Monday, November 20, 2017

Forum:The #MeToo Accusations; a Positive or Negative Development?



Every week on Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: The #MeToo Accusations; a Positive or Negative Development?

  Don Surber: In the 1980s, there were a rash of stories, and a witch hunt over child molestation at day care centers. The McMartin family was absolutely innocent, and absolutely ruined by Los Angeles District Attorney Ira Reiner.

But there also was the Tailhook Association's convention in Las Vegas in 1991. It was a gathering of Navy pilots past and present, as tailhook refers to the device that grabs the wire on an aircraft carrier. About 1,500 attended -- and they drank and chased women. In the end, 83 women and 7 men were sexually assaulted. 300 men ruined their careers (including admirals) by acting like animals.

About that time, Clarence Thomas stood accused of putting a pubic hair on a can of Coca Cola -- and others strange things -- by Anita Hill. Her false charges of sexual harassment almost cost him a seat on the Supreme Court.

False stories of gang rape surface from time to time: Tawana Brawley, the Duke lacrosse team, and that frat at the University of Virginia.

The latter triggered a witch hunt over campus rape, pushed by Obama.

Now we are in a witch hunt over sexual abuse by men in power. What should guide us is past experience. 1. Hear the women out (Tailhook). 2. Hear the men out (Duke lacrosse). 3, Assume nothing. Allegations and accusations are gossip, not facts.

We do know that Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and Al Franken abused people sexually. They admitted it.

George Takei and Roy Moore vehemently deny such allegations. I give them the benefit of the doubt.

Those who advise Alabamans to not vote for Moore are opportunists. If he's guilty, he can be removed from office. But if he is innocent and his opponent wins, guess what? His opponent cannot be removed from office.

Many conservatives made a big deal about Bob Menendez who is on trial for bribery. I did not. Federal prosecutors are ruthless. Look how they railroaded Ted Stevens and withheld exculpatory evidence to convict him -- a conviction overturned because of their behavior. It was too late. Stevens had lost that election.

What can we as conservatives do? Adhere to principles. Paramount is the presumption of innocence.

 Rob Miller : Ah,yes, the #Me Too accusations. Definitely a two-edged sword that cuts both ways.

Let's examine the positive and negative aspects.

It's notable that the accusations are almost entirely coming from two areas, show biz and politics.

The so-called casting couch has been an entertainment  business reality almost since the industry got started. The idea was always very simple...a man or a woman seeking to advance their career would be told to submit to the sexual desires  of someone in power in the industry in exchange for a contract, a part, or other help in their career. Some refused. Others succumbed. Many times they got what they were seeking, other times they were simply cynically used, discarded and nothing came of it.

It was hardly a secret that this was going on. No one seeking a career in 'the Business' could hardly claim to be unaware that they might be approached that way.

The problem with the latest flood of accusations is that in most cases, they occurred a long time ago and the women (and men) involved made a choice to keep their mouths shut, whether they gave in to the sexual demands or not. One of the things that struck me about the Cosby case is how many of the women who were drugged and raped realized what had happened, yet they came back to Bill Cosby and let it happen again, because they wanted to take advantage of his  promise of help with their careers.

The problem here is twofold. First, by keeping their mouths shut the women enabled a sexual predator, often because they felt it would help their careers. And second, by keeping silent, they allowed other women to be victimized.  There's no doubt many women would have been spared a degrading and harmful experience if many of these women had not decided to stay quiet, to go along to get along.  And it's not just the women. I have no doubt that a lot of male associates of the Harvey Weinsteins and Kevin Spaceys in Hollywood also knew what was going on, and also kept silent.

Another problem with the Hollywood accusations is that far too many people  outside the business have a pretty good idea of what was going on in Hollywood even if they didn't know the details. These are, after all, the same folks who covered up for perverts like child rapist  Roman Polanski. So just like the the recent virtue signaling in the outing of Bill Clinton as a sexual predator years after it would matter, the element of outrage and surprise is missing and comes across as somewhat phony to many people. It simply doesn't matter as much anymore after all these years.

 The political angle is slightly different. Washington DC has aptly been called Hollywood for ugly people. There's also no doubt that a lot of young interns,  congressional assistants, secretaries  and pages are preyed on in the same manner as actors and actresses in the 'other Hollywood.' Some of the perps have been busted and disgraced, others have not, depending on how indiscreet  or how influential they were. What's new is its use as a political weapon, a selective political weapon used by the Democrat Party against Republicans, and designed to promote fundraising and gin up turnout from women of a certain ideology. 

The real author and enabler of this was former President Barack Hussein Obama.

The  Obama White House and  Department of Education pressured  colleges to change the burden of proof standard that they used in disciplinary proceedings over sexual harassment and sexual assault in 2011 or lose federal funds. And unfortunately, given the politics, many colleges didn't have to be pressured at all.

They  routinely restricted a male student's right to due process by using ‘preponderance of the evidence’ as the new, lower standard of proof instead of the higher ‘clear and convincing’ standard.According to the Obama administration's Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR), “Preponderance of the evidence” meant that if the University inquisition thought  there was as  little as a 51 per chance that the accused is guilty, (or the girl involved was decent actress) the accused could be disciplined and expelled.

These are the same people who claim to want to 'protect women' on campus by refusing to allow them to carry arms...with  predictable results.

Among other things, the new guidelines demanded that students “not be allowed to personally cross-examine each other.” Court rulings like Donohue v. Baker (1997), concluded that cross-examination must be allowed in campus disciplinary hearings, but Obama made sure that wasn't being taken into consideration anymore. Frequently, male students weren't t even allowed an attorney in these college inquisitions.

Secretary of Education Betsy DeVoss has made heroic efforts to correct this, but many universities still operate this way. If you think  I'm exaggerating? Here are just a a few examples that ought to change your mind.

Third stream feminism has been largely responsible for the hookup culture, the sexualizing of women's view of themselves and the devaluing of the ideas of traditional marriage, courtship and family life.*  The response of many men was simply to enjoy the relaxed morality this brought about and utilize it for their own pleasure, to objectify women, and to treat them with less respect than women formerly enjoyed.  It is possible that this is a new trend of women insisting on the old style standards of respect may mark the beginning of a backlash to third stream feminism and its extremism.  It's too early to tell at this point.

Unfortunately,at this point any positive aspect  is offset because the current rash of accusations largely has a hollow ring to them for the reasons I mentioned, which negates their effect
*It should be noted that the attitudes created by third stream feminism did not make much headway in Americans who were part of religious communities and certain immigrant groups and their traditions. Orthodox Jews, religious Catholics, Evangelicals, Many East, Southeast and South Asians,  Mormons and other religious and some ethnic communities resisted these attitudes and  still remain largely practitioners of traditional courtship, family life and marriages. They also tend to have more children and fewer divorces. Selah.

Puma By Design: The people who are buying into this “Me too” propaganda are the same individuals who last winter donned “pink p***y hats,” and took part in the not all “Women’s March” the day after President Donald J. Trump was inaugurated.

The question, of course is: The #MeToo Accusations; a Positive or Negative Development?

I dare to say that considering the spin comes from the left, “negative” but not for the reasons that some would think.

The “#MeToo” meme/accusations are a propaganda tool/stunt to bring about the desired means to an end favorable to the Progressive agenda.

#Me Too, Another Sandra Fluke Moment.

The #Me Too” meme is meant to be another Sandra Fluke moment.

In 2012, during a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing, Georgetown activist/Progressive, Sandra Fluke, called for free contraceptives because she did not believe that college students or women having sex should have to foot the bill for their choices, i.e., sexual activity.

Rush Limbaugh had his say, advertisers hit back at Rush and then Gloria Allred (what else is new) got involved. Eventually, the insanity backfired on the White House because of the habit by Progressives to spike the football ten times too many after Fluke became the Progressive darling, at least until she failed to garner enough support from Progressive Californians in 2014 to run for the Senate.

