Is it Only Past Sins of Republicans Matter in Elections?

It is incredible how the Media, about a year before national elections, always seem to forget about the sins of politicians who run for office under the Democrat Party banner. Do you think that is done on purpose? Ha! This election cycle is NO different.

Don’t get angry because I pointed to only the sins of Democrat candidates and not Republicans. Why would I do such? Probably because the Media never STOP pointing Americans to the sins of Republican candidates: you know the “REAL” sins as well as their “PERCEIVED” sins! Democrat candidates get a free pass. If not a free pass a “get out of jail free” card.

I’m not sure of your religious perspective, but if you are a Christian who holds to the Bible as factual and the guide for Christians, we are taught that “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” I’m reasonably sure Democrats who run for office will occasionally blow one of the Ten Commandments, too!

Maybe, though, that is NOT true of Joe Biden. If you watch and listen to any news reports, podcasts, interviews, or analyses of many experts, it appears that Joe Biden stepped off a cloud to begin his formal campaign for President. And, of course, angels in Heaven — where Joe descended from on that cloud — do not commit sins. And if one ever did, it would not have been an “actual” sin, but merely an “honest mistake.” That’s the job of the Mainstream Media during this election cycle: making sure every voter in the U.S. knows in a detailed fashion that former Vice President Joe Biden is not only a good man, a great Dad, a wonderful husband, and a fantastic former U.S. Senator and Vice President.

Painting Joe Biden as a man of honor is a piece of cake for Democrats who have centuries of practice portraying sinners as saints. We don’t even need to go back to Jim Crow-era racists who dominated the party after the Civil War. Or presidents with feet of clay like Woodrow Wilson, who re-segregated the federal workforce in Washington, or even Franklin Roosevelt, who turned away a ship carrying Jews fleeing the Holocaust while allowing Japanese Americans to be placed in internment camps.

Their modern hero, JFK, was a philanderer whose sex partners included a mob boss’s mistress and White House interns not yet out of their teens. Bill Clinton has remained a party hero despite the infamous interludes with his own intern and robust evidence that he committed sexual harassment in Arkansas and multiple felonies – including perjury and suborning perjury – while in office. (Suborning perjury was proven)

Democrats haven’t worked this sliver of history on their own – liberal historians and partisan journalists have diligently twisted the past to create their new cast of heroes. Some of these leaders are now facing a long-overdue confrontation with past evil deeds only accentuates how successfully their past improprieties have been buried.

Now that Biden is their candidate – now that they need him – the propaganda effort to paint this troubling man in a rosy light is in full swing. The glory bestowed incessantly on this cherub from recent political past flows like rivers from the media talking heads. Even a recent smalltown editorial asserted that Biden “is extraordinarily kind, that he is principled in public and private and that he is fundamentally decent.” Their evidence: The video messages extolling Biden at the Democratic National Convention!

The issue is not the Democrats’ hero-worship – the Republicans did the same for Donald Trump during their convention – but the media’s benign acceptance of this spin as fact. (They didn’t accept that of the Republican Convention for Trump) Instead of addressing Biden’s disturbing past regarding areas they repeatedly assail Trump on – race, gender, abuse of office, veracity, and general character – news outlets simply declare his virtue and move on.

They ignore, for example, his troubling history on race. In 1991 Biden pulled the rope in the “high-tech lynching” of Clarence Thomas, leading the cause to derail his Supreme Court nomination in 1991 by promoting racist innuendos about hyper-sexualized black men.

In 2007, Biden asserted that Barack Obama was “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.” Stop for a moment and consider how deep are the lakes of racial stereotypes one must pull from to say that.

Kindness?

The same media outlets that passed along every smear about Brett Kavanaugh during his Supreme Court fight in 2018 quickly dismissed the more credible claims of a Senate aide who said Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993. As a candidate, Biden doesn’t just jeer and bully opponents, as Trump does – he does it with one-on-one expletives to ordinary Americans who ask him questions he doesn’t like.

Principle?

The media has continually ignored clear evidence that Biden stood by while his son Hunter exploited his father’s position as vice president — for hundreds of millions of dollars. While Joe Biden served as the Obama administration’s point man on policy in the Ukraine and China, Hunter received $80,000 per month for a no-show job on the board of a Ukrainian gas company; through another one of his concerns, Hunter cut lucrative deals with the Chinese that included a $1.5 billion cash investment in a newly-formed Hunter Biden investment company.

Decency?

Perhaps the most troubling examples from Biden’s past were the lies he used to tell about the death of his first wife and daughter in a car accident in 1972. Police reports say she drove into the path of an oncoming truck. For years Biden claimed that the truck driver, who tried to save his family, was drunk. He only stopped when the man’s daughter tearfully complained.

Honor?

Let’s be honest: political party doesn’t matter; state of resident doesn’t matter; university nor fraternity or sorority doesn’t matter; religion doesn’t matter: all that matters is the status of a person’s heart. NO candidate for any office in the nation has any type of immunity just because they may be a member of one party and not the other. Political affiliation has never given any candidate a single bit of legitimacy based solely on which party may have done so.

Here’s what the majority of Americans want regarding politics and political parties: Truthfulness. This election like in no other in recent memory has exposed the worst in America’s political system. That’s hard to find.

I am not asking for,  nor do I expect, a free pass for Donald Trump for his past transgressions. I AM asking for everyone to handle the personal attacks regarding individual “issues” one has with Mr. Trump, Mr. Biden and any other person running for any office in a purely personal way.

Honestly, expecting any to accept or reject any candidate based on a perception of who that person is that is painted by a political party is a stupid idea. We owe it to each other to — especially for an election this important — put aside our personal opinions about each of these candidates make our election choices based solely on each candidate’s abilities and expectations of performing in specific ways that align with our views. 

That means: forget about political party affiliation!

The insanity of the demands that people of a certain religion, a certain national origin, a certain skin color, a certain economical class has any obligation to vote for any one candidate based solely on these above characteristics has throttled hatred and division between Americans never before seen. It must stop.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if every voter put aside all of the partisan hand grenades the Media are throwing at us all day every day and determine for whom we will vote based solely on OUR opinion of who will do the better job.

What a novel idea, right? I wish someone else had thought about that years ago — certainly long before me.

Wait a minute: wasn’t that at least in part the process our forefathers put together when they created the American voting system?

Who changed it?!?!

“Die, Atlantic Story! Please Just Die and go Away!”

It won’t! My Labor Day was unusually quiet and restful.

Sundays are “regeneration” days at TruthNewsNetwork. Unless D.C. is helter-skelter with scandal, riots, or impeachment, Sunday is a great day to just relax for a few hours and plan the week ahead. The Atlantic story set the World on fire when published last Thursday, and the fire will just NOT burn out! After all, it included some REAL dirt on Donald Trump! All of that ate up my Sunday.

Sunday was a church day with lunch with the Bride that included some amazing Mongolian Beef, rice, and vegetables. I LOVE carryout Chinese food! My plan was simply to bask in the one day this weekend I felt I could just skate through. I had already prepared my story for Labor Day: “Too Good to be True?” It, of course, was about the 2018 Trump trip to France that suddenly resulted in the Atlantic story last week that set the World on fire two years after the alleged atrocity happened! But, as I said, that story just will not die. I knew I was going to be forced to recharge the batteries for a follow-up story. And sure enough, today’s the day.

The Atlantic stunk up an otherwise beautiful Labor Day weekend for a lot of folks — especially President Trump — with a uniquely ugly story. Anti-Trump editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg (pictured above) claims that Donald Trump snubbed a World War One American cemetery in France because “it’s filled with losers,” and the Doughboys buried there are “suckers.” Goldberg also asserted that “Trump rejected the idea of the visit because he feared his hair would become disheveled in the rain” on November 10, 2018. Honestly, I doubt the President would ever even say the word “disheveled!”

President Trump categorically rejected the Atlantic’s tale. He called it a “total lie. It’s fake news. It’s a disgrace.”

“I was ready to go to a ceremony,” Trump told journalists at Joint Air Base Andrews Thursday night. “But the helicopter could not fly…because it was raining about as hard as I’ve ever seen. And, on top of that, it was very, very foggy.” The Secret Service would not transport Trump by motorcade, he added, since “it was a very long drive.”

The Atlantic’s Goldberg wrote: “Neither claim was true.”

