Fake Truth By Victor Davis Hanson

The most effective way for the media to have refuted Donald Trump’s 24/7 accusations of “fake news” would have been to publish disinterested, factually based accounts of his presidency. The Trump record should have been set straight through logic and evidence.https://amgreatness.com/2017/12/11/fake-truth/

So one would think after a year of disseminating fake news aimed at Donald Trump (Melania Trump was leaving the White House; Donald Trump had removed the bust of Martin Luther King, Jr. from the West Wing; Trump planned to send troops into Mexico, etc.) that Washington and New York journalists would be especially scrupulous in their reporting to avoid substantiating one of Trump’s favorite refrains.

Instead, either blinded by real hatred or hyper-partisanship or both, much of the media has redoubled their reporting of rumor and fictions as facts—at least if they empower preconceived and useful bias against Trump. But after the year-long tit-for-tat with the president, the media has earned less public support in polls than has the president. It is the age-old nature of politicians of every stripe to exaggerate and mislead, but the duty of journalists to keep them honest—not to trump their yarns.

A Dangerous Tic
Last week, ABC News erroneously reported that Michael Flynn, in a supposed new role of cooperation with the prosecution, was prepared to testify that Trump, while still a candidate, ordered him improperly to contact (and, by inference, to collude with) Russian government officials.

For a while, the startling news sent the stock market into a fall of over 300 points. Was the purported pro-business Trump agenda shortly to be derailed by “proof” of a possible impeachable offense? A little while later, however, ABC was forced to retract that story, to suspend Brian Ross (the reporter involved), and to offer a correction that Trump actually had been president-elect at the time of the contact and completely within his elected purview to reach out to foreign governments.

Reuters, likewise eager to fuel the narrative of a colluding Trump, asserted that the Mueller investigators had subpoenaed Deutsche Bank records of Trump and his family. Again, the leaked inference was that the inquiry suddenly was coming near to hard evidence of Trump wrongdoing and was thus entering its penultimate stage. In truth, Mueller has more routinely subpoenaed the records of Trump associates, not Trump himself or his family.

In the most egregious example of peddling fake news, CNN reported that candidate Trump had once received an email entrée to unreleased Wikileaks documents—again suggesting some sort of collusion with Russian or pro-Russian interests. But that narrative was soon discredited, too. CNN failed to note that the email was sent 10 days later than it had originally reported, and instead referred to information already released into the public domain by Wikileaks.

In this same brief period, Washington Post reporter David Weigel, perhaps eager to suggest that Trump’s popularity among his base was at last waning, tweeted a sardonic captioned photo of half-empty seats at a Trump rally in Pensacola, Florida. He soon offered a retraction and noted his tweeted image wrongly showed the venue well before the actual start of the event—a fact he surely must have known.

Is CNN Protecting Adam Schiff? Journalists continue to air his fact-free allegations without requiring evidence. James Freeman

We’re certainly living in strange times when the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee is among the most media-friendly lawmakers in Washington. The times would be less strange if the media were a little less friendly in return.

Since they are charged with overseeing America’s spy agencies, the members of the House and Senate intelligence committees are usually as tight-lipped a group of politicians as you’ll find. Each one takes an oath to protect the country’s secrets and is expected to take special care in protecting the classified information entrusted to them.

That’s the hope anyway. In practice Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.) rarely misses an opportunity to publicly characterize the non-public information that he claims to have seen. This raises the question of whether he’s violating the rules of the committee by discussing classified intelligence, or perhaps misleading the public about what he’s seen. Before giving him yet another platform to hurl allegations of treasonous behavior, journalists should first demand that he show up with some facts.

For the better part of a year, Mr. Schiff has been teasing the public with claims of wrongdoing by his political adversaries, but refusing to back them up. Back in March, NBC News reported:

The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee claimed Wednesday evening that he has seen “more than circumstantial evidence” that associates of President Donald Trump colluded with Russia while the Kremlin attempted to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the Ranking Member on the committee, was asked by Chuck Todd on “Meet The Press Daily” whether or not he only has a circumstantial case.