SIDEBAR

Fluke may have put the nail in her campaign when in 2014 right after the 200 Chibok girls were kidnapped and enslaved by Boko Haram, Miss Looney Tunes said during a radio interview with KCRW host Madeleine Brand stated that:

“I must say that as dire and barbaric as these Boko militants in Nigeria seem, we have to remember that if these girls are released and come to America as political refugees, they could end up working for Republican lawmakers here in California or in Washington, or end up living in a Red state in the South, which would no doubt make them wish they were still in the clutches of militant al-Qaeda-linked rapist terrorists...”

Career over

END OF SIDEBAR

What’s my point? The #Me Too” meme is 2017’s Sandra Fluke moment.

Fluke whose primary talking points were sexual reproductive rights for women and human trafficking did not cut the mustard and neither does the “Me Too” meme.
#Me Too is hypocritical, selective and a weapon.

Let’s be real, it was a little more than 12 months ago that Progressives were ruthlessly attacking Bill Clinton’s victims while placing both Bill and Hillary on a pedestal.

It was less than ten months ago, correction a six months ago month week (never mind) that Progressive pro-abortion women blocked pro-life women from marching with them.

Several weeks ago, Michelle Obama insulted women who did not vote for Hillary Clinton and just recently, a propagandist at the L. A. Times fat-shamed, Sandra Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary.

Of course, there is Hillary Clinton who used sexism and the war on women as a platform when she ran in 2016 despite having for decades took advantage of her power, position and access to the bully pulpit, to silence, strike fear into, denigrate and destroy Bill Clinton’s victims for three plus decades.

Feminists who continued their undying support Bill Clinton were no better and didn’t think twice to follow Hillary’s lead.

Through their demands for free birth control and reproductive healthcare, Progressives have no regard for the sanctity of life, support the murder of the unborn, recently born, ignore pedophilia and child rape.

Thus, the #Me Too hashtag is nothing more than a fluke (no pun intended…oh, who cares) in that it is selective and hypocritical. (Yeah, I really thought this through.)

Progressives now on a witch hunt have weaponized the allegation of rape and sexual misconduct. Due process means nothing.

Innocent until proven guilty does not play a role in their agenda.

Can it be because as we have over the past eight years that in the shootings in which a Black man died in the hands of law enforcement, prosecutors knowingly overreached in their quest to Obama’s bidding and to inflame the masses.

Such pursuits, for eight years, was in full force under Barack Obama’s Department of Justice with prosecuting attorneys across the country appearing to willfully incite people into the streets to riot.

Of course, if Progressives via the women’s movement could drive people into the streets because a woman levies charges or sexual assault or misconduct against someone, they would gladly do it but again, it’s not about justice.

This is about power, control, elections and has nothing to do with justice for the victim. We’ve seen this dance before. Progressives should stop weaponizing their so-called causes.

Dave Schuler: Both. I think there's a genuine problem with sexual abuse and harassment and there's so much silence surrounding it we don't actually have a good handle on its scope. Given that understanding shedding more light on the issue is good.

On the other hand destroying lives and/'or careers on the basis of unsubstantiated allegations is obviously problematic. When even Maureen Dowd is pointing out the political motivations of some of these allegations it isn't too much of a stretch to think there's something to the idea.

I honestly don't know how to strike the right balance.


Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason : We have to consider the current accusations of sexual harassment and sexual assault by looking back over the changes that have occurred in American culture over the past half century or so, especially since some of the accusations go almost that far back. Back in the 1960s and 1970s (some of us remember it well) the sexual revolution was upon us. Women’s liberation proponents convinced young women we were victims of a patriarchal society and we demanded equal rights. We burned our bras to show we were no longer bound by worn out social dictates. Up until that time women who chose to enter a profession generally became teachers or nurses. These were socially respectable professions and could be managed while raising a family. With this new awakening we believed we should be able to go to college and work in the same jobs as men if we so chose and make the same amount of money. Unlimited opportunities opened up for women. This was the positive side of the women’s movement as millions of women joined the workforce in many different professions.

Along with their new careers young women were exposed to more encounters with men in the workplace. At this same time the left, with assistance from Ivy League professors and scientific experts, convinced us women were no different than men when it came to our sexuality. We should not be ashamed of our sexual desires as society now “permitted” us to act upon them. We were encouraged to have sex without the need for emotional attachment. Thus began the sexual revolution which truly was a war on women. In addition during this time the invention of birth control pills eliminated worries of unwanted pregnancies, and once Roe v Wade became the law of the land in 1973 if we did become pregnant we could legally “take care of it.” Men no longer had to worry about taking responsibility or doing the right thing if a sexual partner became pregnant. Pregnancy became her responsibility alone. Abortion became a right and today many liberal women vote solely on this single issue – the preservation of their right to kill their unborn child. This single decision has harmed our society and our culture more than anything else in the last century.

Relationships between men and women have suffered with all this newfound sexual freedom. Men were led to believe women wanted sex even if they protested they did not. If women’s urges were the same as theirs what else could they believe? Does no mean no or does no mean yes… or maybe? Are women just playing hard to get? Where should one draw the line? How far can one go before they stop? Remember the old first base, second base references? Is there a point of no return? Women engaged in casual sex with multiple partners not realizing the emotional toll it would take on their psyche. How many of these current accusations were misinterpreted flirtations that went too far? And who is guilty in such situations? It may sound unforgiving to some, but men can be victims as well as women in some of these cases because of the beliefs of the time, short of molestation, rape or pedophilia. And the fact that these women are speaking out now after decades does not help their case. If they truly were molested or assaulted they should have reported it to the police then, not years later when the accused is running for political office.

In addition, much of the moral decline within our society falls directly on Bill Clinton and his dark history of sexual harassment and sexual assault throughout his time as governor of Arkansas through his two terms as president of the United States. During his first run for president his victims spoke out about his sexual assaults. They were ridiculed and called liars while those in the media covered for him. Hillary Clinton was complicit in these crimes as she threatened and intimidated his victims. It is surprising to see the 180 degree turn in the minds of some on the left who covered up for Clinton during the 1980s and 1990s who are now saying he should have resigned as president for his very public adulterous affair with Monica Lewinsky. They are a little late in acknowledging his crimes and are now saying these women who make accusations today should be believed. One has to wonder if their newfound beliefs are solely motivated by politics as the social and political winds have shifted. Sadly, an entire generation of young children grew up believing oral sex was not sex thanks to President Clinton. Many men have taken advantage of the sexual revolution to intimidate and coerce their victims as we have seen in the unfolding Hollywood scandals. Many people knew and said nothing.

This sexual uncertainty and confusion is a direct result of communist propaganda and indoctrination demoralizing our culture and society. The women’s movement led to the sexual revolution which led to the breakup of the family unit. Today we have staggeringly high percentages of children being born to single mothers with no help from the father, while government encourages dependence on it to meet their every need.

Hopefully the pendulum will swing back, but not all the way back. It is good that women do not have to suffer shame or public ridicule for their sexual behavior. Many of us remember the girls in school who were easy and called horrible names. But we must recognize there is a difference between the sexes. This will never change. We should instill pride and self respect in children of both sexes and help them to understand the personal and emotional ramifications of being sexually promiscuous. Sex should not be taken lightly nor be used for coercion or advancement. When a woman, or a man for that matter, has been sexually molested or assaulted they should report it to the police immediately. Perhaps all of this will lead to timely reporting of such incidents, which might save future victims from being assaulted or molested.

Perhaps this will be a positive shift in our society as we move towards a more moral center.

Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.



Monday, November 13, 2017

The Persecution Of Judge Roy Moore Shows Why The GOPe Must Be Defeated





Former Democrat pollster Pat Caddell has referred to Republicans and Democrats as, respectively, 'the stupid party' and the 'corrupt party.' That labeling gets more appropriate every day, as evidenced by the way the dysfunctional GOP establishment is helping along the persecution of Judge Roy Moore, its Alabama Senate candidate..

As you'll remember, Judge Moore ran in the Alabama Primary against one of Mitch McConnell's swamp creatures, Luther Strange. McConnell and his fellow New Tories spent $30 million dollars on the campaign (an absurdly large amount in Alabama) to get him in, but the people of Alabama knew exactly who Judge Roy Moore was, and weren't impressed. And he won by a substantial percentage.

Moore, a Trump ally, was leading substantially in the polls going up to the election against Leftist Democrat Doug Jones. So the Washington(Com)Post drummed up allegations from forty years ago that Judge Moore, single at the time, had 'initiated an encounter of a sexual nature' with a minor of 14... just after the Post endorsed Doug Jones, of course. Their chief source admitted openly that she had something of a troubled history and credibility issues, with, as she put it, 'three messy divorces, a drug problem and a lot of financial problems.'

Now that she's been so helpful and all, The (Com)Post has likely seen to it that at least the financial problems are alleviated. They also managed to find a couple of other girls (one of them a Democrat operative) who weren't minors at the time but claimed that Judge Roy Moore flirted with them or had a meal with them or something.

BTW, the age of consent in the Magnolia State is sixteen, (believe me, as a single gentleman I had the age of consent in every state of the Union memorized at one time) and even the minor herself admitted that while there was some kissing and fondling, no actual coitus or statutory rape occurred. So even if this actually happened and there's no proof at all it did, we have only this person's word for what occurred. And there's good reason to believe it never did.

Judge Roy Moore has run for five offices successfully over the years in hotly contested campaigns and this never came up in oppo research until now, a couple of weeks away from the election when it's convenient. What are the odds of that, especially in the last primary where all that money was tossed around, and so many attack ads filled with lies were aired?

And there's no prior history or rumors of this sort of thing concerning Judge Roy Moore. Normally, people involved in this kind of behavior leave a trail of incidents behind them...like Bill Clinton, for instance.

Judge Moore has totally denied the encounter with the 14-year-old ever happened. I suggest you listen to what Judge Moore had to say about it to Sean Hannity.



Another interesting item has surfaced recently. This still counts as a developing story, as Matt Drudge would say, but the OAS Network reportedly just aired a segment that there are recordings that show WAPO reporter Beth Reinhard bribing women with offers of $1,000 to smear Judge Roy Moore. And that the recordings have now been turned over to the Etowah County Sheriff's Department. As I said, this is still not confirmed. But if it's true, The (Com)Post and Ms. Reinhard are in a world of hurt.

All that aside, what's interesting to me most is the GOPe's reaction to all this. Democrats can be guilty of lying, massive corruption and graft, rigging primaries, open bribery and even national security offenses and the reaction of Democrats is always to circle the wagons around them, not matter what. Just ask the Clintons, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Maxine Waters or Al Sharpton.

The New Tories in the Republican Party? They actually try to outdo the Democrats and collaborate with them enthusiastically in killing their own.

Mitch McConnell practically tripped over his own feet in his haste to say that Judge Moore should withdraw. And he also saw to it that the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) pulled all funding from Moore's campaign. And along with his fellow New Tories, he's now trying to talk Luther Strange into running as a write in candidate, in hopes he would get just enough votes to throw the election to Democrat Doug Jones. Anything in order to keep a Trump ally out of the Senate, eh Mitch? And McConnell has been joined by a number of other GOPe New Tories and #NeverTrumpers, including Jeff Flake, Lindsay Graham, and of course, John McCain.

In a fascinating quid pro quo, a joint fundraising committee benefiting Moore and a handful of Republican Party organs filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission on Friday removing the National Republican Senatorial Committee as one of its beneficiaries. Going forward, the committee’s fundraising will benefit Moore’s Senate campaign, the Alabama Republican Party, and the Republican National Committee but not the NRSC. Here's hoping more such PACs and fundraising groups do the same, and concentrate on funding the candidates who are willing to support President Trump's agenda and our second American revolution.The New Tories of the GOPe are worthy only of contempt and need to be defeated and thrown from power.

The people of Alabama know who Judge Roy Moore is, and that he is a G-dly, honest and principled man. And they're not stupid. This baying of jackals will fail, and Judge Roy Moore will be Alabama's next senator.

https://media.newyorker.com/photos/5994cedb79cbfa1bfe7326ed/master/w_727,c_limit/Sorkin-Roy-Moore-Luther-Strange-Lessons-Alabama-Senate-Primary.jpg


"But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth.
They shall fall by the sword: they shall be a portion for foxes.


But the king shall rejoice in G-d; every one that swears by him shall
glory: but the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped."

(Psalm 63, by דוד המלך, AKA King David)

Selah.

Saturday, November 11, 2017

Debunking Mahmoud Abbas's Lies On Israel And The Balfour Declaration



As a 'recognition' of the centennial of the issuing of the Balfour Declaration (November 2nd, 1917) the notoriously anti-Israel UK Guardian decided to give Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas an op-ed entitled "Britain must atone for the Balfour declaration – and 100 years of suffering" (no link,but you can find it if you like). It contains a number of outright lies. And while Abbas, a Soviet trained apparatchnik and agent is pretty good at manufacturing this propaganda, someone from the Guardian obviously helped him concoct this, based on the language, much of it drawn verbatim drawn from past anti-Israel screeds from, of course, The Guardian.

As ludicrous as the thing is, Mahmoud Abbas's lies rates a serious debunking.Walk with me awhile in the Valley of Truth...

For starters, the op-ed refers to Abbas as the 'President of Palestine'. That's a hilarious title, considering that he's an unelected dictator now serving in year 12 of what was supposed to be a 4 year term! But let's continue...

 Lord Balfour as having 'signed a letter promising the land of Palestine to the Zionist Federation, a recently established political movement whose goal was the creation of a Jewish state. He promised a land that was not his to promise, disregarding the political rights of those who already lived there.'

What the Balfour declaration actually said was that Britain was in favor of creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine. And contrary to Abbas's nonsense, it specifically mentioned safeguarding the civil and religious rights of non-Jews living there, and of Jews living in other countries. Not only that, but the Balfour declaration meant nothing by itself. It was the League of Nations that created a Palestine Mandate under British control that was designated specifically to create a state that gave  rights of  sovereign specifically to Jews. And as we'll see, Britain bent over backwards when it came to Arab political rights.

It's also worth mentioning that Lord Balfour didn't create this on his own. It was the British cabinet that signed off on this. And they did it to reward the Jews for their help in WWI. Without Chaim Weismann, a skilled chemist discovering a process to enable fixing nitrogen out of the air, British troops would almost certainly have run out of ammo and artillery shells on the Western Front because of the success of German U-Boat attacks. Jews living in Palestine aided General Allenby's conquest of the Levant considerably with espionage and sabotage against the Ottomans at considerable personal risk, and an entire unit of British Jews fought alongside the Anzacs at the debacle in Gallipolli, something Australian PM Malcolm Turnbull pointed out in his visit to Jerusalem last week.

While most of the Arabs fought for their Ottoman masters, the few who didn't as part of the desultory Arab Revolt by the Sharif of Mecca received almost the entire Arabian Peninsula and ultimately 78% of the Palestine Mandate as their reward for taking a weak garrison in Aqaba well behind the fighting lines and sabotaging Turkish railways. Certainly the League of Nations rewarding the Jews with rights of sovereignty in their ancient homeland where a number of them already lived should have been no problem, since the land in the Palestine Mandate didn't belong to the Arabs either. It belonged to the Ottomans, who ceded it to the Allies under the Treaty of Sevres. So 'Palestine' like the rest of the ceded Ottoman lands belonged to the victorious allies, to do whatever they wished with it.

 
'British policy, to support Jewish immigration into Palestine while negating the Arab-Palestinian rights created severe tensions between European Jewish immigrants and the native Palestinian population.'

Oh boy.

Chaim Weismann, representing the Zionist movement and Emir Faisal, the third son of the Sharif of Mecca met and made an agreement to accede to a Jewish State in part of the Palestine Mandate. Faisel and Hussein were more than willing, since the British promised as a sweetener to create an Arab state out of most of the Mandate for his second son, Abdullah and give his first son Ali what became Iraq.  So on 23 March 1918, in Al Qibla, the daily newspaper of Mecca, Feisel  urged the Arabs to to welcome the Jews as brethren and cooperate with them for the common welfare.

