Cold Fury

Harshing your mellow since 9/01

Brechtian nightmare

Dissolving the people, and electing another.

These stories are the more obvious signs of the dissolution of the people: One of the livelier members of the new people is affronted by an obvious provocation – a satirical magazine, a Jewish school, a pop concert, a swingers’ club; it’s an ever longer list… But we think we know how to handle that: increase the budget of the security services, more surveillance, more databases, more manpower swooping down in the nick of time…

But, in between such stories, the softer, slyer, suppler dissolution continues unseen and largely unreported. My sometime editor Mary Wakefield has an interesting if rather agonized column about how the dwindling numbers of non-Muslim pupils in certain English schools can’t seem to make any Muslim friends:

Quite by coincidence and on separate occasions, in the past month I’ve met two (non-Muslim) women whose children have had trouble at Muslim-dominated state schools. The kids made friends easily in their first term, said the mothers, but as the months went by it became harder to stay pals. Their schoolmates never invited them home, nor would they come round for playdates or parties. The friendships faded away and the kids were left confused. One of the two mothers I met had decided to move house: new catchment area, new start. She felt guilty, she told me, because she’d been keen her son have friends of all faiths. But he was one of only two non-Muslim boys in his class, and he was lonely.

So there’s now only one non-Muslim boy, who presumably feels even lonelier. Although I’d wager he’ll go too – and, to invert Rupert Brooke, there’s yet another corner of an English field that is forever foreign.

What remains now of “Christian civilization” in England? Or of “our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions” – such as, say, Church of England primary schools in which all but two boys are Muslim. There are many communities “far beyond the oceans…built up on our laws and on our civilization”, but in the ancient Motherland Bertolt Brecht’s words seem more pertinent than Churchill’s.

And which men in a new Britain will still say “This was their finest hour”?

As Brecht so stingingly quipped of the East Germans, British subjects have forfeited the confidence of the government. Now they’ve indeed been replaced, turning Churchill’s wistful speculation on the Empire and the Commonwealth lasting “a thousand years” into a sad joke. Winston was right, though: it WAS Britain’s finest hour— one they’ll never again come anywhere near equalling.

Share

Ask yourself why

As I keep saying: it ain’t just Trump they hate.

They’ve hated us – those heartland Americans clinging to our guns and religion – long before Trump came along and will do so long after he is gone. The Justice Department’s I.G. report has confirmed widespread prejudice among top Justice and FBI officials, but it’s a mistake to think this bias is directed against Trumpper se. Officials like Peter Strzok were intent on “stopping” Trump, but stopping him from doing what? Stopping him from restoring the right of ordinary Americans to govern their country?

Well, DUH.

With the Trump presidency, everyday citizens have gained a voice in Washington. At exactly the same time, media attacks on these Americans have exploded. The inference is clear: Hollywood, the mainstream media, and academe believe that ordinary Americans must be silenced. Only the “smart” ones, as leftists consider themselves, have a right to be heard. The left is attempting to silence the opposition and has been doing so for a long time.

Welcome to the party, pal.

Fortunately, conservatives have not succumbed to this sort of extremism. No matter how much we disagree with the left, we still believe that all Americans are entitled to the same protections under the Constitution, chief among them freedom of speech. While he may have strong disagreements, a true conservative does not respond by denying his adversary’s right to speak.

Oh lord, here we go with the “no true conservative” crap again. Because MUH PRINCIPLES!™

I fear that if they ever gain full control, progressives will go much farther than Obama did. It won’t just be the use of powerful government agencies to attempt to steal a presidential election, as appears to have happened in 2016. It will be a much broader theft of our freedom, including our personal freedoms and our right to own property.

You “fear”? It’s an absolute certainty. It’s their entire agenda; it’s their reason for being. Which makes the following sorta baffling.

Conservatives must resist, but even then, we will not descend into the level of hatred that denies the humanity of our opponents.

Then you aren’t going to win, bub. Hate to say it, hate to even think it, but it’s the sad fact.

“Conservatives” are going to have to decide what they consider to be worth fighting for, or whether anything at all is. The decision isn’t being offered to them as an option which can be avoided or abstained from; it’s being rammed down their throats, by adversaries whose commitment and relentlessness are absolute, whose willingness to do violence against their enemies has been repeatedly demonstrated. “It can’t happen here”? It already has, way more than just once.

You aren’t going to save the Shire by being shocked and sad, my dear Frodo.

Share

House of cards, crumbling

Told ya McCabe was only the first worm to turn.

FBI agent Peter Strzok, whose controversial text messages with an ex-FBI lawyer exposed apparent wrongdoing inside the Department of Justice, is willing to testify before Congress, his lawyer said in a surprise letter Sunday.

Goelman said Strzok is willing to testify without immunity and would not invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in response to any question from a member of Congress. He also said Strzok is willing to testify before any committee that requests him.

There’ll be more Deep Staters crawling out from their grubby little holes in hopes of saving their asses before the rising tide of Truth inundates ’em. A quote from Jerry Pournelle’s “The Prince” collection seems apropos: “They demanded their rights. We’ll give them their due. We’ll give them justice.” No more, no less.

Share

Gonna need more whitewash

Chateau Heartiste, pulling no punches.

If you’ve ever doubted what your “betters” in the degenerate ruling class think of you, dispel your doubts. You now know. And you should be thinking of them in only one way: frog-marched to the public gallows.

I dunno what to make of the discrepancy between the substance and summary of the IG Report. Read through it and it’s clear there’s enough damning information in there to put multiple heads of the FBI and DOJ on trial for treason. Or at least to appoint a special prosecutor whose job it is to lock up as many Deep State creeps as he can while razing the institutions to the ground and rebuilding them in the image of the God Emperor.

Either (((Horowitz))) is /ourguy/ or he’s /theirguy/. There’s no such thing as an objective human being; everyone has their biases which necessarily taint their work and their interpretation of evidence. If he’s /ourguy/, then why the weak sauce summary that is utterly belied by the report’s substance? Maybe he’s playing a long game to set the stage for arrests of high ranking Deep Staters down the road so that normies aren’t scared off by the spectacle, and he didn’t want to come out too strong (recall that the second IG Report into the FISC abuses by the FBI is coming out next). Or he’s /theirguy/ and he deliberately watered down the summary knowing shit tier leftoid outfits like NPR would gleefully ignore the substance to report on the conclusion that there was no political bias found (laughable on its face).

Oh, and Peter Strzok, the soyboy at the center of this Deep State tootsie roll? He wasn’t just some low ranking underling:

Strzok was in charge of
the HRC investigation
the FBI’s contribution to the hacking report
the Flynn investigation
the Trump/Russia investigation
and the first months of Mueller’s investigation.
His bias and malfeasance is kind of a big deal.
Ffs!

FFS is an understatement. Where is Jeff Sessions in all this? High treason occurs under his nose and…wtf is he doing about it? Waiting to pounce when the time is right? Jeff, the midterms are just months away; you don’t have much time left to make a move before a horde of screeching anti-American mystery meats and pussyhatters take the lower chamber.

Incredible as it may seem, there’s more. Way, way more, incuding an absurdity-highlighting Tweet from TuCa: “Thank God 69-year-old Paul Manafort is behind bars. Unchain the door, let the kids play outside. We’re safe.” Heh. Indeed.

Via WRSA, who quips: “You can stop ‘respecting the institution’ now.” One more time: heh. Indeed.

Update! A not-so-artful dodge.

Here’s the elephant in the room that the OIG tries to step over: Clinton was going to win the election and become the next president. All of the pols, polls, and pundits agreed on this point. Consequently, there was no way that the FBI and DOJ were going to do a serious investigation of Clinton. Such a course would incur her wrath and needlessly put jobs, careers, and agency budgets at risk once she took the oath of office.

Faced with the inevitability of a Clinton presidency, the FBI and DOJ went into self-preservation mode by going through the motions of doing an investigation and publicly exonerating her. But it was all a vaudeville act staged to help Hillary put one over on the rubes who comprise the great unwashed voting public. By their actions, the FBI and DOJ contrived to lend their credibility to Clinton’s candidacy.

In short, even though the participants in the Clinton investigation never expressly confessed their intentions to the OIG, the clear and unambiguous facts compel the inescapable conclusion that the FBI and DOJ acted with the basest of political motives to save Hillary Clinton from criminal charges.

As the old song goes, you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.

Nope. In fact, you’d have to be a complete dumbass NOT to. But I have to disagree with the idea that it was all about self-preservation; being staunch Democrat Socialists and Hillary supporters, they were only too happy to do it. Really, as accustomed as the Deep State vermin had become to getting away with such skullduggery, you’d have had a hard time preventing ’em from doing it.

Keystone Koup update! Self-inflicted wounds. Hopefully fatal.

“In sum, we concluded that the explanations given for the failure of the FBI to take action on the Weiner laptop between September 29 and the end of October were unpersuasive,” notes the report of the Inspector General (IG). “The FBI had all the information it needed on September 29 to obtain the search warrant that it did not seek until more than a month later. The FBI’s neglect had potentially far-reaching consequences. Comey told the OIG [Office of Inspector General] that, had he known about the laptop in the beginning of October and thought the email review could have been completed before the election, it may have affected his decision to notify Congress.”

Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who infamously pledged to “stop” Trump’s election, did not deem the laptop important enough to explore despite knowing it contained Clinton emails, many of which remained mysteriously missing. Strzok explained his decision not to immediately seek a warrant to the IG by explaining he “did not know what was there,” a premise that usually inspires rather than dissuades curious investigators from action.

Oh, they weren’t “missing.” They were withheld, and the reason incurious “investigator” Strzok was “dissuaded from action” couldn’t be more obvious.

Share

We cannot spare this man

Devin Nunes, bless his heart, battles on against the swarm of Deep State vermin.

House Intel Committee Chairman Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) was flabbergasted to find that the Strzok-Page text messages released with the IG report were redacted. He called it a “classic case of obstruction” from Congress. On the Thursday edition of FOX News’ Ingraham Angle, Nunes promised the committee is “going to get all of the documents” and the question will become, “Who is going to get busted? Who’s going to jail?”

The IG report was a whitewash, which is the only result one could expect when a Mordor on the Potomac bureaucracy as profoundly and irretrievably corrupt as the FBI/DOJ is allowed to “investigate” itself. Nunes knows all this.

“I mean, this is a classic case of obstruction, but then, the question is, who’s going to go investigate these guys?” he added.

“I want to read, to you, an exchange between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok, the star-crossed lovers. She basically said, you know, she was worried (ph) he’s — Donald Trump’s not going to get elected, right, right. And he answers, basically, don’t worry, we’ll stop it. No, no, no, no, we’ll stop it,” host Laura Ingraham said to the Congressman.

“He was the lead investigator on the Clinton e-mail case,” Nunes responded. “He’s the lead investigator that starts off the counter intelligence investigation, using our intelligence agencies to go after and target the Trump campaign. This is the guy who leads that off, but worse than all that, worse than all that, and I just want to repeat what I said, in the opening.”

“Why wasn’t that given to Congress? Why did I find out about that, today, at noon?” Nunes asked.

Oh, I think we can all figure that one out easily enough.

Nunes said he doesn’t know how the Mueller investigation can “end up fairly” after at least five people have already been kicked off the team and Clinton donors make up the “rest.”

It can’t. It was never intended to. That wasn’t its purpose.

“So if there’s five people who’ve been kicked off the campaign, I mean off the Mueller team, how is it possible that – if you look at the rest of the people that are there, I mean they were all Clinton donors. So – I – you know, I don’t know how this is – this is going to end up fairly. I don’t know where this is going,” he said.

It’s either going to fizzle out eventually with a shrug and a “meh,” followed by a very loud silence, or it’s going to lead to an upheaval so violent—yes, perhaps literally—that it will shake the very foundations of our metastized, malignant cancer of a national government.

Share

Fake news? You better believe it

The Last Real Journalist does her homework.

We the media have “fact-checked” President Trump like we have fact-checked no other human being on the planet—and he’s certainly given us plenty to write about. That’s probably why it’s so easy to find lists enumerating and examining his mistakes, missteps and “lies.”

But as self-appointed arbiters of truth, we’ve largely excused our own unprecedented string of fact-challenged reporting. The truth is, formerly well-respected, top news organizations are making repeat, unforced errors in numbers that were unheard of just a couple of years ago.

Our repeat mistakes involve declaring that Trump’s claims are “lies” when they are matters of opinion, or when the truth between conflicting sources is unknowable; taking Trump’s statements and events out of context; reporting secondhand accounts against Trump without attribution as if they’re established fact; relying on untruthful, conflicted sources; and presenting reporter opinions in news stories—without labeling them as opinions.

What’s worse, we defend ourselves by trying to convince the public that our mistakes are actually a virtue because we (sometimes) correct them. Or we blame Trump for why we’re getting so much wrong. It’s a little bit like a police officer taking someone to jail for DUI, then driving home drunk himself: he may be correct to arrest the suspect, but he should certainly know better than to commit the same violation.

So since nobody else has compiled an updated, extensive list of this kind, here are…

Follows, a compendium of fifty (!) “mistakes”—some major, some minor, some distortions of the truth, some outright fabrications. Some of them are truly petty and childish, enough so to make one wonder what kind of purblind dolt would put not merely his own personal credibility but that of his entire industry at risk by perpetrating them. But all of them cut only one way (against Trump) and are therefore neither “honest” nor “innocent,” but self-evidently malicious.

And still a dwindling few of them persist in denying the existence of any liberal bias in “journalism,” a claim that would be despicable if it weren’t so transparently laughable. Thus do they deal their rapidly-vanishing credibility another shattering blow, carrying self-beclownment beyond limits previously thought unbreachable.

Share

Desaparicido

Hey, remember when this sort of thing happened mainly in Third World commie dictatorships? Oh wait

The arrest of British free speech activist Tommy Robinson has sent shockwaves across the Anglosphere. The United Kingdom, once dedicated to the values of freedom, has taken a path toward authoritarian government and away from freedom. The once great nation, which created the Magna Carta and once commanded an empire, is now the land of tyranny. Unless the British people love their freedom enough and fight this injustice in fierce fashion, it will remain a land silenced by intimidation and fear.

Robinson, a former member of the English Defense League whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, is being unfairly persecuted by the U.K. government.  Robinson’s “crime” was that he yelled questions outside Leeds Crown Court and named the alleged defendants, like any other reporter. So what? The state broadcaster, the BBC, and the mainstream media had already named them. Why was he arrested, and why were they not arrested?

If gangs of white men had spent decades torturing and raping little Muslim girls and a justly outraged Muslim reporter were covering the case, in a similar manner as Robinson, would he be arrested?

We all know that the answer is “no,” and we know why. The U.K. is so invested in its politically correct multiculturalism diversity project that it has applied a different treatment of Muslims under the law, which accepts the diversity of legal systems and places the country on a path toward ruin.

Americans should be highly concerned over this case, because the same type of “hate speech laws” used against British citizens are currently being advocated in the U.S. Senate, by Marco Rubio (R), Kamala Harris (D), Susan Collins (R), and Dianne Feinstein (D) and a long list of others. Hillary Clinton pushed the same laws in 2012 and 2015 and 2017. Three similar unconstitutional laws aimed at our First Amendment rights were advanced in our Congress, after being drafted by Emgage USA and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, two Islamic organizations and defenders of designated terrorist organizations and their supporters, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism. The passage of any such anti-freedom of speech bill would place our country on Britain’s same ruinous path.

I only wish I could say I find any of that surprising. With just this one grotesque crime against liberty and decency, the Brits have moved themselves from “pitiable” right into the “despicable” column. There could not be a more revolting statement than the one the British government has just made with this outrage: that they much prefer tolerating and protecting Muslim child-rape gangs to safeguarding freedom of speech. But I can’t say I’m much surprised by that either; as noted, we have no shortage of Moonbat Lefties (and gutless RINO sellouts, sadly enough) right here in the States who feel the same way about it.

