Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for the ‘Opinion’ Category

Opinion: Luckily, Dems Never Have ‘Personal, Political’ Motives


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 10, 2019 9:30 AM

Luckily, Dems Never Have ‘Personal, Political’ Motives | Source: AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Today we will answer the question: May a president ask a foreign country to investigate corruption if it serves his “personal, political” interests? The “personal, political” angle is the last gasp of the impeachment hysterics. (I’m looking at you, Sens. Rob Portman (Ohio), Susan Collins (Maine), Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Nebraska).)

Yes, Donald Trump is, technically, “president,” and, yes, former Vice President Joe Biden used his government position to withhold foreign aid until the president of Ukraine fired a prosecutor looking into a company paying Biden’s drug addict son millions of dollars for mysterious reasons. But, the impeachment fanatics assert, by asking a foreign leader to assist in an otherwise legitimate corruption investigation, Trump has committed a monstrous crime — because he was pursuing a “personal political interest.” To wit: Trump was trying to harm his political opponent, Joe Biden.

Apart from the blindingly obvious fact that you can’t commit crimes and then escape justice simply by running for president, Democrats take official government action for “personal, political” reasons all the time. Frequently, they do so for the sole purpose of harming their political opponents.

President Barack Obama’s IRS investigated and harassed conservative groups for years, using the most fearsome arm of the government to punish political enemies — for personal, political reasons. Then his Department of Justice refused to prosecute the corrupt officials, which, I believe, was again for — yes, it was personal, political reasons.

How about the Obama administration’s endless investigations of Ferguson, Missouri, police officer Darren Wilson? As was obvious from the outset, Officer Wilson had done absolutely nothing wrong when he fatally shot Mike Brown — something even Obama’s corrupt, subpoena-defying attorney general, Eric Holder, had to concede after reviewing all the evidence.

Those massive Department of Justice investigations were undertaken to gin up the Democratic base in order to help Hillary, who proceeded to honor Mike Brown’s mother on stage at the Democratic National Convention.

In the most perfect example of a president demanding investigations for no other purpose than serving a “personal, political” interest, in 1999, when Hillary was gearing up to run for the Senate from New York against Mayor Rudy Giuliani, President Bill Clinton (her husband) launched investigation after investigation into the crown jewel of the Giuliani administration, the NYPD.

In 1999, as the NYPD was virtually eliminating crime in New York City, there were a grand total of 11 fatal shootings by police officers. That’s 0.28 fatal shootings for every 1,000 officers.

In Washington, D.C., that year, there were four times as many fatal police shootings — 1.14 per 1,000 cops. In Houston, the number was 1.68. In San Diego, it was 4.36.

In the end, Giuliani withdrew from the race to treat his prostate cancer, but when President Clinton was demanding these investigations, Rudy was crushing Hillary both in the polls and in political contributions.

Speaking of whom, Hillary used her position as secretary of state to overthrow Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi, leading to the murder of a U.S. ambassador and several other Americans in Benghazi, as well as creating the refugee crisis currently engulfing Western Europe — all for her own personal, political reasons.

As was dramatically revealed in Hillary’s email exchanges with her unofficial adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, her motive for deposing Qaddafi was to display her foreign policy chops, apart from that lunkhead Obama, who was, as Blumenthal sneered, “intent on seizing defeat from the jaws of victory.”

Blumenthal egged on Hillary to keep the pressure on Qaddafi, promising her a major political win. When Qaddafi was ousted, Blumenthal exulted: “First, brava! You must go on camera. You must establish yourself in the historical record at this moment. … You are vindicated.”

Soon thereafter, Qaddafi was beaten to death in the desert by rebels who posted graphic video of the murder online. Cackling with delight at the initial reports, Hillary positioned herself alongside Julius Caesar: “We came. We saw. He died.”

Most obviously, the Obama administration’s entire illegal FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign was undertaken for personal, political purposes. We’ve been waiting for three years to hear some legitimate reason for the FBI’s surveillance of the Trump campaign. At this point, I think it’s fair to say, we’re not getting one.

The Obama administration spent millions of dollars and millions of man-hours on a purely political investigation to hurt Trump and help elect Hillary.

