Do Black Lives Matter?

Let me make one thing clear: there is a vast gulf between the social and political organization “Black Lives Matter” and someone — ANYONE — saying, “black lives matter.” Both versions of the word are important. And we all need to stop weaponizing each.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a social justice organization that got its start in Ferguson, Missouri, in the wake of the outrage in the African American community following the police shooting death of Michael Brown. It turned into a national civil rights organization that has expanded across the nation. Because of Ferguson, Black Lives Matter’s focus has been on the killings of young African Americans at the hands of police from every level of law enforcement: federal, state, and local.

Additionally, BLM sponsored a number of demonstrations in several of the largest U.S. cities in protest to police shootings, some of which resulted in the death of blacks. In almost every one of the rallies or demonstrations, violence breaks out. In fact, many have begun to compare Black Lives Matters with ANTIFA, who seem to target rallies and meetings initiated as Free Speech rallies or conferences. Just take a look at what’s happened almost nightly in major cities across America like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New York City. It seems that in each city in each protest/demonstration/riot, the anger and furor escalates and turns into more and more aggressive actions in each.

ANTIFA is another story we’ve previously written about but are not the focus of this conversation. Please know, however, it seems to many BLM takes much of their demonstration and even violence planning from ANTIFA. (Or maybe it’s the other way around)

In our summary, we will address the fact that these and other far-left political groups seem to focus most of their attention on those from ethnic communities who are involved in incidents that are often racial and often end in the death of someone. They discovered that such violent acts are magnets for news coverage. Violent death makes for a good news story!

Instead of just throwing up our hands saying, “It doesn’t matter what we do or so, these people are going to harp on this claim: ‘police target blacks in almost all incidents that include some type of serious crime in which an African American is shot. They do so for purely racist and political purposes.'”

That’s been the police shooting story since half-way through Barack Obama’s first term as president. BLM supporters have built that into a narrative that accompanies every news story at every network, newspaper, and national television show when such killings are reported to Americans. Facts prove otherwise, which many minority Americans refuse to accept. This brings us today to ask not, “Is the storyline that police are responsible for most deaths in the African American community true?” What needs to be asked and answered instead is this:

Does the truth matter?

Evidently, not to groups like Black Lives Matter. That’s tragic for many reasons, not the least of which is that black lives are being lost as a result. When it comes to the subject of American police, blacks, and the deadly use of force, here is what we know:

A recent “deadly force” study by Washington State University researcher Lois James found that police officers were less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white or Hispanic ones in simulated threat scenarios. Harvard economics professor Roland Fryer analyzed more than 1,000 of officer-involved shootings across the country. He concluded that there is zero evidence of racial bias in police shootings. In Houston, he found that blacks were 24 percent less likely than whites to be shot by officers even though the suspects were armed or violent.

Does the truth matter?

An analysis of the Washington Post’s Police Shooting Database and of Federal Crime Statistics reveals that fully 12 percent of all whites and Hispanics who die of homicide are killed by cops. By contrast, only four percent of black homicide victims are killed by cops. But isn’t it a sign of bias that blacks make up 26 percent of police-shooting victims, but only 13 percent of the national population?

It is not, and common sense suggests why. Police shootings occur more frequently where officers confront armed or violently resisting suspects. Those suspects are disproportionately black.

According to the most recent study by the Department of Justice, although blacks were only about 15 percent of the population in the 75 largest counties in the U.S., they were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of assaults. In New York City, blacks commit over three-quarters of all shootings, though they are only 23 percent of the city’s population. Whites, by contrast, commit under two percent of all shootings in the city, though they are 34 percent of the population. New York’s crime disparities are repeated in virtually every racially diverse city in America. The real problem facing inner-city black communities today is not the police but criminals. In 2014, over 6,000 blacks were murdered, more than all white and Hispanic homicide victims combined. Who is killing them? Not the police, and not white civilians, but other blacks. In fact, a police officer is eighteen and a half times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer. If the police ended all use of lethal force tomorrow, it would have a negligible impact on the black death-by-homicide rate. In Chicago, through just the first six-and-a-half months of 2016, over 2,300 people were shot. That’s a shooting an hour during some weekends. The vast majority of the victims were black. During this same period, the Chicago police shot 12 people, all armed and dangerous. That’s one half of one percent of all shootings.

Does the truth matter?

If it does, here’s a truth worth pondering: There is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police. The proactive policing revolution that began in the mid-1990s has dramatically brought down the inner-city murder rate and saved tens of thousands of black lives. Unfortunately, that crime decline is now in jeopardy.

Police officers are backing off of proactive policing in black neighborhoods, thanks to the false narrative that police officers are infected with homicidal bias. As a result, violent crime is going up. In cities with large black populations, homicides in the last two years rose anywhere from 54 percent in Washington D.C. to 90 percent in Cleveland. Overall, in the nation’s 56 largest cities, homicides rose 17 percent, a nearly unprecedented spike. Many law-abiding residents of high-crime areas beg the police to maintain order — precisely the type of policing that the ACLU, progressive politicians, BLM, and some in Congress denounce as racist. This is tragic because when the police refrain from proactive policing, black lives are lost—lost because of a myth.

The rancor escalated to never-before-seen heights with the death of Michael Floyd in Minneapolis. Since that day, the fires of anger and bitterness have stoked fires of division across the nation. Almost without fail, peaceful protests become peaceful demonstrations and marches. But almost without fail, those morph into violence, rioting, and looting.

It is uncontroverted that there are instances of white cops killing blacks — far more than we would hope would ever happen. Thankfully they are not in the numbers most in the public feel are certain. But the problem here is even though the best research and data conclude that there is no evidence that police are killing blacks just because they are black. Exclusively such incidents occur as a result of severe law-breaking acts and acts of violence.

What Matters?

OK, we’ve examined the statistics. They originate from very authentic and credible sources. And they’re quite conclusive in the finding that disproves the almost universal perception that police “in general” are killing blacks because they are blacks. But those statistics beg for answers to a question not part of the first segment of this conversation: What is the REAL reason for this conversation that is so necessary yet so damaging?

There’s a simple answer: No one yet has, on a national scale, offered a plausible solution. Find a peaceful way to resolve these differences is — and always has been — a monumental task which no one has completed. Many have tried, several have gotten started, but none so far have seen success.

Here’s the fearful part of where we find us today: those actively involved in these conversations have become so polarized, so far apart, it often seems a solution will NEVER be found. And even if a solution is identified, it is doubtful all sides in this crisis will agree. I think there is a group of people who are the loudest and most demanding in this that don’t even want resolution. They feed on the anger and hatred, the fear and the violence, the infliction of pain for which they know there’s no real price they will be forced to pay.

What we need is a “new” Martin Luther King, Jr. who could draw people of all races and backgrounds to him for a conversation. He taught that communication is the necessary element to begin resolution. When people speak “to” each other and not yell “at” each other, it’s much easier to finish a conversation and have substance to show for the labor.

It would help, too, if we didn’t have an industry that relies on conflict, confusion, and violence to self-perpetuate a need for their existence: the Media.

As we find ourselves inside of 90-days until an election, it would be wise for every American to pause just a moment and consider where they WANT to go in the near future. Then choose the best way under the best circumstances to get there. Open those conversations with others that live within your circle of influence. Challenge everyone to THINK instead of just ACTING.

We MUST find a way through this. And we can…I’m certain of that.

 

“Frick and Frack”

Irony after irony: after all, it’s election season!

Remember all that finger-pointing between Republicans and Democrats about which socialist/communist country like Hillary, which preferred Trump, and which loved them both? I always wondered why those “experts” that made those outlandish claims discovered a way to read the minds of some of the evilest and most unreasonable totalitarian leaders on the Planet. But don’t you dare question the experts: they KNOW! At least, that’s what they told us — again, and again, and again. (Maybe these are the same experts that repeatedly for the last five months have told us COVID-19 absolutes that change 48 hours later and then change again)

Now we face another election. This election includes one of the same people that ran in 2016 and another who ran and won as part of the presidential ticket the previous two elections: President Trump and Vice President Biden. Of course, the experts emerged from their closets in which they supernaturally communicate with the leaders of multiple socialist countries who never tell any lies to any American! The nation awaits their daily and weekly trips to the closet so they can educate the underclass of Americans with who needs to be watched because “China wants Trump to win,” and “Russia wants Biden to Win” — or is it the other way around?

“China Joe” and “Beijing Biden” could be more than nicknames Trumpers throw at the Democrats’ nominee. It turns out there is some evidence behind the gamesmanship. A new national intelligence report says foreign adversaries have their presidential preferences and are trying to tilt our election. Among the findings, China and Iran want Biden in the White House while Russia favors the incumbent.

Guess which part of those findings is getting most of the media coverage. Hint: You don’t need a sign.

Dems and their media minions can’t quit their passion for picturing President Trump as a Russian agent. The New York Times and Speaker Nancy Pelosi insist that the Russian role is so much more significant and more effective than that of either China or Iran. How would they know? Why, naturally, anonymous sources, those “officials briefed on the intelligence,” according to the Times in its latest effort to carry water for the anti-Trump Deep State.

Both also question the accuracy of the Biden findings, with the Times suggesting, without evidence, that the push for Biden was included as a political stand-in to Trump. Pelosi told Fox News that the analysts “try to blanket it with the Chinese, they said, prefer Biden — we don’t know that, but that’s what they’re saying, but they’re not getting involved in the presidential election.”

Wow, remember when Trump was excoriated for doubting the intelligence agencies? Remember Chuck Schumer’s warning to Trump in January 2017 when he said: “Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you?”

But now it’s hunky-dory to dump on the spooks. It’s the First Law of Politics: Anything that can be twisted to make Trump look bad will be twisted.

The double standards shout to the high heavens, especially when you consider what the FBI did in 2016. Based mainly on the unverified Steele dossier, financed by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, and the tall tale about Russians having Clinton’s emails that involved George Papadopoulos, the FBI opened “Crossfire Hurricane” and spied on the Trump campaign. It turned out to be the biggest nothing burger in American history — but by the time special counsel Robert Mueller and his band of Democrat sycophants finally admitted in 2019 there was no campaign collusion, the media had worked with Dems and investigators to severely damage the new administration and the lives of many innocent people.

Pelosi certainly owes her party’s victory in the 2018 midterms to the “Russia, Russia, Russia” hysteria. And there would have been no Ukraine impeachment had Pelosi not been running the House.

In short, the world changed because of the false accusations against Trump and others. Yet, now that the intelligence agencies say Biden is preferred by two major adversaries, the story comes and goes over a late summer weekend.

Before the dirt settles on the grave, it’s worth looking at the findings with some foreign-policy perspective.

November’s winner will face significant challenges with all three countries. But the truth is that Trump has been tougher on all three than the Obama-Biden administration ever was. He has used sanctions against individuals and organizations in ways that the previous White House rejected. Trump has been especially hard on Iran and China, giving both significant reasons for wanting to get rid of him and bring back Biden — the VP in an administration that bowed and buckled before them.

The Iran nuclear pact, for example, was so lopsided toward the mad mullahs, and dangerous to Israel and the rest of the world, that even Schumer opposed it. Trump kept his campaign promise to ditch it and levy harsh penalties that have helped to cripple Iran’s economy.

(Exhibit A of the First Law of Politics: Schumer switched sides after Trump took office, saying the new president should have kept the Iran deal!)

Trump also ordered the airstrike last January that took out Qasem Soleimani, the murderous Iranian commander, in an act that demonstrated the president’s willingness to confront Iran’s aggression in Iraq and throughout the region.

Biden, on the other hand, said he would not have approved the mission and predicted it would lead to further war. He was wrong on both counts. The Democrat also is making noises about trying to rejoin the nuclear deal, so it’s no surprise that Iran wants him back in the White House. The mullahs might even be gracious enough to accept another planeload of fresh American cash as a down payment on Biden’s friendly intentions.

The China preference for Biden also makes perfect sense. During his long career in Washington, Biden was the sort of Washington man China could count on to support its goal of becoming an economic power. He endorsed virtually every trade deal with China that hollowed out American manufacturing — the same deals that Trump campaigned against and has been revamping. In July alone, Trump sanctioned Chinese leaders for abusing human rights, arrested alleged spies, and ended special privileges for Hong Kong.

There’s no reason to believe Biden would have done any of that. His team is suggesting he wants to get the relationship back on an even keel. In reality, that means back to where China was ripping us off. Moreover, the Obama-Biden administration was shockingly passive as China expanded its military aggression in the region. The talk of a “pivot” toward Asia was never more than talk.

Then there’s the smelly deal Hunter Biden made with a Chinese firm connected to the government, and, of course, connected to the Communist Party. Expect to see Trump ads featuring pictures of Hunter getting off Air Force Two, traveling with his father to pad his own pocket.

Joe Biden was only the vice president then. Imagine the big bucks Hunter could make in China with Daddy sitting in the Oval Office.

Besides a 2020 VP Candidate with Joe Biden, Who is Kamala Harris?

Everyone has heard: former Presidential Candidate and now Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) has joined Joe Biden on the Democrat Party ticket as the vice-presidential candidate. Most had Biden’s VP-choice narrowed to Harris and former UN Ambassador and Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Months ago, TruthNewsNetwork predicted that Sen. Kamala Harris would win the Democrat Party presidential nomination. We missed it — by one spot!

What does Harris mean for the Democrat Party? What does her joining Joe Biden on the ticket mean for Democrat voters? Does Harris bring anything to the table to help Biden win the election?

All of these and other matters will be discussed extensively and consistently over the next few days. But by next Monday, Harris will be little more in the public eye than Biden’s VP pick. So let’s get to know Kamala Harris.

We are not going to dive into the minutia of her history. Instead, we will detail elements of her public service, conversations, interactions with others in the public sphere, and where her specific political stances on various issues related to the American electorate stand on multiple issues. After all, even though she’s been in public service, most Americans know little about her politics.

We’ll begin with some bullet-points that include multiple situations in which the Senator has made several personal political perspectives known. There are far more points than just these listed below. But this a point for all to understand where and on what issues Sen. Harris stands. After all, she, as all other Vice Presidents would, if the Biden ticket is chosen in the election, will be at all times just one heartbeat away from holding the highest office in the U.S. Let’s get started.

Let’s Bullet-Point ten things you may or may not know about the Senator

1. As both a district attorney and state attorney general, Harris pushed for a new statewide law that lets prosecutors charge parents with misdemeanors if their children are chronically truant. “We are putting parents on notice,” she declared. “If you fail in your responsibility to your kids, we are going to work to make sure you face the full force and consequences of the law.”

3. Harris also has been a strong advocate of civil asset forfeiture. She supported a bill in California that would have allowed prosecutors to seize assets before initiating criminal proceedings — a power now available only at the federal level — if there were a “substantial probability” they would eventually initiate such actions. Besides cases involving violent crimes, the legislation allowed seizures in cases involving such crimes as bribery, gambling, and trafficking endangered species. Harris endorsed the bill after then-attorney general Eric Holder sharply limited civil asset forfeiture among federal prosecutors. She argued that the practice gave local and state law-enforcement officials “more tools to target the illicit profits [of transnational criminal groups] and dismantle these dangerous organizations.”

4. As San Francisco district attorney, Harris created “Back on Track,” an anti-recidivism program that she expanded as state attorney general. The program received $750,000 in federal funding and quite a bit of praise from crime-policy experts. But it faced criticism early in its history, when illegal immigrant Alexander Izaguirre, who had pleaded guilty to selling drugs, was selected and graduated, only to grab a woman’s purse later and run her down in an SUV, severely injuring her.

As the Los Angeles Times put it, “Harris’ office had been allowing Izaguirre and other illegal immigrants to stay out of prison by training them for jobs they cannot legally hold.” Harris said she had been unaware that Back on Track had been training illegal immigrants and that they would no longer be eligible for the program.

5. In 2012, Harris submitted a brief supporting an illegal immigrant’s application for a law license. In 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled in the immigrant’s favor, even though the California State Bar’s rules state that it is disqualifying professional misconduct to commit a criminal act.

6. In her first speech on the Senate floor, Harris declared, “An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.” She later avowed the belief that illegal immigration is “a civil violation, not a crime.”

This classification applies to only a portion of those in the country without permission. First, entering the country illegally has criminal penalties. Overstaying a visa is considered a civil violation, not a criminal one, with deportation as the appropriate penalty. But reentry without permission after deportation is a crime, as is, in most cases, working in the United States without legal residency, since it almost always involves some falsification of documents or lying on work forms under penalty of perjury.

7. Harris’s reputation as a tough prosecutor has played a key part in her political rise, and she continues to tout the high rate of felony convictions on her watch. But in 2010, SF Weekly reviewed the work of her office and concluded that “felony convictions for cases that go to trial and reach a jury verdict — a comparatively small group that nevertheless includes some of a district attorney’s most violent and emotionally charged cases — have declined significantly over the past two years.” The review found that in 2009, San Francisco prosecutors “won a lower percentage of their felony jury trials than their counterparts at district attorneys’ offices covering the 10 largest cities in California,” and San Francisco’s rate dropped further in the first quarter of 2010. Harris’s 71 percent conviction rate on felony cases had been boosted by a significant increase in pre-trial plea agreements.

8. In October 2017, Harris declared that she would rather shut down the government than vote for a spending bill that did not address the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and ensure those covered by the program would not be deported. “I will not vote for an end-of-year spending bill until we are clear about what we are going to do to protect and take care of our DACA young people in this country,” she said. And she has kept her word, at least so far.

9. In April 2018, Harris urged the Senate Appropriations Committee to “reduce funding for beds in the federal immigration system,” reject calls to hire more Border Patrol personnel, and “reduce funding for the administration’s reckless immigration enforcement operations.”

10. In 2010, a California Superior Court judge declared that as San Francisco district attorney, Harris had violated defendants’ rights by hiding damaging information about a police drug-lab technician and was indifferent to demands that the lab account for its failings. The crime-lab technician had been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence in 2008; district attorneys are obligated to hand over to the defense information about prosecution witnesses that could be used to challenge their credibility. Prosecutors’ failure to disclose the information about the technician led to the dismissal of more than 600 drug cases.

11. Before she was serving the people of California as a senator, Harris served as the state’s attorney general. As attorney general, Harris had to enforce California’s laws as written, but she also used her position to advocate for policies she felt would keep her constituents safe.

12. Formerly as California’s Attorney General she supported immigration laws that though controversial had to be enforced — even that which required the reporting of illegal juveniles to ICE, which flies in the face of sanctuary cities. As a presidential candidate, her story changed. She encouraged all federal, state, and law enforcement members to NOT cooperate with ICE on anything that goes against the concept of sanctuary cities and supports deportation of illegals — a “Switch-A-Rooskie.”

Then during a radio interview with “The Breakfast Club,” Harris claimed that she smoked pot when she was younger and that any claim that she opposes full marijuana legalization is “not true.” But, in her 2014 campaign, her Republican opponent for attorney general, Ron Gold, was very public about his support for full legalization of pot. Harris was not on the same page. When she was asked about legalization by KCRA in 2014, she laughed at Gold’s stance and said he was entitled to his opinion. Her presidential campaign may have been pro-pot, but her time as attorney general certainly wasn’t.

13. During an interview with CNN shortly after her presidential announcement, Harris told host Jake Tapper that America should “eliminate” the private healthcare system. “Let’s eliminate all of that,” Harris said of the private health insurance industry. “Let’s move on.” BUT, according to CNN, “as the furor grew” toward her plan to ban private healthcare, her team announced that she is open to keeping a market system.

Harris has also done the old “Switch-A-Rooskie” on a required investigation of cops involved in killings and on mass incarceration.

14. As U.S.Senator for California, in a confirmation hearing of one federal judge, Harris delved into religious matters. Harris, in her questions to the nominee, called the Knights of Columbus “an all-male society” and asked the Nebraska lawyer if he was aware that the group was anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage when he joined. The California senator also referenced Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson’s statement that abortion amounted to “the killing of the innocent on a massive scale” and asked Buescher if he agreed with the statement. Buescher responded that his involvement in the group consisted mostly of charitable work and community events at his local Catholic parish. He indicated he would abide by judicial precedent regarding abortion.

Summary

Today, Sen. Harris needs NO ONE to answer questions for her about anything in her public record. Facts speak for themselves. And in the weeks to come, Americans will see and hear her on a number of issues important to each of us. And each American who votes will decide if she and her running mate are the match that can and will be best to lead the nation.

What shocked me when this decision was announced is my realization of just how far Left the Biden/Harris ticket will be for the Democrat Party. Think about it: less than a year ago, Joe Biden was considered among all of those 24 Democrat Party presidential candidates as the lone representative of the moderate center of the Party. Now, with Biden’s embrace of the Green New Deal, Medicare-for-all, free college tuition along with the cancellation of student debt and a strong move back into international agreements with Iran and the Paris Accords, the selection of Harris to reinforce the ticket proves Joe Biden is no longer a moderate in any way. He has joined the ranks of Leftists with Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

It’s going to be interesting (and I think it’ll be fun) for the next 80 days or so to watch Democrats with faux glee try to get everyone excited about “their” ticket. It probably will be hilarious to hear the things they allege about the good Biden and Harris will do for the nation after the pair is inaugurated.

The Democrats only hope now is to get their party members out to vote. In this pandemic, that’s going to be hard to do. So they’ll resort to the worst possible political tactics: they’ll everyday present the vilest and nastiest campaign attacks possible directly at President Trump. And specifically for that purpose, their VP pick is a perfect choice. If you don’t think so, just go to YouTube and watch some of her viciousness in Senate Judiciary hearings as she grills Attorney General Barr, Jeff Sessions, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh in his Supreme Court confirmation hearing.

I think two things are certain: the anti-Trump attacks, which have never gone away, will only amplify from the Media talking-heads and intensify daily. Harris and Biden will just add their two-cents to the media rhetoric on cue. President Trump must tamp-down his rage and furor and refuse to fight back.

Of those two things, I doubt the second is even possible!