The very idea of “hate speech” laws is an abomination which of right ought to be intolerable in even a half-free country. Once-Great Britain is well and truly finished; it will soon begin to live up to its “Old Blighty” nickname in ways its benighted subjects never imagined. I don’t pity them; they deserve their ignoble fate, having earned it many times over. But there’s a small, guttering spark yet flickering in some of them:

In a land that once could proudly state, “The sun never sets on the British Empire,” the torch of freedom has been extinguished. It’s a land divided by diversity that has now descended into the darkness of tyranny.

If the globalists in both American parties and the U.S. State Department have their way, America will be next.

Tommy Robinson represents a large segment of Britain’s people, with over 500,000 signatures on a petition already to “Free Tommy.” The people sent a clear message on Saturday, May 26, 2018, that they have had enough, as thousands of British people stopped traffic, chanted, and pressed the gates of 10 Downing Street and threw bottles at machine gun-toting policemen. Their anger hung thick in the air, because they want Robinson, at the very least, to be released from prison and allowed to get back to his life and enjoy the same protection and human rights and dignity as Anjem Choudary, the terrorist-supporter, was afforded by the authorities. Short of this, the summer in Britain will turn out to be a season of riots and civil strife, awaiting the spark that moves the good and decent Brits – of a long ancestry dating to 1066 and William the Conqueror – to fight furiously to make their land free once more.

Well, possibly, I guess, and I wish those folks well. But I have little expectation of any such thing, and none at all that it might be successful. They can anticipate neither succor nor sympathy from these shores; we face a grim enough struggle ourselves, with victory by no means assured.

Share

Blue wave, red sea

Running the numbers.

Liberals represent America’s distinct ideological minority. In 2016, despite eight years of America’s most liberal president popularizing and raising their issues and profile, exit polling still showed them only 26 percent of the electorate — well behind conservatives (35 percent) and moderates (39 percent). And comprising a quarter of America’s electorate is their high water mark — as recently as 2004, liberals comprised just 21 percent.

Positive spin would acclaim the left’s growth, but there is no escaping it remains just a quarter of the electorate, still needing roughly twice its number to reach an electoral majority. Yet with this liability comes loyalty: Liberals voted 84 percent for Clinton in 2016 — greater attachment to Democrats than either moderates or conservatives showed to either party.

The Democrats’ conundrum with a decidedly loyal minority is: How to win when America’s minority becomes your majority. The left has been the Democratic Party’s most fervent element for several years. Its growth, although still the nation’s ideological minority, has apparently raised it to at least close to majority status within the Democratic Party and its loyalty to the Democratic Party is unquestionable.

Democrats have little choice but to attempt to relabel the left as “progressive,” before the left re-brands the Democratic Party as “the left.”

Far, far too late for that, I’m afraid. Too bad, so sad. Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of assholes.

The effort is as neat as it is necessary. By using “progressive,” they implicitly acknowledge the weakness — separation (i.e., extreme) from the center — but seek to make it positive: Although separated, it is because they are ahead of where the center will be.

Of course, the progressive label’s greatest service is masking reality diametrically opposed to its rhetoric. The left’s ideology is anything but new, just as it is anything but successful.

Slice it where you like, it’s still the same old Marxist baloney. NeverTrump GOPe cucks better figure out quick just who it is they’ve allied themselves with, lest they wind up going to the bottom with the DSS Titanic themselves.

Update! Anybody up for a Red Wave?

Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader, is pledging higher taxes. Al Green, a seven-term Texas Democrat, and at least 58 other House Democrats, are promising impeachment. But the stock market is up, wages are up, unemployment is down, and peace may be breaking out on the Korean Peninsula. How many people will vote for higher taxes and all the social and political stress associated with impeachment?

Some Democrats are beginning to sense this. One Washington Post columnist predicted that “there will be no Trump collapse” while others are expressing concern that Mr. Mueller’s investigation — his dawn raids and strong-arm tactics — don’t play well in Peoria. If Mr. Mueller is not able to prove collusion with Russia, the stated reason for his appointment, then Democrats, who have talked about little else for the past 18 months, will be left looking unserious or worse. They’re right to worry.

Up until recently, the conventional wisdom has been that a blue wave powered by a huge enthusiasm gap would propel Democrats to midterm glory. But the evidence doesn’t bear that out. Yes, Democrats have won some special elections and those victories are real and should warn Republicans against complacency. But left almost totally unremarked upon is that Republican primary turnout is way up from where it was at this point in the 2014 midterm cycle. This is often the result of competitive primaries, but that underscores the vibrancy of the grass roots’ struggle to reclaim control of the party.

According to Chris Wilson at WPI Intelligence, Republican primary turnout was up 43 percent or more over 2014 in states like Indiana, Ohio and West Virginia. The president’s popularity has been rising overall but especially in these critical battleground states. In West Virginia, his approval rating was over 60 percent in 2017. That sounds more like a red wave than a blue one, especially for imperiled senators like Joe Manchin in West Virginia and Claire McCaskill in Missouri.

Yes, the victories won in 2016 can be reversed, but only by voters at the polls and not by any of the irregular means that occupy the fantasies of many people who still can’t believe that their side lost.

Y’know, it still frosts my nuts a bit that the Democrat Socialists and Leftymedia were somehow able to hang the “Red” label on the Right and misappropriate “Blue” for themselves, when they’re the ones who are truly Red in tooth and claw. That’s okay though, since it’s looking more and more like being the last smart move they’ll ever make.

Share

Thar she blows!

All over the Klown Kar Koup plotters’ faces.

SpyGate: Just as fiery volcanoes have erupted in Guatemala and Hawaii, a volcano of another kind looks set to blow in Washington: The “investigation” into alleged Trump campaign collusion with Russia, amid new revelations of possible FBI and Justice Department deceit and misconduct and the anticipated release of the Inspector General’s report.

It might not end like the investigators had hoped.

Oh, I’d say their nefarious hopes have been dashed already. With McCabe’s offer of testimony for immunity, the stampede into turncoat ass-covering territory is well under way.

This enormously complex U.S. intelligence scandal is difficult to follow, even for the media who do so for a living. But the revelations have been adding up. As they do, they create an ever-clearer picture of massive political corruption at the DOJ, FBI and CIA.

That is, “deep state” collusion by our three main intelligence agencies, not collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Indeed, in recent weeks, the rationale for the Trump investigation — alleged concern about Russia hacking our election — has been shredded.

What’s left is a major scandal, SpyGate as some call it. It makes Watergate look like a two-bit burglary conducted by political amateurs. Which is what it was.

That rumbling you now hear? It’s the volcano of political corruption that now is shaking the earth and set to erupt in Washington, D.C.

With any luck, the flow will immolate the very foundations of the Deep State and sweep the whole blighted mess into overdue oblivion.

Share

SWATting the Hogg

I’m probably gonna annoy some people with this. Oh well.

An anonymous — and fraudulent — hostage-situation emergency call to the Broward County Sheriff’s Office resulted in a Coral Springs Fire rescue team racing to the family home of Parkland shooting survivor David Hogg.

A local TV station reported that “Hogg was not home at the time of the incident and is currently in Washington, DC with his mother to accept the RFK Human Rights award.”

SWATting is the dangerous “prank” of calling in fake crime reports in order to get heavily armed police to show up at the victim’s house. The resulting situation is potentially deadly.

The condemnation for today’s SWATting attempt on Hogg and his family has been swift and universal — and that’s just the condemnation coming from the Right.

Follows, a whole passel of Tweets from Righties screaming about how just awfully awful it is that it happened to the little twit.*

But honestly, guys? I just ain’t feeling it. Yes, yes, it’s a horrible, no good, and very dangerous thing to do. No decent person would ever dream of doing such a thing. It puts innocent lives at risk, wastes police resources and time, and has resulted in at least one wrongful death that I know of.

And as with doxxing, it’s now become just another arrow in the Leftist quiver; they’ve used it against their enemies—that would be us, in case you were uncertain about it—without a thought or care, way more than once. It represents another line of civilized behavior trampled under Lefty jackbooks with nary a look back.

So do I get upset when the Left has it thrown back at them? Why no, I can’t say that I do. Do I wish such abuses didn’t happen? Sure I do. Would I rather things hadn’t come to such a godawful pass? Of course. Would I ever dream of doing such myself, or recommend that someone else do so? Not in a million years. Am I going to join others on the Right in anguishing over it happening to the Left now that they’ve long since declared open season on us, with no holds barred and no bag limit?

Nope.

It goes back to what I’ve been saying for a while now: the Left needs to be made to feel pain—real pain, pain that can’t be waved away or brushed off—for their ever-escalating depredations against decency, civilized behavior, and the right to dissent. Seems to me that this is one way to make that so, if an admittedly extreme one.

Anybody see this story earlier today?

Congressman Steve Scalise returns to baseball a year after he was shot at practice

Watch the video. It’s pitiful…and enraging. Hats off to Scalise, of course; he’s shown nothing but class, heart, and courage throughout what one might call his man-caused ordeal, and one can but admire him for that. But he was crippled, most likely for life, by a Democrat Socialist true-believer who only differs from the so-called “mainstream” in his willingness to act on the things they’ve all been saying.

Note, too, that the nearly-successful attempt on his life was “condemned” in only the most mealy-mouthed, half-hearted, and self-serving terms by Democrat Socialist leaders, and even that only after they’d been hectored about it by the Right. As for the Progtard rank and file, the main takeaway from their response was the openly-expressed regret that the shooter didn’t succeed in killing the guy.

And this same despicable response happens every time any similar atrocity occurs. Every. Single. Time. You could set your clock by it.

Now, I’m not slamming all those well-intentioned folks on the Decent Right who reacted with honest horror over Hogg’s SWATting. But I’m not going to be joining them. It sounds to me like the old “This is NOT WHO WE ARE” argument writ larger, deployed on a different battlefield than the usual NeverTrumpTard one.

We’re in a war here, people; maybe not a shooting war, not yet, but a war just the same. Seeing how they’ve brutalized good, honest people on our side again and again and again without repercussion, my patience with them is exhausted, my sympathy when some of their own splashes back on them nonexistent. Some lying, clueless liberty-thief gets himself SWATted, or doxxed, or sucker-punched? Meh. It’s just sauce for the fucking goose as far as I’m concerned. Most of them deserve a lot worse. And if they keep on pushing their fascist agenda, they’ll quite likely get it, too, before all’s said and done.

*Note, too, that the whole thing smells to high heaven anyway, if Hogg’s own too-blasé response is any sort of tell—and it is.

Update! Dang it, I double-posted this one by accident, discovered the error this morning, and deleted the one with the comments attached before heading out to work. Gonna try to fix that in just a bit if I can; sorry for the glitch, guys.

Share

Rollin’ rollin’ rollin’

The first in what one has to suspect will be a long, long line.

The news is that former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe—who has been referred to the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia for possible criminal prosecution by Michael Horowitz, the Department of Justice’s inspector general—wants immunity in exchange for testifying in front of the Senate judiciary committee headed by Charles Grassley of Iowa. At issue are allegedly false statements McCabe made to investigators looking into Hillary Clinton’s private email server, and how that “investigation” was handled by former officials at Justice and FBI, among them attorney general Loretta Lynch and FBI director James Comey.

Pass the popcorn—and this double feature’s just getting started.

It remains to be seen how this movie turns out; after all, the last act has yet to be written. But this time, it’s the good guys—not the media mouthpieces who routinely leap to the defense of the Democrats—acting as the screenwriters. McCabe’s in serious trouble and, if and when he falls, or rolls over, the sanctimonious Comey may be in for it, too. What other ending can there be in a plot for a man who leaked his own memos to the press in order to encourage the duplicitous Rosenstein to appoint Robert Mueller (Comey’s immediate predecessor at the FBI) to look into the Russian “collusion” charges? What will satisfy the audience more than comeuppance for a man who passed off a dossier that originated with the Clinton campaign and was facilitated by the media in the form of Fusion GPS, the oppo-research organization founded by former journalists and responsible for commissioning a former MI6 spy to compile this imaginary pile of concocted hearsay called “evidence” from Russian “sources” that was then presented by… who else? Rosenstein!—to the FISA courts.

As the saying goes, you can’t make this stuff up, unless you actually do. But perhaps the gangsters inside the FBI and Justice ought to remember how their namesake, Rico, got his comeuppance—filled full of Hollywood lead and mouthing his last words: “Mother of Mercy – is this the end of Rico?”

Mother of Mercy, is this the end of Washington’s public enemies?

No chance of that, I’d say; as long as absolute power over so much of our national life remains concentrated in Mordor on the Potomac, there will be those drawn to it, convinced of their divine right to wield it, maddened by desire for it. But what the hell, we takes what we gets. No matter how you parse it, it’s still a win.

Share

Same old story, same old song and dance

Nothing new under the sun, folks.

Trump hasn’t provided evidence to support these allegations,

He doesn’t have to. Comey, Mueller, and the rest of the Klown Kar Koup posse already did it for him. But Politico gotta Politico, I guess.

but regardless of their veracity, there is precedent for an American intelligence agency spying on a presidential campaign. It happened in the summer of 1964; the target was Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater, and the perpetrator was the CIA, not the FBI.

…After (E Howard) Hunt’s revelations were leaked to the press, Sen. Goldwater told Washington Post reporters that during the 1964 campaign, he had come to believe he was being spied on. “I just assumed it was one man or two men assigned at the direction of the President…It never bothered me,” he said. “I guess it should have, but knowing Johnson as I did, I never got upset about it.” Goldwater never suggested that the CIA’s spying had cost him the election.

Even in the heat of the ’64 campaign, as he thought he was being spied on, Goldwater never mentioned his concerns publicly, and even insisted that his aides kept quiet. Going public with the allegations would have distracted attention from his agenda, and absent any proof that surveillance was actually happening, complaints about being spied upon would’ve likely reinforced the common perception that he was paranoid.

It’s a very different course of action than the one President Trump is taking today.

And for that, we can all be thankful.

This story serves as a powerful reminder that our rogue Deep State juggernaut didn’t jump its tracks overnight, and that none of this began with Obama, corrupt tyrant though he was.

Update! The Three Stooges of Spygate. Their laughable incompetence is another thing we can all be thankful for.

Backstory update! Codevilla was part of the group that wrote FISA? Wow. I had no idea.

The events of the past two years have confirmed the objections to FISA I stated in 1978: pre-clearance of wiretaps by a court that operates secretly, ex parte, and that is agnostic on national security matters, is an irresistible temptation to the party in power and its friends in the intelligence agencies to use the law to spy against their political opponents—that is, to do Watergate legally.

FISA was a bad idea, made worse after 9/11 by the addition of Section 702. It is a license to collect and use electronic data on Americans, so long as that collection is claimed to be “incidental” in the collection of data relating to foreigners. Since the claiming is done in secret, and the yearly court review can be finessed, officials’ self-restraint is all that keeps Section 702 itself from being an abuse. Item 17, “about queries,” specifically authorizes the collection of emails and phone calls of “U.S. persons.”

9/11 was certainly bad enough. But looking back, it seems that its aftermath was even worse, at least in terms of the long-term damage done to our rights, our liberty, and any expectation of privacy. Codevilla digs deep and provides some fascinating inside dope with this one, winding up here:

Recall that in 1947 the main objection to establishing the CIA was the widespread fear that, someday, its espionage would be used against Americans. That is why CIA was given no powers of arrest, why its agents would operate only abroad, and only against foreign targets. But from the very first, CIA officials, from the top down, have thought of themselves as entitled to transcend the role of lookouts for the ship of state. They have identified with and built relationships with policymakers, and placed their hands on the wheel as best they could.

The FBI used to be very different. CIA people looked down on the bureau’s “cop mentality.” But, gradually, the top levels of FBI started thinking of themselves as do those up the river: as partners with policymakers, fellow policymakers.

Just as important, a large part of these agencies—certainly the most personally successful one—absorbed and was absorbed by the ethos of the ruling class, the chief item of which is a sense of rightful superiority over the rest of Americans. The sense of entitlement to power, of the right and duty to do whatever it takes to defend it against bad people whom despicable Americans might elect or have elected, followed naturally.

There’s a nugget of truth in every cliche; it’s why they become cliches in the first place. That includes this one: power corrupts. Onwards.

Now the alternatives are all too clear: either those who have taken America across these red lines are punished severely, and with bipartisan approval—in which case we may return to a politically neutral national security establishment. If they are not, the national security apparatus is sure to become the queen in the nation’s political chessboard.

I can’t see that first option happening: if they’re punished at all, it won’t be “severely,” and most certainly won’t be “with bipartisan approval.” Observing the Left’s on-a-dime about-face from neverending horror and outrage over Watergate to their blase disinterest in Obamagate—along with its jaw-slackening switch from deep mistrust and even loathing for the FBI and CIA to reverence for their integrity and trustworthiness—makes that much all too obvious.

So Codevilla’s first alternative is impossible, and the second is unacceptable. My own opinion is that the Obamagate outrage against every last thing the country is supposed to stand for has set wheels in motion that will move us in wholly unexpected directions, winding up with that Great Reckoning I keep yammering on about—a reckoning which could easily turn out to be catastrophic.

Share

Rule Rot, Britannia

Beyond disgusting, beyond despicable.

You can say a lot of things about Tommy Robinson, but he’s one of the embarrassingly small number of Britons who recognizes the horror inflicted on those young and vulnerable girls on the receiving end of “diversity” and seeks to do something about it.

So on Friday he was outside the Crown Court in Leeds. He was not demonstrating, or accosting or chanting, or even speaking. He was just pointing his mobile phone upon the scene from a distance. Within minutes, seven coppers showed up in whatever they use instead of a Black Maria these days, tossed him inside it and drove off. In other words, these were not “investigating officers” called to the scene: They showed up with the intent to take him away. Within hours, he was tried, convicted and gaoled – at HM Prison Hull, a Category B chokey, or one level below maximum security. The judge in the case, one Geoffrey Marson, spent all of four minutes on trying, convicting and sentencing Robinson. It is not clear whether that leisurely tribunal included his order expressly forbidding “any report on these proceedings” (the case is Regina vs Yaxley-Lennon because that’s Robinson’s real name).

Which is why, all the way over in Sydney, Messrs Dean and Cameron were being so vague and cautious. In Britain itself, early online reports at The Mirror, the Scottish Daily RecordThe Birmingham Mail and elsewhere vanished instantly, and silence has been maintained, especially on radio and TV, ever since.

Every last one of those media outlets have disgraced themselves and destroyed whatever credibility they might once have had. Every damned one.

The justification for this is Robinson’s previous conviction in a previous Grooming Gang of the Week case at Canterbury Crown Court. On that occasion, the judge sentenced him to three months’ imprisonment suspended for eighteen months. That was almost exactly a year ago – so, suspension-wise, he came up six months short when the plods collared him on Friday. That doesn’t explain why Judge Marson in Leeds added an additional ten months (ie, he quadrupled his sentence) and disregarded a point that Judge Norton last year took into account – that the British state insists on banging up Robinson in gaols full of Muslim blokes who violently assault him. In Canterbury, Her Honor was sympathetic – up to a point:

I accept what Mr. Kovalevsky [Robinson’s barrister] tells me about the dangers that you might face were you to be sent into immediate custody. I have to say it is on a knife edge so far as I am concerned because a very large part of me thinks so what? you could be put into protective custody.

Given that Judge Marson devoted a full four minutes to his drive-thru trial on Friday, I seriously doubt whether 25 seconds of that was devoted to any consideration of “protective custody”. Indeed, it is not unreasonable to conclude that the British state would quite like it if Robinson were to be offed in HMP Hull.

Of course they would. He makes them uncomfortable by simply telling the inconvenient truth.

The British state sentenced Mr Robinson to eighteen months in jail for misrepresentation on a mortgage application. At HMP Woodhill he was savagely attacked by the Muslim gangs who operate with impunity in many UK prisons.

Soon enough, they’ll be operating with impunity throughout the entire country. And truthfully, I look forward to that day; it’s no more than the filthy, gutless bastards deserve.

Rod Liddle notes another aspect – the contrast between the urgency of the flatfeet when it comes to Tommy Robinson and their utter lethargic indifference when it comes to the young women I spoke to in Rotherham and the thousands of others like them in Leeds, Telford, Oxford, [Your Town Here]… West Yorkshire Police in Leeds are not to be confused with South Yorkshire Police in Rotherham. The latter are institutionally corrupt and depraved. As I told Mark Steyn Club members last year of my meeting with the victims of Rotherham:

To Mad Ash and his fellow ‘Asians’, the likes of Jessica and Katie are ‘white slags’. To Her Majesty’s Constabulary, they’re mere ‘Paki-shaggers’, and thus unworthy of valuable police resources. The girls recall the night Mad Ash’s brother Bannaras was in his car having sex with a twelve-year-old. A ‘jam sandwich’ – a police cruiser – pulled up alongside, and the officer rolled down the window. ‘She’s just sucking my c**k, mate,’ said Bannaras Hussain.

The cops drove away…

It is striking to read Judge Norton’s sentencing remarks from last year (Judge Marson’s do not appear to be available: he rules in darkness). Her Honor huffs and puffs about Mr Robinson referring to “Muslim paedophiles” and “Muslim child rapists”. I can appreciate that that might be vaguely annoying if one were a non-paedophile Muslim – although evidently not so annoying that spokespersons for the wider Muslim community ever rouse themselves to object to all the industrial-scale sex slavery. But it is a fact that in 21st-century England – in Yorkshire, in Shropshire, in Lancashire, in Oxfordshire, in the Home Counties – child-rape gangs are Muslim. It is a phenomenon, one that has never existed previously in the British Isles and one which will continue and metastasize until there is honest debate about it.

Which will come far too late to save them. It’s a hell of a bed they’ve made for themselves in Old Blighty; may they have much joy of the lying in it.

Robinson is a true hero, one of the last of a now-dead line of staunch, proud, gutsy Brits. His countrymen, far too many of them at any rate, are disgusting cowards, not worth the unzipping to piss over. Too bad for them; they’re sure to find themselves on fire soon enough.

Share

Socialism works!

In one way, and one way only.

How To Become A Third World Country

Yep, it’s the one thing socialism does really, really well. The author uses Venezuela as a dismal example of the essential truth before setting another hook:

Could Maduro really have that kind of support among the people even as the economy collapses and millions are starving?  Or is something else going on here? I’m sure that many factors are in play. But clearly one of the most important factors, if not the most important, is the game of using the state prosecutorial apparatus to bring trumped-up criminal investigations and charges against the main political rivals to get them out of the way.

Hm. Sounds sorta…familiar, no?

Now, which is the more preposterous basis for siccing the state investigative forces on the main opposition candidate: (1) claiming “instigation” of a riot via explicit calls for peaceful protest, or (2) claiming “collusion” with Russia? Seems like a close call to me. At least our prosecutors didn’t go through with an actual prosecution to take the opposition candidate out in advance of the election. But that’s probably because they didn’t think they had to.

Nope. They were dead certain they’d win with Her Herness, and none of their Obamagate skullduggery would ever be exposes to the disinfecting light of day. And with Komey’s Klown-Kar Koup, they’ve done their feeble best to take Trump out after the fact. If Trump is unsuccessful at de-lousing the joint, look for them to try harder next time. As I’ve said all along: the Deep State ain’t going down without a fight.

Share

Also incompatible

Speaking of which, and at the risk once more of sounding like a broken record.

Sharia law and the caliphate are institutions that most Muslims feel an obligation to accept as expressions of Allah’s will. The global imposition of sharia law and the caliphate are not distortions of true Islam; they are mainstream ideals that the religion expects all believers to pursue. Many Muslims secretly admire the jihadists whose personal commitment to establishing sharia under a caliph is glorified by Islam.

The problem for the West is that Muslims view sharia law as the word of Allah, an absolute and uncompromising truth that can never be modified. What makes the problem intractable is that Muslims accept the superiority of sharia law based on its foundation in faith rather than reason. Not only do Muslims believe that law must come from Allah, but they reject out of hand the possibility that the existing laws of sharia can evolve as societal conditions change or that any new legal principle can be entertained if it relies on mere reason.

Compounding the problem for the West is the fact that Muslims believe in the caliphate, an absolutist form of governance in which a single individual exercises authority in the name of Allah – comparable to, but even more absolutist than, the old idea of “divine right of kings.” The caliphate is even more absolutist because Muslims know that there can be only one caliph.

There is, in short, an unbridgeable gulf between Islam and the West, a difference founded in principles and therefore a difference that brooks no compromise. Islam and the West are irreconcilable.   

Now, it is NOT true that no Moslem can live peaceably among us in Western Civ; there are many who do, actually. It’s just that they have to reject certain core Islamic beliefs specifically spelled out in the Koran. They therefore, pretty much by definition, must become what true-believing Moslems would label apostates, the penalty for which is death.

If you’re a Moslem, you can’t be a moderate; if you’re a moderate, you aren’t really a Moslem. The truly tragic thing is that, contrary to the calls from ill- or mis-informed Western pundits for a Moslem “reformation,” they already had it. Its primary mover and shaker was the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and…well, we all already know how it went.

Share

Point: missed

Basically right, but still wrong.

Purdue University President Mitchell E. Daniels, former President Ronald Reagan’s political director and a two-term Indiana Republican governor, sees the nation dividing into feuding “tribes” that gravitate to tyrants who “bludgeon” opponents.

In two separate reports, the two opposites come to a similar conclusion that the nation and even families are terribly divided and that the media has played a big role in creating the split.

Daniels is well regarded as level-headed and has been dubbed the best university president in the nation. He has used his commencement addresses to push for openness and understanding, but this year he noted a shift to “tribalism,” where sides cluster in cliques.

“It’s no longer just a matter of Americans not knowing and understanding each other. We’ve seen these clusters deepen, and harden, until separation has led to anger, misunderstanding turned into hostility. At the individual level, it’s a formula for bitterness and negativity. For a self-governing people, it’s poison,” Daniels told his students this month.

The hostility is justified and legitimate, and comes not from “misunderstanding” but from understanding, in truth—from an overdue awakening to what Progressivists really want and intend for us. Hint: it is assuredly NOT “self-government.” Although it’s poison, sure enough. This, though, is where the analysis goes off the rails completely:

Among the culprits he cited were biased media, the “anti-social media.” Said Daniels, “Our various modern media lead us to, and feed us from information sources that reinforce our existing biases. They put us in contact with other tribe members, but rarely those who see things differently. We’re starting to resemble ominously our primitive forebearers, trusting no one outside the tribe.”

And he called that “dangerous,” warning “almost all of history has belonged to the tyrants, the warlords, the autocrats, the totalitarians. And tribes always gravitate toward tyrants.”

He didn’t name names, mention President Trump or former President Barack Obama, on purpose. The reason: both sides and their mouthpieces are to blame. “It’s a general phenomenon,” he said in an interview in which he bemoaned “there is no overlap anymore.”

With all due respect: bullshit. The REAL reason: freedom cannot co-exist with tyranny. There is no “overlap” because between liberty and tyranny, well, there is no overlap. You either have one, or you have the other. They cannot coexist. And THAT is our big problem. It’s probably the main reason the status-quo statist types hate Trump so much: he’s unmasked them, revealed them for what they are, whether he did so by design or not. Clarice Feldman calls it the Great Unmasking. She gets quite specific about the thing, in the preamble to which she tosses out a great quote from Scott Adams:

Four things to understand about SPYGATE: 
1) There was no spy in the Trump campaign. 
2) The spying that did NOT happen was totally justified.
3) It would be bad for national security to identify the spy who doesn’t exist. 
4) His name is Stefan.

Spygate, hell. We should start calling it by its proper name: Obamagate.

SpyGate: Did the Obama administration spy on the Donald Trump campaign because it feared Russian hacking of the 2016 election? Or was it merely a smokescreen to cover up the real reason: to keep Trump from winning the presidency or take him down if he did?

As the saying goes, timing is everything. Recent revelations keep pushing back the beginning of the CIA and FBI investigation into “Russian hacking” or “meddling” in the 2016 election further and further in time.

This is significant, since the farther back in time the actual origin of the spying on Trump, the less likely it is that it had anything to do with Russian involvement in the 2016 elections, but everything to do with stopping the surprising surge of Trump during the GOP primaries and beyond.

Increasingly, a political motive seems not only likely, but almost certain.

At the risk of becoming boringly repetitious, I’ll say it again: always assume the absolute worst about whatever Obama might be doing or saying and you’ll never go far wrong. True then, true now, true forever.

Share

The play’s the thing

Fake phony frauds, as Bob Grant used to say.

Hypocrisy Watch: Democrats hope they’ve found an issue that will re-energize the fading “Blue Wave” with the recent spike in gas prices. Never mind that the increase is temporary. Or that Democrats have for years tried to force gas prices up — permanently — through various tax hikes.

Sen. Minority Leader Charles Schumer and other Democrats plan to use this price spike to blast President Trump and, hopefully, improve their election chances in November.

“President Trump’s reckless decision to pull out of the Iran deal has led to higher oil prices,” Schumer said. “These higher oil prices are translating directly to soaring gas prices, something we know disproportionately hurts middle and lower income people.”

But what’s really rich is that Democrats are complaining about a temporary spike in gasoline prices after having spent years trying to force them up permanently.

As recently as 2015, Democrats were pushing to nearly double the federal gasoline tax. At the time, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said that it was the perfect time to do so because “if there’s ever going to be an opportunity to raise the gas tax, the time when gas prices are so low — oil prices are so low — is the time to do it.”

At the same time, Democrats have pledged to impose a tax on carbon emissions of around $50 per ton of CO2 — which would go up each year at a rate faster than inflation — to combat “climate change.”

Schumer himself promised to enact a carbon tax if Hillary Clinton won and Democrats regained control of the Senate in the 2016 elections.

Well, guess what? A carbon tax of that magnitude would sharply raise gasoline prices. A report out of the University of Michigan last fall concluded that a carbon tax of $40 per ton would hike gasoline prices by 36 cents a gallon.

Where was Schumer’s concern about working families then?

Same place it always was: in the theater, wearing a kabuki mask and cavorting onstage to distract the suckers. It’s less hypocrisy than it is undiluted, raw deception. Like the GOPe’s “conservative principles,” the Democrat Socialists’ concern for the working stiff exists only in the runup to an election, to be carefully packed away at the very back of a securely locked closet the rest of the time.

Share

Nothing in common

The divorce, she is a-comin’.

The question all boils down to this – is it acceptable for the party in power to use the intelligence and law enforcement communities against its rivals? Are these convoluted and often delusional explanations – RUSSIANS TREASON OK NO RUSSIANS THEN UH QATARIS YEAH QATARIS TREASON! – enough to take that step, even if true?

Of course not. Even if Trump’s people sought to get the Russians to release the contents of the emails Hillary Clinton should never have had on her literally “password“ password-protected illegal server – and after two years, there’s zero evidence they did –was that enough to send spies into the campaign, to tap its phones, and leverage the power of FBI et ceterea to surveil them? Does the liberal elite have any concern that maybe, just maybe, it has to be about as serious a situation as you can get to do that? Is a coordinated campaign by the FBI backed up by the NSA and probably the CIA the proper remedy for the unauthorized release of Hillary’s yoga dates and wedding plans, because that’s all Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit said was on the 33K emails she deleted, right?

Hey, it’s diff’runt when they do it.

No one objected. The Democrat Party is committed to the New Rules. And the New Rules are tyranny.

It can’t be a surprise. After all, the Democrat Party has bulldozed every norm, custom, and tradition out there in its quest for undisputed power. It spews hatred at its opponents – hey, everyone reading this is racist, sexist, and a denier of #science and so forth. The Democrats will happily deny you your free exercise of religion – put on your aprons people, because you can bake a cake or be bankrupted. They seek to suppress speech by encouraging fascism both in academia and by online tech companies, and if you think they won’t pass laws to limit speech given the chance, you’re fooling yourself. Hell, they tried to amend the First Amendment to overturn Citizens United, a case where the government tried to ban a movie critical of Hillary Clinton.

Let’s say that again, because it’s madness. The position of the left-of-center party in the United States is that the government should be allowed to arrest and imprison people for making a film critical of a politician.

Only when they’re running it.

We cannot have a functioning republic where about half of the population actively supports the trappings of tyranny. We can’t. No nation, especially one full of citizens who zealously guard their freedom, can tolerate a double standard for political behavior. It won’t be double for long. The New Rules, should they become ingrained in our systems, will inevitably go both ways.

Ah, but there’s the rub: we DIDN’T “zealously guard” our freedom; we sat back, all docile and complacent for the most part, and let them take it. They became accustomed to our acquiescence, and now that we’ve made the first halting steps at revoking it, they’re shocked, surprised, and enraged—to the point of mental pathology, quite literally.

A Great Awakening has occurred. A Great Reckoning will be hard on its heels. No one among us should think for a moment that just because we’ve belatedly withdrawn our compliance, the Left will just give back what they’ve taken from us. They won’t. Not without a struggle, they won’t. As a closer, Kurt asks: “Do they really want to go down this road?” Sadly, I don’t think it’s a matter of choice any longer—for any of us. The only way I can see it becoming one again is for Lefty to relent, to back off. Much as I might wish things were otherwise, I just can’t see that happening.

UNEXPECTED update! Hillary!™ is…gulp…right?!?

“Right now we’re living through a full-fledged crisis in our democracy. No, there are not tanks in the streets, but what’s happening right now goes to the heart of who we are as a nation, and I say this not as a Democrat who lost an election but as an American afraid of losing a country.”  — Hillary Clinton to Yale graduates.

She is absolutely correct. The refusal by Barack Obama to be a Man and peacefully hand over power to the duly elected president of the United States is an unprecedented attack on our nation’s beliefs, our rights as citizens, and our way of life.

The fascist use of the FBI and the national intelligence system to spy on Mister and to harass his supporters and appointees is a malevolence never visited upon this land, even by King George III.

The abuse of power allowed Jimmy the Weasel Comey to destroy evidence and allow Hillary to walk away despite her many felonies, while his predecessor at the FBI wages a witch hunt against the Real President.

Face it, we have the enemy within. Its name is the Democratic Party.

Lock her up.

Lock all of them up.

From Don’s lips to God’s ears.

You betcha it’s related update! More from Surber:

How Obama became the first communist president
The use of the state to spy on and infiltrate the campaign of a political opponent is the final proof of the truth that we have averted our eyes from for the last 14 years.

Barack Obama is a communist. Mild compared to Castro or Mao, but nevertheless a believer in state control of everything.

Electing a communist president was easy, although it took more than seven decades. While the steps were many — Stalin’s Soviet Union collapsed before achieving his goal — the major ones are obvious in hindsight.

Don really did his homework with this one, and shows his work, as they used to say in math class. His closing ‘graph is right on the money, too.

Share

Calling it by its name

The Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party.

As it happens, the leaders of the PBFP sat for a group portrait the other day. The occasion was the funeral of former First Lady Barbara Bush, wife of George Herbert Walker “Poppy” Bush and mother of George Walker Bush, American presidents 41 and 43, respectively. Also in the photograph was the man who beat Poppy, William Jefferson Blythe III, more commonly known as Bill Clinton; and Barack Hussein Obama II, also known as Barry Soetoro, the man who succeeded George W. Bush. And their wives, of course, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, former senator from New York, former secretary of state in the Obama Administration, and the defeated candidate in the 2016 presidential election.

But the man who defeated Hillary—Donald J. Trump, the 45th president of the United States—was nowhere to be seen. The Bush family, which bears him no love after his demolition of heir-apparent Jeb in the 2016 Republican primaries, had made it clear that Trump would not be welcome in Houston. And so the Trump family was represented by First Lady Melania, while the president stayed behind in Washington under the fig leaf of protocol (presidents don’t normally attend first ladies’ funerals) and not wishing to “disrupt” the event.

The picture is less evocative of a group portrait of past presidents as it is of a family, in this case the Kennedys, with Poppy sitting in for old Joe, the crippled paterfamilias, surrounded by the offspring who went on to wreak so much havoc upon the American body politic. For, like some Biblical genealogy, Bush I begat Clinton who begat Bush II, who would have begotten Clinton II were in not for Obama, who might have begotten either Clinton II redux or Bush III (Jeb!) were it not for Trump.

If it all sounds rather incestuous, that’s because it is.

No wonder Trump was not invited. The racket was proceeding quite nicely until he came along.

That they hate him ought to be reason enough all by itself for any true, red-blooded American to get behind him.

Share

No bias or partisan motives to see here, folks

None at all. No, really. Trust us.

A veteran of the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s CIA was full of Hillary supporters, some of whom decorated their desks with her campaign paraphernalia. Brennan, whom the press noted would walk the halls of the CIA in an LGBT rainbow lanyard, encouraged this open political atmosphere. While Brennan knew his spying operation on the Trump campaign was an “exceptionally, exceptionally sensitive” matter (as reported by journalists David Corn and Michael Isikoff), he assumed its machinations would never come to light.

The members of Brennan’s working group at Langley “were just a bunch of out-of-control idiots,” says a former high-ranking CIA official to TAS.

It ain’t just Brennan’s “working group,” and it ain’t just Langley either. It couldn’t be more evident at this point that we have a Deep State slap-full of ’em, running said Deep State as out-of-control Lefty idiots always run any bureaucracy they control: corruptly, arrogantly, incompetently, thuggishly, and with no regard at all for the will of the people, the Constitution, the rule of law, or anything else besides their own perks, power, and privilege.

Share

Mogadishu, Minnesota

I couldn’t improve on their title, so I swiped it.

When it was noted that the carry-on bags of multiple airline passengers traveling from Minneapolis to Somalia contained millions of dollars in cash, on a regular basis, law enforcement was naturally curious to know where the money came from and where it was going. It soon emerged that millions of taxpayer dollars, and possibly much more, had been stolen through a massive scam of Minnesota’s social-services sector, specifically through fraudulent daycare claims. To make matters worse, the money appears to have wound up in areas of Somalia controlled by al-Shabab, the Islamic jihadist group responsible for numerous terrorist outrages.

Starting in the 1990s, the State Department directed thousands of refugees from Somalia’s civil war to Minnesota, which is now home to the largest population of Somalis outside Somalia itself. As the Washington Times noted in 2015, in Minnesota, these refugees “can take advantage of some of America’s most generous welfare and charity programs.” Professor Ahmed Samatar of Macalester College in St. Paul observed, “Minnesota is exceptional in so many ways but it’s the closest thing in the United States to a true social democratic state.” A high-trust, traditionally homogenous community with a deep civil society marked by thrift, industriousness, and openness, Minnesota seemed like the ideal place to locate an indigent Somali population now estimated at 100,000.

Still waiting to hear where the clamor of demand for the importation of all these America-hating Muzz-rat swine is coming from. They have no right to be here, they have no reason to be here, and they provide no benefit to our country by being here. At the very least, they owe us reparations for a couple destroyed Blackhawks and some dead US soldiers.

A September 2015 report of the House Homeland Security Committee task force on combating terrorist and foreign-fighter travel revealed that Minnesota led all states in contributing foreign fighters to ISIS. Reviewing the public cases of 58 Americans who joined or attempted to join ISIS, the task force found that 26 percent of them came from Minnesota. Somali Minnesotans occasionally appear in the headlines as “Minnesota men” who have taken up terrorist jihad. In 2015, ten such Minnesota men were charged with seeking to join ISIS in Syria; six pleaded guilty, and three were convicted in June 2016 (one is presumed dead in Syria).  

Well, I guess you COULD call it a “contribution” of sorts. Just not to Minnesota, or America.

Read the rest of the CJ piece, which is by Powerline’s Scott Johnson, a local Minnesota boy who knows whereof he speaks. It’s just disgusting, start to finish.

Share

Distinguishing between “Tame” and “rabid”

Aesop has a thought on my quote about “bringing the Left to heel” yesterday.

“Brought to heel” is what one does with tame dogs, not with rabid ones.

This bunch wants putting down.
Nothing less will suffice.

The Trumpening has, indeed, flushed them from cover.
All that remains is for someone to open fire.

And the way they’re still frothing at the mouth and charging hither and yon, they’re going to get exactly that, the next time they make another mad lunge towards someone with common sense and the wherewithal to do the right thing.

The rabid dog is always the one most surprised by the community consensus, when it smacks him in the skull at about 3000fps.

What I wonder most about is what’s taking so long, seeing as how they’ve been shooting at us for a while now.

As Aesop himself has said: if you’re still having to ask whether it’s time to start shooting, then it probably isn’t. But it seems more certain with every passing assault, violent protest, act of vandalism, or anti-American rhetorical hate-bomb that the demented Left is determined to erase all doubt eventually. At some point, the people who believe so strongly that the 2A safeguards us against tryanny are going to be forcibly brought to the realization that no, not all by itself it doesn’t. Sooner or later, it has to be backed up.

We should also all recognize by now that, despite our assumptions about their cowardice and pacifism, there are plenty of Leftists out there who aren’t just willing to actually commit acts of physical violence against us for the crime of disagreeing with them, but eager to.

Share

Bottom line

This is it.

Liberals want you defenseless. You know all those countless stories of good guys with guns who protect people, you know, the ones that the New York Times tells you don’t exist and not to believe your lying eyes about? Liberals would prefer those stories go, “A mother was murdered in front of her kids today” rather than, “A mother capped an ex-con with a ‘born to lose’ tatt on his forehead when he threatened her and her kids.”

That’s the consequence of the nightmare they seek to impose upon us. Liberals, who (inept gaslighting aside) really do want to take your guns, want you to be without a means of defense. And this necessarily means they are willing to accept the risk of death (yours, not theirs) that comes with being defenseless. That is, they are totally cool with you taking the risk of encountering someone who doesn’t care that guns are illegal, or who is just plain stronger than you, and who wants to hurt you or worse. In short, liberals are eager to accept the risk of you being killed in order to attain their gun-free utopia.

To analyze it a little deeper: a gun-free utopia is the necessary first step on the way to the larger, more comprehensive liberal “utopia.” Then they won’t mind building a border wall nearly as much as they pretend to now—a la Berlin.

Or, more precisely, they want a utopia where Normals are gun-free, and where the liberal elite maintains a monopoly on force. You think their security is disarming? Michael Moore chance. Plus, you citizens being disarmed strips you of your last straw veto over oppression. That disarming Americans means that you are also rendered defenseless against liberal tyranny is a feature, not a bug.

Of course it is. That “monopoly on force” business is key, and a dead giveaway. Or, to put it another way: we’ll give up our AR15s when Hillary’s and Obama’s bodyguards give up theirs.

Now, if liberals really wanted to do something to stop gun killings, they would empower the cops in the big blue cities to sweep through the gang-infested warzones of Chicago and the like and rid them of criminals. But they won’t. Because they don’t hate the guns or the gangsters. They hate you. 

They surely do. The Trumpening has at last flushed them out into the open, though, and everyone can now see what they are—and begin the long-overdue process of learning to requite their hate, in full measure and with bells on. If they’re ever to be brought to heel, that’s where it has to start.

Share

Out of control, out of sanction, out of reach

Hey, anybody remember when Trump’s assertion that the FBI was running spy ops against his campaign was totally absurd, a laughable bit of near-clinical paranoia?

Nah, me neither.

The big story today, and it’s a biggie yet it really comes as no surprise (which is both big and tragic) is the report that leakers to Slim’s Slimes (the NY Times for you rookie morons [new readers]) are confirming that the FBI essentially ran a completely illegal spy operation against the Trump presidential campaign. There were no warrants, there was no judge. The FBI at its highest levels went out and spied on a US presidential candidate for the purposes of gathering information that could be used to either sabotage his campaign or to take him out, politically or by prosecution in court. I suppose the question is did Obama and Clinton know of, authorize, approve of or even plan and initiate this or did we (and still do) have a group of “little Eichmanns” committing crimes all on their own merely because they were fellow travelers?

Oh, I think we all know the answer to that one well enough.

And all things considered, is that even an important question to ask anymore considering the nature of these revelations which, frankly, we all have suspected for quite a long time now? Fact: We have a bureaucracy that lords over us no matter who we elect. Fact: we have a rogue judiciary that mostly exists to violate the Constitution in order to move the country ever leftwards. Fact: we have one political party that is hell bent on overthrowing the nation as founded and another whom we elect in the futile hopes they will oppose it, yet do the exact opposite of what they promise and what we elect them for. Read the links about Paul Ryan and DACA and the GOP and Net Neutrality.

Every damn day I get up to put this post together and every damn day it seems as if it’s f**king Groundhog Day all over again (sorry, Yogi). Sigh. I guess we’re just in the middle of it all and we won’t really be able to assess the meaning of all of this for at least 10 years. This much I do know; what cannot go on – and surely, what is happening in DC and in the courts and the impunity of Obama, the Clintons, Brennan, Mueller and all the rest – ultimately will not go on.

Ahh, but there’s the rub: why exactly can’t it go on? It’s been going on for years and years already—decades, in truth. What we’re talking about here is not just a couple or three rogue agencies; we have a rogue government. And the only way this is going to stop “going on” is if We the People rise up and stop it.

Share

The Klown Kar Koup

Zman lifts the veil:

I take some pride in the fact that I sniffed out the FBI scandal long before the media had any idea what was happening. The whole Russian hacking thing was such nonsense, that it had to be a cover for soemthing else. The subsequent machinations of the FBI and DOJ made it clear that they were hiding something. Of course, we now know that some members of the FBI and DOJ were engaged in domestic spying on the Trump campaign, for purely political reasons. We are now starting to get a sense of who is really behind it.

This post from Conservative Tree House is a bit meandering, the guy really does need someone to organize his thoughts, but it reveals an important fact about this case that has not been made public. That is, the root of the scandal is not the FBI, but the CIA. The guy who got this thing going was former CIA Director John Brennan. He’s been an anti-Trump rage head for a long time. It appears that he is the guy who initiated the surveillance of the Trump campaign and set off the FBI conspiracy to get Trump.

What appears to have happened is Brennan, or his people, contacted a trusted friend of the neocon family for some help. Stefan Halper is the guy fingered by the Tree House guys as the most likely candidate for the job. He is a good candidate, as he did meet with Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. If you look at the career of Halper, he has been in these fever swamps¹ for a long time, so it is not unreasonable to think he was working for the anti-Trump loons. It’s also possible there were others used in this caper.

What makes this more serious than Watergate is that the crimes committed here reveal a malice of forethought. The people caught trying to cover-up Watergate and other campaign shenanigans did so after the fact and mostly as non-participants. The people involved in this caper acted with a clear intent. They set out to trap some Trump people so they could then spy on the Trump campaign, including Trump himself, with the goal of ending his campaign. When that failed, they decided to try and remove him from office.

And in true Keystone Kops fashion, they’ve tripped over their own tiny dicks every step of the way. As for Brennan, he’s by no means averse to a ittle light lying, sedition, and subversion:

Former CIA Director John Brennan’s insistence that the salacious and unverified Steele dossier was not part of the official Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian interference in the 2016 election is being contradicted by two top former officials.

Recently retired National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers stated in a classified letter to Congress that the Clinton campaign-funded memos did factor into the ICA. And James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence under President Obama, conceded in a recent CNN interview that the assessment was based on “some of the substantive content of the dossier.” Without elaborating, he maintained that “we were able to corroborate” certain allegations.

These accounts are at odds with Brennan’s May 2017 testimony before the House Intelligence Committee that the Steele dossier  was “not in any way used as the basis for the intelligence community’s assessment” that Russia interfered in the election to help elect Donald Trump. Brennan has repeated this claim numerous times, including in February on “Meet the Press.”

The only real mystery remaining here is exactly how these short-bus stumblebums ever got the idea they were entitled to rule over us in the first place.

Share

Categories

Archives

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." – Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Subscribe to CF!
Support options

SHAMELESS BEGGING

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:



Click HERE for great deals on ammo! Using this link helps support CF by getting me credits for ammo too.

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS FEED

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

E-MAIL


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

All original content © Mike Hendrix