As long as you mention it, the House Democrats’ investigation of Trump’s phone call to the Ukrainian president has been undertaken for personal political reasons, too. So was Biden’s withholding of a $1 billion check from the president of Ukraine to protect his son’s sleazy business deal.

We can play the “personal, political motive” game all day long!

At least when Republicans do it, the Middle East doesn’t explode in jihadist fury, the crime rate doesn’t skyrocket, people don’t die or lose their livelihoods — and there’s real corruption being exposed.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

The Transcript We Really Want to See


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 25, 2019 7:04 PM

The Transcript We Really Want to See | Joe and Hunter Biden | Source: AP Photo/Nick Wass

Editor’s note: The following column contains graphic language.

The transcript of President Trump’s phone call with Ukrainian President Zelensky is yet another illustration of the rule: Never ask a question you don’t know the answer to.

But on the basis of one drama queen’s overreaction to a rumor she’d heard about what was said on a phone call she didn’t hear (I’m assuming the whistleblower is Christine Blasey Ford), the Democrats have launched impeachment proceedings against the president.

I guess they figured it’s easier than flying to South Dakota with picks and chisels and carving Trump into Mount Rushmore. But it will have the same effect.

Now that the transcript has been released, it’s The New York Times that doesn’t want anyone to see it.

The transcript I’d like to see is the one of Nancy Pelosi reading the Trump transcript. 

F@@@@@@CK! Whose f***ing idea was it to demand this goddamn transcript?
F@CK!
F@@CK!
F@@@CK!

The absolute worst version for Trump — i.e. the one being repeated non-stop on MSNBC — is that he did exactly what Obama and Biden were doing to Ukraine: intimidating an ally into giving us something in exchange for the foreign aid we were giving them.

Biden himself bragged about getting Ukraine’s prosecutor fired by threatening to withhold a big fat check from them.

The Democrats’ argument is: No, no, no! When WE were pressuring Ukraine, we were doing it for good! Don’t you understand? We’re good; they’re bad.

The other reason the media are going to have to bury this transcript is that Trump brought up a few items that the media have been hoping the public would never find out about.

Trump said: “There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

Well, that’s something the media haven’t mentioned before. Ninety-nine percent of Americans will be hearing about the funny business with Biden’s son, Hunter, for the first time with the release of this transcript.

Why did Vice President Biden order the Ukrainian president to fire the prosecutor investigating the Ukrainian company paying his son millions of dollars? Are Democrats claiming that this company was clean as a whistle and it was an absolute OUTRAGE that it was being investigated?

The second issue the media does not want anyone to think about is CrowdStrike.

What is CrowdStrike, you ask? That is the cybersecurity firm that is the sole source of the claim that the Russians hacked the DNC’s emails — which launched the conspiracy theories that tied our country in knots for the past three years.

The Russian collusion story was originally hatched by Hillary Clinton in the summer of 2016 to cover up the utter corruption revealed by the dump of Democratic National Committee emails on Wikileaks. As was her practice whenever a scandal threatened to engulf her, Hillary rushed out and told the press to investigate something else.

And “the great story” about the DNC email hack wasn’t about a “vast right-wing conspiracy” — as she claimed when the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke. No, this time, it was a vast Russian conspiracy!

At the time, the entire media laughed at Hillary’s Russian conspiracy nonsense — The New York Times, New York Newsday, the Los Angeles Times and so on. But then Trump won the election, and suddenly the Russia conspiracy seemed totally believable. What else could explain how Americans could put this boob in the White House?

The subsequent three years of breathless Russia coverage was based entirely on the word of one cybersecurity firm, CrowdStrike, that the DNC’s emails had been hacked by Russia.

Recall that the DNC wouldn’t allow the FBI or any other U.S. government official anywhere near its computers. That’s precisely why so many cybersecurity experts doubted that it was the Russians: The FBI was never allowed to perform its own investigation.

CrowdStrike was founded by Ukrainian Dmitri Alperovitch (now an American citizen apparently — because who isn’t?) and funded by the fanatically anti-Russian Ukrainian oligarch Viktor Pinchuk Foundation.

Talk about interfering with our democracy! Alperovitch and Pinchuk sent one political party and nine-tenths of the American media off on a wild goose chase into Russian collusion that, after years of accusations, investigations and embarrassing conspiracy-mongering … turned up goose eggs.

The entire Russian insanity was launched by a couple of Ukrainians. I think a lot of us would like to get to the bottom of that.

This is why Trump said to President Zelensky: “I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

(How’d you like to be the Ukrainian translator for a Trump conversation?)

Trump has been justly criticized for hiring his daughter and son-in-law at the White House. But at least when he pressures a foreign leader for a favor, it’s to investigate corruption, not to get a prosecutor off his son’s back. Maybe Biden’s son was guilty, maybe he was innocent. But it is a fact that Joe Biden held up foreign aid to a desperately needy ally in exchange for their halting prosecution that implicated his son. It’s not Trump’s fault that Biden is now running for president.

I’ll give the Democrats this: They’ve gotten so good at trying to remove Trump from office that, instead of three years, their insane accusations blow up in their faces within a week.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Ann Coulter: Could I Get All That Illegal ‘To Go’?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | posted: Aug 28, 2019 6:10 PM

Could I Get All That Illegal ‘To Go’? / Source: AP Photo/John Bazemore

As we head into the long Labor Day weekend, here are two tips to make your holiday even more cheerful. 

First: Remember to watch out for drunk driving illegal aliens!

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued a report after report showing that Hispanics are wildly overrepresented in drunk driving accidents (but also contribute so much to our cultural life, musical heritage and landscape!).

Or, as the Huffington Post puts it: “Latinos At Greater Risk of Dying From Driving While Intoxicated.” They’re victims of the drunk driving epidemic! German Concentration Camp Guards At Greater Risk of Dying From Accidental Inhalation of Zyklon B.

One NHTSA report elaborated on the inebriated Latino driver problem:

“The authors found that some Latino parents actively promoted drinking among their sons as a sign of masculinity or machismo. (A focus group) indicated drinking among Hispanics might be motivated by the need to prove their manhood within the Latino culture: ‘Everyone thinks they can handle alcohol, especially men.’ … ‘A lot of Hispanics think that way. It’s the macho male and the woman gives in to the man. Machismo causes this behavior.’”

The report also stated, “Mexican-American DWI offenders vastly overestimated the number of drinks required to make them unsafe drivers (eight to 10 drinks).”

It’s unclear if the NHTSA’s methodology took into account the effects of Cinco de Mayo.

Naturally, it would be outrageous to conclude from this that drunk driving is the national sport of Mexico. However, last year alone, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deported 80,730 illegals for drunk driving, the majority of them Mexicans.

As the Houston Chronicle delicately put it a few years ago: “Young Hispanic men not getting message about drinking, driving.” crashing, burning, their ashes being spread across Cuernavaca …

Thanks to its proximity to Mexico, Texas leads the nation in fatal drunk driving accidents, including those involving a blood alcohol content of 0.15 or greater — nearly double the legal limit. In 2014, young Latinos were responsible for about one-third of all DUI accidents in Houston — 535 — though they made up only 8 percent of the population.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell sneered at President Trump’s June 2018 meeting with family members of Americans killed by illegals, saying most of their dead kids were killed in traffic accidents. As if that doesn’t count.

Yeah, that must have been rough, some real Brian Williams stuff there. But Don Rosenberg finding out his 25-year-old son had been run over, backed over and then run over again by an illegal alien — well, that’s just a “traffic accident.”

Our media have no idea who Don Rosenberg is, and no interest in finding out. Their concern for “children” is limited to the ones they can exploit to get their way on illegal immigration. They wail about “children separated from their parents,” but it would be a dream come true for the “Angel Mom” parents if their kids were merely separated from them for six months — or six years! — if only they could see them again, ever.

You know what else is kind of traumatic? Being wedged into the false panel of a truck with a breathing tube before traversing hundreds of miles of rough terrain to make it to the U.S. border. These parents did that to their kids.

The New York Times, too, nonchalantly mentioned that the kids of some of the families at Trump’s White House meeting “died in car accidents.” They just died. Car accidents happen all the time.

Yes, traffic accidents can be caused by anyone — especially a sh*t-faced illegal going 80 miles per hour on a residential street. Internet scams happen all the time, so, let’s take in more Nigerians!

The point is, these particular drunk drivers never should have been here in the first place.

Tricia Taylor didn’t die, but the 18-year-old had to have her legs amputated almost to the hip after a drunk driving illegal alien from El Salvador swerved his car onto a sidewalk in Pontiac, Michigan, and rammed her against the wall. It was a miracle that she lived, suffering through multiple surgeries and a lifetime of pain medications. At Jose Carcamo’s sentencing, Taylor said, “What you give him won’t come close to the sentence he gave me for the rest of my life.”

D.J. and Wendy Corcoran began 2019 by burying their 22-year-old son, Pierce, senselessly killed when a 44-year-old illegal alien from Mexico, Francisco Eduardo Franco-Cambrany, swerved headfirst across a double yellow line, straight into oncoming traffic. Echoing the media, Alexander De La Espriella tweeted of Pierce’s horrible death, “Accidents happen, by anyone to anyone … ” — as quoted in the Knoxville News. At least we didn’t have to hear about the great tacos this time.

Six-year-old Annie Cumpston was walking hand-in-hand with her mother in 2003, after attending the Ringling Brothers Circus in Baltimore with her family, when a drunk Mexican plowed into the crosswalk, killing the little girl. The intoxicated illegal, Guillermo Diaz-Lopez, fled the scene, dragging a pedestrian on his truck, and was finally apprehended while trying to break through a police barrier.

Today, you can visit “Annie’s Playground,” a beautiful 60,000-square-foot wonderland built in the victim’s honor in Fallston, Maryland — at least until Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris demand its demolition to show their support for “undocumented immigrants.”

Second friendly holiday tip: Always remember — diversity is a strength!

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Ann Coulter Alert: Why the New York Times Is Unreformable and Must Die


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 21, 2019 4:00 PM

Why the New York Times Is Unreformable and Must Die Source: AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

Even before The New York Times launched its “All Slavery, All the Time” project, no one could accuse that paper of skimping on its race coverage, particularly stories about black males killed by white(ish) police officers.

Here’s one you haven’t heard about. I happened upon it by sheer accident.

Antwon Rose II was a 17-year-old boy shot by an East Pittsburgh police officer in June 2018 after he bolted from a jitney car that had been stopped by the officer. The Times published about a half-dozen stories on Antwon Rose — or as the Times calls him, “Antwon, who was unarmed.”

After the officer was acquitted on all charges in March of this year, the Times ran an article by Adeel Hassan on the verdict.

Here’s what you would learn from the Times:

— Antwon was unarmed.

— Antwon “was in his high school’s honors program.”

— Antwon “played basketball and the saxophone.”

— Antwon “volunteered for a local charity.”

— In 2016, Antwon wrote a poem titled, “I Am Not What You Think!” which included these lines:

I see mothers bury their sons

I want my Mom to never feel that pain.

— A policeman stopped the gold Chevy Cruze Antwon “was riding in” because it “matched the description” of a car “involved” in a drive-by shooting minutes earlier.

— The jury consisted of nine whites and three African Americans.

If you read the Times piece, all you would know is that an honor student who loved his mom…was KILLED for the crime of riding in a car similar to one that had just been used in a crime.

Wow. Just wow.

Here are some of the facts the Times left out:

— The gold Chevy Cruze Antwon fled did not merely “match the description of” a car used in a drive-by shooting: It was the car used in the drive-by shooting, as proved by surveillance video posted online days after the shooting and shown to the jury.

— The video shows 13 shots being fired from the back seat of that exact car, with — according to the prosecutor — Antwon riding in the front seat.

— The backseat passenger, Zaijuan Hester, later pleaded guilty to the drive-by shooting.

— One of the victims of the drive-by shooting told police it was Antwon who shot him. “The beef was between me and him,” William Ross told a Pennsylvania State Police officer. “That car came by, he shot me, I ran to the store.”

— The jitney driver told police that, right before the shooting started, he heard the backseat passenger ask, “Is that him?”

— The gun used in the drive-by was recovered in the back seat of the car.

— A stolen gun was found under Antwon’s seat, an empty magazine in Antwon’s pants pocket, and there was gunpowder residue on Antwon’s hands.

— The car stopped by the officer was riddled with bullet holes.

— The jury that unanimously acquitted the officer was led by an African American foreman, who stoutly defended the verdict.

None of that made it into the Times story on the trial’s conclusion.

I’m glad that Antwon did charity work, but isn’t it rather more important that he had participated in a drive-by shooting of two other black guys 13 minutes before being stopped by a police officer?

That’s not conjecture or speculation. Hassan wasn’t writing about the case the day after the shooting. These are facts that were presented in court and copiously reported by the local media — even in the British press.

Normal Person to The New York Times: Why did you say the car “matched the description” of the car used in a drive-by shooting — but not say that it WAS the car used in the drive-by shooting?

NYT: I’m sorry, who are you and do you have a press pass?

Normal Person: You didn’t mention that a stolen gun was found under Antwon’s seat and a matching cartridge in Antwon’s pocket???

NYT: We only have so much space and I needed room for Antwon’s poem.

Normal Person: You didn’t have space to say that gun residue was found on Antwon’s hands?

NYT: I could have run more of the poem. It was a good poem.

Normal Person: Or that one of the victims of the drive-by said Antwon was the one who shot him?

NYT: The officer didn’t know that.

Normal Person: Did the officer know about Antwon’s A.P. classes? It goes to the likelihood of his behavior being perceived as threatening. The officer could certainly see that the car’s back window had been shot out.

NYT: You’re a white supremacist and white nationalist and, yes, I know they’re different, but you’re both.

There’s no reason to think this isn’t standard operating procedure at the Times. The editors can’t say, OK, OK, that one got past us! 

The Times has told wild lies about the racist shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri (false), the racist arrest of Freddie Gray in Baltimore (false), the racist shooting of Trayvon Martin in Florida (false), the racist gang-rape of a black stripper by a Duke lacrosse team (false) and so on.

Antwon Rose’s shooting wasn’t even a flood-the-zone, hair-on-fire story. But the Times lied about it, too.

This is a newspaper that cannot be trusted on anything touching on race. They’re liars and ideologues, not reporters and editors.

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Ann Coulter Letter: Mueller Has a Reputation…


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 24, 2019 4:50 PM

URL of the original posting site: https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2019/07/24/mueller-has-a-reputation—p–n2550571

Mueller Has a Reputation...

Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

It is apparently part of Robert Mueller’s contract with the media that he must always be described as “honorable” and a “lifelong Republican.” (After this week, we can add “dazed and confused” to his appellation.)

If it matters that Mueller is a “lifelong Republican,” then I guess it matters that he hired a team of left-wing zealots. Of the 17 lawyers in Mueller’s office, 14 are registered Democrats. Not one is a registered Republican. In total, they have donated more than $60,000 to Democratic candidates.

Congressman Steve Chabot listed the Democratic political activism of nine of Mueller’s staff attorneys at a December 2017 House hearing.

Here are a few from Chabot’s list:

— Kyle Freeny contributed to both Obama campaigns and to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
— Andrew Goldstein donated $3,300 to both Obama campaigns.
— Elizabeth Prelogar contributed to both the Obama and Clinton campaigns.
— Jeannie Rhee donated $16,000 to Democrats, contributed $5,400 to the Clinton campaign — and represented Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation in several lawsuits.
— Andrew Weissmann contributed $2,000 to the Democratic National Committee, $2,300 to the Obama campaign and $2,300 to the Clinton Campaign.

None had donated to the Trump campaign.

The media brushed off the conspicuous anti-Trump bias in Mueller’s office with platitudes about how prosecutors are, “allowed to have political opinions,” as Jeffrey Toobin said on CNN. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein assured the public that their “views are not in any way a factor in how they conduct themselves in office.”

Obviously, no one believes this — otherwise “lifelong Republican” wouldn’t be spot-welded to Mueller’s name.

In a fiery rebuke at the hearings this week, Mueller denounced complaints about all the diehard Democrats on his legal team, saying, “I’ve been in this business for almost 25 years, and in those 25 years I have not had occasion once to ask somebody about their political affiliation. It is not done.”

No kidding. He’s been director of the FBI. He’s been acting U.S. deputy attorney general. He’s been a U.S. attorney. He’s never been an independent counsel investigating the president before.

But lawyers on a special counsel’s investigation of the president of the United States aren’t supposed to be hungry. They’re supposed to be fair.

As for Mueller being “honorable,” Steven Hatfill and the late Sen. Ted Stevens might beg to differ.

After the 2001 anthrax attacks, the FBI, under Director Mueller’s close supervision, spent SEVEN YEARS pursuing Hatfill, a U.S. Army biodefense researcher. Year after year, the real culprit went about his life undisturbed — until he committed suicide when, at last, the FBI zeroed in on him.

Mueller was deeply involved in the anthrax investigation, recruiting the lead investigator on the case and working “in lockstep” with him, according to a book on the case, “The Mirage Man” by David Willman.

During this multi-year investigation of the wrong man, Mueller assured Attorney General John Ashcroft, as well as two U.S. senators that Hatfill was the anthrax mailer. Presciently, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz asked then-Deputy Attorney General James Comey if he was sure Hatfill wasn’t another Richard Jewell, an innocent man who, a few years earlier, had been publicly identified by the FBI as the main Olympic bombing suspect. Comey replied that he was “absolutely certain that it was Hatfill.”

Recommended

Good Riddance To Bob Mueller

Kurt Schlichter

The hounding of Steven Hatfill finally ended in 2008, with the bureau paying the poor man millions of dollars. In open court, a federal judge, Reggie B. Walton, assailed Mueller’s FBI for its handling of the case. Far from apologizing, the director stoutly defended the bureau’s relentless pursuit of the blameless Hatfill, saying: “I do not apologize for any aspect of this investigation.” He said it would be incorrect “to say there were mistakes.”

Maybe he can use that line to defend the similarly monomaniacal zealots he put on the Russia investigation.

Eight days before the 2008 elections, the government convicted Sen. Stevens of failing to properly report gifts on his Senate financial forms. The longest-serving Republican in Senate history lost his re-election by less than 2 percent of the vote.

Months later — too late for Stevens’ political career — Obama Attorney General Eric Holder moved for a dismissal of all charges against Stevens after discovering that the government had failed to turn over crucial exculpatory evidence. The trial judge not only threw out the charges, but angrily ordered an independent counsel to investigate the investigators.

Unlike the disastrous Hatfill case, the extent of Mueller’s oversight of the Stevens investigation is less clear. Was he aware of the bureau’s malicious pursuit of a sitting U.S. senator on the eve of his re-election? Either he was, which is awful, or he wasn’t — which is worse.

In addition to “honorable,” another way of describing Mueller is: “Too Corrupt for Eric Holder.” 

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

I Stand With Rush: Time To Take Action


Written by Lloyd Marcus on July 8, 2019

Conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh passionately responded to a column which warned of a growing anti-Americanism in our country. Rush told his millions of listeners, “We are facing it right now, not 10 years from now.” Rush said do not misinterpret his concern to mean he has lost hope and given up on saving America. He said to view his rant as a clarion call for all who love our country to take action. Rush explained that he is not encouraging violence, but to simply start saying, “No!”

In essence, Rush is saying to stop passively permitting spoiled brat anti-American leftists to trash our flag, pull down historical monuments, demonize patriotism and our Christian founding. Stop allowing leftists to poison the minds of our youths with hatred for their country.

I share Rush’s frustration, particularly as it relates to my fellow black Americans.

Due to their criminal activities involving illegal drugs, two beloved black millennial relatives are in the hospital. One was severely beaten and the other is fighting for his life. Both young men live in Baltimore which is one of the cities controlled by Democrats, plagued with record levels of black on black crime.

Frustratingly, both young relatives are infected with Colin Kapernick’s, Democrats’ and fake news media’s bogus negative view of America. They believe being black in this awful racist country justifies them doing whatever necessary, legal or illegal, to survive.

Both young men were raised with Christian principles and values. If my dad, Dr Rev Lloyd E. Marcus was still alive, they would be too ashamed to look him in the eye. While I hold my relatives accountable for their bad behavior, it is unarguable that allowing Democrats, public education, entertainment and social media to fill our youths heads with hatred for their country has reaped devastating consequences.

Unfortunately, several members of my family are infected with leftists’ anti-Americanism and hatred for Republicans and Trump. At a family gathering, I was tempted to stand in the middle of the room and proclaim, “Do y’all know Democrats want to kill babies, especially black babies, even after they are born? Do y’all know blacks are experiencing historic financial prosperity thanks to President Trump?

Along with allowing leftists to infect our youths with anti-Americanism, we are passively watching the swift transformation of our culture away from biblical morality. LGBTQ enforcers are abusing our children while cramming their evil agenda down our throats.

Many Christians still do not comprehend the tyrannical aggressiveness of the LGBTQ movement. A Christian minister friend of 30 years stopped speaking to me for writing articles about LGBTQ aggression. He is deceived by leftists’ manipulative false narrative that says not embracing the LGBTQ lifestyle means we hate them. The truth is not embracing their sin means we love them.

Christian relatives instructed me not to post my articles exposing the LGBTQ war on gender and Christianity on their Facebook pages. Meanwhile, a shocked relative approached me at a family picnic. The relative said when they offered a 7-year-old boy at the picnic a toy motorcycle, he said he didn’t want it because he is a girl. The relative noticed the lad was wearing a girl bracelet. Apparently, his parents are complicit in his gender confusion. I told the relative, “This is what I have been warning you guys about. This is the outrageous child abuse allowed to happen in our public schools.”

When my wife Mary read me this headline, I assumed it was fake. Sadly, it is not. “Kids Can Handle the Kink.” A deranged sex therapist said not only can children handle witnessing explicit sex acts during gay pride parades, but it is also beneficial to their healthy development. 

A devastated gentleman emailed me: “My granddaughter, who is not yet 15…began displaying the LGBT banner on Facebook, declared herself transgender, erroneously said the Bible is a bunch of myths written by bored old men, erroneously said the Catholic Church condemns all gay people to hell, literally told me to get my head out of my ass, and then unfriended me on FB. Gee, I wonder where she got those ideas.” His granddaughter’s mother also ended her relationship with him.

The evening of July 4th, our nation’s birthday, I watched a Youtube video of the Statue of Liberty song. Sadly, the lyrics are not embraced by far too many young Americans today.

“I’m so proud to be called an American

To be named with the brave and the free

I will honor our flag and our trust in God

And the statue of liberty”

I stand with Rush Limbaugh, folks. It is time that we take action to take back our country. It is time that we say no to anti-American traitors and anti-biblical cultural assassins.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American

The UK Guardian declared prolific writer, singer and songwriter Lloyd Marcus the Tea Party Movement’s most prominent African American; seen on Fox News, CNN and more. Rejecting hyphenating, Marcus is renowned for proclaiming, “I am NOT an African-American! I am Lloyd Marcus AMERICAN!!!” Marcus is Chairman of Conservative Campaign Committee PAC. It’s mission is to elect conservative candidates across America.

Was Thomas Jefferson On The Duke Lacrosse Team?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 03, 2019 6:15 PM

While tearing down everything that’s great about our country, the left has always permitted us to celebrate patriotic holidays. But this year, on the week that we commemorate the unveiling of the Declaration of Independence, Nike yanked a Betsy Ross tribute sneaker off the market because the American flag didn’t sit well with Colin Kaepernick.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., is telling wild, provable lies about America’s border agents.

This Fourth of July, let’s look at the tactics used by the left to blacken the reputations of American heroes. To wit, the lie that the principal author of the declaration, Thomas Jefferson, fathered a child with his slave, Sally Hemings.

The charge was first leveled in 1802 by a muckraking, racist, alcoholic journalist, James Callender, who had served prison time for his particular brand of journalism. He had tried to blackmail Jefferson into appointing him postmaster at Richmond. When that failed, Callender retaliated by publicly accusing Jefferson of fathering the first-born son of Sally Hemings — or, as the charming Callender described her, “a slut as common as the pavement.”

No serious historian ever believed Callender’s defamation — not Dumas Malone, Merrill Peterson, Douglass Adair or John Chester Miller. Not one. Their reasoning was that there was absolutely no evidence to support the theory and plenty to contradict it.

The Jefferson-Hemings myth was revived by feminists trying to elevate the role of women in history. Modern pedagogy requires that no period of our past be taught without turning it into a lecture on racism, sexism or homophobia.

Fawn M. Brodie got the ball rolling with her 1974 book, “Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History,” which used Freudian analysis to prove Jefferson kept Hemings as his concubine and fathered all six of her children.

Brodie’s book was followed by Barbara Chase-Riboud’s 1979 novel “Sally Hemings,” a work that imagines Hemings’ interior life. When CBS announced plans to make a miniseries out of the novel, Jefferson scholars exploded, denouncing the project as a preposterous lie. The miniseries was canceled.

Finally, a female law professor, Annette Gordon-Reed, wrote “Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy,” which accused professional historians of racism for refusing to defer to the “oral history” of Hemings’ descendants.

She said “racism,” so the historians shut up.

In 1998, a retired pathologist, Dr. Eugene Foster, performed a DNA test on the Y-chromosomes of living male descendants of Sally Hemings, as well as those from Jefferson’s paternal uncle. The Y-chromosome is passed from male to male, so, if the story were true, Hemings’ male descendants ought to have the Y-chromosome of the Jefferson male bloodline.

Foster’s study did establish that Hemings’ last-born son, Eston, was the son of some Jefferson male, but could not possibly say whether that was Thomas Jefferson or any of the other 25 adult male Jeffersons living in Virginia at the time, eight of them at or near Monticello.

For Eston to be Jefferson’s son, we have to believe that five years after being falsely accused of fathering a child with Hemings, Jefferson decided, What the heck? I may be president of the United States, but I should prove Callender’s slander true by fathering a child with my slave!

It would be as if five years after the Duke lacrosse hoax, one of the falsely accused players went out and actually raped a stripper — in fact, the same stripper.

Nonetheless, Nature magazine titled its article on the study “Jefferson Fathered Slave’s Last Child.” Hundreds of newspapers rushed to print with the lie, e.g.:

“Study: Jefferson, Slave Had Baby” — Associated Press Online, Nov. 1, 1998

“DNA Study Shows Jefferson Fathered His Slave’s Child” — Los Angeles Times, Nov. 1, 1998

“Jefferson Exposed” — Boston Globe, Nov. 3, 1998

Two months after these false “findings” had been broadcast from every news outlet where English is spoken, Foster admitted that the DNA had not proved Jefferson fathered any children by Sally Hemings, merely that he could have fathered one child. Only eight newspapers mentioned the retraction.

The science alone puts the odds of Thomas Jefferson fathering Eston at less than 15% — less than 4%, if all living Jefferson males are considered, not just the ones at Monticello.

All other known facts about Jefferson make it far less probable still.

There are no letters, diaries or records supporting the idea that Jefferson was intimate with Hemings, and quite a bit of written documentation to refute it, including Jefferson’s views on miscegenation and his failure to free Hemings in his will, despite freeing several other slaves.

In private letters, Jefferson denounced Callender’s claim — a denial made more credible by his admission to a sexual indiscretion that would have been more shameful at the time: his youthful seduction of a friend’s wife.

None of the private correspondence from anyone else living at Monticello credited the Hemings rumor, though several pointed to other likely suspects — specifically Jefferson’s brother, Randolph.

Eston was born in 1808, when Thomas Jefferson was 64 years old and in his second term as president. His brother Randolph was 52, and Randolph’s five sons were 17 to 24 years old. All of them were frequent visitors at Monticello.

While Jefferson was busy entertaining international visitors in the main house, Randolph would generally retire to the slave quarters to dance and fiddle. One slave, Isaac Granger Jefferson, described Randolph in his dictated memoirs thus: “Old Master’s brother, Mass Randall, was a mighty simple man: used to come out among black people, play the fiddle and dance half the night.”

There is not a single account of Thomas Jefferson frequenting slave quarters. Nor did Jefferson take any interest in Hemings’ children. Randolph did, teaching all of Hemings’ sons to play the fiddle.

Randolph was an unmarried widower when Eston was conceived. After Randolph remarried, Hemings had no more children.

In response to DNA proof that only one of Hemings’ children was related to any Jefferson male — and her firstborn son was definitely NOT fathered by any Jefferson — the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, the Monticello Association and the National Genealogical Society promptly announced their official positions: Thomas Jefferson fathered all six of Hemings’ children! Guided tours of Monticello today include the provably false information that Jefferson fathered all of Hemings’ children.

So now you, at least, know the truth — not that it matters in the slightest. Happy Fourth of July!

Ann Coulter’s Latest Book Resistance Is Futile!: How the Trump-Hating Left Lost Its Collective Mind is available on Amazon

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: