Tag Archives: progressives

Jul 17 2019

Squad Goals: Anarchy


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on July 16, 2019 by 

RNC ad highlights the intense calls to violence from the congressional anarchy caucus.

Jul 17 2019

Jim Jordan Responds to the Hot Mess Today in Congress…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on July 16, 2019 by 

Obviously Fox News needs to present two-and-a-half minutes of negative spin prior to getting to the nub of the representative interview (happens at 2:45 below), but eventually MacCallum gets around to discussing the Moonbat legislative fiasco with Jim Jordan:

Jul 16 2019

“If we don’t speak now”


by Tabitha Korol

“Speak now or forever hold your peace” is based upon the marriage liturgy of the Christians’ Book of Common Prayer.  Today it may refer to our self-monitoring for the irrational fear of not being politically correct.

After reading my essay, “An Assumption of Dignity,” on the Internet, a reader commented, “I circulated it to our editorial board who found it very moving.  However, based entirely on the reality of it not being “politically correct,” I am recommending that it will not be posted on our educational site.  That said, given its compelling nature, I will circulate it privately and selectively.”

This poignant communication appears to be from an academic, corporate or military milieu, who wants to share it but is constrained by a fear of being classified “intolerant.”  In years past, he’d have thought nothing about forwarding and posting the article with his observations on said educational site.  Today, in this post-Obama era, he is threatened by the vitriol that would explode were he to dispatch ideas antithetical to those who set the political agenda, intimidated by the possibilities that harm would come to his family, and concerned that he could be summarily dismissed from his position if the first two and harassed if the third.

Although our First Amendment remains unchanged, with its protections extended to all individuals in the United States, the writer nevertheless reasoned that sharing information contradictory to the views of the ruling class could offend and must be done surreptitiously and with extreme caution.  He is judicious and self-monitoring, but feeling defenseless in his isolated position, he is slowly conforming to “the plan.”  Guarded, he is gradually growing fearful and more submissive to those in power.

The purveyors of hate-speech accusations work to divide us into groups based on their immutable features – race, religion, ethnicity, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, family breakdown, and views on innumerable subjects.  They have always existed in history but are far more forcefully promoted by those who now hold sway over our schools, government, and the workplace.  When these were still insufficient to more completely affect our massive population, the ruling class devised issues for additional divisiveness – climate, abortion and post-partum infanticide, American monuments and symbols, slavery and LGBTQ reparations, a unique foreign invasion, and so many more.  And when our young adults leave the schools to join the mainstream of American life, they will take with them not only their learned prejudices, but also their ways of stifling the free speech of others who would dare to disagree.

The left has worked doggedly to insert their values into our lives, and because they use compassion as their tactic, traditional Americans failed to see that the compassion was highly selective. Compassion for the mother is denied the unborn child; compassion for the gender-confused is denied the healthy heterosexual; compassion for the Muslim newcomer is denied the indigenous Christian and Jew.  We have even witnessed the compassion shown more for the criminal than for his victim in a court of law.

This selective compassion is denied our President, a man who serves his country selflessly, even donating his paychecks to worthy causes.  Why does the left rant about President Trump, insult his every sentence, mannerism, activity?  For one thing, it serves to comfort the left, to keep them engaged with trivia to dodge the discomfort of acknowledging his triumphs.  For another, and perhaps the crux of the issue, is that when they cannot suppress his speech, they can still suppress what they hear.  They impose their will on others by censoring what’s available to the public, such as Google, Facebook and Twitter, and discredit the rest.  The Shangri La for the left is when society is so controlled that it becomes self-censoring.  We are almost there.

Our founding fathers ensured that freedom of speech became the unambiguous law of our land, yet many who claim to support that freedom work to silence the views of others, to eliminate dissent and satisfy their desire for power – even dictatorially seeking to inflict harm on those who disagree.  By making full use of the conflicts inherent in multiculturalism, and further dividing the population into their own cultural attributes and values, now identified as intersectionality, social havoc has been created with political liberty.

Our United States has been fragmented into warring tribes, as we see those who insist on protection from ideas they find intolerable have, themselves, become intolerant of the speaking rights others.  Mainstream media publishes and reports only their leftist view on any subject and event.  Muslims who insist on shari’a law for themselves are dedicated to overtaking their host by denying Americans their Constitutionally guaranteed culture and religious worship.  Demeaning insults abound against any opposition, and democrats now debase men in general and white males in particular for the ills of racial segregation, although they were enacted by the democrat-mandated Jim Crow laws of racial segregation, from the 1870s, after the Reconstruction era, to 1965.

The ideological tactic is also defined as cultural Marxism, when one party can issue invectives to force the other party into “politically correct” silence. This unhealthy situation has replaced honest debate that arrives at understanding and/or gracious compromise.  The resultant increasing levels of antagonism are causing a decline in our social stability – allowing invasion, crime by overpopulation, escalating disease, homelessness, drug abuse, rising sexual crimes, heightened loneliness and suicide, violence – all adding a serious strain to our national debt, as well.  Allowing these failures results from one side’s preying on the compassion of others.  We must recognize that “Limited speech must come from debate, not before debate.” – Izzy Kalman.

We have to condemn publicly the very idea that some people have the right to repress others. In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousandfold in the future. – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. The Gulag Archipelago.

 

If you enjoyed this article, consider Korol’s book, “Confronting the Deception,” available on Amazon.

Tabitha Korol,

https://tinyurl.com/y7e6z63d

 

Jul 16 2019

Why Trump Told ‘The Squad’ of 4 U.S. Lawmakers to Go Back Where They Came From


Published on Jul 16, 2019

President Trump told U.S. Representatives Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Tlaib — known collectively as ‘The Squad’ — to go back where they originally came from and to fix the broken, corrupt governments in those places before they try to fix America. What did he mean by this, and why does he continue to go after a handful of rookie lawmakers as part of his effort to get re-elected? Bill Whittle explains. Bill Whittle brings you his principled reactions to breaking news of the day five times each week thanks to the Members at BillWhittle.com, who fund the production and distribution. If you enjoyed this conversation, we think you’ll like the other 47 shows we make each month, including episodes of Firewall, Right Angle and The Stratosphere Lounge. Join them now at https://BillWhittle.com/register/

 

Jul 16 2019

The US Treasury Does Have the Constitutional Right to Mint Coins


Armstrong Economics Blog/Regulation

Re-Posted Jul 16, 2019 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty, You are wrong. The US Treasury can create the money as the Constitution says it can. Article I, Section 8, Clause 5. The Congress shall have the Power to coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.

To coin is used as a verb. At the time the Constitution was written, to coin money meant to create or to make money. Today’s Dictionary defines to coin as a verb meaning to make or to invent.
Why did you fail to mention this in your Blog today?
TD

ANSWER: Yes, you are correct. I suppose I was referring to the 99.99% of the money supply rather than the coins put into circulation by the US Treasury. President Nixon only closed the gold window in 1971. He did not demonetize “gold” as money under the Constitution. Yes, technically the US Treasury can coin money, but it coins today’s coins. The Fed does not do that. The coinage it creates is minimal in comparison to the overall scheme of things. Since 1913, the printing of currency has been delegated to the Federal Reserve. Prior to 1913, the Treasury issued the paper currency which was backed by coins.

This was the last issue of paper currency issued by the United States Treasury in 1913, the year that the Federal Reserve Act was passed.

Note that in 1934, the Fed actually issued $10,000 bills

Jul 16 2019

Lawsuit Claims Julian Assange Confirmed DNC Emails Received From Seth Rich – Not a Russian Hack…


Re-Posted from The Conservative Tree House on July 15, 2019 by 

A rather stunning report from Gateway Pundit outlines information contained within a lawsuit filing.  The lawsuit, filed by Businessman Ed Butowsky, alleges Wikileaks founder Julian Assange confirmed to Fox News analyst Ellen Ratner that the DNC leaked emails were received from Seth Rich and his brother Aaron.

The details contained within the lawsuit filing (full pdf below) are stunning.

If this information is true and accurate, the DOJ claim of a Russian hack –based on assertions by DNC contractor, Crowdstrike– would be entirely false.  Additionally the DC murder of Seth Rich would hold a far more alarming motive.

(Source, lawsuit filing – pdf link, page 13)

Here’s the Full Court Filing:

REPORT THIS AD

.

The ramifications here are almost too large to describe.

If this information turns out to be true and accurate, the entire narrative around the DNC “hack” will have been proven to be intentionally manufactured.

Despite the FBI’s prior admissions about never reviewing the DNC servers; and despite their recent admissions about never actually seeing the forensic computer analysis, the U.S. Department of Justice, specifically Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and former DAG Rod Rosenstein, cannot blame a simple investigative ‘mistake‘ for the wrong attribution of who gave the DNC emails to Wikileaks.

The FBI, the DOJ and the Mueller special counsel have each purposefully claimed specific Russian actors were responsible for hacking the DNC in 2016.  If it turns out those claims were based on falsehood, the integrity of the DOJ and Special Counsel collapses.

Mr. Butowsky is making a very serious allegation in this court filing.

Additionally, the previously discussed motive to arrest Julian Assange would now be further enhanced.  Heck, the reason for Assange’ arrest would be brutally obvious.

♦Dana Boente was head of DOJ-NSD from May 11th, 2017 through end of October 2017 when he officially announced his intent to retire. However, the timeline gets cloudy here because Boente said he was staying on until an official replacement was announced. There’s no indication of when Boente actually left the DOJ-NSD or the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) role.

On January 23rd, 2018, FBI Director Christopher Wray announced Dana Boente had shifted over to the FBI to be Chief Legal Counsel (replacing James Baker) where Boente remains today. As Mueller was using 19 lawyers, and 50 FBI investigators, Boente was/is the legal counsel to FBI Director Christopher Wray while the Mueller probe was ongoing.

[Remember, Robert Mueller never interviewed Julian Assange.  Additionally, it is worth noting for the U.S. side of the legal framework, the charges against Assange are not related to Russian efforts in a hack of the DNC; nor is Assange charged with anything related to the 2016 U.S. election interference activities, the Podesta email release or anything therein as previously described by the DOJ.]

The April 11th, 2019, Julian Assange indictment stemmed from the Eastern District of Virginia.  From a review of the indictment we discover it was under seal since March 6th, 2018: (The DOJ sat on the indictment for 13 months, until Mueller finished)

REPORT THIS AD

(Link to pdf)

However, on Tuesday April 15th, 2019, more investigative material was released. Again, note the dates: Grand Jury, *December of 2017* This means FBI investigation prior to December ’17..

The investigation of Assange took place prior to December 2017, it is coming from the EDVA where Dana Boente was still, presumably, U.S. Attorney. The grand jury indictment was sealed from March of 2018 until April of 2019.

Why was there a delay?

Why did the DOJ wait until the Mueller report was complete?

Here’s where it gets interesting….

The FBI submission to the Grand Jury in December of 2017 was four months after congressman Dana Rohrabacher talked to Assange in August of 2017: “Assange told a U.S. congressman … he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents … did not come from Russia.”

(August 2017, The Hill Via John Solomon) Julian Assange told a U.S. congressman on Tuesday he can prove the leaked Democratic Party documents he published during last year’s election did not come from Russia and promised additional helpful information about the leaks in the near future.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy, became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years.

Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC [Democratic National Committee] emails during last year’s presidential election,” Rohrabacher said, “Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.”

Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Trump. (read more)

REPORT THIS AD

If you overlay the timing, it would appear the FBI took a keen interest in Assange after this August 2017 meeting and gathered specific evidence for a grand jury by December 2017. Then the DOJ sat on the indictment (sealed in March 2018) while the Mueller probe was ongoing; until April 11th, 2019, when a coordinated effort between the U.K. and U.S. was launched. Assange was arrested, and the indictment was unsealed (link).

To me, as a person who has researched this three year fiasco; including the ridiculously false 2016 Russian hacking/interference narrative: “17 intelligence agencies”, JAR report(needed for Obama – December 29th, ’16), and political ICA (January ’17); this looked like a Deep State move to control Julian Assange because the Mueller report was dependent on Russia cybercrimes…. AND that narrative is contingent on the Russia DNC hack story.

The Weissmann/Mueller/Rosenstein report contains claims that Russia hacked the DNC servers as the central element to the Russia interference narrative in the U.S. election. This claim is directly disputed by WikiLeaks and Assange, as outlined during the Dana Rohrabacher interview.

Right there is the FBI motive to shut Assange down when the Mueller report was released.

The DNC hack claim is contingent upon analysis by Crowdstrike computer forensics who were paid by the DNC to look into the issue. The FBI was never allowed to review the servers independently, and now we know the FBI never even looked at a full forensics report from Crowdstrike.

Almost all independent research into this DNC hack narrative challenges the claims of a Russia hack of the DNC servers; and now this bombshell court filing, again if accurate, makes the DOJ claim completely collapse.

Lastly, if we are to believe everything that is factually visible; including the admissions by the FBI and DOJ itself; and it is proven that Seth Rich was indeed the source of the DNC emails and there was no hack; well,… what does that say about Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein, who would have had to know they were pushing abject lies in their dubious Russian indictments.

The ramifications of this court filing are huge.

Jul 15 2019

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson On The Impact Of the Radical Left


Published on Apr 4, 2019

Clinical psychologist Dr. Jordan B. Peterson has given lectures all over the world—drawing massive audiences with a message that empowers and challenges them to find meaning in their lives through personal responsibility. He shared his wisdom with hundreds of Heritage Foundation supporters in New York City in this captivating conversation with Genevieve Wood.

 

Jul 15 2019

Suspect Nation: FBI and ICE Sweep DMV Photo Databases Unauthorized


Published on Jul 15, 2019

The Boston Globe reports that the FBI and ICE sweep photo databases at state departments of motor vehicles (DMV) to run criminal searches unauthorized by state or federal law. You didn’t sign off, granting the feds permission to access your image and information without probable cause. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle complain that the law enforcement agencies have done this on their own initiative, turning the land of the Fourth Amendment — the Republic of “innocent until proven guilty” — into suspect nation. Right Angle’s 20 new shows each month come to you thanks to the Members who pay for production and distribution. If you value these conversations, join the producers at https://BillWhittle.com/register/ Our 30-day money-back guarantee means that if you don’t think Membership is well worth your investment, just write us for a rapid, cheerful, refund.