Monday, March 19, 2018

Louis Farrakhan’s Anti-Semitism Reveals More Inconsistency On The Left


Photo: Louis Farrakhan

Hostility and prejudice towards Jewish people is obviously nothing new in our country or the world. 

It is actually quite interesting to note that there are neo-Nazis and Black radical extremists, who while simultaneously hating one another, share common ground with both groups having a fanatical distaste for Jewish people.  

With this in mind, this form of bigotry has been the impetus for some political rumblings in the media as of late.

The Daily Caller has revealed the number of politicians with direct connections to Minister Louis Farrakhan, the 84-year-old leader of the Nation of Islam, who has been known for his hostile remarks toward the Jewish people in the past.

Some have gone on to denounce Farrakhan and/or his statements recently.  However, there are still those who have maintained a relationship with him in spite of the vile remarks that he has made about this particular people group.

Farrakhan’s history of anti-Semitism

In 2014, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) detailed Farrakhan’s anti-semitism and what they call his “anti-white theology.”  

The SPLC may not always be correct in their assessments of other well-known individuals or organizations, especially those with a conservative viewpoint, but they seem to hit the nail on the head when analyzing Farrakhan and his own controversial statements from the past.  

The page about Farrakhan on their site gives his “extremist info,” his background, and quotes from him going back to 1990.

With a video he made and a certainly debatable remark from 1990 — “The Jews, a small handful, control the movement of this great nation, like a radar controls the movement of a great ship in the waters … the Jews got a stranglehold on the Congress.” — one may ask the question: did he ever list out the evidence that he has against Jewish people?

Inconsistencies on the left regarding Farrakhan

Even with there being a history of disputable assertions by Farrakhan, politicians, like Democratic California Rep. Maxine Waters, have not condemned him.  

Also, as pointed out by The Daily Caller, Minnesota Representative and Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison continued to meet with Farrakhan, even after having condemned him earlier in 2006.

CNN’s Jake Tapper made a good point about condemning Farrakhan’s bigotry through a recent social media post.

James Hasson, a Contributor for The Federalist, actually pointed back to previous social media posts by Farrakhan to reveal the “bile” that he is known for uttering.

If Trump was seen taking pictures and shaking hands with White supremacists, like David Duke and Richard Spencer, then the Left would be having a field day about his apparent racism and ties to racists. 

Therefore, for them to keep some supposed air of moral superiority over Republicans or conservatives, they must remain consistent and denounce the anti-semitism of Minister Farrakhan.

How can Rep. Maxine Walters blast Trump over the white supremacy displayed in Charlottesville and allow bigotry in another name slide?  Rep. Ellison once said about Trump:

I have to come to a conclusion, based on all of the behavior I’ve seen out of Donald Trump, that the reason he is reluctant to denounce white supremacy and neo-Nazis and Klan members is because he has some level of sympathy for them.

So, if we use Ellison’s logic against itself in this situation, then can we ascertain from his reluctance to completely denounce Farrakhan’s prejudice (and avoid meeting with him until there is change or an expression of regret from Farrakhan) that he sympathizes with this form of prejudice?

Any rational individual who is against any form of bigotry is against all forms of bigotry.

Jerome Danner is a member of Project 21, an initiative of The National Center for Public Policy Research.  Follow him on Twitter and Facebook for more of his thoughts and commentary.  For more of Jerome’s writing, please check out his website.

Saturday, March 17, 2018

SHOCKWAVE: FBI Deputy Director McCabe Fired By AG Sessions!

Former FBI official Andrew McCabe.  (Associated Press)

Trump calls fired McCabe ‘choirboy’, suggests FBI corruption ‘at the highest levels’

President Trump called Andrew McCabe a 'choirboy' as he lauded the former acting FBI Director's firing, suggesting multiple federal reports show “corruption at the highest level.”

“Andrew McCabe FIRED, a great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI - A great day for Democracy. Sanctimonious James Comey was his boss and made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!” Trump tweeted hours after Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the dismissal.

McCabe was fired just days before he would have been eligible for a lifetime pension after it was determined that he lied to investigators reviewing the bureau’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.

"Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately," Sessions said in a statement.

He went to say that after reviewing the reports, it was “McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.”

"The FBI expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. As the OPR proposal stated, 'all FBI employees know that lacking candor under oath results in dismissal and that our integrity is our brand,'" Sessions said.

Soon after his firing, McCabe hit back in a fiery response of his own.

"This attack on my credibility is one part of a larger effort not just to slander me personally, but to taint the FBI, law enforcement, and intelligence professionals more generally," McCabe said. "It is part of this Administration’s ongoing war on the FBI and the efforts of the Special Counsel investigation, which continue to this day. Their persistence in this campaign only highlights the importance of the Special Counsel’s work.”

McCabe said he and his family have been the targets of unrelenting attacks on their reputation and his service to the U.S.

"Articles too numerous to count have leveled every sort of false, defamatory and degrading allegation against us,” he said. “The President’s tweets have amplified and exacerbated it all. He called for my firing. He called for me to be stripped of my pension after more than 20 years of service. And all along we have said nothing, never wanting to distract from the mission of the FBI by addressing the lies told and repeated about us. No more."

McCabe's firing marked a stunning fall for a man who was No. 2 at the bureau for a time under former FBI Director James Comey, ran it and even was reportedly on Trump’s short list for the directorship.

But McCabe has also been mired in controversy in recent years.

Sessions’ decision to fire McCabe came as Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded a bureau oversight investigation, with a report expected to be critical of McCabe’s handling of the Clinton email probe, his handling of the bureau during the early months of the Russia investigation, and his ties to the Democratic Party.

Horowitz determined that McCabe hadn't been forthcoming in regard to the handling of the FBI’s probe into Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state in the Obama administration.

The inspector general’s finding sparked an FBI disciplinary process that recommended McCabe’s firing.

Horowitz’s investigation, which landed McCabe in hot water, faults the former deputy director for the way he answered questions about his approval for interactions between an FBI official and a reporter about the bureau’s investigation into the nonprofit Clinton Foundation.

McCabe was “removed” from his post as deputy to FBI Director Christopher Wray in January, setting in motion a plan to leave the bureau after months of conflict-of-interest complaints from Republicans — including President Trump.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Thursday that the decision was entirely up to Sessions, but that McCabe was a "bad actor."

"That's a determination we [left] up to Attorney General Sessions, but we do think that it is well documented that he has had some very troubling behavior and has been a bad actor," Sanders said.

“FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe is racing the clock to retire with full benefits. 90 days to go?!!!” Trump tweeted in December, before McCabe’s removal.

McCabe became acting director of the FBI after Trump fired Comey on May 9, 2017. McCabe led the bureau, independently, until Aug. 2, 2017 — during the early months of the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates.

Republicans have also long criticized McCabe for his ties to the Democratic Party — his wife received donations during a failed 2015 Virginia Senate run from a group tied to a Clinton ally, former Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe — all while the Clinton email probe was underway.

“How can FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, the man in charge, along with leakin’ James Comey, of the Phony Hillary Clinton investigation (including her 33,000 illegally deleted emails) be given $700,000 for wife’s campaign by Clinton Puppets during investigation?” the president tweeted in December.

The president was “not a part of the decision making process,” when McCabe was removed from the bureau in January, press secretary Sanders said.

McCabe returned to the white-hot spotlight when Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee released its memo on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) abuses in connection with the Russia probe, saying that McCabe signed a FISA warrant targeting former Trump campaign volunteer adviser Carter Page.

“McCabe testified before the committee in December 2017 that no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the [FISA court] without the Steele dossier information,” the memo read. The Steele dossier was unverified, and financed as opposition research by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign.

And recently uncovered text messages between FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page revealed a new timeline in the Clinton email probe, apparently showing McCabe’s knowledge of the investigation.

The text messages suggest that as of Sept. 28, 2016, Strzok, Page and McCabe were aware of new Clinton emails found on the laptop of disgraced former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner, spouse of Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

“Got called up to Andy’s earlier … hundreds of thousands of emails turned over by Weiner’s atty to sdny, includes a ton of material from spouse. Sending team up tomorrow to review…this will never end …” Strzok wrote in a text message to Page.

But it wasn’t until Oct. 27, 2016 that Comey was briefed on the newly discovered emails — meaning McCabe kept the director in the dark for a month.

Horowitz is specifically investigating McCabe and whether he wanted to avoid taking action on the laptop findings until after the presidential election, in which Clinton lost to Trump.

According to testimony obtained by Fox News from an Office of Special Counsel interview with former Comey Chief of Staff James Rybicki, McCabe’s office did not notify him until the night of Oct. 26, 2016.

The OSC also interviewed FBI Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson, who testified that Comey was first briefed on the material found on Weiner’s laptop on Oct. 27, 2016.

Anderson noted that the director’s office decided to “urgently” address the situation.

“Given the significance of the matter, um, uh, that we had to proceed quickly,” Anderson told investigators. “It was just too, too explosive for us to sit on.”

So it wasn’t until Oct. 28, 2016, that Comey sent a letter to Congress announcing the “recent developments” of the discovery of the Clinton and Abedin communications found on the laptop —which he had just been briefed on a day before. That letter reopened the Clinton email probe just a week before the election. The inspector general is investigating McCabe’s involvement in this timeline.

Several Republicans also have pointed with alarm to the Strzok-Page texts and their references to McCabe in relation to an “insurance policy” to prevent Trump from being elected president, and a “secret society” within the bureau.

Brooke Singman is a Politics Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter at @brookefoxnews.

Friday, March 16, 2018

Lessons From the Rise of America’s Irish

By Jason L. Riley 

They arrived dirt poor and uneducated in the 1840s. After decades of struggle, they achieved prosperity.

Every year in the runup to St. Patrick’s Day, the Census Bureau releases a demographic profile of Irish-Americans. 

For anyone familiar with the arduous history of the Irish in this country, the progress report is an annual reminder of America’s ability to assimilate newcomers in search of a better life.

It was the potato famine that began driving large numbers of Irish to leave home in the late 1840s. This migration, along with mass starvation and disease, would eventually cost Ireland around a third of its population. Some went to Great Britain, but the overwhelming majority came to America. 

Today the number of Americans of Irish descent (32.3 million) is nearly seven times as large as the population of Ireland (4.7 million).

The peasants fleeing Ireland had a shorter life expectancy than slaves in the U.S., many of whom enjoyed healthier diets and better living quarters. Most slaves slept on mattresses, while most poor Irish peasants slept on piles of straw. 

The black scholar W.E.B. Du Bois wrote that freed slaves were poor by American standards, “but not as poor as the Irish peasants.”

The Irish who left for America were packed into the unused cargo space of wind-driven ships returning to the U.S., and the voyage could take up to three months, depending on weather. These cargo holds weren’t intended to carry passengers, and the lack of proper ventilation and sanitation meant that outbreaks of typhus, cholera and other fatal diseases were common.

Emigrants slept on 3-by-6-foot shelves, which one observer described as “still reeking from the ineradicable stench left by the emigrants of the last voyage.”

In 1847, 19% of the Irish emigrants died on their way to the U.S. or shortly after arriving. By comparison, the average mortality rate on British slave ships of the period was 9%. Slave-owners had an economic incentive to keep slaves alive. No one had such an interest in the Irish.

The 19th-century immigrants from Europe usually started at the bottom, both socially and economically, and the Irish epitomized this trend. Irish men worked as manual laborers, while Irish women were domestic servants. 

But not all ethnic groups rose to prosperity at the same rate, and the rise of the Irish was especially slow. They had arrived from a country that was mostly rural, yet they settled in cities like Boston and New York, working “wherever brawn and not skill was the chief requirement,” as one historian put it. In the antebellum South, the Irish took jobs—mining coal, building canals and railroads—considered too hazardous even for slaves.

In the 1840s, New York City’s population grew 65%. By midcentury, more than half of the city’s residents were immigrants, and more than a quarter of those newcomers had come from Ireland. At the time, half of New York’s Irish workforce and nearly two-thirds of Boston’s were either unskilled laborers or domestic servants. “No other contemporary immigrant group was so concentrated at the bottom of the economic ladder,” writes Thomas Sowell in his classic work, “Ethnic America.”

It wasn’t just a lack of education and urban job skills that slowed the progress of the Irish in America. So did social pathology and discrimination. The Irish were known for drinking and brawling. Irish gangs were common. 

When an Irish family moved into a neighborhood, property values fell and other residents fled. Political cartoonists gave Irishmen dark skin and simian features. Anti-Catholic employers requested “Protestant” applicants. Want ads read: “Any color or country except Irish.”

Yet none of these obstacles proved insurmountable. Charitable organizations, such as the Irish Emigrant Society, emerged. Temperance societies formed to address alcoholism. 

The Catholic Church took a leading role in tackling poverty, illiteracy and other social problems through the creation of orphanages and hospitals and schools. For millions of Irish immigrants, the church was not simply a place of worship. It was the focal point of the community.

According to the Census Bureau, today’s Irish-Americans boast poverty rates far below the national average and median incomes far exceeding it. The rates at which they graduate from high school, complete college, work in skilled professions, and own homes are also better than average. 

What’s so remarkable about this social and economic trajectory among the Irish is how many times it has been replicated among other immigrant groups.

Whether this kind of upward mobility is still possible today given the changes to our economy and culture is an open question. My guess is that it’s still possible but more difficult—not because of our modern economy, but because of our modern attitudes toward assimilation. 

The type of Americanization of newcomers that once was encouraged is now rejected by activists who push for bilingual education, Spanish-language ballots and the like. The multiculturalists have turned assimilation into a dirty word. Perhaps they’re the ones we should be deporting.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

BREAKING: Tragedy In Miami - Footbridge Collapses and Causes Death


Russia Scandal: Did Obama Tutor Hillary Clinton In Electoral Conspiracy 101?

Investor's Business Daily Editorial

Trump Dossier: With each new revelation, a picture of the Russian scandal emerges: Not only were Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee up to their necks in collusion with Russians to undermine then-candidate Donald Trump, but President Obama was in on the action, too. Is this where collusion becomes conspiracy?

See if this sounds familiar: Democratic presidential campaign pays international law firm Perkins Coie, which then turns around and pays left-wing opposition research firm Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on the campaign's political opponent.

Sounds just like what Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee did in 2016, right?

In fact, Hillary was a Janey-come-lately to that ploy. Obama did it first in 2012. Using his Obama for America campaign front, Obama paid Perkins Coie close to a million dollars, which was reportedly used to pay — who else — Fusion GPS to find salacious stuff about Obama's foe in the 2012 election, the ultra-square Mitt Romney.

But, according to a new book by progressive journalists Michael Isikoff and David Corn, "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and Donald Trump's Election," not only did Fusion do opposition research, something every campaign does, it also did aggressively hostile opposition donor research.

"In 2012, then-President Obama had an 'enemies list' on his campaign website with the names of Mitt Romney's biggest donors," noted PJ Media's Debra Heine.

That enemies list was placed on the Obama campaign's Orwellian "Truth Team" web site. The site called them a "group of wealthy individuals with less-than-reputable records. Quite a few have been on the wrong side of the law, others have made profits at the expense of so many Americans..."

That kind of vilification of decent, law-abiding, successful Americans is bad enough. But to drive home the intimidation, each of the names on the list was subsequently tweeted out from the @TruthTeam2012 twitter feed, along with their supposed misdeeds, most of which really amounted merely to tough or unpopular business decisions they had to make.

Obama "relied on a vast grassroots network to coerce, bully, boycott and vilify individuals lawfully taking part in the political process, just as his own donors and supporter are freely allowed to engage," wrote the Daily Signal back in 2012.

Imagine for a moment the chilling effect that would have on a political foe's campaign — calling those who fund another campaign's candidate "enemies," with all that entails. The IRS, the SEC, the FBI, the Justice Department, all with active prosecution arms, all headed by Obama loyalists. To say it's an act of political and personal intimidation is an understatement.

Obama's fingerprints go beyond that, however.

The Isikoff-Corn book suggests that the infamous relationship between former British spy Christopher Steele, Fusion GPS and the FBI  was forged by Obama officials at the State Department — in particular former Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland, who gave permission to the FBI to talk to Steele in London, and former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Jonathan Winer, who "worked as a middleman to bring Mr. Steele together with Sidney Blumenthal, a fierce Hillary Clinton defender. Mr. Winer spoke with Ms. Nuland, who gave a heads up to Secretary of State John Kerry."

How much do you want to bet that Kerry, a cabinet member, reported all this to former President Obama?

By the way, both Nuland and Winer worked for Clinton at the State Department, and both have since left. 

And the notorious Trump dossier that resulted from putting Steele together with the FBI, Fusion and the Clinton campaign led to a wiretap of the Trump campaign and also now serves as the centerpiece of a year-and-a-half long Mueller investigation into Trump — one that has now spilled over its boundaries, looking into things that have nothing to do with Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

The genius of it all is that, at the same time they were using spurious Russian contacts to smear Trump's name, they were also launching the FBI investigation into phony allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians in 2016. 

The only collusion, in short, was between the Clinton campaign, Steele and the Russians.

But what we now see clearly is this entire scheme wasn't just cooked up by a Nixonian Hillary Clinton, trying her best to destroy her political foe. 

No, it was part of a pattern set by President Obama and copied by his able student, Hillary. 

The Obama-adoring media knew what Obama had done in 2012, but barely bothered to report at the time.

This goes beyond mere creepy political collusion, or dirty campaign capers. It suggests a broader Democratic scheme to use government resources to hamstring opposition political campaigns and, now, to destroy a presidency.

And this conspiracy spans two presidential campaign cycles and two separate opposition presidential candidates, using remarkably similar tactics and even the same law firm and research operation. With a number of government officials knowingly involved, this, in short, reeks of conspiracy to subvert the election process.

Wednesday, March 14, 2018

Meghan McCain Calls the Clintons 'A Virus' Over Hillary's Latest Remarks on Trump Voters

By Lauretta Brown | Townhall

Meghan McCain called the Clintons a “virus” on “The View” Tuesday in response to remarks Hillary Clinton made in India Monday calling Trump voters racist and sexist. 

McCain also said Clinton’s messaging is maybe not the best for the Democratic party coming into the midterm elections.

"His whole campaign: 'Make America Great Again' was looking backwards,” Hillary told a crowd in Mumbai of Trump. “You know, you didn't like black people getting rights, you don't like women, you know, getting jobs, you don't want to you know see that Indian American succeeding more than you are, whatever your problem is, I'm going to solve it.' So it was a symptom."

“She ran one of the worst campaigns ever,” McCain said in response to Clinton’s remarks, “she didn’t do the kind of ground game in Wisconsin and North Carolina that she should have. I think at this point if you can’t stop making this about virtue-signaling and race, a lot of it was about poverty, a lot of it was about the economy, a lot of it was this anti-Washington sentiment, anti-establishment sentiment that we should’ve seen growing within the Tea Party.”

“Honestly, I have to tell you,” she added. “It’s one thing to lose to President Obama. It’s an entirely other thing to pull off losing to President Trump. And you gotta come up with a better excuse than this.”

McCain warned that Hillary’s messaging could backfire in the upcoming midterm elections.

 “If your messaging is that you want to go back in time, that women can’t think for themselves, that our husbands, and our bosses, and our sons tell us what to do, that’s quite the message going forward into midterms and [the] general election,” she said.

“The Clintons are a virus in the Democratic Party. You have to move on,” she said.

"View" host Joy Behar partially agreed with McCain.

“Well I thought that it was time for them to back off right now,” Behar agreed, “I don’t think that they’re helping the party right now.”

Democrat Adopts Trump Agenda To Win In Pennsylvania


Also In the News