But one thing of which I’m pretty certain: Kamala will do her best to irritate the President daily by making continual outlandish allegations. The Biden media lapdogs will follow her around and give her 24/7 camera time. For that reason, she was the correct VP pick over Susan Rice. Rice isn’t a fighter. Harris is not just a fighter, she’s a fighter who cannot stand to lose and seldom does lose.

My pick about the fight result? She won’t be the fight loser: Trump will be the winner ,and Biden will go back to the basement.

Play

Human and Child Sex-Trafficking in General: How Bad is it?

There is no greater injustice on Earth than some human actually owning another human. Yet, it happens every day in every country. It’s not just adults that are bought and sold. In fact, human trafficking happens mostly to children.

To get a grip on the problem of human trafficking, it is important to understand the definition of the term. It is recognized today there are three types of human trafficking: labor, sex, and war slavery. In the US, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Victim Protection Act features the following definition of human trafficking:

  • Sex trafficking where a commercial sex act is mandated by force, fraud or coercion, or where the person is forced to perform the act is not at least 18 years old; or
  • The harboring, recruitment, transportation, provision, or obtaining an individual for labor or services through using fraud, force, or coercion for the purpose to subject the individual to involuntary solitude, debt bondage, slavery or peonage.

Human trafficking is a global problem that can possibly be solved through hard work through stakeholders in government, nonprofits, and in communities around the country and world.

Getting a grip on the size of the human trafficking problem is challenging; it is difficult to collect statistics due to the fact of slavery being done in secret, and there is a good deal of discrepancy between the figures available. But there is a report that claims up to 27 million people live in some type of modern-day slavery throughout the world. According to the International Labour Office, there are 21 million victims of human trafficking across the globe. In the US, it is estimated that 17,000 people are put into some form of slavery every year.

 

How prevalent is trafficking? Looking at the top 50 states ranked by per capita of proven trafficking cases, no state ranks higher than Nevada with 5.6 cases per one hundred thousand citizens. But the number one ranked entity in the U.S. or trafficking cases is NOT a state: it is Washington D.C. with 6.1 cases per one hundred thousand citizens.

Why would Washington D.C. be ranked so high? Think about it: the answer will come to you in a moment.

For the purposes of this story, we’ll concentrate on just one segment of the Human Trafficking that has consumed our country and the Earth: Child Sex Trafficking.

Child Sex Trafficking

You might say, “I thought traffickers buy and sell humans primarily for prostitution.” That certainly is true in large. But most Americans associate “prostitution” with adult women. The case is that hundreds of thousands of children around the world are trafficked for prostitution as well. And it is far more prevalent than most Americans can even imagine.

 

 

182,771 sealed indictments being “Unsealed”

  • Democratic Illinois State Representative, Keith Farnham, has resigned and was charged with possession of child pornography and has been accused of bragging at an online site about sexually molesting a 6-year-old girl.
  • A democratic spokesperson for the Arkansas Democratic Party, Harold Moody, Jr, was charged with distribution and possession of child pornography.
  • A Democratic Radnor Township Board of Commissioners member, Philip Ahr, resigned from his position after being charged with possession of child pornography and abusing children between 2 and 6 years-old.
  • Democratic activist and BLM organizer, Charles Wade, was arrested and charged with human trafficking and underage prostitution.
  • Democratic Texas attorney and activist, Mark Benavides, was charged with having sex with a minor, inducing a child under 18 to have sex and compelling prostitution of at least nine legal clients and possession of child pornography. He was found guilty on six counts of sex trafficking.
  • Democratic Virginia Delegate, Joe Morrissey, was indicted on charges connected to his relationship with a 17-year-old girl and was charged with supervisory indecent liberties with a minor, electronic solicitation of a minor, possession of child pornography and distribution of child pornography.
  • Democratic Massachusetts Congressman, Gerry Studds, was censured by the House of Representatives after he admitted to an inappropriate relationship with a 17-year-old page.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Stillwater, New York, Rick Nelson pleaded guilty to five counts of possession of child pornography of children less than 16 years of age.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Clayton, New York, Dale Kenyon, was indicted for sexual acts against a teenager.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Hubbard, Ohio, Richard Keenan, was given a life sentence in jail for raping a 4-year-old girl.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Winston, Oregon, Kenneth Barrett, was arrested for setting up a meeting to have sex with a 14-year-old girl who turned out to be a police officer.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Randolph, Nebraska, Dwayne L. Schutt, was arrested and charged with four counts of felony third-degree sexual assault of a child and one count of intentional child abuse.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Dawson, Georgia, Christopher Wright, was indicted on the charges of aggravated child molestation, aggravated sodomy, rape, child molestation and statutory rape of an 11-year-old boy and a 12-year-old girl.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Stockton, California, Anthony Silva, was charged with providing alcohol to young adults during a game of strip poker that included a 16-year-old boy at a camp for underprivileged children run by the mayor.
  • Democratic Former Mayor of Millbrook, New York, Donald Briggs, was arrested and charged with inappropriate sexual contact with a person younger than 17.
  • Democratic party leader for Victoria County, Texas, Stephen Jabbour, plead guilty to possession and receiving over half a million child pornographic images.
  • Democratic activist and fundraiser, Terrence Bean, was arrested on charges of sodomy and sex abuse in a case involving a 15-year-old boy and when the alleged victim declined to testify, and the judge dismissed the case.
  • Democratic Party Chairman for Davidson County, Tennessee, Rodney Mullin, resigned amid child pornography allegations.
  • Democratic activist, Andrew Douglas Reed, pleaded guilty to multiple counts of 2nd-degree sexual exploitation of a minor for producing child pornography.
  • A democratic official from Terre Haute, Indiana, David Roberts was sentenced to federal prison for producing and possessing child pornography including placing hidden cameras in the bedrooms and bathrooms at a home he shared with two minor female victims.
  • Democratic California Congressman, Tony Cárdenas, is being sued in LA County for allegedly sexually abused a 16-year-old girl.
  • A democratic aide to Senator Barbara Boxer, Jeff Rosato, plead guilty to charges of trading in child pornography.
  • Democratic Alaskan State Representative, Dean Westlake, resigned from his seat after the media published a report alleging he fathered a child with a 16-year-old girl when he was 28.
  • Democratic New Jersey State Assemblyman, Neil Cohen, was convicted of possession and distribution of child pornography.
  • Republican Tim Nolan, chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in Kentucky, pled guilty to child sex trafficking and on February 11, 2018 he was sentenced to serve 20 years in prison.
  • Republican state Senator Ralph Shortey was indicted on four counts of human trafficking and child pornography. In November 2017, he pleaded guilty to one count of child sex trafficking in exchange for the dropping of the other charges.
  • Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.
  • Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
  • Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.
  • Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
  • Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
  • Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.
  • Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.
  • Republican Senator Strom Thurmond, a notable racist, had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.
  • Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
  • Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
  • Republican Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
  • Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.
  • Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
  • Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child.
  • Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
  • Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his stepdaughter.
  • Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
  • Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
  • Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. “Republican Marty”), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.
  • Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.
  • Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
  • Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
  • Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11-year-old girl. Republican anti-gay activist Earl “Butch” Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
  • Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
  • Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.
  • Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first-degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
  • Republican politician Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
  • Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was charged with sexual misconduct involving a 15-year old girl.
  • Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child.
  • Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl. Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.
  • Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner were convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.
  • Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.
  • Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15-year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.
  • Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.
  • Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.
  • Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.
  • Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a “good military man” and “church goer,” was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
  • Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.
  • Republican director of the “Young Republican Federation” Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was charged with rape for allegedly paying a 15-year old girl for sex. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.
  • Democratic donor and billionaire, Jeffrey Epstein, ran an underage child sex brothel and was convicted of soliciting underage girls for prostitution.
  • Democratic New York Congressman, Anthony Weiner, plead guilty to transferring obscene material to a minor as part of a plea agreement for sexted and sending Twitter DMs to underage girls as young as 15.
  • Democratic donor, activist, and Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein is being criminally prosecuted and civilly sued for years of sexual abuse (that was well known “secret” in Hollywood) including underage sexual activities with aspiring female actresses.
  • Democratic activist and #metoo proponent, Asia Argento, settled a lawsuit for sexual harassment stemming from sexual activities with an underage actor.
  • Democratic Mayor of Racine, Wisconsin, Gary Becker, was convicted of attempted child seduction, child pornography, and other child sex crimes.
  • Democratic Seattle Mayor Ed Murray resigned after multiple accusations of child sexual abuse were levied against him including by family members.
  • Democratic activist and aid to NYC Mayor De Blasio, Jacob Schwartz was arrested on possession of 3,000+ child pornographic images.
  • Democratic activist and actor, Russell Simmons, was sued based on an allegation of sexual assault where he coerced an underage model for sex.
  • Democratic Governor of Oregon, Neil Goldschmidt, after being caught by a newspaper, publicly admitted to having a past sexual relationship with a 13-year-old girl after the statute of limitations on the rape charges had expired.
  • Democratic Illinois Congressman, Mel Reynolds resigned from Congress after he was convicted of statutory rape of a 16-year-old campaign volunteer.
  • Democratic New York Congressman, Fred Richmond, was arrested in Washington D.C. for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy.
  • Democratic activist, donor, and director, Roman Polanski, fled the country after pleading guilty to statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl. Democrats and Hollywood actors still defend him to this day, including, Whoopi Goldberg, Martin Scorcese, Woody Allen, David Lynch, Wim Wenders, Pedro Almodovar, Tilda Swinton, and Monica Bellucci.
  • Democratic State Senator from Alaska, George Jacko, was found guilty of sexual harassment of an underage legislative page.
  • Democratic State Representative candidate for Colorado, Andrew Myers, was convicted for possession of child pornography and enticing children.
  • Democratic Illinois Congressman, Gus Savage was investigated by the Democrat-controlled House Committee on Ethics for attempting to rape an underage female Peace Corps volunteer in Zaire. The Committee concluded that while the events did occur his apology was sufficient and took no further action.
  • Democratic activist, donor, and spokesperson for Subway, Jared Fogle, was convicted of distribution and receipt of child pornography and traveling to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor.
  • Democratic State Department official, Carl Carey, under Hillary Clinton’s state department, was arrested on ten counts of child porn possession.
  • Democratic Maine Assistant Attorney General, James Cameron, was sentenced to just over 15 years in federal prison for seven counts of child porn possession, receipt and transmission.
  • Democratic State Department official, Daniel Rosen, under Hillary Clinton’s state department, was arrested and charged with allegedly soliciting sex from a minor over the internet.Democratic State Department official, James Cafferty, pleaded guilty to one count of transportation of child pornography.
  • Democratic radio host, Bernie Ward, plead guilty to one count of sending child pornography over the Internet. Democratic deputy attorney general from California, Raymond Liddy, was arrested for possession of child pornography.

COVID-19: What a Sales Job!

There’s nothing new about COVID-19 itself. The equally “novel,” equally “infectious” Asian flu of 1957 had similar fatalities in Britain: scaled to equal today’s population, the equivalent of 42,000, while the UK’s COVID death total (untrustworthy death total) now stands at 46,000. Globally, the Asian flu was far more lethal, causing between two and four million deaths. The Hong Kong flu of 1968-69 also killed up to four million people worldwide, including 80,000 Britts. Yet, in both instances, life went on. What is unprecedented: never has a virus been so oversold.

Want a few examples?

  • In a recent poll, British respondents estimated that nearly 7 percent of the UK population has died from the coronavirus. That would be 4.5 million people.
  • Scots thought that more than 10 percent of the UK population has died. That would be seven million people.
  • Americans believed that COVID-19 has killed nine percent of their fellow residents or almost 30 million people! The real US total has crossed the milestone of 150,000, but for pity’s sake, “only” 20 million people died in World War One.

True, your average man and woman are not statistics-wizards. Nevertheless, broadcast news has pounded audiences daily with COVID-19 death totals. And a populace ought to have some idea of their country’s population. So folks convinced that in five short months they’d lost an eighth of their fellow “inhabitants.” But then, the public is never good with zeroes — a “citizenry” characteristic which nations in deficit count on.

Many worldwide “scholarly” writers are not immune to COVID-19 Hyperbole Syndrome. One British national writer stated this virus is “killing millions worldwide.” One would expect a plethora of editors and fact-checkers would have jumped on that claim immediately. But it was published, and millions read it. But the true worldwide death toll at the time was about 650,000.

I’m not one to “excuse” US or British editors for allowing something so ridiculous to scare to death millions of their citizens and millions more around the world. So let’s instead take those exaggerated numbers as proof of a grandly successful propaganda campaign. The UK is just ONE government that has destroyed their country, and need to keep ramping up the hysteria the better to keep destroying it. Honestly, several world leaders are doing a good job.

Do you tire of hearing groans from politicians and media “experts” that “nothing will ever be the same again?” Think about those complaints: have you heard any world leader on a national or international stage say, “COVID-19 is horrible, it is lethal, and it IS killing our citizens. But, if we work together, communicate constantly, and refuse to weaponize this horror for political purposes, we can get to the end of this?” If you have, you’re more fortunate than I.

When I was a kid, there was no MMR (“measles, mumps, rubella”) vaccine, and children were expected to get measles, mumps, chickenpox, and rubella: it was just going to happen. And I did! My parents or teachers never took cover or hid under desks. There were no school or business closings. Every kid I knew and I didn’t think much about it. It was just something that happened to kids. I know NOW that each of these was MUCH more serious than my parents made each appear. Today, things are much different!

Naturally, in my house, we also contracted flu and colds throughout my life (no flu for me, Thank God!) and I’ve been resigned to the fact that these disagreeable ailments were due to contact with other people. Abstractly, I’ve known that other people could also infect me with more deadly pathogens: whooping cough, meningitis, and TB, to name but a few. Yet before COVID-19, it’s never occurred to me that I should, therefore, wrap myself in cling film, tie a sanitary towel across my face and lock myself in a cupboard.

The more relentless these micro-managing policies of “social distancing” (an expression I’ve come to loathe), mandatory masks, continued closures and arbitrarily restored regional lockdowns apparently on the basis of a miserable uptick of 14 extra cases, the more we relocate what had lurked far at the back of our minds to the front: other people are sources of contagion — or so the EXPERTS say. We used to live with that fact. But this on-going risk of mixing with other human beings we’re now, apparently, to find intolerable.

Have you checked on New York’s current COVID-19 status? The medical paranoia is doing live and well at “full throttle,” and social life is nearly nonexistent. In the Big Apple, no one is visiting friends. Everyone is afraid of everyone else. If you see anyone coming out of an office or someone’s home or apartment, you can see the distress of “I may have caught COVID-19 from those in there!” I’d say you could see it on their faces except you cannot see their faces: that sterile-mask, you know. Of course, they grab that hand sanitizer from a pocket or purse and do everything but drink it to kill that crazy COVID-19 virus they picked up! It may not be any different next summer. Google, for example, has already advised its employees to work from home for the next 12 months.

The graph of new cases in the US roughly leveled off through August 9th and has even declined after a peak July 31, 2020, of 290,100 confirmed cases.  Daily COVID-19 deaths leveled off on July 23 at just under 10,000 each day. Daily deaths have daily declined since by 50%: 4951 on August 9.

What Next?

So what should we do knowing all these numbers? Go back to school and work, lockdown once more, or just to “give it a go” being careful with social distancing, masks, and slapping sanitizer on everything around us? Usually, Americans would have been able to just turn to the experts, get the proven best practices to beat this virus, and valiantly go forward. Nope. We can’t do that now. Why? The “experts” agree on VERY little! And even what they all agree on has changed at least once but, in some cases, multiple times.

In trade for this valiant vigilance on our behalf, we merely have to sacrifice: our friends. Any new friends. All live performances — music, plays, restaurants. (ever try to drink wearing a mask?) We’ve lost all occasions, like proper weddings, funerals, birthdays, and extended-family celebrations, travel, and our friends. Any search for love in this environment is little more than Russian Roulette.

Our states have made taboo any moving communal experience, like festivals, sporting events, and church services. Casinos are fine as are marijuana dispensaries and abortion clinics. I almost forgot: Black Lives Matters in New York City have full permission to march, protest, and demonstrate, however, and as much as they wish. Dentistry. Honestly, with just a few exceptions, the bulk of our economy is pretty much at “full-stop.

What scarily remains on our nation table is another total national lockdown. Why on Earth? The one constructive conclusion to draw from this debacle is that extended, indiscriminate national lockdowns to suppress infectious diseases are a catastrophe. Yet the most horrifying consequence of COVID-19 could be that lockdown — which once applied only to prisons — becomes officialdom’s established knee-jerk response to any new contagion.

There will be a new contagion, too, and a new one after that. How many times can you send the national debt soaring, devastate a small business, paralyze government services — including healthcare — and cancel for months on end the civil liberties of an otherwise “free people?” In preference to this repeated carpet-bombing, a literal nuclear option might at least get the agony over pretty quickly.

Summary

Have you stopped to consider just how much money the federal government is spread around during the COVID-19 pandemic? Without having the numbers for the “nickel and dime” spending, we’ve “know” about $5-$6 Trillion in direct aid to Americans and American companies. Trying to find an accurate number that the pandemic has cost the nation’s overall economy. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) numbers have not yet been published for the third quarter. So, for the sake of this conversation, let’s assume in dollars and cents COVID-19 has cost American businesses close to $4 Trillion. Let’s be “spending-generous” and add the COVID direct aid of $6 Trillion and the $4 Trillion of business and personal losses and say, just for grins, “COVID-19 has cost American taxpayers $10 Trillion through July 31, 2020.

Stay with me: I am headed down a VERY interesting path here — a really short path!

How many COVID-19 deaths have occurred as of July 31, 2020? 145,425 is the published number. For our purposes today let’s add another 55,000 deaths before we stop this death-spiral. That’s 200,000.

Where are we going with this?

Let’s do some math:

  • 200,000 total U.S. deaths from COVID-19;
  • $10 Trillion of U.S. taxpayer money spent in COVID-19 relief and stimulus;

If you factor the per/death cost to American taxpayers, the value is mindboggling: $50,000,000!

Think what these numbers do NOT include: the cost of healthcare for the extremely COVID-ill Americans that have fought for days and weeks and finally lost the battle. Hospital bills easily total $150,000 in many of these cases.

“Wait a minute, Dan: are you trying to put a price tag on any of these peoples’ lives to justify physician-assisted suicide somehow?”

I AM NOT!

What’s my purpose for publishing these numbers? I think it’s time for Americans to know EVERYTHING that goes into the costs of operating this country in every area: the REAL costs.

These stimulus and aid packages for Americans are not funded by transferring dollars in some “holding” account owned by the federal government. Two or three or four trillion dollars, when spent by Congress, are funded by little more than pieces of paper. For lack of a better term, we’ll call those pieces of paper “IOUs.” Someone will be required at some point in the future to pay the bill.

I am not a “Debt-Hawk.” I’m just a businessman that knows the trap called “Debt” kills more businesses and people than most diseases. I’m 67 years old. There’s no way in my lifetime I see any scenario in which this country buys back all those IOU’s plus paying the purchasers interest due. The repayment burden then falls to our children and grandchildren, then THEIR children and THEIR grandchildren.

How far will repayment fall? Will it get paid? CAN it get repaid?

All are questions that must be considered in situations where government deficit spending is under consideration for anything at any time.

I’ll finish by saying this one thing: if my Congressman heard that I was diagnosed having COVID-19 and my case worsened to the point of hospital intensive care treatment and called my wife and said, “Mary Ann, the medical professionals have advised us that Dan IS going to die. Did Dan express wishes to you in this case?”

Honestly, my wife already knows my wishes: I don’t want to live in a vegetative state and would instead move on over “to the other side.” I’d rather her hear from the Congressman, “Mary Ann, because Dan said he didn’t want to live in this situation, the government will pay you forty percent of the per person death cost to taxpayers for each COVID-19 death or $20 million.”

I know, I know, that’s REALLY extreme! Let me be clear: I DON’T believe in death panels, I DON’T want anyone to commit suicide. And I certainly don’t want any “Death Panel” empowered to determine when my life “should” be over. That’s not my reference here. What I am pointing out is the outrageous dollars our government has and will spend on COVID-19 in total during this pandemic is FAR beyond any acceptable amount. And there is NO similar historical pandemic in which such drastic financial measures have been taken anywhere on Earth.

I’ll wrap this up by simply saying that somebody needs to be paid a really generous sales commission for successfully foisting the biggest scam in history on the entire Earth. There is no doubt this virus is mysterious and unknown in many ways. It’s deadly and it has killed and will kill millions more. But so has numerous other historical pandemics. And in none of those did any government take actions as has this government during this pandemic.

Who is the “COVID-19 Circus Ringmaster?”

I have no idea. But I guarantee that there is one.

He or she have put together a really GOOD circus!

 

Is Federal Attorney John Durham “Asleep at the Wheel” in the Investigation of Russia Gate Wrongdoing?

Have you heard any recent information about the status of the John Durham investigation? Durham is the Connecticut Federal Prosecutor named by Attorney General William Barr to delve into any wrongdoing during the Russian Investigation of purported collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia operatives. The Mueller Report failed to offer any confirmations of any such wrongdoing. But formerly classified documents and phone call transcripts have shown some officials from the Obama Administration Intelligence operations were implicated in potential criminal actions.

While much speculation inside the Beltway says U.S. Attorney John Durham will punt the results of his so-called Spygate investigation past the election to avoid charges of political interference, sources who have worked with Durham on past public corruption cases doubt he’ll bend to political pressure — and they expect him to drop bombshells before Labor Day.

Att. General Barr                  Fed. Att. John Durham

Durham’s boss, Attorney General Bill Barr, also pushed back on the notion his hand-picked investigator would defer action. Under Democratic questioning on Capitol Hill two week ago, he refused to rule out a pre-election release.

“Under oath, do you commit to not releasing any report by Mr. Durham before the November election?” Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL) asked Barr, citing the longstanding Justice Department policy not to announce new developments in politically sensitive cases before an election.