Who to believe? Goldberg or Trump?

Goldberg cites “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day” — all anonymous, of course: my least favorite and most incorrigible journalistic source veracity guarantee process of seeking credibility for a sketchy script.

In contrast, at least 11 named members of Trump’s Paris team to corroborate him. So does an email from an unidentified military aide. So does the weather data. Trump’s next-day agenda also discredits the Atlantic.

President Trump’s most compelling witness is former national security adviser John Bolton. Since sent packing last September 10, Bolton has become a loud but less formidable Trump critic. But, Bolton told Fox News: “I didn’t hear either of those comments or anything resembling them. I was there at the point in time that morning when it was decided that he would not go. It was an entirely weather-related decision and, I thought, the proper thing to do.”

Pages 241-242 of Bolton’s 577-page anti-Trump offering, The Room Where It Happened, published June 23, sinks the Atlantic’s foundering ship.

“The weather was bad, and Kelly and I spoke about whether to travel as planned to the Château-Thierry Belleau Wood monuments and nearby American Cemeteries, where many U.S. World War One dead were buried. Marine One’s crew was saying that bad visibility could make it imprudent to chopper to the cemetery… If a motorcade were necessary, it could take between 90 and 120 minutes each way, along roads that were not exactly freeways, posing an unacceptable risk that we could not get the President out of France quickly enough in case of an emergency. 

‘The press turned canceling-the-cemetery-visit into a story that Trump was afraid of the rain and took glee in pointing out that other world leaders traveled around during the day. Of course, none of them were the President of the United States, but the press didn’t understand that rules for U.S. Presidents are different from the rules for 190 other leaders who don’t command the world’s greatest military forces.”

Others in Trump’s Paris party echoed Bolton’s recollection.

  • “The Atlantic story is not true,” First Lady Melania Trump declared. “It has become a very dangerous time when anonymous sources are believed above all else, and no one knows their motivation.”
  • Former counselor to the President Johnny DeStefano said: “I was on this trip. The Atlantic bit is not true. Period.”
  • “I did not hear POTUS call anyone losers when I told him about the weather,” former deputy White House chief of staff Zach Fuentes revealed to Breitbart Monday. John Kelly’s then-top aide added: “Honestly, do you think Gen. Kelly would have stood by and let ANYONE call fallen Marines losers?”
  • “These are disgusting, grotesque, reprehensible lies,” wrote former deputy press secretary J. Hogan Gidley. “I was there in Paris and the President never said those things. In fact, he would never even think such vile thoughts because I know from first-hand knowledge that President Trump absolutely loves, respects, and reveres the brave men and women of the United States military.”
  • “Again, this is 100 percent false,” a former personal aide to the President Jordan Karem tweeted. “I was next to POTUS for the whole day! The President was greatly disappointed when told we couldn’t fly there. He was incredibly eager to honor our Fallen Heroes.”
  • “I was with the President the morning after the scheduled visit,” said staff Secretary Derek Lyons. “He was extremely disappointed that arrangements could not be made to get him to the site and that the trip had been canceled. I have worked for the President for his entire administration… I have never heard him utter a disparaging remark, of any kind, about our troops.”
  • Senior adviser Stephen Miller dismissed the Atlantic hit piece as a “despicable lie.” He told the Washington Examiner: “The President deeply wanted to attend the memorial event in question and was deeply displeased by the bad weather call.”
  • “The Atlantic story on Donald Trump is total BS,” said former press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders. “I was actually there and one of the people part of the discussion — this never happened.”
  • “I was with POTUS in France, with Sarah, and have been at his side throughout it all,” said assistant to the President Dan Scavino. “Complete lies by ‘anonymous sources’ that were ‘dropped’ just as he begins to campaign (and surge).’”
  • Former deputy chief of staff Dan Walsh said: “I can attest to the fact that there was a bad weather call in France and that the helicopters were unable to safely make the flight. Overall, the President’s support and respect for our American troops, past and present, is unquestionable.”

An email stamped 5:59 a.m. that day, from a “United States Marine Corps Military Aide to the President,” whose name the White House redacted, reads: “Team, We are BAD WX call for today’s lift. COS Gen. Kelly, will motorcade and replace POTUS for today’s ceremony.”

With NO traffic, Château-Thierry is a roughly 90-minute drive northeast of Paris, partially along two-lane, rural roads. The congested return journey would have taken a presidential a motorcade 15-30 minutes longer. And a presidential motorcade is NOT comprised of a few cars with one leading the pack and several following. It is undoubtedly a small army because, after all, it would have been the President of the United States.

What about the truth of the Weather that day? Here’s the “official” weather report from France:

“During this time period, the ceilings (height of the base of the clouds) were extremely low during the midday hours (600-700 feet),” the Manhattan-based forecasting company reported. “Note that ceiling heights that low can be treacherous for a helicopter when flying over unfamiliar terrain. For reference, during the crash that killed Kobe Bryant earlier this year, ceilings were reported to be around 1,100 feet nearby.”

The next day, November 11, 2018, President Trump’s public schedule placed him at French President Emmanuel Macron’s noon Armistice Day Centennial Commemoration Luncheon at Élysée Palace. Given what the Atlantic calls “Trump’s seeming contempt for military service,” his alleged dismissal of America’s war dead as “losers” and “suckers,” and his purported to keeping his hair dry, President Trump could have sped to Orly Airport at 12:55 p.m., boarded Air Force One, and headed back to Joint Base Andrews.

Instead, Trump stayed in France two-and-a-half hours longer. He ventured to Suresnes American Cemetery and spoke in the rain for 10 minutes — without an umbrella.

“Each of these marble crosses and Stars of David marks the life of an American warrior — great, great warriors they are — who gave everything for family, country, God, and freedom,” the President said of the fallen there, from both world wars. “Through rain, hail, snow, mud, poisonous gas, bullets and mortar, they held the line, and pushed onward to victory…never knowing if they would ever again see their families or ever again hold their loved ones.”

Call me a southern redneck, skinhead, or even an idealist if you like. But putting all of the above in context, I think Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg thinking he was going to drop a blockbuster revelation Labor Day Weekend on a President who he despises instead dropped something in the punch bowl. And it wasn’t a bunch of cherries or a chunk of pineapple!

Now can we put this event to bed and move on to a REAL story about something truthful? Do you think Goldberg has any REAL information about that $1.5 Billion Xi Xinping gave to Hunter Biden? A story about that might bring some REAL facts to the table!

Too Good to be True?

Usually, when something is too good to be true, it isn’t true. Also, timing is everything.

Coronavirus is probably the most intelligent virus or bacteria or any other infectious disease that has ever existed. Why? Coronavirus is so smart it knew not to show it’s head in the United States until the day after the U.S. Senate declined to remove Donald Trump in the impeachment trial. Too good to be true? Millions of Americans think the COVID timing IS too right to be true: NOT that COVID is NOT true, but that the timing of its revelation in the U.S. was not just coincidence.

If you have an hour or two, I can share dozens of other “too goods.” There are plenty to go around — especially in U.S. politics. Yet they continue. That in itself is puzzling to me. Washington D.C. and the press are full of knowledgeable journalists of every ilk: political, military, medical, educational, foreign policy, and domestic policy geniuses. Yet, the press seems to be THE source of one “too good” after another, especially during a campaign season. But even more ironic than that is how they appear always at the exact time necessary to receive maximum news coverage!

Case in point: last Thursday, Washington D.C. virtually shut down for the Labor Day holiday weekend: four days of no hard news, nothing happening on Capitol Hill, nothing going on in Trump World, and no significant campaign events scheduled. But some viewed this period as an “opportunity zone.” Atlantic dropped a bombshell on America that has captured the Labor Day weekend with non-stop anti-Trump horror that has dominated every aspect of news for the last four days around the clock: “Donald Trump hates World I veterans and lashed out at their uselessness while in France in 2018.”

OMG! We all knew what a cad is this president. We all knew how crude and cruel he sometimes is. But we thought he was pro-military, pro-veterans, pro-Mom’s apple pie, and the “Star-Spangled Banner.” How could a sitting president demean anything to do with the military at a time like this? We’re in an election cycle!

That is unbelievable!

What happened?

Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg dropped what could be his most significant piece since he won a substantial award for drawing bogus links between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. The piece claims that during a 2018 visit to France, President Trump canceled a visit to an American war cemetery, dismissing the dead who lie there as “suckers” and “losers” unworthy of his walking among their graves.

