08/25/16
Glenn Beck

LISTEN: Glenn Beck breaks silence on tyrannical court order forcing him to reveal sources

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

Glenn Beck via TheBlaze

Glenn Beck via TheBlaze

On Thursday, Glenn Beck broke his silence on a recent court order that would force the media mogul to reveal sources stemming from the Islamic terror attack during the Boston marathon in 2013 or potentially face time in prison.

As previously reported at TrevorLoudon.com:

Media mogul Glenn Beck has been ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Patti Saris (appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1993) “to identify at least two confidential sources” that gave him information about Abdulrahman Al Harbi, the Saudi national and initial “person of interest” in the Boston Marathon bombing, which took place on Monday, April 15, 2013.

It was reported yesterday at Politico that Beck and his colleagues who were in contact with the sources refused to name them as ordered by a federal judge.

Beck’s attorney wrote in part:

“Defendants cannot disclose the identities of Confidential Sources 1 and 2 for several compelling reasons. First and foremost, as a matter of fundamental journalistic integrity, Defendants cannot disclose the identities of the Confidential Sources without their authorization…”

Beck addressed the case on his Thursday radio broadcast, referring to the First Amendment. Beck said in part that the sources “have begged us not to reveal them and we are not going to reveal sources…” Whistle-blowers against the government, Beck continued, should be protected.

Beck quickly addresses the issue in the beginning of his show.

Listen to the show here:

Read more:

08/23/16
Trump

Alt-Right Bashes Constitutional Conservatives, Patriots Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro – Dances with Leninism

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Trump

I believe that each of us has a right to support our chosen candidate and that includes Donald Trump. I do not hold that against someone once they have made that decision, for any of a myriad of reasons. However, I do hold it against those that go out of their way to attack and savage patriotic conservatives because they will not kneel at the altar of Trump. Such is the poison written by Edmund Kozak on Laura Ingraham’s website entitled: “Alt-Right vs. Conservative Inc.

I have been a Ted Cruz supporter from the beginning. Even though he is no longer in this race, I still support him as the Constitutional Conservative we have waited for. I most likely will write him in when I vote. That is not a vote for Hillary Clinton. It is me voting my conscience, standing by my principles and refusing to vote for one evil to stop another. Two evils that I view as two sides of the same coin and equally repugnant.

I was told when I didn’t fall in line with Trump that my vote didn’t matter and wasn’t wanted. Now I’m told that if I don’t vote for Trump, it will be my fault that he loses and Hillary wins. That doesn’t sway me in the least. In my world, right is right and wrong is wrong. I won’t vote for a Fascist to stop a Marxist, especially when the two are interchangeable.

Kozak has written a piece that paints Constitutional Conservatives as the Establishment GOP Elite. Nothing could be further from the truth and he knows it:

In truth, it is the Establishment GOP elite — who profit in both power and dollars by pushing a globalist economic agenda — who have strayed farthest from the tenants of traditional conservatism. These elites have actually created a for-profit structure. This “Conservative Inc.” dupes the base of the party into handing more power and campaign cash to an Establishment network that operates primarily against their interests.

Constitutional Conservatives and patriots such as Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro in no way support a globalist economic agenda. They are for free trade… perhaps that is something that seems foreign to the likes of Kozak. We are not protectionist as Trump is and there’s the rub. True conservatives believe the market should decide the economic outcome. Those that are true globalists are on the left and this is his attempt to smear conservatives and lump them in with not only the GOP Elite, but leftists as well, essentially branding them the enemy. You see, he has to do this as true conservatism and constitutionalism is a danger to the likes of Trump. We believe in our God-given rights and freedoms and we want the Constitution to be followed, just as we want the rule of law implemented. Nice try on branding, but fail.

The next part I am quoting is simply insane:

The Constitution worship of those like Shapiro and Sen. Ted Cruz reveals that the mainstream conservative movement has largely forgotten the principle of imperfectability.

The Constitution alone cannot guarantee some sort of political utopia. Man is fallen — a city on a shining hill cannot be guaranteed by a mere piece of paper. The fact that within a decade of the documents’ adoption the government was already trying to subvert it should be a clear indication of that reality.

None of us has ever claimed the Constitution was perfect. No document or man is. But the Founding Fathers made sure that could be rectified with Amendments. Whereas it does not create a political utopia, when the Constitution was adhered to, our country thrived and prospered. There have been those trying to subvert the Constitution from the beginning and who still are. Again, I was told that when I would not follow Trump, that Constitutional Conservatism was dead and the document was outdated. I was told that I would regret not following the man and it would destroy me. It hasn’t yet, but if it did, then so be it. My principles and freedom mean more to me than any strongman or his followers who threaten me. Kozak’s argument here is specious and utterly flawed. It is the justifications of someone laying the groundwork for a dictatorship.

It is not Constitutional Conservatives and the likes of Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro who have lost their way. They aren’t lost period. It is the Alt-Right who has veered off to follow a leader who does not believe in the Constitution or freedom. A man who will rule with an iron grip, an enemies list and who will slam the lid down on this nation so hard it will shatter.

I believe that Donald Trump is a very dangerous man. And some of those around him may be just as dangerous or more so. Steve Bannon comes to mind. Bannon has claimed that he is a Leninist.

This is the definition of Leninism:

Leninism is the political theory for the democratic organisation of a revolutionary vanguard party and the achievement of a dictatorship of the proletariat, as political prelude to the establishment of socialism. Developed by and named for the Russian revolutionary Lenin, Leninism comprises socialist political and economic theories, developed from Marxism, and Lenin’s interpretations of Marxist theories, for practical application to the socio-political conditions of the agrarian Russian Empire of the early 20th century.

Ronald Radosh, a former communist turned conservative, had this to say about Steve Bannon:

Why has the Trump campaign taken as its new head a self-described Leninist?

I met Steve Bannon—the executive director of Breitbart.com who’s now become the chief executive of the Trump campaign, replacing the newly resigned Paul Manafort—at a book party held in his Capitol Hill townhouse in early 2014. We were standing next to a picture of his daughter, a West Point graduate, who at the time was a lieutenant in the 101 Airborne Division serving in Iraq. The picture was notable because she was sitting on what was once Saddam Hussein’s gold throne with a machine gun on her lap. “I’m very proud of her,” Bannon said.

Then we had a long talk about his approach to politics. He never called himself a “populist” or an “American nationalist,” as so many think of him today. “I’m a Leninist,” Bannon proudly proclaimed.

Shocked, I asked him what he meant.

“Lenin,” he answered, “wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.” Bannon was employing Lenin’s strategy for Tea Party populist goals. He included in that group the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as the traditional conservative press.

This is the man who now basically has Trump’s ear and this is what he proclaims and supports. That’s chaos and it is just moonbat crazy. Add that to Russian influence, shady dealings, vile attacks and unconstitutional leanings and you have the makings of a South-American style strongman.

Nationalist populism is not the answer… it is a death knell for this country, just as liberal Marxism is. The only thing that will save the Republic and our country is to return to what made us great in the first place: faith in God, the Constitution, founding principles, limited government and our God-given rights. No one man can save us or solve this and to turn to one is suicide.

The Founding Fathers were brilliant men who sacrificed everything for this country and to ensure our freedoms. The Constitution is a foundational document that has served us well for 240 years. These people keep trying to fix something that is not broken to serve their own political agenda. We don’t worship the Constitution… we revere it and believe that it is the answer to righting this country. The answer certainly isn’t a strongman, nor is it a federal leviathan government.

I’m proud to be a Constitutional Conservative and if one day that has me labeled as a traitor and tried for being a patriot, I will make sure they have enough to convict me.

08/9/16
Obama

Obama Administration IRS Scandal Back in the News

By: Roger Aronoff | Accuracy in Media

Obama

The mainstream media have gone to great lengths to avoid reporting on controversies with the potential to damage President Obama’s reputation or legacy. The endeavor to politicize the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) became an article of impeachment against Richard Nixon in 1974. But the actual politicization of the IRS under Barack Obama is treated as a phony scandal ginned up by Fox News, talk radio and the tea party movement. So it’s no surprise that recent news stories about the IRS scandal have been met with nearly complete silence from the mainstream media. The goal is clear: if the media ignore this scandal long enough, it will be treated and dismissed as old news.

There was a major development last Friday, but the media, for the most part, continue to look the other way. As The Washington Times reported, “A federal appeals court slapped the IRS with yet another rebuke Friday, ruling that it did, in fact, discriminate against tea party groups and insisting the tax agency prove that it’s permanently stopped the unconstitutional targeting of groups because of their political leanings.”

The IRS was seeking to get a lawsuit dropped, claiming they had voluntarily stopped such targeting. But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit—considered the second most powerful court after the U.S. Supreme Court—ruled unanimously that the lawsuit should be sent back to a lower court for a more thorough ruling. In a previous ruling earlier in the year, Judge David Sentelle, one of the members of the three-judge panel, said, “It’s hard to find the IRS to be an agency we can trust,” and suggested that it had infringed on the constitutional rights of some tea party groups.

There were hundreds of conservative groups targeted for intense scrutiny that liberal and leftist groups were not subjected to. Last year the Justice Department announcedthey were ending their criminal investigation of the matter, in what looks more and more like a politically motivated decision, much the same as the decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for her repeated instances of sending and receiving classified material on an unsecured server.

Days before the appeals court rebuked the IRS on August 5, The Hill published an article in which current IRS Commissioner John Koskinen characterized Congress’ push to impeach him as sending a message that people should not take government posts. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) “has said Koskinen did not comply with a subpoena and made false and misleading statements under oath during a congressional investigation into the IRS’s scrutiny of conservative groups’ applications for tax-exempt status,” reports The Hill. The remainder of this article discusses Koskinen’s comments out of context—glossing over the details of the IRS scandal, so that readers are not well informed by the article.

Commissioner Koskinen is no innocent victim. His IRS erased over 400 backup tapes which could have contained Lois Lerner’s missing emails in March 2014, “a month after the IRS realized it was missing some of Lerner’s emails,” reported CNN in 2015.

“The IRS’s strategy was the stuff of banana republics: Organizations that were critical of the president’s signature health-care law were to be targeted, as were those making statements critical of the general direction of government under the Obama administration,” wrote the Editors of National Review in June, calling for Koskinen’s impeachment. “Those with ‘tea party’ or ‘9/12’ in their names (the latter refers to groups associated with conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck) were to be targeted. Hundreds of such organizations were subjected to improper harassment and invasive requests for financial and political information.”

Lerner staged an exchange with a reporter in 2013, in which she apologized for the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups at an American Bar Association conference in Washington, DC. “Lerner, who retired in September, said of the agency’s Cincinnati employees, ‘They didn’t have the appropriate level of sensitivity about how this might appear to others and it was just wrong,’” reported Eliana Johnson for National Review in 2013.

“… [then-IRS Commissioner Steven] Miller and Lerner both initially blamed ‘low-level employees’ for the targeting, FBI documents show,” reports The Daily Caller. “Miller, in fact, called the Cincinnati IRS officials who handled the tax exemption cases ‘maroons’—his humorous way of saying ‘morons.’”

President Obama later also claimed there wasn’t a “smidgeon of corruption” at the IRS and that news organizations like Fox News were deliberately keeping the controversy alive.

The Cincinnati rogue IRS agent myth that has been perpetuated can now be fully laid to rest. Judicial Watch recently released the 302s, the 2013 summaries of FBI interviews of both IRS personnel and individuals who applied for non-profit status.

In these summaries the Cincinnati IRS employees repeatedly state that they feel they had been thrown under the bus by Lerner.

“When Lois Lerner made her public comments, he believes she threw them under the bus, backed over them, and ran over them again,” states the FBI summary, which communicates that this employee followed the necessary procedures and “elevated questions at the time as they should have.”

In other words, the Cincinnati office sent applications that needed higher-level scrutiny on to the DC-based Exempt Organization (EO) Technical. This black hole of a bureaucracy provided little reply. “Nobody told him directly where the delay was in resolving the Tea Party issue. DC is like a black hole,” states the FBI summary. Whether true or not, Cincinnati employees have blamed Washington for the errors.

We reported in 2013 that the IRS scandal may extend up to the White House, given that Kathryn Ruemmler, White House Chief Counsel, and White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough were aware of the brewing scandal a month before Lerner’s comments.

Now, with the release of the 302s, the lingering question is whether the IRS EO Technical unit, based in Washington, DC, was politicized and deliberately chose not to process conservative group applications.

Statements by Cincinnati workers do raise some suspicions. One summary states that “The Tea Party cases started to backlog since [redacted] was no longer responding.” In fact, “[Redacted] cannot remember having a conversation with [redacted] after August 15, 2010. She saw this backlog as a ‘ticking time bomb.’”

This ticking time bomb is now treated as a phony scandal by the press, which often take their cue from White House elites who believe that the damage caused by targeting conservative groups should be overlooked. But only by investigating and exposing those who decided to target these groups in the first place can we prevent future abuses. As in so many other instances, the press is derelict in its duty to hold the Obama administration accountable.


Roger Aronoff is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. He can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Roger Aronoff.

07/15/16
Slavery

Slavery and America’s Founding Fathers: How did they really feel?

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

John Jay via theimaginativeconservative.org

John Jay via theimaginativeconservative.org

In 2009, Hillary Clinton won the Margaret Sanger Award. Margaret Sanger, socialist and racist, is still hailed by the left. She coined the phrase, “birth control” and believed that “the physically unfit, materially poor, racially inferior, and mentally incompetent needed to be eliminated.” Hillary Clinton was questioned about this during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing and she made the following deflective statement:

“Well, Congressman, let me say with respect to your comments about Margaret Sanger, you know, I admire Thomas Jefferson. I admire his words and his leadership and I deplore his unrepentant slave holding. I admire Margaret Sanger being a pioneer in trying to empower women to have some control over their bodies and I deplore statements that you have referenced. That is the way we often are when we look at flawed human beings. There are things that we admire and things we deplore.”

This is a recurring theme on the left. To discredit the founding fathers, they are often referred to as “Old, white slave owners.” This history should be put in context with the time in which they lived.

So the question is, what did the founding fathers actually say about slavery?

Read more here…

07/7/16
Christians

The Left’s Stealth Religious War: Church of Liberalism vs Christianity

By: Lloyd Marcus

Christians

Much of my wife Mary and my time is spent traveling the country helping to elect conservatives to the House and Senate. I am chairman of the Conservative Campaign Committee.

On a rare stop back home in Florida, we decided to enjoy a day at our favorite New Smyrna Beach. After multiple stops for gas, banking and Walmart, we were finally on our way. It brought back fond childhood memories of hot summer family trips to the beach; mom, dad, fat Aunt Nee and five kids all crammed into a station-wagon with no air conditioning. The ritual included picking up Aunt Nee from her house and several stops for select foods to take with us. I remember the excitement I felt after all the stops and we were finally headed to Carr’s Beach; the only Maryland beach open to blacks.

Back to present day. Before we left home, Mary said, “Don’t forget a book to read.” Scanning our book shelves, Ann Coulter’s book published in 2006, “Godless” caught my eye.

In her book, Coulter said, “If a Martian landed in America and set out to determine the nation’s official state religion, he would have to conclude it is Liberalism, while Christianity and Judaism are prohibited by law.” Coulter said Liberalism is the state-sanctioned religion and is a godless one. Ten years later, Liberalism has become the state-mandated religion. Remarkably, practicing biblical Christianity has become illegal. http://bit.ly/1NPGbWI

Coulter says despite liberals claims of being non-religious, Liberalism has all the attributes of a religion. Coulter exposes the “Church of Liberalism” in which “its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (Roe v. Wade)…its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free)…its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).”

I would included the LGBT agenda as sacraments of the Church of Liberalism.

Seemingly over night in America, our freedom of speech, freedom of religion and parental rights have been taken away. Obama’s DOJ says it will prosecute anyone who speaks badly about Islam. http://bit.ly/1mxTG1G Christians are being persecuted and even jailed for not obeying sacraments of the Church of Liberalism. http://nws.mx/1EEMZmR Federal judges have decreed that parents are not allowed to opt out even their preschool children from LGBT indoctrination in school curriculum. http://bit.ly/1SEGJPi

Just like the Hitler Youth, the Obama Administration has indoctrinated students to become Church of Liberalism spies. Students are instructed to report family members who make racist and politically incorrect comments around the dinner table. http://bit.ly/1necFcz

My dad and Mary’s mom taught us that the democrats were for the little guy, the working man. Our parents are clueless regarding how far to the left their party has moved; becoming a godless cult – home of the Church of Liberalism.

The Church of Liberalism’s control of our government will dramatically increase if liberal zealot Hillary Clinton becomes president. Americans have been beaten down, forced to embrace the sacraments of this religious cult. A perfect example is ESPN awarding the Arthur Ashe Award to Bruce Jenner, a man in drag. http://bit.ly/1CJCZb0

C’mon folks, you can imagine what most of the men in that hall at the awards event were thinking. For the most part, pro sports is a celebration of maleness. And yet, those high testosterone pro-athletes knew they had better smile and applaud Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner or be forced into sensitivity training and risk losing their livelihood.

Typical of religious cults, the Church of Liberalism does not tolerant opposing points of view. Church of Liberalism zealots used the federal government to silence the Tea Party. http://bit.ly/29aPpMn The Church of Liberalism seeks to punish and silence Fox News. http://fxn.ws/29dlzJJ The Church of Liberalism brands all opposition, “hate speech” enabling them to use government to silence Christian pastors and close down Christian churches. http://bit.ly/1a5fb43

Decades of the Church of Liberalism controlling public education has reaped masses of dumbed-down Americans; brainwashed into embracing the Church of Liberalism’s tyranny. Dummies believe Church of Liberalism zealots are good guys, advocates for the disenfranchised; defending them against mean, selfish and racist Christians and Conservatives.

For example: Obama routinely trashes and rules against Christianity while forcing Christians to submit to the sacraments of the Church of Liberalism. http://bit.ly/P54u6I Obama displays his utmost respect for Islam. And yet, Obama’s Administration has made it quite clear that speaking badly about Islam or any of the sacraments of the Church of Liberalism could land you in jail. http://bit.ly/29eYq81

Think about the folks. Church of Liberalism zealots are free to outrageously blame Christians and law-abiding American gun owners for a massacre they had nothing to do with. We have suffered numerous incidents of Islamic terrorists attacks; killing Americans on US soil. And yet, our federal government threatens to jail anyone caught speaking badly about either of these two religions (Church of Liberalism and Islam).

Christians are being banned from many jobs and jailed for not submitting to sacraments of the Church of Liberalism. http://bit.ly/1K1LKi8

Folks, the America we knew is gone. Prayer, repentance and a regime change should be our first baby steps towards restoring our nation. This is one of the many reasons why my battle cry is, “Never Hillary!”

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Chairman: The Conservative Campaign Committee
LloydMarcus.com

07/6/16
Meme1

The Rule of Law is Dead in America

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Meme1

I have lost all faith in both parties and our government. Yesterday, the rule of law in America officially died. There was no fanfare or pretense… only corruption. As Ayn Rand said: “When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed.” That just about sums it up. Time to go to Galt’s Gulch.

FBI Director James Comey pronounced Hillary Clinton innocent of all wrong doing in the email scandal that has engulfed her now for well over a year. A man who was thought to be ethical and had integrity proved beyond a shadow of a doubt he was anything but. I have said from the beginning, when you lose the unbiased nature of our military and intelligence agencies, you are toast and he has unfortunately proven me exceedingly right.

Noah Rothman at Commentary wrote:

No amount of cynicism could have prepared Americans for what they witnessed on Tuesday morning, and 2016 has not been short on cynicism.

That has bite and screams truth from the rooftops. But if you want even more truth, ask someone who lived under communism what this means. In response to the Comey verdict, Karo. Markowicz tweeted out a statement as to how others who came from the USSR expected no other result: “Guys, the ex-president’s wife was never going to get indicted.” – all my USSR-born friends.” We now live under a manipulated, de facto dictatorship, regardless of party, that pretends Americans are free, while ruling corruptly for and by the elite. Sounds a lot like communist Russia or China to me.

History repeats itself and this particular chapter has Russian overtones – EdgeOfTheSandbox had this to say:

In the waning days of the Soviet Union, the goings on of the nomenclatura were shrouded in mystery. We gossiped about the families of Politburo members, but didn’t know who they were for sure. The only thing certain was that they were above the law, or whatever pretense at law the USSR managed to stage. This produced a culture of cynicism and hopelessness and an epidemic of alcoholism.

Feels oh so familiar, now doesn’t it? Andrew McCarthy nailed it in his first paragraph over at National Review:

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services.

And yet, here we are. Hillary Clinton walks away unscathed after committing blatant violations of the Espionage Act and what I consider to be treason. The fix was in, she was never going to answer for any of this. Ever.

Hillary

More from McCarthy:

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never intend the bad things that happen due to gross negligence.

I would point out, moreover, that there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed.

Andrew McCarthy, Paul Ryan and Ted Cruz have all said this makes absolutely no sense and it doesn’t. It defies explanation, except for cronyism and in-your-face corruption. The law is being flaunted here. Let’s put it this way… when the people feel laws are not just and the law means nothing, crime goes up and rebellion brews. Always.

No one should ever be above the law. Unless of course you are an elitist acting like a czar and feel that the law does not apply to you. It is small wonder a populist uprising and the politics of vengeance are boiling here in the US. Politicians might do well to reflect on the French Revolution right about now, as well as the American Revolution.

In April, 2003, investment banker Frank Quattrone was indicted on charges of obstruction of justice by then-US Attorney for the Southern District of New York by James Comey for one email sent to employees. 21 words brought an indictment. Yet, Comey could not recommend charging Clinton at all seemingly.

Ted Cruz is demanding answers on the whole mess. He wants access to information tied to the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton, saying the decision to recommend no charges “threatens the rule of law.” Once again, Cruz is presidential and right here.

From Ted Cruz: “Under President Obama, we have seen the most politicized Department of Justice in history; I very much hope that politicization has not similarly corrupted the Federal Bureau of Investigation,” Cruz said in a statement Tuesday. “I join my Senate Judiciary colleagues… in calling for public transparency of, and full access to, all the information that the FBI used to come to today’s dubious decision.” Cruz added Tuesday that he has “serious concerns about the integrity of Director Comey’s decision.” As do I sir, as do I. “Director Comey has rewritten a clearly worded federal criminal statute. In so doing, he has come dangerously close to saying that grossly negligent handling of classified information should not result in serious consequences for high-level officials,” he said. Doing so, declares the rule of law all but dead in America. It means the power brokers and elites are above the laws that apply to everyone else. It is the very definition of corruption.

One wonders if someone got to Comey, or was he this bought and paid for all along? I agree with Patricia McCarthy, our government has morphed into an actual crime syndicate and it doesn’t matter which party is elected here, that syndicate will continue and grow.

And as Ben Shapiro wrote: “It’s not just the corruption that shocks — it’s the flagrant, shameless display of it.”

Aristotle’s definition of tyranny speaks here: “…that arbitrary power of an individual which is responsible to no one, and governs all alike, whether equals or betters, with a view to its own advantage, not to that of its subjects, and therefore against their will. No freeman willingly endures such a government.” The problem here is that the people cannot decide whether we are a nation of laws or not come election time… either choice now leads to lawlessness and tyranny.

Bob Owens may have made the most profound statement of all: “When the rule of law no longer matters, it’s time to gun up.” Millions of Americans will look at what just happened and prepare for the worst now. They have had the blinders stripped off and now clearly see this is no longer the land of the free. And the fun has only begun with the House Republicans joining Democrats in pushing legislation that will completely gut the Bill of Rights, infringing upon the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, according to Republican Rep. Justin Amash. Not only is corruption ignored and rewarded… not only is the rule of law dead… the Constitution is being destroyed once and for all by both sides. When corruption reigns, revolution follows.

07/4/16
Independence

Paul Harvey: Our Lives, Our Fortunes, Our Sacred Honor

Hat Tip: BB

Independence

06/28/16
Dems

How the Media Sided with the Democrats on Gun Control Sit-in

By: Roger Aronoff | Accuracy in Media

Dems

Last week, when Democrats staged a sit-in in the House of Representatives over gun control legislation, the mainstream media were all-too-willing to allow the participants to claim the mantle of being involved in a historic civil rights movement. For example, ABC News carried an article discussing the civil rights activities of Congressmen John Lewis (D-GA), labeling him “the face of the Democrats’ unprecedented sit-in.” In this story, and practically every mention of him throughout the day, he was labeled an “icon of the civil rights movement.”

But this sit-in was hardly unprecedented, or comparable to ending legalized discrimination on the basis of race. The sit-in followed, and was inspired by, a 15-hour filibuster in the Senate led by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT). In 2008 the tables were turned when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) turned off the lights on Republicans in the House who were organizing for energy legislation amid high gas prices.

“Democrats were furious at the GOP’s move then, called it a stunt,” writes Russell Berman for The Atlantic. “Eight years later, Democrats are trying to cloak what is essentially the same attention-seeking maneuver in the weightier historical tradition of the sit-in.”

Democrats decided to adopt the tactics of Occupy Wall Street—call it Occupy Congress—by broadcasting despite House rules and operating without decorum—even shouting down those who tried to speak. Yet the mainstream media yielded to the liberal narrative that this was an historic moment for civil rights, and that the public wants more gun control laws.

“The sit-in is because you won’t bring this to a vote,” CNN’s Wolf Blitzer said to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI) on his June 22 show, The Situation Room. “House Democrats have tried to force a vote on all of this week on the questioning—the questioning of how to prevent those on the terror watch list, the no-fly list from purchasing a gun.”

Ryan condemned the Democrats’ sit-in as little more than a “publicity stunt.” “Point number two is this bill was already defeated in the United States Senate,” he told Blitzer. “Number three, we are not going to take away a citizen’s due process rights.”

The Democrats and Republicans submitted two failed Senate bills each on gun control, and a fifth compromise bill sponsored by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) passed a procedural hurdle on Thursday, but is not expected to garner the 60 votes needed to pass. Yet nearly all of the news coverage has suggested it is the Republicans who are the obstructionists, while offering little in the way of contrasting the substance of the various bills.

But Blitzer continued to advocate for the Democrat’s agitation, saying, “Why not at least allow a vote up or down [in the House]?”

Maybe Blitzer forgot that in the last Congress, when the Senate was run by then-Senator Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), more than 350 bills that passed the House failed to receive a vote in the Senate.

The Democrats’ sit-in ended on June 23, drawing ridicule from left-wing commentator and third-rate comedian Bill Maher for pledging to stay until they got their vote, but lasting only 25 hours before giving up. Yet, the media have historical amnesia regarding how it treated Republicans in 2008. Reporting from Politico in 2008 refers to the GOP’s own sit-in as a “stunt,” and worse, a “tantrum.”

“Democrats faced a choice here: Should they leave the cameras on and let Republicans rip Pelosi & Co. on C-SPAN, or should they leave the cameras off and let the Republicans have their ‘tantrum,’ as one Democratic aide characterized it, with the cameras off?” reportedJohn Bresnahan for Politico in 2008.

The truth is that liberal policies and Democratic Party governance have led to many of the worst problems that plague the inner cities, including the high rate of carnage that occurs in cities like Chicago and Baltimore. Welfare, for example, has helped to institutionalize homes without father figures because of perverse incentives against marriage. And the Ferguson Effect may be causing crime to increase across the country.

This, from a party claiming to reduce crime with further gun control initiatives.

“The murder rate is going up in many cities across the country, The New York Times informs us, and the experts are baffled,” writes “Jack Dunphy,” a cop in southern California writing this May under a pseudonym for National Review.

“When police officers on the street spot someone whose behavior is indicative of possible lawbreaking, they know that initiating a stop carries the risk of an altercation that may not unfold in a manner approved by cowardly superiors, rabble-rousing ‘community activists,’ craven politicians, or perhaps even the president,” “Dunphy” argues. “Against that risk he weighs the benefits of driving on by and finishing his shift on time and in one piece, and without having played the villain in some new YouTube sensation.”

In other words, the fear of recreating another Ferguson in their own town scares police and makes them risk-averse. “There’s a perception,” FBI Director James Comey said, “that police are less likely to do the marginal additional policing that suppresses crime—the getting out of your car at 2 in the morning and saying to a group of guys, ‘Hey, what are you doing here?’”

In this fearful climate, the Democrats, along with a willing press, are pushing once again for stricter gun laws. If, as new polling indicates, 90 percent of Americans “said they support expanding background checks” for gun purchases, then the Republicans’ push to ensure that all gun buyers, even those on terror watch lists, receive due process is a principled stand—not a political one—despite public pressure. No one wants suspected terrorists to be able to purchase guns, but Mateen wasn’t currently on any terrorist watch lists. He had been on, then off, after the FBI closed their investigations on him. Others have been wrongly placed on the lists, with no knowledge of how they got there, and have great difficulty getting their names removed.

Yet the media continued to cast the Democrats’ short sit-in as an instance of seizing the moral high ground from Republicans who, they argue, are in the pocket of the National Rifle Association (NRA). This is little more than an attempt to swing the election through favorable coverage of Democratic initiatives, and suggesting that Republicans are heartless.

Lost in the discussion is the fact that the Orlando shooting was an appalling act of Islamic jihadist terrorism, and not just a gun rampage. The left is seeking any, and all, alternative explanations for the Orlando shooting beside jihad. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) approached the members sitting in to remind them that the Orlando shooting was the result of Islamic radicalism, not America’s Second Amendment or gun laws.

Pressures for political correctness led the government to initially disclose Mateen’s 911 call with his pledge of loyalty to the Islamic State carefully edited out. The Department of Justice and FBI did, eventually, release an un-redacted transcript of one of Mateen’s calls containing his support for ISIS, but condemned this episode as an “unnecessary distraction.” The transcript says that he kept referring to “God,” rather than “Allah,” contrary to what several eyewitnesses said they heard.

The media, Obama administration, and Democrats alike are trying to muddy the water so that Orlando becomes an organizing point for gun control, rather than the need to stop terrorists from targeting American citizens. Yet, despite this tragedy, the public cannot allow the media to ignore the due process rights of Americans.


Roger Aronoff is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. He can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Roger Aronoff.

06/25/16
Bill Whittle

RIGHT ANGLE: BE AFWAID, BE VEWY AFWAID!

Hat Tip: Craig Miller

06/23/16
Louie Gohmert

Louie Gohmert Unleases on House Democrats During Sit-In on Gun Violence

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton

Good for Louie Gohmert! What a bunch of fascist pansies the Democrats are. It’s obvious to all of America that a radical Jihadist killed 49 people in Orlando… it was not a gun issue. Gohmert was having none of this insanity and went down to the floor to unload on the Marxists. It was epic. He physically got into it with Corrine Brown and they had to be pulled apart. Say it with me now… Islamic terrorism.

Louie Gohmert

From The Hill:

Tensions between Democrats and Republicans reached a boiling point late Wednesday night, with one GOP lawmaker getting into a shouting match over a sit-in aimed at forcing votes on gun control measures.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) shouted at Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) and other Democrats, yelling, “Radical Islam killed these people,” pointing to posters with photos of gun violence victims.

He was drowned out by chants from Democrats calling for “No bill, no break.”

According to reports from the scene, Gohmert got into a particularly heated exchange with Rep. Corrine Brown (D-Fla.), whose district includes the site of the massacre in Orlando last weekend. Other lawmakers had to separate the two.

The spat followed a tense vote on a measure unrelated to gun control, in which Speaker Paul Ryan attempted to take back control of the floor, causing an eruption of chants from Democrats who had been holding the floor for more than 12 hours.

Gohmert was totally bad ass and did exactly what is called for here. I’m surprised they didn’t beat Louie half to death for standing up to these commies. Gohmert was a constitutional warrior against the Star Wars bar scene in Congress. These people are acting like they are five… pitching a tantrum in Congress and throwing a fit because they don’t get their way on gun control and eviscerating the 2nd Amendment. Only these children are violent and evil. Gohmert at least has a set and says something. Things are coming apart in America fast and are about to get very bad. Where was everyone else on this? Do we only have a couple of guys with the stones to stand up to these fascists? Utterly corrupt and so very pathetic.

Congress

Congress1