“No,” the attorney general curtly replied.

Justice Department policy prohibits prosecutors from taking overt steps in politically charged cases typically within 60 days of an election. Accordingly, Durham would have to make a move by the Friday before Labor Day, or Sept. 4.

A low-profile prosecutor, Durham has kept a tight lid on his investigation into the origins of the misleading RussiaGate investigation of Donald Trump and his 2016 campaign, leading to rampant speculation about who he might prosecute and whether he would take action ahead of the Nov. 3 presidential election.

That could well be of historic consequence, since Durham’s probe involves both the Trump administration and high-level officials in the previous administration, including Trump’s presumptive Democratic rival, former Vice President Joe Biden. Recently declassified FBI notes show Biden offered input into the investigation of Trump adviser Michael Flynn in early January 2017. Another declassified document reveals that Biden was among those who requested Flynn’s identity be “unmasked” in foreign intelligence intercepts around that same time.

If Durham announces criminal indictments or plea agreements involving former officials operating under the Obama-Biden administration or releases a report documenting widespread corruption, independent voters could sour on Biden and sympathize with Trump.  On the other hand, kicking the ball past the election would certainly dishearten Trump’s base.

“I would find it hard to believe that he punts under any circumstances,” said former assistant FBI director Chris Swecker, who knows Durham personally and has worked with the hard-nosed prosecutor on prior investigations.

He pointed out that Durham would risk throwing away 16 months of investigative work if he delayed action beyond the election.

“There’s no question that if Biden is elected, everything Durham has done at that point will be canceled out,” Swecker explained, adding that Biden would replace Barr and possibly even Durham. But by putting indictments and reports “into the public arena” before the election, Durham would put a Biden administration in the position of either taking further action or closing down his probe.

“It would make it very difficult for Biden’s appointees to undo his charges or bury the results of his probe,” he said. “John knows this, and I fully expect he will take action before the election.”

Swecker, who’s also a former prosecutor, anticipates Durham will deliver criminal charges, a written report, or some combination of the two around the first week in September, if not sooner. “He must get his work done and out to the public by Labor Day,” he said. “That way he avoids any accusations that he was trying to impact the election.”

Democracy 21, which is a liberal Washington watchdog group, has already cited the department policy in recent complaints to Barr demanding he suspend Durham’s investigation and place on hold any further actions or public comments about it until after the election.

“If Barr allows indictments from the Durham investigation to come out during the presidential election campaign, he would be abandoning longstanding DOJ policy by misusing the department’s prosecutorial power to support Trump’s reelection campaign,” Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer argued.

Swecker, who served 24 years with the FBI before retiring as assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division, said he expects Durham to take more action “than just issuing a report” similar to the 500-page document issued in December by Justice’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz. The IG made criminal referrals to Durham, including against an FBI attorney accused of altering evidence used to support a surveillance warrant on a former Trump adviser.

“I know John Durham. I worked under him on the Whitey Bulger case, which resulted in indictments of corrupt FBI agents,” Swecker said. “I don’t think he’s the least bit squeamish about bringing indictments if there is criminal exposure.”

Swecker says he’s confident Durham has uncovered crimes. “He’s onto something, I’m convinced of it, otherwise he would have folded up his tent by now,” he asserted in a RealClearInvestigations interview.

The lack of media leaks coming from Durham’s office is another sign he is building a serious corruption case. Targets and witnesses have largely been kept in the dark about the scope and direction of his investigation, encouraging cooperation and possible plea deals. And the secrecy of grand jury proceedings has been fiercely protected.

“I’m impressed with the discipline his team has shown,” Swecker said. “There’s been no leaks. Details of the investigation have been very closely-held.”

Durham, a Republican, has been known to threaten to polygraph investigators whenever he suspected a leak.

His team is led by his deputy, Nora Dannehy, who specializes in the prosecution of complex white-collar and public corruption cases. Dannehy is a Democrat with a reputation for integrity. She left a high-paying corporate job to rejoin Durham’s office in March 2019, the month after Barr was confirmed.

Barr officially announced in May 2019 that he had put Durham in charge of looking into what he called the government’s “spying” on the Trump campaign in 2016. Was that surveillance justified? Or was it done to smear Trump and sink his campaign — and when that failed, his presidency?

Durham is exploring a host of other questions, including: What role did the CIA play? Did it monitor Trump advisers overseas? Were U.S. laws restricting spying on U.S. citizens broken? Did the spy agency slant U.S. intelligence on Russian election interference to justify the anti-Trump operation?

“As a former CIA analyst, Barr recognized that this is the biggest thing since Watergate in terms of the abuse of the intelligence community,” Swecker said. “This is a huge intelligence scandal.”

Swecker named former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith among officials most vulnerable to possible criminal charges in Durham’s investigation of the investigators. Justice’s watchdog made a criminal referral pertaining to his conduct – specifically, that Clinesmith forged an email in a way that hid the fact that former Trump adviser Carter Page had been a cooperating CIA source on Russia. The information, if disclosed to the FISA court, would have weakened the FBI’s case that Page was a “Russian agent.”

     Comey              Clapper          Brennan

On the other hand, Swecker does not expect Durham to indict former FBI Director James Comey, nor former CIA Director John Brennan or Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. None of these central figures in the scandal has been interviewed by Durham’s office, according to recently published reports, though Durham reportedly is working out details with Brennan’s lawyer for a pending interview. Durham’s investigators have already reviewed Brennan’s emails, call logs and other records.

“It’s hard to prove criminal intent at their level, and unless there’s a smoking gun, like an email or text, they’ll probably get off with a damning report about their activities,” Swecker said.

Durham’s portfolio also includes exploring the extent to which Ukraine played a role in the counterintelligence operation directed at the Trump campaign during the 2016 election. Officials from Kyiv, the Democratic National Committee, and the Obama administration reportedly coordinated efforts to dig up dirt on Trump – and Biden was Obama’s point man in Ukraine at the time.

Though Biden may factor into Durham’s probe, don’t expect him to appear in any pre-election report. Another longtime Durham colleague noted that political candidates cannot be part of indictments or any report on investigative findings, according to Barr’s own rules.

“The policy says you can’t indict political candidates or use overt investigative methods targeting them in the weeks before an election,” said the former federal prosecutor, who requested anonymity.

Barr has publicly acknowledged the policy. “The idea is you don’t go after candidates,” he said in an April radio interview. “You don’t indict candidates or perhaps someone that’s sufficiently close to a candidate within a certain number of days before an election.”

The former prosecutor, who’s worked with Durham, said his old colleague may start revealing developments from his case weeks in advance of the 60-day cut-off, or ideally right after the political conventions. The GOP convention, which follows the Democrats’ gathering, ends Aug. 27.

“They are nervous about affecting the election, so timing is everything,” he said. “It will be tricky.”

At the same time, the former Justice official said Durham could exploit a loophole in the department rule, memorialized in memos dating to 2008, that allows for action closer to the election. It states that “law enforcement officers and prosecutors may never select the timing of investigative steps or criminal charges for the purpose of affecting any election, or for the purpose of giving an advantage or disadvantage to any candidate or political party. Such a purpose is inconsistent with the Department’s mission.

The operative phrase – “for the purpose of” – leaves leeway for actions close to an election that aren’t taken “for the purpose” of affecting the election. In other words, Durham wouldn’t necessarily have to lie low for the two months in the run-up to the election.

Testing that loophole with an “October surprise” would almost certainly send Democrats and the Washington media into a high panic. Can you fathom the media insanity that would occur? Democrats would probably storm the Department of Justice!

Some are skeptical Durham will deliver at all, regardless of the deadline, while others question his reputation as a fierce prosecutor. They point to his nearly three-year investigation of CIA officials who destroyed videos of terrorist detainees allegedly being “tortured.” Congress had sought the evidence, but Durham closed the case in 2012 without filing any criminal charges. And his final report about what he found remains classified. In a 2018 criminal case, moreover, he cleared Comey’s general counsel, James Baker, of unauthorized leaks to the media.

The Senate’s top FBI watchdog, Chuck Grassley, has grown frustrated with Durham’s lack of progress. “Durham should be producing some fruit of his labor,” the Iowa Senator stated in a recent tweet.

Swecker attributes the sluggish pace of Durham’s sprawling probe to the COVID-19 health scare, which has restricted travel and grand jury meetings in the D.C. area. Durham’s team of investigators, who include retired FBI agents, has been operating out of his New Haven, Connecticut offices. Besides Washington, they have taken trips abroad. Before the coronavirus outbreak, they interviewed authorities and other sources in Italy, Britain, and Australia.

In addition, Durham’s agents have been slowed by an avalanche of subpoenaed electronic media, including emails, texts, and direct messages, “which are incredibly difficult and time-consuming to sort through,” Swecker said. Such evidence is not limited to FBI, Justice, and CIA officials. Durham also has reportedly obtained, for instance, data and meta-data contained on two BlackBerry cellphones used by Joseph Mifsud, a shadowy Maltese professor who some believe was used by the FBI to create a predicate to open the original case against the Trump campaign.

During that recent House hearing, Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA), asked Barr if he would be able to “right this wrong” against Trump before the election.

“I really can’t predict that,” the attorney general answered. “John Durham is looking at all these matters. COVID-19 did delay that action for a while. But he’s working very diligently.”

Added Barr: “Justice is not something you can order up on a schedule like you’re ordering a pizza.”

McClintock warned Barr that if he is succeeded by a Biden appointee, Durham’s investigation will simply go away.

“I understand your concern,” Barr sighed.

Summary

This summary is easy to put together: 2 + 2 + 2 = 6. That’s NOT claiming there will be six indictments, six people indicted, or six anything. It’s simply stating that whatever John Durham found in this criminal investigation will be put in a template of political crime indictments. And if the numbers he finds add up, he’ll tell American what, if anything, the equation shows criminal prosecution found to be indicated. Durham’s past shows he’s that kind of “cut-and-dry” prosecutor.

Any prediction? Just my gut feeling, but I’m reasonably certain there will be indictments of several individuals. But for the reasons listed above, I am certain there will be damning details confirmed in the Durham Report of wrongdoing by those from the Obama Administration. Which (if any) cry for prosecution in cases like this are always a crap-shoot. But even if Comey, Clapper, and Brennan do not face indictments, it is likely their intelligence and/or political opportunities in U.S. government work are in the past.

I’m confident we’ll know all these answers by Labor Day.

Saturday Bullet Points, August 8, 2020

The craziness in our nation simply will not stop. I have it on good authority, (MY amazing intuitiveness!) that between today and Election Day, it will only get crazier. My advice to you is to “buckle up.” Find a way to get and stay safe until the election furor subsides. Unfortunately, it looks like that may not happen before the end of the year. Can you imagine a scenario in which Santa drops by the Post Office and is pictured counting mail-in ballots to help out for Christmas? Let’s hope we see nothing like that.

Until then, our job is to keep you informed about some of the things you’ve missed in news during your busy days. Maybe you’ve seen or heard these stories, but the “explanations” you were given with the stories was not quite accurate. TruthNewsNetwork is always ready to give you clear and concise information on which you can comfortably rely.

