Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for September, 2018

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Friday, September 28, 2018


Top Stories

Democrats Plan to Impeach Kavanaugh If He’s Confirmed, Former Hillary Aide: “He Will Not Serve for Life”
“Pro-Life” Democrat Joe Donnelly Will Vote No Against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh
Want to Know Brett Kavanaugh’s True Character? He and His Family Prayed for Christine Ford
ABC Reporter Threatens Kavanaugh: Don’t Oppose Abortion on SCOTUS or You’ll “Annihilate” Women

More Pro-Life News
Kavanaugh’s Classmate Leaves CNN Host Speechless: No Sexual Misconduct. “I Would Remember That”
Joy Behar Claims GOP Supporting “Angry Drunk” Kavanaugh to Keep Their “White Power”
Abortion Activist to Women: If You’re Upset About Brett Kavanaugh “Divorce Your Husbands”
Why Another FBI Investigation of Brett Kavanaugh Would be Pointless
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories



 


After Using Her, Feinstein Actually Threw Ford Under the Bus with Jaw-Dropping Accusation


Reported By Cillian Zeal | September 28, 2018 at

11:49am

If you had the stout constitution to sit through every moment of the Kavanaugh/Ford hearings Thursday, I’m both envious and curious. The envy stems from the fact that you could watch a room of craven politicians preen for the camera and donor-email clips and not lose interest. The curiosity stems from the fact that I get paid to do it, while most of our readership does not.

If you waited until the end, however, you got to glimpse the guiding spirit of the whole affair — or what a certain anonymous Op-Ed writer might have called the “lodestar” that directed the proceedings — in a line from Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

After being accused of leaking the letter that set this whole thing rolling, the California senator denied either she or her staff released it. Instead, she blamed the leak on a woman who was now utterly disposable to her — Christine Blasey Ford.

The exchange began after Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz questioned the leaking of the letter, which had been passed on to Sen. Feinstein.

“We also know that the Democrats on this committee engaged in a profoundly unfair process,” Cruz said.

“The ranking member had these allegations on July 30th and for sixty days, that was sixty days ago, the ranking member did not refer it to the FBI for investigation, the ranking member did not refer it to the full committee for an investigation.

“This committee could have investigated those claims in a confidential way that respected Dr. Ford’s privacy,” Cruz continued.

“Dr. Ford told this committee that the only people to whom she gave her letter, were her attorneys, the ranking member, and her member of Congress.

“And she stated that she and her attorneys did not release the letter, which means the only people who could have released the letter were either the ranking member (Sen. Feinstein) and her staff, or the Democratic member of Congress, because Dr. Ford told this committee those are the only people who had it.

“That is not a fair process,” Cruz said.

There were two options for Sen. Feinstein in this situation: a) apologize or b) deny. If she chose option b), however, there wasn’t the obligation to take path c): throw Christine Blasey Ford under an entire Greyhound station of buses.

That’s what she decided to do, however.

“Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, I did not hide Dr. Ford’s allegations. I did not leak her story, she asked me to keep it confidential and I kept if confidential as she asked,” Feinstein said in response.

“She apparently was stalked by the press, felt that what happened, she was forced to come forward, and her greatest fear was realized,”Feinstein continued.

“She’s been harassed, she’s had death threats, and she’s had to flee her home.”

After blaming the Republicans for their investigation, which she called “a partisan practice,” she continued to talk up the possible imperilment Ford was in.

“I was given some information by a woman who was very much afraid, who asked that it be held confidential, and I held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward,” Feinstein said.

She was then asked if her staff had leaked the letter by Sen. John Cornyn, another Texas Republican.

“I have not asked that question directly, but I do not believe — the answer is no,” Feinstein responded. “The staff, they did not.”

“Well, somebody leaked it if wasn’t you,” Cornyn said.

“I did not, I was asked to keep it confidential, and I’m criticized for that too!” she said.

“It’s my understanding that her story was leaked before the letter became public, and she testified that she had spoken to her friends about it and it’s most likely that that’s how the story leaked, and she had been asked by press.

“But it did not leak from us,” Feinstein concluded. “I assure you of that.”

Yes, the letter leaked because this woman, who thought she was in grave jeopardy, leaked the whole thing to the press by telling her friends, who were willing to put her in that grave jeopardy by passing it on.

It had nothing — nothing — to do with the Democrats who would have benefited most from this and would have had the motivation to pass it on.

Right.

Every single problem with this entire process can be, in some way, traced back to Dianne Feinstein. She’s the one who sat on the letter, refusing to bring it up when it should have been addressed. She’s the one whose cryptic statements helped stoke the embers of curiosity. She’s the one who would call for an FBI investigation even though the FBI added the letter to Kavanaugh’s background file and moved on. She’s the one who helped oversee the circus we witnessed Thursday.

And, once Christine Blasey Ford was finally disposable to her, she was tossed to the tigers as an encore.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Twilight Zone

Democrats say all women need to be believed, All women? Keith Ellison accusers? Kathleen Willie, Paula Jones, and Juanita Broderick. #NotYou.

Democrats in the Twilight ZonePolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Conservative Daily News cartoons here

A.F.Branco’s NEW Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here! 

take our poll – story continues below
  • Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Thursday, September 27, 2018


Top Stories

Kavanaugh Rips Democrats: “You’ve Destroyed My Family” But “I Will Not be Intimated Into Withdrawing”
Christine Ford’s Only Evidence Kavanaugh Assaulted Her are Witnesses Who All Say It Never Happened
Why Did Your Friend Say Kavanaugh Never Assaulted You? Christine Ford: “She Has Health Issues”
Brett Kavanaugh Slams “False and Uncorroborated Accusations” of Sexual Assault

More Pro-Life News
WATCH Lindsey Graham’s Epic Takedown of Democrats’ “Sham” Attempt to “Destroy” Kavanaugh
George Soros Sends $246 Million to Pro-Abortion Groups Smearing Brett Kavanaugh
Liberals Threaten Chuck Grassley Before Kavanaugh-Ford Hearing Today: “I Hope You Get Raped”
Christine Ford “Doesn’t Remember” Much, Democrats Just Play Politics, and Kavanaugh Should be Confirmed
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories



 


Ford Polygraph Results Released. Did They Just Blow a Huge Hole in Her Story?



Reported By Benjamin Arie | September 26, 2018 at

3:37pm

The narrative that liberals have hung their hopes on to stop Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is falling apart. There are now so many holes in the story, it’s incredible Democrats are still running with it.

Christine Blasey Ford is the woman who accused Kavanaugh of drunkenly groping her at a party way back when he was 17 years old, but she has been largely unable to produce solid evidence or witnesses to back up her serious claims.

One of the only points in her favor was that she took a “lie detector” polygraph test, which was widely reported by the media as supporting her story by showing that she wasn’t lying.

That is, until now. On Wednesday, the actual details from that polygraph were released to the public — and they make her already-flimsy story seem downright unbelievable.

The biggest problem with the so-called “lie detector” results are that the examiner never actually asked questions about Kavanaugh during the polygraph test.

Bizarrely, the person conducting the polygraph — who was a third-party examiner and not a law enforcement official — had Ford scribble down her nearly 40-year-old memory of the drunken party, and then asked her two vague questions.

Those two questions were: “Is any part of your statement false?” and “Did you make up any part of your statement?”

This is absolutely important to understand: Again, the polygraph test didn’t actually ask the main accuser any questions about Kavanaugh. His name was never brought up by the interviewer. Instead, Ford was simply asked if she believed her own hand-written statement.

It gets even more strange, as nowhere in that written statement does the name “Kavanaugh” appear, either.

And, to make matters worse, the statement from Ford that she was then asked about by the polygraph examiner directly contradicts different versions of the alleged event that the accuser has also given.

“Ford’s polygraph letter contradicts letter she sent to Feinstein,” pointed out Charles C. W. Cooke, the editor of The National Review.

“Polygraph letter says ‘4 boys and a couple of girls’ were at party. Letter to Feinstein says ‘me and four others,’” he continued. “No way to reconcile the two — irrespective of whether she’s counting herself in polygraph letter.”

It’s important to remember that fundamental facts such as how many people witnessed the alleged incident and what their genders were have been up in the air already. Even journalists from the left-leaning Washington Post are seemingly unable to keep the details straight.

“July 30 (to Dianne Feinstein): It was me and four other people. August 7 (to polygraph examiner): There were four boys and a couple of girls. September 16 (to Washington Post reporter): There were three boys and one girl,” The Federalist co-founder Sean Davis posted to Twitter, summarizing the inconsistencies.

Here’s another huge point: The fact that Ford “passed” the polygraph based on a statement that she later herself contradicted while telling the story to other people shows how unreliable this “evidence” truly is.

Contrary to how it’s shown in the movies, a polygraph can’t actually determine if a person is lying or not. All it can do is indicate how calm or stressed somebody is compared to a baseline. It can be used to indicate deception, but a completely delusional person can also “pass” a polygraph.

In other words, Ford may believe that something happened at a party four decades ago, and she may be confident that some version of her story is true, but the vagueness and unscientific nature of this process proves absolutely nothing. The problems with this accuser’s story don’t stop there. Buried in the release of the weak polygraph results was the fact that Ford was in Maryland — on the other side of the country from her home in California — to take that test.

But the supposed reason she couldn’t appear to testify in front of the Senate and answer questions about her accusations was that she’s afraid of confined spaces, which means she won’t travel by plane.

“The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington … which means she may need to drive across the country,” reported Politico just five days ago. “Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane.”

Yet the letter from Ford to Senator Feinstein made no mention of this difficulty, and casually mentioned that she planned to be back in California from the East Coast in less than three day’s time. It takes at least 42 hours of nonstop driving to go from Maryland, where the polygraph was administered, to Palo Alto, California, where Ford lives and teaches at a university.

This borders on being humanly impossible: Anybody who has done long road trips knows that a realistic daily limit is about ten hours of driving a day before exhaustion sets in. USA Today has recommended that people set aside between four and six days to do this arduous drive.

When none of the details add up or pass even the most basic sniff test, something is wrong.

This entire ordeal looks increasingly like a slimy and desperate effort to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation at any cost. But the truth always has a way of coming out, and it doesn’t even need a polygraph.

HERE IS THE POLYGRAPH REPORT:

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Benjamin Arie has been a political junkie since the hotly contested 2000 election. Ben settled on journalism after realizing he could get paid to rant. He cut his teeth on car accidents and house fires as a small-town reporter in Michigan before becoming a full-time political writer.


Report: Insider Grassley Emails Blow Apart Ramirez Accusations


Reported By Ben Marquis | September 26, 2018 at

1:36pm

A second accuser came forward against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh over the weekend, a former Yale classmate named Deborah Ramirez, who alleged that a drunken Kavanaugh had exposed himself in her face at a dorm party in either 1982 or 1983.

But her allegations, published by The New Yorker when several other outlets reportedly passed on the story, were admittedly vague, and nobody alleged to have been at the party where this incident was said to have occurred have any recollection of such an event.

Still, Ramirez, her attorneys and the Democrats cheering them on have demanded that a full FBI investigation be opened and Kavanaugh’s confirmation be further delayed, prompting Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, led by chairman Chuck Grassley, to once again scramble to accommodate another accuser and arrange a time for her to present her evidence to them so it can be considered by the committee, the proper venue for an investigation into allegations against a judicial nominee.

Ramirez’s attorneys had asserted through the media that committee Republicans were giving them the run-around, but a pair of tweets from CNN’s senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju would seem to indicate that Ramirez’s attorneys aren’t exactly telling the whole story, at least in regard to the level of cooperation they’ve received and reciprocated with the committee.

“Internal emails show Grassley staff asking Debbie Ramirez’s attorneys six times for evidence of her claims to New Yorker on Kavanaugh,” Raju tweeted Tuesday. “They also show Dem aide raising concerns that GOP was seeking precondition before having a call – all while Ramirez’s counsel calls for FBI probe.”

A follow-up tweet from Raju summarized, “Basically this shows GOP at a standstill with Debbie Ramirez’s attorneys, as Rs say they haven’t been given any evidence to back her claims and her side saying they’re refusing to back an FBI probe. It’s a clear sign the committee won’t get to hear Ramirez’s story before votes.”

As previously noted, the FBI has no jurisdiction over this alleged crime — if any law enforcement agency does, it would be local — and the proper venue for an investigation of allegations against a judicial nominee — including to the highest court in the land — would be the Senate Judiciary Committee, meaning the calls for an FBI investigation are a distraction and irrelevant.

The fact Ramirez’s attorneys are insistent upon an FBI investigation and have refused repeated requests to provide any relevant evidence of the alleged incident to the committee would seem to suggest that there is little, if any, additional information they can provide that wasn’t already included in the New Yorker article.

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel delved even deeper into the matter and published several informative and explanatory tweet threads on Tuesday with regard to the developing situation around Ramirez’s allegations.

A short three-tweet thread highlighted why the demands for an FBI investigation were nothing more than a delay tactic, followed a few hours later by a 12-tweet thread that exposed the back and forth emails between Grassley’s staff and Ramirez’s lead attorney, John Clune.

Strassel noted that Clune had appeared on CNN and accused Republican committee members of “game playing,” but called that particular accusation “downright false” in light of the contents of the emails.

Starting Sunday evening, just hours after the New Yorker article was published, committee staff began to request a time when Ramirez could be interviewed so the committee could investigate. The attorneys responded by insisting on an FBI investigation and attempted to schedule conference calls for details on a potential hearing.

But the committee staff repeatedly asked for the provision of any actual “evidence” — outside of the disputed and gap-ridden article — Ramirez may have prior to there being any phone calls arranging a hearing or interview. Indeed, they asked for evidence no less than six separate times over the course of two days, all of which were avoided, ignored or summarily dismissed by Ramirez’s attorneys.

“This is a serious accusation. No law enforcement would commence investigation without such statement — this is basic request, in line with any committee probe. Yet every polite request for basic on record statement is ignored, rebuffed, delayed, denied. GOP has bent backwards,” Strassel tweeted.

To conclude her thread, Strassel wrote “Finally, as you can read, claim by Clune that GOP ‘blew off scheduled call’ (CNN headline) is flat out falsehood. Majority always said testimony/evidence first. Says something that an attny resorts to such deceptions. And that CNN (would) report w/o checking.”

So there you have it. Republicans have been begging Ramirez’s attorneys for any evidence in support of her claims, to no avail. Keep these facts in mind over the next several days as Democrats and the media caterwaul about Republican “games” or accuse them of not taking Ramirez’s allegations seriously.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Writer and researcher. Constitutional conservatarian with a strong focus on protecting the Second and First Amendments.

Pompeo Smacks Acosta for Having Facts Wrong Then Asking ‘Ludicrous’ Question


Reported By Ben Marquis | September 25, 2018 at

1:46pm

The liberal media was all abuzz recently over an anonymous report published by The New York Times which alleged that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had once suggested to other administration officials — perhaps jokingly — that he wear a wire when meeting with President Donald Trump in order to gather evidence of his alleged mental instability to support invoking the 25th Amendment to remove the president from power.

The Daily Caller reported that this rather ridiculous story was brought up in the form of a question about the alleged 25th Amendment discussions posed to U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo during a news conference at the U.N. on Monday, where Trump was scheduled to address the General Assembly on Tuesday.

The reporter who brought up the story was none other than CNN’s Jim Acosta, and both Haley and Pompeo let him know how “absurd” and “ludicrous” both his question and the allegation in general were, while also calling him out for getting the basic facts and premise of his question wrong.

First addressing Haley, Acosta said, “You are the one person here who has been with this administration from the beginning,” and then mentioned the story about Rosenstein and invoking the 25th Amendment. “Were you ever involved in any of those discussions? Were you aware of any of those discussions?”

“I said yesterday on the Sunday shows that, literally, I have never once been in the White House where that conversation has happened,” Haley replied.

“I’m not aware of any cabinet members that are even talking about that. It is completely and totally absurd. No one is questioning the president at all. If anything, we’re trying to keep up the pace with him, in the fact that he has a lot he wants to accomplish very quickly and we’re going to continue to support him in the way that he does that,” she added.

Acosta then attempted to ask Pompeo a follow-up question regarding North Korea — particularly about not having details of a deal ironed out prior to high-level summit meetings — but the secretary felt the need to first address Acosta’s initial line of questioning, snarkily fact-checking him in the process.

“Two things: Fact check, I’ve been with the administration since the beginning, too. That’s relevant,” said Pompeo, who first served in the administration as CIA director prior to transferring to the State Department.

“I’ll add, no discussion with me about the 25th Amendment in any way either, so you can now report that there are two senior leaders who’ve said that your question was ludicrous,” Pompeo added.

Pompeo attempted to move on to the North Korea part of Acosta’s questions, but the reporter interrupted to apologize for forgetting Pompeo’s role as the former CIA director and to wonder why Rosenstein would be talking behind the scenes about the 25th Amendment, if it were so “ludicrous.”

