Saturday, March 11, 2023

HARVARD AND THE OBAMA FAMILY OF GAMER LAWYERS - Having learned little from her Princeton experience, Michelle applied to Harvard Law and was admitted for the same reason her husband would later be — not the content of her character, but the color of her skin.

 

Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.” JACK CASHILL


2.  Solway comments on the high quality of Mooochelle's recent writing; he says "Of course, books such as Becoming and The Light We Carry, which garnered multi-million dollar publisher’s contracts, are very different from the earlier work."


“Protect and enrich.” This is a perfect encapsulation of the Clinton Foundation  (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) (WHAT ABOUT THE BIDEN PENN CENTER?)  and the Obama (TWO GAMER LAWYERS) book and television deals. Then there is the Biden family (THREE GAMER LAWYERS) corruption, followed closely behind by similar abuses of power and office by the Warren (GAMER LAWYER) and Sanders families, as Peter Schweizer described in his recent book “Profiles in Corruption.” These names just scratch the surface of government corruption (ADD GAMER LAWYER KAMALA HARRIS AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND AND THE BANKSTERS’ RENT BOY, LAWYER CHUCK SCHUMER).    BRIAN C JOONDEPH


Writer/essayist/educator/poet David Solway discusses Doctor Jill’s doctoral thesis and Michelle’s Princeton senior thesis.

A couple of interesting bits to consider from David Solway:

1.  Obama's administration persecuted Dinesh D'Souza, who made fun of the wooky's senior thesis, as did Christopher Hitchens, but we can't be critical of a self-serving, preachy, oppressed black female, can we.  Wouldn't you love to know her LSAT score since she was admitted to Harvard Law and rotated through a couple of make work jobs before losing her membership in the Bar.

2.  Solway comments on the high quality of Mooochelle's recent writing; he says "Of course, books such as Becoming and The Light We Carry, which garnered multi-million dollar publisher’s contracts, are very different from the earlier work."

C'mon Mr. Solway, do you think the wookie doesn't have access to excellent ghost writers, just like a commie and former weatherman named Bill Ayers, who was shown by Jack Cashill to be the ghost for Obama's fabulous fake autobiographical Dreams from My Father.

Here's Professor Solway's takedown of first lady "academic" papers.  

Warning, a Democrat party that could get Biden elected can certainly put Moochelle in the White House for another 8 years of racialist, socialist, anti-American destruction.  Being the first "consort" would be right in Obama's wheelhouse.  Travel the world in Air Force One and meet with his allies in the commie and jihadi world. 

Graphic credit: Free SVG


The friend's name was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and the introduction had taken place about twenty years prior. Sutton described al-Mansour as "the principal adviser to one of the world's richest men." The billionaire in question was Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, the same billionaire whose anti-Semitism caused Mayor Rudy Giuliani to reject his $10 million gift to New York City post 9/11.

How Affirmative Action Screwed Up Michelle Obama

 

By Jack Cashill

In 1985, Michelle Obama presented her senior thesis in the sociology department of Princeton University.  Although Michelle drew no such conclusion, the thesis is a stunning indictment of affirmative action.  Those who benefited from it, Michelle most notably, may never recover from its sting.

Her thesis reads like a cry for help.  "I have found that at Princeton no matter how matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me," she writes, "I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as I really don't belong."

She didn't.  Michelle should never have been admitted to Princeton.  Thanks to the "numerous opportunities" presented by affirmative action, however, Princeton is where she found herself.  "Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren't good enough for an Ivy League school," writes biographer Christopher Andersen, "Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway."  Sympathetic biographer Liza Mundy writes, "Michelle frequently deplores the modern reliance on test scores, describing herself as a person who did not test well."

She did not write well, either.  She even typed badly.  Mundy charitably describes the thesis as "dense and turgid."  The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observed, "To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be 'read' at all, in the strict sense of the verb.  This is because it wasn't written in any known language." 

Hitchens exaggerates only a little.  The following summary statement by Michelle captures her unfamiliarity with many of the rules of grammar and most of logic:

The study inquires about the respondents' motivations to benefit him/herself, and the following social groups: the family, the Black community, the White community, God and church, The U.S. society, the non-White races of the world, and the human species as a whole.

The design of the thesis is a disaster, but the idea behind it is not a bad one.  Michelle wanted to gauge the attitudes of black Princeton alumni on a range of variables.  She sent her survey to 400 alumni; 89 responded, 60 percent of whom were male, 80 percent of whom were between the ages of 25 and 34.

The survey is a stark exercise in black and white.  Michelle never uses the phrase "African-American."  It had apparently not yet entered the lexicon.  Nor does she retreat to phrases like "people of color" or "minority groups."  In her world, there are only black people and white people.

White people intimidate her, as they appear to do to many of the alumni.  Although most of the survey results are either impossible to decipher or irrelevant, one set of data is worth attention.  The alumni were asked whether they felt comfortable around whites.

On the question of social comfort, 17 percent of the respondents claimed to have been comfortable with whites before Princeton, 6 percent while at Princeton, and 2 percent post-Princeton.

On the question of intellectual comfort, 24 percent of the respondents claimed to have been comfortable with whites before Princeton, 8 percent while at Princeton, and 8 percent post-Princeton.  As Michelle notes, black students were forced "to compete intellectually with whites."  For those like herself who didn't test well, the competition had to deliver a body blow to the old self-esteem.

"Blacks may be more comfortable with Whites," Michelle hypothesizes, "as a result of a greater amount of exposure to whites in an academic setting while at Princeton."  This was standard academic cant then.  It still is today.  In fact, the exact opposite happened.  On the question of general comfort, 13 percent of the respondents claimed to have been comfortable with whites before Princeton, 4 percent while at Princeton, and only 1 percent post-Princeton.  Michelle had stumbled upon a seriously inconvenient truth.

Michelle was not among the one percent.  As a senior at Princeton, for instance, she imagines herself going forward "on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant."  In a sense, she never let herself.

Having learned little from her Princeton experience, Michelle applied to Harvard Law and was admitted for the same reason her husband would later be — not the content of her character, but the color of her skin.  The obvious gap between her writing and that of her highly talented colleagues marked her as an affirmative action admission, and the profs finessed her through. 

One almost feels sorry for her.  She had to have been as anxious as Bart Simpson at Genius School, but Bart at least knew he was in over his head, and he understood why: he had cheated on his I.Q. test.  "It doesn't take a Bart Simpson to figure out that something's wrong," he tells the principal and demands out.

If there is a "white privilege," Bart nailed it: when "something's wrong," he has to look within.  He can't blame the white man for his problems.

@jackcashill's forthcoming book, Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency, is available for pre-order at https://amzn.to/2VHOnS8.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr.

 Malia, Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/malia_michelle_barack_and_the_college_admissions_scandal.html

 

By Jack Cashill

What shocked even the old timers in my hometown was that Mayor Hugh Addonizio, the man who gave me my Eagle Scout Award, would accept kickbacks in cash right across his desk. They were troubled less by his criminality -- that was expected in Newark -- than by his lack of subtlety. Addonizio paid for his indiscretion with a lengthy prison sentence.

So it is with the current college admissions scandal. People have been scamming their ways into prestige universities for decades, maybe centuries, but in the past they have had the good sense not to put the cash on the table. It seems that in this scandal a few of the bribers and their brokers may well pay for their indiscretion with prison sentences as well.

The media pretend to be shocked. In an editorial on the scandal, the New YorkTimes singled out Harvard University for its “special admissions preferences and back doors for certain applicants.” This is the same New York Times, however, that published an entirely uncritical article three years prior headlined, “Malia Obama Rebels, Sort of, by Choosing Harvard.” 

Malia is the fourth member of the Obama family to attend that august university, none of whom, save perhaps for Grandpa Obama, deserved to be there.

Let’s start with Obama Sr., the only member of the extended family to attend college before the affirmative action/diversity era. Obama arrived at Harvard in the early 1960s with the goal of getting a Ph.D. in economics. According to biographer Sally Jacobs, Obama “struggled” with his studies but managed to get a Masters degree.

Alas, the university booted him on moral grounds before he could get his doctorate. An inveterate playboy despite his two ongoing marriages, Obama had an affair with a high-school girl. Denied his Ph.D., says Jacobs, “He goes on to claim the title, nonetheless. He's Dr. Obama. The older he gets, the more he claims it.” As will be seen, intellectual fraud runs in the family.

Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”

Sympathetic biographer Liza Mundy writes, “Michelle frequently deplores the modern reliance on test scores, describing herself as a person who did not test well.” She did not write well either. Mundy charitably describes her senior thesis, "Princeton-Educated Blacks and the Black Community," as “dense and turgid.”

The less charitable Christopher Hitchens observed,  “To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb. This is because it wasn't written in any known language.” Hitchens exaggerated only a little.  The following summary statement by Michelle captures her unfamiliarity with many of the rules of grammar and most of logic:

The study inquires about the respondents' motivations to benefit him/herself, and the following social groups: the family, the Black community, the White community, God and church, The U.S. society, the non-White races of the world, and the human species as a whole.

Michelle even typed badly.  Still, she was admitted to and graduated from Princeton and Harvard Law.  I have been told by those on the inside that there are ways of recognizing affirmative-action admissions. Still, one almost feels sorry for Michelle.  She was in so far over her head it is no wonder she projected her angst onto the white people around her. “Regardless of the circumstances underwhich [sic] I interact with whites at Princeton,” she wrote in the opening of her thesis, “it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."

Barack was the smarter and better educated half of the couple. That said, had Obama’s father come from Kentucky not Kenya and been named O’Hara not Obama, there would been no Harvard Law Review, no Harvard, no Columbia.

In his overly friendly biography, The Bridge, David Remnick writes that Obama was an “unspectacular” student in his two years at Columbia and at every stop before that going back to grade school. A Northwestern University prof who wrote a letter of reference for Obama reinforces the point, telling Remnick, “I don’t think [Obama] did too well in college.” As to Obama’s LSAT scores, Jimmy Hoffa’s body will be unearthed before those are.

How such an indifferent student got into a law school whose applicants’ LSAT scores typically track between 98 to 99 percentile and whose GPAs range between 3.80 and 4.00 is a subject Remnick avoids.

Obama does too. Although he has admitted that he “undoubtedly benefited from affirmative action programs” during his academic career, he has remained mum about some reported “back door” influence peddling that may have been as useful to him as affirmative action.

In late March 2008 the venerable African-American entrepreneur and politico Percy Sutton appeared on a local New York City show called "Inside City Hall." When asked about Obama by the show’s host, Dominic Carter, the former Manhattan borough president calmly and lucidly explained that he had been “introduced to [Obama] by a friend.”

The friend's name was Dr. Khalid al-Mansour, and the introduction had taken place about twenty years prior. Sutton described al-Mansour as "the principal adviser to one of the world's richest men." The billionaire in question was Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, the same billionaire whose anti-Semitism caused Mayor Rudy Giuliani to reject his $10 million gift to New York City post 9/11.

According to Sutton, al-Mansour had asked him to "please write a letter in support of [Obama]... a young man that has applied to Harvard." Sutton had friends at Harvard and gladly did so.

Three months before the election it should have mattered that a respected black political figure had publicly announced that an unapologetic anti-Semite like al-Mansour, backed by an equally anti-Semitic Saudi billionaire, had been guiding Obama’s career perhaps for the last twenty years, but the story died a quick and unnatural death.

As for Malia, whose grades and scores are as much a state secret as her father’s, the old man damns with the faint praise of  “capable” and “conscientious.” But hell, Bill’s daughter Chelsea got into Stanford and George’s daughter Barbara got into Yale, so this particular path to the back door was well worn.

Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.

Harvard virtue-signals: DoJ brief finds that 45% of its black and Latino admissions got in on race

By Monica Showalter

Imagine being a talented black or Latino applicant who got into Harvard University. Now there's news that 45% of the blacks and Latinos have been found to have been admitted on race over merit, according to a new Justice department brief, which credibly argues that Harvard engaged in illegal "race-balancing."

According to J. Christian Adams at PJMedia:

Almost half of all blacks and Hispanics who attend Harvard were admitted because of illegal racial preferences in admissions according to a brief just filed by the Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice filed the brief in a federal lawsuit filed by Students For Fair Admissions. It says Harvard's race-based admissions process violates federal law. 

Every employer is going to be looking at your diploma and wondering if you were part of the 45%.

Which is a pretty nasty burden to throw onto the talented 55% who got in on merit alone. Everywhere they go, they'll be suspected of not being Harvard material but for the color of their skin. Make a mistake at work? It's because of the Harvard affirmative-action advantage. What an ugly thing to have to worry about for the rest of your life, solely because you are black or Latino. It's the typically lefty good intentions and virtue-signaling that in the real world does blacks and Latinos absolutely no favors.

According to the DoJ brief:

The school considers applicants’ race at virtually every step, from rating applicants to winnowing the field of applicants when attempting to avoid an oversubscribed class. And its inclusion of race in the analysis frequently makes a dispositive difference. The district court found that Harvard’s use of race was “determinative” for “approximately 45% of all admitted African American and Hispanic applicants.” ADD84. Moreover, Harvard meticulously tracks and shapes the racial makeup of its emerging incoming class throughout the process, continuously comparing the new class’s racial composition with that of the previous year. 

The DoJ brief argued that the funnily consistent number of admissions among minorities proved there was some intense "racial balancing" going on, which it notes, is explicitly unconstitutional in a university that takes massive federal funding:

These numbers speak for themselves. The minimal variation, including in the percentages of underrepresented minorities that Harvard seeks to benefit, over a multi-year period is much narrower than the 6.6-percentage-point range in underrepresented minorities the Supreme Court sustained in Grutter.

Asian-Americans, of course, were the ones knocked out on the old subjective 'personality' factor, with Harvard apparently claiming most have bad ones:

 Second, Harvard’s process imposes a racial penalty by systematically disfavoring Asian-American applicants. It does so in part through the subjective personal rating that admissions officers apply with minimal guidance or supervision. That rating produces consistently poorer scores for Asian Americans. Harvard did not prove that the personal rating is race-neutral. 

The DoJ brief notes that the personality rating is a big one in determining who gets admitted - applicants who got 1's and 2's, the highest ratings, were 80% of the incoming class:

With the personal rating excluded, both experts’ models show Harvard’s program inflicts a statistically significant penalty against Asian-American applicants.

So what is there to unpack here? 

Minorities are getting shortchanged on the values of their diplomas, now that news is out that their admission, unlike those of the others, was disproportionately based on race over other more qualified applicants. That's the impact of Harvard's white leadership looking to virtue-signal at the top instead of confront failing black schools and poor cultural outcomes in Great Society-poisoned black and brown cultures.

We see a lot of the effects of this affirmative-action shortchanging in lower-tier schools, which often feature huge dropout rates of minority students who as admitted minorities, cannot keep up with the other kids in the classes.

We don't see that pattern at Harvard - the 2019 statistics show that 99.04% of black students, or, 103 out of 104 graduate (presumably within the 6-year time period noted), and 98.68% of Hispanics -- 150 out of 152 -- do the same. Whites, by contrast, have a 97.6%, or 733/751 rate, and Asians have a 97.73%, or 733/751 rate. Students of mixed race have a 96.19%, or 101 out of 105 graduation rate.

All pretty hunky dory, but it's still possible this may be manipulated to keep the virtue-signal going.

The DoJ charges that racial bean-counting is continuous at Harvard. It's also noteworthy that the school has a gargantuan "diversity" staff -- which needs to somehow keep busy. Might it be that these students are expressly guided to be graduates over other students? That's one possibility. 

Another way the graduation rate can be manipulated is through grade inflation and gut majors. Are these ultra-high black and Latino graduation rates the result of the students taking easy majors? Such as a major that ends in '-studies'? Well, to take one benchmark, about half the student section of Harvard's African-American Studies department, based on appearances, is African or African-American, or about 13 out of 27 students. That would be about 10% of the black student body, a rather disproportionate enrollment. 

The Harvard physics department, by contrast, doesn't feature faces of its students as the African-American Studies department does. The site features a gigantic eight-person committee on 'diversion and inclusivity' though, but no student facebook listings, quite unlike the African-American Studies page. A jaunt to the Harvard 'Women in Physics' section, though, features 22 female faces, nearly all students, it appears, and none apparently African-American or Latina, in the two pictoral line-up photos showing 22 faces and 25 faces. They all appear to be white, South Asian, or East Asian. Since I couldn't find any information about what black and Latino students are majoring in, the photos serve as a suggestion, particularly since the physics page has a 'diversity and inclusion' link that the African American Studies section does not, suggesting the school thinks someone might notice.

But something probably even more significant was brought up by Henry Louis Gates of all people: It's not the ghetto kids getting into Harvard under the checkbox of 'black' - it's the rich and upper middle class black kids -- and the children of African or Caribbean immigrants, who have a significant work ethic and sense of excellence, probably putting a lot of them in the 55%.

The race-balancing going on at Harvard seems to be primarily a subsidy to the rich black and Latino kids who enroll when admitted, as this academic sums up

University of Illinois professor Walter Benn Michaels put the question most bluntly when he said, “When students and faculty activists struggle for cultural diversity, they are in large part battling over what skin color the rich kids have.”

And that does seem to be going on with the Harvard race-balancing, using the richer kids. That is supported by the fact that only 76% of blacks admitted to Harvard actually go to the school. Harvard itself attributes that to the appeal of historically black colleges such as Howard University and full scholarships offered by other ivy league schools. The Journal of Black Higher Education thinks it's black kids going to high-grade selective state schools, which serve their needs better. The admissions committee, it seems, is throwing things at black kids that a lot of them might not really want. Some may see themselves as more successful at Howard University, or U.C. Santa Barbara, and meet more people in the same boat as themselves.

Meanwhile, over at Harvard, a combination of gut majors, grade inflation, and admitting the rich kids with the requisite background to at least minimally sudceed at Harvard seems to be what keeps the Asian-American kid with poor immigrant parents from the Flushing or Jackson Heights neighborhoods in Queens from getting in - which is fundamentally discriminatory, and a nasty surprise to their American dreams. All because of those supposed bad personalities.

The DoJ fundamentally shows how kids of all races are getting shortchanged by Harvard's racial bean counting, which far from serving kids, serves as a sop to the whites who run these programs -- to virtue-signal to other whites. It's nonsense. Racialism by any other name is still racism. The black and Latino kids get shortchanged, and so do the Asians. The case shows that Harvard needs to scrap that whole thing and move to race-blind admissions more than anything else, or else go without federal funding. Better still, they might just start speaking out on why ordinary African-Americans are condemned to such bad union-run schools that keep them from out of the competition at Harvard as richer kids with the same skin color glide right in.

Image credit: Original art by Monica Showalter, shareable Instagram

 “Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.”

 

Black Lives Matter Founder Mentored by Ex-Domestic Terrorist Who Worked with Bill Ayers 

CNN

JOSHUA KLEIN

The co-founder of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, Patrisse Cullors, was the protégé of a communist-supporting domestic terrorist for over a decade, spending years training in political organizing and absorbing the radical Marxist-Leninist ideology which shaped her worldview.

Eric Mann, who mentored Cullors for over a decade in community organizing, was a member of radical-left militant groups: Students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground, which bombed government buildings and police stations in the 1960s and 1970s.

In a newly resurfaced video from 2015, Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors reveals that she and her fellow BLM founders are “trained Marxists.”

In the video, Cullors is interviewed by Jared Ball of the Real News Network and discusses the direction of the BLM movement.

“The first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers,” she said. “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories. And I think that what we really tried to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folk.”

In previous interviews in 2018, while promoting her then-new book titled, “When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir,” Cullors describes her introduction to and affinity for Marxist ideology.

In an interview with Democracy Now!, Cullors describes how she became a trained organizer with the Labor/Community Strategy Center, calling it her “first political home” and the center’s director, Eric Mann, her personal mentor.

She told The Politic that it was there that she was trained from her youth and grew as a leader.

The Labor/Community Strategy Center describes it’s philosophy as “an urban experiment,” utilizing grassroots organizing to “focus on Black and Latino communities with deep historical ties to the long history of anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, pro-communist resistance to the U.S. empire.”

The center teaches and studies the history of the “Indigenous rebellions against the initial European genocidal invasions,” the “Great Slave Haitian Revolution of the 1790s,” and the “Great Slave Rebellions that won the U.S. civil war for the racist north.”

The center also expresses its appreciation for the work of the U.S. Communist Party, “especially Black communists,” as well as its support for “the great work of the Black Panther Party, the American Indian Movement, Young Lords, Brown Berets, and the great revolutionary rainbow experiments of the 1970s,” while flaunting its roots in the new communist movement.

Speaking with ACLU’s At Liberty weekly podcast, Cullors described the center as her “foundation,” claiming it was there that she developed the skills which helped her found the Black Lives Matter movement, after having been recruited by its director, Eric Mann.

Mann, an avowed communist revolutionary, was the New England coordinator for Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) in 1968. The following year, a more radical wing splintered from the SDS, led by Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, calling for violent “direct action” over civil disobedience.

The splintered faction became known as the Weather Underground, with the stated goal of overthrowing the U.S. government. As a result, the FBI classified the organization as a domestic terrorist group in 1969.

Mann led a group of fellow Weathermen who launched their own violent direct action at the Harvard University Center for International Affairs.

In an article titled: “Band Invades, Violently Disrupts Center for International Affairs,” the Harvard Crimson reported that a band of 20 to 30 activists invaded the Center for International Affairs, “roughing up” several staff members and employees before fleeing.

Several slogans, including “Pig,” “Fuck U.S. Imperialism,” and “Imperialists Screw All Women,” were sprayed on the building’s walls. Rocks thrown by the group broke several windows and a telephone was damaged to prevent police from being notified.

Undergraduates who saw the group leaving the building and chanting “Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh; NLF is going to win,” said they recognized some of them as members of Weathermen, a militant spin-off of the older New Left Caucus of SDS.

Mann was later charged with five counts of assault and battery, disturbing the peace, damaging property, defacing a building, and disturbing a public assembly, for which he spent 18 months in prison.

At the 2010 United States Social Forum in Detroit, under the slogan “Another World Is Possible. Another U.S. Is Necessary,” the Labor/Community Strategy Center sponsored a session titled: “Transformative Organizing Theory: Conscious Organizers Seek to Build Anti-racist, Anti-imperialist Politics Rooted in Working Class Communities of Color.” In it, Cullors––rising to prominence––was chosen by Mann to be a panelist along with him.

There, Cullors spoke about growing up as a working class, queer, Black woman, in a single-parent household, with a father who was in and out of prison.

Cullors stated that “positionality in this country is supposed to devastate us” and had done so somewhat successfully, while stressing the need to “fight this thing.”

Both Cullors and Mann strongly endorsed Bernie Sanders. Cullors was a primary speaker at a Sanders campaign event the day before Super Tuesday, which Mann attended.

Cullors, viewing Biden as far too moderate, pushed for the latter to end his campaign, accusing him of having an “old guard mentality” and coming from an “old establishment.”

Now with Biden leading as the Democratic presidential nominee, Cullors and Mann are finding a sympathetic ear for their radical agenda.

As Breitbart news reported, a group of 50 leading national progressive groups representing millions of active members across the country, are pressuring Biden to adopt the radical platform of the Movement for Black Lives which was co-written by BLM.

The group is calling for Biden to immediately incorporate their radical policies, including putting forward a transformative and comprehensive policing and criminal justice reform laid out by the Movement for Black Lives (M4BL).

Citing his “moral responsibility in this moment” to make amends for past harms he had caused, the groups demanded that Biden make commitments such as advance reparations and defund police, prisons, and weaponry in order to fully fund healthcare, housing, education, and environmental justice.

“We ask that you revise your platform to ensure that the federal government permanently ends and ceases any further appropriation of funding to local law enforcement in any form and redirect those and additional resources towards much needed community-led and community-controlled public safety efforts,” the letter reads.

Follow Joshua Klein on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.

 

There is Nothing ‘Loony’ About Bill Ayers as Obama’s Muse

By Jack Cashill

This past week several people called my attention to a post by Scott Johnson on his influential PowerLine blog that addressed the literary relationship between Barack Obama and his radical friend, Bill Ayers.      

In the post Johnson spoke of his high regard for David Garrow’s “staggeringly researched” 2017 Obama biography, Rising Star. “Without resolving all mysteries,” Johnson writes, “[Garrow’s] scholarship belies the notion that [Dreams from My Father] was ghostwritten by Bill Ayers or other such collaborator.”

Johnson emailed Garrow to follow up on the authorship question, and Garrow responded, “I don’t recall exactly where the Bill Ayers [stuff] got started, but it, like the Frank-Davis-as-father notion, is just beyond loony, ’cause Dreams is already *in galleys* when Barack and Bill first get to know each other.”

do know where the Ayers stuff got started because I started it with a major assist from American Thinker on these pages on October 9, 2008. I never said Ayers wrote Dreams, but I presented overwhelming literary forensic evidence that Ayers, a skilled writer and editor, helped Obama shape Dreams.

I did not advance this theory casually. I understood then what Obama biographer David Remnick would later affirm, namely that my theory, “if ever proved true, or believed to be true among enough voters, could have been the end of [Obama’s] candidacy.” 

My research on this topic, aided by several helpful literary detectives, culminated in my 2011 book, published by Simon & Schuster, Deconstructing Obama. I think I can safely assume Garrow has never read it. I would invite those curious about the evidence to read the book or even to read the preliminary article cited above.

That Garrow does not know the source of a theory he dismisses offhand as “beyond loony” is, unfortunately, altogether typical of establishment political writers. His airy dismissal, in fact, reinforces the theme of my forthcoming book Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency.

In the book, I use the phrase “samizdat” -- Russian for underground press -- to describe the loose coalition of conservative blogs, online publications, talk radio shows, and legal monitors such as Judicial Watch that challenged the Left -- and, occasionally, the “responsible” right -- for control of the Obama narrative.

For eight-plus years, the samizdat broke virtually every major unflattering story about Obama and his presidency, some of which the major media grudgingly confirmed, some of which they continue to suppress. In the book I tell how the individuals in question managed to break these stories out. In every case, as you might imagine, the samizdat journalists were met with condescension, if not outright contempt, from the major media.

Obama’s biographers were among the more contemptuous. Curiously, the four major biographers are all named David -- Mendell, Remnick, Maraniss, and Garrow. The last three are Pulitzer Prize winners. To his credit, Garrow was the only one of the four who refused to prop up what Remnick called Obama’s “signature appeal: the use of the details of his own life as a reflection of a kind of multicultural ideal.”

The story Obama told about his happy multicultural family at the conventions was pure fiction. According to Garrow, Obama’s mother, Ann Dunham, and Barack Obama Sr. “never chose to live together at any time following the onset of Ann’s pregnancy.” Garrow quotes approvingly one unnamed scholar to the effect that Obama Sr. was no more than “a sperm donor in his son’s life.” All of this was common knowledge in the samizdat as early as 2008, but it came as news to many of Garrow’s readers in 2017.

Like his fellow Davids, however, Garrow has no use for information gleaned from the samizdat, especially information I introduced. On the subject of the Obama poem “Pop,” for instance, Garrow notes, “Most commentators presumed that Obama had written about his grandfather, Stan Dunham, not Frank Marshall Davis.”

This much was true, but “hostile critics,” Garrow continues, insisted the poem was about Obama’s bi-sexual Communist mentor, Davis. The “hostile critics” Garrow cites in the footnotes are historian Paul Kengor and me.

Instead of giving me credit for being the first to decode “Pop,” Garrow describes me in the footnote as “someone who is cited with the greatest reluctance.” What I did to deserve this slight is left unsaid, especially since Garrow knows I nailed the identity of “Pop” two years before anyone in the mainstream media did, including the other Davids.

As to Bill Ayers’s involvement in the writing of Dreams, Garrow does not even deign to dismiss the possibility. He has a discovery of his own, namely that outside literary help came from a law school buddy of Obama’s named Rob Fisher.  This is an important find if for no other reason than it undercuts Obama’s 2008 boast to a crowd of schoolteachers, "I've written two books. I actually wrote them myself."

An established economist before starting law school, Fisher became good friends with Obama at Harvard. There, they co-authored a manuscript that perhaps prophetically was never finished. One completed chapter dealt with the always sexy topic of plant closings.

“The quest is to develop guidelines,” they wrote, “on how politically progressive movements can use the market mechanism to promote social goals.” Garrow quotes the unfinished manuscript extensively. Its style is wonkish and ungainly throughout.

Sentences like the following suggest that one author wrote as awkwardly as the other: “While Yuppies can afford the expensive frivolities provided by The Sharper Image, others receive insufficient nutrition to allow their minds to develop properly.”

I do not question Fisher’s involvement. Obama needed all the help he could get. What I do question is Fisher’s ability to provide the poetry, the rage, the postmodern rhetoric, and the Homeric structure that inspired Oona King of the London Times to overpraise Dreams as “a beautifully written personal memoir steeped in honesty.”

Garrow seems to dismiss my thesis for no more substantial reason than his belief that Dreams was already in galley form when “Barack and Bill first get to know each other.” Garrow traces the first meeting of these two gentlemen to a breakfast some time in early 1995. He bases this timing on the suspiciously well-remembered account of a common friend who claims to have introduced them.

Garrow, however, has a problem with chronology. He writes that Obama took six weeks off from his law firm job “in late spring 1994” to finish Dreams. He needed time to complete the book’s third section, the one on Africa. Garrow claims Obama worked largely from letters he sent in 1988 while in Kenya and retrieved from his girlfriend at the time, Sheila Jager.

David Maraniss told a different story in his 2012 bio. According to Maraniss’s source, Crown editor Henry Ferris, Obama made an additional trip to Kenya for further research. Obama confirmed this trip when interviewed by Marannis. Garrow makes no mention of this mysterious trip, which would have taken place in 1994. No one else does either. Like much in his life, Obama appears to have made it up.

A more likely possibility is that Obama lied to Ferris about the trip. Instead of going to Kenya, Obama may have contented himself with going to the local library and pillaging the memoirs of longtime Kenya resident Kuki Gallmann

This is the theory proposed by tireless researcher Shawn Glasco. He was intrigued by the many words and phrases in Dreams that also appeared in Gallmann’s book, African Nights, which was published in 1994. These include Baobab [a tree], bhang [cannabis], boma [an enclosure], samosa [a fried snack], shamba [a farm field], liana [a vine], tilapia [a fish], kanga [a sheet of fabric], shuka [decorative sashes], and many, many more. 

Based on Garrow’s imprecise timeline, Obama flew to New York to hand the completed book off to Ferris no later than early June 1994. In other words, he spent six weeks to finish the last third of the 400-page book between “late spring” 1994 and early June 1994, which is, in fact, late spring.

In his 2009 book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage, celebrity biographer Christopher Andersen offers a much more credible account of how Obama managed to finish a project that hung over his head ever since he finished law school.

According to Andersen’s two sources in Chicago’s Hyde Park, Obama found himself deeply in debt and “hopelessly blocked.” At “Michelle’s urging,” Obama “sought advice from his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.” Noting that Obama had already taped interviews with many of his relatives, both African and American, Andersen elaborated, “These oral histories, along with his partial manuscript and a trunkload of notes were given to Ayers.” Andersen’s six-page account makes sense, logically and chronologically, but Garrow fully ignores it.

Andersen is a best-selling, mainstream author. He even appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball to discuss the book. Said Chris Matthews at the end of the interview, “You‘re amazing, successful guy. You have a winning streak here.” Matthews likely did not read the book. Garrow did read it and cites the book in the footnotes but, oddly, not on the subject of authorship.

Garrow nonetheless offers some valuable insights into the Ayers-Obama relationship, insights that I believe strengthen my thesis. Once Ayers helped launch Obama’s political career in 1995, Garrow writes, “Barack and Michelle began to see a great deal more of not only Bill and Bernardine [Dohrn] but also their three closest friends, Rashid and Mona Khalidi and Carole Travis."

According to Garrow, the three couples attended "almost nightly dinners” together up until the time Obama ran for the U.S. Senate in 2004. This information, of course, makes complete hash out of Obama’s infamous claim during a 2008 debate that Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”

Khalidi, a radical Palestinian, begins his 2004 book, Resurrecting Empire, with a tribute to his own literary muse. “First, chronologically and in other ways,” writes Khalidi, “comes Bill Ayers.” Unlike the calculating Obama, Khalidi had no reason to be coy about this relationship.  He elaborates, “Bill was particularly generous in letting me use his family’s dining room table to do some writing for the project.”  Khalidi did not need the table.  He had one of his own. He needed help from the skilled neighborhood editor and writer who obviously could and would provide it.

There is nothing “loony” about Bill Ayers helping a good friend finish his book. That is what Ayers did. He was grooming Obama for higher office and was savvy enough to keep his writing relationship with Obama under wraps. Being a friend of a terrorist, Ayers knew, would not exactly help Obama’s career.

Jack Cashill’s most recent book, a political thriller called “The Hunt” co-authored with Mike McMullen, is available wherever you buy books. For a signed collector’s edition, see www.TheHuntBook.com.

 

Democrats Allow Communists to Infiltrate Their Party Across the Nation

 

https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/06/obamas-lackey-judge-blakey-hands-obomb.html

 

“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”


“Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.”


We are all victims of the Obama cabal’s collusion with Russia – President Trump’s voters and all Americans who believe in our free and fair election process.

 

BARACK OBAMA: Was he America’s first closet Communist president?

 

https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/05/karin-mcquilan-barack-obama-and-his.html

 

Obama choose Communists and Marxists for the highest, most powerful positions in our land, including his closest political advisors, and his head of the CIA.  These facts are not in dispute.  Most are openly admitted by the people in question, as necessary damage control.  Our press chooses not to report them.

 

Professor Paul Kengor has extensively researched the Chicago communists whose progeny include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power.

OBAMA’S WAR ON THE JEWS

 

The Democrats are now officially the party of Jew-hatred. This is largely due to the disastrous presidency of Barack Hussein Obama. PAMELA GELLER


https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-disaster-of-barack-obama-democrats.html


Abunimah’s piece -- and Obama’s numerous anti-Semitic associations -- got little attention. Throughout his life Barack Obama has been close friends with numerous virulent anti-Semites: Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, Khalid al-Mansour, Rashid Khalidi and others.  PAMELA GELLER

 

THE OBOMBS AND HARVARD

OBAMA AND HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS… Did he serve them well?

Malia, Michelle, Barack and the College Admissions Scandal 

https://globalistbarackobama.blogspot.com/2019/03/malia-michelle-barack-and-college.html 

 

Michelle was the next to attend Harvard, in her case Harvard Law School. “Told by counselors that her SAT scores and her grades weren’t good enough for an Ivy League school,” writes Christopher Andersen in Barack and Michelle, “Michelle applied to Princeton and Harvard anyway.”

 

GOOGLE WHAT THE OBOMB DID FOR HIS SAUDIS PAYMASTERS

 

Barack Obama’s back door, however, was unique to him. Before prosecutors send some of the dimmer Hollywood stars to the slammer for their dimness, they might want to ask just how much influence a Saudi billionaire peddled to get Obama into Harvard.

 

“Of course, one of the main reasons the nation is now “divided, resentful and angry” is because race-baiting, Islamist, class warrior Barack Hussein Obama was president for eight long years." MATTHEW VADUM

 

THE OBAMA MARXIST-MUSLIM BANKSTER-FUNDED THIRD TERM for life:

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/03/obamas-marxism-still-hankering-for.html

 

"Cold War historian Paul Kengor goes deeply into Obama's communist background in an article in American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an excellent Mark Levin interview.  Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power." Karin McQuillan


 

Enemies of Freedom

BARACK OBAMA

Barack Obama

Nickname(s): Barry O’Bummer, the Choom Gangsta, Hussein in the Membrane

Occupation: Serial memoirist, nicotine addict, property owner, Netflix producer, secret Muslim, 44th president of the United States

Background: “Born” in “Hawaii” in 1961, B. Hussein Obama moved with his mother at age six to Indonesia and ate dog meat. He returned to Hawaii years later to join the Honolulu-based “choom gang” and experiment with drugs before “enrolling” at Occidental College, followed by Columbia, followed by Harvard Law School. After publishing his first memoir at age 33, Obama worked in the Illinois state government under the tutelage of left-wing terrorist Bill Ayers before getting elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004 and immediately running for president to validate his preternatural self-regard. Mission accomplished.

Hobbies: Hanging out with celebsdrinking wine with “interesting Italians,” and complaining about his wife’s literary success. Being wrong about politics might even be considered one of Obama’s hobbies. In 2016, for example, he backed Hillary Clinton over his own vice president. We all know how that turned out. In 2020, Obama was “enamored” with failed candidate Beto O’Rourke and feared Joe Biden would “dishonor himself” by running. He didn’t even donate to Biden’s campaign.

Hates freedom? Without question.

Why/how? Where to begin? As president Obama relished every opportunity to apologize for American exceptionalism, which he dismissively likened to “British exceptionalism” or “Greek exceptionalism.” His signature move when greeting foreign leaders was the submissive bow. He brazenly lied about whether Americans would be able to keep their doctors following the passage of Obamacare. He repeatedly expressed frustration with the fact that he was merely president of the United States, as opposed to an “emperor” or “dictator” with total authority to decide how the American people should live their lives. Apart from coddling terrorists, his signature foreign policy achievements include presiding over the death of an American ambassador in Benghazi and cozying up to the anti-American regimes in Iran and Cuba.

Claim(s) to shame: Generally speaking, Obama is a pathological narcissist who journalists lustily admired as president because he reminded them so much of themselves and satisfied their overwhelming desire to publicly demonstrate opposition to racism and other bad things. He resented the American people for constantly letting him down, and behaved as though the office of the presidency was beneath him. In March 2014, for example, Obama refused to let Russia’s impending annexation of Crimea spoil his vacation plans. “I needed this,” he told former NBA star Alonzo Mourning and other guests at the Ocean Reef Club in Key Largo. “I needed the golf. I needed to laugh.”

Fun fact(s): Obama is the first former president since Dwight Eisenhower, commander of the D-Day invasion, to compose a multi-volume memoir about his time in office. During the 2012 election, the Choom Gangsta voted for himself at precisely 4:20 p.m.

What’s next? Becoming the first ex-president billionaire, finishing his third memoir, and eventually publishing a 900-page novel that reviewers will unanimously praise as “Holden Caulfield meets Ta-Nehisi Coates … an intellectual call to arms,” because they’ll be too gutless to admit it’s rather tedious and overwrought.

 

No comments: