from GWB to Obama, the not yet in power Obama administration sent contacts to Iran to tell them NOT TO deal with the GWB administration but to wait until they got into power, because things were changing. That is EXACTLY what Flynn is accused of doing, yet nobody makes the comparison? Frankly, I think Flynn was doing just that for Trump, letting the Russians know not to overreact to the outgoing idiot of a President.
Not that Trump is a Russian plant, instead Trump truly believes that the greatest threat to our nation right now is the McCain/Graham/neo-con cabal that makes money and keeps power by finding new enemies to fight. When I say “fight” I mean they stay home and go on Sunday shows, and our kids get injured and/0r end up dying in the sand or mud in some shithole on the other side of the world.
Ask yourself what is our intel community attempting to hide? What did it do? What is it doing? Why are they afraid of letting us see? Sure, some things do need to be hidden from the American people, we are horrible at keeping secrets, but if they are doing bad things, we need to know. Of course, they will argue, bad things is a matter of perspective.
Who is behind this effort? The better question is who isn’t. Over at the New York Post, Paul Sperry points out Obama has his hand in this. We were told before he left, he intentionally inserted his people into career positions (so they can’t be rooted out) in order to disrupt Trump’s attempt to undo any of Obama’s screwed up and dangerous legacy. That is some seriously aggressive actions done by a man who seems to have no concept of boundaries.
When former President Barack Obama said he was “heartened” by anti-Trump protests, he was sending a message of approval to his troops. Troops? Yes, Obama has an army of agitators — numbering more than 30,000 — who will fight his Republican successor at every turn of his historic presidency. And Obama will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House.
In what’s shaping up to be a highly unusual post-presidency, Obama isn’t just staying behind in Washington. He’s working behind the scenes to set up what will effectively be a shadow government to not only protect his threatened legacy, but to sabotage the incoming administration and its popular “America First” agenda.
He’s doing it through a network of leftist nonprofits led by Organizing for Action. Normally you’d expect an organization set up to support a politician and his agenda to close up shop after that candidate leaves office, but not Obama’s OFA. Rather, it’s gearing up for battle, with a growing war chest and more than 250 offices across the country.
Since Donald Trump’s election, this little-known but well-funded protesting arm has beefed up staff and ramped up recruitment of young liberal activists, declaring on its website, “We’re not backing down.” Determined to salvage Obama’s legacy, it’s drawing battle lines on immigration, ObamaCare, race relations and climate change.
Obama is intimately involved in OFA operations and even tweets from the group’s account. In fact, he gave marching orders to OFA foot soldiers following Trump’s upset victory.
“It is fine for everybody to feel stressed, sad, discouraged,” he said in a conference call from the White House. “But get over it.” He demanded they “move forward to protect what we’ve accomplished.”
Uh…listen….just because you think you are the second coming, doesn’t mean the rest of us do- or HRC would be President… .
Now I ask, as a retired detective, this obvious question. When does it cross over from protests and politics into conspiracy and crime? You remember, many on the Left wanted DOJ to look at the Tea Party as a RICO crime. The difference here is the Left is breaking things and committing assaults to intimidate others. THAT is a crime. Wearing a three pointed hat and marching- then cleaning up your mess afterwards- is not. See the difference lefties?
And speaking of crimes. This is an interesting take. Flynn is a private citizen with a long military career and top secret clearance. He calls or receives a call from the Russians, and while talking to them, they bring up the sanctions (according to one report). To that he says wait until Trump gets in and everything is under review. What is the crime?
Remember, the sanctions were put in place by Obama on the way out as a way to cement the meme “The Russians stole the election” to explain why HRC lost. It was not a serious effort, just politics.
However during this conversation(s), Flynn is being recorded by top secret intercepts. As Intel Chairman Nunes points out there had better be a paper trail- including a warrant signed by a judge as per the federal law- allowing for that conversation to be kept and transcribed. THEN the person who leaked it MUST BE arrested and prosecuted. You want to play, there’s a fee for playing. It is that simple. I hate “whistleblowers” on the Left who are truly never at risk for prosecution, while the guys in the real world get hammered for coming forward if the complaint is against a liberal progressive. No more.
House Select Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes called foul on the leaks of classified information relating to conversations between former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and a Russian ambassador.
“Any intelligence agency cannot listen to Americans’ phone calls,” Nunes told reporters Tuesday night. “If there’s inadvertent collection that you know is overseas there’s a whole process in place for that.”
He explained, “It’s pretty clear that’s not the case, so then they could have been listening to someone else and inadvertently picked up an American. If that happens, there’s a whole process in place to where they have to immediately get rid of the information unless it’s like high level national security issue and then someone would have to unmask the name — someone at the highest levels.”
“So in this case it would be General Flynn and then how did that happen. Then if they did that, then how does all that get out to the public which is another leak of classified information,” Nunes added. “I’m pretty sure the FBI didn’t have a warrant on Michael Flynn.”
The California Republican said he expects the FBI to tell him exactly what is going on.
One would hope, but at this point it is obvious the leviathan is simply going to do what it wants, screw the law and the good guys.
Like I said, Flynn should go up to Congress, with THEIR files, and spill the beans, demand the FBI show him the warrant and explain he was just doing what Valerie Jarrett did in 2008/9 before Obama came into office. Remember, this guy is the one who made Obama and the PC crew look stupid by demanding they call radical Islam..well, radical Islam.
To abandon him is a loss. Maybe Trump makes him a private contact and lets him hammer the PC crowd like a rusty nail!
The Democrats, who have SCREAMED the Russians did it!, may have a serious problem. It seems their desire for diversity may have compromised serious security for our nation. Now we don’t know exactly what happened, but the guess is a number of them, if not all of them, who use the DNC system and the intel committees, had their data accessed and even equipment stolen by three subjects- Abid, Imran and Jamal Awan (plus a mystery woman).
Three brothers who managed office information technology for members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and other lawmakers were abruptly relieved of their duties on suspicion that they accessed congressional computers without permission.
Brothers Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan [Ed: Militant Quakers, no doubt] were barred from computer networks at the House of Representatives Thursday, The Daily Caller News Foundation Investigative Group has learned.
Three members of the intelligence panel and five members of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs were among the dozens of members who employed the suspects on a shared basis. The two committees deal with many of the nation’s most sensitive issues and documents, including those related to the war on terrorism.
Also among those whose computer systems may have been compromised is Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Florida Democrat who was previously the target of a disastrous email hack when she served as chairman of the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 campaign.
The brothers are suspected of serious violations, including accessing members’ computer networks without their knowledge and stealing equipment from Congress.
Jamal handled IT for Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Texas Democrat who serves on both the intelligence and foreign affairs panels.
“As of 2/2, his employment with our office has been terminated,” Castro spokeswoman Erin Hatch told TheDCNF Friday.
Jamal also worked for Louisiana Democrat Rep. Cedric Richmond, who is on the Committee on Homeland Security.
Imran worked for Reps. Andre Carson, an Indiana Democrat, and Jackie Speier, a California Democrat. Both are members of the intelligence committee, and their spokesmen did not respond to TheDCNF’s requests for comment. Imran also worked for the House office of Wasserman Schultz.
Then-Rep. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat, employed Abid for IT work in 2016. She was a member of House committees dealing with the armed services, oversight, and Benghazi. Duckworth was elected to the Senate in November, 2016. Abid has a prior criminal record and a bankruptcy
How much was accessed and stolen? That’s a good question, but remember, these are the same guys who swore the Russians did it. Even when the Russians kept saying, “Hey look, we do bad shit all the time, this time, Honest Injun’ we did not do it!”
What makes me wonder if there is a bit of a cover up going on here, because the complaint is they “stole” equipment. More likely they took equipment that had data on it, because they made a salary of 160,000.00- a PIECE! So, snagging a laptop isn’t cost effective. What they may have stole is information on the laptop.
You can bet if the Dems were compromised by hiring, for the sake of diversity, Middle Eastern types, but managed instead to be compromised by those same ME types and top secret data was stolen, you can bet they are in full cover up mode! Worse, if that data made it to even bigger ME bad guys.
They will chase the brothers down for stealing a laptop, deny they took data, and blame Putin and Trump. (Which sadly, I may have just written Don Lemon’s opening statement on his lame show!)
“if they were compromised”… who am I kidding. It is how MUCH they were compromised!
Fools. Utter fools who will get a bunch of good people killed on the altar of PC and the progressive agenda. Not them, sadly, they are above all this mess. It will be just regular folks trying to do the right thing. Maybe even the SEAL in Yemen.
Apparently, not Mormons from Utah.
I understand now why the Trump people are fighting over things like crowd sizes and popular votes. They are in a dog fight with a large and violent and unconstitutional segment of our society. Some of my “conspiracy” buddies- and I put this in quotes only because it appears they are onto something- warned me and others about the “deep state” inside our government, along with other major elements of our nation, that are hellbent on undermining and destroying and REMOVING a duly elected President, violently or illegally if necessary. And they do it with the confidence of a Fascist ideologue. All the while calling the Trump supporters fascist ideologues. Weird, right?
And yet, there is not doubt this is an all out war on a President, who is only two weeks in office. Imagine had Americans did the same thing in 2008 because they didn’t like Obama?!
By the way, this is a map of America Trump won. Take out the liberal urban population centers and HRC’s entire campaign was non-existent.
So who is doing this? The answer, sadly, is a good number of Americans and international influences who fear Trump might actually have a point here- that America first is not a bad thing. The fact they are so violently certain of their ideals is frightening. Trump’s large victory, and it was large, has ripped off any facade of decency the people behind the effort have as they try to destroy America quietly (led by Obama and his ilk), and exposed the violent underpinnings of what is simply an all out effort to eliminate America from within. Imagine if HRC had made it, the wounds would have been fatal.
Now some of the people are arguing against themselves and don’t realize it. Gays are against Trump for no good reason. He’s trying to save their lives and lifestyles by slowing down the immigration of a culture that murders gays- for simply being gay. (Pulse nightclub shootings were Muslim on gay attacks.) Militant gays, like the one we have here, would be hunted down and killed on the spot in a world dominated by Islam. So, next time a gay person gets all twisted up over Trump, he/she should take a minute to rethink his/her position- or a trip to the Middle East- and consider their good fortune.
Same with the INSANE woman’s movement, which is figuratively and literally melting down over what exactly? A cad in the White House? Back when WJC was in there, you girls were lining up to see if you could “get you some” of ol’ Billy! Now it’s the worse thing ever? Come on!
Now the media is simply out and out lying about Trump at every turn, and when one of the spokespeople makes an honest mistake, they jump in with both feet. The other day, Kellyanne Conway misspoke calling the break up of a plot in Kentucky a “massacre” and CNN, along with every liberal source in America, ran with that single mistake over and over, and over and over, totally missing the rest of Conway’s message. Or better put, dismissing her message because “she’s the enemy.” (Seriously, if CNN is in the front row at the next presser, shame on Trump and Spicer.)
They ignore the almost perfect message she sends otherwise, like when being interviewed by Chris Wallace and smoking his weak arguments like an angry wife telling her errant husband EXACTLY what is wrong with him, and him taking it like a wimp! Here’s that interview. She is so much smarter and better than they all are. Take the time to watch it.
But the MSM simply will not waiver from their conviction that Trump “must be stopped”. Because I guess, we were doing so well going in the other direction; arming Iran, freeing terrorists while letting more into our country, destroying the middle class, while enriching billionaires and other nation’s lower class of workers, destroying our way of life, our morality and what was once a common fabric of all of us being Americans rather than divided groups full of self interested activists.
Now we expect the Dems to be fighting back. It the hypocrisy that drives normal people nuts. Schumer is a snake. The quintessential example of the Serpent. Not his fault- he’s a lawyer, and a New Yorker, and a corrupt politician. Like I said- snake. And I’m wrong, it is his fault.
However, at this point the obstructionist attitude is going a bit far.
The Senate Democrats’ obstruction of President Trump’s cabinet nominees has reached a record-setting level. Yesterday, ABC News reported: “President Trump has more unconfirmed Cabinet nominees at this point in his term than all previous presidents combined.” Senate Democrats have failed to a historical magnitude to offer deference to the president, running counter to what they argued for during previous administrations.
From President George Washington to President Barack Obama, “only 10 times has a president’s initial Cabinet nominees remained unconfirmed two weeks into their terms.“ Never in all of American history has this level of obstruction been seen.
Remember they can get away with this because Trump supporters are working and not marching on Schumer’s office and setting it on fire- like the anarchists are doing everywhere else. The Left/Soros/liberals still setting the narrative. Imagine how quickly ol’ Chucky would get on board if his limo was set on fire like that poor driver in New York!
Maxine Waters, a nutbag liberal, and rich from DC corruption (remember, it’s all about the money and power), is saying she lives to impeach Trump, even though she can’t explain why- other than she’s pissed HRC sucked as a..I mean lost.
All of this is liberal madness. But it isn’t a crime. However, we are now hearing that former Obama administration people are holding classes for federal employees on how to thwart the President’s efforts and not get fired or disciplined. Now think about that for a second, if this had occurred in 2009, which CNN talking head would just have exploded? That’s a trick question, they would have ALL exploded! And yet there is a movement to do exactly that.
At the EPA, a small group of career employees — numbering less than a dozen so far — are using an encrypted messaging app to discuss what to do if Trump’s political appointees undermine their agency’s mission to protect public health and the environment, flout the law, or delete valuable scientific data that the agency has been collecting for years, sources told POLITICO.
Fearing for their jobs, the employees began communicating incognito using the app Signal shortly after Trump’s inauguration. Signal, like WhatsApp and other mobile phone software, encrypts all communications, making it more difficult for hackers to gain access to them.
One EPA employee even got a new, more secure cellphone, and another joked about getting a “burner phone.”
This underground resistance effort is also said to be communicating with “former Obama administration political appointees” on their plans. So you can probably expect lots of leaked exclusives about the EPA at the New York Times and the Washington Post, none of which will mention that the former President’s people are passing them the information. In fact, these people are so proud of themselves that they are already leaking their existence to the media before they’ve even done anything.
Imagine for a moment that Hillary Clinton had won the election and a group of partisans at Customs and Border Patrol decided to start an encrypted network to stay in contact with former Trump campaign staffers. I have little doubt this would be considered extreme and dangerous. The word “sedition” would likely appear in print somewhere. If there was any question about cutting the EPA’s budget before, there won’t be now.
Agreed, along with some serious employee reassignments, to places like Fairbanks Alaska to measure snow drifts.
The trouble is the liberal ideological person, who was embedded into the government for a long time cannot allow his or her personal belief system (which may be wrong) to stop them from doing the job. If it does, they must resign.
When a federal employee turns dissent into disruption and disobedience, then they have crossed a line. If President Trump issues a policy that is legal and with which a federal employee disagrees, they have to carry out the directive. If their conscience forbids them to carry out the policy, they need to resign. The civil service is effective largely to the extent that it is above politics. As the Heritage Foundation explained, “the President needs a full cadre of personnel committed to him and his agenda in the federal agencies that execute the details of national policy.” Once a presidential election is over, federal employees are obliged to respect the results of that election, and carry out the lawful policy initiatives of the president.
If a federal employee doesn’t like the ideological foundation or likely outcomes of a presidential directive, it doesn’t mean that the directive is not legal. It means that the views of the federal employee are in conflict with the views of the president who runs the federal government. In that instance, the solution should not be to resist the actions of the president in their professional capacity as a career civil servant in the workplace. The solution is for that federal employee to honorably resign, not actively or passively hamper the White House.
Unlike the Acting AG, who decided she wanted to act out (and get some publicity) instead of being a professional. What she doesn’t understand is this isn’t about her or Trump, but over sixty million voters, three thousand counties and 304 electoral votes Trump won. They are the ones who are insulted by these actions- and there should be a penalty for her and other to act out that way.
What penalty? I would make it a law- quickly- that if you show up in a mask to protest you get arrested. You can protest, you can be violent, but when you do, the police will know who you are and hold you accountable. Trust me, that would cut the violence down to nothing.
Secondly, Trump should quietly move to take the silly union protections from the employees. Not all, but the ones that stop them from being fired for being freaking terrible employees and even criminals! Let the good people do a good job without having to drag the dead weight of bad employees along with them! (Take the time to read up on the VA for examples.)
Trump is going to be swimming upstream, while under fire, weighed down lead weights hung on him by his own bureaucracy. He’s going to need to eat his Wheaties. Especially when dealing with fools like this. Remember, they have been told he’s the bad guy, not seen it so far.
In a blog post for Foreign Policy magazine, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama administration official, outlined four ways to “get rid” of President Trump, including declaring him mentally unfit for command or carrying out a military coup.
Brooks is a Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation, which is funded by billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. She served from 2009-2011 as Counselor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and served as a senior adviser at Obama’s State Department.
Her posting is titled “3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020,” although the piece actually outlines four ways.
In what seems to be a deliberate tactic, Brooks repeatedly questions Trump’s mental stability, claiming that the president’s first week in office “has made it all too clear: Yes, he is as crazy as everyone feared.”
Brooks, who is not a mental health professional, offered no evidence for her armchair psychological evaluation other than citing policies that she doesn’t like.
Remember those optimistic pre-inauguration fantasies? I cherished them, too. You know: “Once he’s president, I’m sure he’ll realize it doesn’t really make sense to withdraw from all those treaties.” “Once he’s president, surely he’ll understand that he needs to stop tweeting out those random insults.” “Once he’s president, he’ll have to put aside that ridiculous campaign braggadocio about building a wall along the Mexican border.” And so on.
Nope. In his first week in office, Trump has made it eminently clear that he meant every loopy, appalling word — and then some.
Brooks listed four ways to get rid of a “crummy” president.
Elect him out of office after his four-year term. “But after such a catastrophic first week, four years seems like a long time to wait,” she wrote.
Impeachment. However, she lamented, “impeachments take time: months, if not longer — even with an enthusiastic Congress. And when you have a lunatic controlling the nuclear codes, even a few months seems like a perilously long time to wait.”
Utilizing a claim of mental instability to invoke the 25th Amendment of the Constitution, which sets the path for the commander-in-chief’s removal if the “president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”
A military coup. She writes: “The fourth possibility is one that until recently I would have said was unthinkable in the United States of America: a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders.”
Military coup. Where was that idea eight years ago?
He’s the ultimate political insider/do-boy. He’s the one that made the intel officers in the ranks change their reports to match not reality but what Obama’s people wanted. Reality, as she is a fickle bitch, bit Obama in the ass and he blamed the rank and file officers for screwing up. Which is a dumb thing to do (hello Wikileaks).
But Brennan, the “perfect” bureaucrat, doesn’t realize he has no friends. He screwed up by getting too far up the chain and then being called out for his lies. His public persona is just off putting, as he looks like he’s that kind of guy. If he had stayed in middle management inside such a huge system he could F-up until the cows came home and just be moved around but never fired. (If you have ever worked in government you know those people I’m talking about.!) But he’s been caught publicly putting his finger on the scales of truth more than once, so his credibility is shot with any average citizen out there who has paid even the slightest attention.
But he still wants to bitch.
Just one day after he left the seat, former CIA Director John Brennan said President Donald Trump “should be ashamed of himself.”
Trump gave his first speech to the CIA Saturday after repeatedly attacking the U.S. intelligence community as president-elect. At the time, he alleged they leaked information about Russian interference in the presidential election.
Then-Director Brennan lashed back, telling The Wall Street Journal, “It’s when there are allegations made about leaking or about dishonesty or a lack of integrity, that’s where I think the line is crossed,” he said. “Tell the CIA officers who are serving in harm’s way right now and their families who are worried about them that they are akin to Nazi Germany. I found that to be very repugnant, and I will forever stand up for the integrity and patriotism of my officers who have done much over the years to sacrifice for their fellow citizens.”
Trump went to the rank and file of the agency and cleared all that up by pointing out that he doesn’t think THEY are the problem, but types like Brennan are. (He’s wrong, there are far too many politically left employees in the agency. A result of the intentional seeding of ALL departments by democrats.) Brennan trying to use the real agents as cover for his corruption is an embarrassment. If you look at Brennan, you can see that classic “But I was just following orders” personality that the world witnessed in the docks at Nuremberg. So no, Trump isn’t saying the CIA are Nazi types, he’s saying YOU are the Nazi types, and guess what, the average Joe agrees.
My message to Brennan is- go away, get on panels, get guest shots on CNN where they will allow you to spew your message that Trump is a screw up. Who cares, you were in charge when he wasn’t and everything went sideways. That’s the reality of it, and reality bit you in the ass as well.
And when the dems quit stalling over the new CIA director, I hope the new guy pulls the files on your questionable operations and makes them transparent. People have a right to know just how badly all of this was handled. Of course, there is that persistent rumor those files are being eliminated.
The campaign to delay Pompeo’s confirmation appears to be just one piece of a larger effort aimed at undermining Trump’s national security team, multiple sources told the Free Beacon.
There is evidence Obama’s outgoing administration took steps to complicate and delay the building of Trump’s new team, according to one veteran foreign policy insider who has been in close contact with Trumps’ national security transition team.
“Something strange is going on,” the source, who is not authorized to speak on the record, said. “The Trump folks keep loading up accounts and looking at specific jobs, and they’re not finding anything like what should be there. It’s like the Obama national security team went out of their way to cripple the transition on the way out.”
A senior congressional aide familiar with the efforts to hold up Pompeo’s confirmation vote told the Free Beacon that Democrats are playing politics with America’s national security.
“This is nothing more than an exercise in partisan showmanship,” the source said. “Senate Democrats know Pompeo is wholly qualified for this job and that he’ll eventually be confirmed.”
“Playing politics with this confirmation only jeopardizes our national security at a time when the United States faces a multitude of security challenges,” added the congressional source, who asked not to be named so he could speak freely. “They should drop this charade and confirm him.”
Keep shredding boys. Of course you know somebody inside made copies and is just waiting for you to leave…so…