“Actually no, Chuck,” he said. “I can tell you that the case is more than that and I can’t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”

That sure sounded ominous. But nearly nine months later, he’s still going on talk shows and making accusations. He’s still declining to back them up. And he’s still finding friendly news organizations to broadcast his claims, even though by this time a fact-free Schiff accusation of collusion with Russians can hardly be considered news. On Sunday Jake Tapper interviewed Mr. Schiff and the CNN host did make an effort to finally get Mr. Schiff to show his cards.

New York Gets Lucky Again Three homegrown jihadists have struck the city in 14 months.

For years after the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center towers, it was a point of civic pride among New Yorkers and their stellar police department that no serious terrorist attack had succeeded again in America’s foremost urban target. Now that may be changing, which raises questions about whether the post 9/11 status quo needs to be re-examined.

Monday morning’s failed pipe bombing by Bangladeshi Akayed Ullah at rush hour near the Port Authority bus terminal is the third attack in New York City by an Islamic terrorist in the past 14 months.

On Halloween day this year, Sayfullo Saipov, a New Jersey resident, drove a truck down a lower Manhattan bicycle path and killed eight people. A year before, Ahmad Khan Rahimi, also of New Jersey, detonated a pressure cooker filled with ball bearings on a street in the downtown Chelsea neighborhood. Rahimi planted two other bombs, one nearby in Chelsea and another in Seaside, N.J. No one died but he wounded 30.

The fact that no one died in two of these incidents is little solace. Make no mistake: On Monday New York City averted a major calamity.

In won’t do to dwell on the New York terrorists’ bomb-detonation ineptitude. That’s dumb luck. The driver who plowed through pedestrians in Nice on Bastille Day last year killed 86, and the United Kingdom’s Manchester Arena suicide bomber this May killed 23 and injured more than 500 people.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said Monday morning, “This is one of my worst nightmares—a terrorist attack in the subway system.” That’s right, Governor, as it is constantly for all the millions of New Yorkers sitting in those subway cars every day.

After 9/11, two of the most significant terror-related incidents were political disputes about police surveillance. In 2007 Mitch Silber, then the NYPD’s top terrorism analyst, issued a detailed report, “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat.” Mr. Silber and co-author Arvin Bhatt were prescient, but civil liberties groups denounced his report for its “stigmatizing effects” and supposed religious profiling.

Fracking Our Way to Mideast Peace Low oil prices have so eroded Arab states’ power, they now see Israel as a protector. By Walter Russell Mead

Whatever you think of President Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, it points to the most important strategic reality in the Middle East: Arab power has collapsed in the face of low oil prices and competition from American frackers.

The devastating oil-price shocks of the 1970s, orchestrated by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, nearly wrecked the world economy. Ever since, the U.S. has looked for ways to break OPEC’s parasitic and rent-seeking grip on the oil market—and thereby to reduce America’s geopolitical vulnerability to events in the Middle East.

Victory did not come easily. Intense conservation efforts made the U.S. much more energy-efficient. New oil discoveries in Africa and elsewhere significantly broadened the available supply. Renewable energy sources added to the diversification. But the most decisive development was that decades of public and private research and investment unleashed an American oil-and-gas boom, leading to a revolution in energy markets that has sent geopolitical shocks through world affairs. The consequences reverberate in the Middle East and beyond. Future oil revenues to countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, Russia and Iraq will fall trillions of dollars short of what once might have been expected. The shift in energy markets will benefit consumer economies like Japan, China, India and the nations of the European Union. The U.S. and similarly situated nations, like Australia and Canada, can look forward to faster growth and greater foreign investment, since they will capture much of the oil revenue that Russia and OPEC lose.

Low energy prices already have given the EU’s struggling southern countries a chance to return to growth. They have limited Russia’s prospects and forced Vladimir Putin onto a tight budget. They have largely offset the gains Iran had hoped to make from signing the nuclear deal and escaping Western sanctions.CONTINUE AT SITE

Obama tries to claim credit for Trump economic boom, finally gets smacked down By Monica Showalter

One of the more obvious things about the Trump economy is how much better it is than the Obama economy.

Yet incredibly, President Obama, as if jealously looking on at this night-and-day difference, is trying to claim credit for it.

From the Washington Times:

Former President Barack Obama is taking credit for the robust economic growth that is taking place under President Trump.

At a conference of mayors in Chicago, Mr. Obama congratulated himself Tuesday for strong employment numbers in the U.S. this year, saying his climate-change policies have contributed to growth.

“As we took these actions, we saw the U.S. economy grow consistently,” Mr. Obama said. “We saw the longest streak of job creation in American history by far, a streak that still continues by the way.”

He added wryly, “Thanks, Obama.”

Investor’s Business Daily did two fine editorials on what was really going on, how and why the economy was growing, here and here, and American Thinker noted one of these editorials here. Cutting taxes, throwing out regulations, and ending the harassment of Obama-unfavored industries such as oil and coal have done wonders.

Now White House press secretary Sarah Sanders called Obama out on his bid to claim credit.

“Donald Trump’s relentless focus on tax cuts, deregulation and draining the swamp is great for job growth… with minorities, women, men and even those with low incomes, showing the best gains” https://t.co/DpvWtKlCY6

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) December 10, 2017

Since the election “the jobless rate for African Americans dropped from 8% to 7.3%, while for Hispanics it fell from 5.7% to 4.7%…and with Trump’s big tax cuts on the way, job growth isn’t likely to end soon -more good news for all Americans.” -Investor’s Business Daily

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) December 10, 2017

Can’t make it up: Obama now wants credit for the booming Trump economy. At least we can all agree the economy is better under President Trump.

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) December 10, 2017

I’m old enough to remember when President Trump’s election was going to “crash the market.” One year later: market up over 30%, two million new jobs & 1,000 new manufacturing jobs created every day just last month…and now Obama wants credit for the booming Trump economy.

— Sarah Sanders (@PressSec) December 10, 2017

Obama’s claims to credit are not new. Ben Rhodes has been crafting this “narrative” for several months now on Twitter as news after news comes out about the U.S. finally seeing better economic times under President Trump.

The Swamp against the People By James Lewis

Anybody who still believes that there is no Deep State in America might recall three major Deep State rebellions against constitutionally elected administrations in recent history.

1. The Stalin period, when communists, both overt and covert, had deeply infiltrated the State Department; the White House; and, most dangerously, the Manhattan Project of DOD, which built the first two nuclear bombs. At that time, the Communist Party of the USA was directly controlled by Stalin’s Comintern in Moscow, the international center for worldwide infiltration, sabotage, espionage, and agitation-propaganda aiming to destroy the United States and its allies. Stalin’s Comintern was especially powerful in Hollywood, in universities and the media.

2. The Watergate period, when historically anti-communist President Richard Nixon was destroyed by a revenge campaign, combining the NYT-WaPo media axis with the FBI’s Mark Felt and the Democrats (among them Hillary Clinton) to bring down the duly elected president of the U.S. by unconstitutional means.

The extra-constitutional office of the special prosecutor was made up at that time, with no constitutional warrant or standing, and indeed in direct violation of the U.S. Constitution (USC Amendments I-IV).

3. Today, we are seeing a third example of an attempted coup d’état by the Deep State and the left-controlled media, both monsters that were never imagined by the Founders. In 2016, Hillary Clinton was openly endorsed by the Communist Party USA, and Hillary never rejected that endorsement. That fact speaks for itself.

In the meantime, the corrupt media keep aiming for conservative scalps. If Roy Moore is elected to the Senate, he will be harassed and scapegoated next. That is 100 percent predictable, because for the left, the swamp, and the corrupt media, there are no credible punishments.

Today, we see another politically motivated special counsel in close cahoots with the Democratic Party and three Deep State chiefs who were recently fired by Donald J. Trump: James Comey, George Brennan, and Jim Clapper. These individuals, as well as Mr. Mueller, were appointed by Barack H. Obama, who has repeatedly expressed his open contempt for the clearly delimited powers of the U.S. Constitution.

Trump’s courage and cunning confound his opponents David Goldman

After less than a year in office, President Donald J. Trump has exceeded the expectations of his supporters and confounded his enemies.

Economic growth is accelerating, stock prices are rising, and consumer confidence is soaring. The only distressed asset in the US market is conventional wisdom, which dismissed the former real-estate developer and reality TV star as a blundering amateur.

On the contrary, Trump evinces a shrewdness about American voters better than that of any politician of his generation. Even more importantly, he has the nerve to take risks in order to draw his opponents into battles that he thinks he can win. I can think of no politician with his combination of courage and cunning since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, to whom I compared the then president-elect in a December 2016 essay for Standpoint.

In the past week alone:

– The White House shepherded its tax cut bill through the Senate and probably will have reconciled legislation from the House and Senate on the President’s desk before year-end;

– The mainstream media’s efforts to tar Trump with the charge of collusion with Russian interference in the 2016 elections flamed out in some of the most embarrassing blunders in television history;

– Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of alleged Trump collusion ran into land mines as evidence of political conflicts of interest surfaced; and

– Most impressively of all, Trump appears to have inflicted punishing losses on the National Football League, which suffered a sharp drop in viewers after the president attacked team owners for allowing players to refuse to stand for the national anthem.

It’s one thing to take on the Senate Republicans or the Federal Bureau of Investigation, quite another to persuade Americans to turn off football.

The kneeling protests of black football stars who refused to honor the national anthem may seem trivial beside the great questions of economics and national security. Trump’s adroit handling of the issue, though, shows both his political virtuosity and the fatal weakness of the Democrats, who have turned their party into the defender of racial, sexual and ethnic victimhood.

CAIR Director Outside White House: Trump ‘Empowering Christian Religious Extremism’ By Nicholas Ballasy

WASHINGTON – Nihad Awad, executive director and founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), argued that President Trump is “empowering Christian religious extremism in the United States” by announcing his intention to move the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“Donald Trump does not own Jerusalem. He does not own Palestine. He does not own one acre, one piece of soil of Palestine. What he owns, he owns Donald Trump’s towers, and he can give away Trump Tower, but not Jerusalem to the Israelis. Donald Trump has been working hard to create controversy and headline news to distract the public here and around the world from his scandals in this White House surrounding the Russia probe,” Awad said during a protest outside of the White House on Friday.

“He’s trying to create controversy strong enough to distract the attention from the fact that he and many people in his administration have been dealing a blow to our national interests, to our systems of governance,” he added. “He has been an embarrassment to our nation, an embarrassment to this White House and an embarrassment to our democracy.”

Awad referred to evangelicals as an “extremist religious group” for supporting Trump’s decision to move the embassy under a 1995 law.

“Unfortunately, he appeased an extremist religious group in the United States, the evangelicals, who somehow erroneously believe that God commands injustice by recognizing the Israeli occupation of Palestine. We challenge these evangelicals who believe in God, how come they believe in injustice against Christians and Muslims in Palestine?” Awad said at the protest.

“We believe that Donald Trump is empowering Christian religious extremism in the United States and that has to be scorned. We believe also that we as a nation can work together as we have done for ages, for decades, to oppose injustice,” he added. CONTINUE AT SITE

Campus Antisemitism and Pseudo-Intellectual Complicity By Rachel Hirshfeld

In recent decades, academics promoting pseudo intellectual studies have sought to advance the notion that antisemitism in the contemporary context, and specifically on college and university campuses, is a mere illusion, created by a group of alarmists,”[1] attempting to exaggerate the severity of threats against the Jewish community. Recently, this phenomenon received attention when the Research Group of the Concentration in Education and Jewish Studies at Stanford University published a September 2017 report, entitled “Safe and on the Sidelines: Jewish Students and the Israel-Palestine Conflict on Campus.”[2] The report, which has been presented in testimony before the US House of Representatives’ Judiciary Committee,[3] attempts to discredit the argument that colleges and universities have become “breeding” grounds and “hotspots of antisemitism.”

While the report acknowledges that “[s]ince 2014, there have been at least seven separate studies[4] dedicated to tracking campus political discourse as it pertains to antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment,” it argues that “what [these studies] offer in numerical impressions, they obscure in the subtleties of student experience.” While the existing studies –conducted by the Anti-Defamation League (2015)[5], the AMCHA Initiative (2015, 2016, 2017)[6], Barry A. Kosmin and Ariela Keysar (2015)[7], Leonard Saxe et al. (2015, 2016),[8] and others — generated extensive data and statistics, using reported incidents, surveys, polls, and questionnaires, the study by the Research Group of the Concentration in Education and Jewish Studies at Stanford University is based solely on personal interviews with sixty-six undefined students across five California university campuses[9].

In fact, the study acknowledges that it “intentionally sought out Jewish students who were either unengaged or minimally engaged in organized Jewish life,” thereby excluding students who are most likely to either be the targets of antisemitic attacks or be cognizant of antisemitism on campus. In light of these findings, this paper will illustrate that the study by the Research Group of the Concentration in Education and Jewish Studies at Stanford University contains fundamental methodological flaws, omissions, and distortions, thereby presenting a highly inaccurate and misleading account of antisemitism on campus.

Given the atmosphere on many university campuses, which often curtails and inhibits freedom of speech and dissenting views, as illustrated by Jonathan S. Tobin[10] and others, it is no surprise that the report was “approved and supervised by the Stanford University Institutional Review Board,”[11] when it, in fact, is devoid of scholarly merit. One must look no further than the cover page of the report to see that the authors include Abiya Ahmed, a former employee of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization with close political and ideological ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and Ari Y. Kelman, a member of the Academic Council of Open Hillel, which seeks to overturn Hillel International’s guidelines that proscribe partnering with anti-Israel groups or individuals. Open Hillel gives recognition to supporters of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, including Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), two of the organizations most directly responsible for creating a hostile campus environment saturated with anti-Israel sentiment.

Chanukah guide for the perplexed, 2017 Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger

Chanukah’s historical context according to the Books of the Maccabees, The Scroll of Antiochus and The War of the Jews by Joseph Ben Mattityahu (Josephus Plavius):

In 175 BCE, the Seleucid Emperor Antiochus (IV) Epiphanies of Syria (1/3 of the disintegrated Greek Empire) wished to exterminate Judaism and forcibly convert Jews to Hellenism. He suspected that the Jews were allies of his chief rival, Egypt. In 169 BCE, upon returning to Syria from a war against Egypt, he devastated Jerusalem, massacred Jews, forbade the practice of Judaism and desecrated the Temple.

The 167 BCE Jewish rebellion featured the Hasmonean (Maccabee) family: Mattityahu, a priest from Modi’in, and his five sons, Yochanan, Judah, Shimon, Yonatan and Elazar. The heroic, creative battle tactics of the Maccabees, were consistent with the reputation of Jews as superb warriors, who were frequently hired as mercenaries by Egypt, Syria, Rome and other global and regional powers. The battles of the Maccabees inspired the future Jewish rebellion against the Roman Empire: from the battle against Pompey in 63 BCE through the suppression of the Bar Kokhba Rebellion in 135 CE.

2. The name Maccabee (מכבי or מקבי) is a derivative of the Hebrew word Makevet (מקבת), power hammer in Hebrew. It is also a derivative of the Hebrew verb Cabeh (כבה), to extinguish. Maccabee, מכבי, is also the Hebrew acronym of “Who could resemble you among gods, O Jehovah” מי כמוך באלים יי)). In Latin, the C is sometimes pronounced like a TZ, and Maccabee could be the Latin spelling of the Hebrew word Matzbee, a commander-in-chief.

3. Chanukah ( חנוכהin Hebrew) celebrates the initiation/inauguration (חנוכ) of the reconstructed Temple. Chanukah (חנוכה) is education-oriented (חנוכ). A key feature of Chanukah is the education/mentoring of the family and community, recognizing education as the foundation of human behavior.

According to the First Book of Maccabees, Judah the Maccabee instituted an 8-day holiday on the 25th day of the Jewish month of Kislev 165 BCE (just like King Solomon’s 8-day celebration of the inauguration of the First Temple), in order to commemorate Jewish history, in general, and the inauguration and deliverance of the holy altar and the Temple, in particular. The Hebrew word, Chanukah, חנוכה, consists of two words, Hanu-Kah ( חנו-כהin Hebrew) which means “they camped/rested” (חנו) on the 25th day (כה equals 25 in Hebrew) of the Jewish month of Kislev.

4. The Chanukah Menorah (a 9-branched-candelabra) commemorates the legacy of the Maccabees, highlighting the prerequisites of spiritual and physical liberty, in defiance of formidable odds: value-driven faith, tenacious optimism, patriotism, attachment to roots, adherence to long-term values and interests over political-correctness and short-term convenience.