“I find the question ludicrous,” Pompeo replied. “I’ve been involved, I’ve been at the center of this administration, along with lots of other folks, from virtually Day One — I think it was actually day three or four — I’ve never heard anyone talk about it, whisper about it, joke about it in any way.”

“I’ve been in a lot of meetings with a lot of senior officials from this government,” he added, prior to transitioning to Acosta’s question about North Korea.

In that regard, Pompeo noted that “we went at this the other way for decades,” to no avail, and said “we’re coming at this from a different direction” by bringing together the two most senior leaders from North Korea and the U.S. in an effort to make actual progress toward denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula.

Acosta, like many other “journalists” in the liberal media, accepted the report from The Times about Rosenstein’s wearing a wire and invoking the 25th Amendment against Trump as if it were the gospel truth, largely because it fit into their preconceived notions and narratives about the mental state of the president.

But Acosta’s “ludicrous” focus on a story that may not even be true, at the expense of more focus on far more pressing international matters, serves to fit snugly with the growing perception that the “fake news” media care only about hurting, smearing and ultimately getting rid of Trump. That’s why it was so it was nice to see Haley and Pompeo verbally smack him back into place.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Writer and researcher. Constitutional conservatarian with a strong focus on protecting the Second and First Amendments.

Grassley Borrows Trick from Dems, Unveils Game-Changer Hours Before Ford Appears


Reported By Joe Saunders | September 27, 2018 at

6:59am

Timing is everything.

On the eve of pivotal testimony scheduled to take place Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee that could determine whether Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh rises to the high court, committee Republicans released word of a development that throws a new twist on the already tortured proceedings.

And Democrats are screaming that their own trick has been pulled against them.

According to Fox News, Judiciary Committee Republicans released a statement late Wednesday revealing that they had spoken with two men who have said it was possible that they were actually responsible for an alleged sexual assault in the early 1980s that Palo Alto University Professor Christine Blasey Ford is blaming on Kavanaugh.

According to Fox, the statement revealed that the GOP had been in contact with one of the men since Monday. The Republicans, led by committee Chairman Charles Grassley, obviously opted not to share the information with Democratic colleagues.

In a statement to NBC News, an unnamed Democratic congressional aide was outraged.

“Twelve hours before the hearing they suggest two anonymous men claimed to have assaulted her,” the aide stated. “Democrats were never informed of these assertions or interviews, in violation of Senate rules.”

Seriously? This is the same party that kept quiet about a letter received by California Sen. Dianne Feinstein in July but didn’t see fit to reveal its existence to the country until after Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing had ended.

Sen Orrin Hatch, a Utah Republican, pointed out the hypocrisy in a Twitter post.

“Some might find it exceedingly difficult to imagine Judiciary Committee Democrats expressing this complaint with straight faces,” he wrote.

The bombshell news from Wednesday night was the latest development in a tumultuous week that started when The New Yorker published an account of a second accuser against Kavanaugh in a barely believable piece that was essentially built on a hazy memory, rumor — and Democratic probes.

Then, publicity-hungry attorney Michael Avenatti went public on Wednesday with a tale of a client with a bizarre story that Kavanaugh was part of a gang rape ring in the early 1980s (Avenatti has publicly mused about mounting a 2020 presidential campaign, so Democrat politics are clearly a factor).

Both accusations — like Ford’s — were sprung out of the blue.

Now, Judiciary Committee Republicans have officially released word that there are yet more stories out there that could put the whole thing to rest.

As the New York Post reported:

“On Monday, the timeline recounts GOP staff members interviewing ‘a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982.’

“The ‘encounter’ refers to an episode in which Ford claims that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in a bedroom at a Maryland house party.

“They had a follow-up interview with that man, and he provided more detail about the assault.

“Then on Wednesday, the committee staff said they spoke with a second man who said he assaulted Ford in 1982.”

No credible conservative has denied it was possible that Ford actually went through some kind of ordeal in the early 1980s. Kavanaugh himself said as much during an interview with Fox News on Monday.

“I am not questioning and have not questioned that perhaps Dr. Ford at some point in her life was sexually assaulted by someone in some place,” he said, according to a transcript from USA Today. “But what I know is I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone in high school or at any time in my life.”

Obviously, it’s too soon to tell where Wednesday’s developments will lead, but it’s possible that they could eventually show Ford’s story was correct to the extent that she actually did go through an ordeal at the hands of a male. It’s also possible they will show, even to Democrats and rabid liberals, that Kavanaugh is innocent of Ford’s accusations.

But considering how they came out, and the Democrats’ hypocritical reaction to them, they prove one thing for sure:

Timing is everything.

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “No More Mr. White Guy”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

“They know the optics of 11 white men questioning Dr. Ford … will be so harmful and so damaging to the GOP.” — Areva Martin, CNN legal analyst

“They understand that you have all of these white men who would be questioning this woman … the optics of it would look terrible.” — Gloria Borger, CNN chief political analyst

“Women across this nation should be outraged at what these white men senators are doing to this woman.” — Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif.

“There has been some discussion of the GOP senators who happened to all be … white men.” — Jim Sciutto, CNN correspondent

“What troubles me is now there are … they’re all white men.” — Jennifer Granholm, former governor of Michigan, on CNN

“You’re seeing on display a metaphor for what this party is, which is basically ignorant white men.” — “Morning Joe” contributor Donny Deutsch

“All these white men … stumbling all over themselves asking her, you know, aggressive and obnoxious questions.” — Asha Rangappa, CNN analyst

“What are those — that collection of old white men going to do?” — Cynthia Alksne, MSNBC contributor

“If she testifies in front of the Judiciary Committee, where 11 members are white men …” — Susan Del Percio, Republican political strategist, on MSNBC

“Once again, it will be all white men on the Republican side of the Judiciary Committee.” — CNN anchor Poppy Harlow

“The optics for Republicans are going to be really tricky … You’ve got all white men on the Republican side here …” — Julie Pace, Washington bureau chief for The Associated Press, on CNN

The Republicans, it happens to be 11 white men still on that side.” — CNN host John Berman

“The Republicans, it is 11 white men, talk to me about how you think the tone inside this hearing on Monday will be perceived?” — Berman, a few minutes later

“On the Republican side, all 11 are white men.” — Berman, again, same show, several minutes later

“What hasn’t changed is the number of white men questioning, certainly, on the Republican side.” — Dana Bash, CNN chief political correspondent

“The Republican side on the Senate Judiciary Committee is all white men …” — Irin Carmon, senior correspondent for New York Magazine, on MSNBC

“Only this crowd of clueless old white guys …” — The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin on Twitter

Let me begin by saying these commentators are making a brilliant and totally ORIGINAL point, the plain truth of which is outshone only by, as I’ve said, its sheer no-one-has-ever-made-that-observation-before-ness.

As the Supreme Court confirmation hearing resumes this week for Judge Brett Kavanaugh, it’s clear that the Republicans are simply too white to get the job done. I suggest the Republicans sign up some outside help, the way baseball teams make late-season acquisitions of pitchers and designated hitters for the playoffs.

Some suggestions (note: not all of the following individuals are Republicans, but none has any partisan profile that I am aware of):

1. The Rev. Al Sharpton (Tawana Brawley affair demonstrates that he believes women).

2. Bill Cosby (extensive, up-close experience with victims of sexual assault, albeit from a rapist’s, rather than a “rapee’s” perspective).

3. Keith Ellison (likely good rapport with committee Democrats; has own transportation to Capitol Building).

4. Matias Reyes (would undoubtedly throw himself into committee’s work as pleasant change of pace from prison).

5. Sorry, I don’t remember the gentleman’s name, but that guy who kidnapped and raped the Columbia student, poured bleach on her and Krazy-Glued her lips shut. (This one is sort of a “wild card,” I admit; he could be absolutely great, or, judging by his history of poor impulse control, he could be too emotionally unstable to handle the committee’s important work; definitely a Person of Color, though; that I’m sure about.)

6. Alton Maddox, attorney for black youth hired by Jewish landlord to slash a model’s face because she refused to date him. Maddox pioneered novel “she’s a manipulative slut who had it coming” defense. (Close relationship with the Rev. Sharpton a definite plus.)

7. Lakireddy Bali Reddy, entrepreneurial Indian immigrant with strong experience with underage rape victims, having brought little girls to the U.S. purchased from their poverty-stricken parents in India as his private sex slaves. (His presence may bring Asha Rangappa on board.)

Seriously, if feminists want to make the point that only female senators have any business conducting these hearings, they have a logical point, albeit an idiotic one.

Of course, the last time feminists bet big on women being certain allies in the fight against misogyny, they were the women of the O.J. jury.

Still, I get the logic of demanding women interlocutors.

But what is the thinking behind snickering at “white men” judging an accusation of sexual assault? Chuck Grassley is a big rapist?

You can be for rape or against it — I happen to be against it — but the idea that alleged sexual assault survivors need the loving care of black, Indian or Hispanic men to judge their stories flies in the face of crime statistics from around the globe.

In the history of the world, there has never been a more pacific, less rapey creature than the white male of Western European descent.

I realize it gives The New York Times’ editorial board (recent acquisition: Sarah Jeong) warm feelings every time someone throws in the word “white” as an intensifier, denoting extra hatefulness, but really, guys, it’s getting old.

Can we please, for the love of God, drop the painfully trite, mind-numbing cliche about “white men,” as if somehow their whiteness makes evil even eviler?


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Manifest Destiny

According to most people on the left, all white males are predators and all women are victims.

All Males are PredatorsPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order

take our poll – story continues below
  • Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Wednesday, September 26, 2018


Top Stories
Woman Claims Brett Kavanaugh Attended Teen Gang Rape Parties, But Her Story Has Massive Holes
Kavanaugh Accuser Deborah Ramirez Refuses to Testify Before Senate Committee
If Julie Swetnik’s Kavanaugh Claims are True, She Attended Rape Parties and Never Reported the Rapes
Kavanaugh Attorney on Julie Swetnick: “He’s Never Met Her.” Witnesses Say Swetnick’s Claims are False

More Pro-Life News
Poll Finds More Americans Believe Ford Than Kavanaugh Despite No Evidence, No Witnesses
Cecile Richards, Who Covered Up Statutory Rape at Planned Parenthood, Defends Christine Ford
Pro-Abortion Groups Spending Millions on Election, Pro-Life Organizations Work to Respond
FDA is Spending Over $100 Million on Research Using Body Parts From Aborted Babies
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories



 


Dobson warns of socialist takeover if Christians don’t vote


Reported by Michael F. Haverluck (OneNewsNow.com)

| Monday, September 24, 2018

Dr. James DobsonDr. James Dobson warned Christians that if they neglect their duty to vote in November’s midterm elections, they will likely lose their freedom – giving way to a socialist takeover sweeping America.

“Socialism would replace freedom and free enterprise,” Dobson alerted readers of his October monthly newsletter, according to WND. “God help us if you and I fail to fulfill our moral responsibility.”

Vote, or else …

The founder of Family Talk radio and the James Dobson Family Institute (JDFI) made it clear that there will be dire consequences if Christians sit out November’s election – stressing that it carries much more weight than any other midterm in United States history.

“Everything is on the line, and a wholly new interpretation of the Constitution looms before us,” insisted Dobson, who also founded Focus on the Family decades ago.

Having advised five presidents and received his Ph.D. in Child Development from the University of Southern California (USC) – where he served as an associate clinical professor of pediatrics for 14 years – Dobson’s counsel has been held in high esteem throughout America for many decades, and his latest piece of advice focuses on one topic that he said “rises to the top” over all others.

“Powerful social movements and passions are ‘blowing in the wind,’ and most of them have dangerous implications for the institution of the family, religious liberty, our children and unborn babies – and the country at large,” the evangelical leader wrote his constituents.

Dobson impressed that America’s direction over the next few decades will be determined by the results of November’s midterm election.

“Christians must go to the polls next month and let their voices be heard!” the pro-family activist exclaimed.

The host of the Dr. James Dobson’s Family Talk radio program – speaking with the authority of his 17 honorary degrees, 17 years’ experience on the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles’ attending staff, and as a member of the National Radio Hall of Fame – asked his supporters if they will take action steps in order to continue living out their faith in America.

“What will you do about it?” Dobson questioned his readers. “Will you sit out this election? God help us if you and I fail to fulfill our moral responsibility … Everything is on the line.”

Dobson then referred to an election win 150 years ago by one of the most devout Christian presidents in U.S. history.

“Dobson notes Abraham Lincoln’s presidential election victory for a second term, which has been described as the most important presidential election ever,” WND reported. “The outcomes of many races likely will hinge who decides to vote, he argues.”

The author of dozens of books – such as The New Dare to Discipline, Love for a Lifetime, Life on the Edge, Love Must Be Tough, The New Strong-Willed Child, Bringing up Boys and Bringing Up Girls – explained why this election is probably the most significant midterm since America’s founding.

“Destiny rides before us again,” Dobson warned. “As Barack Obama said after winning a second presidential term, ‘Elections have consequences.’ Indeed, they do. We – the voters – have it within our power to protect our Constitution, preserve our democratic system of government, and secure the blessings of liberty for us and our posterity.”

He implored Christians to do their duty by taking “30 minutes to go to the polls on November 6” after studying out the issues and candidates on the ballot, while urging them to get those around them involved in political process at their local polling precincts.

“Call or email every friend in your church or neighborhood and urge them to vote!”Dobson exclaimed. “Drive them to the polling place in your car if they don’t have transportation or don’t know where it is located. Ask your pastor to set up registration tables in the vestibule of your church. Talk to your family members. Do everything you can to influence this election. You can be sure that those whose views you oppose will be working just as hard. If you are AWOL in this battle, you and everything you stand for might slip away.”

Warning from the past

The evangelical leader went on to point out that America is “plagued by hatred” before referring back to Lincoln and begging for mercy for Christians suffering the consequences of the midterm results.

“In that tragic environment, I will point you to the words of Abraham Lincoln – spoken on the occasion of his second Inaugural address, March 2, 1864,” Dobson continued. “The war had 13 months to go, and the North would eventually achieve victory. Lincoln had said years earlier that, ‘This government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free.’ It would take a terrible Civil War to resolve that conflict. During that struggle, 600,000 of his countrymen would die, both from the North and South.”

He then cited Lincoln’s call for compassion that he would like to be relayed onto Americans today.

“With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan – to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations,” Dobson quoted the 16th president.

(Go to https://www.bartleby.com/124/pres32.html)

The Christian based in Colorado ended with a call to believers.

“Dobson adds [that Christians must] spread the word [and] get the message to columnists, websites, pastors, newspapers, magazines and more,” WND’s Bob Unruh noted.

There is no time to lose,” Dobson warned.

Protect your faith and family

Last month, Dobson sent out a similar warning in anticipation of the approaching midterms.

“Everything that matters – everything of value – sits on the foundation of the family,” Dobson told The Todd Starnes Show in August. “The institution of marriage and parenthood underlies everything that is good about what we believe in, yet since the ‘70s – and certainly up to now – there is this effort to redefine marriage and to undermine what it means to raise children.”

Point blank, he warned that socialism will swarm and destroy America.

“[The attack] came from liberal ideology [and although it can be traced as far back as the ‘70s and ‘80s, the left-wing movement has] reached a fever pitch that has brought hatred for everything that made this country great,” Dobson added. “I am deeply concerned about it.”

He then gave an example of how socialist principles in America’s bureaucracy are getting out of hand.

“In a real example of undermining ‘what it means to raise children,’ Dobson related how children in a California school district – aged seven to 10 – were subjected to a questionnaire that asked them numerous questions about their sexuality, including if they ever ‘think about touching someone else’s private parts,’” ToddStarnes.com’s Jeremiah Poff noted. “Dobson said that the parents of the children sued in both federal and district court, but lost the initial ruling – as well as an appeal to the Ninth Circuit.”

Dobson was not sure if God-given parental rights ultimately lost or prevailed in this situation, but regardless of the outcome, he says that such instances should serve as a dire warning to parents in America of any background.

“I don’t know what has happened since then, and I hope that’s going to go to the Supreme Court if it hasn’t already,” the Christian doctor expressed to Fox Radio’s Starnes on his show. “But it illustrates the fact that the school districts want to gain control.”

Circling back to the upcoming election, Dobson revealed the shocking figure that less than 50 percent of Christians turn up at the ballot box to vote in elections.

“Many of us agree completely with what you and I are talking about, but they’re too lazy – or they think politics is dirty, or who knows what their motivation is,” Dobson lamented to Starnes.

The pro-family and pro-life leader also shared that he was shocked about how a growing number of Americans view socialism in a positive light.

“[Socialism’s economic model has] never worked anywhere in history, [and is a] disaster,” Dobson concluded. “You can’t have a socialistic country and have a respect for the Constitution and the rule of law because we’re given rights in there that socialistic leaders will undermine. If you take out the Constitution, there’s not a whole lot left. That takes my breath away that there are people out there that are really serious about making this a socialistic country.”

