RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2018/12/20/james-wolfe-

In a recent court filing, the defendant’s attorneys begged for mercy. The offender—once a high-level government official assigned with protecting national security secrets—had pleaded guilty to one charge of making a false statement to the FBI in 2017.

Citing his modest upbringing, community involvement, and decorated military service, the defendant’s lawyers asked the judge only to impose a sentence of probation rather than jail time.

“This case has garnered a significant amount of media attention,” the attorneys wrote, “and plainly sends a message to the public that lying to federal agents—even when those lies were denials animated by a desire to conceal a personal failing—has profound consequences.”

The appeal was supported by letters written by powerful people, including top lawmakers on Capitol Hill, who attested to the man’s overall decency, claiming he had already suffered enough and how his “conduct is contradicted sharply by the character of the man that his family and community and country relied upon and loved and respected.”

No, that entreaty was not about Lt. General Michael Flynn; it was on behalf of James Wolfe, the former security chief for the Senate Intelligence Committee who was caught not just lying to FBI officials but illegally leaking classified information to journalists, including his 20-something girlfriend. Wolfe’s misconduct was far more egregious—and damaging—than the process crime committed by Flynn.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13446/dershowitz-twitter-misinformation

Lying to the FBI is not a crime if the lie is not material.

“[18 U.S. Code §] 1001 explicitly requires that the lie must be material. The statute (a2) reads ‘…makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation;'” — Alan M. Dershowitz, on Twitter.

If Twitter users wish to spread stories as pseudo-reporters, they must also fact-check what they publish. If they do not, they become complicit in the spreading of disinformation.

Controversy over the responsibility Twitter has in policing its users has been at the forefront of our national discourse. There is also a role for individuals to play in propagating fair and accurate stories on this platform. On Twitter, information seems to spread at lightning speed and “news” stories have a way of taking on a life of their own. Twitter undoubtably has some virtue — I myself am a frequent user. It is a forum where otherwise disparate people can communicate quickly and information can be democratized. However, Twitter all too frequently can be used to deceive and mislead.

On Twitter, I am often the target of misleading news stories based on out of context or truncated quotes as well as outright lies. My recent commentary on Michael Flynn’s lying to the FBI is a perfect example of just that. On December 17, I was interviewed by Bill Hemmer and was asked about the repercussions of Flynn lying to the FBI. I first responded by stating:

“I hope the judge understands when he has the case tomorrow; Flynn did not commit a crime by lying because the lie has to be material to the investigation, and if the FBI already knew the answer to the question and only asked the question to give him an opportunity to lie, his answer, even if false, was not material to the investigation.”

My point was clearly laid out. A few minutes later, Hemmer brought the topic back to Flynn. I then, once again, clearly stated my aforementioned argument around materiality:

“The lie has to be material to the investigation, and if the FBI already knew the answer to the question and only asked him the question in order to give them an opportunity to lie, his answer, even if false, was not material to the investigation. Which answers the question [Hemmer interrupts]… Lying to the FBI is not a crime [Hemmer interrupts]…”

I was interrupted and unable to finish my point which was “lying to the FBI is not a crime if the lie is not material.”

https://www.city-journal.org/disparate-impact-analysis

A federal commission on school safety has repudiated the use of disparate-impact analysis in evaluating whether school discipline is racially biased. The Trump administration should go further, and extirpate such analysis from the entirety of the federal code of regulations, as well as from informal government practice.

Disparate-impact analysis holds that if a facially-neutral policy negatively affects blacks and Hispanics at a higher rate than whites and Asians, it is discriminatory. Noticing the behavioral differences that lead to those disparate effects is forbidden. In the area of school discipline, disparate-impact analysis results in the conclusion that racially neutral rules must nevertheless contain bias, since black students nationally are suspended at nearly three times the rate of white students. In 2014, the Obama administration relied on this methodology to announce that schools that suspended or expelled black students at higher rates than white students were violating anti-discrimination laws.

To understand how counterfactual such an analysis is, consider Duval County, Florida, which has Florida’s highest juvenile homicide rate. Seventy-three children, some as young as 11, have been arrested for murder and manslaughter over the last decade, according to the Florida Times-Union. Black juveniles made up 87.6 percent of those arrests and whites 8 percent. The black population in Duval County—which includes Jacksonville—was 28.9 percent in 2010 and the white population 56.6 percent, making black youngsters 21.6 times more likely to be arrested for homicide than white youngsters. Nationally, black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic male teens combined; if Hispanics were removed from the equation, the black-white disparity would be much greater.

Beneath those homicide numbers is a larger juvenile crime wave. “The reason so many kids commit murder in Jacksonville is not because they are murderers, but because they are everything else: drug dealers, robbers, thieves, rapists and a bunch of other types of criminals whose crimes of choice has a great likelihood of leading to a murder,” a teen murder convict, Aaron Wright, told the Florida Times-Union. Fifty-nine percent of juvenile murder convicts from Duval County who responded to the paper’s inmate survey reported that they were committing another crime such as robbery or burglary when they or their co-defendant killed their victim. Wright himself was robbing a woman when his fellow robber shot and killed her, making Wright guilty of felony murder.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/womens-march-sponsors-silent-on-anti-semitism-allegations/his is how toxic the far Left has become.

It has been a week and a half since Tablet magazine detailed extensive allegations of anti-Semitism and financial corruption on the part of the Women’s March leadership.

The organization, which since November 2016 has organized grassroots efforts across the country to demonstrate and vote against the Trump administration, has yet to offer a formal statement on the exposé. And so far, not one of the more than 100 partners and sponsors of the Women’s March has raised a fuss over the story — including more than 20 high-profile groups that National Review contacted directly seeking comment.

As of this morning, the Women’s March website still featured a November 20 statement from co-chair Linda Sarsour side-stepping demands from the group’s founder that the current co-chairs resign over their support for anti-Semitic Nation of Islam (NOI) leader Louis Farrakhan.

The Tablet essay, by Leah McSweeney and Jacob Siegel, from earlier this month added fuel to that fire. Several sources told the magazine that at the leaders’ first meeting in November 2016, Carmen Perez and Tamika Mallory, now co-chairs along with Sarsour, “first asserted that Jewish people bore a special collective responsibility as exploiters of black and brown people — and even, according to a close secondhand source, claimed that Jews were proven to have been leaders of the American slave trade.”

Later, Mallory and Perez allegedly “berated” one of the group’s leaders over the fact that she was Jewish, saying, “Your people this, your people that” and “Your people hold all the wealth.” The co-chairs have also been accused by former group leaders of reshaping the financial structure of the organization for their personal benefit and of employing members of the NOI security team for Women’s March events.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/alan-dershowitz-michael-flynn-now-has-three-options-to-stay-out-of-prison

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s handling of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s sentencing hearing Tuesday on Flynn’s guilty plea to lying to the FBI was anything but exemplary. The judge – who has a well-deserved reputation as both tough and fair – made several fundamental errors right at the outset.

First, Sullivan suggested that Flynn might be guilty of treason. This reflects an abysmal ignorance of the governing case law. Nothing Flynn did comes even close to satisfying the strict definition of treason.

The U.S. Constitution states: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same Overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”

Flynn admitted he represented Turkey – America’s NATO ally – before he became a federal employee as President Trump’s national security adviser, but said he failed to register until later under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller did not charge Flynn for failing to register – let alone with the far more serious crime of treason.

But Sullivan blundered by accusing Flynn of having been an unregistered foreign agent while he was serving in the White House, thereby having “sold your country out.” This was flat out wrong, since Flynn stopped working for any foreign government before he became President Trump’s national security adviser when Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2017.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/12/the-barr-memo-is-a-commendable-piece-of-lawyering/

Trump’s attorney-general nominee would help Mueller conclude his work within DOJ guidelines.

It is exactly what we need and should want in an attorney general of the United States: the ability to reason through complex legal questions in a rigorously academic way. Not to bloviate from the cheap seats, but to think these issues through the way a properly functioning Justice Department does: considering them against jurisprudence, statutes, rules, regulations, and Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinions, with a healthy respect for facts that we do not know or about which we could be wrong — facts that could alter the analysis.

That is precisely what Bill Barr did in June, when he penned an unsolicited memorandum to top Justice Department officials on a matter of immense national significance: the obstruction aspect of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of President Trump.

Barr, whom President Trump has nominated to be the next attorney general, was not prejudging the facts. He was addressing the law and Justice Department policy. With great persuasive force, the 19-page memo posits two contentions. First, based on what is publicly known, the special counsel’s theory of obstruction is legally flawed. Second, if a Justice Department investigation is going to be used to take down a democratically elected president, the social cohesion of our body politic demands that it be over a clear, very serious crime, not a novel and aggressive theory of prosecution.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/12/19/the-eagle-and

Google CEO Sundar Pichai’s recent congressional testimony capped a deservedly rough year for the embattled search giant. While Pichai largely avoided any major missteps in his testimony—thanks mostly to the technological illiteracy of the questioners—even Google-friendly sources couldn’t help noticing his evasiveness on one key point: the infamous proposed partnership between Google and the Chinese government to build a censored search engine in line with Chinese government ideology—a project ominously code-named “Project Dragonfly.”

Most notably, Pichai absolutely refused to rule out making such a product, instead devolving to corporate doublespeak about being “committed to engagement,” whatever that means. He also tried to downplay Project Dragonfly, characterizing it merely as an “internal product,” rather than something under serious development.

This was wise of him, considering that the reports on what Dragonfly allegedly is being designed to do. According to a suppressed Google internal memo, Dragonfly is being built not only to limit search results, but also to enable the Chinese government to track what every single citizen searches for on the app. In other words, it’s a surveillance tool disguised as a search engine.

The FBI did not treat Flynn fairly, but while the Bureau’s situational ethics leave much to be desired, its aggressive tactics did not violate the law.

So. . . it turns out Michael Flynn was not sentenced on Tuesday.

No sentence does not mean no drama. We were treated to the notoriously unscripted Judge Emmet Sullivan suggesting that Flynn might somehow be guilty of “treason.” Now, I’ll grant you, being an unregistered agent of a foreign power is not a good thing (there’s even a law against it). But it’s tough to fathom how a judge could spin such a thing into treason when (a) the foreign power, Turkey in this case, is a NATO ally (at least technically), (b) General Flynn was not a U.S. government official when he acted as Ankara’s agent, (c) the prosecutor did not think it was an important enough crime to charge against Flynn, (d) Flynn is a decorated 33-year combat veteran who has written a book detailing a strategy for defeating America’s actual enemies, and (e) the prosecutor, in fact, has proposed a sentence of no jail time for the process crime that was actually charged in the case.

After calling a brief time-out in the proceedings, a contrite Judge Sullivan returned to the bench and retracted his loopy treason comments. All in all, it was a disgraceful performance: Flynn’s is not a complicated case, yet Sullivan failed to have a grip on basic facts. Still, before postponing the former national-security adviser’s sentencing, Sullivan — however unwittingly — performed a useful service in deconstructing the competing Flynn narratives.

Narrative overwhelms fact in modern political discourse. Maybe this is a function of the information age and modern news programming: Information gushes at people like an open hydrant. They feel the need to process information thematically, if they are to process it at all. And the lines between fact-reporting and opinion-analysis have blurred.

In my weekend column, I contended that there are two narratives of the Flynn episode, and that neither is accurate. Flynn fans say he has been railroaded, that the case against him is entirely fabricated, and that he was extorted into pleading guilty in order to protect his family from further ruin. Flynn critics counter that he lied to the FBI, and that a longtime military officer and national-security pro who ran the Defense Intelligence Agency is well aware that it is a crime to lie to the FBI, case closed.

https://pjmedia.com/trending/anti-semitic-nation-of-islam-receives-federal-funds-to-proselytize-to-federal-inmates/

Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the U.S. government “to teach religious study programs for federal prison inmates,” the Washington Examiner reported in an exclusive Wednesday. Since 2008, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and Department of Justice leaders have given at least $350,000 to Farrakhan’s black nationalist group according to records obtained by the Examiner.

The Anti-Defamation League calls Farrakhan “the lead­ing anti-Semite in Amer­ica,” who for 30 years “has espoused and promoted anti-Semitism and racism” and “has repeatedly alleged that the Jewish people were responsible for the slave trade, as well as the 9/11 attacks.”

The black nationalist preaches that white people are “blue-eyed devils” and Jews are “the synagogue of Satan,” and once even called Adolf Hitler “a very great man” who “raised Germany up from nothing.”

Farrakhan has long preached to his followers that “a mother wheel” hovers over the Earth — “a heavily armed” spaceship of death that will “rain destruction upon white America, but save those who embrace the Nation of Islam.”

“White folks are going down. And Satan is going down. And Farrakhan, by God’s grace, has pulled the cover off of that Satanic Jew and I’m here to say your time is up, your world is through,” said Farrakhan during a “Savior’s Day” address in February of this year. More recently, Farrakhan traveled to Iran where he called America the “great Satan” and led “death to America” chants.

Ironically, Farrakhan has instructed his followers to not accept money from the U.S. government. Said Farrakhan in a Dec. 14, 2013 statement: “If they offer you anything, look carefully into it, lest the Nation will no longer be tied to the principles that the Hon. Elijah Muhammad desired for us: to make us an independent nation on some of this Earth that we can call our own.”

Despite the group’s stated beliefs and intentions, Nation of Islam leaders “have received at least $364,500 in contracts and awards from the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and the Department of Justice between fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2019,” according to the report:

The funding was designed to provide “Nation of Islam religious services,” “Nation of Islam spiritual guide services,” “Nation of Islam study services,” and other related programming led by the organization’s leaders, according to Bureau of Prison records. The Nation of Islam has been labeled a hate group by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center. CONTINUE AT SITE

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272289/democrat-appointed-judge-lambastes-flynn-matthew-vadum

A Democrat-appointed federal judge lashed out at former National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn Tuesday, suggesting the defendant was guilty of treason as he postponed the scheduled sentencing for three months.

Meanwhile, The Hill newspaper reports, the judge’s tirade came after two of Flynn’s Turkish associates were indicted:

The Department of Justice indicted Flynn’s two Turkish lobbying business associates on Monday for conspiracy and acting as foreign agents. The indictment spells out in sharp detail how Flynn was paid thousands of dollars to allegedly lobby for the Turkish government through a conduit while he was working for Trump.

Although federal prosecutors say Flynn committed ethical lapses they have long maintained they could not make a successful treason case against Flynn, but grandstanding Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, appointed in 1994 by President Clinton, suggested without evidence that they could have done so.

At a federal courthouse in the nation’s capital Dec. 18 Sullivan pressed prosecutors, asking if what Flynn did rose “to the level of treasonous activity” or if he could be prosecuted under the archaic Logan Act which forbids unauthorized U.S. persons from negotiating with foreign countries. Prosecutors present in the courtroom refused to answer. No one has ever been successfully prosecuted under the Logan Act, which was enacted in 1799.

Flynn has pled guilty to lying to the FBI about conversations he had with the then- Russian ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak during the transition period following the 2016 election and regarding the lobbying he conducted on behalf of Turkey while he worked on the Trump campaign and on the transition.

“I’m not hiding my disgust, my disdain for your criminal offense,” Sullivan told Flynn. “Arguably, you sold your country out. … In the White House! In the West Wing!”

“You were an unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the national security advisor to the president of the United States,” the judge said during his outburst.