When confronted with a buffoon, duct tape is magic

Enough said.

Posted in politics | Tagged , | Leave a comment

If Nunes is accurate, how bad could it get…for the Obama gang.

Charles Krauthammer is suffering.  He is having trouble wrapping his head around the idea that any group of individuals running at the level of the Obama administration- lawyers included- could be so stupid as to violate laws that sooner or later would catch up to them.  I love listening to the guy, he’s freaking smarter than most, but like my MENSA buddy, these people often overthink the human factor.  They believe that nobody can be so human in their ideology that they override their higher functions of reason and common sense.

Image result for charles krauthammer fox news panel

Nobody could be that stupid..wait what?

On the other hand, me and people like me, who have dealt with the true believers on the street, know all too well just how stupid ideology will make you.  If not so, how do you explain incidents where gang bangers shoot up other gang bangers even though they know they will be caught?  Or jihadis gleefully blowing themselves up for Allah?  The common theme for both of them is a shared desire to do something for their version of the greater good.  For gangs, it is helping their gang gain dominance, for jihadis it is the goal of dominance for Islam.  In politics, Obama and Obama’s acolytes believe their way is the only way and should gain dominance over America, and in that they follow the meme that has identified most far leftist in American history- “The ends justify the means.”  It really is that simple.

How bad is it? That depends 0n the truth of what happened, and the sad part is we may never know because the NSA supporters like Nunes are stuck between a rock and a hard place.   (He said so in his open statements in the hearings.) They believe in the programs, but are horrified about the abuses.  If they hammer the abuses too hard, others- like Senator Paul- will lead the charge to unwind the programs.  So what to do?  Already, Nunes, who went to the trouble of telling the White House they were under surveillance, is backing down a little. Either it happened or it didn’t, there is no “in between” unless someone said something to him arguing for the big picture instead.

Here’s the fact.  Obama is the first black President and a transformational leader (good or bad depending on your politics), so political correctness has protected his and his people’s bad acts for years.  It may continue to do so. However, if by some chance someone up there decides that no one is above the law, there is plenty of law that may have been broken, several are sure things.  Robert Barnes at Lawnewz lists a number.

What crimes could have been committed? Ironically, for Democrats falsely accusing Attorney General Sessions, perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury, as well as intentional violations of FISA. Rather shockingly, no law currently forbids misusing the power of the presidency to spy on one’s adversaries. What the law does forbid is lying to any judicial officer to obtain any means of surveillance. What the law does forbid, under criminal penalty, is the misuse of FISA. Both derive from the protections of the Fourth Amendment itself. Under section 1809, FISA makes it a crime for anyone to either “engage in” electronic surveillance under “color of law” under FISA without following the law’s restrictions, or “disclose” or “use” information gathered from it in contravention of the statute’s sharp constrictions.

FISA, 50 USC 1801, et seq., is a very limited method of obtaining surveillance authority. The reason for its strict limits is that FISA evades the regular federal court process, by not allowing regularly, Constitutionally appointed federal judges and their magistrates to authorize surveillance the Fourth Amendment would otherwise forbid. Instead, the Chief Justice handpicks the FISA court members, who have shown an exceptional deference to the executive branch. This is because FISA court members trust the government is only bringing them surveillance about pending terror attacks or “grave hostile” war-like attacks, as the FISA statute limits itself to. Thus, a FISA application can only be used in very limited circumstances.

One important reminder about electronic surveillance. Occasionally, a law enforcement officer will hear or see or record information not allowed by the warrant, but incidental or accidental to otherwise lawful surveillance. Their job is to immediately stop listening, stop recording, and to delete such information. This is what you occasionally see in films where the agent in the van hears the conversation turn away from something criminal to a personal discussion, and the agent then turns off the listening device and stops the recording. Such films simply recognize long-standing legal practice.

FISA can only be used for “foreign intelligence information.” Now that sounds broad, but is in fact very limited under the law. The only “foreign intelligence information” allowed as a basis for surveillance is information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential “grave” “hostile” attack, war-like sabotage or international terror. Second, it can only be used to eavesdrop on conversations where the parties to the conversation are a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. An agent of a foreign power cannot be a United States person unless they are knowingly involved in criminal espionage. No warrant is allowed on that person unless a FISA court finds probable cause the United States person is knowingly engaged in criminal espionage. Even then, if it involves a United States person, special steps must be taken to “minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of non publicly available information concerning un-consenting United States persons.”

This includes procedures that require they never identify the person, or the conversation, being surveilled, to the public where that information is not evidence of a particular crime. Third, the kind of information sought concerns solely information about a pending or actual attack on the country. That is why the law limits itself to sabotage incidents involving war, not any form or kind of “sabotage,” explicitly limiting itself to those acts identified in section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

This bring us to Watergate-on-Steroids, or #ObamaGate. Here are the problematic aspects of the Obama surveillance on Trump’s team, and on Trump himself. First, it is not apparent FISA could ever be invoked. Second, it is possible Obama’s team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by withholding material information essential to the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance. Third, it could be that Obama’s team illegally disseminated and disclosed FISA information in direct violation of the statute precisely prohibiting such dissemination and disclosure. FISA prohibits, under criminal penalty, Obama’s team from doing any of the three.

At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.

Out of 35,000+ requests for surveillance, the FISA court has only ever rejected a whopping 12. Apparently, according to published reports, you can add one more to that — even the FISA court first rejected Obama’s request to spy on Trump’s team under the guise of an investigation into foreign agents of a pending war attack, intelligence agents apparently returned to the court, where, it is my assumption, that they did not disclose or divulge all material facts to the court when seeking the surveillance the second time around, some of which they would later wrongfully disseminate and distribute to the public. By itself, misuse of FISA procedures to obtain surveillance is itself, a crime.

This raises the second problem: Obama’s team submission of an affidavit to to the FISA court. An application for a warrant of any kind requires an affidavit, and that affidavit may not omit material factors. A fact is “material” if it could have the possible impact of impacting the judicial officer deciding whether to authorize the warrant. Such affidavits are the most carefully drawn up, reviewed, and approved affidavits of law enforcement in our system precisely because they must be fully-disclosing, forthcoming, and include any information a judge must know to decide whether to allow our government to spy on its own. My assumption would be that intelligence officials were trying to investigate hacking of DNC which is not even a FISA covered crime, so therefore serious questions arise about what Obama administration attorneys said to the FISA court to even consider the application. If the claim was “financial ties” to Russia, then Obama knew he had no basis to use FISA at all.

Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves.

That raises the third problem: it seems the FISA-compelled protocols for precluding the dissemination of the information were violated, and that Obama’s team issued orders to achieve precisely what the law forbids, if published reports are true about the administration sharing the surveilled information far-and-wide to promote unlawful leaks to the press. This, too, would be its own crime, as it brings back the ghost of Hillary’s emails — by definition, FISA information is strictly confidential or it’s information that never should have been gathered. FISA strictly segregates its surveilled information into two categories: highly confidential information of the most serious of crimes involving foreign acts of war; or, if not that, then information that should never have been gathered, should be immediately deleted, and never sourced nor disseminated. It cannot be both.

Recognizing this information did not fit FISA meant having to delete it and destroy it. According to published reports, Obama’s team did the opposite: order it preserved, ordered the NSA to search it, keep it, and share it; and then Obama’s Attorney General issued an order to allow broader sharing of information and, according to the New York Times, Obama aides acted to label the Trump information at a lower level of classification for massive-level sharing of the information. The problem for Obama is simple — if it could fit a lower level of classification, then it had to be deleted and destroyed, not disseminated and distributed, under crystal clear FISA law. Obama’s team’s admission it could be classified lower, yet taking actions to insure its broadest distribution, could even put Obama smack-middle of the biggest unlawful surveillance and political-opponent-smear campaign since Nixon. Except even Nixon didn’t use the FBI and NSA for his dirty tricks.

No, no he didn’t.  Would he have? He tried to get the IRS to target his political enemies with no success- unlike Obama’s IRS led by Lerner and Sarah Ingram Hall (and others). So Nixon is no angel, but Obama’s abuses, if history allows the truth to be told, will knock Nixon off the “worst President ever!” pedestal permanently.

Worse, there is a good chance they will get away with it.  I’m convinced now Comey is compromised.  He lied in his open testimony, giving off all the “tells” of a man who wanted to be anywhere but where he was. Rogers just looked pissed.  Either he is an honorable man who is beyond his depth, or a man who realizes things are out of control and he can’t keep the lid on it. Imagine realizing your entire crew is doing bad things and either you knew and hoped it wasn’t that bad or worse, you didn’t know and now realize it is truly really, really bad.

Nunes says people have come forward who maybe not in the leadership to give him reports indicating Trump’s team was targeted.  That could mean that there is a group out there who want to suggest to Nunes that they would be far better witnesses than suspects.  Good.  Maybe the fear of Trump’s anger is motivating them to do the right thing. I am convinced no blue suit wearing, big house in the suburbs bureaucrat is willing to spend ten years in gen pop inside some federal pen in Kansas!  It should be put out there by the Trump administration that anyone not cooperating with an investigation is going to end up there.   I’m betting the witness line is going to fill up!

Sadly, the DC insiders either can’t understand what happened or refuse to admit things have gone too far under Obama.  Mollie Hemingway at the Federalist is an exception.  She gets it. When she was on Fox the other night she was nearly leaping out of her chair so she could jump on AB Stoddard’s dismissive tone about the whole thing. She too is willfully avoiding the scandal.  Even if ONE Trump campaign member is targeted it is miles beyond anything Nixon did.

