Displaying posts published in

June 2018

The Supreme Court Rises Above Five Justices defend the Constitution against anti-Trump passions.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-supreme-court-rises-above-1530054005

Donald Trump is so polarizing that a test of his Presidency is whether American institutions can keep their bearings and hold to principle despite the passions of the moment. Five Supreme Court Justices did the country a service on Tuesday by sticking to the Constitution and rule of law on executive power rather than succumb to the temptation to rebuke an unpopular President’s dubious policy.

A 5-4 majority upheld Mr. Trump’s third “travel ban” from 2017 that restricted entry to America from eight countries. The ban in our view isn’t necessary, and the Court made no judgment on the policy merits. But Chief Justice John Roberts and four conservative Justices found that the ban falls well within the President’s core national-security powers. This is less a victory for Mr. Trump than for the ability of future Presidents to defend the country.

Hawaii (Hawaii v. Trump) argued that Mr. Trump exceeded the authority delegated to him by Congress in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and that his order was a pretext for excluding Muslims. But the Chief Justice ruled that the INA grants the President broad discretion to restrict the entry of aliens whenever he finds it “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Unmasked: America’s Real Fascists Jeffrey Lord

https://spectator.org/unmasked-americas-real-fascists/
From the Red Hen to Hollywood, the mask comes off.

They come in all different disguises.

* Protesters disrupting the Mexican restaurant meal of a Cabinet Secretary, forcing her to leave.

* The owner of an innocent-sounding “Red Hen” restaurant in Lexington, Virginia boasting that she refused to serve the presidential press secretary Sarah Sanders and asked her to leave. Sanders quite politely did. Now we learn from Sanders’ Dad, Governor Mike Huckabee, that when Sanders did as requested and went to another nearby restaurant — the angry Red Hen owner followed and kept harassing her. (Note: At press time I had heard that Sanders herself was present at another restaurant when harassed again by the owner of the Red Hen. This was later clarified. So to update correctly: Sanders and husband went home after the incident at the Red Hen, but the family with her stayed and it is they who were harassed a second time, not Sanders.)

* A Florida Democratic Party activist threatened Republican Congressman Brian Mast’s children, saying to one of the Congressman’s interns: “If you are going to separate kids at the border, I’m going to kill his kids.” News reports note that the man had called the Congressman’s office 478 times.

Supreme Court hands Trump predictable win on travel ban By Jonathan Turley,

http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/394173-supreme-court-hands-trump-predictable-win-on-travel-ban

The Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. Hawaii today was more than a predictable reversal of the 9th Circuit appeals court in its dubious ruling that the travel ban was unconstitutional. As some of us noted from the outset of this litigation, the precedent heavily favored President Trump.

What was unprecedented was the degree to which courts relied on campaign statements and tweets by Trump to rule that the entry limits were based on religious animus. The ruling properly returns the courts, and others, to basic principles of legal process. Call it “The Red Hen moment” for the courts, where judges, appalled by Trump’s inflammatory and reckless comments against Muslims, refused to extend him the same deference shown to predecessors like former President Obama. The response from judges, however, seemed more visceral than analytical in ignoring the nondiscriminatory rationales cited by agencies for the policy.

The Supreme Court’s decision is, obviously, a major win for Trump, but it also is a major victory for those who believe courts must rule within the confines of the traditional record of review. CNN was quick to declare that this presidential order was “very different” from the original order. Despite my criticism of the original order — which was poorly drafted, poorly executed and poorly defended — it is not true that this decision was based on different questions. The challengers emphasized that the third order was based on the same threshold questions raised in the first order. The Supreme Court specifically hit the same flaw found in the first, second and third opinions, which was the reliance on the statements made by Trump on the campaign and over Twitter.

Europe seeks to pin down President Trump – and America Caroline Glick

http://carolineglick.com/europe-seeks-to-pin-down-president-trump-and-america/

National Security Advisor John Bolton said last Wednesday that while discussion of President Donald Trump’s decision to leave the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has centered on the administration’s revulsion with its institutional anti-Israel bias, the move was really about restoring American control over U.S. foreign policy.

In his words: “We did talk about Israel [in setting out our reasons for leaving the UNHRC] because it’s singled out unfairly. But in many respects, Israel is, as the saying goes, ‘the canary in the mine shaft’ for the United States. Countries that attack Israel do so because they think it’s easier, but much of their criticism is really aimed at us.”

Bolton added, “Getting off of the council is an assertion of America’s determination to stick to its Constitution and not to recognize that there’s some ‘higher authority’ at the UN … to judge our performance or to give us advice on how to implement the constitution … That’s what this is about: self-government.”

The Trump administration’s determination to restore American power and independence in the international arena places it on a collision course with the European Union, whose perspective on the proper goal of international affairs is diametrically opposed to the administration’s.

American power abroad rests on military and economic power. Since the end of the Second World War, Europe has been militarily dependent on the U.S.

Rather than build their own military power to secure their interests and enable them to play a leading role in world affairs, European leaders have based their international position on their power as a voting bloc in international and transnational institutions, and on their collective financial power.

Canada Supports, Infantilizes Jihadis by Judith Bergman

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12522/canada-jihadis

The Canadian government is willing to go to great (and presumably costly) lengths to “facilitate” the return of Canadian jihadists, unlike the UK, for example, which has revoked the citizenship of ISIS fighters so they cannot return.

Attempts at deradicalization elsewhere have frequently turned out to be ineffective. In the UK, for example, a new government report shows that the vast majority of deradicalization programs are not only ineffective, but even counterproductive, and that those tasked with executing the programs “…would refuse to engage in topics over fears of bringing up matters of race and religion without appearing discriminatory”

In France, the country’s first and only deradicalization center closed in September 2017 after just one year, without having “deradicalized” a single individual. On the contrary, three participants reportedly behaved as if the center were a “Jihad academy”.

Canadians who go abroad to commit terrorism – predominantly jihadists, in other words – have a “right to return” according to government documents obtained by Global News. They not only have a right of return, but “… even if a Canadian engaged in terrorist activity abroad, the government must facilitate their return to Canada,” as one document says.

According to the government, there are still around 190 Canadian citizens volunteering as terrorists abroad. The majority are in Syria and Iraq, and 60 have returned. Police are reportedly expecting a new influx of returnees over the next couple of months.

The Canadian government is willing to go to great (and presumably costly) lengths to “facilitate” the return of Canadian jihadists, unlike the UK, for example, which has revoked the citizenship of ISIS fighters so they cannot return. The Canadian government has established a taskforce, the High Risk Returnee Interdepartmental Taskforce, that, according to government documents:

“… allows us to collectively identify what measures can mitigate the threat these individuals may pose during their return to Canada. This could include sending officers overseas to collect evidence before they depart, or their detention by police upon arrival in Canada.”

Turkey’s Election: Stockholm Syndrome at Its Worst by Burak Bekdil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12599/turkey-election-results

Despite Erdoğan’s clear victory, his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) performed worse than expected.

Erdoğan may not be too happy having to share power.

The national joy over the re-election of a man known best to the rest of the world for his authoritarian, sometimes despotic rule, is not surprising in a country where average schooling is a mere 6.5 years.

Millions of anti-Erdoğan Turks are now terrified of the prospect of further torment under an Islamist-nationalist coalition show run by a president with effectively no checks and balances.

Nothing could have better explained the Turks’ joy over their president’s election victory on June 24 than a cartoon that depicts a cheering crowd with three lines in speech balloons: “It was a near thing,” one says. “We would almost become free.” And the last one says: “Down with freedoms!”

Turkey’s Islamist strongman, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, won 52.5% of the national vote in presidential elections on June 24. That marks a slight rise from 51.8% he won in presidential elections of August 2014. More than 25 million Turks voted for Erdoğan’s presidency. His closest rival, social democrat Muharrem Ince, an energetic former schoolteacher, won less than 16 million votes, or nearly 31% of the national vote.

The opposition candidate admitted that the election was fair. There have been no reports of fraud from international observers, at least so far.

The Politics of Iconic Images How iconic photos are often exploited or faked to support political agendas. Dawn Perlmutte

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270549/politics-iconic-images-dawn-perlmutter

A photograph of crying two-year-old Yanela Sanchez became the iconic image of children being separated from their parents after crossing the border illegally. The photograph immediately went viral and was featured in international coverage around the world. Yanela Sanchez became the face of the Trump administration’s zero tolerance immigration policy. The cover of the July 2, 2018 edition of Time Magazine depicted a photoshopped image of Yanela looking up at President Trump, with the heading “Welcome to America.” The crying toddler was also pictured on the June 16 cover of The New York Daily News with the headline: “Callous. Soulless. Craven. Trump.”

The image, taken by photographer John Moore of Getty Images, was immediately bestowed iconic status and designated the visible symbol of family separation in the ongoing immigration debate. Iconic photographs function as symbols of historical events, controversies, persons or locations and sometimes they are representative of an entire generation. Protests and war are popular themes of iconic photos because they capture heroic, tragic and significant incidents.

The primary criteria of iconic photographs are their emotional effect. There was no shortage of images of crying children at the border. What distinguished this photograph from others is that it depicted Sandra Sanchez, Yanela’ s mother, being patted down by a U.S. Border Patrol agent. The image of a Border Patrol agent frisking a Honduran woman in front of her crying child was granted iconic status because it reinforces anti-police propaganda that portrays officers as inhumane, heartless, racist and violent. The image went viral because it evoked anti-police sentiment. Overt and subliminal messages work particularly well when they resonate with previously inculcated narratives. Continual negative media depictions of law enforcement have programmed public perception to interpret the image as a police officer terrorizing a child by harassing her mother.

Sweden: Open For Business! Just make sure to watch your back. Bruce Bawer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270555/sweden-open-business-bruce-bawer

I try to be careful about these things, so I won’t give a thumbs-up – yet – to the new party Alternativ für Sverige. I want to know more about them. That said, the party leader, Gustav Kasselstrand, is saying all the right things. “What you read about Sweden on alternative news platforms is true,” he told an interviewer recently. “We are facing problems more severe than ever before in our history, where Swedes face a situation of being a minority within 20 years if nothing is done to stop the replacement of our people.” He added: “I would describe the problems in Sweden as some kind of low-intensive civil war (with gradually increasing intensity for each day).”

While I’m not yet sure what to make of Kasselstrand and his party, I do know what to make of the establishment they’re taking on. It’s a gang of liars. Case in point: recently the Council for the Promotion of Sweden Abroad – a joint effort by Sweden’s Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation, Ministry of Culture, the Swedish Institute, Business Sweden and Visit Sweden – distributed a manual, Sharing Sweden, which explains to Swedish entrepreneurs how to attract tourism, business development, investment, trade, “cultural and scientific exchange,” and the like. The thrust is to project a “strong image of Sweden abroad.” This, admits the Council, is not easy nowadays, because, and I quote, “Sweden has been affected in recent years by negative rumours and in some cases outright disinformation, particularly in the areas of migration and integration.”

“Negative rumours”? “Outright disinformation”? Translation: the horrifying truth about our national mess of an immigration and integration policy has gotten out, and if we want to attract vacationers, investors, etc., we’ve got to double down on the denial.

The Media Accuses Trump of its Own Crimes If the media wants to investigate enemy collusion, it can look in the mirror. Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270554/media-accuses-trump-its-own-crimes-daniel-greenfield

On Tom LoBianco’s LinkedIn profile, the former Associated Press reporter self-identifies as a “White House reporter covering Trump Russia probes.” At CNN, LoBianco writes that he “covered the 2016 presidential race and the Russia probes.”

Now LoBianco is in trouble for reasons having nothing and everything to do with the Russia probe.

Earlier this year, Elliot Broidy, a Trump ally and Republican fundraiser, was targeted by Qatari hackers. Broidy had been sharply critical of the terror state which has been linked to everything from 9/11 to Iran. And his emails were quickly peddled to media figures who spun them into pro-Qatari hit pieces.

When Broidy struck back with a lawsuit targeting Qatar and its lobbyists, phone records showed that LoBianco had spoken three dozen times to a registered foreign agent of the Islamic terror state.

LoBianco’s stories were nakedly hostile to Broidy, the Saudis and the UAE to the extent that they were hard to distinguish from Qatari propaganda. And they were aimed at what LoBianco and his collaborator deemed a “secret campaign” to “alter U.S. foreign policy and punish Qatar.” LoBianco’s story accused Broidy of not registering as a foreign agent, but he was the one allegedly colluding with a Qatari agent.

In his story, LoBianco wrote of a “cache of emails obtained by the AP.” The emails are described as having been “anonymously leaked.” A more factually accurate term would have been “hacked” or “stolen.” And LoBianco and the AP had no problem with posting these stolen emails online.

There was nothing unusual about that. Media organizations routinely publish stolen emails while describing them as ‘leaked’: a term associated with classified government or corporate documents, not stolen private correspondence. Like LoBianco’s stories, they emphasize the role of the news organization in “analyzing” the “documents” while evading the question of how they came into their possession.

25th American Sickened by Mysterious Attacks on U.S. Diplomats in Cuba, China By Bridget Johnson

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/25th-american-sickened-by-mysterious-attacks-on-u-s-diplomats-in-cuba-china/

Another U.S. diplomat has been confirmed to be suffering from the same ill health effects as embassy personnel sickened by mysterious attacks in Cuba and China.

The State Department first heard about the incidents in late 2016 and news broke last summer that they believed a sonic device outside the range of audible sound was targeted at the residences of U.S. diplomats, operating either inside or outside their homes. Officials have been investigating whether a third country looking for “payback” against the U.S. was involved, possibly with the assistance of Cuban security services. Those affected suffered “cognitive, vestibular, and oculomotor dysfunction, along with auditory symptoms, sleep abnormalities, and headache,” and were left with conditions including mild traumatic brain injury and permanent hearing loss.

Press secretary Heather Nauert said last August that the U.S. personnel were being treated and “the incidents are no longer occurring.”

The first medically confirmed case since August, learned by the State Department late this morning, brings the total of affected members of the diplomatic community in Havana up to 25.

On June 21, Nauert told reporters at today’s State Department briefing, “following a comprehensive medical evaluation, one U.S. diplomat working at the U.S. Embassy Havana was medically confirmed to have experienced health effects similar to those that were reported by members of the U.S. Havana diplomatic community.”

The Cuban government was notified of the “occurrence,” she said, on May 29 and “assured us that they will continue to take this seriously and are continuing their investigation.”

“We strongly remind the Cuban government of its responsibility under the Vienna Convention to protect our diplomats.”

One other potentially affected employee who was also medically evacuated to the United States is still being evaluated at this time.

Nauert confirmed that a “number of individuals have returned to the United States from China” for medical testing of their symptoms and “some of them still do remain under evaluation at this point.”

“From China, we have one medically confirmed case at this point — one medically confirmed case. It does not mean that that number won’t change, but that is where it stands at this time,” she said. CONTINUE AT SITE