Outsiders have expressed skepticism of the story for many reasons. For starters, in Goldberg’s account, Trump also questioned America’s pointless and enormously costly involvement in World War One. If Trump said that, it would be an unprecedented display of historical knowledge and insight on the President’s part. You know: the mainstream media are certain Trump knows NOTHING about American history, especially not about either World War.

Then there’s the fact this supposed exchange happened all the way back in 2018. For four years, every remotely unflattering conversation involving the President has leaked almost immediately: the phone call with then-Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, or the “shithole countries” remark. But somehow, this conversation was locked-up in Manhattan Project-level secrecy for more than two years, through a hotly contested midterm election, before abruptly being leaked and confirmed by four separate sources at the apex of the 2020 campaign, with a very well-produced ad ready to come out barely 12 hours later. Yet confirmed Trump-hater John Bolton undercut the core claim of Goldberg’s piece in his own recently-published book?

And then there’s the “unnamed sources” part. Trump has innumerable public enemies, many of whom were once close advisers to his administration. Yet for this “ironclad” story, nobody is willing to go on the record, while numerous people are on the record denying it. Supporters have pointed to Goldberg’s personal reputation as a decorated journalist and the Atlantic’s status as a very credible and respected news outlet. Remember, though, this is the same magazine that printed a fake story to justify the defunding of the police. According to Goldberg, his sources just couldn’t take the fateful final step of lending their names to their allegations because they fear having mean tweets sent at them. Literally! Two former senior administration officials also “confirmed” the story to Fox News. That meant the news most certainly was truthful because everyone knows FOX is in the tank for Trump and would never report anything so negative about the President.

“Come on, Man!” Whoever these alleged sources are certainly would know the significance of not only the content of their claims but also the timing of Goldberg’s story. So why would such a reputable reporter for such a respected news outlet even consider publishing such information and without naming sources?

“Some Things are too Unbelievable to be Believed by Anyone.”

Before we conclude today with input on the reality of media “anonymous sources,” here’s some inside information about Atlantic’s editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg.

“Unnamed” sources from inside the Atlantic have shared disturbing information about editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg. According to these four unnamed sources, Goldberg lives in terror of his staff.

In 2018, when the Atlantic’s Red Guards targeted a recently hired conservative Kevin D. Williamson, Goldberg at first tried to defend him, but later, according to three eyewitnesses, began crying, soiled himself, then hid in a bathroom on a different floor of the building for seven hours. (Yes, it’s true: an “anonymous source” confirmed the details to TruthNewsNetwork!)

Sources said Goldberg’s letter announcing Williamson’s firing after a single week was extracted under offensive threats from his staff: they hated Kevin D. Williamson not so much for his writings, but he’s a Conservative! And every decent journalist — especially an editor-in-chief at Atlantic — should NEVER hire a real Conservative. By doing so, Goldberg threw mud in the faces of Mussolini and Stalin!

Since the Williamson incident, Goldberg seldom interacts with his staff. He stays to himself and communicates with his writers and other editors through email and text.

Summary

There are undoubtedly several “real” thinkers looking-in today who take umbrage with some of the stuff included in the last paragraph. It may seem crude for me to allege these things were happening in Atlantic offices and by Goldberg. After all, the sources that related them to us remain unknown. It’s impossible for their verification.

Isn’t it a bit comical that the same is true of Goldberg’s story? The umbrage every American should take is this: if a person has information that if made public, will demean, diminish, threaten professionally or personally any person — especially an important and very public person — those Americans who demand the truth in reporting are also in more significant and growing numbers requiring ALL sources not only have references but the revelation of those sources with such a story.

I am a journalist, and I summarily reject that worn talking-point that “in real journalism in a free nation, we must protect the identities of those who reveal information that is vital to our nation. Often revealing their identities will place them in personal and professional jeopardy. We must protect them.”

What about the Truth?

Do today’s journalists not understand those claims cut both ways? Doesn’t journalism owe all of those who partake in it in anyways factual information and not merely opinions and hateful innuendos? Is there such a consuming rush for ugliness to use against political opponents that our editors and publishers abandon the necessity first to be factual?

This rush to believe anything demeaning of a political opponent is being quickly and regularly paraded to Americans as News when, in most cases, is found to be nothing but gossip.

Where is the accountability? What can be done to eliminate this yellow-journalism?

Since reporters, editors, and publishers no longer demand verification before reporting news, the only option is for Americans to exercise the ultimate accountability: Capitalism. Atlantic, CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, New York Times, any and every other news outlet rely on readers, viewers, listeners, who are the consumers required for news outlets’ success. If Americans will say, “Enough!” this will stop.

Isn’t it shameful that we’re even having such a conversation? Power begets followers. Followers beget consumers. Consumers begat advertisers. Advertisers begat advertising revenue.

“The Love of Money is the Root of ALL Evil.”

Mark Levin Clarifies the Lies of Mail-In Voting and Hydroxychloroquine

Mark Levin is without question one of America’s most adept Constitutional experts. He hosts a Sunday Night show on FOX News and is known for tackling some of our nation’s greatest problems — especially in political matters — and providing documented proof of many of the political rumors that are daily passed around by today’s fawning Leftist media as “factual.” Levin is adept at cutting to the chase in important matters. He is passionate, detailed, informed and adamant about ferreting-out truth in every matter he addresses and making certain Americans are given facts in every matter of importance.

Two days ago, Mark Levin on his television show presented the facts that expose the conspiracy theory of the Democrats and mainstream media about two critical matters right now in our nation. Today as we approach the final few months before our 2020 election. He has examined and found factual information regarding two of the hottest and most contested matters in 2020: Mail-in voting and Hydroxychloroquine as used to attack COVID-19. Levin tackles both.

Mail-In Voting

First and foremost, voting by mail is the responsibility of states that are independent of the federal government, that is, Trump has no power over those elections.

Based on a report by the Politico, Levin pointed out the main factors that could make the mail-in election a complete disaster:

  • Ballots arriving on time: If ballots don’t arrive on time, you can’t vote and delays in the mail are commonplace.
  • In fact, some states have their own election laws; they require that ballots have postmarks on Election Day, others require that ballots arrive in the mail on Election Day.
  • Clerical errors on ballots: Clerks and people who fill the ballots make mistakes ranging from not putting the stamps in, to not closing the envelope properly, to not signing the ballot, to forgetting personal information. If any of these things fail, the ballot is invalidated. In 2018, 8.2% of votes were not counted due to human error.
  • Casting the ballots is one thing and counting them is another: the states are not prepared for a massive vote. The voting rolls are not updated properly. There have been cases of people who are registered in two or more states and the votes go both ways. Also, if all the votes arrive on the same day, it could take weeks to count them all.

This year’s primary elections which have relied on mail-in ballots have been decimated with errors and mistakes.

  • In the New York primary election just a month ago, 20 percent of the ballots were invalidated solely on the basis of outward appearance because they did not meet the requirements for filing.
  • In Wisconsin, 6% of the votes were rejected.ziI
  • In Nevada, 250,000 ballots were nullified.

With respect to the mailboxes, Levin pointed out the statistics of the period between 2011 and 2016, in the Obama-Biden era, when 14,000 mailboxes were replaced within the mailbox collection program. When a mailbox receives less than 25 pieces per day, it is removed, others are replaced due to old age or vandalism.

Levin wondered why the Democrats and mainstream media are so keen on voting by mail and he gave his theory: They want to flood the system, overwhelm it, create anarchy, and seize power.

Levin said the Democrats want to create a constitutional crisis. When the ballots do not arrive on time, when there are irregularities in the voting, when after weeks the results are not known, there will be a wave of litigation against the federal government and this can generate chaos and a collapse in the judicial system. In fact, Biden has hired 600 lawyers for these lawsuits, Levin said.

Levin asked his guest, Hans Von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation if the $25 billion the Democrats want to give the USPS will solve the mail problem. Von Spakovsky said it wasn’t a question of money. The mail has been mismanaged for decades, and attempts have been made to modernize it to function as a company like FedEx, for example, but the mail unions have been adamantly opposed.

“There is no sabotage here going on, except by the Democrats,” concluded Levin.

Hydroxychloroquine

The second topic of the Life, Liberty & Levin program was the use of Hydroxychloroquine to treat patients with the CCP Virus for which Levin invited Yale University public health professor, Dr. Harvey Risch, to share facts.

Levin wondered why, when most studies say the drug is effective in CCP Virus patients, President Trump has promoted it, as have many doctors, the media and Twitter, and Facebook have censored or disqualified it.

Risch said, “The evidence is overwhelming that patients who are treated early with this drug substantially reduce the risk of hospitalization and mortality.”

Risch added, “And there’s been a massive disinformation campaign that stretches from the government to the media. That is either suppressing this message or is countering with a false message.”

Risch explained that the few studies that show negative or neutral results and which are used by FDA following Dr. Fauci’s advice, were performed on patients under 60 years of age without CCP Virus conditions, people who can overcome the disease on their own and in whom the drug shows no beneficial effects.

“So those are low-risk people, and we are not talking of low-risk people. We are talking about people who are over 60, or with corona conditions, or obesity, diabetes, and so on. Those are the people who are at risk of being hospitalized and dying from this illness, those are the people who have to be treated,” Risch explained. In this group of people, the results have been completely positive.

Levin asked the professor if people with asthma or heart disease are at risk of dying if they use this drug. The doctor said no. But like all drugs, it has to be prescribed by a doctor who knows the patient and can follow up. “In general, it is a very safe medication,” Risch said.

Finally, Levin consulted the professor about reports in the media, particularly one from The Washington Post, which accused the president of promoting a drug that is killing more and more people.

Risch responded that they did not specify what type of patients were those who had died. If they were people who were already in the last stage where nothing was working and they were given the drug, that relationship could be established.

“You have to be very specific about what kind of patients you are referring to when you make statements like that,” Risch said.

Risch concluded that “somehow politics overruled science” and the media has managed to silence this message, although now more and more people have stepped forward to speak publicly of its benefits.

An independent general physician, Dr. Mariana Colombres Garmendia, when asked what the reason might be behind this censorship effort, said that perhaps there is opposition to Hydroxychloroquine from Big Pharma because this compound is so cheap and easily available.

Summary

Isn’t it eerie that we in the 21st Century find ourselves in the greatest country in World history that is torn apart by political narratives shoved down our throats by a group of frantic politicians who are trying to use these lies and others to somehow achieve a specific goal? This all seems to me like an episode of that 1960s television series “The Twilight Zone.”

There is very little logic in these two footballs being battered around by Leftist politicians: Hydroxychloroquine and Mail-in Voting. Common sense plays NO role in this charade.

What is so mind boggling to millions of Americans is that millions of other Americans have fallen into this nightmare without even a question of what and why this is being foisted on this nation.

I have NO absolute answers for all this. And the temptation is to launch into some frantic reaction just to escape from what appears to be a nightmare and nothing more. But even if it IS a nightmare, it’s not about to go away any time soon.

It’s in a time like this our best resort is to clutch the things in our lives that are absolute and unquestioned: those things, events, and people which we have no doubt about motive and intention.

As Levin illustrated above, Mail-In voting can only be an opportunity to control our upcoming election to achieve the desired goal of driving Donald Trump from office. There is NO other reasonable conclusion.

It is an uncontroverted certainty that Hydroxychloroquine is a 60-year-old drug that was and has been laboratory tested in dozens of trials with decades of proof of its efficacy.

So why the efforts to force fear upon our nation?

That answer has still not been revealed. But one thing is certain: we will know before this plays out.

My suggestion for all Americans is be honest with yourself and others, even if in doing so you share your fears and concerns with others. Trust your gut feelings. Delay making major decisions until YOU achieve a comfort level in every such decision.

Other than that, consider prayer for guidance and peace.After all, this nation still is “One Nation Under God.”

He created this globe on which we live. He knows what we need to survive.

Let’s trust in that, especially with all else in question.

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!

The New York Times Gives In to the Mob. All the Adults are Gone!

Saying that “Twitter has become its ultimate editor,” New York Times columnist and editor Bari Weiss resigned yesterday with a scathing letter to the paper.

Weiss, one of the few centrist voices at The Times, said she faced bullying at the paper for her views, and that the free exchange of ideas on the opinion pages was now dead. The search for truth has been replaced by “orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.”

In the letter addressed to publisher A.G. Sulzberger, Weiss bemoans how the Times has strayed from the ideals laid out by Adolph Ochs in 1896, that the paper should publish “all shades of opinion.”

In part, here is Weiss’ resignation letter:

It is with sadness that I write to tell you that I am resigning from The New York Times.

I joined the paper with gratitude and optimism three years ago. I was hired with the goal of bringing in voices that would not otherwise appear in your pages: first-time writers, centrists, conservatives and others who would not naturally think of The Times as their home. The reason for this effort was clear: The paper’s failure to anticipate the outcome of the 2016 election meant that it didn’t have a firm grasp of the country it covers. Dean Baquet and others have admitted as much on various occasions. The priority in Opinion was to help redress that critical shortcoming.

But the lessons that ought to have followed the election — lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society — have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.

Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.

My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me a Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be friendly with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors regularly weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are.

There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.

What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selectivity. If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.

Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece is perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media, the editor or writer avoids pitching it.

What’s Going On?

Weiss was an unusual fit at the New York Times. It is a rare occurrence when a young writer at that paper still maintains a sense of providing its readers looks into both sides of political policies — not just that of the Millennials who gorge daily on Twitter and Snap Chat. Weiss honored the institution of Journalism. She is not a patsy and never hesitated to pen her thoughts on any applicable subject.

But she also allowed for considerable room for readers to hold an OPPOSITE opinion. After all, Journalism is supposed to be a free marketplace of ideas.

The marketplace of The Times is anything but open to multiple ideas on ANY subject.

“Bari Weiss’s letter was tame,” a New York Times insider said. She could have named names. She could have said, “There are dozens of other instances of bullying and harassment. Because there are.”

What took Weiss so long? Prominent writers at the Times never accepted her as a colleague. Instead, her colleagues on the opinion page sniped and leaked against her on Twitter from the first. Was it “tall poppy syndrome” – resentment of a young writer who, in an era when legacy media seem to be in perpetual crisis, landed a plum job at the Times? Or, as Weiss implies in her resignation letter, was it something nastier than mere jealousy – an ethical and legal failure that my source calls a ‘hostile workplace culture’?

The resignation letter she released on Tuesday alleges that Weiss, a liberal centrist who also happens to be a prominent Jewish supporter of Israel, has been called a “racist and Nazi” in her place of work and on Slack social media channels on which senior Times management are regular presences. She also says that the Times’s publisher, A.G. Sulzberger, and ‘other Times leaders have “stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage.” Her letter is restrained, but still, what sources call “the actual horror of her daily life at her job” again comes across.

“It’s astounding, but it’s also instructive,” one source says. “This is what happens when management doesn’t lift a finger to defend you.”

As Weiss herself says, her verifiable claims could amount to a costly compensation case for the Times: “unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge.” The Times’s management may also have breached Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964), by failing to protect Weiss from “discrimination based on certain specified characteristics” including “race, color, national origin, sex, and religion.”

Weiss’s online enemies are already assuming that she jumped before she was pushed. That alone would confirm the impression of ethical collapse at the Times. The radical left is running the paper, and no dissent is tolerated – not even from a US senator. But the truth is that she left in disgust.

‘This was obviously her decision. It was just, “What am I doing here anymore? The place has gone mad.”’

It won’t stop with Weiss. Colleagues on the opinion pages and in the newsroom have ratcheted up their disdain for moderates and conservatives. Who’s next?

It’s harder to get rid of a weekly columnist than an editor like Weiss. It’s a much bigger stink if a columnist leaves. But the fish stinks from the head, and the owners have no guts.

Summary

In her resignation letter, Weiss blathered what must have been devouring her insides for months. She made clear what the internal issues are at the formerly top newspaper not just in the U.S. but in the World. Today, it is far from that. Why is that?

The Times editors and publisher have stepped to the side in silent approval of a pronounced swing to the far left — not just far-left politics, but far-left social and moral mindsets that heretofore been subjects of columns like those from Weiss. Today, they are nothing more than ho-hum tweets from pimple-faced teens opining about their barrage of tweets that embarrassed, humiliated (or both) subjects of their attacks.

With Weiss gone, The Times has relented to be little more than an extension of Twitter. Maybe the paper should change its prominent building signage in Manhattan. Based on what Americans see today, an applicable sign on their building would say: “Twitter-East.”

The Adults Have Left the “Twitter-East” Building!

Coincidence?

Some time things happen that cause you to just shake your head in disbelief: “How in the world do you think that could have even been possible? SMH!” Look at the picture of that little boy on the beach. He took his head off and dropped in the sand!

I think it is relatively safe to conclude this one thing: If something looks like it cannot possibly be actual or real, we almost always call it “a coincidence.” In actuality, if it seems like it cannot be genuine or real, it almost certainly IS NOT real! Another way of putting that is, “If it looks too good to be true, you can almost bet it isn’t true.”

These kinds of comparisons are prevalent in pretty much every part of our lives. If you google “coincidences,” you’ll get hundreds of examples of some of the strangest “coincidences” that often look real even though they are undoubtedly contrived. Most coincidences are not coincidences at all. Look at some of these pictures:

I doubt pretty seriously the girl actually painted grass all over her body and then put on a pair of cutoffs and a bikini top! I also don’t think that clouds are created with hot coffee and will sneak out of a coffee cup to spread across the sky.

Our world today is full of coincidences that each and everyone seems to be real. But we know IF we look close enough, we can see the attempted trick that is always included in each. I think the problem in America today is that too many people are content to just live at the 10,000-ft. Level instead of living at sea level. Two miles in the air, things look much different than they do at sea level. Because we all are prone to determine what something is based on OUR perspective of it in whatever surroundings we see it, we often ignore some of the tell-tale signs of the realities of things and happenings that we see in our lives every day. We take for granted in most cases that it appears to be legitimate, so it must be real!

Far too often, it’s NOT real at all. And that’s where our problems begin.

Can you Think of Any Coincidences in our World Today?

Oh my! There are far too many to count. But why don’t we do this: let’s list a few and breakdown a few of those so we all can understand that in 2020 (and in 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016), there were far too many coincidences to be casual occurrences simply. In reality, most coincidences are just plans that have remained hidden — until just the right time.

 

Coincidence #1: the Trump Family

Our coincidences began when someone came across some books on the office of Congress’ Library website. The books are called, “Baron Trump’s Marvelous Underground Journey,” and, “1900; Or, The Last President.” Both were written in the 1890s by Ingersoll Lockwood. The books themselves are real. But wait, it gets better.

The plot of the first book about Baron Trump includes the story about a young boy who finds a secret portal and time travels. Dan Evon of Snopes.com gives a great, in-depth description of the eerie connection. “There are some incredible connections to be made to the first family of the United States and Lockwood’s novels from the turn of the 19th century. For starters, the main character’s name is the same as President Donald J. Trump’s son, albeit spelled differently. Trump’s adventures begin in Russia and are guided thanks to directions provided by ‘the master of all masters,’ a man named ‘Don.’ Before leaving for his voyage through the unknown, Trump is told of his family’s motto: ‘The pathway to glory is strewn with pitfalls and danger.’” But wait, it gets even creepier.

Lockwood wrote a sequel series of novels four years after the initial publication of his first book. In his third novel, “1900; Or, The Last President,” things link eerily to the present day. The story begins with a scene from a panicked New York City in early November. It describes a “state of uproar” after an election in which an enormously opposed outsider is granted power—an outsider candidate. Sound familiar? After the chaotic scene in NYC, we find out that the man who won the presidency is extraordinarily wealthy and resides on 5th avenue. In case you did not know, the Trump Tower lives on 5th avenue.

We’re just getting started!

Coincidence #2: COVID-19

Wuhan, where the virus originated, just happens to be the location of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China’s only level 4 biosafety lab. Also curious is how quickly Wuhan purportedly became virus-free, and how other major Chinese cities such as Shanghai and Beijing weren’t affected. While the Chinese government quarantined Wuhan, the virus had already been around for months, potentially spread by Chinese New Year travel before the quarantine was placed. Yet the outbreak was quite limited and short-lived in China, unlike elsewhere, almost as if they were prepared.

Coincidence #3: from a Virus to Economic Disaster in Just Days

Just four months ago, Trump’s economy was on top of the world, literally. A booming stock market, strong economic growth, and record low unemployment was Trump’s first term legacy. What better way to derail a gangbuster economy than shutting it down due to a viral pandemic? It would be an ideal way to weaken a president ahead of an election. So what if there was collateral damage? Trump is the existential threat to the deep globalist state, and the ends justify the means.

A viral outbreak, whether hatched in a laboratory or a wet market, could have been a nuisance like past outbreaks. Yet this one was treated far differently, devastating world economies.

What a coincidence in timing.

Coincidence #4: Mysterious One Million Trump Tulsa Rally Tickets

The Trump Campaign gleefully announced for two weeks that their first rally since the start of the pandemic was quickly packed far beyond capacity: one million tickets had been snatched up! Who can forget what happened at showtime that Saturday night? When the television lights went on, the BOK Center in Tulsa looked to be not even half full. What went wrong? Where are all those who claimed those one million tickets?

As part of a coordinated effort, K-pop fans and teenage TikTok users scooped up tickets to President Trump’s rally in Tulsa, potentially leaving at least hundreds of empty seats, The New York Times reported. A tweet from the Trump campaign June 11th urged people to use their phones to register for the free tickets. The K-pop fans shared the information and encouraged their followers to get tickets, and then not show up for the rally. The plan quickly caught on on TikTok, where people followed the K-pop fans’ lead.

CNN credited Iowa grandmother Mary Jo Laupp with leading part of the charge on the video platform. She posted a TikTok video two weeks before the rally encouraging people to “go reserve tickets now and leave him standing alone there on the stage.”

We could spend your entire day listing coincidence after coincidence regarding numerous political events during this presidency. There are far too many to number. But there are some significant ones that we must share here to get you thinking and looking for more of this ahead of the November 3rd election. We’ll just list them in bullet points.

  • Was it a coincidence that the soap opera removal of the federal attorney of the Southern District of New York happened as it did and when it did? Geoffrey Berman was a powerful attorney who regularly dealt with high profile cases that involved some of the most influential people in Washington and elsewhere. Berman and Barr clashed multiple times over the handling of several different cases involving politics and even foreign governments. When Berman was ousted, CNN and other leftist media outlets accused Barr of sidelining Berman because he prosecuted Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen and an ongoing case against NYC former Mayor Guiliani. Those news outlets forgot that Barr was not the Attorney General when those cases happened. But there’s an odd coincidence that occurred immediately upon the firing of Berman. Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend and accused accomplice in Epstein’s sex trafficking business had been under surveillance by U.S. intelligence agencies living in a mansion in New Hampshire. Indictments of her were issued but were not executed UNTIL Berman’s termination. Is that a coincidence? It seems that Berman was connected to some high power Americans and foreign dignitaries that had been fingered as being complicit in the Epstein criminal activity. It was widely thought that Berman would have gone light on Epstein if he had not committed suicide and would undoubtedly have done the same in the prosecution of Maxwell. Immediately after his firing, agents arrested Ghislaine in New Hampshire. She has told the world she’s ready to talk. Who knows who and how many of these powerful men and women will be implicated by her testimony. Many thought with Berman handling the case, she would be coddled in her prosecution and might even have walked. Coincidence?
  • Let’s go back several years — to the early 60s. Lee Harvey Oswald was a loner, a political dissident who had close ties to Cuba and a Russian wife. He was not a fan of President John F. Kennedy. He was fingered as the lone gunman who assassinated the President in Dallas. Surprisingly, two days after Oswald was arrested, he was being moved to another facility. During the transfer, a man named Jack Ruby — a high roller and owner of a bar — mysteriously appeared in the basement of the Dallas police station, walked right up to Oswald. The latter was being escorted by several detectives to a car and shot and killed Oswald. It was later revealed that Oswald had terminal cancer and would not have lasted long. And Ruby knew about that before the shooting. Coincidence?