Image result for AB stoddard fox news

Doesn’t get it.

Image result for AB stoddard mollie hemingway

Gets it.

Here is Hemingway’s article from the Federalist.

In the last three months of the Obama presidency, significant personal information from and about the Trump transition was collected and widely disseminated at intelligence agencies, according to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes.

Dozens of intelligence reports provided to Nunes by an unnamed whistleblower were floating around during the sensitive transition period following the election, he said. The information collection itself may have technically been legal, but the failure to properly mask the information “alarmed” the California congressman, who notified the White House of the surveillance and dissemination of information on Wednesday afternoon.

Many of the reporters present didn’t seem to grasp the significance of what Nunes revealed. You can — and should — watch that press conference here.

Nunes began his remarks by reiterating his Monday request that anyone with information on surveillance of Trump or his team come forward. “I also said while there was not a physical wiretap of Trump Tower, I was concerned that other surveillance activities were used against President Trump and his associates.” While Nunes’ earlier refutation of Trump’s wiretap claim received outsize attention by the media, his concern about other surveillance did not.

He then dropped the bombshell: “First, I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions, the intelligence community incidentally collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition. Second, details about U.S. persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value, were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting. Third, I have confirmed that additional names of Trump transition team members were unmasked. Fourth and finally, I want to be clear, none of this surveillance was related to Russia or the investigation of Russian activities or of the Trump team.” Again:

1) Information was collected on the Trump team by Obama administration agencies.
2) This information had no reason to be shared in intelligence reports to Obama officials.
3) Obama officials may have flouted legally required attempts to minimize and mask personal identifying information.
4) This had nothing to do with Russia.

He later explained that these reports were related to Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act-permitted information collections. Such collections of information on foreign sources require hiding and protecting information about U.S. citizens incidentally picked up during the process when disseminating reports on information gleaned. He even referenced how this reminded him of the trouble the spy agencies got in when failing to mask members of Congress they routinely picked up while spying on Israel. So his concern is not just that the personal identifying information was not masked, but that there appeared to be little or no foreign intelligence value in the spreading of information regarding the political opponents of the previous administration.

Remember, as Krauthammer can’t grasp, the people in charge of our government for the last eight years believed that the ends justified the means.  Even the early ATF “Fast and Furious” scandal was full of illegal or questionable activity  (which someone in the Trump administration needs to investigate and arrest the violators).  The whole plan was to create a false story- that American gun stores were selling weapons to the Mexican cartels- so that the federal government could attack the second amendments rights of citizens. The operation was never to act as publicly stated, and it got two agents and over two hundred Mexicans killed with the guns they let “walk” into Mexico’s drug cartel. (Senator Feinstein was also in the loop, as she pushed already prepared anti-gun legislation- so this corrupt was THROUGHOUT government!)

Frankly, that should have been enough to send the Obama administration packing…but Holder simply refused to cooperate, lied to Congress and was held in contempt.  And still served Obama because he was…politically correct protected. Now he’s getting rich screwing with the Trump administration…so why not do bad things?

So when Krauthammer is reluctant to accept that Obama’s people who spy on an incoming administration in order to undermine it and protect Obama’s legacy, I say “DUDE WAKE UP!”  Of course they would! Why not? The chances of a downside were minimal, the upside- destroying Trump before he got going- was huge!

My worry is Nunes and the rest will buckle under the pressure and sweep this away “for the greater good” of the programs.  Or, and this is the scary part, the NSA simply pulls up the data on Nunes and blackmails him.  Don’t think they have it? Watch this.








Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

“Asian” runs over people in Britain. London mayor blames everyone else.

Not to minimize the carnage, but when will the Brits quit blaming Japanese and Chinese people for the terror attacks in their country.  They keep calling the terrorists “Asians”.  They are not Asians, they are middle eastern Muslims.  Today, another one decided to become their version of a drone strike and kill a bunch of innocent people.

It is currently known that:

  • One woman was killed on Westminster Bridge after a number of pedestrians were mowed down by a car.
  • Two more people were killed in the incident on the bridge.
  • Another woman ended up in the Thames and was treated for serious injuries after being pulled from the water.
  • A group of French schoolchildren were among those targeted on the bridge.
  • The attacker jumped out the car and fatally stabbed police officer Keith Palmer in the grounds of the Palace of Westminster.
  • The knifeman was shot dead moments later by another officer.
  • Police are treating the incident as a terrorist attack.

Witness Jayne Wilkinson said: ‘We were taking photos of Big Ben and we saw all the people running towards us, and then there was an Asian guy in about his 40s carrying a knife about seven or eight inches long.