Let’s get started with our bullet-point summary of the big stories from this week you may have missed. Just read the first several lines in our bullet-point and click on the arrow link if you want to read the complete details of each story.

Bullet Points

  • It seems that the Democrats have taken the ax to the invited speakers for their upcoming convention. Because of the changes forced on Democrats by the unknown but certain threats from COVID-19, much of their convention will be virtual. As they edit their normally lengthy invited-speaking guests, one Democrat rising star has been shown the door: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was disinvited! For more details, click on this link:
  • It’s certain that most Americans are concerned about some apparent cognitive issues being displayed regularly in public speeches by Joe Biden. But almost just as magnetic for the same Americans is the question: “Who will be the pick to run as Vice President on the Joe Biden ticket?” We were told last week it’s down to two, but it now seems like the list has enlarged a bit! For more details, click on this link:
  • The U.S. job report released Friday gave Americans a “bit” of news: not “great” news, but certainly not “bad.” Almost 2 million jobs were created last month. But there’s much more to look to. For those complete details, click on this link:
  • In all of the uproar that captures our attention, one very important element of American life that has simply been forgotten is Broadway. COVID-19 attacked Broadway at the same time it attacked you. We have been told that already hundreds of American companies that closed “temporarily” during the lockdown have announced they will NOT be coming back. But have you thought about Broadway? It may be gone, Too! For complete details, click on this link:
  • Has your mail delivery seemed to slow down a bit in the last month or so? There’s a reason for it. The U.S. Postmaster issued a change last month that certainly slowed some mail delivery: he canceled overtime for postal workers. Both Democrats and Republicans alike in Congress are enraged, especially with the upcoming November election and certainly with more votes being process through the mail. For complete details, click on this link:
  • We stopped hearing stories about massive illegal immigration from below our southern border. Why is that? Apparently our U.S. Customs agents and the partial border wall have been effective so far. But that doesn’t mean they’ve stopped trying to find ways to get over the border! In fact, what is deemed to be the most advanced tunnel ever from Mexico to the U.S. has just been discovered. It’s mindboggling how technologically advanced is this tunnel. For complete details, click on this link:
  • The thought that the next international major attack on American would come in the form of some process of destroying all or part of our electric grid. In fact, there are books and movies that have used that scary thought as a central topic in their offering. Many thought what happened Thursday night in New York City might have been such an attack, or, if not an attack, a “dry-run.” For complete details, click on this link:
  • COVID-19 has viciously attacked every sector of our lives — not just in healthcare. Seldom considered when thinking through the economic tragedies from the virus is the media advertising industry. Billions of dollars are spent promoting all types of things year-round and 24/7 in various types of U.S. media formats. But what about the people who work in the advertising business? Many of them have lost their jobs, too. And that means they’re probably finding it tough to replace that old job. It is. For complete details, click on this link:
  • Many U.S. employers are in panic-mode about their employees. They probably should be. Many are finding employees are slow to return to their jobs, even as the lockdown here has ended. They should be concerned if they look toward Briton. Employees who worked from home during the lockdown have become accustomed to doing so and a larger number than expected are simply wanting to work “from the house.” For complete details, click on this link:
  • We’ve known for years that the state of Utah is one of the strictest states at enforcing laws including requiring criminal offenders to serve more of their sentences than in most other states. Utah has turned up the heat even hotter! It seems that some of the laws broken in the state by Black Lives Matter protestors regarding violence during protests actually carry a potential “LIFE” sentence! For complete details, click on this link:

Summary

You probably missed a bunch of news this past week! Don’t worry. In this heightened political and COVID-19 climate in which we live, there are far too many important items for most of us to follow daily. That’s what we’re here to do for you!

NOTE: Sunday we take a day away. That doesn’t mean we’re not working. We are diligently preparing a new report about the investigation by Federal Attorney John Durham into criminal wrongdoing by members of the Obama Administration regarding alleged illegal actions on the part of multiple intelligence agency officials. That report will be published here first thing Monday morning!

We’ll follow it up with more details of that report plus get you started on your week with TNN Live: our daily talk-show that streams live Monday through Friday right here on this site.

Have a wonderful weekend. See you all Monday!

Dan

The Nation is Vastly Divided and Trump is at Fault

I don’t remember a time when the United States has experienced anything similar to what we are watching play out daily today. Who could have fathomed cities would be torn apart by protests that quickly morph into violent demonstrations that almost as quickly morph into full-blown riots? It’s happening daily throughout America.

It hasn’t been surprising to watch and listen to Democrats blame all of it on President Trump. They seem to forget that each of the cities in which this violence occurs has mayors, local police and fire departments, and the states in which they are have governors that direct their state police forces that are fully equipped and trained to handle violence of these kinds. Why haven’t the cities or states acted in whatever fashion is required to quell the violence? That answer is beyond my comprehension.

Add to that the madness of each of these city’s mayors and each state’s governors have symbolically (and in some cases literally) given President Trump the middle finger placing 100% of the blame for all these travesties on his shoulders. To make matters worse, each of these local and state officials has demanded that President Trump not even consider sending federal officers to assist local and state law enforcement officials in preventing the devastation that occurs nightly.

It should not (but it does) surprise me that in each of the impacted cities across America and in each affected state every mayor and every governor are Democrats!

Does that even mean something?

I think it does.

What DOESN’T surprise me is that President Trump from the beginning has been ready to act, has federal agency officers set to go, and even has National Guard commanders abreast of current status at these locations with an order to be prepared to go when called.

He sent federal officers to Portland when things deteriorated to the point the Federal Courthouse was not just being covered in graffiti on a nightly basis, but firebombed, sustained fireworks, bricks, and rock attacks that were hurled at the Courthouse. In addition to the physical damage already sustained by the multimillion-dollar facility at the hands of these rioters, federal employees working within the building were daily put in danger by this terror. For sending those federal agents, President Trump was excoriated in Portland and in other cities around the nation. He found himself in one of those “damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don’t” dilemmas.

One thing has been proven in these riotous cities: Donald Trump is a learned leader in a crisis. His actions have been swift, well-planned, and decisive. And he happily takes responsibility.

It is certain that the fault for the violence does NOT lie at the President’s feet. It was laughable to hear former President Obama in his eulogy of Congressman John Lewis (D-GA) blame this administration for “attacking peaceful protestors.” Each of these nights in Seattle, Portland, and even Louisville and Atlanta have begun with peaceful protestors and demonstrators. But shortly after sundown in each city, the looters, rioters, and rabid activists sweep into the streets and begin their destruction.

It’s not “peaceful” to bring a club to a demonstration. It’s not “peaceful” to bring a knapsack full of bricks. It’s not “peaceful” to throw small bombs into a courthouse building that explode and leave holes where they strike. It’s not “peaceful” to shine lasers in the eyes of policemen trying to keep safe citizens on the streets. It’s not “peaceful” when those terrorists permanently blinded with lasers three of those policemen.

President Obama was dead wrong. Those people are violent rioters. And to clarify that statement, Portland authorities have legally labeled these “wars” in their city as “Riots.”

Is the President really responsible for the division in the United States?

Think This Through:

I know many are saying today that Trump divided America. Did he really divide us? Let’s together prove or disprove that claim against Mr. Trump. Let’s together determine if he did so when the division of America actually happened.

  • How about when NONE of the Democrats showed up for his inauguration? Do you think that started the division? He hadn’t yet taken the Oath of Office, and except for Clinton and Obama, not one Democrat showed up. Is that when Trump divided America? Can you imagine if the Republicans didn’t show up for Obama’s inauguration because they lost? Can you even begin to imagine what would have happened?

 

  • How about when 19 minutes after Trump was inaugurated, the Washington Post declared, “The Impeachment of Donald Trump Begins!” Was that when Trump divided America?

 

  • What about when Nancy Pelosi ripped up Trump’s State of the Union address before the entire World, showing her disrespect for the office of the President of the United States? Did that bring the country together or is that when Trump divided America?

 

  • How about when Americans endured three years and over 40 million dollars spent on trying to prove that Trump only won because of Russian collusion and not because Americans voted in sufficient numbers to beat Hillary Clinton? Seventeen Democrats did everything in their power to prove that there was Russian Collusion and found NO proof. Was that when Trump divided America?

 

  • How about the press he’s received since his surprise win.  90% of the Mainstream Media are owned by corporations controlled by major Democrat Party Donors. Add to that 90+ percent of all national press stories about this President have been framed in a negative fashion? Could that be when Trump divided America?

 

  • Remember the Big campaign donors to Hillary? Michael Bloomberg gave $27 million, Tom Steyer gave $17 million, George Soros gave $9 million, and many others gave millions of dollars to Hillary.  Do you think those donors gave millions just because they loved Hillary? Those weren’t campaign donations, they were “investments” in whatever Hillary Clinton had promised them she would do for them when she became president. They were certain she would win and they would then be showered with massive returns. When it didn’t happen, they lost all those millions of dollars of their campaign “investments.” It was those big donors that lost their dreams of more power, more control, and even more money with Hillary’s defeat. They were angered by their losses. They needed to punish Trump and those deplorables that voted for him. Was that when Trump divided America?

Here’s a question: If you’re a Democrat who does not support President Trump, have you ever listened to Trump or thought through any of the accomplishments or campaign promises he’s kept? Have you ever gone to one of his rallies or watched one from start to finish on television? Or have you just closed your mind to ANYTHING he has accomplished for ALL Americans?

When you determine your answer to that, then ask yourself the following questions:

  • What did Joe Biden do for America during the last 47 years in which he’s held office?
  • What did Joe Biden do for African Americans when he and Obama were in office for eight years?
  • What did Joe Biden do in his entire life to create private-sector jobs?
  • What did Joe Biden do to help the American middle-class workers?
  • Why do you think there are so many people tearing down statues, burning our flag, beating up police officers, disrespecting our founders, and hating our country? Their doing so is a direct result of today’s educators that have carefully denigrated the United States history.

If you are a teacher reading or listening to this today, please answer for yourself the following:

  • Do you teach that it was Democrats who founded and operated the Ku Klux Klan; that the leader of the KKK was Robert Byrd, who was elected to Congress and served as a representative for West Virginia for decades? It was Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama that eulogized Byrd at his funeral. Each claimed that Byrd was their mentor, their friend, and who taught them much about fairness. Was that when Trump divided America?
  • Do you teach that Democrats in America that fought the Civil War to keep slavery?
  • Do you teach that inner-city ghettos were created by Democrats to maintain control of slaves after they were freed?
  • Do you teach that Planned Parenthood was founded in inner cities to control the black population by killing their unborn children?
  • Do you allow a student to speak when he/she disagrees with you to say that Trump is a horrible president, or the electoral college must be eliminated? If you do allow that student to speak, you’re allowing the exercise of Free Speech. But do you teach the reason for the establishment of the electoral college occurred was to guarantee that even Americans who do not live in large cities have a Constitutional assurance their vote counts as much as those who do live in big cities?

President Trump’s family members and close friends have, since the day of the 2016 election, been vilified, chastised, demeaned, and hated by many Americans for one simple reason: He won the election.

