NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

RUSSIA REPORT: Three Major Take-Aways Republican members clear Trump; Object to ‘excessive and unjustified redactions’ Sara Carter

Posted By on April 29th, 2018

The House Intelligence Committee released its long-anticipated and highly redacted Russian intelligence report Friday clearing President Donald Trump’s campaign from “colluding” with Russians in the 2016 presidential election and chiding the intelligence community for “significant intelligence tradecraft failings” as the committee found no evidence to date that collusion had occurred.

The 248-page report, of which some pages were completely redacted after review by FBI and DOJ officials, have raised the ire of committee Republicans and will lead to a review of the report once again in an effort to un-redact elements of the report that the Committee says does not relate to the classified material. Numerous Congressional committees have complained openly that the DOJ and FBI continue to “stonewall” their investigations and have slow rolled documents needed for adequate oversight of the highly controversial investigations into Trump and the Bureau’s handling of former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for government business.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-CA, said in a press release that due to public interest and the importance of the report the Committee chose to make the report public. Nunes has had to threaten Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray with contempt of Congress before documents have been provided. It’s a battle that he continues to fight but one that has slowed down the progress of the Committee’s investigations, say congressional sources, familiar with the investigations.

Nunes stated in the press release that “we object to the excessive and unjustified number of redactions, many of which do not relate to classified information. The Committee will convey our objections to the appropriate agencies and looks forward to publishing a less redacted version in the near future.”
Three Major Takeaways from the Russia Report’s Findings:
1. Flynn Didn’t Lie

Former National Security Advisor Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the embattled three-star general who was fired by the White House for allegedly misleading Vice President Mike Pence about his conversation with former Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, did not lie to the FBI special agents who interviewed him at the White House in January 2017.

This is important because Flynn eventually plead guilty to one count of making false statements about his December 2016 phone conversation with Kislyak to DOJ Special Counsel Robert Mueller, “even though the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents did not detect any deception during Flynn’s interview.”

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

The Tangled Web Comey Weaves By Peter Berkowitz

Posted By on April 29th, 2018

“I explained that he could count on me to always tell him the truth. I said I don’t do sneaky things, I don’t leak, I don’t do weasel moves.” So said then-FBI Director James Comey, according to his own memo, to a recently inaugurated President Donald Trump on Jan. 27, 2017, at a private White House dinner.

In early May 2017, Trump fired Comey. Contrary to FBI policy, Comey promptly leaked four of the seven memos—at least one may have contained classified information—that he wrote concerning his conversations with the president. In short order, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself) appointed Comey’s friend and former colleague Robert Mueller as special counsel. Mueller’s task was to continue the counterintelligence investigation Comey initiated in July 2016 into possible cooperation between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Within weeks of Mueller’s appointment, Comey testified to Congress that he had hoped his leaks would trigger such a result.

Apparently, Comey did not tell the president the truth when he assured him that he doesn’t do sneaky things, he doesn’t leak, and he doesn’t do weasel moves.

Launched last week with a massive media campaign, Comey’s new book, “A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership,” aims to cement his reputation for impeccable honor and irreproachable integrity. Instead, the book confirms that on matters of great public interest, he doesn’t always tell the truth.

Any author can make mistakes. Even the most meticulous sometimes get a date wrong, blur a crucial detail, overlook an important aspect of context. And it is distressingly ordinary for a writer, on behalf of a pet point, to exaggerate small matters and minimize large ones.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

A Tale of Two Bills by Mark Steyn

Posted By on April 29th, 2018

By strange serendipity, Bill Cosby was convicted of three counts of sexual assault on the day Juanita Broaddrick marked the 40th anniversary of her rape by Bill Clinton. Mr Cosby is eighty years old and likely to die in prison; Mr Clinton is still, in every sense, at large.

Mrs Broaddrick has provided a timeline of the events of April 26th 1978. Clinton’s defenders have responded as one has come to expect. Last year, after the sudden, dizzying implosion of Harvey Weinstein, Democrats were briefly distancing themselves from the pathologies of their hero:

Steyn noted how a recent mainstream media headline read “I Believe Juanita,” referring to Juanita Broaddrick, a former nursing home administrator who says then-Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton (D) raped her.

He said he wrote the same post in February 1999…

That’s true. I did. From The National Post of Canada over 19 years ago:

He raped her. Old news. Get over it.

He raped her. Or rather (for we must observe the niceties) she alleges he raped her. That’s what Juanita Broaddrick told The Wall Street Journal last Friday. That’s what The Washington Post reported Saturday —on page one. That’s what The New York Times somewhat tardily got around to letting its readers in on yesterday — although the fastidious Times boys forebore to let the word “rape” sully their account, preferring the term “assault” and noting only that “he forced her down to the bed and had intercourse with her,” which would be rape if Mike ‘Tyson did it but with Bill Clinton qualifies merely as a marginally non-consensual relationship.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Comey Confirms: In Clinton Emails Caper, the Fix Was In By Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted By on April 29th, 2018

While promoting his memoir, A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership, former FBI director James Comey sat for what turned out to be a tough but fair and refreshingly civil interview by Bret Baier, host of Fox News’s Special Report. (See Part 1 and Part 2.) Owing to President Trump’s comparatively unhinged interview earlier in the day on Fox & Friends, the Trump–Comey feud over alleged leaking of classified information is drawing most of the media attention. But something more important is less apparent: Comey has implicitly confirmed what we’ve been saying here for well over a year: In the Clinton emails caper, the fix was in.

Before we turn first to leaking, some disclosure. I am fond of Jim Comey and have been for 30 years. I vigorously disagree with both his handling of the Clinton emails investigation and the manner in which the FBI has conducted what is supposed to be a classified, counterintelligence probe of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election — not a public, government-orchestrated campaign of insinuation that Trump was complicit in Russian perfidy.

No doubt because of my personal regard for him and respect for his high-end ability, I am inclined to cut the former director slack. He was thrust into a no-win situation: It is not his fault that Democrats nominated a criminal suspect, or that Republicans nominated an irregular politician heedless of the norms of discretion and distance that a president should maintain when dealing with his law-enforcement subordinates. Comey aside, I had no better friends in nearly 20 years as a federal prosecutor in New York than Dan Richman, the Columbia Law School prof through whom Comey transmitted information to the New York Times, and Pat Fitzgerald and Dave Kelley, Comey’s lawyers. These aren’t just former colleagues of mine; they are old friends. I haven’t tried to speak to any of them about this matter, but my esteem for them weighs on me — as does my duty to be an honest analyst. How well I resolve that tension is not for me to say; I can just tell you it is real.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Europe: Safeguard Values or Disappear by Giulio Meotti

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

We no longer replace our numbers; instead we rely on immigration to compensate for the shortfall in births. This immigration is for the most part Muslim; the effect of our demographic decline is, therefore, the Islamization of Europe.

The response of members of the political class, at least in Italy, is to shrug their shoulders, and say, “So what?” European elites believe that religion is private. However, most Muslims do not believe that religion is private, and some are working hard to create a state in which Islamic law is the legal foundation for everyone. The effect of this is already being felt across the European continent. We have more Islamic veils and mosques, and fewer cartoons of Mohammed.

Without the courage to insist on safeguarding our values, and passing our inheritance on to our children, we Europeans will simply disappear — as many groups have before. With us, however, will disappear the most enlightened civilization the world has ever known.

“We have to decide if our ethnicity, if our white race, if our society continues to exist — or if it will be wiped out.” This observation was recently made by Attilio Fontana, a politician with the anti-immigrant Northern League, who is running to govern the Italy’s northern region of Lombardy. Fontana’s remarks sparked quite a political storm. He may not have chosen the most delicate words, but he was right in pointing out the potential suicide of Europe. Italy’s problem, in fact, is not the word “race”, but the empty cradles and the crowded boats which have brought in 500,000 African migrants in a relatively short time

In Milan, Italy’s financial district and second-biggest city, there are more dogs than newborns. The city has literally “lost” half its births in a mere ten years. From 2006 to 2016, the number of children born in Milan has declined from 17,000 a year to fewer than 10,000. By comparison, in 1880 Milan had a population of 350,000, and that year, 10,000 children were born. Today, Milan is inhabited by 1,362,000 people with fewer than 10,000 new births. So, relatively, 138 years ago Milan had proportionately four times as many children as today. That is how Europe’s indigenous population will die out.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Robert Mueller’s sorry history

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

READ THE REFERENCED ARTICLE BY LOUIE GOHMERT : “ROBERT MUELLER: UNMASKED”
“Robert Mueller has a long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people that is a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence. He lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.”
https://www.scribd.com/document/377409983/Gohmert-Mueller-UNMASKED#from_embed

Several weeks ago, FBI agents raided the office of President Donald Trump’s fixer, the New York lawyer Michael Cohen, which set Australian correspondents in the US to doing what they do best: re-writing Washington Post and New York Times reports and transmitting those borrowed insights and lifted quotes to the folks back home. The popular image of your typical foreign correspondent is of an intrepid pursuer of truth, but the fact of the matter is that this applies only if a stroll to the nearest newsstand is regarded as a perilous exercise. Toss in the rather blinkered perspective of reporters operating in newsrooms where everyone shares the same politics and perspectives and, well, you get coverage like that provided by the ABC’s Anne Barker on April 11.

The Cohen raid, she wrote, demonstrates special counsel Robert Mueller (above right) “is prepared to act on information that may be well beyond the brief he was hired for”. As Mueller was engaged to explore Moscow’s alleged patronage of Mr Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, no evidence of which has been found, his interest in the current president’s 12-year-distant roll in the hay with a porn star makes her point rather neatly. Ms Barker appears not to regard Mueller’s new interest in sniffing soiled sheets as anything remarkable, let alone untoward.

What Ms Barker and others might have reported but haven’t is Mueller’s own history, which is checkered to say the least.

When leading the hunt for whoever mailed anthrax-filled letters in the days immediately after 9/11, he focused obsessively on the wrong man. This produced a $5 million settlement when it became apparent that it would take more than a concerted campaign of leaks, smears and whispered fabrications to brand virologist Steven Hatfill as the guilty party and make the label stick.

FOREIGN POLICY, ISRAEL Comments turned off

American Greatness in the Mideast Means Protecting Israel By Brandon J. Weichert

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

The American-led Middle East order is collapsing. Rival powers and regional actors now jockey for position in the region, in an attempt to form the next order there. While America’s position as the de facto regional hegemon has imploded, we still retain an immense amount of power—and, through our traditional allies in the Sunni Arab states and Israel—can help shape whatever comes next in that geostrategically vital place. For the United States to help establish a new regional order that remains relatively amenable to American national interests, the United States must protect Israel—and not just with rhetoric.

Israel is a fellow democratic state facing the same enemies that we face: Sunni jihadism and Iranian imperialism. Israel is also home to one of the world’s most capable militaries and houses one of the most dynamic economies. The United States effectively served as midwife at the birth of Israel as an independent country, so in addition to interest, we have sentiment and affection with Israel.

A Mideast without Israel would be a region that is still vitally important for the global economy and one lacking any conduit for real American influence. Loss of influence there would be a serious threat to our ability to preserve our own national independence. And make no mistake: an Israel-free Middle East is precisely what Iran (and even some of the Sunni Arab states) want.

Iran’s Genocidal Ambitions
Whereas Sunni Arab states with histories of exporting terrorism (such as Saudi Arabia) are now moving toward reform, Iran has made no effort to restrain its Islamist fervor. In fact, Iran’s constitution giddily declares that its armed forces “will be responsible not only for guarding and preserving the frontiers of the country, but also for fulfilling the ideological mission of jihad in God’s way; that is, extending the sovereignty of God’s law [Sharia] throughout the world.” As Ilan Berman observed, “Iran’s radical vision of Islamic governance . . . was intended from the start to be an export commodity.”