‘And then there were three shots fired, and then we crossed the road and looked over. The man was on the floor with blood.

‘He had a lightweight jacket on, dark trousers and a shirt. He was running through those gates, towards Parliament, and the police were chasing him.’

Her partner David Turner added: ‘There was a stampede of people running out. You saw the people and you thought ‘what the hell is going on’.’

Foreign Office minister Tobias Ellwood was among those who rushed to help the policeman who had been stabbed.

Mr Ellwood, who lost his brother in the Bali bombing, could be seen pumping the officer’s chest then standing above him, his hands and face smeared with blood.

Frazer Clarke, 25, from Burton-on-Trent, said: ‘We heard a loud bang and screaming and then I noticed some smoke. I thought it was a car crash.

‘I looked towards the front gate and people were running, a police officer and a fellow coming to the gate with two knives.

‘He was stabbing the police officer with the knives. He was wearing black tracksuit bottoms, a black of grey top and what looked like work boots. The police officer was stumbling and fell on the floor’.

This was the series of events this afternoon where a knife attacker drove into pedestrians before he was shot by police

courtesy of UK daily mail

There is video now, since Britain is one large CCTV nation and there will be more I’m sure.  One video shows people jumping off the bridge into the very cold river to avoid being run down.

This is another terror attack in a nation full of terrorists.  One of them is the London mayor, who is playing the part of “kitman.” He’s the first Muslim mayor and is literally the well dressed educated camel’s nose under the tent.

London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has already been controversial for his ‘openness’ towards Islamic immigrants with no plans what so ever to help assimilate them to Western culture. Well, with today’s attacks that left at least four dead and many injured, we are reminded of Sadiq Khan’s chilling remarks that terrorism is ‘part & parcel’ of living in a large city. Via DailyMail:

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has said that living with terror attacks – like the one that hit New York at the weekend – is ‘part and parcel of living in a big city’.

Mr Khan told the Evening Standard: ‘It is a reality I’m afraid that London, New York, other major cities around the world have got to be prepared for these sorts of things.

‘That means being vigilant, having a police force that is in touch with communities, it means the security services being ready, but also it means exchanging ideas and best practice.’

It goes without saying that the majority of Londoners, or New Yorkers, or pretty much the population of ANY major city are NOT willing to accept terrorism as nonchalantly as Sadiq Khan has; the rise is terrorism across the Western world is a direct consequence of open immigration laws extending to countries that are known hotbeds of Islamic extremism and terrorism. Unfortunately, Sadiq Khan recently won re-election back in 2016 and Mayoral terms in London last for four years. One can only imagine that many Londoners are deeply regretting their last vote.

Seriously, what were you thinking Brits?

Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump was right and is waiting for an apology…well, from everyone!

How bad is it for the Left wing news and politicians on the “Trump’s a nut because he said Obama wiretapped him!” claim now? (Remember, Trump is seventy-one. He cut his teeth on an era where wiretaps were the only method of collection electronic data.  So, I forgive him for the catch-all phrase.)

Image result for trump on phone oval office

Jake Tapper and Don Lemon? Sure…sure…I accept your apology…NOT!

I just watched CNN literally be backed into the one…last…corner of “Well, there is no proof it was ordered by Obama!”


They seem to not quite grasp the CRIME of spying on American citizens!

Here’s the Breitbart article, far more accurate to what Nunes actually said. On a side note, my ex-intel buddy said right off the bat this was probably “extra-judicial surveillance”.  They swept up everything “legally”.  However, “legal” is a bullshit term used by people who like to hold power over others. Legal doesn’t mean right or just or good, just legal.  (Don’t get me started on lawyers and judges…aaaagghh!)

My friend said that Congress and the courts have to reign in the powers being used by the intelligence agencies. Not stop them, but make them accountable for their actions through some kind of judicial review.  One suggestion was- People whose information is “incidentally” swept up must be notified and be allowed to seek redress.

From Breitbart-

House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) announced on Wednesday that he had learned that members of President Donald Trump’s transition team had been under surveillance by the Obama administration, that individual names had been “unmasked” by the intelligence community, and that those names had been leaked to the media.

Nunes’s information — which he said he would deliver to the White House later — vindicates the bulk of Trump’s claims earlier this month.

Nunes said that while there was no direct “wiretap” by President Barack Obama of Trump Tower, there was indeed surveillance — perhaps collected incidentally — of people close to Trump, possibly including Trump himself.

Much of that had been suspected, on the basis of mainstream media reports, but Rep. Nunes reported something new: that the surveillance did not involve the ongoing Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) inquiry into Russia’s alleged involvement in the 2016 presidential election. Indeed, none of the surveillance had intelligence value, he said.

“I believe it was all done legally,” Nunes told a press conference. The question, he said, was why names of those swept up in the surveillance had been leaked. The collection of the intelligence appeared to have been legal, but the leaking may have been illegal.

Most of the activity occurred during the transition period from November to January. Furthermore, Nunes said, he did not know whether phone calls — including phone calls involving Trump — were among the communications captured.

CNN is admitting, because they are Obama apologists, that not only was the information captured it was widely disseminated, and that information had nothing to do with Russians, but how the Trump administration was going to govern.

THINK ABOUT THAT! If anyone else did it (named Nixon) the media would go crazy!

Now there is no way the Obama administration would widely distribute political information and Obama not know.  Impossible.  He will deny it and you’ll have trouble getting people to admit he knew, but he knew.

But let’s go over the facts here.  What do we know now?

  1. Obama was President when the FBI started their “investigation”. 
  2. Obama was President when the NSA and other illegally captured and kept what appears to be POLITICAL conversations on an opposition party President elect.
  3. That information, which had nothing to do with any crime or Russians, but dealt with how the Trump administration wanted to govern, was captured, transcribed and WIDELY disseminated. (Seriously, why isn’t someone in jail?)
  4. The NSA/FBI/et. al. have been hiding behind their classified status in order not to reveal who did it. Comey outright lied in his testimony. He was sweating bullets and giving off “tells” all day!  Trust me, the feds document everything. NOBODY goes “rogue” without someone knowing. So some tech guy has the conversation, passed it to some higher up, who passed it to some higher up.  The NSA KNOWS who did what.
Image result for Rogers and Comey testifying

Okay, yes, I was lying before, but I’m not lying now, right Mike? Mike??

A true measure of Trump will be if he lets this go. If he does, then he’s just another flunkie in the “I won’t tell on you if you don’t tell on me.” world of politics.  If I see people running for lawyers and getting perp walked across to the US Justice building, then I will know Trump is serious about draining the swamp.  He should be, he’s a victim of a felony and was spied on by his former President.

Hmm… I wonder if Tahiti has an extradition agreement with us.

Update:  Here is the video of the press conference. One reporter, a female, was just a little crazy trying to undermine what Nunes was saying.  He’s not happy.  He just had to tell a President, that the powers Congress gave the Intel community ended up with the President being put under political surveillance.  The fact the media is so biased that it can’t see the HUGE scandal here is just amazing.

Further, the democrat head of the committee is whining it wasn’t fair Nunes put all the info out there because he was told. That’s a lie. He was told last week. This is all grandstanding. If you take the time to watch Comey and Rogers earlier this week in the public meeting, you were seeing two guys who wanted to be anywhere but where they were! They knew bad things are coming.




Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

If the enemy is telling you he’s at war with you, believe him! Turkey tells Europe it is on!

Turkey’s President Erdogan, is playing a game with Europe.  Europe, being suicidal and stupid, is playing along.  Erdogan has been pushing “migrant refugees” into Europe from the war torn area of Syria.  He stopped when Europe paid him billions.  Now he took the money and has threatened to start up the migration again.   In addition, he tells the people already there to take over Europe through demographics.  Europe is in deep sh*t.  Everybody but the global elites knows this and cares.  The globalists may know, but don’t care and they hold the power.  It is curious why they want to undermine Europe, they will be some of the first who will die at the hands of the Islamists.

ANKARA (AFP) – President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Friday urged Turks resident in Europe to have five children, telling the millions strong diaspora community “you are Europe’s future.”

Turkey and Europe are locked in a bitter spat after Germany and the Netherlands blocked Turkish ministers from holding rallies to campaign for a ‘yes’ vote in next month’s referendum on expanding Erdogan’s powers.

Erdogan has repeatedly accused EU states of behaving like Nazi Germany over what he sees as discrimination against Turks, in comments that have caused outrage across the continent.

“From here I say to my citizens, I say to my brothers and sisters in Europe… Educate your children at better schools, make sure your family live in better areas, drive in the best cars, live in the best houses,” said Erdogan.

“Have five children, not three. You are Europe’s future.”

“This is the best answer to the rudeness shown to you, the enmity, the wrongs,” he added in a televised speech in the city of Eskisehir, south of Istanbul.

Some 2.5 million Turkish citizens resident in Europe are eligible to vote in elections in their homeland. But millions more people living in EU states have Turkish origins.

Their leadership is getting good innocent people, Europeans, killed every day by people who are not Europeans.  It is a war.  A serious Crusader level, clash of cultures, war.  And the people who know they are war will win.

Which means Europe is doomed UNLESS the Europeans change leadership.

Muslim population in Europe

Remember, the key here is how many, in what concentration vs how little dispersed.  That’s how  armies win battles.


Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Okay, this is a little bit funny. Mexicans are flooding Canada. Suddenly, they aren’t as critical anymore.

Remember when the Prime Minister, “Kid” something…oh yeah Trudeau, said that his nation was an inclusive nation which would never turn anyone away?  Well, it turns out their laws are tougher than ours and they just aren’t used to having waves of illegals walk across the border.  Now they are experiencing it firsthand and suddenly.

Canada’s border authorities detained more Mexicans in the first 67 days of 2017 than they did annually in any of the three previous years, according to statistics obtained by Reuters.

The spike comes immediately after Canada’s federal government lifted its visa requirement for Mexican citizens in December.

Many Mexicans looking north have shifted their focus from the United States to Canada as President Donald Trump vows to crack down on America’s undocumented immigrants, about half of whom are Mexican. On Friday, Reuters reported, immigration judges were reassigned to 12 U.S. cities to speed up deportation.

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) said it detained 444 Mexican nationals between Jan. 1 and March 8, compared with 410 for all of 2016, 351 for 2015, and 399 for 2014.

The CBSA can detain foreign nationals if it is believed they pose a danger to the public, if their identity is unclear or if they are deemed unlikely to appear for removal or for a proceeding.

The number of Mexicans turned back at the airport has risen, too – to 313 in January, more than any January since 2012 and more than the annual totals for 2012, 2013 and 2014.

With the visa requirement lifted, all that Mexicans need to come to Canada is an Electronic Travel Authorization (eTA), obtainable online in a matter of minutes. But they cannot work without a work permit, and the eTA does not guarantee entry.

Canada issued 72,450 travel authorizations to Mexican citizens between Dec. 1, 2016, and March 10, 2017 – a significant increase compared with a similar period when visas were required.

Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Minister Ahmed Hussen has said his department is monitoring the situation.

“It would be premature to draw conclusions or to speculate on future policy at this point,” Hussen’s spokeswoman, Camielle Edwards, wrote in an email Friday evening.

Plus, the “immigrants” are just wandering across the border, through the fields and into small towns.

On Tuesday, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said another 22 people had walked across the border and into Canada over the weekend; 19 of them on Saturday and three on Sunday.

“They’re not crossing at the actual point where there’s an immigration and customs offices,” said Rita Chahal of the Manitoba Interfaith Immigration Council. “They’re walking through prairie fields with lots and lots of deep snow. In Europe we’re seeing people in boats; now just imagine a prairie flatland and snow for miles and miles.”

Ahhhh…reality sucks and Karma is a bitch.




Posted in politics | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Proving a picture is worth a thousand words once again. The Rachel Maddow/Geraldo moment

Geraldo Maddow

Enough said…..

Posted in politics | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Well, that about does it. Brazile lied, then confessed and the rest of the Left is stuck.

Remember when all the liberals said Donna Brazile would never lie about helping HRC cheat in her run against Bernie?  Remember how upset and outraged Donna was at the idea, even though WikiLeaks had just released the hacked emails proving that she did it?  Remember how the Left screamed that the Right was chasing yet another conspiracy theory?

Well that’s done.

One of the most astounding revelations from the Podesta email published by Wikileaks was that then interim DNC Chair and CNN commentator Donna Brazile leaked potential primary town hall questions to the Clinton campaign.

That was astounding in two regards — that it happened, and that the media didn’t make a bigger deal about it.

Just imagine what the media reaction would have been if during the general election it came out that questions during Republican primary debates had been leaked to the Trump campaign. It would have been non-stop, 24/7, foaming at the mouth coverage demanding Trump drop out of the race. …

…Now Brazile has confessed in a column in Time devoted to decrying Russian hacking. The admission of guilt was buried in one paragraph in that column.

Fox News reports on the confession:

Former interim Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile admitted Friday that she forwarded Democratic primary debate questions to members of Hillary Clinton’s campaign – something she had previously denied.

“[I]n October, a subsequent release of emails revealed that among the many things I did in my role as a Democratic operative and D.N.C. Vice Chair prior to assuming the interim D.N.C. Chair position was to share potential town hall topics with the Clinton campaign,” she wrote.

In October, emails from Clinton campaign Chair John Podesta’s account were released by WikiLeaks showing that Brazile – then a CNN contributor – had forwarded questions ahead of a March primary debate.

In one email, Brazile told Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, “One of the questions directed to HRC tomorrow is from a woman with a rash,” the night before a March 6 CNN primary debate in Flint, Michigan.

“Her family has lead poison and she will ask what, if anything, will Hillary do as president to help the ppl of Flint,” Brazile wrote.

The following night, a question along those lines was posed to both Clinton and her primary rival Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-Vt.

In another email, dated Mar. 12, she passed on to Palmieri a question on the death penalty set to be asked in a Mar. 13 town hall and said: “From time to time I get the questions in advance.” After Palmieri responded, Brazile wrote back: “I’ll send a few more.” …

In the essay, Brazile said she will “forever regret” the decision to leak the questions to the Clinton campaign.

“My job was to make all our Democratic candidates look good, and I worked closely with both campaigns to make that happen. But sending those emails was a mistake I will forever regret,” she wrote


Uhhh…don’t care.  She lied, knew she was lying, threw out “As a Christian woman I know persecution” line on a Megyn Kelly interview and basically laughed at citizens who asked someone, ANYONE inside the Clinton circle to tell the truth for once.

On the other hand, Greg Gutfeld at Fox pointed out something.  If Bernie had won, he may have won it all. So in a way Brazile, by cheating and helping HRC, saved all of us.

Hmmm…well if you put it that way…



Posted in politics | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Judge Napolitano says the Brits did it, the Brits say never. The Brits lie.

There are two issues here.  First, did the Brits tap the Russian Ambassador and pick up Flynn’s side of the conversation? Who knows, but the reaction to Judge Napolitano’s assertion by the Brits is a lie.

In a startling segment on the Fox News program The First 100 Days, Judge Andrew Napolitano told viewers that there will be no paper trail linking President Obama to any surveillance of telephone calls in Trump Tower during the presidential transition period.  (President Obama called it “wiretapping” even though no wires were involved.)  The reason is that British intelligence had access to NSA surveillance data – which captures every phone call in the United States – and were able to provide such intelligence to President Obama without a FISA court warrant or any other paper trail that would expose an American intelligence agency that used the same NSA data.

Of course, the Brits deny this.  As any intelligence agency would.  Unfortunately for them, there was this guy named Snowden. And Snowden proved them all liars.  Communications are digital and can be hacked and stored.  In fact, the revelation that the Brits were doing it did not escape the Brits.

British intelligence services acted unlawfully in accessing millions of people’s personal communications collected by the NSA, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled today. The decision marks the first time that the Tribunal, the only UK court empowered to oversee GHCQ, MI5 and MI6, has ever ruled against the intelligence and security services in its 15 year history.

The Tribunal declared that intelligence sharing between the United States and the United Kingdom was unlawful prior to December 2014, because the rules governing the UK’s access to the NSA’s PRISM and UPSTREAM programmes were secret. It was only due to revelations made during the course of this case, which relied almost entirely on documents disclosed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, that the intelligence sharing relationship became subject to public scrutiny.

The claimants in the case are Privacy International, Bytes for All, Liberty, and Amnesty International.

In a previous December 2014 ruling, the IPT held that GCHQ’s access to NSA data was lawful from that time onward because certain of the secret policies governing the US-UK intelligence relationship were made public during Privacy International’s case against the security services. Yet that belated disclosure could not remedy the lack of transparency regarding the UK-US sharing prior to December 2014, meaning that all UK access to NSA intelligence material was unlawful before the Court’s judgement.

In light of today’s ruling, Privacy International and Bytes for All will now ask the court to confirm whether their communications were unlawfully collected prior to December 2014 and, if so, demand their immediate deletion.

While we welcome today’s decision, Privacy International and Bytes for All disagree with the tribunal’s earlier conclusion that the forced disclosure of a limited subset of rules governing intelligence-sharing and mass surveillance is sufficient to make GCHQ’s activities lawful as of December 2014. Both organisations will shortly lodge an application with the European Court of Human Rights challenging the tribunal’s December 2014 decision.

The people, and they are just people, who are collecting this data are not monsters. They are doing their job. It is the guy working with them, or above them, that has access to that data and no moral compass or has political agendas that makes the collection of the data dangerous.

My very intelligent former detective partner had a local take on how data can be misused.  He created a case about a high end burglary that occurred at 1am in our city.  To catch the burglar we gathered all the cell traffic metadata in a one mile square around the crime scene. We throw out all the residents, all the people just traveling through. What is left we run background on and find one is a high end burglar.  Through that we run down the stolen property he fenced and he gets to go to jail.  Good solid police work.

Unfortunately, we have all that raw data, so what do we do?  Do we keep it? In a criminal case we have to, discovery and appeals and such.  My friend points out a possible local problem.  He offers a scenario.  What if a sergeant on the team looks through the data and finds that the current mayor’s cellphone was in the area and pinged off an address belonging to his secretary. The mayor is married.  Worse, the sergeant’s brother in law is running against the mayor in the upcoming election. Do you think the information about the mayor and his secretary will remain confidential?  Hardly.

But in an intel collection effort, what do they do with it? Do they keep it?  The answer is yes, because even if they are good guys, they are lazy guys.  And having all that data on hand and not have to go and find it when they are putting together a case is easier.

What they are doing is lazy policing. They are making cases in almost an opposite of the Tom Cruz’s movie “Minority Report” about pre-crime. They are using the data to make cases on post crime.  Say a bad guy commits a crime.  Instead of making the effort to stop it (Hello travel bans and the FBI being compromised by CAIR, thus preventing FBI agents from stopping events like the Boston bombing), the government is great on post crime gathering of already seized (illegally) data by intelligence agency.  Once the bad guy does something they can track his PAST movements and contacts through the metadata.  Not who is he talking to, but rather who DID he talk to.

In the case of the local sergeant using data to undermine a political opponent, Obama’s people did the same thing. IF there is a transcript, and not an all out lie pushed into the papers by never Trumpers and Obama acolytes, that means somebody illegally obtained the raw data and disseminated it.

Either way, it’s a trick bag they are now trying to get out of by rewriting history.

Good luck on that.  They should check the papers- Trump won.








Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ninth District Judges slay the HI judge TRO. An epic beatdown

If this was a street beating, the judge would be in ICU! The other judges lay out the reasons why the Hawaii judge erred to an unprecedented level. In fact, he has in his warped opinion, created a constitutional crisis and exposed the danger of letting advocates inside the judicial system.  You can bet the ninth will suffer for it- and they know it.

In one of the most ruthless opinions issued of fellow panel judges, five judges from across the political spectrum in the Ninth Circuit went out of their way to issue an opinion about a dismissed appeal, to remind everybody just how embarrassingly bad the prior Ninth Circuit stay panel decision was on Trump’s travel ban. The five judges included the famed, and most respected intellectual amongst the Ninth Circuit, Alex Kozinski. The others included Jay Bybee, Consuelo Callahan, Carlos Bea and Sandra Ikuta.  Nobody other than the original panel came to the defense of the original panel decision, a less than promising start for future approvals of district court interference in Presidential immigration policy.

The language of the opinion was almost Scalian: the five Ninth Circuit judges noted their “obligation to correct” the “manifest” errors so bad that the “fundamental” errors “confound Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent.” The district court questioned any judge issuing a “nationwide TRO” “without making findings of fact or conclusions of law” on the merits of the matter and conducting published opinions on seminal matters of national security based on “oral argument by phone involving four time zones.”

Aside from the procedural defects of the process, the five panel jurists then noted the deep legal problems with the panel’s order: its a-historicity, it’s abdication of precedent, and its usurpation of Constitutionally delegated Presidential rights. Mirroring much of the Boston judge’s decision, the five judges then detail and outline what other critics, skeptics and commentators have noted of the prior panel decision, including critical commentary from liberal law professors and scribes Jonathan Turley, Alan Dershowitz, and Jeffrey Toobin. The original 3-judge panel “neglected or overlooked critical cases by the Supreme Court and by our making clear that when we are reviewing decisions about who may be admitted into the United States, we must defer to the judgment of the political branches.” Of particular note, the five panel judges note how the 3-judge panel decision in “compounding its omission” of Supreme Court decisions and relevant sister Circuit precedents, also “missed all of our own cases” on the subject. The 5 judges conclude the panel engaged in a “clear misstatement of law” so bad it compelled “vacating” an opinion usually mooted by a dismissed case.

Read the whole article.  It is stunning in its dismissal of the whole opinion.  In Maryland, another former Obama acolyte, and now judge, thinks he might force Trump to increase the number of Muslim immigrants by demanding he do it, as a simple district judge.  Another crisis created out of whole cloth by judges who should be slapped across the nose for trying it.  The Senate is doing just that, and you can bet Trump will sign it.

As judges on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals weigh the legality of President Trump’s immigration executive order, a Republican push to split up the controversial court — and shrink its clout — is gaining steam on Capitol Hill.

Republican Sens. Jeff Flake and John McCain of Arizona introduced legislation last month to carve six states out of the San Francisco-based court circuit and create a brand new 12th Circuit.

They argue that the 9th is too big, too liberal and too slow resolving cases. If they succeed, only California, Oregon, Hawaii and two island districts would remain in the 9th’s judicial fiefdom.

Right now, Flake said, the circuit is far too sprawling.

“It represents 20 percent of the population — and 40 percent of the land mass is in that jurisdiction. It’s just too big,” Flake told Fox News on Wednesday. “We have a bedrock principle of swift justice and if you live in Arizona or anywhere in the 9th Circuit, you just don’t have it.”

Flake says it typically takes the court 15 months to hand down a decision.

“It’s far too long,” he added.

Conservatives have mocked the 9th Circuit for years, often calling it the “Nutty 9th” or the “9th Circus,” in part because so many of its rulings have been overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The court has a reputation as one of the most liberal in the country, in large part because of its makeup. Eighteen of the court’s 25 active judges have been appointed by Democrats. Former President George W. Bush appointed six justices, while former President Barack Obama appointed seven.

Unless Congress runs into a problem, you can bet the ninth’s days are numbered and they know it.  It’s long overdue.






Posted in politics | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment