Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Showing posts with label Washington Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Washington Times. Show all posts

Thursday, March 22, 2018

Pruden Tells It Like It Is

Explaining 

the Foreign Intelligence 

Surveillance Court (FISA) 

Fiasco

https://israel-commentary.org
The surveillance state is here, and to stay
Redacted from article
By Wesley Pruden – The Washington Times
February 8, 2018
The administration of Barack Obama, eager to advance the interests of Hillary Clinton, who was to be the front for his otherwise constitutionally forbidden third term, sought court approval to spy on a suspected colluder with Russians, and in doing so advanced the surveillance state that will now spy on everybody.
Everything about FISA is shady, smarmy and suspicious to the limit. The Obama administration cut corners and trashed the ethics (do not laugh) of government lawyers to get necessary warrants to pursue Carter Page, a minor Trump campaign aide and the suspected colluder.
To do that, the lawyers for Mr. Obama’s government told the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court some imaginative things about Mr. Page, none of them good and some of them more than a little naughty. But what Mr. Obama’s lawyers didn’t tell the court was that their “facts” were extracted from a dossier of unverified rumors, hearsay, gossip and street talk, put together by a British undercover man whose word and reliability the FBI would not vouch for.
Nor were the judges told that an official of the Justice Department, one Bruce Ohr, had colluded privately with the author of the dossier — and that Mr. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, had worked on the dossier. The dossier was not great literature, but it apparently was enough to keep a family together.
Most revealing of all, the dossier was originally paid for by Hillary Clinton, eager to collect campaign dirt on Donald Trump, and the Democratic National Committee, which was doing everything it could to grease the nomination for Bubba’s first lady. Mr. Obama’s lawyers were working under the mushroom theory of courtroom connivance, keep the judges in the dark and under a blanket of bovine fertilizer. Judges usually don’t like that.
But it was all in a good cause. Donald Trump had to be destroyed, lest lightning strike and he become the president of the United States. Lie, fib, fudge and make it up, and when caught at it lie some more. Everybody expects politicians to lie. Denial is the unanimous reaction on the left to “the memo” that set out some of the particulars of the chicanery uncovered by congressional committees.
“The big memo was a bust,” wrote one hyperventilating pundit in flyover country, still in a sulk that Donald Trump was elected by the Electoral College, as the Constitution provides, and not by a popular vote. The memo accomplishes “little other than prompting the preposterous second-place president to declare preposterously that somehow, amid its utter irrelevance, the memo had vindicated him.”
But what we saw, Judge Andrew Napolitano, retired from the New Jersey judiciary, observes in The Washington Times, was “a new turn as politicians engaged in cherry-picking snippets from classified raw intelligence data that support their political cases, pro-Trump and anti-Trump.”
Politicians, good ones and bad ones, are eventually deleted from the passing parade, and this, too, will pass. (So far it has no name, but only if we’re lucky will it escape being called “something-gate”). But the damage done will not pass so easily. The surveillance state, once established, is likely to be with us forever.
The implications of “something-gate” are well over the heads of the big-time mainstream legacy media, so called. Barack Obama was once a professor of constitutional law, deeply distrustful of what he agreed was a secretive “deep state,” but once in the White House he, too, recognized the usefulness of a weaponized intelligence service and even the IRS, ready to go after pesky critics. The big-time mainstream legacy media is largely dedicated now to the restoration of how it used to be, and how it must be again.
Woodward and Bernstein are footnotes now to an ancient history. There are no hungry reporters in hot pursuit of a Nixon administration or rogues in the government of Ronald Reagan. The New York Times and The Washington Post, together with the great civil libertarians, are no longer demanding accountability in inconvenient places. They oppose the disclosure of embossing public documents. The president is an inviting target and bashing him is great fun.
The watchdogs have gone to sleep, lest they see something they don’t want anybody to talk about.
• Wesley Pruden is editor in chief emeritus of The Times.

