Is Trump Transforming Midterms With Arena-Size Rallies? . By Adele Malpass –

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/10/25/is_trump_transforming_midterms_with_arena-size_rallies_138461.html

One of the new dynamics in this midterm election is President Trump reprising the rallies that helped fuel his victory in 2016. While it’s common for presidents to campaign during midterms, arena-size crowds at rallies all over the country is a new phenomenon, and these events have proven to be a powerful way to communicate with, and excite, base voters.

The big question, however, is whether Trump’s supporters will turn out on Nov. 6, because it’s one thing to go to an energy-filled rally, another to find time on Election Day to go a polling place and put an X beside a candidate that isn’t nearly as motivational as the president.

In 2016, Trump had the ability to fill arenas in multiple states on the same day, but some in the media played down the importance of rallies even after he won the election. In response, White House aide Kellyanne Conway said in a post-election analysis: “The size of rallies matters.” Recently, the president echoed that point in a tweet:

“The crowds at my Rallies are far bigger than they have ever been before, including the 2016 election. Never an empty seat in these large venues, many thousands of people watching screens outside. Enthusiasm & Spirit is through the roof. SOMETHING BIG IS HAPPENING – WATCH!”

Trump isn’t alone in this assessment. “If people stand out in the rain and sun for hours, camp out overnight and take off work to attend a rally, then they’ll certainly show up to vote,” said Trish Hope, publisher of “Just the Tweets,” a compilation of the president’s first-year tweets. Hope’s sold more than 4,000 books at rallies, nine of which she has attended in the last month. “What the media misses is that people just want to be part of the Trump movement. And they are in denial that something big is going on here.” She added, “The media is going to be more shocked this year on election night than in 2016.”

MARK STEYN: BOMBS AWEIGHED

https://www.steynonline.com/8943/bombs-a-weighed

Me yesterday:

I shall hold off further comment until more facts are known.

No such circumspection stayed Utah Senate candidate Mitt Romney, who reacted instantly to the “suspicious packages” mailed to the Clintons, Obama, George Soros, CNN and others, and weighed in with boundless confidence:

Hate acts follow hate speech. It is past time for us to turn down and tune out the rabid rhetoric.

This is a nitwit statement even by Mitt’s recent standards, and doubtless a preview of the role he intends to play in the Senate. It is also an object lesson in the perils of Tweet-speed insight. “Moderate” “reasonable” “centrists”, like all other politicians, should take a deep breath and be mindful of the old adage: Don’t just say something, stand there.

“Hate speech” is not a notion a supposedly “severe conservative” (as Mitt once styled himself) would sign on to. “Hate speech” is free speech – because the concept of free speech exists for the speech you hate. In the modern world, “hate speech” is the enforcement arm of identity politics: Once an approved victim group is designated – Muslims, transgenders – “hate speech” is a pseudo-legal concept for shutting people up: Unpersuaded by the benefits of mass Muslim immigration? Concerned that seven-year-olds should not be hustled into “transitioning”? Hate speech, hate speech, hate speech…

Until you reach the stage that most of the western world is at – where polite society has ruled anything worth talking about out of bounds. At which point the masses turn to impolite society – Trump, Brexiteers, Salvini, Orbán…

Is it true that “hate acts follow hate speech”? To lazy types like, alas, “severely conservative” Republican Senate candidates, the logic is self-evident. As I wrote almost a decade ago:

Ever since this magazine attracted the attention of Canada’s “human rights” regime, defenders of the system have clung to a familiar argument. In a letter to Maclean’s, Jennifer Lynch, Q.C., Canada’s chief censor, put it this way:

Pipe Bomb and Powder Delivered to CNN Were Harmless By Jack Crowe

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/cnn-pipe-bomb-white-powder-harmless-law-enforcement-report/

The pipe bomb and white powder that forced an evacuation at CNN headquarters in New York City Wednesday morning were harmless, a law enforcement source told the Associated Press.

The purported explosive device was similar in construction to those sent Wednesday to former President Barack Obama, former attorney general Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, Representative Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D., Fla.), and Representative Maxine Waters of California. A package containing white powder was delivered later in the day.

The NYPD said the explosive devices were live during a Wednesday afternoon press conference but subsequent reporting suggests they were not functional.

All of the devices carried a parody ISIS flag featuring comedian Larry the Cable Guy’s signature slogan, “git ‘er done,” NBC News reported late Wednesday.

The most recent wave of potential bombings came two days after billionaire liberal activist George Soros received an explosive device in the mail, which police later detonated. The package left in CNN’s mailroom was addressed to former CIA director John Brennan, who frequently appears on the network.

New York governor Andrew Cuomo said during a Wednesday press conference that his office received an explosive device but the NYPD later revealed the package in question actually contained a letter and a flash drive.

President Trump called the spate of attacks “despicable” in a Wednesday statement.

The Nobel Peace Prize Shines This Year It finally goes to someone who deserves it. Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271718/nobel-peace-prize-shines-year-hugh-fitzgerald

Of all the Nobel Prizes, the one that gives rise to the most doubts is the Peace Prize. Nobels in the sciences and in economics are for achievements recognized by others in the field. The Peace Prize is political and wildly subjective, sometimes given for work that has nothing to do with “peace,” or used to promote the political side that the Norwegian judges favor. Yassir Arafat, before bin Laden the world’s foremost terrorist, shared a prize (with Rabin and Peres) for promoting peace by signing the Oslo Accords, which accords represented a stunning diplomatic victory for the “Palestinians.” The left-wing Norwegians were eager to forget all the terrorist attacks by Arafat’s men and to honor him in order that he might continue “on the path of peace.” Barack Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize for his “extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” although his main diplomatic effort, that led to the Iran Nuclear Deal, also included, as is now known, all sorts of side deals favorable to Iran, that he made while keeping Congress largely in the dark.

There was Anwar Sadat, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for graciously agreeing to receive back the entire Sinai from Israel as part of a peace settlement. Sadat was later murdered by a Muslim fanatic who failed to realize what a diplomatic coup Sadat had pulled off as a veritable Prince of Peace. There was Shirin Ebadi, an Iranian female activist, who has worked for women’s rights in Iran, where Islamic misogyny is in full flower. Her Nobel hasn’t protected her; she now lives in London where, she now insists, she was wrong: she used to push for reform from within Iran, but has concluded that no reform is possible with the current regime, and women will continue to suffer in Iran until the regime is overthrown.

There was Malala Yousefzai, who worked for the right of girls in Pakistan to get an education, not something many Muslim males in that country favor, including the one who shot her through the head (she survived). There was a Nobel Peace Prize shared by Mohammed Yunus for his attempts to spread microloans, in order to help the poor start businesses. Mohammed el Baradei won for his efforts, as Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which shared the prize with him, “to prevent nuclear energy from being used for military purposes and to ensure that the Agency’s monitoring of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in order to make sure it is used in the safest possible way.” Some American officials believed he was engaged in communications with the Iranians who were suspect. Of course, although he was dealing mostly with weapons programs in Iran and Iraq, two very aggressive states, El Baradei has accused Israel of being the biggest threat to the Middle East because of its nuclear weapons. Israel has repeatedly said it would not be the first to introduce nuclear weapons to any conflict, but that’s not good enough for El Baradei. He would like to force Israel to rid itself of nuclear weapons, but Israel, unsurprisingly, is not impressed with his suggestion and is not about to commit suicide to please the likes of Mohamed el Baradei.

Anniversary of a Shameful U.S. Surrender—the Cuban Missile Crisis How JFK pulled defeat from the jaws of victory. Humberto Fontova

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271720/anniversary-shameful-us-surrender%E2%80%94-cuban-missile-humberto-fontova

Those who think “Fake News” started with Trump’s term and the media’s “slobbering love affair” with a U.S. president started during Obama’s should have seen John F. Kennedy’s term.

Imagine Obama’s term with no Fox News, internet or talk radio. That’s about what JFK enjoyed. And tragically, the fairy tales Kennedy’s court scribes (with their media cohorts of the time) concocted about JFK’s Pattonesque handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis prevail in media/academic circles even today.

In fact, that Khrushchev swept the floor with cowed Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis was mainstream conservative conclusion throughout much of the Cold War. Richard Nixon and Barry Goldwater, for instance, represented opposite poles of the Republican establishment of their time.

“We locked Castro’s communism into Latin America and threw away the key to its removal,” growled Barry Goldwater about the JFK’s Missile Crisis “solution.”

“Kennedy pulled defeat out of the jaws of victory,” complained Richard Nixon. “Then gave the Soviets squatters rights in our backyard.”

Generals Curtis Le May and Maxwell Taylor represented opposite poles of the military establishment.

“The biggest defeat in our nation’s history!” bellowed Air Force chief Curtis Lemay while whacking his fist on his desk upon learning the details of the deal.

The Threats Posed by the Impending Invasion All Americans need to wake up and pay attention. Michael Cutler

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271727/threats-posed-impending-invasion-michael-cutler

As I have been watching with growing concern the rapidly increasing numbers of aspiring illegal aliens in Latin America who are heading north towards the United States, I came to draw the comparison that the aerial videos of these huge numbers of people, at least from high overhead, appear somewhat like the images of the runners participating in the New York City Marathon.

That analogy caused me to think back to March 20, 2013, during the Obama administration, when I testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the topic, “Building An Immigration System Worthy Of American Values.”

The last two paragraphs of my prepared testimony for that hearing more than five years ago now seem all the more appropriate if not, in fact, prophetic:

Law enforcement is at its best when it creates a climate of deterrence to convince those who might be contemplating violating the law that such an effort is likely to be discovered and that if discovered, adverse consequences will result for the law violators. Current policies and statements by the administration, in my view, encourages aspiring illegal aliens around the world to head for the United States. In effect the starter’s pistol has been fired and for these folks, the finish line to this race is the border of the United States.

Back when I was an INS special agent I recall that Doris Meissner who was, at the time, the commissioner of the INS, said that the agency needed to be “customer oriented.” Unfortunately, while I agree about the need to be customer oriented what Ms Meissner and too many politicians today seem to have forgotten is that the “customers” of the INS and of our government in general, are the citizens of the United States of America.

President, Democrats should seal a deal: Trade the wall for Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court by Clarence Schwab

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/412683-president-democrats-should-seal-a-deal-trade-the-wall-for-merrick-garland

Donald Trump has won big with Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. He also is leaving his imprint on the lower courts. These results are paying real-world political dividends, as Republicans appear poised to keep control of the Senate. This is the moment for President Trump to win big with “The Wall” along our southern border.

Yet, with Democrats about to take control of the House, the wall will likely be as real as Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court, without some Democratic support.

President Trump should start thinking about making a deal, and the next Supreme Court seat vacated by a liberal justice may be just the pressure point. How about offering assurances to Senate Democrats that Judge Garland, the stalled Supreme Court nominee of the Obama administration, would fill the next seat vacated by a liberal justice, in return for full funding of a “big and beautiful wall”?

The last time the wall was part of a possible deal, the price was DACA, and ultimately the GOP and White House balked. But offering to trade the wall for Merrick Garland, with a Supreme Court firmly in conservative control, leaves the Trump political base with little to lose.

In fact, the House Republicans’ Freedom Caucus would have plenty to cheer about. Rank-and-file Republicans could sleep easier at night knowing that the southern border was safer. Like the president, Senate Republicans have some room to give, and the president could smile because he didn’t have to give anything on immigration to get the wall.

As for the 2020 re-election, such a trade would highlight Trump’s political deal-making prowess, and show him to be capable of compromise. For Independents, that could ease doubts about the president’s capacity to govern effectively. It could increase Trump’s chances of getting their votes and, in so doing, of maybe winning the popular vote.

To be sure, the Federalist Society may oppose this proposal. But the Federalists would still get to name every other appointment to the federal bench while Trump remains as president. And, lest anyone forget, Trump’s brand is on the ballot, not theirs.

So, how might congressional Democrats react?

Britain’s Grooming Gangs: Part 3 by Denis MacEoin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13169/britain-grooming-gangs-part-3

This reformist activity in the migrant community needs to be encouraged and backed by government resources.

“On one level, most imams in the UK are simply using their puritanical sermons to promote the wearing of the hijab and even the burka among their female adherents. But the dire result can be the brutish misogyny we see in the Oxford sex ring.” — Taj Hargey, imam of the Oxford Islamic Congregation.

There are decent Muslims everywhere who work hard to counter all the anti-social and criminal activities in which so many of their co-religionists engage and the theological positions through which they try to justify what they do. But terrorist attacks, anti-Semitic hate speech, and sexual harassment of young white women are real crimes committed by a different kind of Muslim and must be addressed as such.

“Women in some communities are facing a double onslaught of gender inequality, combined with religious, cultural and social barriers preventing them from accessing even their basic rights as British residents. And violence against women remains all too prevalent….” — Dame Louise Casey, The Casey Review, 2016.

Not all Muslims remained silent about the grooming gang problem. We have already seen how the new Home Secretary, Sajid Javid, a Muslim of Pakistani origin, took rapid action to open an enquiry into the crimes. A number of Muslim organizations and individuals have spoken out against the gangs, and condemned them for bringing their faith into disrepute. The integrative Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), for one, has spoken out strongly about grooming culture.

In May 2013, Julie Siddiqi, chief executive of the ISB, coordinated a Muslim-led coalition to campaign against offenders, known as The Community Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation, which, in turn, was launched in Bradford with the backing of the Bradford Council of Mosques. The following month, a Muslim group called Together Against Grooming (TAG) declared that a Friday prayer sermon (khutba) would be read out in around 500 mosques across the country to draw attention to the grooming issue. The sermon was written by Alyas Karmani, an imam who has a background in psychology and serves at several mosques around Bradford. Karmani specializes in sexual counselling from a non-fundamentalist perspective and has worked on a PhD entitled, “The Crises of Masculinity and Urban Male Violence”. His detailed understanding of the grooming gangs and their various motivations are perhaps the most sophisticated yet advanced by a Muslim expert and should be taken into account by any present or future investigation.

Serving Spartacus With all of New Jersey’s problems, guess which bill is moving in the Garden State legislature. By James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/serving-spartacus-1540414712

A seemingly never-ending caravan of migrants has been fleeing New Jersey for years as the Garden State economy sputters under the weight of high taxes and dysfunctional government. Residents who haven’t yet joined the caravan might be hoping for some relief from state legislators. But lately politicians in Trenton have prioritized relief for just one particular resident who spends much of his time in Washington, D.C.

Politico’s Ryan Hutchins reports:

New Jersey Democrats are clearing the way for Sen. Cory Booker to run for reelection and president at the same time — and they’re not being bashful about their motivations.

State lawmakers on Monday quickly introduced and advanced a bill that would ensure no one could mount a legal challenge should Booker — or, in theory, another federal elected official — decide to run for the White House while trying to retain his current job.

The measure could land on Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy’s desk next week, and his office has already said he’s willing to sign it.

Mr. Hutchins notes that the “loquacious, coffee-chugging” Mr. Booker appears to be considering a run for President in 2020. Fellow Democrats want to ensure that there’s no risk of him having to give up his Senate seat in order to seek the highest office in the land.

New Jersey homeowners would also love to have downside protection until the day they decide to join the caravan. Actually, many of them are already participating in a harrowing daily journey as they attempt to cross the Hudson River in search of better economic opportunities in New York City. As the New York Times reported in September, attempting such crossings has lately become more difficult:

New Jersey Transit, which has been struggling for months to maintain its already reduced commuter train service, plans to take more trains off its schedule next month and to temporarily eliminate some routes…

The statewide transit agency has been canceling trains on short notice, infuriating its customers as they have to scramble to get to work on time and keep appointments. New Jersey Transit, the country’s second-busiest commuter rail system, has blamed the failures on its rush to meet a Dec. 31 federal deadline to install an automatic braking system. CONTINUE AT SITE

Zero Hour for the Islamic Republic The time has come for the world to unite against Iran’s regime. 3 Comments By Danny Danon

https://www.wsj.com/articles/zero-hour-for-the-islamic-republic-1540422152

Iran has long been a subject of intense discussion during the United Nations General Assembly. But in years past the world lacked the leadership and political will to confront Tehran over its nuclear ambitions and support for terrorism. This year is different. With the regime facing political unrest at home and escalating sanctions from abroad, the international community can block its expansionist and dangerous designs.

The Iranian leadership is beleaguered. It faces protests that directly challenge its legitimacy. Iranians are outraged that their leaders have funneled the billions of dollars their government received from the nuclear agreement to support terrorist proxies. Protesters are shouting “Death to Palestine”—repudiating the regime’s anti-Israel eliminationism—and “Leave Syria and think of us.”

Financial pressure from U.S. sanctions has compounded this domestic turmoil, as companies around the world end their commercial dealings with Iran. The value of the Iranian rial has plummeted, while Iran’s oil exports have fallen 25% since June. In November a second round of sanctions will target the backbone of Iran’s economy, its oil and gas sectors.

When the General Assembly convened in September, President Trump advised the international community to join the U.S. in isolating the regime. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed the existence of a new nuclear site constructed in violation of the nuclear agreement. He invited the International Atomic Energy Agency, or anyone with a smartphone, to inspect the site: latitude 35.5022, longitude 51.2997.