Maybe THAT was when President Trump divided America!

Summary

Have you noticed that Democrats and other Leftists object to everything he does and have not once supported or applauded any of his actions that have helped make America stronger and more economically stable than in decades? Why haven’t they supported any of his considerable actions that have dramatically improved the lives of all Americans?

Answer: They can’t afford to support those things that have helped Americans. If they do, their support will help him win a second term in office.

If Mr. Trump wins in November, it will destroy the Democrat Party – and Democrats are scared to death.

By the way, did you forget about those cages that Leftists claimed President Trump used to cage illegal immigrant children? Those cages were built or used first by President Obama. He created the cages and put them in place to house illegal immigrant children. Was that all over the news when Obama did it? During Trump’s administration, those were the same cages used for the same purpose as did Obama’s Homeland Security.

Donald Trump recently commuted the sentence of Roger Stone and was demonized by the Left for doing so. There was not even a whisper of criticism when Obama commuted the sentences of 1715 inmates of which 330 were given their commutations on Obama’s last day in office. 405 of those were people who were sentenced to life without parole.

Don’t forget that Biden and Obama allowed the “H1N1” virus, or “Swine Flu,” to infect 60 million Americans before declaring it a health emergency seven months after the first confirmed infection. (So far, only four million Americans have contracted COVID-19) Did the media ever call that flu the “Obama Flu” or blame the Obama Administration for it reaching our shores? Compare Obama’s Swine Flu media coverage to the flurry of attacks levied against President Trump when he quickly halted travel from China at the end of January of this year. In February, Nancy Pelosi went to Chinatown and said, “Come on down! There’s no virus problem in Chinatown!” Joe Biden called President Trump a xenophobe and a racist for implementing that China travel ban. U.S. medical experts later stated that the President’s doing so saved Americans from hundreds of thousands of additional COVID-19 infections. Did you see those congratulatory Trump stories for that success for America?

Imagine what this country could accomplish if the Democrats worked with President Trump and the G.O.P. to further improve the economy, eliminate the coronavirus, restructure our inner cities where he’s already created Opportunity Zones that encourage minority home and business ownership and include new job training programs.

Do you know that more than 60% of African American parents are desperate for School Choice? When President Trump offered it, teacher unions and their members threatened to walk away and leave teaching. Their doing so was simply a demand to allow them to keep control of those inner-city schools that are devastating to African American children and are solely responsible for the horrible educational status for those children from those schools.

There’s just one important question that is critical for every American to answer honestly, but only after thinking-through the pluses and minuses of the candidates running to be the residents of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue for the next four years. Who is best suited to finish our war against COVID-19 and quickly get us back on track to recovery? Your honest answer to that question should be the ONLY determinate you use for your decision to vote for Joe Biden (or whoever may end up replacing him on the Democrat Party ticket) or President Trump.

Happy Hunting in ferreting out the Truth!

Play

Does America Have a Caste Problem? (What the heck is “Caste!”)

IMPORTANT NOTIFICATION!!!

Today on TNN Live, we are exposing the latest bombshell about a pending indictment of former Vice President Biden by the nation of Ukraine. We go into great detail in the story plus we give you audio sound from several telephone conversations between the former Ukrainian President and then Vice President Biden about the incident on which Biden’s pending indictment(s) are based. It’s a mind-blower!

TNN Live is a two-hour conservative talk show that airs right here streaming live beginning at 9:00 AM Central time. To join us, at 9:00 AM Central click on the blue horizontal banner above this story that says “Live Now, Click to Listen.” It will bring you right to the show. We’ll see you then!

 

Most in the U.S. don’t know what “caste” means, probably because very few believe “caste” even exists in the U.S. Let’s get first things done: what is “caste?”

Caste: A caste system is a class structure that is determined by birth. Loosely, it means that in some societies, if your parents are poor, you’re going to be poor, too. And there is NO way for anyone to break-out and change their own caste.

The discussion of a “not-yet-confirmed” American caste system has been brought to light recently in dramatic fashion. The African American billionaire, Oprah Winfree, pointed to an author of a book Oprah is touting as “the greatest book I have ever read.” Isabell Wilkerson wrote that book titled simply, “Caste.” Oprah has made it a best seller with her promotion. Wilkerson is a well-known author and Pulitzer Prize winner who formerly worked at the New York Times.

In promotion material, a writer described Wilkerson’s writing on a caste system with this: “While at New York Times, Wilkerson reported on a range of topics whose underlying themes of race, class, and citizenship in the U.S. and beyond would be echoed in Caste, a book that puts the U.S.’s caste system in conversation with India’s and Nazi Germany’s.”

We won’t today dive into her book, but we WILL dive into the “caste system.” We’ll start with a few words from another writer who happens to be a professor of English at the University of Hawaii: Subramanian Shankar. He shared some poignant perspectives on the REAL caste system on Earth: that in India. He is a native Indian who describes what a caste system has been for centuries in his country.

The original caste system appeared centuries ago in India. People’s entire life was determined at their birth: if born into a wealthy or politically well-connected family, that baby would grow knowing from birth he/she would have the same privileges as did their fathers. Caste was determined for them. They retained it forever.

For those who were born into poor or impoverished families, nothing they could ever do in their lives would enable them to break out of that place in India’s caste system just because of their caste at birth.

Both Ms. Wilkerson and Mr. Shankar are confident the U.S. contains a caste system and always has. With that comes an automatic that cannot ever be changed: “you are and will always be in whatever financial and political class in America into which you were birthed.

Let’s look at what Mr. Shankar said:

Subramanian Shankar

Many Americans would be appalled to think that anything like caste could exist in a country allegedly founded on life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After all, India’s atrocious caste system determines social status by birth, compels marriage within a community, and restricts job opportunities.

But is the U.S. so different?

What is caste?

I first realized that caste could shed new light on American inequality in 2016 when I was a scholar-in-residence at the Center for Critical Race Studies at the University of Houston-Downtown. There, I found that my public presentations on caste resonated deeply with students, who were mostly working-class, black, and Latino. I believe that’s because two key characteristics differentiate caste from race and class:

First, caste cannot be transcended. Unlike class, people of the “low” caste cannot educate or earn their way out of being “low.” No matter how elite their college or how lucrative their careers, those born into a low caste remain stigmatized for life.

  • Caste is also always hierarchical: As long as it exists, so does the division of people into “high” and “low.”
  • What distinguishes it from race, is that people in a caste system cannot dream of equality.

Caste, in other words, is societal difference made timeless, inevitable, and cureless. Caste says to its subjects, “You all are different and unequal and fated to remain so.” Neither race nor class nor race and class combined can so efficiently encapsulate the kind of social hierarchy, prejudice, and inequality that marginalized Americans experience.

In Houston, that sense of profound exclusion emerged in most post-presentation discussions about caste.

As children, the students there noted, they had grown up in segregated urban neighborhoods – a geographic exclusion that was federal policy for most of the 20th century. Many took on unpayable student loan debt for college, then struggled to stay in school while juggling work and family pressures, often without a support system.

Several students also contrasted their cramped downtown campus – with its parking problems, limited dining options, and lack of after-hours cultural life – with the university’s swankier main digs. Others would point out the jail across from the University of Houston-Downtown with bleak humor, invoking the school-to-prison pipeline.

Both the faculty and the students knew the power of social networks that are essential to professional success. Yet even with a college degree, evidence shows, Americans who grow up poor are almost guaranteed to earn less.

The above is the opinion of a native-born scholar from India who lives and teaches in the United States. His perspective is one that obviously is drawn from both his early life in India (where caste classification actually began for the entirety of Planet Earth). That perspective compares life under a true caste system in India and makes comparisons.

In doing so, he draws broad assumptions and makes assertions as fact that are nothing more than his opinions, which he certainly is entitled to share. But often what we think — especially if taken out of context — prove to be untrue. In this case, he cannot truthfully assume that he knows how being born in the United States is different from those born into India’s TRUE caste system. He makes assumptions to support his theory about a U.S. caste system and does so based on NO logical fact.

So what about America?

Casteist ideologies in America

In the United States, we have a quasi-caste system, a welfare system, which incentivizes people to remain poor by staying on welfare and supporting the politicians who further their benefits. Star Parker, a former welfare single mom who worked her way out of the system, later founding Urban Cure, states, “It is no accident that the most loyal Democratic Party supporters are those most dependent on the government.” Democratic politicians mainly trade “free stuff” for votes, which keeps the poor in poverty and the elitist politicians in power. Sadly, many of its recipients have bought into the lie that welfare is good for them when, in reality, it’s only good for the politicians who exploit them.

In addition to the $1 trillion spent yearly by federal, state, and local government funding of roughly 80 welfare programs, the welfare-caste system incentivizes people to stay poor, rather than encouraging them to seek opportunity, take responsibility for their behavior, and care for their families. While the massive national debt incurred by welfare programs should greatly concern us, our greater concern should be for the victims of these programs. The system rewards broken families and penalizes in-tact ones. It encourages failure and creates a multigenerational group of people who don’t believe that they can achieve because the system has taught them that “not achieving” is its own achievement. This must change.

As a culture, we must champion the cause of the poor by empowering them to break free from the bondage of poverty. True compassion sees the value and dignity of each human being and helps them to achieve their potential. This occurs not through spending more government money but by incentivizing work, family, and responsibility. Gov. Sam Brownback’s reforms in Kansas illustrate just that. Brownback instituted both work requirements and time limits for welfare eligibility. Since then, able-bodied adults on food stamps (without dependents) dropped 75%.

Additionally, 60% of those who left welfare found employment within the first year. Their incomes increased by 127%. These people found opportunity. They found dignity. Most importantly, they found hope.

The state of Maine also reinstated the work requirement for able-bodied adults who saw their incomes increase by 114% in the first year, as they left welfare for a job. In addition to increasing their income, this good policy helped set free those souls trapped in the hopelessness of poverty, putting them instead on course to live a life of hope and dignity. All Americans should have an equal opportunity to build a life for themselves and their families, like those in Maine and Kansas.

The incredible story of Dr. Ben Carson recounted in the book “Gifted Hands” and the film of the same name, tells the story of a young boy raised in urban Detroit who ultimately becomes a world-renowned neurosurgeon. Later, of course, we know that he ran for president and now serves as the secretary of Housing and Urban Development. His story exemplifies the power of opportunity, hard work, and determination.

As a nation, we must pursue welfare reform that ends the politically created, socially stratifying welfare caste system. We must pursue welfare reform that gives all Americans access to the path of freedom and prosperity. We must remember our shared humanity and reject the caste system with its predetermined order and social stratification. If we truly believe in the value and dignity of the individual, and if we create our policies to encourage responsibility and hard work, we will see our brothers and sisters break free from generational poverty. We will show the poor that America is with them and for them. We will show them that the American Dream of self-sufficiency and self-reliance is not just for some but for all.

Summary

I’m tired of “outside” identification assignment! There are far too many people who today, for some reason, feel entitled to stick a label on anyone they bump into. They do that based on what?

Often when a person with whom they interact does or says something, these elitists just hang a tag on that person that says, “racist,” “bigot,” “homophobe,” “xenophobe,” or some other “phobia” that they can conjure up. If you want to call that a caste system, feel free to do so.

But what all this means to me is today in the United States there IS a group of people who are entitled to do such things. And their entitlement is real, and it comes from other Americans!

Think about it: we glorify professional athletes, professional singers and actors, politicians, and tycoons of business. In doing so, we actually create a caste of elite Americans. The style of caste in the U.S. IS slightly different from that in India. Those in India are generational and are based on nothing more than who are the parents of a newborn child. No person in India can change whatever caste they enter at birth.

That’s not the same as in the U.S. — thankfully. Because our country allows each to achieve and become whoever they desire, entering and leaving any caste system here is not solely based on a biological last name. It is based on just what price every American is willing to pay to achieve whatever caste membership they desire.

“But not everyone can be the President of the United States!”

That’s true — there have been only 45. But who on this Earth has the right to tell you that you cannot be the President! What determines that is almost solely on the shoulders of whoever is willing to pay the price to get there. It’s certainly not a role that anyone deserves just because of their last name.

I’ll leave you with a piece of advice: Don’t let WHERE you are in your life determine WHO you are. WHERE you are is just one stop on the road to WHERE you are going. YOU determine WHO you or — no one else.

 

Comey and McCabe

Little has been heard about any legal actions of any kind being levied against two top FBI officials: Andrew McCabe and James Comey. Many think that criminal indictments for the pair will be included in the release of details of the criminal investigation of FBI wrongdoing during 2016 and 2017. But, this is the FBI! Politics usually dictates who in the FBI accused of (and later found guilty of) criminality will actually be charged and forced to face prosecution.

I thought it was odd for Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) to tweet several days ago, that there are two tiers of justice in the United States: one for everyday Americans and one for Donald Trump’s friends and confidants. Why is that odd? Two reasons: Adam Schiff is a pathological liar who is recorded consistently lying before Congress, in television interviews, and even in his own tweets! Schiff seems to have forgotten how much criminal activity occurred before Trump even got to Washington. And that criminal activity not only occurred under President Obama, but it has also been confirmed Mr. Obama played a role in it. If he didn’t initiate it, he knew it was happening on his watch.

Rep. Schiff invoked U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is conducting a criminal inquiry of the federal Russia investigation, as he discussed his dread that “more serious abuse” of federal law enforcement will happen in the coming days.

Schiff Does Not Like Attorney General William Barr

“One of the concerns I have with Bill Barr is that the worst is yet to come. I mean, he’s got a terrible, destructive track record as it is, and it may get worse in the coming days,” Schiff said. “But what we have seen largely is Barr’s intervention to protect the president.”

As examples, Schiff mentioned Barr’s rollout of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report and “intervention” in cases spun off from the Russia investigation to “help Trump cronies” such as Roger Stone and former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

“What we have not yet had full visibility on is not Barr’s use of the shield to protect corruption writ large of his boss, Donald Trump, but the sword,” Schiff continued. “How he may be using the power of the Justice Department through Durham or others to go after the president’s enemies. And in many respects, that is a far greater, more serious abuse of the power of the Justice Department than his use of the shield.”

It’s a well-worn line of criticism for Schiff, who has complained since last year that the Justice Department has kept the Democratic-led House in the dark about its inquiries into whether there was inappropriate “spying” on Trump’s 2016 campaign and other misconduct. But more recently, that anxiety has deepened as Trump accused former President Barack Obama and his vice president, Joe Biden, of committing crimes as part of the “Obamagate” scandal.

“And so I continue to be concerned with the president, who is tweeting about how Obama and Biden should go to prison, that Bill Barr may be preparing the use of the sword in a politicized and dangerous and desperate way,” Schiff said.

Barr has repeatedly said he does not expect Obama or Biden, who is now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, to be targets of Durham’s investigation. He also has dismissed the inquiry as being a partisan hit job, even as some critics fear an “October surprise.”

“This cannot be, and it will not be a tit-for-tat exercise. We are not going to lower our standards to achieve a particular result,” the attorney general said in May. Barr said last month that he anticipates “developments” in Durham’s criminal investigation by the end of the summer.

Whereas Schiff is spooked by being kept in the dark about Durham’s work, his Republican counterpart on the House Intelligence Committee views that as a “good sign.”

What About Comey and McCabe?

While we’ve been totally wrapped in the COVID-19 fears, may others have been captured by nightly stories of violence — disguised as “peaceful protesting,” a few more layers of the “Intelligence Community Onion of Ill Repute” have been peeled away. John Solomon — an investigative reporter who in my opinion is one of the most diligent and concise of today’s investigative reporters — uncovered some bad news for James Comey and Andrew McCabe.

The FBI agent who ran the FBI warrantless spying program said he warned ex-FBI Director Comey and his deputy, Andrew McCabe that the program was a useless waste of taxpayer money that needlessly infringed Americans’ civil liberties, but his bosses refused to take action. Retired Special Agent Bassem Youssef ran the FBI’s Communications Analysis Unit from late 2004 until his retirement in late 2014. He told John Solomon he fears the deeply flawed program, which was started in response to the Sept. 11 attacks, was allowed to keep going to give Americans a false sense of security in the war on terror and possibly to enable inappropriate spying, such as that which targeted President Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“I have no doubt, or very little doubt, that it was used for political spying or political espionage,” Youssef said during a lengthy interview.

Youssef confirmed that the FBI performed an audit of the highly classified program (also known as the NSA program because it searched call records captured by the National Security Agency) after Edward Snowden leaked its existence. The audit showed that while the program had generated two moderate leads for counterterrorism cases, it had not helped thwart dozens of terrorist attacks as officials had claimed, despite costing tens of millions of dollars per year. In fact, the program was generating large numbers of “false negatives and positives,” Youssef said. The audit, he added, also showed “there was collateral damage in terms of civil liberties” of Americans whose phone records were unnecessarily searched or who were falsely identified as connected to terrorism.

Youssef said he discussed the concerns with McCabe both when McCabe served as assistant director for counterterrorism and then when he was promoted to acting executive assistant director, the No. 3 job in the bureau. But his efforts to pause the program and reform it so it could work better, cost less, and infringe less on American privacy fell on deaf ears, he said.

When McCabe was acting executive assistant director, “I explained to him again, the model that I was looking to establish and to let him know that we were not really getting good support from this program and that maybe we should reconsider this whole thing, unless we can re-tweak it,” Youssef recalled. “And I remember, he was so adamant about, we need this program. We’re keeping it like this, even though we’re not getting anything out of it.”

Asked why the FBI would keep a program that was not producing any terrorism leads, Youssef said: “It was a way to say, you know, it’s an insurance policy to show that we’re doing everything we can, when in fact it wasn’t giving us anything of what we hoped it would get.”

FBI and DOJ declined to comment. Lawyers for Comey and McCabe also did not respond to requests for comment.

Youssef said that in September 2014, shortly before he retired, he was invited to brief Comey privately about his concerns in the director’s office. “It was a very lengthy briefing,” Youssef recalled. “He was very interactive. He asked very good questions. And after I explained everything to him, his only concern was not that we should shut it down, or that we should change it so that we can protect civil liberties … his concern was, do you have a problem or concerns with the statutory authority?”

Youssef recalls explaining that while he had no reservations about the legal authority of the surveillance, which had to be approved by FISA court judges, he had serious concerns about both the “waste of human resources” inherent in the “hundreds of thousands of agent hours in the field” lost to the labor-intensive program and the threat the program posed to civil liberties.

“Unless we change it to a different model,” Youssef recalls telling Comey, “we’re going to continue to get many false positives and false negatives. And you can imagine with a false positive, we would be knocking on people’s doors who have nothing to do with any kind of terrorism act.” Youssef said he had “no doubt whatsoever” that McCabe and Comey understood the severity of the problems. “I gave them the full monty brief,” he said. “I explained everything to them. They were fully briefed on the program.”

The New York Times reported that even after the Obama-era audit flagged serious concerns, the FBI kept operating the program until President Trump shut it down in 2019. Between 2015 and 2019 the program only generated two more leads, the newspaper reported, citing the White House report.

“That’s probably what grieves me more than anything,” Youssef said. “Here we have a program that was not doing what it should. It was leaked. And the Obama administration very quickly appointed a privacy and civil liberties board to look into this. And we were mandated to give, we called it the options paper. And so my option was really the one that would give us the best intelligence at the lowest cost while minimizing the false positive and false negative intelligence. And so it makes perfect sense that this would be adopted. And yet, the director basically didn’t do anything with it.”

Youssef said he has developed deep concerns since his retirement that the NSA program may have been abused, like the FISA warrants, during the Russia collusion probe of the Trump campaign that included a highly flawed Foreign Intelligence Surveillance warrant against Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

“There is no doubt in my mind now, looking at the backdrop and the information that has come up since 2016 in the media, that the abuses were rampant,” he said, “and not just for the FISA process, the FISA program, but for other programs that were used to spy on the Trump campaign. That to me is almost the obvious conclusion of what I’ve seen.

There is “a high probability that that program was used to handpick selected targeted numbers for purposes other than fighting terrorism,” Youssef believes. “It’s kind of a mirror image of the FISA abuses on Carter Page. As you know, it came out much later that the FISA process was for counterintelligence and counterterrorism purposes only. That was not what they used it for on Carter Page. And so it’s sort of the same type of situation with this other program. I have no doubt or very little doubt that it was used for political spying or political espionage.”

Summary

“Same Song, Second Verse.”

Is it at all doubtful, based on what we ALREADY know as fact, that at least Comey is up to his eyeballs in corruption and a certain criminal indictment or two? And McCabe dug a deep hole for himself, if for no other reason than his “looking the other way” while Comey and others in the Obama Administration if not destroyed the intelligence agencies’ operational guidelines then at least blurred the lines between legal and illegal so as to be able to say, “I’m sorry. I simply did not know that doing exactly this one thing, I was violating criminal statutes. Can’t we all ‘just get along?'”

The onion has just begun to shed layers of illegalities. But here’s what is petrifying all Americans who have seen and understood at least a small part of how egregious were the actions of Comey’s FBI and former Attorney General Lynch during this time: what if Trump is not re-elected?

Every American can be assured that if Trump leaves the White House, the multiple dozens of Obama Administration wrong-doers will walk without ANY prosecution for their criminal actions. And James Comey will be the biggest winner.

All that average Americans can do is plan to vote and make certain we do. But there’s one more thing: share the facts of this story with all those you know. In fact, you may want to not just forward the story link to this story; you may want to copy and paste this story and send it around.

Is it worth the trouble?

Forget about your own life for a moment. Think of your children, grandchildren, and their children and grandchildren.

This issue is a totally unique political travesty played out on Americans on the watch of a sitting President! Our government owes us not just an explanation, but a prosecution for every wrongdoer in ObamaGate.

Adam Schiff, I’m certain Attorney General Bar is just the man who can make this happen. With the added factual foundation being provided by Federal Attorney John Durham, when completed I’ll volunteer to write the book!