The British then went back to the  League of Nations to negotiate borders for an Arab state in Palestine, thus fulfilling their agreement with Emir Feisal. In the 1923 San Remo Accords, an agreement the Arabs were happy to sign off on, the Arabs received 78% of the Palestine Mandate for a state governed by Abdullah. It was called  Trans-Jordan, later Jordan. The border the Arabs agreed to accept was the Jordan River. And accordingly, British removed a number of Jewish families who had settled east of the Jordan River to the other side, although no Arabs were removed from the 22% promised to the Jews.

The proof of this is the fact that so many of the 'settlements' like Ariel and the  Gush Etzion bloc were first built in the 1920's after San Remo, on land legally purchased from the local Arab Muktars. 

The tension was caused by the Arabs, led by the British appointed Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini. The British did little to stop it, and Arab violence became endemic. 

The British also responded by repeatedly limiting or even cutting off Jewish migration entirely to what was supposed to be the Jewish part of the Mandate while allowing in unlimited Arab migration.  The worst example of this was the White Paper of 1939, which cut off all Jewish migration and denied Jews desperate for a haven from the coming Holocaust a refuge.That was something the League of Nations planned to take up as a violation of the conditions of the Mandate, until WWII erupted and made the League irrelevant. The death toll of the Holocaust was vastly increased as a result.

'Palestine (the last item on the decolonisation agenda) led to our greatest catastrophe – in Arabic the Nakba.'

 In 1948 Zionist militias forcibly expelled more than 800,000 men, women and children from their homeland, perpetrating horrific massacres and destroying hundreds of villages in the process. I was 13 years old at the time of our expulsion from Safad.

Let's compare this with what Abbas has said on other occasions, shall we?

The Wall Street Journal on June 5th, 2003 made reference to an article penned by Abbas (AKA Abu Mazen) in an article entitled “Abu Mazen Charges that the Arab States are the Cause of the Palestinian Refugee Problem" ( emphasis mine) :

"Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) wrote an article in March 1976 in Falastin al-Thawra, the official journal of the PLO in Beirut: ‘The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny, but instead they abandoned them, forced them to emigrate and to leave their homeland, imposed upon them a political and ideological blockade and threw them into prisons similar to the ghettos in which the Jews used to live in Eastern Europe.’”

But wait, there's more. Here's Mahmoud Abbas's own version of his family's 'expulsion' in 1948.

  In an interview with Al-Palestinia TV in 2009, Abbas admitted that his family was not expelled or driven out, but rather left voluntarily out of fear that the Jews might take revenge for the slaughter of 20 Jews in the city during the Arab pogroms of 19 years earlier:

“I am among those who were born in the city of Tzfat (Safed). We were a family of means. I studied in elementary school, and then came the naqba [calamity, namely, the founding of the State of Israel – ed.]. At night, we left by foot from Tzfat, to the Jordan River, where we remained for a month. Then we went to Damascus, and then to our relatives in Jordan, and then we settled in Damascus.

“My father had money, and he spent his money systematically, and after a year, the money ran out and we began to work.


So embarrassing when one's lies are contradicted from one's own mouth isn't it...and Abbas and his family aren't the only ones who left voluntarily.

Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was allowed back into mandatory Palestine in spite of his work for Hitler and the Nazis during WWII is on record as actively encouraging Arabs to leave what became Israel so that the Arab armies could massacre the Jews. The idea was that afterwards, these Arabs could return home again and have the pick of the dead Jew's wealth, property and women.  Al-Husseini was joined in that by that by other Arab media. Which is exactly why the Arabs who left took those house keys with them. And at this link, you'll find a number of quotations from the Arab press admitting it.

You see, the 'Nakba' Abbas is talking about was actually a failed attempt at genocide, only three years after Auschwitz was liberated. To Abbas (and apparently his morally delinquent pals at the Guardian) the fact that it failed is cause for mourning and sorrow.The Arabs knew that genocide was their goal. And so did the British, who armed, trained and in the case of Jordan officered that attempt. If the Brits need to atone for anything, it's not the Balfour Declaration but their collaboration in trapping desperate Jews in Europe seeking refuge in what was supposed to be their land  on the eve of the Holocaust to appease the Arabs. And collaborating actively with the next attempt by the Arabs in 1948  to massacre the Jews of Israel. 

Oh, and those numbers Abbas cites? According to the last British census in 1947, there were 700,000 or so Arabs in the part of Palestine west of the Jordan. The ones who lived in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem were never expelled by anyone, because the Jordanian Arab Legion illegally occupied those areas and ethnically cleansed every Jew living there. Only about 600,000 Arabs or less lived in what became Israel. This included Druse, Bedouin and Christians. We also know that 120,000 Arabs stayed in Israel and later became Israeli citizens with full rights. Now the last time I checked, that would mean that about 480,000 or so Arabs left Israewl when the Arabs attacked, not '800,000.'

I'm not suggesting that some of these Arabs weren't forcibly driven out by the exigencies of what was, after all, a war of survival. But th elarge number who stayed shows that there were obviously many instances where those Arabs who wanted to  simply stayed put, and decided not too listen to what Haj Amin al-Husseini and the Arab countries were telling them to do.

Now, if you want to see real ethnic cleansing in action, all you need do is examine the behavior of the Arab world after 1948. Almost a million Jews were thrown out of Arab countries they had lived in for decades forcibly simply because they were Jews,  after everything they owned was plundered. Israel took in most of them, and the property, bank accounts and businesses stolen  from them in today's money is conservatively estimated at a trillion dollars U.S.

There's a bit more nonsense about 'occupation' that's too ridiculous to even need a rejoinder. (Fun Question...which country's territory is Israel supposedly 'occupying?' It can't be 'Palestine,'  which doesn't exist as a country. Even the UN hasn't signed off on that one just yet. And it can't be Jordan, since Jordan relinquished all claim to Judea and Samaria as part of the peace deal with Israel.)

But one thing that bears looking at who's writing this and what he and the PLO have created. Here we have Soviet trained dictator  who actively supports terrorism,  pays convicted murderers out of donor aid based on how many Jews they've murdered, and  holds them up as heroes and 'holy martyrs.'

Abbas is a Holocaust denier who's book on the matter,written when he was being trained by the Soviets  in Moscow is required reading in the Palestinian schools and used as a standard text in what passes for Palestinian education.

And human rights? Here's what someone who formerly lived under Abbas and Fatah's rule had to say about them:




And speaking of human rights, do you notice that the regimes shown here attacking Israel have a little something in common in terms of their own human rights situation? 

I could also mention that 'honor killings' still occur in Abbasistan with distressing regularity, that journalists dare not voice any criticism of the regime and that homosexuals are persecuted and even killed there. I could also get into how Abbas became a billionaire and why he and his Fatah cronies live so well while his people struggle, but I digress.

You see, there's  no reason, really, to expect anything better from Abbas. Like his former boss Yasser Arafat, he is always going to lie, cheat, and steal. He's always going to foment violence and murder. It's what he was trained to do by the Soviets, it pays really well and at this point, his main objective is to keep  the status quo going, since actual peace would get a lot of people thinking about why they need parasites like Abbas and Fatah any more. They might even start asking awkward questions about where all that donor aid money went and try to do something about it.

The really interesting question is why so many people seem interested in being his enablers and  collaborators. Especially people who claim to care about human rights, democracy and justice.

Could it be, just maybe, that it's because helping a thug like Abbas and his friends is a fashionable and acceptable 'Anti-Zionist'  cover up for the real agenda... attacking Israel, the only Jewish State?

Plus ça change plus c'est la même chose...the more things change...you know the rest I assume.

Monday, November 06, 2017

WoW! Forum: Is America In A Civil War?




Every week on Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Is America In A Civil War?

Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason :America is not in a civil war. It goes much deeper than that. One the one side we have those who understand the exceptional circumstances surrounding the founding of America. We believe that Providence, our Creator, brought the greatest minds of the time together to put words on paper and affirm to the world what we believe are the fundamental truths of human existence; that the essence of humankind is freedom and liberty. We believe this truth predates any laws or civilizations. We are inherently free and our freedom and basic rights cannot be limited by another person or government. But the Founding Fathers also understood the necessity of government to protect these basic rights and created a government template which limited the power of government over our lives and our freedoms. A government’s primary obligation is to protect its citizens so they are able to live their lives without fear while they pursue whatever they choose to do that makes them happy. We proudly believe in a country where the rule of law applies equally to everyone; rich or poor, black, brown, or white.

However, today we are a country in chaos. We can no longer say we are a country where the rule of law applies equally to everyone. We have seen our elected “trusted servants” work not for their constituents but for themselves. Our representative government no longer represents us. They create separate laws for us and exempt themselves from them. They have tasted power and will do anything to stay in power. This applies to both parties as very few of our representatives are truly working for the people.

Over the past century an evil has pervaded America through government, media, entertainment, and education. The war we are in is between good and evil. This evil has many names; communism, Marxism, socialism, globalism, progressivism. Those who espouse and advance this evil know very well how to destroy our country. It has been done before throughout history. The only thing standing between America and this evil are we Conservatives who understand at the elemental level what is at stake. We know what they are doing by creating divisions within our population. They use diversity and moral relativism as weapons. Social justice warriors carry the flag of the cause du jour while screaming about the intolerance of the right. Our youth and young adults are being flooded with incredible disinformation and extremely violent movies and video games desensitizing them against any real injustices in the world. The uncertainty they are being exposed to is dangerous and abusive. It is psychological warfare being practiced on them at their most vulnerable ages. Certainty is healthy, uncertainty is debilitating and destructive.

In order to win this battle we have to restore certainty and morality into our American culture. There are basic truths we can and must hold on to and only those who share these beliefs should be allowed to immigrate to this country. This is the real war in and against America and I fear we are losing it as our voices are being shouted down or ridiculed in the media as intolerant or racist. We must not let them silence us. There is too much at stake.

Rob Miller : Those of you kind enough to read me regularly know that I've always thought of it more as a second American revolution rather than a civil war. That belief of mine goes back to the 2016 campaign.

Contrary to what many people believe, America's Revolution was not exactly universally popular or supported. There were lots of people who supported the status quo, felt that the rebels were traitors to the King of England and acted on those beliefs. Many of them even fought on the British side and took great pleasure and yes, profit in helping the British and their Hessian mercenaries (ach, those Germans!) to commit a number of atrocities, especially in the mid-Atlantic colonies and  the South.  Just like today, the Tories felt that no violence and abuse was beyond the pale for the Revolutionaries, not even inciting, arming and unleashing hostile Indians on unprotected women and children, just as the French did during Queen Anne's War.

It's hardly surprising that many of these Tories relocated after our independence was won.

There are a number of parallels today if you think about it. We too have an entrenched elite living off excessive taxation and laws they passed to benefit themselves that are plundering our country for their pleasure and enrichment. And they likewise think it is right and proper to demonize anyone trying to end the game. They believe that no violence or hatred directed at those and their families whom obstruct them  and their self-appointed privilege  is out of line. They even employ bringing what amounts to foreign mercenaries to America, many of whom have no loyalty to our country, laugh at our laws, steal our wealth and likewise often commit atrocities these new 'Tories' are more than willing to defend and excuse...because like the Hessians, these new mercenaries support their evil purpose.

And as before, many of these new 'Tories' like their 18th century counterparts have no real loyalty to America, its founding principles and especially not to our democracy when you come right down to it. Their loyalties lie elsewhere. Some even openly boast of being 'citizens of the world' and 'globalists' rather than being loyal to the land of their birth.

The biggest difference is the weapons being used. No cannons, bayonets, muskets and sabres this time. Nowadays, the weapons are a crooked, biased media spouting propaganda, 'educators' with no sense of intellectual honesty or responsibility, judges who rule on cases based on their political beliefs rather than the law, disrespect and obstruction by what seems to be 95% of the Democrats in congress (aided by not a few Republicans), rent-a-mobs, 'resistance' and  the Antifa and #blacklivesmatter thugs, the Left's brownshirts. And of course, the new Tories's entrenched minions hiding in government.

No one should be surprised at this. It's been a long time coming, and the rot even reached into our highest office, giving us a quarter century of dysfunction and decline.  But thank G-d, at least the war is out in the open now.

One of the things I've always liked about Steve Bannon aside from his innate decency was that like Andrew (Z"L) he understands that this is a war, not just mere political fisticuffs. And in war, victory is what counts.

2016 was the first major victory, and an insane counterattack was to be expected.  So were some strategic setbacks and errors. But I see our side getting stronger and the New Tories getting weaker as time passes. 2018 will be the next great battle to be fought, and that doesn't just come down to the usual jackass versus elephants nonsense. It's about solidifying real gains to make the 2016 victory not just a momentary triumph but a lasting one that will give us our beloved Republic back, and getting rid of the obstructionists in both parties to the point where even the Tories  who manage to survive the carnage are rendered powerless. That's how I see this ending up...provided we want it bad enough and are willing to keep going no matter how difficult. We owe that to both ourselves and our posterity.

Again, we have been here before:

THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. {...}

'Tis surprising to see how rapidly a panic will sometimes run through a country. All nations and ages have been subject to them. Britain has trembled like an ague at the report of a French fleet of flat-bottomed boats; and in the fourteenth [fifteenth] century the whole English army, after ravaging the kingdom of France, was driven back like men petrified with fear; and this brave exploit was performed by a few broken forces collected and headed by a woman, Joan of Arc. Would that heaven might inspire some Jersey maid to spirit up her countrymen, and save her fair fellow sufferers from ravage and ravishment! Yet panics, in some cases, have their uses; they produce as much good as hurt. Their duration is always short; the mind soon grows through them, and acquires a firmer habit than before. But their peculiar advantage is, that they are the touchstones of sincerity and hypocrisy, and bring things and men to light, which might otherwise have lain forever undiscovered. In fact, they have the same effect on secret traitors, which an imaginary apparition would have upon a private murderer. They sift out the hidden thoughts of man, and hold them up in public to the world. Many a disguised Tory has lately shown his head, that shall penitentially solemnize with curses the day on which Howe arrived upon the Delaware. {...}

...Why is it that the enemy have left the New England provinces, and made these middle ones the seat of war? The answer is easy: New England is not infested with Tories, and we are. I have been tender in raising the cry against these men, and used numberless arguments to show them their danger, but it will not do to sacrifice a world either to their folly or their baseness. The period is now arrived, in which either they or we must change our sentiments, or one or both must fall. And what is a Tory? Good G-d! What is he? I should not be afraid to go with a hundred Whigs against a thousand Tories, were they to attempt to get into arms. Every Tory is a coward; for servile, slavish, self-interested fear is the foundation of Toryism; and a man under such influence, though he may be cruel, never can be brave. {...}

I thank G-d, that I fear not. I see no real cause for fear. I know our situation well, and can see the way out of it. While our army was collected, Howe dared not risk a battle; and it is no credit to him that he decamped from the White Plains, and waited a mean opportunity to ravage the defenceless Jerseys; but it is great credit to us, that, with a handful of men, we sustained an orderly retreat for near an hundred miles, brought off our ammunition, all our field pieces, the greatest part of our stores, and had four rivers to pass. None can say that our retreat was precipitate, for we were near three weeks in performing it, that the country might have time to come in. Twice we marched back to meet the enemy, and remained out till dark. The sign of fear was not seen in our camp, and had not some of the cowardly and disaffected inhabitants spread false alarms through the country, the Jerseys had never been ravaged. Once more we are again collected and collecting; our new army at both ends of the continent is recruiting fast, and we shall be able to open the next campaign with sixty thousand men, well armed and clothed. This is our situation, and who will may know it. By perseverance and fortitude we have the prospect of a glorious issue; by cowardice and submission, the sad choice of a variety of evils - a ravaged country - a depopulated city - habitations without safety, and slavery without hope - our homes turned into barracks and bawdy-houses for Hessians, and a future race to provide for, whose fathers we shall doubt of. Look on this picture and weep over it! and if there yet remains one thoughtless wretch who believes it not, let him suffer it unlamented.


Tom Paine, excerpted from 'The American Crisis.' Emphasis, mine.

As King Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes, "There is nothing new under the sun."

Wise man, that King Solomon.  Human nature doesn't change, only the names of the players.

Selah.


 Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.





Monday, October 30, 2017

Mueller's Lame Indictments Show He's Desperately Trying To Protect The Real Culprits

Hillary Putin Trump Derangement Syndrome

Well, Robert Mueller finally dropped his explosive indictments. And his lame indictments not only have all the power of a wet firecracker, but they tell us something we already know...that the real collusion with Russia during the campaign came from the Democrats. And that today's travesty was designed to obscure it, provide a distraction,get the real story out of the headlines and protect the guilty parties involved.

The charges focus on three men. Two of them, Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates are charged not with anything to do with the Trump campaign. Instead they're being charged with money laundering and tax evasion that occurred years before Paul Manafort had anything to do with President Trump or his campaign...or as the president himself tweeted:



President Trump pounced on Monday, denying Manafort's alleged crimes predated his campaign and insisting that he never colluded with Russia to affect the 2016 election


Well, we all know the answer to the first question. The focus isn't on the completely corrupt Clinton and the Democrats because their trained seals in the media are doing their very best to get the real collusion by the Clinton Campaign and the DNC out of the headlines and because of Robert Mueller's own probable collusion in the Uranium One deal 

And remember, Mueller was supposed to be investigating collusion in the 2016 campaign with Russia.  The indictments of Manafort and Gates have nothing to do with that.  Odd he hasn't indicted any Democrats yet for collusion, isn't it?

Manafort and Gates have both pled not guilty to the charges. Manafort is free on $10 million bond, and Gates agreed to $5 million. Both are on 'home confinement' as a condition of their pretrial release and have surrendered their passports.

The charges against Manafort involve his lobbying work for Viktor Yanukovych, the former president of the Ukraine and one of Manafort’s former clients. The feds alleged he illegally funneled millions of dollars of payments into offshore bank accounts in order to avoid detection by U.S. authorities. Manafort is also accused of failing to have registered as a lobbyist for Yanukovych in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (“FARA”). In view of what the Podestas and Mrs. Clinton appear to have done in the Uranium One scandal, let alone the Fusion GPS scandal, this is hilarious.

Another fact that might even prove more humorous is that a lot of the evidence against Manafort could be thrown out of court because it was obtained illegally.

The Feds did a surprise raid on Manafort's home Alexandria, Virginia on July 26th. The warrant they had explicitly allowed them to search for documents and other materials related to the FBI probe into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians. It didn't cover anything else.Not only that, but in order for the feds to obtain a warrant for that search in the first place, a federal judge would need to determine that probable cause existed that a crime was committed. And as part of the warrant,the FBI would have been required to attach an affidavit which contained a list of items that FBI agents hoped to collect. So evidence was collected that was probably not covered by the warrant.

But wait, there's more. During the raid, Mueller’s FBI agents took documents covered by attorney-client privilege. And this is fairly egregious, because Manafort's attorneys explicitly warned Mueller’s office before the raid that their search warrant didn’t allow access to documents covered by that attorney-client privilege. The feds took these materials anyway and shared it with Mueller's prosecutors, after which they returned it.

There are numerous precedents where this kind of tainted evidence has been thrown out of court, because it is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment, and constitutes unreasonable search and seizure. The fact that the agents at the  Famous But Incompetent returned them after Mueller's prosecutors (who should have known better) had a thorough chance to peruse them  doesn't change that one bit.

So the entire case against Manafort might result in a mistrial.

There is one more thread we should explore here. One other former  peripheral member of the Trump campaign, a foreign policy advisor named  George Papadopoulos has already pled guilty to making false statements during a January 27, 2017 interview with the FBI. Those false statements concern meetings Papadopolos had with a professor who had ties to the Russian government and who discussed “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton, as if that was hard to find. Papadopoulos has agreed to cooperate with Mueller's team in exchange for immunity. He has admitted that his contacts with the professor and other Russian nationals came after he started advising the campaign and that he apparently made numerous attempts  to convince then candidate Trump to travel to Russia in order to have an “off the record” meeting with Russian officials.Which of course never happened.

Moreover, the Mueller team says that a “Campaign Supervisor” told Papadopoulos, 'I would encourage you’ and another foreign policy advisor to the Campaign to ‘make the trip, if it is feasible.'

So let's recap what this is all about. The Famous But Incompetent set a trap for someone who was a foreign policy adviser and a peripheral figure in the Trump campaign who had unauthorized contact with a professor and perhaps some other people connected to the Russian government, and who may have tried to set up a meeting, which never happened. Moreover, someone connected with the Trump campaign told Papadodoulos that he could make the trip if he wanted to.

Guess what? None of this is illegal, although the way the Dems and their media allies are carrying on about this, you'd think they caught Papadodoulos green lighting Russian control over a big part of America's uranium production or divulging our secret missile defense technology to them.

The stuff about Papdodoulos being encouraged by a 'Campaign Supervisor' is simple hearsay. And we know what that's worth in court. Even if it occurred, again, there's nothing illegal about someone telling someone else, 'yeah sure, make a trip toRussia if you want.'

The sole crime here is that Papadopoulos lied to the FBI about meeting with this professor. The rest smacks of the sort of thing Mueller's partisan team would cook up by putting words in the mouth of someone they already had by the testicles:

" If we're going to give you immunity, we need more. Someone from the Trump campaign authorized you to make the trip and contact the Russians, right?"

"Oh, yes! Well, really, they didn't exactly authorize it, but someone encouraged me to do it."

"Well, not exactly what we were looking for, but I guess that's enough."

 The idea here is pretty clear. Nothing Papadopoulos says will likely be actionable in court, but it will provide a distraction to the real scandals involving collusion with Russia by the Democrats. And of course, material for the Left's fever swamp mentality...let's call it the legend of a unicorn rather than a real one that actually exists.

 Image result for Robert Mueller

This nonsense is what Mueller and his pals have spent a year and millions of taxpayer dollars putting together. This isn't a Hallow'een thing unless you count the masks and costuming going on. More like April Fool's although I doubt it's fooling anyone who isn't vested in pushing this stuff at all costs and has a fighting chance of a two digit IQ.

It's high time this travesty was ended, and that Jeff Sessions appointed a special prosecutor to go after the people really involved with collusion with Russia. And that likely includes Robert Mueller, who has a few questions about the Uranium One scandal he needs to answer under oath.

WoW! Forum::Should Robert Mueller Fired?



Every week on Monday, the WoW! community and our invited guests weigh in at the WoW! Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question:Should Robert Mueller Be Fired? 

 Don Surber: Robert Mueller poses no threat to anyone but himself. His arrogance -- hubris -- will do him in because he does not know whom he is dealing with. Mueller is a perfect media darling because he reflects so many of the swelled heads in the newsrooms.

Donald Trump is no ordinary billionaire, if such a beast exists. He knows the law well, the politicians better, and the press best of all.

Trump hires best lawyers. Roy Cohn was his first attorney. Ruthless. Prosecuted the Rosenbergs and got them executed. When the feds charged Trump with housing discrimination, Cohn countersued for defamation and demanded that the feds file an actual lawsuit, not just an administrative action.

Two years later they settled with Trump paying no fine and making no admission of any guilt.

Trump is not a man to be trifled with.

Trump has been involved in 3,500 lawsuits. He knows the courts better than any president not named Lincoln. Some cases he won. Some he lost.

Mueller should know this. He does not seem to know. He has been a federal prosecutor too long. They have nearly unlimited power.

But I think he has met his match.

Name someone who began a feud with him who prevailed. You cannot. Rosie O'Donnell went from the queen of nice on daytime TV to whatever she is today.

Megyn Kelly got a nice deal with NBC -- and is watched by fewer people now than she was at Fox News.

And so on.

The Russian dossier is fiction by a retired British intelligence officer. In nine months since it was made public, no one has independently verified any of the 35 allegations.
Trump lawyered up anyway, and it will pay off.

The leak of grand juries on Friday night was a breach of ethics. Mueller has nothing on Trump, and Manafort is nothing to him.

Mueller tried to get Trump through his kids. That was a low blow.

Firing Mueller now makes this swine a martyr.

Keep him.

He has nothing. He will whither on the vine.


 Rob Miller: Mueller shouldn't be fired, at least not right now. But he needs to be neutralized by destroying his credibility in public.

The twin scandals of Fusion GPS, the spying and illegal wiretapping by the Obama Administration on a political campaign by the opposing party during an election year, and Uranium One, which Mueller appears to be directly complicit in have already been revealed.The Democrat's servile media minions are doing the best they can to twist things around and muddy up the details to confuse the American people, but I unraveled the facts last week in an easy to follow article, and when they're presented in a straightfoward manner it's obvious that the very people ranting about Donald Trump and 'Russia collusion' were the ones colluding with the Russians themselves.

 Robert Mueller is clearly implicated in the Uranium One Scandal, which happened during Mrs. Clinton's term as Secretary of State in 2010 Certain Canadian investors working on behalf of the Russian government wanted to acquire ownership of certain assets amounting to one fifth of U.S. uranium production. They were represented by the Podesta Group ( yes, that would be John Podesta and his brother Tom), who lobbied Washington for them.

Since this involved strategic materials, it needed oversight and a green light from Hillary Clinton’s State Department. That green light was obtained after these same investors ‘donated’ $148 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation and arranged for Bill Clinton to receive $500,000 for a speech in Russia, more than double his usual fee. There are also some indications a donation to the Clinton Library was involved as well.

As the Hill revealed recently, the FBI had uncovered a bribery plot involving the Russians and uranium transactions in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. They had substantial evidence, including eyewitnesses. The investigation also revealed that the deal involving the Clintons was part of the illegal bribery scam. Yet someone ordered the FBI not to reveal the details of their investigation or even to disclose it to Congress. Essentially, things were stonewalled for four more years,until 2015, after Obama’s re-election.  So the deal went through, even though the Obama Administration was fully aware of what the FBI had uncovered.

The head of the FBI when this was going on was Robert Mueller. Either he personally quashed the bribery investigation or he was told by his boss Eric Holder to do it and complied. There's no way he couldn't have known the national security implications of the Uranium One deal, yet he stonewalled the investigation until after Barack Obama was re-elected.

Meuller was always going to come up with something, and I imagine it will be trumped up charges involving  Paul Manafort or perhaps against Donald Jr. for taking a meeting with a Russian lawyer withsome connections to the Russian government  about - wait for it - adoptions!

It's also pretty obvious that Mueller whipped this stuff up in a hurry to try and spin the news cycle and bury the facts about who really colluded with Russia.

That's why the President needs to immediately name a special prosecutor to investigate these scandals, and especially, to investigate Robert Mueller among other things. He obviously knew about the bribery. Why did Mueller stonewall the investigation?  Did he receive orders to do it, and if so, from whom? Is there any evidence in his bank records that he received a sum of money or profited via an investment? And as head of the FBI, what made him be so negligent as to turn his back on something so vital to national security, keep his mouth shut and attempt to bury it?

The Democrat's Trump Russia lie is already on life support. A solid special prosecutor  ought to be able to finish the job and turn the spotlight on some of the most corrupt people ever to hold public office and betray the public trust.

Patrick O'Hannigan: I agree with Don that Robert Mueller will likely "wither on the vine," but I still think that President Trump should fire him rather than waiting for that to happen. There would be political repercussions to firing Mueller, because the anti-Trumpers and the Left would indeed treat him (undeservedly) as a martyr, and would have another fig leaf with which to try to cover bad behavior by the Obama administration and its notoriously tone-deaf Secretary of State. On the other hand, there is, I think, a significant up-side to demonstrating (by letting Mueller go) that the rule of law actually requires prudent exercise of responsibility in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government.

Robert Mueller, when he was running the FBI, had to have known more than a little of what the rest of us are now learning about the extortion and backroom-dealing behind Uranium One. He would also have realized that the Clinton Foundation was little more than a global money laundering operation. He probably figured that going after the Clintons or the Russians was a waste or resources. You can argue the merits of that inactivity, but it's ridiculous to make him the point man for an investigation into "collusion with Russia" now when he did nothing about it then.

I was once sympathetic to the argument that Mueller ought not be criticized for staffing his current investigation with donors to the Democrat party, because every big law firm donates to the party in power, so the pool of investigative talent was always going to be in the shadow of the DNC. That argument no longer persuades me, because Mueller himself has been so obviously partisan. He was touted as having earned "bipartisan respect," but what that means today is that other agents of the "administrative state" recognize him as one of their own. And let's not forget the President Trump was elected in large part on his promise to Make America Great Again. He was going to do that not just in positive ways (such as tax reform and repeal of "Obamacare"), but also in negative ways, by "draining the swamp" that Washington, D.C. has become. Mueller is part of the problem, not part of the solution. Firing him would be akin to saying (correctly) that when President Obama created the DACA program and the immigration machinery around it, he did that in an unconstitutional manner, by executive order.

Let's not forget that Robert Mueller and James Comey are friends, either. I don't know either man and can't fairly judge their characters, but Comey's record has been less than stellar, and friends ought not be put in charge of "investigating" each other. Mueller and his acolytes continue looking at President Trump while the media breathlessly reports even uncorroborated "findings," but Mueller's activity looks more and more like willful misdirection every day. By looking at Republicans (or even alleged Republicans), Mueller helps his Democrat friends avoid the spotlight that should be on them. For example, people are talking about Uranium One because Hillary Clinton is still a high-profile name, but how about Debbie Wasserman-Shultz and her unusual IT staffing arrangements? Those had national security implications, too.

Laura Rambeau Lee : Robert Mueller should have recused himself at the outset of this investigation. The fact that he did not in spite of his obvious and many conflicts of interest leads me to believe his job as special counsel is to make sure the truth of what really transpired between the DNC, the Clinton campaign and the Russians never comes to light. It appears the establishment Democrats AND Republicans seem bent on taking down a duly elected President Trump. A Friday leak revealed the Mueller team has filed the first charge or charges in the case with a federal grand jury, although the charges have been sealed by a federal judge. We may find out who has been charged and what the charges are as early as Monday. Will it be someone connected to the Trump campaign? All of this high drama is a smoke screen to keep us from finding out the real truth. Congress should end this investigation now.

Well, there it is!

Make sure to drop by every Monday for the WoW! Magazine Forum. And enjoy WoW! Magazine 24-7 with some of the best stuff written in the 'net. Take from me, you won't want to miss it.




Friday, October 27, 2017

The Democrat's Russia Lie Implodes - And Yes, It's Worse Than Watergate

 

The latest revelations about both the fake Trump dossier was the basis for a huge lie, repeated endlessly by the trained seals in the Democrat media. The Democrat's Russia lie has now imploded, and the fallout has revealed other aspects of actual collusion with the Russians, including a $148 million dollar kickback to the Clintons in exchange for in exchange for then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton green lighting a deal that gave Vladimir Putin and Russia control over 20% of the United State's uranium production.

Not only that, but the new evidence has revealed facts that seem to point to collusion and the use of America's intelligence apparatus for partisan political purposes.

Like most things concerning the Clintons, this is a very twisted web, and deliberately so in my opinion. I'll do my best to try and unravel it so it's easier to understand.

The Democrat's Russia lie really went public when it was concocted by Mrs. Clinton and her campaign manager John Podesta on election night once she stopped screaming, pounding the walls and throwing things But as we now know, the groundwork was laid far earlier. The infamous fake “Russia dossier” created by a company called Fusion GPS was partly funded (if not entirely) by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. And the sources of the 'intelligence' in that “Russia-Trump dossier” were senior Russian officials.

 

Let's take a breath here to realize what we're talking about. Here is a political candidate and her party colluding with Russia to attempt to influence our election.

As an aside, let's recall that John Podesta is no stranger to Putin and the Russians, to the tune of, oh, a mere $35 million investment they gave a company once Podesta was named to the board. And a $170,000 lobbying contract with the Podesta Group, run by by John Podesta’s brother, Tony Podesta.

Fusion GPS claimed to reporters (though they refused to provide any evidence) that a Republican funded separate opposition research on Trump. But as the Washington Post,hardly a fan of President Trump itself reported, the dossier did not exist until after the Democrats hired Fusion GPS.

And as was later revealed, Christopher Steele, the former spy, got this 'information' by paying his sources, who happily supplied him with the most outlandish nonsense they could think of as long as they got paid. The dossier was completely bogus. It got basic facts about Russia wrong, and made numerous claims that were completely false, like the claim that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen met with Federation Council foreign affairs head Konstantin Kosachev in Prague. Cohen, as you'll recall, proved he'd never been there at all.

But the worst it yet to come. It appears that the fake dossier was used by the Obama Administration to justify wiretaps and use America's intelligence agencies to conduct surveillance on American citizens...because they were involved with the Trump Campaign in an election year. And - just a coincidence, of course - just before he left office, President Obama changed to rules for disseminating intelligence by executive order so that the identities of the people who were under surveillance and their personal information was unmasked and spread throughout numerous agencies. After which, of course, they were leaked to the media.

This included wiretaps on Trump Towers and what appears to be a deliberate attempt to pervert the FISA court system. And as former Obama DNI James Clapper let slip yesterday on CNN the wiretapping, in his words "began before the dossier."

Whoopsie.

Let's again look at exactly what this means. A sitting president used the U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on a presidential candidate from the opposition party in an election year. And later on, Clinton campaign opposition research using disinformation from top Russian intelligence officials was used as a license by the Obama Administration to conduct spying on an opposing political party’s campaign.


And the FBI was directly involved in this.They reimbursed the 'expenses' involved in collecting the 'intelligence' in the fake dossier, some of which may very well have involved reimbursing payments to the Russian officials involved. We don't know for sure how much was paid or to whom, because so far the FBI has resisted all oversight by congressional committees looking into the FBI’s role in funding and use of the dossier. Rep. David Nunes, Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is being very careful here, but Fusion GPS operative Christopher Steele has already admitted that the FBI reimbursed Fusion GPS. We'll obviously know the full extent of this once their banking records are investigated, something the DOJ can provide.



You'll notice that Tucker Carlson and Rep. Nunes briefly discussed the Uranium One scandal, which is directly connected to the entire Democrat's Russian Lie. We'll get to that in a bit. But first, let's examine exactly who Fusion GPS is and what they do.

Fusion GPS is a company made up primarily of former journalists. They're extremely well connected to a lot of the current cast of trained seals in the media. What they specialize in is 'media relations' which translates into using their connections to spike or downplay certain news items and promoting favorable narratives for their employers. And their employers? Some of the most repressive dictatorships on the face of the earth.

The Senate Judiciary committee has heard testimony about Fusion GPS working as advocates for corrupt Russian and Venezuelan officials, as well as hiding its work for foreign entities from federal authorities. They've also been accused illegally working as an unregistered foreign agent. And they're currently refusing to comply with federal subpoenas for information on their foreign clients...like the one mentioned above regarding payments to Russian officials for the bogus dossier.

Fusion GPS peddled the fake dossier to their pals in the media, but it was rejected - at least in the beginning- by anti-Trump media outlets like the New York Times, the Washington Post, Yahoo News, The New Yorker, and CNN because it was so obviously fake. But it remained hovering over the newsrooms, with reporters running themselves ragged trying to confirm it.

The ball actually started rolling after James Clapper, Obama's Director of National Intelligence told FBI head James Comey to brief President Trump on the dossier. After which, the story of the meeting was leaked to CNN, who published it. The meeting was an obvious set up, designed to give this garbage legitimacy. And once Buzzfeed released the text of the dossier, it became a part of the Trump/Russia collusion meme and shaped coverage at all these outlets.

Never have the American people been served so poorly by the press.

Let's also recap that while Fusion GPS's media pals were initially cautious above using the bogus dossier, the FBI and almost certainly their boss, Loretta Lynch used it as an excuse to collect intel on an opposing party's campaign during an election year.

Now let's briefly connect this with the Uranium One scandal.


During Mrs. Clinton term as Secretary of State in 2010, certain Canadian investors working on behalf of the Russian government wanted to acquire ownership of certain assets amounting to one fifth of U.S. uranium production. They were represented by the Podesta Group, who lobbied Washington for them.

Since this involved strategic materials, it needed oversight and a green light from Hillary Clinton’s State Department. That green light was received...after these same investors 'donated' $148 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation and arranged for Bill Clinton to receive $500,000 for a speech in Russia, more than double his usual fee. There are also some indications a donation to the Clinton Library was involved as well.

As the Hill revealed recently, the FBI had uncovered a bribery plot involving the Russians and uranium transactions in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. They had substantial evidence, including eyewitnesses. The investigation also revealed that the deal involving the Clintons was part of the illegal bribery scam. Yet someone ordered the FBI not to reveal the details of their investigation or even to disclose it to Congress. Essentially, things were stonewalled fo four more years,until 2015, after Obama's re-election. So the deal went through, even though the Obama Administration was fully aware of what the FBI had uncovered.

Oh, and the head of the FBI when this was going on? None other than Robert Mueller. Who is now special prosecutor investigating President Trump for Russia collusion! The irony is monstrous.

 Related image

Either Mueller quashed the investigation himself or was ordered to do it by Obama's Attorney General, Eric Holder. Mueller has some serious questions to answer, and no business investigating anyone else for collusion, especially with Russia.

Speaking of irony, it seems that everyone mouthing the Democrat's lie about Trump's collusion with Russia was - wait for it - colluding with Russia!


President Trump should wait a short while to allow this fact to become common knowledge, and then insist Robert Mueller recuse himself and end the open ended witch hunt that has gone on fo ra year with no evidence linking Trump to collusion with Russia. If Mueller refuses, Trump should fire him and tell the American people exactly why. And the president should order Jeff Sessions to appoint a special prosecutor to pursue a case against the guilty parties involved in these illegal acts.

I actually like our attorney general in many respects, but if Jeff Sessions can't bring himself to do this, he needs to resign.



Catalonia Independence...Barcelona Takes The Plunge

 Image result for catalonia votes for independence


Catalonia declared its independence today. Secession was approved by only 70 of the 135 legislators, with the pro-Spanish parties walking out of the chamber after arguing passionately against the move.Lawmakers from three national parties - the People’s Party, the Socialists and Ciudadanos - walked out before the vote. Members of the pro-independence parties and the far-left Podemos then voted 70-10 in favor...and used a secret ballot aimed at impeding any attempt by Madrid to file criminal charges on them.

I've reported previously what the press isn't...that there's a lot more to this than meets the eye, and Muslim migration into Catalonia is a factor.

At any event, the deed is done, and Spanish PM Rajoy is going to have to take control of the situation. The Spanish parliament is almost certain to approve of using Article 55 of the Spanish Constitution to restore central control over Catalonia. Rajoy has already dismissed the members of Catalonia's regional government, including Catalan First Minister Carles Puigdemont, who could face years of prison for what he just did.

Catalonian separatists are already enforcing a kind of civil rebellion, demanding that civil servants in Catalonia refuse to cooperate with their counterparts in Spain. And even though many Catalonians want to remain part of Spain, there are enough hotheads to spark real violence as Spain attempts to restore order.

Rajoy really has two choices. He can send in the paramilitary state police, the Guardia into Catalonia to take control and simply take the fallout as he did when they went sent in to stop the illegal referendum. Or he can try and find some reasonable actors to deal with and perhaps discuss new elections and changes that could be made.

I personally doubt the second choice is a viable option, but we'll see.