Antisemitism and anti-Americanism, not oil, are the true the lifeblood of Iran. More recently, the regime in Tehran has denied that the Holocaust ever happened—while simultaneously promising to usher in a new Holocaust (only this time with nuclear weapons). After the disastrous U.S. “war of choice” in Iraq, followed by our equally moronic support for regime change in Libya, Egypt, and (until Trump’s arrival) Syria, along with the Obama Administration’s foolish nuclear agreement with Iran, Israel’s position has never been more tenuous.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

You Can Limit Death’s Financial Costs, if Not the Emotional Ones The transfer of assets when a spouse dies can be fairly simple—if you learn from my mistakes. Warren Kozak

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

I pride myself on keeping meticulous financial records. But since my wife died on Jan. 1, I discovered I had made some real rookie mistakes that led to hours of extra work and substantial fees. The transfer of assets between spouses can be fairly simple—if you learn from my mistakes.

Dr. Lisa Jane Krenzel and I shared everything throughout our marriage. Like many couples, we split responsibilities. I paid the bills and made investments. She took care of our health insurance, plus the house. We maintained individual checking and savings accounts, as well as separate retirement accounts from various jobs throughout our careers. What went wrong?

• Issue One: When we opened those checking and savings accounts, we never named beneficiaries. I had assumed, incorrectly, that our accounts would simply transfer to the other in case of death. The banker who opened the accounts never suggested otherwise. With a named beneficiary, her accounts would have simply been folded into mine. Instead, I had to hire a lawyer—at $465 an hour—to petition the court to name me as the executor of her estate. I needed this power to transfer her accounts. Filing costs in New York City for the necessary document was $1,286. The running bill for the lawyer stands at $7,402.00, and I expect it to rise.

I also needed the documents for the companies that managed her retirement accounts and a mutual fund, because, as at the bank, we never named a beneficiary. By the way, this paperwork also required signature guarantees or a notary seal, which can take up an afternoon.

• Issue Two: The highly charged question of funeral and burial. Last summer, when I was told Lisa would not survive this illness, I tried to raise the issue of burial with her. She refused to have the conversation, but I quietly went ahead and purchased a plot of graves in the cemetery in Wisconsin where my parents, grandparents and great-grandparents are buried. This was something I actually did right.

EDUCATION Comments turned off

Take a Hike, Penn State By Andrew Cline

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

Penn State’s Outing Club controversy is about keeping students in a state of childhood.

Penn State University’s Outing Club can no longer organize student-led hiking and camping trips, which the club has done for 98 years. This decision is not about the inherent risk of hiking. It is about letting students be independent adults.

At first, the university explained that the outing, scuba, and caving clubs are “losing recognition due to an unacceptable amount of risk to student members that is associated with their activities,” as a university spokesperson put it.

International mockery helped the Outing Club regain recognition as a student organization, but it will not be allowed to organize trips. It can bring speakers to campus and hold meetings, but going hiking together on club-organized outings is no longer acceptable.

A university spokesperson suggested to the Centre Daily Times that alcohol use was a factor in the decision, though Outing Club says there is no alcohol use on its trips. The real reason was surely contained the sentence before the mention of alcohol use:

In addition to the inherent risks found in many of these student activities that occur without fully trained guides or leaders, the behaviors of some students on unsupervised trips have become a concern. These concerns have, at times, included the misuse of alcohol in the context of already risky activities. This mix is obviously dangerous.

EDUCATION Comments turned off

Free-Speech Lawsuit against UC Berkeley Moves Forward By Mairead McArdle

Posted By on April 28th, 2018

Conservative students at the University of California, Berkeley will be allowed to move forward with their lawsuit alleging the school discriminated against conservative speakers.

U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney ruled Wednesday that the lawsuit levied by two student groups can continue, shooting down the school’s request to dismiss it.

The Berkeley College Republicans and the Young America’s Foundation accused the school of efforts to “restrict and stifle the speech of conservative students whose voices fall beyond the campus political orthodoxy,” after two speakers they invited to campus had their events cancelled.

Conservative author Ann Coulter was bumped from a planned appearance at the school in April 2017 after angry protests by left-leaning students caused security concerns. After a national backlash, the school allowed Coulter to speak in early May during a “dead week” when many students were off campus.

Another conservative writer, David Horowitz, had a speech canceled the same month after difficulties with campus security and accommodations, and the previous February, a Milo Yiannopoulos event was also shut down over safety concerns.