Summary

Let’s end this with some “today” coincidences. We’ll do these in bullet points as well:

 

Timing

  • Was it a coincidence that Attorney General Jeff Sessions was appointed by the president only to recuse himself from the Russia Collusion investigation almost immediately immediately?
  • Was it a coincidence that his successor, Rod Rosenstein, immediately appointed his good friend Robert Mueller as Special Counsel for that investigation shortly after Mueller had met in the Oval Office to discuss Mueller becoming FBI Director because of the firing of James Comey? (Rosenstein and Mueller are close friends and had worked together multiple times)
  • Was it a coincidence that Russia was (and still is) the focus of EVERY Democrat in Congress, every media outlet, every day regarding any news or discussions about election interference, which Russia preferred in 2016 to be President and the same thing for 2020? Did the fact that Hillary Clinton funded the production of a fake document that implicated then-candidate Donald Trump for massive wrongdoings in Russia? And why was that fact never revealed until after Mueller brought no Trump impeachable finding to Congress?
  • Was it a coincidence that shortly after the Mueller report, Democrats morphed immediately into Ukraine-Gate? It was to the surprise to many when revealed that former Vice President Biden had threatened to withhold U.S. aid to Ukraine if they did not first fire a Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Biden’s son for financial wrongdoing. Was it a coincidence that before that alleged wrongdoing by the Bidens could be investigated, the Democrats found a way to turn that into an impeachment attack against President Trump. Coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence when immediately after the failure of the impeachment of Donald Trump, the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic was used by Washington to begin the systemic destruction of the greatest economy in World history? Not only did they use the fear of the unknown about the virus, but they also transitioned that into the necessary shutdown of the nation, unemployment of 40 million Americans with no certainty of the details, and the scope of the virus. Coincidence?
  • Was it multiple coincidences that the World’s foremost virologists and epidemiologists of the Centers for Disease Control were pushed on President Trump as the “experts” of how to handle the coronavirus? That happened to then only force Americans to make critical decisions every day based on faulty information that was wrong as many times as it was right. Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx were and still are so mixed up and unsure about what is valid, what is necessary, what is prudent, and what things are not that Americans today are still uncertain about what and who to believe. Coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence that the drug Hydroxychloroquine that had been prescribed for 60 years to treat malaria and other infectious diseases in America successfully? Dr. Fauci began trials for a coronavirus vaccine weeks before the first U.S. coronavirus case was confirmed. Was that a coincidence?
  • Was it a coincidence that immediately upon notification that the pandemic looked to not be as critical as first thought that protests and demonstrations and racial unrest would sweep through the nation following the death at the hands of four policemen of one black man?
  • Was it a coincidence that the pandemic lockdown stopped the convening of grand juries in several criminal cases regarding the wrongdoing of many politically connected members from the Obama Administration? Many in the nation thought that Attorney John Durham would have begun releasing indictments in those cases long before the November election. It appears now not to be possible.
  • Is it a coincidence that Democrats are pleading for school systems around the nation to cancel classes for the Fall? One Louisiana state senator sent a letter today to the Lousiana Board of Education advising them to not only cancel school classes, but every athletic event, training, practicing, and anything else that involves close contact between athletes, but to make that mandatory for the entire 2020-2021 athletic season for all sports.

We MUST stop there! There are hundreds more. It’s amazing what creative people who have deep embedded anger and hatred for others can build from pure hatred. But we see it happen over and over again, all of which is certainly not coincidental. And few people today will even deny that there is no way for it to BE coincidental.

But don’t weary: we still have five months before the election. You can bet we’ll see many more coincidental things that happen on the national stage.

Stay tuned!

It’s Not a Revolution — It’s the Exact Opposite

America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary “putsch” — or a coordinated attempt to overthrow a government. It started four years ago immediately upon a group of people understanding that their long quiet and deadly push to the left politically had been railroaded by a conservative billionaire from Queens. What people are they? The sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalization who suddenly found themselves out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit in the UK, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist candidates in the U.S.

Those four sentences explain the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Marxist revolt, even if some within this uproar scream hard-left rhetoric. What’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the entrenched elitist class — academia, media, large corporations, ‘experts,’ Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016 when Donald Trump shot their balloon out of the sky. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

They’re not seeking some new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump status quo which was working out very well for them. It was working out less-well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, aggressive cultural liberalism that destroyed tradition and community, and a ‘global governance’ that purposely handicapped democracy and politics.

Conservatives generally don’t tend to pay much attention to class analysis. But in this case, it does help to explain what’s going on. And it helps to shine a light of the truth of social movements that disguise themselves and can get mistaken for revolutionary leftism. We at TruthNewsNetwork have called it that way. Why? Because we could find no other purpose for all that is happening than that.

Does anyone seriously believe the American establishment — Walmart, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, the trustees of Ivy League universities, the major sports leagues, even Brooks Brothers, for God’s sake — would sign on to a movement that genuinely threatened its material interests? And yet these and many other firms and institutions are falling over themselves to express solidarity with the ‘uprising,’ some going so far as to donate millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter, an outfit that lists among its objectives the abolition of the nuclear family.

Before my conservative friends go postal, think through this with me:

Over the past four years, every trick in the book has been used to end the ‘nightmare’ of national conservatism and populism. The methods deployed by the elite reflect its tendencies and preferences as a class. None of the methods they have exercised to bring down this president were unexpected. Remember: I even predicted all this craziness in politics — including impeachment — was going to happen as far back as 2017! Just think of recent happenings. Though few of us in the U.S. think about what’s happening similarly at the same time as in the U.S., it happened at the same time as Brexit in the U.K.

A majority of Britts voted to leave the EU and then had to spend three years fighting a political establishment that pulled all its vast resources to Brexit from happening. It failed. Does that parallel what’s happening here right now?

In America, the liberal establishment tried harder, failed harder, but learned more. From the minute Trump won the presidential election, Democrats, a significant group in our Intelligence Community, and their media allies set out to undo the result of the 2016 “send-home” of Hillary Clinton. The “Big” bullets in their gun were the ‘collusion’ probe and an impeachment push that was perhaps the single biggest insult ever to the intelligence of the American people. There were also countless smaller attempts to unseat Trump and destroy his followers. Remember: as he has so famously stated to American conservatives from the beginnings of the Mueller investigation: “They’re NOT coming after me. They’re coming after YOU.”

Trump survived it all. Now comes the new wave of rioters and mad anarchists, which many corporates and Democratic governors and mayors have actively encouraged, even as they continue to bar children from public parks and families from holding outdoor funerals, going to church and work, citing COVID-19 risks.

But wait: riots and statue-toppling — such things aren’t pleasant to establishment figures, are they? The logic becomes obvious when you see it as a form of class struggle. For all its fury, the storm of the riots ends. Their demands for ongoing racial fairness, equality, and attacks on law enforcement ends. There’s little in their cries about labor injustice, wages, and job security. Just demands for ‘representation’ or diversity (on corporate boards, in university curricula, etc). And, of course, the firing of those who say the wrong or awkward thing in the digital public square, in workplaces or in classrooms: you know, “Cancel Culture.”

The goal isn’t to repair economic injustices. You remember those protests and demands from the past: massive inequalities in wealth, health and job security. The goal today is 180 degrees opposite: to compromise, to defer, to smooth over, to hide these substantive disagreements, and instead have battles on methods of operations and social rule and racial changes.

Which social class most excels at politically correct treatment of others? That would be the professional-managerial class, the laptop class. Its children learn the communication and speech lingo for discussing ‘issues of race, gender, and sexuality’ from an early age. They’re expected to have mastered it by the time they take their entry-level jobs. It’s a skill that private schools are positively teaching already.

Working-class people, meanwhile, are most likely to struggle with this language. Even when they mean well they don’t always get it right, not because the rules constantly shift with the multiple and dramatic changes in race theory and LGBTQ desires and demands. By protecting the requirements to speak and think correctly — and raising the stakes for failures — the “new” liberal class has now created a new mechanism for staying at the top and keeping the peasants — American’s working-class — down: especially those who voted the wrong way in 2016.

So whatever you do, don’t call it a leftist revolution. With the flags, the protests, the kneeling, and the new language, it’s the OPPOSITE of war or revolution. The outcome is certainly unknown, but the class war is thriving and gaining strength every day.

Best Example of this “Counter-Revolution”

Former NFL star and activist Colin Kaepernick marked July Fourth by sharing a video of actor James Earl Jones reciting Frederick Douglass’s historic speech, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July” with Kaepernick calling the holiday a “celebration of white supremacy.”

The video shows images of the Declaration of Independence, slaves, Klu Klux Klan members, lynchings and police brutality as Jones’s voice narrates in the background: “Fellow-citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us?”

Kaepernick captioned the video with strong condemnation of racism and a call for “liberation for all” in the future.

“Black people have been dehumanized, brutalized, criminalized, and terrorized by America for centuries, and are expected to join your commemoration of ‘independence’, while you enslaved our ancestors,” he wrote. “We reject your celebration of white supremacy and look forward to liberation for all.”

His demonization of tens of millions of Americans happens while many citizens contemplate today’s Independence Day in the context of nationwide protests against police brutality and racism. Lawmakers have faced growing pressure in recent weeks to pass comprehensive police reform as well as other policies to protect Black Americans in the wake of the deaths of George Floyd and others who have been killed in police custody.

Many minority members of the nation look at Kaepernick as a “soldier for the cause” of fixing the nation: a Counter-revolution.

Summary

Here’s the hard part: being patient. How many times have you had to tell yourself the last few months “I wish I knew exactly what is going on!” If you’ve said or thought that, you’re one in about 200 million here and probably half that in Europe. To grasp an understanding of sorts that will probably answer your questions, consider this:

  • The political class in this nation evolved into the beast we find ourselves feeding so that we can survive in the 60s. No one stepped out and declared “Here’s what we’re going to do.” It was found to be simpler to quietly takeover Washington with policies and regulations to grab as much power as possible without making it obvious it was happening.
  • Serving in the U.S. government for two centuries had been an honorable vocation that paid less than did similar jobs in the private sector. But that was OK: you know, “the greater good.” But then with a booming economy that saw cost-of-living increases in the Potomac Valley skyrocket, D.C. political elitists began the process to even the scales for politicians personally. A process of increasing Congressional income and also the compensation for political bureaucrats began a slow increase that has peaked today. In doing so, we suddenly see an economic environment that not only has those in office paid equivalent to their private-sector counterparts, but are paid significantly more than their private counterparts. And why not? Congress determines not only their base pay but personal business and office expenses and has created a profitable retirement opportunity for all members of Congress. POWER!
  • They make the rules for everything in government. Wouldn’t you if in the same scenario could legally increase your total compensation do so? The U.S. Congress makes all the rules, all the laws, all the regulations that control every sector of living in the U.S. They under almost permanent liberal leadership have done just that year after year.
  • Campaign finance has not only increased the cost of getting elected, it created political action committees (PACS) that though strapped with regulations can legally raise tens of millions of dollars for candidates.  Super political action committees have less restraint on contributions and therefore take campaign donations to new heights.

None of the above has even been mentioned by the liberal leaders of this “counter-revolution.” They certainly do NOT want to upset the behemoth of the U.S. Government that has so successfully granted the elect in that group of elitists virtually unfettered power and legally unlimited collection of money.

Why would they support the destruction of that multi-billion-dollar piggy bank? The answer: THEY DON’T!

This entire travesty that dominates every newscast, every news story that centers on any part of this process is ancillary to their objective: destroy the populism and nationalism of Trump here, Brexit in the U.K., and dramatic civil unrest in Hong Kong to protect the power of the liberal left elitist that remains while doing all that’s necessary to re-implement what of it was torn away by Donald Trump.

Does that mean to not be concerned or to not be vocal about the evil we’re staring at? No. It simply states they don’t want to lose the gravy-train that has fed them so long just because Donald Trump messed it up!

They want it just the way it was before it was taken from them.

Play

Which America is OUR America?

If you were born in the 50s, that world looked nothing like the world in which you live today. Sure, we made it from the 50s through the JFK 60s, the hippies, LSD, and free love. In the 70’s we watched as the “cool” dudes and dudettes discovered cocaine gave everyone who partook a “new” high that wasn’t as crazy and didn’t blow your mind for taking one too many Acid Trips. American culture changed just like it always has throughout our history.

But through all of those changes, there was one constant, one rock, one eternal thing of substance: the core of the nation — its people, its citizens — always embraced true freedom and justice under the law. A lot of those teens didn’t believe it at the time because of the Vietnam War. But it was always there: a rock of stability they later learned was permanent for them.

There was craziness back then: we had the Black Panthers, The Weathermen, Bill Ayers, and Bernadette Dorne. We dealt with each and somehow never lost a sense of calmness, no matter what demonstrations and riots took place or what they looked like. Ayers bombed a New York police station.

1968 saw the height of the rebellion. There were constant demonstrations against the Vietnam War and the government that thrust us into it, knowing full well it was NOT a war to be won. Those Americans dreaded that evil feeling of helplessness as their draft numbers came up. Many saw that number as their death sentence. And many died. But the nation made it through it all, as did most of those young people.

With the turn of the century, things began to change — far more dramatically it seems today than we thought as the change took place. We discovered that the petulance in our children was NOT the same that we grew through. Our parents watched us and waited. But they knew we’d grow out of it.

Today, America’s youth are “different.” They don’t mature at the same age or in the same ways as we. These young Americans are angry and vicious, hiding a raw hunger for power under a brand new moralism. They don’t accept the status quo just because it’s the status quo. Yes, we hope they will eventually. But there’s no way to tell where they’re headed!

This side of 2000, a nation of high- tech teens revealed a new and different set of values and ways of thinking. They refuse to “pay the price” to get “there,” as did we. They want what they want, and they want it now. This gaggle of young Americans claims to deplore the capitalism that previous generations each grew to embrace, finding doing so was necessary to become anything in life — anything at all. But this generation deplores responsibility, the “normalcies” of their parents’ generation, and summarily reject commitment to anything longterm. They dodge marriage, buying homes, cars, and even spurn the responsibility of a leased place to live. They prefer to just “fly by the seat of their pants.” In a job interview today, the questions they ask most often early in that conversation are “How much does it pay, what are the benefits, how long is lunch, how much vacation do I get, and how long before I can take off for a few days?” Their own “Me-ism” devours them.

The Differences

In the late ’60s and ’70s, hundreds of bombs — REAL bombs of sorts — were detonated as various radical groups carried out their campaign against “Amerika.” According to The Los Angeles Times, “in California alone, 20 ­explosions a week rocked the state during the summer of 1970.’’ Our parents deplored the actions of these “radical young folks.” They couldn’t wait for those teenagers to grow up.

How many bombs will we see in the summer of 2020? Not so long ago, the radicalism of the 1960s seemed far behind us and a certain fixture in our rearview mirrors. Now it seems to have come roaring back.

In 1968, Leonard Bernstein entertained the Black Panthers for a fundraiser in his Park Avenue duplex. The Black Panthers were murderous thugs. But to a certain part of New York society, they were exciting moral fashion accessories. The Weathermen and Black Panthers have been reborn today as Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM), a well-funded outfit, whose founders are self-confessed “Marxists” bent on destroying America.

But now, in 2020, even more than in 1968, the leftist establishment is tripping over itself to embrace the radicals.

Does that mean we have to accept statues and other monuments to our past being defaced, toppled, destroyed? Does it mean that we have to stand by as police stations are incinerated and Bobby Seale’s call to “barbecue some pork” — i.e., murder some police — is resurrected on our city streets?

In 1968, it was mostly fancy people like Bernstein and Susan Sontag, who celebrated the Panthers and other radicals. There was still some resistance in the culture at large. Our parents were the products of a generation that fought to prevent any Americans from being forced to speak German or Japanese. They were disciplined and resolute. And they respected the prices for maintaining freedom and justice for all.

Today, the long march that commenced in the 1960s has proceeded wholesale through the schools, colleges, and the mainstream press. It is now marching through the corporate world. Businesses as disparate as Facebook and Brooks Brothers have issued abject letters of surrender to the rioters and looters who invaded America’s major cities.

We are meant to believe that the riots and anarchy we are witnessing across the country are legitimate in response to the death of George Floyd. But Floyd’s death was merely the pretext for anti-civilizational lawlessness.

In 1939, Evelyn Waugh noted that “the more elaborate the society, the more vulnerable it is to attack, and the more complete its collapse in case of defeat.” Waugh added: “At a time like the present, it is notably precarious. If it falls, we shall see not merely the dissolution of a few joint-stock corporations, but the spiritual and material achievements of our history.”

I think this is true. This is why, looking at the reprise of 1960s destructiveness on our streets, I am not inclined to say, “I told you so,” but rather: “We must do something about this. Now.”

Summary

Are we too late? Has the calendar flipped too fast too many times for us to take a pause, analyze, converse, and find consensus with this “today” generation: a world in which we can live with the shreds of our foundations on which THEY were raised while allowing them to flex their 21st-century muscles? Are there any parts of their mantra: socialism, lack of commitment to anything and anybody, hatred for capitalism and our free market — all of which are the fundamentals that made the world in which they were raised?

Most of us would never dream of embracing and acting-on the feelings and ideas on which they are acting today. We accepted far more of the morals and foundational elements of the generation of Americans that raised us than these youngsters are of ours. They seem sold-out to “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” Everything goes!

The scariest thing to me as a father and grandfather is their lack of understanding of what is in the world that they think they want. They don’t understand the political structure of those teachers and professors who were born in the 60s’ “despise authority” era. Those hippies and free-love advocates wanted much of what these do. But at some point, they learned what they wanted could NOT be taken — it had to be developed. When they understood their task was not to turn the U.S. and its structure upside down, theirs’ was to teach this generation all that they had learned. But there is one significant addition to their education menu: HOW to do it.

That’s the scary part: many are confident they can do just that.

Is this our America…or is it theirs’?

Rep. Jerrold Nadler’s Judiciary Committee Hearing was Nothing but a Circus

The House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday held an oversight hearing focusing on Attorney General William Barr’s decisions as head of the Department of Justice. As part of the proceedings, the committee heard testimony from two DOJ officials: Aaron Zelinsky, a federal prosecutor at the US attorney’s office in Baltimore, and John Elias, a senior official in the department’s antitrust division.

Zelinsky worked on the special counsel Robert Mueller’s team during the FBI’s investigation into Russian interference in the US election, and he testified Wednesday that senior DOJ officials improperly interfered in the sentencing recommendation for the former longtime Republican strategist Roger Stone. Specifically, he told lawmakers that DOJ leaders sought a weaker sentence for Stone at Barr’s direction because they were “afraid of the president.”

Elias testified that Barr weaponized the antitrust division to harass marijuana companies because he doesn’t like the cannabis industry.

The committee also heard testimony from two former DOJ officials: former Attorney General Michael Mukasey and former Deputy Attorney General Donald Ayer. Mukasey was invited to testify by Republicans on the panel.

The witnesses who appeared on Wednesday were asked at one point why they chose to testify. Here’s how Elias and Zelinsky, both of whom are still serving at the Justice Department under Barr, responded:

Elias: “I looked at what was happening, which was unlike anything I had ever seen before, and it didn’t feel like a good faith calling of balls and strikes that I had been used to seeing. And I care very much about the antitrust laws, their evenhanded enforcement, protecting consumers, and also the institution of the antitrust division where I have spent my entire legal career. And when I saw these abuses, I thought that the public should get to know about them. So that’s why I stepped forward.”

Zelinsky: “Because I took an oath to do so.”

Things went downhill from there. Want an example? At one point, Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell excoriated Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan for not wearing a mask during the hearing:

“Let me just remind every member of this committee, and people that are walking into this room, that the guidelines have been set forth by the office of the attendee physician and the house speaker that members need to be wearing masks,” Mucarsel-Powell said. “And the chairman stated earlier, very clearly, that members will not be recognized if they are not wearing masks.”

She then addressed Jordan, saying it was “incredibly disrespectful that you have been sitting here next to the chairman without wearing a mask. You are putting other peoples’ lives and their families in danger.”

Jordan replied by saying that “the unmasking this committee should be concerned about is the unmasking that took place at the end of the Obama administration.”

Jordan was referring to “unmasking,” which is a routine and legal process that the US intelligence community engages in regularly. Republican lawmakers allege that the Obama administration improperly and illegally “unmasked” former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s name in intelligence reports monitoring the communications of then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, one of the most outspoken Democrats on the committee, asked former Deputy Attorney General Donald Ayer about Barr’s unfounded claim that foreign countries would meddle in the 2020 election by mass-producing counterfeit ballots.

Barr has “provided an echo for the president, who has voted himself by mail in New York and in Florida and whose party encourages its members to go out and vote by mail — but he’s echoed the president in saying there’s something wrong with voting by mail, and he’s alleged that voting by mail makes us vulnerable to foreign influence by counterfeit ballots,” Raskin said to Ayer. “Is that an appropriate role for the attorney general of the United States?”

Ayer said: “I think it’s not, and especially it’s not because it appears to be something that there’s absolutely no truth in at all. There are five states that do nothing but vote by mail, and every other state, I think virtually every other state, uses vote by mail somewhat substantially. So the idea that we’re going to throw cold water on the notion that we’re going to vote by mail is just disreputable. And it’s entirely inappropriate. It really isn’t his job anyway. If there were some law-enforcement function, there it might be. But basically he’s just echoing the president.”

Enough of these meaningless allegations tossed about and the screaming match in the House committee hearing room! A bunch of adults acting at best like children and, at worst, a bunch of circus clowns!

What Really Happened in that Hearing?

I’ll give you my two cents:

  • Two DOJ lifetime bureaucrats were enraged when AG Barr instructed their office to reduce the federal sentence handed down in the Roger Stone case. They both resigned over Barr’s order to do so.
  • The reduced sentence was not only a process that happens in at least 40% of federal cases when judges prepare to sentence defendants, their recommended sentence in the case far exceeded punishments meted out in every previous federal case with similar situations.
  • None of this mentions that the Attorney General is overall responsible for the actions of any attorneys that work in the DOJ under him. Obama’s AG Eric Holder frequently intervened in federal sentences as did his replacement, AG Loretta Lynch.
  • What was shocking to me (but should not have been) was that nobody who testified offered any firsthand evidence of any of the evidence of alleged wrongdoing! Why should that NOT surprise me? Because that has been the case in every allegation against President Trump in those impeachment hearings initiated in “Ukraine-Gate!” All-day it was this: “Mr. So-and-so told me that he heard Mr. Boo-Boo talking on the phone to Miss La-La, who said Attorney General Barr coughed when he was reading the recommended charges against Mr. Stone. And  because he coughed, that was a sign that President Trump was mad because Stone was his friend and had promised he’d take care of it all.”

That may sound like a juvenile—explanation for a House Judiciary Committee hearing. But, folks, it was that stupid! It was nothing but a show for the Hard Left in Congress and the nation. Why do that? CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS!

Summary

I’m confident you’d like to know what was the purpose of the charade perpetrated by Rep. Nadler. “The Penguin,” as he has been termed held this committee for no other reason than to lay a foundation. Put that one hearing in the context along with what is imminent in Washington.

Have you forgotten that former Attorney General Jeff Sessions appointed Federal Attorney Jim Huber of Utah to investigate alleged wrongdoing in the Hillary Clinton email server investigation? Even though Session was fired and replaced with Barr, Huber continued acting on his commission, worked (and still does) behind a curtain of secrecy, and has yet not stepped forward with his findings. Additionally, Attorney General Barr appointed Connecticut Federal Attorney John Durham to investigate any wrongdoing by those in the Obama Administration regarding all things that occurred during the Russian Collusion investigation. About six months into Durham’s investigation, the DOJ announced his investigation had shifted gears into a full-blown criminal investigation.

Here’s what’s about to happen:

  • Huber and Durham are very close to bringing their cases forward;
  • The Huber case will probably implicate those from the Hillary Clinton Campaign, the Clinton Foundation, and possibly others in wrongdoing regarding that private email server kept in her home. Just having it there was a constant violation of the handling of classified information. And each such violation was a felony;
  • The Durham case purportedly included multiple grand juries hearing the testimony of numerous subpoenaed witnesses. It is almost certain its recommendations will consist of indictments of numerous members of the Obama Department of Justice, the Obama FBI, and possibly even members of Obama’s White House leadership team;

Don’t for one moment think the Nadler House Judiciary Committee hearing and future such hearings ahead are NOT purposely to build layer upon layer of finger-pointing at Attorney General William Barr to destroy his credibility. Both House and Senate leadership teams know their only hope at escaping the vitriol of American voters just before the November election is to paint Barr as nothing more than a Trump sycophant acting on instructions from the President to attack, attack, and attack those who oppose him to deflect attention from HIS wrongdoing.

In other words, all of these upcoming House committee hearings are nothing more than smokescreens.

Should we expect anything less?

Play