Echoing a past warning

Earlier in the summer, Dobson also warned about the dire consequences of elections.

The results of Christians not getting to the polls in the 2012 election led former President Barack Obama to his second term, when he demanded that Christian ministries pay for employees’ abortions, which spurred Dobson to defy the president by saying, “Come and get me – I will not yield to your wicked regulations.”

In his August newsletter, Dobson blasted Americans’ negligence to vote.

“More than half of Americans – including the majority of Christians – don’t even bother to vote,” Dobson wrote, according to a July WND report posted on TLDM.org. “Shame on them all! Don’t they know that tyranny for us and our children is only one generation – or even one election – away?”

He passionately called Christians to vote and set up biblically minded leaders who will allow their families to live according to their faith in God.

“We must vote, vote, vote to elect leaders who will defend what has been purchased with the blood of patriots who died to protect our liberty,” the faith leader continued. “We owe it to the memory of their sacrifice to preserve what they did for us. We must not fritter it away on our watch!”

Dobson went on to cite the famous “fundamental change” slogan that was touted by Obama – using it as a dire warning to Christians.

“If any politician tells you he will ‘fundamentally change’ this nation, what he means is that he plans to undermine our Constitution and take away our heritage of freedom,” Dobson explained. “Run from him or her!”

This alert was dispatched this summer over fears of the Democratic Party’s threat to gain control on Capitol Hill and over its ongoing efforts to impeach the commander-in-chief – threats that have not abated to this date with just over a month left until November’s midterms.

“The exhortation comes as Democrats seek to recapture the majority in the U.S. House – where they already have laid plans to impeach President Trump,” WND reported at the time.

Army Col. Awarded $8.4 Million After Woman’s Sex Assault Allegations Blown Apart


Reported By Jack Davis | September 24, 2018 at

6:01pm

As official Washington is captivated by the drama surrounding decades-old allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a former soldier whose career was cut short by similar allegations is trying to get out a message that accusations are not the same as the truth.

Back in 2013, Wil Riggins was an Army colonel who had been nominated for general, when Susan Shannon wrote on her blog that Riggins raped her at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point back in 1986, according to the Daily Mail.

Four years later, after Riggins had been denied his promotion based on the claim, a jury heard Riggins’ suit against Shannon and awarded him $8.4 million in damages, according to The Washington Post.

With that as the background, Riggins has been using his Twitter account to remind those rushing to judgment in the Kavanaugh case that regardless of what an accuser says, the truth may be very different.

Most of his posts are retweets of others who cite his case as a cautionary tale against believing any accuser at face value.

Riggins said that even though he was exonerated, he still suffered irreparable damage from the false claim.

This journey we’ve been on the last four years,” Riggins said, “it’s been a nightmare. … The large dollar amount is meaningless. All I was looking for was the opportunity to be vindicated, to set the record straight, to take every action to get my reputation back to where it was before the 15th of July, when she published that false accusation.”

Shannon entered West Point in 1983 and resigned in 1986. She never mentioned being raped until 2013. In a blog post, she named Riggins as her rapist and said she was drunk at the time. Despite Riggins’s denials, she has maintained that she told the truth in her blog post.

“Frankly the day I started saying his name was the day I started blaming him instead of myself,” Shannon told WJLA.

Riggins admitted he and Shannon had a sexual encounter in 1983, but had no relationship after that time. Shannon called that “a compete fabrication”  and said Riggins “smugly admitted he did indeed rape” her.

However, after the verdict she did take down the posts she made about Riggins.

Stephen Horvath, Riggins’s lawyer said Riggins was able to win because,  “Everything in that blog post was provably false and could not have happened.”

Riggins said that his effort to fight back was aimed at sending a message to those who make false accusations.

“This will discourage other false accusations but would not discourage legitimate accusations of sexual assault,” he said.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jack Davis is a free-lance writer. Writing as “Rusty” Davis, he is a Spur Award-nominated writer whose first two novels, “Wyoming Showdown” and “Black Wind Pass” were published by Five Star Publishing.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Nose Blind

Attorney General seems to be nose blind when it comes to the corruption in the DOJ, the deep state, and Hillary’s crimes and corruption.

Attorney General Sessions DOJPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco cartoons at Constitution.com here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo

From My Email INBox


California ruling cuts against barbers, hair stylists 

 The Las Vegas Review-Journal

Government continues to find ways to make it harder for people to work for themselves — for their own good, of course.

The latest example comes from California.  Its Supreme Court has saved its residents from the scourge of permitting barbers, hairstylists, tattoo artists and taxi drivers to work for themselves.

Consider a barbershop.  Traditionally, barbers aren’t employees of the establishment.  They rent a chair and then set their own hours, working as independent contractors.  They are entrepreneurs.  This gives them the flexibility to work as much or as little as they want.  It’s easier for the barbershop owner too.  The owner receives an income stream without having to increase overhead or manage employees.

No more.  The California Supreme Court ruled this year that the work of an independent contractor must “fall outside the usual course” of the business’ activities.  So hiring someone as an independent contractor to clean a barbershop is OK.  It is now illegal, however, for a barbershop owner to hire a barber in the same way.

Last week, all seven barbers at Bottle & Barlow, a combination barbershop and bar, quit rather than be forced to work as traditional employees.

“They have really gutted us,” Anthony Giannotti, Bottle & Barlow’s owner, told the Sacramento Bee.  “You can’t hire and structure things the way (barbershops) have for decades.  They’ve just destroyed the pay structure for the barber and cosmetology industry.”

This is just one example of the far-reaching implications of this decision.  Another is that labor lawyers will start circling companies like sharks, trying to find businesses to sue for not following California’s numerous mandates on employees. Ironically, large employers that can afford large compliance departments are best suited to adjust to this.  It’s small employers that will have the hardest time surviving.

California law requires that companies provide overtime pay and meal and rest breaks.  You may think those things are desirable for all workers.  But they come with trade-offs. If you’re an employee, the company sets your schedule and tells you how to do your job.  Overtime pay is great, but many companies cap employee hours to avoid paying it. Some independent contractors can work as many hours as they want.  They also have the freedom not to show up when don’t feel like working.

“Conspicuously absent from the test (determining who can be classified as an independent contractor) is worker preference,” noted Amy Lessa and Megan Walker with the Fisher Phillips law firm.

That’s the significant problem with the nanny state.  Some people prefer a 9-to-5 job with set breaks.  Some people prefer the freedom that comes with being their own boss as an independent contractor.  Individuals, not government, should decide which category they join.

Huge: Letter Shows Ford Wanted To Stop Sex Crime Prosecutor from Investigating


Reported By Cillian Zeal | September 25, 2018 at

6:12am

A letter from one of Christine Blasey Ford’s attorneys indicates that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser wanted to dissuade the Senate Judiciary Committee from using an experienced sex-crimes prosecutor, according to a tweet from NBC’s Frank Thorp V.

The letter from attorney Michael Bromwich, as Thorp notes, seems to indicate Ford’s testimony at the hearing “does not appear to be a done deal.”

It addresses several issues, including the fact that Kavanaugh’s background check from the White House won’t be provided and comments made by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that Ford’s account was part of a “smear campaign.”

However, perhaps the most puzzling detail was the fact that Ford’s team objected to an experienced sex crimes prosecutor being brought on in the case.

“In our view, the hiring of an unnamed ‘experienced sex crimes prosecutor’ as (Senate Judiciary Committee Chief Counsel for Nominations Michael) Davis described in his email, is contrary to the Majority’s repeated emphasis on the need for the Senate and this Committee’s members to fulfill their constitutional obligations,” Bromwich’s letter read.

“It is also inconsistent with your stated wish to avoid a ‘circus,’ as well as Dr. Blasey Ford’s repeated requests through counsel that senators conduct the questioning.”

“This is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate,” Bromwich said.

This is a curious development indeed. A prosecutor experienced in sex crimes would be utilized questioning not just Ford but Kavanaugh as well. Having a figure like that investigating through questioning at the scheduled hearing could be key. It would be someone who would know how to get down to the truth of the matter.

Yet, Bromwich contends that the hearing “is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate.”

Except that his client is accusing a Supreme Court nominee of a sex crime. That’s kind of a pertinent detail here.

Getting to the truth of Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations — if it can indeed be done — is vital, as it’s vital in the case of any sexual assault. The Kavanaugh case has a different dimension, however, in that it could literally decide whether or not a federal judge is morally fit to receive a lifetime appointment to the nation’s highest bench.

If Brett Kavanaugh did what Ford is alleging, he shouldn’t be on the Supreme Court. That’s not debatable. However, she hasn’t produced a single piece of evidence or a single witness who’s able to back up her claims. That’s problematic, to say the least.

Even more problematic is the fact that Bromwich doesn’t feel that this should be treated anything like “a criminal trial” where the accused in the United States gets the benefit of the presumption of innocence. One assumes that his client shares his view on this. This means, essentially, she wants the hearing to be as uncritical as possible.

The import of her appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee — the mere fact that a Supreme Court nomination and the reputation of a public figure hangs in the balance — apparently doesn’t register with either Ford or her team.

If you’re alleging a brutal rape attempt involving a man who’s poised to be one of the most powerful individuals in America, why would you not want an experienced sex crimes prosecutor investigating? One can think of several reasons, none of which are particularly complimentary to Christine Blasey Ford.

There is nothing in bringing in a prosecutor that gets in the way of the “fair and credible process” Bromwich seems so concerned about in the letter. On the contrary, it’s the only way we can ensure what happens before the Senate Judiciary Committee will be either fair or credible.

The fact that the Ford team is fighting this should be seen as a highly telling move.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Writing under a pseudonym, Cillian Zeal is a conservative writer who is currently living abroad in a country that doesn’t value free speech and exercising it would put him in danger.

Reports: Kavanaugh Has Found 1982 Calendar, Detailed Entries Help Clear His Name


Reported By Benjamin Arie | September 23, 2018 at

5:26pm

The last-minute attempt to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation as the next Supreme Court justice has just hit a serious snag. Facing damaging but almost completely unsubstantiated claims that he acted improperly with a girl back when he was a teenager, the conservative nominee has dug into his personal archives to defend himself.

Up until now, the vague accusations made by Christine Blasey Ford had only resulted in a “he said, she said” stalemate. Liberals insisted that Blasey Ford’s story of a bad encounter at a drunken party be believed, while conservatives have pointed out that the nearly 40-year-old claim is impossible to verify.

Finally, Kavanaugh has presented tangible evidence that the accusation doesn’t hold up.

On Sunday, The New York Times reported that the judge has found old calendars from the period when the unproven groping allegedly took place — and they appear to support his claim that the incident didn’t happen.

“Kavanaugh has calendars from the summer of 1982 that he plans to hand over to the Senate Judiciary Committee that do not show a party consistent with the description of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford,” explained The Times.

“The calendar pages from June, July and August 1982, which were examined by The New York Times, show that Judge Kavanaugh was out of town much of the summer at the beach or away with his parents,” the newspaper continued.

“When he was at home, the calendars list his basketball games, movie outings, football workouts and college interviews. A few parties are mentioned but include names of friends other than those identified by Dr. Blasey.”

Here is perhaps the biggest nail in the coffin for Blasey Ford’s already-flimsy story: The calendar contains entries for parties, but none of the names included in those entries match the names Blasey Ford listed.

That any names were included in his calendar entries for parties shows Kavanaugh was remarkably thorough about recording his social schedule.

That fact is yet another point in favor of Kavanaugh and against his accuser. The woman behind the claim has admitted that she can recall almost nothing specific about the incident, including its location, time, or other people involved.

The few names brought up by Blasey Ford have refuted her story and indicated that they don’t remember a party with both her and Kavanaugh.

“Mr. (Mike) Judge has told the Judiciary Committee that he remembered no such incident and had never seen Judge Kavanaugh behave in such a way,” explained The Times, referring to one alleged witness of the drunken party.

“The only other two people identified as being in the house at the time, but not the bedroom, have also said in recent days that they did not recall the incident. Patrick J. Smyth said he did not remember such a party or see any improper conduct by Judge Kavanaugh.”

“Leland Keyser, a former classmate of Dr. Blasey’s at Holton-Arms, said she did not know Judge Kavanugh or remember being at a party with him,” stated the newspaper.

Accusations of this type are of course serious, and conducting due diligence is part of the vetting process for anyone nominated for a powerful position. There comes a point, however, when weak and impossible to prove allegations need to be put to rest. Blasey Ford may genuinely believe that something like the incident she described did happen; she may be telling the truth about a teenage trauma affecting her for decades, too.

The problem is that there is zero evidence it was Brett Kavanaugh who did what she claims, and no way short of a time machine to prove her accusations.

By all accounts, Kavanaugh has been a responsible and thoughtful family man and legal scholar for the entirety of his adult life — and that record needs to stand far above one person’s increasingly shaky claim.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly claimed that Judge Kavanaugh’s 1982 calendar does not contain any names identified in Christine Blasey Ford’s claim against Kavanaugh. The calendar does reference Mike Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh and, according to Blasey Ford, a witness to the alleged assault. Judge’s name, however, is not mentioned in reference to any parties, while other names are — none of which have been identified by Blasey Ford. We apologize for the mistake.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Benjamin Arie has been a political junkie since the hotly contested 2000 election. Ben settled on journalism after realizing he could get paid to rant. He cut his teeth on car accidents and house fires as a small-town reporter in Michigan before becoming a full-time political writer.

DOJ Is Assessing Employee Featured in Undercover ‘Deep State’ Video Released by Project Veritas


Reported By Jared Harris | September 20, 2018 at

12:30pm

The conservative activist group Project Veritas is creating shockwaves around the nation’s capital with its latest undercover videos. On the videos, federal employees boasted about slowing President Donald Trump’s agenda with resistance from inside the government — effectively acting as the kind of “deep state” President Donald Trump’s supporters are so suspicious of.

A woman identified as Department of Justice paralegal Allison Hrabar was one of those caught on the video, which is titled “Deep State Unmasked.” She was one of the leaders of the group that harassed Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen in a D.C.-area Mexican restaurant in June, according to the Project Veritas video.

On camera, she speaks of like-minded co-workers who talk of “how we can resist from the inside.”

https://www.projectveritas.com/video/deep-state-unmasked-doj-official-resists-from-inside-cant-get-fired-leaks-at-hhs/fvp/

And she’s apparently not afraid of any repercussions.

“Like, what’s kind of lucky is at the DOJ, we can’t really get fired,” she said in the Project Veritas video.

The DOJ said in a statement that the video’s contents were “deeply concerning.”

The department is looking into the videos over a policy that “prohibits misuse of government resources to advance personal interests.” Possibly to highlight the seriousness of the situation, the matter was also referred to the department’s Office of the Inspector General.

Project Veritas, the source of the sting videos, has a long history of undercover investigations. One of its projects shook up The New York Times so much an editor got fired.

Several of the Deep State videos have been released this week. Some have even been picked and played on FOX News.

On video, the employee talks about slowing down the gears of government and destroying capitalists. He was identified by Project Veritas as “Natarajan Subramanian … a government auditor for the GAO and a member of the Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America.”

He claimed there are a “fair number” of Democratic Socialists are federal employees.

The Democratic Socialists of America are hostile of their perceived version of capitalism.

In the organization’s constitution, it pledges to firmly “reject an economic order based on private profit, alienated labor, gross inequalities of wealth and power, discrimination based on race, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression, disability status, age, religion, and national origin, and brutality and violence in defense of the status quo.”

The alleged “deep state” operatives exposed in the Project Veritas videos show a disregard for the rule of law, and are using their taxpayer-funded positions to push a dangerous socialist agenda.

We can only hope more investigations are to follow.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jared is a husband, dad, and aspiring farmer. He was an infantryman in the Arkansas and Georgia National Guard. If he’s not with his wife and son, then he’s either shooting guns or working on his motorcycle.

Ann Coulter Letter: “Haven Monahan To Testify In Kavanaugh Hearings”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2018/09/19/haven-monahan-to-testify-in-kavanaugh-hearings/

If this is what the left pulls against a sweet nerd like Brett Kavanaugh, I can’t wait for the hearings to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg!

Observers of the passing scene were not surprised that the same lunatics screaming that Kavanaugh is going to impose “The Handmaid’s Tale” on America also announced that he had committed attempted rape and murder in high school.

His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, remembered this in a therapy session 30-plus years after the alleged incident — coincidentally, at the exact moment Kavanaugh was all over the news as Mitt Romney’s likely Supreme Court nominee.

She doesn’t remember the time or place of the assault, told no one for 30 years and has no evidence or corroboration. Maybe the party was at Haven Monahan’s house. (He was the instigator of the fraternity gang rape reported in Rolling Stone, which never happened and — luckily for Monahan! — who doesn’t exist. Otherwise, he was in BIG trouble.)

But the psychology professor at Palo Alto University — who recently signed a letter denouncing President Trump’s border policies (thank you, Attorney General Sessions!) — says a teenaged Kavanaugh threw her on a bed at a party and began groping her, trying to take off her clothes.

Here’s the kicker: “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”

We went pretty quickly from drunken teenaged groping to manslaughter.

This is always my favorite part of any feminist claim: The leap from “he used a bad word” to “HE ADMITTED COMMITTING SEXUAL ASSAULT!” (That’s what the media lyingly said about Trump’s remarks on the “Access Hollywood” tape, as detailed in Chapter Two of my new book, “Resistance Is Futile! How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind.”)

Kavanaugh emphatically denies that anything of the sort ever occurred at any party, but feminists are already off on, Maybe he’s one of these sick people who rapes corpses!

It’s also great how the media act as if attempted rape was perfectly acceptable in America, until we were educated by the #MeToo movement. No, the breakthrough of the #MeToo movement was that it was finally acceptable to call out liberal sexual predators.

Until recently, it was OK to rape and even murder girls — but only if your name was “Clinton,” “Kennedy” or “Weinstein,” et al. Then Hillary lost, and Teddy was dead, so there was no point in ferociously protecting the Democrats’ rapists any longer.

Thus, for example, The New York Times defended Blasey Ford’s failure to tell anyone about the alleged groping/manslaughter for 30 years, claiming things were different in the 1980s. “More likely,” the editorial explained, “a girl in the early 1980s would have blamed herself than report it.”

As proof, the Times linked to a Washington Post article citing the Times’ own treatment of a Kennedy victim. After Patricia Bowman accused William Kennedy Smith of rape, the Times “reported on her speeding tickets, partying in adulthood and even dredged up an unnamed woman who claimed Bowman showed a ‘little wild streak’ in high school.”

So the Times’ defense of the decades-old, therapy-induced recovered memory by Kavanaugh’s accuser is, Look at the way we abused a Kennedy accuser! We were horrible to her! OK, New York Times, you win.

Most hilarious is the media’s insistence that Kavanaugh’s accuser is putting herself at enormous risk by coming forward. Oh, cut the crap, media. In terms of press coverage, no one alive would prefer to be Kavanaugh than his accuser. Everywhere you look, someone is praising the “survivor” for her stunning, unprecedented courage as she viciously tries to derail Kavanaugh’s nomination.

True, accuse a Clinton, a Kennedy or a Weinstein (et al), and you’ll be treated like dirt. You’ll get the Patricia Bowman treatment. Paula Jones was smeared and laughed at for three years, until Stuart Taylor’s 15,000-word article defending her in the American Lawyer. (That took courage.)

But accuse the elitist white male Duke lacrosse team, Haven Monahan or a Republican nominee to the Supreme Court, and you can upgrade to a much better university and spend the rest of your life being showered with awards, fellowships, honorary degrees, media appearances and so on. Look up “Anita Hill.”

And, boy, was Hill right about Clarence Thomas! (Honorary white male.) He got confirmed, and now he issues conservative rulings. We warned you.

Following days of the entire media demanding that the victim (by which they mean the accuser) be allowed to tell her story, it turns out she’d really rather not. Blasey Ford spent an eternity deciding whether to accept the Senate’s invitation to testify, finally announcing on Tuesday night that she would appear only after a thorough and complete FBI investigation.

Tell me what an “investigation” of this matter involves. Do agents go door to door in Montgomery County, Maryland, asking everyone who went to high school in the early 1980s if they remember going to some kind of party?

Second: IT’S NEVER THE VICTIM WHO NEEDS AN INVESTIGATION! She knows what her story is. It’s the accused who wants an investigation to know exactly what he’s accused of.

Blasey Ford already knows what she thinks happened. I’ve been waiting my whole life to unburden myself about that night in 1981, 1982 or 1983 in a dark bedroom. Well, I’m not sure if it was a bedroom, but it definitely had a door. And a ceiling and a floor-ish kind of thing. And walls — I know I was surrounded by walls. I remember thinking, “OH MY GOSH, I’M IN A CLOSED SPACE!” On one hand, walls keep me warm, but that’s also why I’ve never enjoyed sex.

The only reason for the professor to insist upon an “investigation” is to delay having to give her story under oath until she knows what can be proved — and what can be disproved.

Of course, the main purpose of an “investigation” is to give the media time to browbeat Republicans into withdrawing Kavanaugh’s name and doing the honorable thing by nominating someone more suitable. Someone like Asia Argento.

Getting Caught Up with A.F. Branco Politically INCORRECT Cartoons


Abracadabra

Obama mocked Trump’s promise to bring jobs back and raise the GDP up to 3.0 by asking does he have some kind of magic Wand? Yes, he does.

Trump’s Magic WandPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

Passing Wind

Some say that the Democrats and the media are exaggerating the Kavanaugh storm in Washington D.C.

Kavanaugh Sexual AssaultPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

California Dreamin’

California is broke and in a horrible mess due to years of Democrats in power. Maybe it’s time to try John Cox Republican to clean up their mess.

California Governor Election 2018Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

That’s Show Biz

At times it appears Ms. Ford is purposely dragging her feet to testify against Brett Kavanaugh in order to sabotage his confirmation.

Christine Blasey Ford Dragging FeetPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.

Russian To Judgment

Democrats are so desperate they are willing to accept any accusation as fact from anywhere and anyone.

Evidence Against KavanaughPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

A Very Special Message


I will be offline for a couple of days. My 91 year old mother passed away on September 8th, and her funerals
services are on Thursday. The next couple days will be extremely busy as I continue taking care of my 92 year old father, be his support, and transporter. By the way, they were married 73 years.

I am not sorrowing as one that has no hope. My mom was a genuine Christian having a genuine personal relationship with our Lord and Savior, Jesus The Christ, the Risen Son of the Living God. She is without doubt in heaven. I rejoice in her life, my memories and all the many ways she has impacted my life.

So with your understanding, I will take care of my family, especially my dad. Thank you for your prayers.

In His Service,

Jerry Broussard of WhatDidYouSay.org.

 

Kavanaugh’s Mom Foreclosed On His Accuser’s Folks’ Home In ’96 – Is Her ‘Assault’ Claims A Bitter Grudge?


Reported By K. Walker |

The bombshell accusation that Brett Kavanaugh may have groped a teenage girl at a party when he was 17, could delay his confirmation to the Supreme Court. But is it all just revenge? 

As a woman, my first inclination is to give the woman the benefit of the doubt in these sorts of cases. But then I remember how horrible and vindictive some people can be.

We are told that all accusers need to be believed.

Why?

I’m old enough to remember that the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty. That’s actually an integral part of our legal system. Funny how that doesn’t get mentioned when we are discussing the guilt or innocence of a Supreme Court nominee against boorish behavior 35 years ago.

There are some serious holes in Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s story. Her account of the incident detailed in her letter obtained by Sen. Dianne Feinstein disagrees with her 2012 account in the notes from her therapist. In her letter, she claims that only Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, were in the room, but her therapist’s notes say that there were 4 men in the room, and she didn’t name Kavanaugh or Judge.

Dr. Blasey Ford is a staunch leftist, which may or may not have any bearing in her coming forward.

(Personally, I think it might.)

And now, a rumor that had been swirling around Conservative Twitter has been confirmed.

Brett Kavanaugh’s mother, Martha Kavanaugh, was the judge that foreclosed on a property owned by Dr. Blasey Ford’s parents.

Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s mother issued court rulings from her Maryland courtroom in a property foreclosure case involving the home owned by the parents of Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, court documents reveal.

The case dates to 1996, years after the party where Ford claims Kavanaugh – President Donald Trump‘s pick to serve on the Supreme Court – got on top of her, groping her while covering her mouth in what she alleges was an attempted rape.

The court document below clearly shows that the judge is Martha Kavanaugh, and the defendants are Ralph G. Blasey and Paula K. Blasey.

The case resulted in a settlement with a lender, allowing Ford’s parents, Ralph and Paula Blasey, to maintain the home. Kavanaugh’s mother issued rulings allowing the settlement to go through.

The home is located in the leafy community of River Falls neighborhood of Potomac, Maryland. The case was brought by United Mortgage & Loan Investment Corp.

Kavanaugh’s mother, Martha Kavanaugh, oversaw the case in Maryland’s circuit court.

She granted a voluntary motion to dismiss the case in January of 1997, state court records reveal. There are no further records on the case after 1997.

Source: Daily Mail

Is that enough for Dr. Blasey Ford to seek revenge for her parents? Who knows. Maybe — maybe not.

Kavanaugh has not only categorically denied the allegations made by Dr. Blasey Ford but that he has done anything like that at any time to anyone. He even denies being at that particular party. Both Kavanaugh and Ford are willing to answer questions from the Senate Judiciary Committee.

So, we’re back to He Said/She Said. And here, I’m going to state My Personal Opinion™. Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s character is impeccable. He has passed six background checks, and not one other allegation has been made against him.

Even if Dr. Blasey Ford is telling the truth, (and maybe she is,) should one, solitary and completely unacceptable, drunken moment when he was a teenager prevent him from a Supreme Court nomination?

If someone dug into your high school past, would you be able to sit on the Supreme Court?

I don’t know about you, but I made some stupid decisions when I was a teenager.

Maybe that’s what we should do — dig into every Democratic Senator’s high school past and see if a single one of them could hold themselves up under scrutiny. I would bet that some of that would be quite revealing.

Meanwhile, let’s just confirm the man already!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

ClashDaily’s Associate Editor since August 2016. Self-described political junkie, anti-feminist, and a nightmare to the ‘intersectional’ crowd. Mrs. Walker has taken a stand against ‘white privilege’ education in public schools. She’s also an amateur Playwright, occasional Drama teacher, and staunch defender of the Oxford comma. Follow her humble musings on Twitter: @TheMrsKnowItAll

Mad Maxine Tells Her Posse To ‘KNOCK OFF’ President Trump


Reported By K. Walker |

Here’s a prime example of civility and decency in our public discourse by an elected representative. Oh, wait. No, it isn’t. It’s the exact opposite of that. But then, would you expect anything better than that from Maxine ‘Impeach 45!’ Waters (D-CA)? How this woman can still get elected is beyond comprehension.

Somehow, Maxine Waters was named by TIME magazine as One of the Most Influential People in the World.

ClashDaily has been covering the antics of the beloved #Resistance hero, ‘Auntie’ Maxine for a loooong time:

Dear Liberals: Maxine Waters Is The Face Our Your Party – Good Luck With That

GOOD LAWD! Did Mad Maxine Waters Just Physically Threaten President Trump?

MLK’s Niece Just Dropkicked Maxine Waters And It’s Brutal & True

Maxine Goes Full Racist In Her Latest Rant — Imagine If A White Bro Said This!

Contained in those (and many more articles) are critiques on Rep. Waters and her almost non-existent record in Congress, her corruption, her blatant racism, her constant showboating, and her seeming inability to string two logical and coherent thoughts together.

So, there is no need to do that here.

Instead, we’ll jump right in and show how confident this woman is that she’s going to be the end of the Trump administration.

For some reason, the National Newspaper Publishers Association honored Maxine, along with Al Greene and others, a ‘National Leadership Award.’

During her acceptance speech, she said that she’s first going to ‘knock off’ Trump and then do the same to Pence.

Here’s a partial transcript of her comments:

There are those who say that we shouldn’t talk about impeachment.

And when Al Green comes up here, you are going to find out who presented the first resolution for impeachment in the House of Representatives.

There are those who say, ‘Well, what if we get rid of him? Then we’ve got that Vice President and he will be worse.’

I said, ‘Knock off the first one and then go after the second one.’ (Applause)

We have the power. We have the numbers. But we have to understand our power and we’ve got to use our power.

Not only do we all have individual power, but just think about the readers that you have, the people who look forward to getting your newspapers, the people who are looking to see if their picture is going to be in it or their child’s picture is going to be in it, or are you going to tell them something about what is going on nationally with some of the people that you have who are your columnists in your newspapers. Well, that’s all power. Let’s use it.

Let’s have this president understand, in ways that we have not done before, that we are the patriots of this country.

We’re the ones who stood by this country no matter what has happened to us, no matter that this country has not always embraced us.

We fought in the wars, came home and oftentimes didn’t have a house to live in and didn’t have a job.

But we stayed with America. We fought for the democracy. We believed in the Constitution.

All the folks on the other side of the aisle who claim to be such patriots, they’re scared of this president.

They won’t stand up to him. They’re intimidated by him.

They won’t denounce some of the terrible things that he’s doing and the fact that he’s alienated all of our allies.

Watch ‘Mad’ Maxine’s rambling speech:

Wow.

She really is nuttier than a granola bar, isn’t she?

Can you imagine the outrage if she had an ‘R’ after her name?

It would be headline news for 6 weeks that a high-profile GOP member of Congress was calling for violence against the President and the Vice President.

This isn’t her first time doing such a thing, and she’s called for the harassment of Trump administration officials at gas stations, grocery stores, restaurants — anywhere in public.

I’m sure if the shoe was on the other foot she’d cry racism-sexism-bigotry-discrimination-hate-speech.

Doesn’t it just speak volumes that this one of the key leaders in the opposition to President Trump?

But hey, she’s just fulfilling her ‘calling from God’ — or something.

Keep talking, ‘Auntie’ Maxine — the midterms are just around the corner.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

ClashDaily’s Associate Editor since August 2016. Self-described political junkie, anti-feminist, and a nightmare to the ‘intersectional’ crowd. Mrs. Walker has taken a stand against ‘white privilege’ education in public schools. She’s also an amateur Playwright, occasional Drama teacher, and staunch defender of the Oxford comma. Follow her humble musings on Twitter: @TheMrsKnowItAll

Hidden Cam: Anti-Trump ‘Democratic Socialist’ Working At State Department Vows To ‘F–k Sh-t Up’ At Every Level


Reported By | Wes Walker |

Just a couple of weeks ago the entire left CHEERED as ‘heroic’ some anonymous chucklehead that claimed to be gumming up the works in the White House. A hidden cam conversation found a guy just like that working in the State Department. How ‘heroic’ does it seem once it’s unmasked? #Resist

He’s one of those ‘Democratic Socialists’ the Left has been warming up to. And he’s living on the taxpayer dime, bragging that he can’t be fired for his ethics violations.

Let’s test his ‘I can’t be fired’ theory, shall we?

Project Veritas went undercover again. Here’s the highlight reel version of the first installment of what they’ve brought back:

Here’s the full version:

Today, Project Veritas released the first installment in an undercover video investigation series unmasking the deep state. This video features a State Department employee, Stuart Karaffa, engaged in radical socialist political activity on the taxpayer’s dime, while advocating for resistance to official government policies. In addition to being a State Department employee Stuart Karaffa is also a ranking member of the Metro DC Democratic Socialists of America (Metro DC DSA.)

Metro DC DSA is a socialist group that works to advance progressive causes in the metropolitan DC area.

[…]Stuart Karaffa is just the first federal government employee that Project Veritas has recorded in an undercover series unmasking the deep state.

“We’ve heard a lot about the Deep State; holdovers from the previous administration resisting change or nameless and faceless bureaucrats slowing things down or leaking secrets in an effort to undermine this administration,” said Project Veritas President James O’Keefe. “What is truly striking is their boldness, they are not afraid. They are even boastful about a warped reality, where they won’t get caught and can’t get fired even if they did.”
Source: Project Veritas

This is what we mean by ‘drain the swamp’. This is also why we have a ‘Hatch Act’.

As for my own personal favorite moment in the video, it would have to be this one:

He thinks he can get away with subverting the system on the government dime. He may be getting a very different kind of government assistance soon enough. But which kind?

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – The Eleventh Hour

In the eleventh hour, Democrat Senator Feinstein has pulled one of their typical sleazy dirty tricks reminiscent of the Clarence Thomas hearings.

Dirty Diane FeinsteinPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco Cartoons at The Daily Torch.

A.F.Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Monday, September 17, 2018


Top Stories
Joe Biden Calls Trump Supporters the “Dregs of Society”
Woman Accusing Brett Kavanaugh of Sexual Harassment and Her Lawyer Are Democrat Activists
Woman Making Sexual Assault Claims Against Brett Kavanaugh Exposed for Seeking Retribution on His Mom
Brett Kavanaugh Refutes 11th-Hour Smear, Calls Sexual Misconduct Allegations “Completely False”

More Pro-Life News
Pro-Abortion Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi Claims, “I Am a Practicing Catholic”
Brett Kavanaugh Accuser Has No Evidence, No Proof and Her Supposed Eyewitness Says She’s “Absolutely Nuts”
Pro-Abortion Group Will Spend $37 Million Trying to Take Over Congress
Abortion Activists Want Brett Kavanaugh’s Nomination Withdrawn After 11th-Hour Smear
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories




Dear CNN: Lisa Page Admits FBI Could NOT Prove Collusion Between Trump & Russia, Is That ‘News?’


Reported By Wes Walker |

Despite assertions by the Media(D) and Adam “Shifty” Schiff that Russian collusion is a known fact, the people who were actually investigating it are saying otherwise… under oath. Schiff has gone on record saying there was ‘plenty of evidence’ and ‘ample evidence’ of so-called Russian collusion in the Trump campaign, as though he’s got some kind of inside information.

That’s quite a feat. Unless he is lying through his teeth or was part of the framing job some say is really behind this investigation, Shiff supposedly knows something that even the investigators themselves didn’t know.

Lisa Page is a familiar name by now. But some may have trouble placing it without that other name she usually makes the news with — Peter Strzok of the now-infamous text exchange fame.

Both Lisa and Peter were involved in the investigations into (among other things) Hillary’s email scandal, the ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation into Trump/Russia, AND the Mueller investigation until they were removed on account of these same texts.

It was while answering questions about these texts that we see an interesting development months after the investigations into Russia first began:

“It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named special counsel to take over the Russia investigation.

With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia’s election meddling.

Page opined further, acknowledging “it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing” to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did.

“As far as May of 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” she said at another point.
Source: The Hill

This does nothing to diminish any skepticism of the whole Mueller Probe that observers have had from what she said earlier in the summer:

From other reporting of the exchange, we get a little more context:

“I cannot provide the specifics of a confidential interview,” Ratcliffe told Fox News when asked for comment. “But I can say that Lisa Page left me with the impression, based on her own words, that the lead investigator of the Russian collusion case, Peter Strzok, had found no evidence of collusion after nearly a year.”
Source:FoxNews

And despite the fact Strzok obviously wanted Trump out of office, even he had been skeptical:

The May 18, 2017, text was highlighted by Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz in his recent report about the handling of the Clinton email probe by the FBI and the Justice Department. The day after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment to the Russia probe on May 17, Strzok and Page discussed whether Strzok should join Mueller’s team.

“Who gives a f*ck, one more A(ssistant) D(irector)…(versus) (a)n investigation leading to impeachment?” Strzok texted on May 18, according to the IG report. Strzok later continues, “…you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”

The transcript shows Ratcliffe read the text exchange nearly verbatim to Page, and asked her to explain it, specifically if the lead investigator on the Russia collusion case, agent Strzok believed “the odds were nothing and that he had a concern that there was no big there there regarding any collusion…”

Source:FoxNews

And THAT is the statement Page’s earlier comments about a reflection of us still not knowing was in answer to.

Strzok had every reason to be skeptical… he had been part of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation that unleashed some of the most powerful investigative powers available on the idea of Russian Collusion and came up empty. Even the ‘big players’ like Carter Page have been hit with charges completely unrelated to anything Russia may or may not have done.

If at the end of this, there turns out to be no evidence of connections to Russia and the Left — including the ‘free press’ have been using this to shape election narratives, and to dog the duly-elected President’s every step, there is going to be HELL to pay.

That’s ok. the cries of ‘Impeach 45’ don’t care about evidence. They care about knocking off a political rival.

Is it clear now why those midterms matter so much?

Kavanaugh Accuser Is An Anti-Trump, Open Border, Leftist


Reported By K. Walker |

The woman that is accusing SCOTUS nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, of sexual misconduct 35 years ago has come forward. Who this woman is — is quite revealing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) sat on this story for months and tossed it out as a Hail Mary play. What took her so long to come forward? Probably a few things.

It’s not easy for someone to come forward and make accusations of sexual misconduct publicly, and coming forward will certainly impact not only the accuser, but her entire family, and even her workplace. Is that what happened in this case? Perhaps.

There are some troubling details in this particular case, though.

The allegation was 35 years old, and the woman hadn’t come forward until 2012. Interestingly, it was in 2012 that Kavanaugh’s name was dropped as one of the front-runners as the Supreme Court pick of the then-Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney. It was in couple’s therapy that Blasey Ford mentioned Kavanaugh’s name and the incident.

The Washinton Post reports:

In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

In the Washington Post article that details Blasey Ford’s claim, she says that she was 15 attending a party with no parents in the home, and had been drinking. She also claims that Brett Kavanaugh and his friend, Mark Judge, were both there already quite drunk. She alleges that she was pushed into a bedroom and was groped by Kavanaugh, but managed to escape.

To take those accusations at face value, they are problematic. But both Kavanaugh and Judge deny the claim. It’s a classic he said/she said scenario.

There are reasons to believe that Blasey Ford may not be telling the truth. We’ve seen that with the Duke Lacrosse team, Mattress Girl at the Columbia University, the Rolling Stone article about the alleged rape that occurred at the University of Virginia, and women have been prosecuted for lying. ClashDaily has asked if women who lie about rape should go to jail.

There are discrepancies between the claims in the Washington Post article and other reports of actions taken by Blasey Ford. Here are a few of the head-scratchers:

The Post story says that she called a tip line, but Sen. Feinstein says that she wanted to remain anonymous.

She contacted The Post through a tip line in early July, when it had become clear that Kavanaugh was on the shortlist of possible nominees to replace retiring justice Anthony M. Kennedy but before Trump announced his name publicly. A registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations, she contacted her congresswoman, Democrat Anna G. Eshoo, around the same time. In late July, she sent a letter via Eshoo’s office to Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.
Source: Washington Post

As the Post mentioned, she is a registered Democrat. She’s donated to several Democrat causes like the DNC, DCCC, and Friends of Bernie. She’s obviously pretty far left.

She has also deleted all of her social media accounts.

According to WaPo, she also hired Debra Katz as her attorney and had a polygraph test administered.

She engaged Debra Katz, a Washington lawyer known for her work on sexual harassment cases. On the advice of Katz, who said she believed Ford would be attacked as a liar if she came forward, Ford took a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in early August. The results, which Katz provided to The Post, concluded that Ford was being truthful when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate.

Christine Ford, who sometimes uses the name Christine Blasey professionally, is also a clinical psychology professor at Palo Alto University, specializing in statistical models for research. She also teaches at the Stanford University School of Medicine and is a visiting professor at Pepperdine University. She has had many published research articles.

If you look her up on RateMyProfessors.com, she doesn’t have a very good record. It seems that several former students think that ‘there’s something wrong with her.’

This student rated her as ‘Awful’:

Christine ford is the worst educator I have ever experienced. Avoid taking her class and avoid any interaction with this person. I feel like she has something wrong with her and I am surprised no one has caught this. Also avoid fullerton’s MSW program as long as she is there.

So did this one:

Prof. Ford is unprofessional, lacks appropriate filters, and I am honestly scared of her. She’s made comments both in class and in e-mails, if you cross her, you will be on her bad side. I fear to think of the poor clients that had to deal with her while she got her MSW and her LCSW. Absolutely the worst teacher I ever had.

This one gave her a ‘Poor’ rating:

Take her class and you will take antidepressant, start smoking or drinking again and gain 20lbs at your risk.

Yikes!

In April 2017, Blasey joined fellow scientists at what wasn’t so much a ‘March for Science’ as it was an anti-Trump march, wearing a knit hat made to look like a human brain. The hat was the ‘brainchild’ of a friend of hers, inspired by the pink kitty hats worn at the Nasty Women’s March.

“It’s a science party!” said biostatistician Christine Blasey, of Palo Alto, who will wear an elaborately knitted cap of the human brain — yarn turned into a supersized cerebral cortex — inspired by the “pussy hats” donned during the Women’s Marches.
Source: Mercury News

Blasey Ford also signed a letter by the ACLU opposing President Trump’s border control policies. In the letter, it specifically cites the Obama-era policy of separating children from their (alleged) parents, which has been blamed on Trump and called ‘racist.’ The letter claims that the zero-tolerance policy on border control was ‘violating human rights’ and the separation of families ‘traumatized children.’ 

Well, she seems like a peach. And of course, she has no political dog in this race, right?

WATCH: Heroic Bro Rescues Dogs From LOCKED Cage In Flo’s Rising Flood Waters


Reported By K. Walker |

This is both awesome and horrific at the same time. It’s wonderful that these dogs were rescued, but it’s absolutely terrible that they needed to be.

Six dogs were abandoned by their owner and left in a locked cage as flood waters rose following Hurricane Florence.

Flooding in North Carolina had reached 4 feet on Sunday, and the water is still rising.

Video of the heroic rescue has gone viral and shows the dogs barking and standing on their hind legs, desperate for someone to let them out of the cage.

The dogs were rescued from a property in Leland, North Carolina where their owners left them as they fled Hurricane Florence, without thinking of how the animals would fare in the violent storm.

Source: Daily Mail

Who leaves dogs caged to weather a hurricane on their own?

Fortunately, not everyone is so callous.

Watch the beautiful moment when the dogs were rescued:

Ryan Nichols of Longview, Texas rescued the dogs by wading into the knee-deep flood water and releasing them from the cage.

The dogs were on their hind legs howling and desperate to be let out.

Once the cage was opened, the dogs swam out whimpering and howling. They then headed for a nearby wooded area and rescuers followed them.

When you have animals, you sign on to take care of them, and when a big storm is heading your way, they’re still your responsibility.

Don’t leave your dogs to fend for themselves — especially in a hurricane!

Kudos to Ryan Nichols and all of the others that are rescuing animals that were abandoned by their owners.

We need more heroes like this.

Woodward: No evidence of Trump-Russia collusion


Reported By Rick Moran | September 16, 2018

 

If the Democrats take control of the House, Donald Trump is likely to be impeached. It doesn’t mean he’s guilty of an impeachable offense, all it means is that the political realities and hyperpartisan climate in Washington make impeachment almost inevitable.

There are any number of excuses Democrats can use to put the country through the ringer on impeachment. There’s a case for obstruction of justice – a weak case but Mueller may decide that’s all he’s got and recommend indicting the president for firing James Comey. Or there may be some unknown charge that Mueller is considering, perhaps connected to the Stormy Daniels payoff.

You will note I have not mentioned that Trump will be impeached for colluding with Russia to win the election. That’s because, despite desperately hopeful commentary from the left as Trump associates plead guilty and are granted immunity, the opposition tells itself that Trump is trapped, or a dead duck, and will be charged with treason for conspiring with a foreign power, even though there isn’t a shred of evidence to make that case.

What’s going to happen when Mueller’s final report doesn’t recommend indicting Trump for collusion?

In an interview with Hugh Hewitt, Watergate reporter and recent author of the Trump book “Fear,” said that in his two years investigating the president, he found no evidence of collusion – none.

RealClearPolitics:

In an interview with Hugh Hewitt on Friday, Bob Woodward said that in his two years of investigating for his new book, ‘Fear,’ he found no evidence of collusion or espionage between Trump and Russia. Woodward said he looked for it “hard” and yet turned up nothing.

“So let’s set aside the Comey firing, which as a Constitutional law professor, no one will ever persuade me can be obstruction. And Rod Rosenstein has laid out reasons why even if those weren’t the president’s reasons. Set aside the Comey firing. Did you, Bob Woodward, hear anything in your research in your interviews that sounded like espionage or collusion?” Hugh Hewitt asked Woodward.

“I did not, and of course, I looked for it, looked for it hard,” Woodward answered. “And so you know, there we are. We’re going to see what Mueller has, and Dowd may be right. He has something that Dowd and the president don’t know about, a secret witness or somebody who has changed their testimony. As you know, that often happens, and that can break open or turn a case.”

“But you’ve seen no collusion?” Hewitt asked again to confirm.

“I have not,” Woodward affirmed.

Hewitt would once again ask Woodward about collusion at the conclusion of the interview.

“Very last question, Bob Woodward, I just want to confirm, at the end of two years of writing this book, this intensive effort, you saw no effort, you, personally, had no evidence of collusion or espionage by the president presented to you?” Hewitt asked.

“That is correct,” Woodward said.

Mueller has never said that the president is a target in his investigation. There is no witness who has come forward with any testimony or evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. There has been no leak from the special counsel’s office that suggests collusion. No congressman or senator on the intelligence committees has said there is any evidence of collusion. There has been no leak from congress that would point to collusion.

Why then, the gleeful celebrations every time a Trump crony pleads guilty and is promised immunity? The plea deal made by Paul Manafort in exchange for his testimony illustrates this point. Trump is “cornered.” He’s “nervous.” He’s losing his grip. Manafort, or some other aide will “bring Trump down.”

Where does this optimism come from? As you can guess, it is wishful thinking. And the basis for this magical thinking is the Democrat’s continuing denial of the reason Hillary Clinton lost the election. 

It is comforting for the left to believe in the collusion narrative. It means they don’t have to face the hard fact that they nominated the worst presidential candidate in modern history – a woman who had nothing to say, nothing to offer the voters except that she was a woman. A woman who disdained ordinary people, who insulted the electorate, and whose own shady dealings made her the least trusted presidential candidate ever.

But it wasn’t her fault! It was the Russians who elected her! What happens when there are no collusion charges presented by Mueller will be the Second Great Awakening as the left tries to come to grips with their own epic failure.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – In the Shadows

John Kerry appears to be undermining U.S. foreign policy by going behind Trump’s back and secretly negotiating with Iran. Is he breaking the Logan Act?

John Kerry in IranPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Are you done with Nike after announcing Colin Kaepernick will be featured in their 30th anniversary “Just Do It” marketing campaign?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Friday, September 14, 2018


Top Stories
Chelsea Clinton Says It Would be “Un-Christian” to Protect Babies From Abortion
Democrats Try to Trash Bret Kavanaugh With False Sexual Harassment Claims Like They Did Clarence Thomas
Joy Behar: “God Forbid” “Sociopath” President Trump “Lives Another 20 Years”
Diane Feinstein Sat on Letter With Bogus Sexual Harassment Allegations Against Brett Kavanaugh for Months

More Pro-Life News
Chelsea Clinton: “As a Deeply-Religious Person, Its Un-Christian to Me” to Oppose Abortion
Insulting New Ads Imply Women Have to Abort Their Babies to Enjoy Lipstick and High Heels
New Planned Parenthood President Repeats Lie That Abortions are Only 3% of Its Business
How Can Planned Parenthood Prez Leana Wen Celebrate “Being a Parent” and Oversee 328,000 Abortions?
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories

The Alarming Findings of a New Study on Transgender Teens and Suicide


A new study highlights the danger of society’s rushing to affirm adolescents and teens who identify as transgender. (Photo: Erik McGregor/Sipa USA/Newscom)

The study, “Transgender Adolescent Suicide Behavior,” was published in Pediatrics, the official peer-reviewed journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. It raises serious questions about how families, schools, doctors, government, and the media should grapple with the increasing number of children and teens who self-identify as transgender.

In addition to the alarmingly high rate of suicide attempts among transgender boys, the study reported an attempted-suicide rate of over 40 percent for adolescents who identify as gender nonconforming (neither exclusively male or female) and nearly 30 percent for transgender girls (children and teens who were born male but identify as female).

Researchers said they did not find any evidence that transgender youth of color were at a higher risk compared with white transgender adolescents. Higher levels of education among parents and geographical location—urban or rural—did not have a significant effect on suicide attempts.

To arrive at the results, three researchers from the University of Arizona analyzed a survey filled out by more than 120,000 young Americans between the ages of 11 and 19.

By comparison, they found that 14 percent of all teenagers had attempted suicide at least once.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is the second-leading cause of death among adolescents and young adults ages 10 to 34 in the U.S.

The study’s leading author, Russell B. Toomey, focuses his work on youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or what they call queer—meaning that any attempts to discredit the research as “anti-LGBTQ” will likely fall flat.

Toomey describes his research in his bio:

Largely, my research has examined these relationships with explicit attention to the minority-specific stressors of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination that contribute to the disparate rates of negative outcomes experienced by sexual and gender diverse adolescents and Latinx youth, and the protective factors (e.g., family support, acceptance) that buffer these associations.

Latinx” is a gender-neutral term that some use instead of Latino or Latina.

The new study comes on the heels of another alarming and controversial one examining the contagious nature of transgender ideology.

That study, published Tuesday in the journal PLOS One by Brown University’s Lisa Littman, looked at “rapid-onset gender dysphoria”—that is, gender dysphoria not present in early youth but that manifested within days or weeks in teens and young adults. Littman found that exposure to peers who identified as transgender and transgender-positive content online may contribute to development of this rapid-onset gender dysphoria.

Within days, Brown University pulled down an article promoting Littman’s study. The university said it removed the article in order to conduct an academic review, but it’s clear the decision had more to do with political correctness and uncomfortable results.

Unlike “Transgender Adolescent Suicide Behavior,” Littman’s study wasn’t peer-reviewed. Littman herself concluded that her study “raises questions for more research.”

“One of the main conclusions is that more research needs to be done,” she said.

The study by Toomey and fellow University of Arizona researchers Amy K. Syvertsen and Maura Shramko provides further evidence that research institutions should encourage more studies in this area—not shut them down. At this point, we don’t just know that lives are at stake—we know how many lives are at stake.

And those numbers deserve repeating:

One in two biological girls who identify as boys tried to kill themselves in the past year.

Two in five gender-nonconforming adolescents tried to kill themselves.

And three in 10 biological boys who identify as girls tried to kill themselves.

In discussing these results, Toomey described an “urgent need to understand why transgender, female to male, and nonbinary adolescents report engaging in suicide behavior at higher levels than other adolescent transgender populations.”

He’s right. But that’s just the first of many questions this study begs to be answered.

There’s no excuse. You can’t be an ally of the transgender movement and reject this research. You can challenge it. You can debate it. You can encourage more of it. But you can’t suppress it. Doing so is harmful to the cause you claim to defend.

Every day, more and more children and teens are identifying as transgender. That’s a fact that The Atlantic captured well:

In June 2016, the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law estimated that 1.4 million adults in the U.S. identify as transgender, a near-doubling of an estimate from about a decade earlier. As of 2017, according to the institute, about 150,000 teenagers ages 13 to 17 identified as trans. The number of young people seeking clinical services appears to be growing as well. A major clinic in the United Kingdom saw a more than 300 percent increase in new referrals over the past three years.

With more teens identifying as transgender, and attempted-suicide rates for this group between 30 and 51 percent, this has become a national epidemic. The time for political correctness has passed.

Families, schools, doctors, government, and the media have an obligation to figure out how to differentiate between celebrating differences and encouraging dangerous behavior. Because if being transgender poses such a grave risk to adolescent lives, it’s hard to understand why any sane society would embrace the trend.

Commentary By

Portrait of Kelsey Harkness

Kelsey Harkness is a senior news producer at The Daily Signal and co-host of “Problematic Women,” a podcast and Facebook Live show. Send an email to Kelsey.

 

 

 

FBI Throws Cold Water on Feinstein’s Kavanaugh Scandal Claim


Reported By Randy DeSoto | September 14, 2018 at 11:16am

The FBI reportedly has no plans to investigate the possible sexual misconduct allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh stemming from his high school days in the early 1980s, which is believed to be contained in a letter Sen. Dianne Feinstein passed on to the bureau, according to The Washington Post.

“I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further,” the California Democrat said in a statement released Thursday.

“I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities,” she continued.

A woman first approached Democrat lawmakers in July, shortly after Kavanaugh’s nomination by President Donald Trump, reported Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer with The New Yorker.

In the letter, the woman alleged that during an encounter at a party while she and Kavanaugh were in high school, he held her down and attempted to force himself on her.

She claimed in the letter that Kavanaugh and a classmate of his, both of whom had been drinking, turned up music that was playing in the room to conceal the sound of her protests, and that Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She was able to free herself,” according to The New Yorker.

Kavanaugh, 53, graduated from Georgetown Preparatory School in 1983.

The judge responded in a statement on Friday, saying, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Kavanaugh’s classmate told The New Yorker of the woman’s allegation, “I have no recollection of that.”

The woman declined to be interviewed by the paper.

Feinstein refused to share the contents of the letter — which was reportedly first given to her by Democrat Rep. Anna Eshoo of California — with fellow members of the Judiciary Committee.

“A source familiar with the committee’s activities said that Feinstein’s staff initially conveyed to other Democratic members’ offices that the incident was too distant in the past to merit public discussion, and that Feinstein had ‘taken care of it,’” according to The New Yorker.

Seung Min Kim with The Washington Post reported the “FBI does not now plan to launch a criminal investigation of the Kavanaugh matter; instead the bureau passed the material to the White House as an update to Kavanaugh’s background check.”

White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec called the letter a “smear” attempt, intended to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation, according to The Post.

“Throughout his confirmation process, Judge Kavanaugh has had 65 meetings with senators — including with Senator Feinstein — sat through over 30 hours of testimony, addressed over 2,000 questions in a public setting and additional questions in a confidential session,” Kupec said. “Not until the eve of his confirmation has Sen. Feinstein or anyone raised the specter of new ‘information’ about him.”

Kupec also noted that the FBI has “thoroughly and repeatedly vetted” the judge through his 25 years of public service, including 12 years on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and prior to that serving as an attorney and White House staff secretary in the George W. Bush White House.

Judiciary Committee member Sen. John Cornyn responded with apparent skepticism about Feinstein’s letter.

“Let me get this straight: this is statement about secret letter regarding a secret matter and an unidentified person. Right,” the Texas Republican tweeted Thursday.

Cornyn told CNN that the move “smacks of desperation to me.”

George Hartmann, a spokesman for Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, said the senator is aware of Feinstein’s referral.

“At this time, he has not seen the letter in question, and is respecting the request for confidentiality,” Hartmann said. “There’s no plan to change the committee’s consideration of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.”

A committee vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination is slated for Thursday, Sept. 20, with a full Senate vote expected by the end of the month.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Randy DeSoto is a graduate of West Point and Regent University School of Law. He is the author of the book “We Hold These Truths” and screenwriter of the political documentary “I Want Your Money.”

A.F. Branco Cartoon

“Act of God”

In their non-stop bash Trump fashion the Leftist Mainstream is now blaming Trump for hurricane Florence and the death of thousands in Puerto Rico.

Trump and Hurricane FlorencePolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Conservative Daily News cartoons here

A.F.Branco’s NEW Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here! 

take our poll – story continues below
  • Are you done with Nike after announcing Colin Kaepernick will be featured in their 30th anniversary “Just Do It” marketing campaign?

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

Police: Democrat Ended Political Argument by Driving to Man’s Home, Opening Fire


Reported By Kara Pendleton | September 12, 2018 at

2:46pm

Brian Sebring of Tampa, Florida, was arrested last month for allegedly shooting a man who he had a political disagreement with on social media. The victim suffered non-life threatening injuries.

Tampa Police DepartmentBrian Sebring of Tampa, Florida, was arrested last month for allegedly shooting a man after the two had a political argument on social media. The victim suffered non-life threatening injuries. (Tampa Police Department)

Perhaps when President Barack Obama, known for being divisive, left office, some held out hope for a more unified nation. Instead, there has been a ramping up of not only violent political rhetoric, but acts of violence, as well. Social media has been one place where that aggression has been seen surging. Take the example of a political disagreement on social media that resulted in a Florida man being shot.

According to the Tampa Bay Times, 44-year-old Brian Sebring — a registered Democrat — and Facebook friend Alex Stephens, 46, a convicted felon with no political registration, got into an online dispute last month involving politics. It ended with Sebring driving to Stephens’ home and shooting him.

“After receiving several explicit messages and threats, the defendant responded to the victim’s home to confront him (regarding) the messages,” according to a police report cited by the Tampa Bay Times. Sebring was arrested and told police that Stephens had threatened him, so he drove to his home in order to confront him.

However, Sebring took a Glock, in a waistband holster, and an AR-15 with him when he went to confront Stephens. After arriving at Stephen’s home, Sebring allegedly honked his truck horn and waited outside of the vehicle for Stephens. Stephens went outside and allegedly “charged at” Sebring. It was at this point that Sebring allegedly opened fire, hitting Stephens in the buttocks.

Despite Stephens fleeing and Sebring leaving the scene, police ultimately found and arrested Sebring for the shooting. He was charged with aggravated battery with a deadly weapon and carrying a concealed firearm. His bail was set at $9,500.

“I’m not a bad guy,” Sebring said in an interview with the Tampa Bay Times a few days after the incident. “But I mean, this guy threatened to hurt my family, and I went off the deep end. I wasn’t thinking right. You know, after this I’m going to go see a therapist or something, man, because that’s some scary s—, that I could lose my temper like that and do something so stupid.”

The exact topic of the men’s dispute is not known, other than it had to do with politics. What we do know is that in the current political climate, violent rhetoric and violent acts are on the rise. And that makes it even more fool-hardy for anyone to make threats.

What we also know is that, overall, the violence is being perpetrated more heavily in one direction. And those violent threats and acts are leaning heavily against those on the right.

Breitbart has reported that instances ofviolence against the right are increasing as media outlets “amp up hate-rhetoric against Trump.” In July, Breitbart began documenting “acts of media-approved violence and harassment against Trump supporters.” The running total is now up to 564.

In mid-July, The Gateway Pundit noted that Breitbart’s running total at that time was just over 300. This means that in  approximately two month’s time, the number has almost doubled. And more reports of violence continue to pour in.

It has long-since gone beyond an increase in violent threats on social media to actual attacks in real life.

Meanwhile, few on the left have said anything to discourage such behavior. Some, such as Democratic Rep. Maxine Waters, have been blamed for amping up the hate and violence.

Some believe the incitement is intentional, with the ultimate goal being that of a civil war. Others point to mental disorders on a mass scale, with such tags as “liberalism” and “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

While such labels are sometimes used in jest, the injuries sustained by victims of the violence is no laughing matter. Something needs to be done and it needs to include Democratic leadership and media taking responsibility.

Violent rhetoric and violent acts against political opponents are not OK. This should be something both sides of the political aisle can agree upon and commit to fighting against. What actually happens, as reports continue to pour in and public outrage continues to grow, is yet to be seen.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Specializing in news, politics and human interest stories, Kara Pendleton has been a professional writer and author since 2002. One of her proudest professional moments was landing an interview that even mainstream media couldn’t get.

Inmate Admits Sex Assaults at Women’s Prison… ‘She’ Used to Be Named Steve


Reported By Malachi Bailey | September 12, 2018 at

3:50pm

An inmate in a British female prison sexually assaulted multiple fellow inmates, and it turns out the predator is actually a man, formerly known as Steve, who “identifies” as a lesbian woman.

These days, according to The Telegraph, the 52-year-old is officially known as Karen White, but was born with the name Stephen Wood. At the time of the assaults, White was undergoing sex reassignment, but had not had surgery, The Telegraph reported.

White didn’t hesitate to prey on the female inmates. Within weeks of arriving in prison, he began making lewd comments toward another inmate before he forced himself on her, according to the Telegraph.

That was not White’s only victim. He was accused of four sexual assaults in total between September and November last year, according to The Guardian. He confessed to at least two of the attacks.

He was finally moved to an all-male prison, according to PJ Media.

It’s good that he won’t be able to assault any more women in his new prison, but he should have been in the all-male prison to begin with.

The female prison where White committed his assaults did not only have female prisoners. It also had children. The prison contains a mother-and-baby unit that can accommodate up to 10 infants aged under 2, according to The Times.

This fact becomes even more shocking considering White’s past convictions. White is a convicted pedophile who was previously jailed in 2001 for an attack on a child, according to PJ Media.

Putting a convicted male pedophile into an all-female prison with infants and toddlers is not just a simple mistake. This is an example of negligence in the name of being “progressive.”

Social media users were disgusted at the news.

RELATED: Report: Nearly All Sex Assaults Reported at Sports Centers Were in Unisex Facilities

The United Kingdom’s Ministry of Justice claimed that it made a mistake by not looking at the predator’s history when he was transferred to the female prison, but said the offender’s history is typically taken into account. Considering the number of transgender sexual predators in prison in the U.K., it’s a mistake could easily happen again. A government survey found that there were 125 total transgender inmates in England and Wales, and 60 of them were serving time for a sexual offence, according to BBC News.

It is likely that there are even more because the list doesn’t include those who already have a gender recognition certificate.

As long as men are moved into female prisons, it is inevitable that human error will allow another case like this one to fall through the cracks.

In the United States, President Donald Trump’s administration has taken steps to avoid something similar here by sensibly relying on an inmate’s biological sex to determine what facility the inmate will be house in, according to a report in The New York Times in May. (Naturally, The Times didn’t like that one bit. The headline was “Federal Prisons Roll Back Rules Protecting Transgender People.”)

But U.K. prison officials are finding out what the Trump administration already knows — and liberals and The New York Times will never accept.

Men shouldn’t be put into women’s prisons at all.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Summary: Malachi Bailey is a writer from the Midwest with a background in history, education and philosophy. He has led multiple conservative groups and is dedicated to the principles of free speech, privacy and peace.

Commentary: “The Post-9/11 Cycle of Cynicism”


Commentary by Michelle Malkin / /

/ 14 Comments

URL of the original posting site: https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/09/12/the-post-9-11-cycle-of-cynicism/

The Tribute in Light, an installation of searchlights representing the fallen twin towers, is seen Tuesday from New Jersey. (Photo: Chine Nouvelle/Sipa/Newscom)

For 17 years, America has engaged in a collective ritual every Sept. 11: hang flags, light candles, bow heads, and make vows to “Never forget.”

Then, every Sept. 12, it’s back to business as usual: See something, do nothing.

Did you remember that five of the 9/11 hijackers—Mohamed Atta, Marwan al-Shehhi, Hani Hanjour, Nawaf al-Hazmi, and Satam al-Suqami—carried out their killer plot after overstaying their visas, evading detection, and avoiding deportation?

Did you remember the other radical Muslim members of the Terrorist Visa Overstayers Club?

They include 1997 New York subway bomber Lafi Khalil; 1993 World Trade Center bombers Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammed Salameh, and Eyad Ismoil; 1993 New York landmark bombing plot conspirator Fadil Abdelgani; convicted Times Square bomb plotter Faisal Shahzad; and U.S. Capitol bomb plotter Amine El Khalifi, whose visa expired in 1999 and who escaped Homeland Security’s notice for 12 years before he was arrested in 2012—just blocks from the Capitol building donning what he thought was a suicide bomb vest.

Did you remember that a year after the jihadist attacks that stole nearly 3,000 innocent lives, the 9/11 Commission urged our government to build a biometric entry-exit program to track and remove visa overstayers—who comprise an estimated 40 percent of the total illegal immigrant population?

Did you remember that Congress had already mandated exactly such a system for all ports of entry—land, sea, and air—in 1996 as part of the Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act?

Janice Kephart, former border counsel on the 9/11 Commission, testified five years ago that “tracking the arrival and departure of foreign visitors to the United States is an essential part of immigration control, with collateral effects on law enforcement and national security.” Without both arrival controls and departure records, she warned, “there is no way to know whether travelers have left when they were supposed to.”

At least eight separate federal statutes, passed with bipartisan support, have established the parameters and appropriated funds for a foreign visa holder entry-exit system over the past two decades.

But as I reported in my book “Invasion” 16 years ago, lobbyists for the travel and tourism industries, airlines, universities, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and illegal immigrant amnesty banded together to undermine the implementation of this most basic national security program, which every sovereign country needs to defend its borders.

On the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, then-House Homeland Security Chairwoman Candice Miller, R-Mich., reported on the federal backlog of more than 750,000 unvetted visa overstay records: “If we are serious about controlling who comes into the nation and preventing another 9/11 attack, we need to get serious about an exit program,” she testified.

Spoiler alert: The swamp creatures in Washington are not serious.

Now, the Department of Homeland Security reports a whopping 700,000 foreigners overstayed their temporary tourist, business, or student visas in fiscal 2017. Most alarming, among the countries with the highest overstay rates are the terrorist breeding grounds of Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Libya.

An estimated 40 percent of the 700,000 student/exchange visa overstays on record last year came from four countries: China, India, South Korea, and Saudi Arabia. (In case you’d forgotten, Saudi Arabia sent 15 of the 19 hijackers to America 17 years ago this week.)

Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies analyzed the data and flagged five countries “where we need to critically examine visa issuance processes” because of overstay rates of more than 30 percent: Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, Liberia, and the Solomon Islands.

Last year, a DHS inspector general’s audit concluded that Immigration and Customs Enforcement cannot account for all visa overstays because its 27 different databases are a stovepiped mess. ICE arrested a measly 0.4 percent of visa overstays (3,402 out of 500,000) it could account for—in part because investigators couldn’t access information or weren’t even aware of available national security databases.

President Donald Trump called on Congress to expedite completion of the long-delayed biometric exit program, and several pilot programs at airports are now in place. But Trump faces the same open borders/big business roadblocks that have stymied the system ever since the twin towers came crashing down.

If Congress wanted to, it could immediately pass measures to make overstaying a visa a felony, to impose re-entry bars on visa violators, and to require bonds for foreigners entering through the highest-risk temporary visa programs or from countries of concern.

But annual pretension is so much easier than actual prevention. All remembrance and no action dishonors the 3,000 who died 17 years ago—and endangers us all.

COPYRIGHT 2018 CR

Commentary By

Portrait of Michelle Malkin

Michelle Malkin is a columnist for The Daily Signal, senior editor at Conservative Review, a best-selling author, and Fox News contributor.

 

 

 

Twitter Rejects Ads Using the Words ‘Illegal Alien’ and ‘Criminal Alien,’ Calling That ‘Hate Speech’


Twitter says they shouldn’t be called illegal aliens: The Border Patrol discovers 25 residents of Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras huddled inside a trailer July 25 at the border checkpoint in Falfurrias, Texas. (Photo: Border Patrol/Polaris/Newscom)

Twitter rejected four tweets from a Washington-based immigration research center’s advertising campaign as “hate speech” Tuesday because they used the legal terms “illegal alien” and “criminal alien.”

The rejected tweets by the Center for Immigration Studies, proposed for its Twitter Ads campaign to attract more followers, generally provided a statistic or factual statement and pressed for an immigration-related policy.

One tweet included a video from The Daily Caller news organization depicting immigrants illegally crossing the border and said the video “reminds us why we need a wall” and “the best defense is always to prevent individuals from entering in the first place.”

Another rejected tweet from the Center for Immigration Studies referred to a news story about arrests made by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and provided a statistic:

In a press release Wednesday, the immigration research group said Twitter approved “several other” tweets for the Twitter Ads campaign. When the center asked why the social media company had rejected the four tweets, it said it received this response from the company:

We’ve reviewed your tweets and confirmed that it is ineligible to participate in the Twitter Ads program at this time based on our Hateful Content policy. Violating content includes, but is not limited to, that which is hate speech or advocacy against a protected group.

The immigration center said its motive was “to promote specific tweets in order to drive traffic” to its website, not to violate Twitter’s “Hateful Content Policy.”

The term “illegal alien” is a precise term in law, Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, wrote in a recent commentary for The Daily Signal decrying politically correct language  about illegal immigration such as “undocumented immigrant”:

‘Alien’—rather than ‘immigrant’—is the correct legal term, since ‘alien’ is defined in 8 U.S.C. §1101 (a)(3) as ‘any person not a citizen or national of the United States.’

Precision in the law is a vital principle, since the exact words used in statutes, regulations, contracts, guidance documents, and policy statements can significantly affect how they are applied and interpreted.

>>> Commentary: ‘Undocumented Immigrant’ Is a Made-Up Term That Ignores the Law

Twitter did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment.

Marguerite Telford, communications director at the Center for Immigration Studies, said in the group’s release:

Organizations of all kinds pay Twitter to promote specific tweets in order to drive traffic to an organization’s website. Twitter advertises that the ads ‘can get you more likes, amplify your message, and get more people talking about the things that matter to you most – your cause, project, business, or brand.’ This is exactly why the center selected these specific tweets to be placed as ads.

At a July congressional hearing on social media filtering practices, House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte said that social media platforms need to ‘do a better job explaining how they make decisions to filter content and the rationale for why they do so.’

We agree.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Troy Worden

Troy Worden is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

Tax Reform Spurs a Doubling of This Texan’s Business


“Our sales have just gone through the roof … because of the general business climate everywhere,” Austin Hose co-owner Jim Cramer says. Pictured: Cramer with sons Bill, left, and Daniel, right. (Photo courtesy of Jim Cramer)

Republican-passed tax reform has helped to more than double his supply company’s business, a Texas entrepreneur says.

“The tax reform took our taxes from 34 percent down to 21 percent, so we had additional capital and we used that capital to reinvest in the business,” Jim Cramer said in a phone interview Thursday with The Daily Signal.

Cramer is a co-owner of Amarillo-based Austin Hose, a supplier of hose, fittings, and accessories with six locations serving six states.

He spoke with The Daily Signal four days before House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas, introduced three bills to build on the success of the initial overhaul of the tax code.

When President Donald Trump was elected, Cramer said, his business had 70 employees. It now has 150.

“So in just less than two years, we have more than doubled,” he said. “And our sales have just gone through the roof … because of the general business climate everywhere.”

Confidence among U.S. small businesses reached a historic high in August, according to the National Federation of Independent Business. The lobbying group’s monthly index hit 108.8 in August, the highest level in its 45-year existence. The reading eclipsed the previous record high of 108 from July 1983, Business Insider reported.

The tax reform package, which cleared Congress Dec. 20 and went into effect Jan. 1 after Trump signed it, repealed the corporate alternative minimum tax in addition to cutting the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.

It also provided for full and immediate expensing, which allows businesses to deduct expenses immediately from taxable income, an element that Cramer says has been a huge asset to Austin Hose.

“If you can expense it immediately, as opposed to doing it over four or five years, that has an immediate effect on your business and your taxes, so we have probably … bought 20 trucks in the last 18 months,” Cramer said, adding:

We have really invested heavily in plans and equipment, [and] we have opened a new branch in Oklahoma City. In the last two years, our sales have doubled; it went up 50 percent a year ago and they’re going up another 50 percent this year.

Cramer, 60, has lived in Texas since eighth grade. He and his wife, Josette, have six children. Two of their children are employed at Austin Hose: Daniel, who is CEO, and Billy, who works at the Amarillo warehouse.

Cramer said he sees a marked difference in both the economy and how businesses are treated between the presidencies of Barack Obama and Donald Trump:

The big problem for the last eight years with President Obama is you just had no idea what was coming next. And in terms of tax relief, we didn’t get any tax relief; corporations did not. You never knew what new regulations might pop up and cause all kinds of problems in your business. We just have a lot better understanding of what the future looks like for the next several years, so we are really excited about it.

Kiki Houndjago works in the Amarillo location of Austin Hose. (Photo courtesy of Jim Cramer)

Public policy has a direct influence on the outlook of business owners and whether they are willing to take risks, Cramer said:

If you have a positive attitude about the future of your industry, it makes a big difference.

You have to have a lot of confidence in the future, and what the business environment is going to look like if you are going to add that kind of staff to your payroll. And we are just real confident, not only about the way things are going now but how the future looks. So if you have that confidence, you are willing to do that and step out on a limb and reinvest in your business.

Cramer said he wants lawmakers to build on the success of the initial tax reform package in a “Tax Reform 2.0” overhaul like that outlined Monday by Brady.

“My request would be to make … the changes to the corporate taxes permanent,” Cramer told The Daily Signal, “to allow us to depreciate as many assets as possible. Because when you are buying things, that’s stimulating the economy right on down the line.”

“You buy trucks and crimpers and computers and software, and we are buying all that stuff,” he added. “So if we can expense that in the year that we buy, that gives us the opportunity to accelerate everything.”

Cramer said American businesses and employees have Trump to thank for the economic success from tax reform.

“I don’t know what better thing you can do for an individual without work than give him a job; that to me is just super important,” Cramer said, adding:

And when I talk to all my friends who are more on the liberal side, that’s what I tell them … the environment that President Trump has created is an environment where we are willing to go out on a limb and invest in our business and hire more people, and that to me is extremely important.

Editor’s note: Jim Cramer is a donor to The Heritage Foundation, parent organization of The Daily Signal.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel.

 

Now CNN Blames Trump For … Hurricanes? No, This Isn’t Satire


Reported By Wes Walker |

If anyone was wondering what end-stage Trump Derangement Syndrome looks like, apparently it is the belief that he has God-like Malevolent powers. Every bad thing that happens has some kind of a tie-in to Trumpian responsibility. And today’s example of that awesome malevolent power is weather control.

CNN employees worked hard to discredit and drive from the Internet Alex Jones for, among other reasons, promoting conspiracy theories. And now that he’s all but disappeared from the digital public square CNN has moved in and filled the vacuum he left behind by reporting ideas that used to be firmly in the ‘tinfoil hat’ category — the weather.

CNN cited an editorial from WaPo as their excuse for treating this like a legitimate news story, as the East Coast is bracing for a big storm to come crashing down upon their shores. And of course, they found a way to lend credibility or legitimacy to that OP-ED:

Is Trump “complicit in this storm?” asked Alisyn Camerota in the segment introduction.

“His policies have been tearing down our defenses to climate change, which is often a blame for extreme weather,” Avlon answered. “On the same day Trump was discussing Florence, his EPA proposed rolling back restrictions on emissions of methane. That’s just the latest environmental policy targeted by the Trump Administration.”

Avlon rattled off a series of Obama-era environmental regulations the Trump Administration is rolling back — including pulling out of the Paris climate accord — and then boldly predicted a death toll in the thousands.

“It is so bad according to two Harvard scientists, it could lead to 80,000 unnecessary deaths every decade,” Avlon said. “Warmer water means more intense storms. When President Trump called Hurricane Florence tremendously wet, he was on to something.”
Source: Federalist Papers

In using the phrase ‘this storm’ she’s claiming that choices Trump made since taking office — and Trump alone — had such a profound effect on the environment off the Western Coast of Africa, where hurricanes that hit the East Coast first form, that we are already seeing violent storms because of it.

Have you seen overheated rhetoric like this before? Of course you have, a ‘Hugo Chavez mouthpiece’ was talking about USA unleashing our ‘earthquake weapon’ on Haiti and I can remember hearing about people who were convinced that America was somehow responsible for the devastating Tsunami that hit Japan just after Christmas.

What’s NEW about these wild theories is that the so-called ‘legitimate’ news sources have now laid the personal blame for particular storms on particular politicians. What do we expect from the people who were slavishly devoted to Obama, the man who announced at the Democratic Primary that ‘today was the day’ that would be pointed to as when the earth began to heal, and the oceans stopped rising.

(Sorry Hillary, apparently you were just not ‘green’ enough.)

And who are these theories being leveled against? It just ‘happens’ to be politicians the ‘non-partisan’ news media are in fundamental disagreement with on almost every issue. What a coincidence.

There is no POSSIBLE way they can draw a straight line of causation between the cause and effect. Why is that a big deal? It means they are LITERALLY presenting propaganda dressed up as news, especially when they throw in that line about ‘80,000 unnecessary deaths’.

Do you know what they conveniently left out of their Blame America weather change alarmism? They left out the detail that there really is one country that is attempting to make massive man-made changes to weather patterns. They are building machines whose sole purpose is to increase man-made climate change. And they are building them by the thousands. That would be China.

China is installing tens of thousands of chambers across the Tibetan Plateau and mountains. These machines will produce very fine silver iodide particles that are then lifted into the atmosphere with upwelling winds. As these particles are dispersed into the atmosphere they act as the nucleating point of condensed water.

[…] Each rain machine (chamber) is expected to create a 3-mile long strip of billowing clouds. When multiplied by the thousands of chambers China is installing along the Tibetan Plateau, it is estimated that China will be artificially controlling the weather over an area similar to the size of Alaska.
Source: Forbes

A little rough math puts Alaska at about 1% of the Earth’s total landmass, for anyone keeping score.

But they’re looking for ways to blame TRUMP for 80,000 deaths a decade, are they?

And for what? For leaving a meaningless, nonbinding agreement that bypassed the role of Congressional approval?

Sorry, CNN, if you’re going to tell stories like that one, and call it ‘news’ you’ll need to update your company dress code.

These hats will now be standard-issue and should be worn at all times.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Wes Walker

Wes Walker is the author of “Blueprint For a Government that Doesn’t Suck”. He has been lighting up Clashdaily.com since its inception in July of 2012. Follow on twitter: @Republicanuck

Today’s Ann Coulter Letter: “Everyone’s Urinating On The Dossier Now!”


Commentary by Ann Coulter  | 

I was minding my own business reading about Bob Woodward, the GREATEST INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER IN THE HISTORY OF OUR REPUBLIC (as he will be the first to tell you), and came across this bit of genius from his book. According to The New York Times, Woodward is flabbergasted that former FBI Director James Comey released the Russian dossier, when he had the “airtight” report of 17 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES.

Woodward writes: “It would be as if I had reported and written one of the most serious, complex stories for The Washington Post that I had ever done, and then provided an appendix of unverified allegations. Oh, by the way, here is a to-do list for further reporting and we’re publishing it.”

You will know, if you have read a much better book about the Trump hysteria, “Resistance Is Futile! How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind,” that, eventually, this is what the Resistance says about every part of the Russian collusion story. Oh, that old yarn? Yeah, we hysterically oversold that one, but maybe you’d be interested in this other scandal we tried pushing a few months ago!

(Thus, according to the Times: “Woodward has never been a graceful writer, but the prose here is unusually wooden.”)

The Russian collusion story isn’t a story at all, but a constantly changing kaleidoscope with the same glass panes appearing, disappearing and then reappearing under the same headline: RUSSIAN COLLUSION PROVED! Each time, we’re supposed to pretend it’s an all-new “breaking news” story that hasn’t been disproved six times already.

Among the kaleidoscope panes are:

  • The Russia dossier!
  • Roger Stone tweeted something mean about John Podesta!
  • Jeff Sessions met with the Russian ambassador!
  • Carter Page went to Russia! (But unlike Bernie Sanders, NOT on his honeymoon — ed.)
  • George Papadopoulos talked about Hillary’s emails!
  • The GOP platform on Ukraine was changed!
  • Seventeen intelligence agencies say Russia hacked the DNC’s emails to help Trump!

Of all these, it was the dossier that dominated the news for most of Trump’s first year in office. Here was the proof that Trump was owned by the Russians. The dossier had to be true — it just had to be! Then, suddenly, 10 months later, that kaleidoscope pane completely disappeared. The dossier was an irrelevancy, a red herring, a conspiracy theory, a misnomer. Why do Republicans keep talking about the dossier?

Extra credit if you remember why the dossier got dropped like a hot potato in October 2017.

ANSWER: After lying to the public all year about the dossier being funded by a “Republican donor” — just a random concerned citizen! — a judge finally forced the media to cough up the truth: The dossier was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton — deviously, of course, using a law firm to pimp for her. The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee had paid $12 million for that dossier.

But during the 10 glorious months before we found out that the Russian dossier was nothing but Hillary’s oppo research, the media stamped their feet and demanded that we all swear to believe the dossier. They deny this now, but I have Nexis.

With every other proof of Russian collusion discredited (except the actual collusion by both Hillary and the FBI), now they’re apparently going back to the 17 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES!

The 17 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES gag is what liberals do whenever they have no evidence, no facts and no argument. They cite a surprisingly large, but meaningless, number.

  • Three thousand scientists agree there is man-made global warming! (On closer examination, most of the “scientists” are ACLU lawyers.)
  • President Trump has made 4,713 false or misleading claims! (Actually, only two: That bombing Syria was in America’s “national security interest” and “we’ve already started building the wall!”)

The allegedly “airtight” report of 17 INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES was not what anyone would call “airtight.” In fact, it was kind of the opposite of “airtight.” Scratch the part about “airtight.” It could more accurately be described as a “complete joke.”

Russian scholars scoffed at it, cyber-security experts said it was impossible to know who hacked the DNC, and intelligence veterans churlishly pointed out that the report contained not a speck of evidence. Until Trump won the election, even the media laughed at Hillary’s claim that Russia hacked the DNC to help Trump.

President Obama took the claim that Russia had hacked the DNC so seriously that he boldly told Vladimir Putin to — I quote — “cut it out.”

In lieu of evidence, the report merely asserts conclusions. It reads like a stiffly worded, bureaucratic version of Hillary’s talking points: We assess that president-elect Donald J. Trump has said degrading things about women in the past. We further assess that president-elect Trump will continue to develop capabilities to fat-shame women in the United States, judging from past practice and current efforts. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

Maybe it’s time for the Resistance to wheel out the one about Sessions meeting the Russian ambassador again.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


The Definition of Insanity

Obama says we should vote for Democrats to bring some sanity back to our politics. LOL.

Obama Insanity PoliticsPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Are you done with Nike after announcing Colin Kaepernick will be featured in their 30th anniversary “Just Do It” marketing campaign?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

LifeNews.com Pro-Life News Report Wednesday, September 12, 2018


Top Stories
Abortion Biz Planned Parenthood Names Leana Wen President, She Claims it Does “Lifesaving Work”
Abortion Activist Threatens to Rape Susan Collins Staffer if She Votes for Brett Kavanaugh
Elizabeth Warren Compares Abortion to “Getting Your Tonsils Out”
Hillary Clinton Lies About Brett Kavanaugh, Falsely Claims He Called Birth Control “Abortion-Inducing Drugs”

More Pro-Life News
New Planned Parenthood President Leana Wen Tried to Force Pregnancy Centers to Promote Abortions
Abortion Activists Threaten to Rape, Kill Christian Woman Over Her Pro-Life Tweet
Not Just Adults. New Campaign Has Teens Celebrating Their Abortions
Abortion Clinic Sued After Killing Woman in Botched 6-Month Abortion
Scroll Down for Several More Pro-Life News Stories




America Has Strayed From Founders’ Vision for Economic Freedom and Limited Government, Walter Williams Says


“I think that our government has become destructive of the ends it was created to serve,” Walter Williams, a professor of economics at George Mason University, said in a speech Tuesday at The Heritage Foundation. (Photo: Thaleigha Rampersad)

An author and economics professor warns that America must return to the Founders’ vision of limited government to preserve the economic future of the country.

“I think we can safely say that we have made a significant departure from the constitutional principles of individual liberty and limited government that made us a rich nation in the first place,” Walter Williams, a professor of economics at George Mason University, said in a speech Tuesday at The Heritage Foundation.

Most legitimate functions of government are noted in the Constitution, such as collecting taxes and providing for the common defense and general welfare of the country, and regulating commerce between the states and with foreign nations, he said.

“Nowhere in the Constitution, in the United States Constitution, do we find authority for Congress to tax and spend for up to three-quarters of what Congress taxes and spends for today,” Williams said. “In other words, there is no constitutional authority for farm subsidies, bank bailouts, food stamps, business bailouts—not to mention midnight basketball.”

The latter is a reference to a provision in a federal anti-crime bill in the mid-1990s.

The rise in spending in government, he said, is the best way to illustrate how fast and how much the government has grown.

“To put it in perspective, in 1902, expenditures at all levels of government—I mean federal, state, and local levels of government—totaled $1.7 billion,” he said. “In 1902, the average taxpayer paid $60 a year for state and local taxes. In fact, from 1787 until 1925, federal expenditures were only 3 percent of the [gross domestic product], except during wartime.”

But that was then, and this is now.

“Today, federal expenditures alone are close to 25 percent of the GDP. State and local governments spend over $3 trillion. The federal government over $4 trillion,” he said. “The average taxpayer today pays more than $10,000 a year in federal, state, and local taxes.”

Williams, a syndicated columnist, urged those in his audience to take ownership of what is rightfully theirs.

“As time goes by, you and I own less and less of our most valuable property; namely, ourselves and the fruits of our labor,” he said, adding:

Free enterprise is threatened today, not because of its failure. Somewhat ironically, it is threatened because of its success.

That is, free enterprise or capitalism has been so successful in eliminating the traditional problems of mankind—such as disease, pestilence, hunger, and gross poverty—that all other human problems appear to us at once to be inexcusable and unbearable.

Williams said Americans need to remember that all of the programs “offered” by the government come at a personal cost and that the government has no resources of its own.

“[T]hose programs coming from Washington or out of your state capitals, they don’t represent congressmen and legislators reaching in their own pockets to send out the money,” he noted, adding:

When we recognize that government has no resources of its very own, that forces you to recognize that the only way the government can give one American one dollar is first through intimidation, threats, and coercion—confiscate that dollar from some other American.

Now if you think I am being too loose with terminology and intimidation, threats, and coercion, you have April 15.

He said that it’s incumbent on the American people to return to the Founders’ vision of limited government to preserve freedom.

“I think that our government has become destructive of the ends it was created to serve,” Williams said. “I think that our Founders would be very disappointed with you and me if they were to come back and see that we have developed a new class of people that prefers safety to liberty.

“But the optimistic note for us is that we Americans have not done the wrong thing for a long time,” he added. “But we better get about setting our house in order while we still have the freedom to do so.”

Williams’ lecture was the first in a new series, “Free Markets: The Ethical Economic Choice,” sponsored by The Heritage Foundation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel.

Newly Disclosed Strzok-Page Texts Shed New Light on ‘Media Leak Strategy’ at FBI, Justice


Strzok-Page texts revealed “an apparent systemic culture of media leaking by high-ranking officials at the FBI and DOJ related to ongoing investigations.” (Photo: Aaron P. Bernstein/Reuters/Newscom)

Peter Strzok has been fired from his job at the FBI, but the hits from his text messages to his former mistress, former FBI lawyer Lisa Page, just keep on coming. In the latest development, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., has written a letter to Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, disclosing that the latest documents provided to his committee by the Justice Department contained Strzok-Page texts that revealed “an apparent systemic culture of media leaking by high-ranking officials at the FBI and DOJ related to ongoing investigations.”

Meadows, who chairs the subcommittee on government operations of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, was referring to a text on April 10, 2017, in which Strzok tells Page that he wants to talk to her “about [a] media leak strategy with DOJ.”

The reason that this is significant is that on April 11, the very next day, The Washington Post broke the story that the FBI had obtained Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants to electronically eavesdrop on former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page after convincing the FISA court that Page was “acting as an agent of a foreign power.”

The Washington Post article cited “law enforcement” officials as the source of its story. On April 12, the day after the story broke, Strzok sent Lisa Page another text message that, according to Meadows, congratulated her for a job “well done,” while referring to two derogatory articles about Carter Page.

As Meadows correctly points out, the story set “off a flurry of articles suggesting connections between President Trump and Russia.”

Of course, after a year and a half of the special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller, there still has not been any evidence publicly revealed that shows any actual collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials and agents. Moreover, Carter Page has never been charged with being an agent of a foreign power or for any other violation of the law.

What makes this even worse is that Meadows also tells Rosenstein that other documents indicate that Andrew Weissmann “participated in unauthorized conversations with the media during this same time period,” as did other “senior officials at the FBI and DOJ.” Weissmann is a senior deputy to Mueller in the special counsel’s investigation.

None of this alleged misbehavior should be a surprise.

In June, the Justice Department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, released his report on the handling of the separate Hillary Clinton email investigation. One of his findings was that FBI agents “widely ignored” the FBI’s policy against disclosure of confidential information about law enforcement investigations. The agents making these disclosures even “received benefits from reporters, including tickets to sporting events, golfing outings, drinks and meals, and admittance to nonpublic events.”

The disclosure of confidential law enforcement information in a criminal investigation can irreparably damage the reputations and livelihoods of innocent individuals (not to mention presidential candidates). It can also unduly prejudice the due process rights of those targeted in a federal investigation and prosecution.

What is especially disturbing about this is that, as Meadows says in his letter:

During our interviews with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, FBI attorneys consistently suggested witnesses could not answer questions due to the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual’s policy for ongoing investigations.  However, documents strongly suggest that these same witnesses discussed the ongoing investigation multiple times with individuals outside of the investigative team on a regular basis.

If anyone thinks this leaking has been stopped since Horowitz criticized the FBI in his June report, think again.

Meadows says that his committee “continues to receive troubling evidence that the practice of coordinated media interactions continues to exist with the DOJ and FBI.” In August, Meadows claimed that he had information indicating that the FBI and Justice Department leaked information to the press in order to be able to use “those same press stories as a separate source to justify FISA” warrants.

As a result of his review of this recently provided documentation, Meadows is asking Rosenstein for copies of all communications between several FBI agents and Justice Department officials and Strzok, Lisa Page, Andrew McCabe, Bruce Ohr, and Weissmann that “would provide critical insight into the backdrop of the Russia investigation.”

What Meadows didn’t ask for—but should have—is an explanation about Weissmann’s alleged meetings with the media.

  • Did they happen, and, if so, why? Who authorized them? 
  • What was the purpose?
  • What confidential information was revealed?
  • Did those communications reveal any bias by Weissmann that might affect the integrity of the ongoing investigation?
  • Were any media stories used in any FISA applications to justify electronic surveillance?

It seems clear from Meadows’ letter that Congress and the public may still not have all of the information they need to determine whether there was a legitimate basis for the FISA warrants that authorized electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign and launched the Russian election-collusion investigation, and whether this investigation has been appropriately handled.

Horowitz’s office is investigating alleged abuses of the FISA process. Hopefully, his report will cover these issues.

It is also important that Congress get to the bottom of this, not only to protect the rights of individuals who may have been unfairly targeted by federal law enforcement agents, but also to ensure that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is an important and necessary tool in our counter-intelligence operations, was not maliciously abused for political purposes.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Portrait of Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research.

Government for Hire? Emails Show ‘Climate Industry’ Funds Jobs in Offices of Governors, Attorneys General


California Gov. Jerry Brown is welcoming climate activists to a global summit in San Francisco this week. Pictured: Brown delivers his final state of the state address Jan. 25 in Sacramento. (Photo: Fred Greaves/Reuters/ Newscom)

California Gov. Jerry Brown is host of a three-day “Global Climate Action Summit” in San Francisco organized by an “activist donor network” that has burrowed into state government agencies, a climate change skeptic says in a new report.

Chris Horner, a senior fellow with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, is the author of two reports detailing how a well-endowed “climate industry” steers donor money through nonprofit organizations into the offices of state governors and attorneys general.

The relationship between governors and environmental activists who are using governors’ offices to advance the climate change agenda of certain donors is the subject of a report by Horner released Tuesday by CEI, a libertarian think tank in Washington.

“A particular theme slated for the San Francisco event is that President Trump’s promise to withdraw from the Paris climate treaty is isolating the United States from what is otherwise and elsewhere a doable, successful, and economically beneficial adoption of this agenda,” Horner writes.

The new report highlighting Brown, a Democrat, builds on Horner’s report last month describing how these same special interests work with compliant state attorneys general.

It views the actions of Brown in California as a case study, examining how elected officials and other political figures allow their offices to be used to pursue climate change policies that conform with the international accord known as the Paris Agreement.

Government officials around the world negotiated the agreement in Paris as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2015. The agreement calls on countries to combat the perceived threat of climate change by working to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

In June 2017, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, which he said “disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries.”

Brown’s San Francisco summit, set for Wednesday through Friday, places a strong emphasis on opposition to Trump’s policies, Horner writes:

Trump vowed to withdraw from the Paris Agreement because it is in reality a costly and ineffectual solution to the alleged climate crisis, it mostly directs resources to politically favored industries, and it harms disfavored ones. For similar reasons, the climate industry is dedicated to reversing Trump’s not yet consummated decision.

A major component of its campaign is claiming momentum toward Paris’s goals and rebutting the history of economic and social costs involved in implementing the policies that Paris demands. Implementation of the Paris agenda requires domestic policies, and implementing those policies is the principal objective of the campaign detailed in this paper.

The Daily Signal sought comment from Brown’s office on the new report, but had not received a response at publication time.

The California governor’s three-day summit comes with a budget of $10 million made possible through the support of individuals, foundations, governments and business, according to Horner’s report.

The nonprofits involved “take a handsome percentage for serving as middlemen,” it says.

Emails obtained from open-records requests indicate that politicians are making use of nonprofits and consultants as “pass-throughs for donors to support politicians with resources that the relevant legislatures will not provide and that donors cannot legally provide directly,” Horner’s report says.

The email records describe privately funded staff members placed in governor’s offices as “refugees” from the Obama administration who are working to reposition U.S. policy on climate and energy to conform with their preferred policies.

Horner, author of a 2007 book called “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism,” raises several questions in the new report in response to what he uncovered:

Are the donors going to such lengths to avoid 1) directly placing consultants in governors’ offices or 2) giving the money to do so directly to those offices, because they are barred from such placement? If so, why is this permissible? Or is the effort creating middlemen all merely due to appearances? Why do we find participants misleading or telling outright falsehoods when questioned about what we have found?

And the biggest issue of all is, does this represent government for hire?

The “off-the-book” operations detailed in the emails call out for legislative oversight to determine whether they violate state laws, Horner concludes.

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


Whining From Behind

Obama won’t take responsibility for the worst economic recovery in U.S. history but is trying to take credit for Trump’s historic economic boom.

Obama Economic CoattailsPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2018.
More A.F. Branco cartoons at Constitution.com here.

A.F.Branco’s New Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

take our poll – story continues below
  • Are you done with Nike after announcing Colin Kaepernick will be featured in their 30th anniversary “Just Do It” marketing campaign?

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News” and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, and even the great El Rushbo.

FYI Cartoonists: Drawing Serena Williams Throwing A Fit Is Now ‘Racist’


Written By Wes Walker |

You haven’t seen this much outrage over a cartoon since that Danish guy drew something that set half the world on fire. Turns out some people get really antsy when you draw Mohammed. Who knew?

In America, they don’t care so much if you draw a religious figure. And mocking politicians (especially if they are Republican) is fair game. Not just ‘fair game’, but it’s absolutely open season.

Have you seen Time Magazine’s representative of our President on their covers? They even used that bogus pic of Trump towering over a little girl who wasn’t ACTUALLY separated from her mommy like the press photographer had first claimed.

And one guy is so worked up on the bogus idea that Russia stole the election that he expressed himself with this dishonorable slop, on 9/11 of all days:

But if a cartoonist lampoons a beloved celebrity’s childish behavior? Serena threw a tantrum, broke the rules, was docked points, stole the spotlight, and sucked all the oxygen out of a moment that should have been one of triumph for the new champion.

Make fun of THAT in a comic, and all hell breaks loose.

People took issue with the caricature of Serena’s features. (Are these critics new to the idea of political and current-event cartoons?)

Here are some responses:

And no, there wasn’t really a baby’s pacifier on the court when Williams had her tantrum but that is part of the humor and embellishment that cartoonists routinely employ to make a point. It’s astonishing that something so obvious needs to be pointed out.

“I have to make her look like who she is. I’m not going to draw Taylor Swift when I’m portraying Serena Williams,” Knight explained.

“It’s a cartoon about poor behavior. It’s got nothing to do with race.

“Maybe you can’t caricature people of color but a couple of weeks ago I did a cartoon of Aretha Franklin. I’ve heard cartoonists say to criticize a minority in any way is ‘punching down’ and because I’m a white man, it’s out of bounds for me to criticize someone like Serena Williams.”
Source: Herald Sun

Someone wrote in with about as sensible a defense of the picture as you can get:

SHOW a race-obsessed agitator a cartoon lampooning a petulant tennis star and all they’ll see is “racism”. That’s all they ever see, whether it exists or not.

You know we live in crazy times when a progressive artist from country Victoria is slandered around the world as a racist misogynist for a funny cartoon that depicts Serena Williams’ outrageous antics at the US Open tennis final.
Source: Herald Sun

Just like a little while ago when everyone was freaking out about the ‘obvious racism’ of Ron DeSantis saying ‘monkey this up’, finding new ‘racist overtones’ every day says more about the perpetually offended grumblers who cry foul than the people they accuse of racism.

It’s a cartoon. Grow up and get yourself a sense of humor. If you won’t do that, you can just pick up Serena’s soother and go home.

Opinion | Trump Shuts Down Assad, Shows Obama How a Real Leader Handles Chemical Warfare


Reported By Jared Harris | September 10, 2018 at

6:57pm

Chemical weapons are some of the nastiest things to come out of war. They can’t tell the difference between a soldier and a child. Depending on the level of exposure, death can come after a few agonizing minutes. Those that do survive often live with neurological, physiological, and mental wounds for the rest of their life.

It’s no wonder this was a “red line” for former President Barack Obama in the Syrian Civil War. When chemical weapons were used, however, the United States of America was nowhere to be found.

Obama’s excuse? Chlorine gas, used in the attack, isn’t a chemical weapon.

“Chlorine itself has not been listed as a chemical weapon,” the former president stated.

Chemical weapon or not, chlorine gas isn’t pretty. I won’t list the effects here, but accounts from the First World War paint a grisly picture of chlorine’s gruesome interaction with human skin, eyes, and organs.

Let’s give Obama a pass and let him play around with semantics. President Donald Trump operates by a different standard.

Syria attempted to test Trump’s red line with chemical weapons, possibly expecting the same response as Obama. Within a week, Trump had U.S. warships parked on the coast. A few missile salvos made his position on the matter painfully clear.

Now, apparently not done with poking the sleeping giant, Syria has doubled down on chemical weapons. Syrian President Bashar Assad has given the green light for use of chlorine in what is expected to be the last true battle of the Syrian Civil War.

Idlib province is the last remaining rebel holdout, and the target of Assad’s chemical ambitions.

The remaining rebels are a motley crew — the survivors include al-Qaeda allies and the Turkistan Islamic Party, an Islamic terrorist group that was founded in China. Unfortunately, the area is also crawling with civilians.

The province of Idlib had a population of 1.5 million in 2011, giving it roughly the same population as modern-day Hawaii. Although international treaties forbid use of force against civilian targets, the Syrian Civil War is already rife with humanitarian crimes.

Trump leveled a stark warning against Assad, telling him to play fair — or else.

“If it’s a slaughter, the world is going to get very, very angry, and the United States is going to get very angry too,” President Trump said.

A new initiative approved by the Commander-in-Chief would see 2,000 U.S. troops stationed in Syria indefinitely. The purpose is to ensure the total eradication of ISIS as well as the return of Iranian forces to their home country.

The Middle East has ultimately been a quagmire for the United States military. Every insurgent force we fight is an expert in asymmetrical warfare, draining our economy while giving us no real gains. We have nothing to show in the almost 17 years we have spent engaged in Afghanistan. Our time in Iraq did unseat a dictator, but our exit gave ISIS a playground full of abandoned U.S. equipment.

This doesn’t mean we should ignore evil in the world. Trump was right to act once his red line had been violated. Assad knows to tread carefully now — the second lesson from the United States is sure to be more painful than the first.

As for the best Syria policy? Donald Trump himself hinted at it in 2013.

If they want a war, we’re always ready to give them one. But let’s hope they don’t.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Jared is a husband, dad, and aspiring farmer. He was an infantryman in the Arkansas and Georgia National Guard. If he’s not with his wife and son, then he’s either shooting guns or working on his motorcycle.

Tag Cloud