Saturday, February 24, 2018

Sometimes The Facts Don't Agree With The Argument

PM Pulls Rug From Under Libs Who Love Aussie Gun Laws

Australian PM Shatters Libs Narrative On Gun Control
 
 Print
The anti-gun crowd in the United States often holds up Australia as a model of what America should be… but trying to emulate “the land down under” may not be a perfect solution after all.
Australia’s prime minister met with President Trump on Friday, but made a surprising statement: He doesn’t actually recommend his country’s gun laws here in the states.
“You have an amendment to your Constitution which deals with gun ownership. You have a very, very different history (with guns),” Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said during a press conference with Trump, according to The Washington Times.
Turnbull acknowledged that the U.S. had some decisions to make on its gun policy, but took a fairly prudent stance of respecting that America was in a different position and declining to lecture the president.
“We certainly don’t presume to provide, you know, policy or political advice on that matter here,” Prime Minister Turnbull said. “I will focus on our own political arguments and debates and wish you wise deliberation in your own.”

Conservative Tribune Daily Email

Facebook
 
Australia has much more strict gun laws than the United States. The country’s “solution” some 22 years ago was exactly what Second Amendment supporters fear: Mass gun confiscation.
“Between 1996 and September 1997, around 650,000 privately owned guns were confiscated in a mandatory buyback following a shooting in a cafĂ©,” explained Metro UK. Other outlets estimate that the number was closer to one million firearms.
At the time, Australian Prime Minister John Howard “introduced major gun reform the National Firearms Agreement, which included complete bans on certain weapons, permits for new firearms, and registering owned guns,” the newspaper continued.
Did it work? The results are mixed.

Would Australia-style gun laws stop shootings here?

 
Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Tribune news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Pundits pointed to a decline in murders and homicides after the ban went into effect, but failed to admit that these statistics had already been declining before the huge gun grab began.
“Firearm homicides and suicides were falling from the mid-1980s onwards, so you could pick out any subsequent year and the average firearm homicide and suicide rates after that year would be down compared to the average before it,” explained John R. Lott in an opinion piece published by Fox News.
“But the decline in firearm homicides and suicides actually slowed down after the buyback,” he continued. In other words, there just wasn’t a direct correlation.
“For other crimes, such as armed robbery, what happened is the exact opposite of what was predicted. The armed robbery rate soared right after the gun buyback, then gradually declined,” stated Lott, who is a gun policy expert and author of several books on the subject.
RELATED: Trump Gives Audience Rare, Up-Close Look at His Hair
It is true that Australia has thankfully not had to deal with mass shootings on a scale that America does. However, other countries that have similarly strict gun control laws still have problems with shootings, making it unlikely that it’s a one-size-fits-all solution.
“European countries such as Belgium, France and the Netherlands have even stricter gun control laws than Australia does, but their mass public shooting rates are at least as high as those in the United States,” stated Lott’s Fox News piece.
“During the Obama administration, the per capita casualty rate from shootings in the European Union was actually 27 percent higher than the U.S. rate,” he summarized. This bombshell fact is conveniently swept under the rug by gun control advocates.
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull made a smart choice by not jumping on the sanctimonious bandwagon to lecture the American people about their gun laws.
He has apparently realized what so many in the mainstream media fail to admit: The two allied nations are not identical, and seizing the firearms of law-abiding citizens is not a magic solution to stopping crime.
Press “Share on Facebook” if you believe America needs to stay on its own path.
What is your response to the Australian leader's words? 

Tuesday, June 20, 2017

Trump Is Proven Right Again. Media Will Poo Poo It.

TRUMP WAS RIGHT: NEW STUDY REVEALS UP TO 5.7 MILLION ILLEGALS VOTED IN ELECTION

Media claimed illegals voting was "fake news"

9
0
A new study reveals that up to 5.7 million illegal immigrants were likely to have voted in the 2008 election, meaning Donald Trump was almost certainly right when he said this was the reason for him losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in the 2016 race.
After Trump made the claim that votes by millions of illegal immigrants cost him the popular vote, he was lambasted by the press, who blamed an Infowars story published on November 14 in which we reported that around 3 million illegals voted.
Ever since then, Trump’s assertion that millions of illegals voted has been called a “fake news” conspiracy theory.
Back in January, the New York Times again called Trump’s claim a “lie,” however a new study shows that if anything we underestimated the number of illegals who voted.
“A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at post-election polling data and concluded that the number of noncitizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates,” reports the Washington Times.
Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team of researchers looked at data from a Harvard/YouGov study which includes a sample size of tens of thousands of voters, including non-citizens who admit they are not eligible to vote.
Agresti concluded that as many as 5.7 million illegals voted in 2008,a far higher figure than previously thought. In 2012, the figure was as high as 3.6 million.
“The details are technical, but the figure I calculated is based on a more conservative margin of sampling error and a methodology that I consider to be more accurate,” Mr. Agresti told The Washington Times.
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 3 million. If we take the 2008 figure and subtract that from her total, Trump would have easily won the popular vote.
Vice President Mike Pence is currently leading an investigation into voter fraud in the 2016 presidential election. If his findings replicate Agresti’s, the media is going to have egg on its face once again.

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Cinco De Mayo Gets The Trump Boot. Why Celebrate A Mexican Holiday?


Report: Trump Issues Surprise Orders on Mexican Holiday… Libs Will Be Irate


 Print

Under the past two administrations, there has been an official celebration of Mexico’s Cinco de Mayo holiday at the White House, but that tradition has come to an end under the current “America First” administration of President Donald Trump.
The Hill reported that the 16-year-old tradition will instead be a much smaller affair held somewhere other than the White House and will feature Vice President Mike Pence as the host.
The reported modification of the White House celebration of the Mexican holiday was initially revealed by Spanish-language media outlet La Opinion, which noted that there had been no official announcement of any change in plans and cited unnamed government sources. The White House did not respond to requests for comment, according to The Hill.

Hispanic activists weren’t pleased.
“The decision of the White House to renounce the celebration of Cinco de Mayo is another slap for many Mexican Americans and Latinos,” complained Felix Sanchez, co-founder and president of the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts. “Instead of embracing our nation’s multicultural heritage, we are deepening divisions, not looking for common ground.”
The tradition of hosting a big event celebrating Cinco de Mayo at the White House began under former President George W. Bush and was continued under his successor, former President Barack Obama, who welcomed some 500 guests, a celebrity chef and popular Mexican band to the celebration in 2016.

That occurred at the same time that then-candidate Trump posted his now infamous “taco bowl” tweet in honor of the Mexican holiday, a tweet that was criticized by many Hispanics, Mexicans and of course, the liberal media.
Here is the tweet that drew so much condemnation and accusations of racism toward Hispanics, in case you had forgot:


As for the reported decision by the Trump administration not to hold a Cinco de Mayo celebration on White House grounds this year, honestly who can blame them? It likely would have sparked outrage and boycotts and harsh criticisms, much like everything else the administration does.

Meanwhile, the only Cinco de Mayo celebrations that have been officially canceled thus far are those held in various cities around the country by Mexican-Americans, amid fears that immigration agents will monitor the events and round up any illegal immigrants in attendance, according to a report from The Washington Times.
It is worth noting that the Cinco de Mayo holiday — which marks the date in 1862 of the Battle of Puebla, during which the Mexican army held off invading French forces — is typically only solemnly observed in Mexico, with Mexican-Americans and others in the U.S. being the ones treating the holiday as an occasion for festive celebration. (Mexico’s real Independence Day is Sept. 16.)
Though Trump-haters will be upset at the lack of celebration at the White House, they would have been upset regardless, so this move should be viewed less as an effort to offend Mexicans and more likely an effort to either poke the liberal media or simply not waste time on a non-American holiday that isn’t even really celebrated in its country of origin.
Please share this on Facebook and Twitter to let everyone know of the reports that the White House won’t be holding an official Cinco de Mayo celebration.
What do you think of this report about the Trump White House and Cinco de Mayo?