We just might get that Trump-Sanders race

By Glenn Harlan Reynolds

Hillary Clinton's email woes grow while Sanders gains and Trump stays strong.

Back last summer, I wrote about the prospects for a Trump-Sanders 2016 race. Trump, of course, remains atop all of the polls for the GOP nomination. And now Bernie Sanders is crushing Hillary Clinton in CNN/WMUR's latest New Hampshire poll, 60% to 33%. That's right, Bernie has a 27-point lead among New Hampshire Democrats.

There's no question that Hillary is in real trouble. As Peter Wehner noted in Commentary, "Mrs. Clinton is now running as basically the third term of President Obama. She may tweak what he did here and there, but she is fully embracing Mr. Obama. In an election year in which anger and disgust at the political establishment and business as usual are dominant, and in which only a quarter of the American people believe the country is headed in the right direction, that is a dangerous strategy to adopt. In addition, there's a historical burden Mrs. Clinton faces: Since 1948, a political party has won three straight presidential elections only once, when George H.W. Bush succeeded Ronald Reagan, who was much more popular at the end of his second term than, in all likelihood, Mr. Obama will be."

With the Middle East on fire and the U.S. economy looking shaky, the "Obama's third term" strategy isn't looking very good. But Hillary was part of his administration, so what else can she do?

She also faces increasing legal problems. In particular, as the email story trickles out, it's now clear that she had beyond top secret material on her secret personal email server. As Politico reports: "In a copy of the Jan. 14 correspondence obtained by Politico, Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough III told both the Senate Intelligence and Senate Foreign Relations committees that intelligence agencies found messages relating to what are known as 'special access programs,' or SAP. That's an even more restricted subcategory of sensitive compartmented information, or SCI, which is top secret national security information derived from sensitive intelligence sources."

As intelligence experts like to point out, normal federal employees would face career-ending consequences, if not prison, for this sort of mishandling of classified information, which made it easy for foreign nations to learn extremely important secrets about U.S. intelligence - and U.S. methods of gathering intelligence. In Charles Krauthammer's view, what Hillary did is worse than what Edward Snowden did: "What people have to understand is that there is nothing higher, more secret than an SAP. And that, from some people I've talked to, this is worse than what Snowden did, because he didn't have access to SAP. And that, if this is compromised, this is so sensitive, that the reason - and the reason it is is that, as a result, if it's compromised, people die. It also means that operations that have been embedded for years and years get destroyed and cannot be reconstituted."

Hillary used this insecure private-server setup, it seems clear to me, because she wanted to be sure that emails she sent as secretary of State wouldn't be available under Freedom of Information Act requests that might hurt her politically. (Under the Freedom of Information Act, the government doesn't have to turn over emails that aren't in its physical possession. Former secretary of State Henry Kissinger gamed the system to keep his correspondence out of public hands, but not in a way that was deemed to have made secrets vulnerable to foreign espionage.)

Hillary, on the other hand, chose a method of protecting herself politically that exposed the nation to serious harm. Even if she escapes indictment (she's a Clinton, and hence presumptively above the law), this will hurt her, and help Bernie. And if she's indicted, well, Bernie's prospects are looking awfully good.

Meanwhile, no Republican candidate has yet managed to gain sufficient traction against Trump, who just got an endorsement from fellow anti-establishmentarian Sarah Palin. So will it be a Trump-Sanders race after all? It's looking likelier by the day.


Glenn Harlan Reynolds, a University of Tennessee law professor, is the author of The New School:
How the Information Age Will Save American Education from Itself, and a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors


http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/01/20/glenn-reynolds-hillary-clinton-emails-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-column/79054166/

Hillary For Prison?

 

Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted?

Commentary
By Frances Rice

The below articles make it quite clear that Hillary Clinton committed a felony and should be indicated. The most damning sentence is in the article "Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs" by Catherine Herridge and Pamela Browne that reads as follows.

"The former federal law enforcement official said the finding in the January IG letter represents a potential violation of USC 18 Section 793, "gross negligence" in the handling of secure information under the Espionage Act."

__________________________

SIREN: IG Says Hillary's Server Contained Material 'Even More Sensitive' Than Top Secret
Guy Benson

If this early January development was a bombshell, today's revelation is a nuclear bombshell. Hillary Clinton's improper, unsecure email server appears to have endangered national security even more than previously thought -- and her excuses continue to melt away under intensifying scrutiny. Extremely serious findings from the intelligence community's Inspector General, reported exclusively by Fox News' Catherine Herridge:

Hillary Clinton's emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers.

Fox News exclusively obtained the text of the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified "several dozen" additional classified emails -- including specific intelligence known as "special access programs" (SAP). That indicates a level of classification beyond even "top secret," the label previously given to two emails found on her server, and brings even more scrutiny to the presidential candidate's handling of the government's closely held secrets...

Intelligence from a "special access program," or SAP, is even more sensitive than that designated as "top secret" - as were two emails identified last summer in a random sample pulled from Clinton's private server she used as secretary of state. Access to a SAP is restricted to those with a "need-to-know" because exposure of the intelligence would likely reveal the source, putting a method of intelligence collection -- or a human asset -- at risk.

Currently, some 1,340 emails designated "classified" have been found on Clinton's server, though the Democratic presidential candidate insists the information was not classified at the time. "There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material," a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. "It is the most sensitive of the sensitive."

Hillary's campaign unsuccessfully attempted to dispute the IG's previous determination that her woefully under-secure bootleg server contained intelligence deemed 'top secret;; this is even worse. Her already-dubious and legally-irrelevant "marked classified" excuse suffers another crushing blow.

The [SAP] programs are created when "the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional," and "the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved," it states.

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding "unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling ... could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation." Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

She sure did.

No wonder officials inside the FBI are reportedly champing at the bit; for an indictment. Her conduct makes Petraeus' criminal but limited indiscretions look like child's play. In case you'd forgotten, Mrs. Clinton insisted last year that no classified material whatsoever had passed through her private server. That lie, one of several has now been disproven more than 1,300 times and today's news marks another devastating disclosure. America's top diplomat trafficked in the most sensitive US intelligence secrets that exist via her private server, which she'd been explicitly and urgently warned  was uniquely vulnerable to foreign penetration.

This isn't about breaking some arcane rules or fudging some statements to deflect a political headache. This is about high-level state secrets being willfully and recklessly compromised by a powerful cabinet secretary in a hair-brained scheme to protect her political ambitions. And yes, it was willful. Her inner circle knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that her email arrangement was a serious problem.

The Congressional committees that received the IG's unclassified assessment should make the memo public. It seems as though Hillary Clinton is about to face more unwelcome questions.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/01/19/bombshell-ig-says-hillarys-server-contained-dozens-of-beyond-top-secret-emails-n2106802?utm_source=thdailypm&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl_pm&newsletterad=

_____________________

At this point, it might make a difference
By Scott Johnson

Catherine Herridge reports the findings of the Intelligence Community Inspector General's summary of intelligence agencies' review to date of the information in Hillary Clinton's unsecured emails. Herridge notes that the IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and State Department inspector general. It's a shame the subject has made Bernie Sanders sick. It has considerably more merit than his usual socialist shtick. This seems like a big deal:

Hillary Clinton's emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers.

Fox News exclusively obtained the text of the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified "several dozen" additional classified emails - including specific intelligence known as "special access programs" (SAP).

That indicates a level of classification beyond even "top secret," the label previously given to two emails found on her server, and brings even more scrutiny to the presidential candidate's handling of the government's closely held secrets.

Herridge injects this evocative remembrance of things past:

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding "unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling ... could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation."

Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.
Fox News is told that the recent IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and State Department inspector general.
Herridge turned to a former senior law enforcement source with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures for comments.

She concludes her report with his comment that the finding in the IG letter represents a potential violation of section 793 of the Espionage Act prohibiting "gross negligence" in the handling of secure information under the Espionage Act.

The IG letter itself hasn't been made public yet, but it won't stay under wraps for long and at this point, it might make a difference. Might.

Herridge's report is below and the whole thing is must reading.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/01/at-this-point-it-might-make-a-difference-2.php
________________

Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs
By Catherine Herridge, Pamela Browne

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton's emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government's most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter from a top inspector general to senior lawmakers.

Fox News exclusively obtained the text of the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified "several dozen" additional classified emails -- including specific intelligence known as "special access programs" (SAP).

That indicates a level of classification beyond even "top secret," the label previously given to two emails found on her server, and brings even more scrutiny to the presidential candidate's handling of the government's closely held secrets.

"To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element. These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels," said the IG letter to lawmakers with oversight of the intelligence community and State Department. "According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources."

Intelligence from a "special access program," or SAP, is even more sensitive than that designated as "top secret" - as were two emails identified last summer in a random sample pulled from Clinton's private server she used as secretary of state. Access to a SAP is restricted to those with a "need-to-know" because exposure of the intelligence would likely reveal the source, putting a method of intelligence collection -- or a human asset -- at risk. Currently, some 1,340 emails designated "classified" have been found on Clinton's server, though the Democratic presidential candidate insists the information was not classified at the time.

"There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material," a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. "It is the most sensitive of the sensitive."

Executive Order 13526 -- called "Classified National Security Information" and signed Dec. 29, 2009 -- sets out the legal framework for establishing special access programs. The order says the programs can only be authorized by the president, "the Secretaries of State, Defense, Energy, and Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence, or the principal deputy of each."

The programs are created when "the vulnerability of, or threat to, specific information is exceptional," and "the number of persons who ordinarily will have access will be reasonably small and commensurate with the objective of providing enhanced protection for the information involved," it states.

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding "unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling ... could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation." Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

Fox News is told that the recent IG letter was sent to the leadership of the House and Senate intelligence committees and leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, as well as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and State Department inspector general.

Fox News has asked the committees to make the letter public because its findings are unclassified.

Representatives for the ODNI and intelligence community inspector general had no comment, but did not dispute the findings.

The intelligence community IG was responding in his message to a November letter from the Republican chairmen of the Senate intelligence and foreign relations committees that questioned the State Department email review process after it was wrongly reported the intelligence community was retreating from the "top secret" designation.

As Fox News first reported, those two emails were "top secret" when they hit the server, and it is now considered a settled matter.

The intelligence agencies now have their own reviewers embedded at the State Department as part of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) process. The reviewers are identifying intelligence of a potentially classified nature, and referring it to the relevant intelligence agency for further review.

There is no formal appeals process for classification, and the agency that generates the intelligence has final say. The State Department only has control over the fraction of emails that pertain to their own intelligence.

While the State Department and Clinton campaign have said the emails in questions were "retroactively classified" or "upgraded" - to justify the more than 1,300 classified emails on her server - those terms are meaningless under federal law.

The former federal law enforcement official said the finding in the January IG letter represents a potential violation of USC 18 Section 793, "gross negligence" in the handling of secure information under the Espionage Act.

http://fxn.ws/1PDqWMz

The Mother of Planned Parenthood

During a television interview, Margaret Sanger defended her battle for the right of birth control:

 

"We do not want the word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population." - Margaret Sanger

"Like the advocates of Birth Control, the Eugenists, for instance, are seeking to assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit."1 These are the words of a woman who is heralded by women's rights groups worldwide. These are the words of Margaret Sanger, the mother of Planned Parenthood, whose beliefs were firmly rooted in the destructive pseudo-science of Negative Eugenics, a social movement that believed in selective breeding to better the human race by preventing the reproduction of the 'unfit'.2

Professionally, Sanger was a nurse who testified before the U.S. Senate in 1916 to call for the formation of the Population Congress that would seek to employ Negative Eugenics to separate humanity. Drastically limiting immigration of those considered 'unfit' was a mainstay of Sanger and her fellow eugenists. Their draconian proposals of forced segregation, for American citizens, were commonly held views among these 'progressives' who sought to achieve a superior and more intelligent race.

"...apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted...to apportion farm lands and homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be...for the period of their entire lives."- Margaret Sanger, Birth Control Review, "Plan for Peace", April 1932, Vol 26, Number 4

Margaret Sanger, an American elite (whose second marriage to oil tycoon Noah Slee provided much of the financial backing for her cause) is the mother of Birth Control in America. Although a mother herself, she abandoned her own children for something she felt was more worthy of her time and passion. Some herald her as a hero that advanced women's rights to new heights. But it's important to understand the context in which she championed such 'rights'.

It was not out of benevolence but a deep-seated hatred of 'forced' motherhood, chastity, of the 'inferior classes', of religion (especially Catholicism), and racial elements that were a hindrance to the breeding of a 'race of thoroughbreds'.3 She wasn't interested in removing the cause of poverty, illiteracy, illegitimate births, or other social ills-just attacking the result...innocent life...which inherently had nothing to do with any of the conditions in which he or she was given life.

"Organized charity itself is the symptom of a malignant social disease...Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks [of people] that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant."- Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, Chapter V, "Cruelty of Charity"

This is only a small fraction of the darker legacy associated with her name. It has been well- documented that Margaret Sanger's Birth Control Philosophy was firmly rooted in negative eugenics. She was the founder of the American Birth Control League, which in 1943, was renamed Planned Parenthood.4

She was funded by the same elite eugenists (i.e. John D. Rockefeller) who also, concurrently, funded Eugen Fischer and his work at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute (responsible for the Nazi scientific theories of racial hygiene that led the slaughter of millions of Jews, gypsies, blacks and others deemed the inferior race).5

Many of whom Sanger associated with, professionally and editorially (writers/contributors to her Birth Control Review publication) are found, by scholars, to have greatly influenced Nazi racist ideology.

To carry out her population control plans, her organization, American Birth Control League that she founded in 1921, opened its facilities in predominantly black, immigrant and poor area of New York City. (This would be the template for the majority of Planned Parenthood clinics.) In 1939, with the help of wealthy Americans moguls (such as Clarence Gamble, of Procter & Gamble, and Mary Lasker) launched her racially motivated population control scheme that she called "Negro Project," recruiting black preachers to sermonize her population control message.

"Birth control itself, often denounced as a violation of natural law, is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defective." -Margaret Sanger, "Women and the New Race" Chapter 18

The aim of the Negro Project was to "severely reduce or eliminate" the reproduction of poorer blacks. As the American Birth Control League promoted this new program, Sanger and her fellow eugenists pushed a program of African-American led indoctrination, birth control policies and even sterilization throughout the United States. Many states adopted forced sterilization programs for the "feeble-minded", the incarcerated, and others deemed to be "unfit".

"We who advocate Birth Control, on the other hand, lay all our emphasis upon stopping not only the reproduction of the unfit but upon stopping all reproduction when there is not economic means of providing proper care..." -Margaret Sanger, "Birth Control and Racial Betterment" from Birth Control Review, Feb 1919, pg 11

When overt eugenics programs became outlawed, its goals and ideology remained thoroughly intact and devastatingly effective through the policy of Birth Control and the legalization of abortion. Eugenicists merely changed the language, speaking in euphemisms.

Today, abortion is a billion dollar industry that escapes any mainstream scrutiny as it pawns off birth control and the deliberate killing of unborn children as the false resolve to poverty. It exploits the mythology of global overpopulation the narcissism of economic convenience and the false liberty of total sexual liberation.
_________________

Footnotes:
1 "Birth Control and Racial Betterment", Birth Control Review, February 1919, pg 11, Margaret Sanger
2 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/negative+eugenics
3 "Pivot of Civilization", Margaret Sanger, 1922
4 http://www.loc.gov/rr/mss/text/sanger.html

http://www.toomanyaborted.com/sanger/

Daddy King's Story Told in New Documentary

By Kate Kelly

Daddy King, as Martin Luther King Jr.'s father was known, is the compelling subject of Bayer Mack's latest documentary, In the Hour of Chaos. The story sheds light on MLK Jr. but as Mack wrote in an email: "The story gives an extraordinary view of American history."

Who Was Daddy King?

Martin Luther King Sr. (1899-1984) was a Baptist pastor, leading the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta for 44 years. He was also an early leader of the civil rights movement. He served as the head of the Atlanta NAACP and the Civic and Political League, leading a fight for equality in teachers' salaries in Atlanta. He also was instrumental in helping end the Jim Crow laws in Georgia.

Martin Luther King Jr. joined him in the ministry, serving with his father at the Ebenezer Church. Daddy King was a strong influence on Martin and the entire congregation, teaching that they need not ever back down from what was right. Martin Jr. carried this message to a national and eventually an international audience.

The idea for a documentary about Daddy King was championed by executive producer Frances Presley Rice who thought King Sr.'s story held keys to a more complete understanding of not only Martin Luther King Jr., but also the civil rights movement. Documentary director and producer Bayer Mack joined her for what turned out to be a major undertaking.

In the documentary, audiences will meet Daddy King, a man of strength and compassion who lived through three heart-breaking tragedies in close succession. First there was the tragic assassination of his oldest son, Martin Jr. Then a little over a year later, his younger son, Alfred Daniel (A.D.), died in the family swimming pool in what is thought to have been an accidental drowning. Finally, a little less than five years later, his beloved wife, Alberta known as "Bunch," was killed by a gunman on a Sunday morning while she sat at her bench in front of the church organ, waiting for the service to begin.

Despite all the pain, Daddy King was able to "keep on keeping on," because he said, "The Lord's not done with me yet." And in the process, King was to continue to shape the country by lending his influence to those who would help African-Americans gain a rightful position in this country. Any politician who was seeking the African-American vote found his way to Daddy King at some point. Prominent among them was Georgia peanut farmer, Jimmy Carter, consulted Daddy King prior to his gubernatorial as well as his run for the presidency.

Daddy King Growing Up

Among the stories told in the documentary are a few from his formative years. Born Michael King in Stockbridge, Georgia, Daddy King's personality was largely shaped by his devout mother, Delia, who was married to a sharecropper. Delia believed in a bright future for her children. Though father, James, did not attend church with them, Delia took her children with her every week. King, Sr. reported that in church he found peace, and it kept him from being bitter about the injustices he was becoming aware of.

The documentary's most telling story of this early time period concerned a day when Delia sent her young son with a bucket of milk to share with a neighbor whose cow was no longer producing milk. On his way, the young boy was stopped by a white mill owner who ordered him to immediately go and fetch a pail of water for his men. Martin was frozen at the thought of not doing as his mother asked and tried to respectfully refuse. The mill owner grabbed him by the shirt. The bucket of milk tipped over, and as Martin bent to try to stop its fall, the man kicked and then punched him before Martin could scramble away.

When Martin got home, he was terrified about what his mother would say about his failure to deliver the milk. She asked his story, and to his surprise, she took him by the hand, and the two of them returned to the mill. Delia then confronted the mill owner. When he started to come at her yelling, she caught him off balance, which permitted her to push the man over and pummel his face until his nose spurted blood.

As she stepped back, she said: "You can kill me but if you put a hand on a child of mine, you'll have to answer for it." Taking Martin's hand again, Delia and Martin returned home.

Daddy King: Doing What Is Right

From his mother, Martin learned how important it was to stand up for what was right. When he went on to become a pastor with his father-in-law at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, it gave him a position from which he could reach out to those in power in order to make a difference. Men like Daddy King preceded the civil rights movement, and it was their work that permitted Martin Jr. to springboard to a national and international stage.

The documentary weaves strands of three stories into one. The underpinnings of the documentary are the events of the time -- everything from the Atlanta Riots and the disenfranchisement of blacks throughout the South to the era of prohibition and war time. Over this background, there are two more stories -- that of Daddy King and the story of Daddy's influence on Martin Jr.

Part One of In the Hour of Chaos can be viewed on Vimeo for $1.99, and it is currently available to subscribers of kweliTV, a documentary channel. It will also air on various local public television stations. There will be a screening in Cleveland on February 19, and Block Starz Music Television will be distributing the DVD via Amazon.

This is the second project on which Bayer Mack and Frances Presley Rice have coordinated. Previously, they produced a film of the first African-American film director, Oscar Micheaux, a contemporary of D.W. Griffith, and a very successful filmmaker in his own right: Oscar Micheaux: Czar of Black Hollywood.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kate-kelly/daddy-kings-story-told-in_b_9005656.html

-----

EDITORIAL NOTE FROM FRANCES RICE: A special thanks goes to co-producer Victor Young for his stellar assistance with the production of "In the Hour of Chaos."  This historically important documentary is inspired by the book by King family friend Murray Silver: "Daddy King and Me: Memories of the Forgotten Father of the Civil Rights Movement."

RNC Statement Commemorating The Legacy Of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

WASHINGTON – Today, Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Reince Priebus and Co-Chair Sharon Day released the following statement commemorating the legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

"Today, as we reflect on the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., let us also honor his legacy by working to ensure the promise of equal opportunity for all Americans," said RNC Chairman Priebus. "As an icon of courage, Dr. King fearlessly led the charge to create an America distinguished by harmony and justice. Dr. King's call – for the nation to live up to its ideals of liberty and justice for all – still resonates today, and reminds us to complete the work yet to be done. We must keep striving for a nation in which everyone can achieve their vision of the American Dream."

"Dr. King's extraordinary sacrifices helped our nation reach new levels of equality, but there is still more work to be done," said Co-Chairman Day. "His call to action challenges us to serve others and end injustice where we see it. In committing ourselves to defending the principles of liberty, unity, and justice, we uphold Dr. King's legacy."

https://gop.com/groups/black-republican-activists/

A Democratic Death Wish

By Paul R. Hollrah

On Wednesday, December 2, 2015, two Muslim terrorists, Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, walked into an afternoon Christmas party at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California, and opened fire on the assembled guests. Fourteen innocent people were killed and 22 injured. Two of the injured remain in critical condition.

Then, late in the evening of Thursday, January 7, 2016, Philadelphia police officer Jesse Hartnett was on routine patrol in his squad car at 60th & Spruce Streets in west Philadelphia. Without warning and without provocation, black Muslim Edward Archer stepped from the shadows, ran across the street, and fired 13 close-range shots at Officer Hartnett from a 9mm Glock pistol... a handgun stolen from a Philadelphia police officer in an October 2013 home burglary. Although Officer Hartnett was gravely wounded, he stepped from his vehicle and gave chase. The officer drew his sidearm and fired three shots at Archer, striking him in the buttocks. (For my Democrat readers, that means Officer Hartnett shot Archer in the ass.)

Captain James Clark, commander of the Philadelphia police homicide unit, said Archer told detectives, "I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS). He told police investigators that he did what he did because police "defend laws that are contrary to Islam."

Moments later, newly-elected Democratic Mayor Jim Kenney stepped to the microphones and parroted to a stunned television audience what has become a standard Democrat Party talking point. He said, "In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teachings of Islam has anything to do with what you've seen on the screen. That is abhorrent. It's just terrible and it does not represent this religion in any way shape or form or any of its teachings. And this is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. It has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith."

In between those two atrocities, on December 17, 2015, seventy-three members of Congress, all Democrats, introduced House Resolution 569, subtitled, "Condemning violence, bigotry, and hateful rhetoric toward Muslims in the United States." The resolution calls upon local and federal law enforcement authorities to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those who perpetrate "hate crimes" against-Muslims. The 73 co-sponsors of HR 569 are as follows:

Don Beyer (D-VA); Mike Honda (D-CA); Keith Ellison, a Muslim (D-MN); Joseph Crowley (D-NY); Andre Carson, a Muslim (D-IN); Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC); Betty McCollum (D-MN): Marcy Kaptur (D-OH); Carolyn Maloney (D-NY); Daniel Kildee (D-MI); Loretta Sanchez (D-CA); Charles Rangel (D-NY); Scott Peters (D-CA); Brad Ashford (D-NE); Alan Grayson (D-FL); Mark Takai (D-HI); Brian Higgins (D-NY); William Keating (D-MA); Raul Grijalva (D-AZ); Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL); G.K. Butterfield (D-NC); Gerald Connolly (D-VA); Ruben Gallego (D-AZ); Cheri Bustos (D-IL); John Delaney (D-MD); Kathy Castor (D-FL); Luis Gutierrez (D-IL); Mike Quigley (D-IL); Elizabeth Esty (D-CT); Joseph P. Kennedy (D-RI); Robin Kelly (D-IL); Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX); Gregory Meeks (D-NY); Grace Meng (D-NY); Al Green (D-TX); Katherine Clark (D-MA); Adam Schiff (D-CA); Alcee Hastings (D-FL); Sam Farr (D-CA); Frank Pallone (D-NJ); Jim McDermott (D-WA); Barbara Lee (D-CA); Donna Edwards (D-MD); Robert Brady (D-PA); Frederica Wilson (D-FL); Michael Doyle (D-PA); Albio Sires (D-NJ); Susan DelBene (D-WA); Judy Chu (D-CA); Jared Polis (D-CO); David Loebsack (D-IA); Bill Pascrell (D-NJ); Debbie Dingell (D-MI); Janice Schakowsky (D-IL); Steve Cohen (D-TN); Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX); John Yarmuth (D-KY); Niki Tsongas (D-MA); James Langevin (D-RI); Mark Pocan (D-WI); John Conyers (D-MI); Mark Takano (D-CA), Tim Ryan (D-OH); Jose Serrano (D-NY); Hank Johnson (D-GA); Paul Tonko (D-NY); Zoe Lofgren (D-CA); Chris Van Hollen (D-MD); Lois Capps (D-CA); David Price (D-NC); Doris Matsui (D-CA); Gwen Moore (D-WI); and Denny Heck (D-WA).

The resolution reads as follows:

Whereas the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes and rhetoric have faced physical, verbal, and emotional abuse because they were Muslims or believed to be Muslim;

Whereas the constitutional right to freedom of religious practice is a cherished United States value and violence or hate speech towards any United States community based on faith is in contravention of the nation's founding principles;

Whereas there are millions of Muslims in the United States, a community made up of many diverse beliefs and cultures, and both immigrants and native born citizens;

Whereas the Muslim community is recognized as having made innumerable contributions to the cultural and economic fabric and well-being of United States society;

Whereas hateful and intolerant acts against Muslims are contrary to the United States values of acceptance, welcoming, and fellowship with those of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;

Whereas these acts affect not only the individual victims but also their families, communities, and the entire group whose faith or beliefs were the motivation for the act;

Whereas Muslim women who wear hijabs, headscarves, or other religious articles of clothing have been disproportionately targeted because of their religious clothing, articles, or observances, and

Whereas the rise of hateful and anti-Muslim speech, violence, and cultural ignorance plays into the false narrative spread by terrorist groups of Western hatred of Islam, and can encourage certain individuals to react in extreme and violent ways:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, that the House of Representatives -

1. Expresses its condolences for the victims of anti-Muslim hate crimes;

2. Steadfastly confirms its dedication to the rights and dignity of all its citizens of all faiths, beliefs, and cultures;

3. Denounces in the strongest terms the increase of hate speech, intimidation, violence, vandalism, arson, and other hate crimes targeted against mosques, Muslims, or those perceived to be Muslim;

4. Recognizes that the United States Muslim community has made countless positive contributions to United States society;

5. Declares that the civil rights and civil liberties of all United States citizens, including Muslims in the United States, should be protected and preserved;

6. Urges local and federal law enforcement authorities to work to prevent hate crimes, and to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those perpetrators of hate crimes, and

7. Reaffirms the inalienable right of every citizen to live without fear and intimidation, and to practice their freedom of faith.

In other words, nearly four out of ten Democratic members of Congress feel as though Muslims are so terribly abused in our country... physically, verbally, and emotionally... that those of us who warn our countrymen of the danger posed by radical Islam must be deprived of our First Amendment rights. What HR 569 tells us is not that Democrats really care about Muslims, Mexicans, or any other ethnic group seeking refuge in America. They don't. What HR 569 tells us is that there are literally no limits to the pandering that Democrats will resort to in order to gain access to yet another voting constituency.

In building their national political coalition, Democrats have extended a welcoming embrace to unionized blue collar workers, teachers, and public employees; trial lawyers; radical feminists; radical environmentalists; gays; lesbians; and ethnic minorities... any identifiable special interest group seeking to gain special treatment or to avoid competition in our competitive enterprise system. The only two things that Democratic special interests share in common are their numbers and the huge sums of political money they bring to the table.

But now it appears they are throwing caution to the winds as Barack Obama, a man with strong Islamic sympathies, announces plans to import hundreds of thousands of future Democrat voters from the Muslim world. They appear to take no notice of the fact that Muslims are incapable of assimilating into western cultures. Instead, they come with sharp knives, suicide belts, and the announced intention of either killing all non-Muslims, or forcing us to convert to Islam.

Meanwhile, Democrats appear to be operating under the mistaken assumption that, when the time comes, the Muslim executioners will first separate Democrats from Republicans before proceeding with their genocidal cleansing. Although to do so is a pure death-wish, Democrats apparently see no downside whatsoever in snuggling up to Muslims who might be their friends and neighbors one day and their executioners the next... a stark reality that they will have to confront firsthand when Islamic terrorism comes to their neighborhood.

But let's not wait for the radical Islamists to deliver a moment of truth to our Democrat friends. Let's do our best to see to it that the 73 cosponsors of HR 569 are not returned to Congress in January 2017. Or better yet, let's provide each of them and their families with a year-long all-expense-paid junket to the Muslim country of their choice. They have a few things to learn.

Paul R. Hollrah is a retired government relations executive and a two-time member of the U.S. Electoral College. He currently lives and writes among the hills and lakes of northeast Oklahoma's Green Country.