The Mexican Invasion and Occupation: Mexico & Dems Build the LA RAZA UNIDOus Mex Welfare State

When Biden took office, one of his first acts was the elimination of our border security. Like a power-hungry dictator, Biden simply decided to ignore our immigration laws. His catastrophic border policy resulted in untold millions of unidentified foreign citizens from around the world pouring into our country. Its impact is now being felt in cities across the country. The worst is yet to come. PETER LEMISKA - AND WE'RE ALREADY THERE!!!

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

AUSTRALIA CONFISCATED 650,000 GUNS - MURDERS AND SUICIDES PLUMMETED!

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.

Updated by Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchampzack@vox.com Nov 6, 2017, 10:05am EST

https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback

The mass shooting at a church in Texas, officially the largest in the state's history, seems bound to evoke some sort of national conversation about gun control. Which means there will likely be some sort of debate about whether it would even be possible for the US to limit its millions of privately held guns — by far a higher per capita gun ownership rate than any other country.

It is worth considering, as one data point in the pool of evidence about what sorts of gun control policies do and do not work, the experience of Australia. Between October 1996 and September 1997, Australia responded to its own gun violence problem with a solution that was both straightforward and severe: It collected roughly 650,000 privately held guns. It was one of the largest mandatory gun buyback programs in recent history.

And it worked. That does not mean that something even remotely similar would work in the US — they are, needless to say, different countries — but it is worth at least looking at their experience.

What Australia did

john howard port arthur — Former Australian Prime Minister John Howard at a service for the victims of Port Arthur. (Fairfax Media/Fairfax Media/Getty Images)

On April 28, 1996, a 28-year-old man with a troubled past named Martin Bryant walked into a cafe in Port Arthur, a tourist town on the island of Tasmania, and opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle. He killed 35 people and wounded another 28.

Australia's prime minister at the time, John Howard, had taken office just six weeks earlier at the head of a center-right coalition. He quickly drew a very clear conclusion from the Port Arthur killing: Australia had too many guns, and they were too easy to get.

"I knew that I had to use the authority of my office to curb the possession and use of the type of weapons that killed 35 innocent people," Howard wrote in a 2013 op-ed for the New York Times. "I also knew it wouldn’t be easy."

Howard persuaded both his coalition and Australia's states (the country has a federal system) to agree to a sweeping, nationwide reform of gun laws. The so-called National Firearms Agreement (NFA), drafted the month after the shooting, sharply restricted legal ownership of firearms in Australia. It also established a registry of all guns owned in the country, among other measures, and required a permit for all new firearm purchases.

One of the most significant provisions of the NFA was a flat-out ban on certain kinds of guns, such as automatic and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns. But there were already a number of such guns in circulation in Australia, and the NFA required getting them off the streets.

Australia solved this problem by introducing a mandatory buyback: Australia's states would take away all guns that had just been declared illegal. In exchange, they'd pay the guns' owners a fair price, set by a national committee using market value as a benchmark, to compensate for the loss of their property. The NFA also offered legal amnesty for anyone who handed in illegally owned guns, though they weren't compensated.

There were fears that the mandatory buyback would provoke resistance: During one address to a crowd of guns rights supporters, Howard wore a bulletproof vest. Thankfully, fears of violence turned out to be unfounded. About 650,000 legally owned guns were peacefully seized, then destroyed, as part of the buyback.

According to one academic estimate, the buyback took in and destroyed 20 percent of all privately owned guns in Australia. Analysis of import data suggests that Australians haven't purchased nearly enough guns in the past 18 years to make up for the initial decline.

Australia's program saved a lot of lives

Australia's gun buyback in action. (William West/AFP/Getty Images)

In 2011, Harvard's David Hemenway and Mary Vriniotis reviewed the research on Australia's suicide and homicide rate after the NFA. Their conclusion was clear: "The NFA seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved."

What they found is a decline in both suicide and homicide rates after the NFA. The average firearm suicide rate in Australia in the seven years after the bill declined by 57 percent compared with the seven years prior. The average firearm homicide rate went down by about 42 percent.

Now, Australia's homicide rate was already declining before the NFA was implemented, so you can't attribute all of the drops to the new laws. But there's good reason to believe the NFA, especially the buyback provisions, mattered a great deal in contributing to those declines.

"First," Hemenway and Vriniotis write, "the drop in firearm deaths was largest among the type of firearms most affected by the buyback. Second, firearm deaths in states with higher buyback rates per capita fell proportionately more than in states with lower buyback rates."

There is also this: 1996 and 1997, the two years in which the NFA was actually implemented, saw the largest percentage declines in the homicide rate in any two-year period in Australia between 1915 and 2004.

Pinning down exactly how much the NFA contributed is harder. One study concluded that buying back 3,500 guns per 100,000 people correlated with up to a 50 percent drop in firearm homicides. But as my colleague Dylan Matthews points out, the results were not statistically significant because Australia has a pretty low number of murders already.

However, the paper's findings about suicide were statistically significant — and astounding. Buying back 3,500 guns correlated with a 74 percent drop in firearm suicides. Non-gun suicides didn't increase to make up the decline.

There is good reason why gun restrictions would prevent suicides. As Matthews explains in great depth, suicide is often an impulsive choice, one often not repeated after a first attempt. Guns are specifically designed for killing, which makes suicide attempts with guns likelier to succeed than (for example) attempts with razors or pills. Limiting access to guns makes each attempt more likely to fail, thus making it more likely that people will survive and not attempt to harm themselves again.

Bottom line: Australia's gun buyback saved lives, probably by reducing homicides and almost certainly by reducing suicides. Again, Australian lessons might not necessarily apply to the US, given the many cultural and political differences between the two countries. But in thinking about gun violence and how to limit it, this seems like a worthwhile thing to look at. If you're looking for lessons about gun control, this is a pretty important one.

Watch: 18 charts that explain gun violence in America

Was this article helpful?

IN THIS STORYSTREAM

Las Vegas shooting: at least 50 killed, hundreds injured

CNN’s Cuomo Questions If Guns Keep Americans Safe — ‘You Give No Dignity to the Dead By Abusing the Facts’

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/11/07/cnns-cuomo-questions-guns-keep-americans-safe-give-no-dignity-dead-abusing-facts/

2037

by JEFF POOR7 Nov 20171,762

Tuesday on CNN’s “New Day,” host Chris Cuomo opined about how guns are used in the United States and argued there was a case to be made that guns are not the self-defense mechanism their advocates make them out to be.

Cuomo also dismissed the notion that mental illness was a factor in the amount of gun violence in the United States compared to other countries.

Transcript as follows:

You give no dignity to the dead by abusing the facts. So, let’s start with them. In the wake of the mass shootings, gun control, or lack there of, gets hot. Facts become a casualty of poison politics. Gun rights advocates will say guns save more lives than take. They cite statistics, guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. And of those instances, the vast majority of times, the gun owner only need brandish his weapon or fire a warning shot to turn back his attacker.

But here’s what they don’t say — first, federal research on gun research is spotty. That’s a political problem. We don’t want to take a look at this closely enough. Why? It’s a bigger discussion. Second, their suggestion is misleading because its based on information from the 80s and 90s. The crime rate was much higher then. So, they extrapolate that data out to today when we have a very different situation. Third, their own number creates a frightening reality. For a gun to be used in self-defense 2.5 million times a year, that’s once every 13 seconds, alright? So the FBI actually counts the average of justified homicides that use a gun. And they have about 213 a year from 2005 to 2010. So there’s clearly a leap being made here. Those numbers don’t size up.

So, here is the reality — for all the talk about mental illness as the key, studies show the U.S. doesn’t have more mental illness than anywhere else, but we do have 25 times the rate of gun murder — 25 times. Americans own more guns per capita than any other country. In fact, half of all civilian-owned guns in the world are owned by Americans. America has more mass shootings than any other country in the world. We own more guns. We have more mass shootings. What are we going to do about it?

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Twenty-six dead in Texas church massacre: A society ravaged by pathological violence

By Kate Randall
7 November 2017

A small town in Texas was the scene of a horrific mass shooting Sunday morning. A lone gunman, wearing black tactical gear and a ballistics vest, and toting what authorities described as an “assault-type rifle,” opened fire at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, population about 700, southeast of San Antonio, killing 26 people.

At least a dozen of the dead were children, one as young as 18 months. Eight members of one family were killed. The grandmother of the shooter’s wife was also killed. Fifteen of the 20 wounded remain in area hospitals, several in critical condition.

The shooter, Devin Patrick Kelley, 26, was pursued by a local resident, who saw the attack and drew a weapon and fired on the gunman. Kelley dropped his weapon and attempted to escape by driving away. Two people followed him by car and he was eventually found dead in his vehicle, crashed by the roadside in a neighboring county. Authorities believe he died of a self-inflicted wound, with several weapons at his side.

When Americans turned on their televisions or checked their phones or laptops midday Sunday, many shook their heads in disgust at the news of yet another gruesome mass shooting in America. More innocent lives gunned down in what authorities would have us believe are “senseless killings,” with no real explanation provided aside from describing the gunman as someone gripped by “pure evil.”

But do such banal explanations hold up under conditions where these mass shootings continue to occur with regularity and increasing brutality? The Sutherland Springs shooting took place just five weeks after the Las Vegas shooting at a country music festival, the deadliest mass shooting in modern US history, which left 59 dead and 546 injured.

Eight of the 20 deadliest mass shootings in the US have taken place over the past five years (all figures include the perpetrators):

· November 5, 2017: Sutherland Springs, Texas church shooting—27 dead

· October 1, 2017: The Harvest music festival in Las Vegas, Nevada—59 dead

· June 12, 2016: Pulse Nightclub, Orlando, Florida—49 dead

· December 2, 2015: San Bernardino, California shooting—14 dead

· October 1, 2015: Umpqua Community College shooting, Oregon—10 dead

· September 16, 2013: Washington Navy Yard shooting, Washington DC—13 dead

· December 14, 2012: Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Newtown, Connecticut—28 dead

· July 20, 2012: Century 16 movie theater shooting, Aurora, Colorado—12 dead

Following Sunday’s shootings, the authorities were quick to chime in with their religious platitudes, as well as cynically seizing on the tragedy as an opportunity to advance their pro-gun-lobby or gun-control agendas.

Speaking at a joint press conference with Japanese President Abe Shinzo in Japan, President Trump stated: “I think that mental health is a problem here. Based on preliminary reports, this was a very deranged individual with a lot of problems over a very long period of time … but this isn’t about guns.”

Former president Barack Obama tweeted: “We grieve with all the families in Sutherland Springs harmed by this act of hatred, and we’ll stand with the survivors as they recover. May God also grant all of us the wisdom to ask what concrete steps we can take to reduce the violence and weaponry in our midst.”

But such statements are cold comfort to the Sutherland Springs families who are grieving and offer little by way of explanation to the public at large as to why such atrocities continue to happen. Of course, the perpetrators of these mass shootings are invariably deranged individuals. How could it be otherwise? What “sane” person would gun down innocent people at a church, a university, an elementary school, or a music festival? But there are always deeper societal issues at work in the lives and actions of these individuals that drive them to lash out with violence.

In his 26 years, Devin Patrick Kelley had already participated in his share of violence before Sunday’s incident. A spokeswoman for the Air Force confirmed that Kelley, who joined the military after graduating from high school in 2009, was court-martialed in 2012 on two charges of assaulting his first wife and her child. The child reportedly suffered a fractured skull.

He was confined for a year, given a bad conduct discharge, and reduced in rank to an airman basic. Although this discharge should have barred him from purchasing weapons, the Air Force never informed the FBI of the charges against him.

Kelley’s first wife divorced him in 2012 and he remarried in Texas in 2014. Authorities say there was a “domestic situation” between him and his in-laws that led to the assault. His mother-in-law was a parishioner at the Sutherland Springs church, and she had reportedly received threatening text messages from him, although she was not present at the church on Sunday.

NBC also reported that two of Kelley’s ex-girlfriends said he stalked them after breakups. A search of criminal records in Comal County, Texas, where he lived, found a record of only minor violations, including driving with an expired registration, speeding, and driving without insurance.

While Kelley lived in Colorado Springs, Colorado for a short time in 2014, he was arrested on an animal cruelty charge, according to police records, involving beating a dog with both fists and punching it in the head and chest, a witness said. He paid a fine in that case.

But the question remains, what kind of society molds such an individual, willing to settle a seemingly petty score by carrying out mass murder? One must first look to the US military. For Kelley and other young men and women, the US has been in a perpetual state of war—in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Africa and elsewhere—for their entire lives. The current occupant of the White House is threatening the obliteration of an entire nation and people in North Korea.

Kelley—faced with the prospect of unemployment, a low-paying job in the service industry or the precarious “gig” economy—chose to enlist in the military upon graduation from high school. He likely absorbed the military’s jingoism and “America First” mentality, but the Air Force eventually spit him out with a bad conduct discharge after he abused his family.

Thousands of young people have also been drawn into the abuse of opioids, spurred on by the lack of job opportunities and the predatory drug companies. Opioid overdoses claimed the lives of about 64,000 Americans last year, a jump of 21 percent over the previous year, according to new figures release by the Centers for Disease Control.

And while the Trump administration claims that not one cent in additional funding can be provided for the opioid “public health emergency,” the White House and the Republicans are pushing through a massive tax cut for corporations that will lower the corporate tax rate from the current 35 percent to 20 percent.

Increasing numbers of older workers are unable to retire, and are working into their 70s to maintain their health insurance and enough money to pay their rent or mortgages. For the first time since 1993, at the height of the AIDS epidemic, life expectancy actually declined between 2014 and 2015.

It is no wonder that a new report from the American Psychological Association, “Stress in America: The State of Our Nation,” reveals that nearly two thirds of Americans (63 percent) are “really, really, really stressed” about the future of the United States. This stress about the future of America supersedes even the usual suspects: money (62 percent) and work (61 percent).

Other common sources of stress reported by those surveyed include social divisiveness (59 percent), health care (43 percent), the economy (35 percent), potential wars/conflicts with other countries (30 percent), unemployment and low wages (22 percent), and climate change and environmental issues (21 percent).

Despite these very real concerns among ordinary Americans, the two big-business parties have no interest in addressing issues of social inequality and the struggles of workers and young people on a daily basis to survive and provide for their families.

The mainstream media and cable news networks took some time away from talk of “Russian meddling” in the 2016 elections to provide some sensationalist and uninformative coverage of the Sutherland Springs church massacre. But this coverage was peppered with new “revelations” about Russia and Vladimir Putin’s intervention into every aspect of American political life. It would not be shocking to hear one of the media’s talking heads suggest that Putin may have somehow been responsible for Sunday’s shooting tragedy.

Democrats in the tank for Hillary Clinton are calling former acting Democratic National Committee chairwoman Donna Brazile a Putin stooge for the great crime of...observing the obvious about Hillary Clinton's health. Brazile triggered this bun...

November 6, 2017

How to get labeled a Putin stooge

By Monica Showalter

Brazile triggered this bunch by writing in her memoirs that she came close to replacing Clinton as the Democratic nominee for president after Clinton collapsed on the campaign trail at a 9/11 commemoration in New York.

Now this:

Hillary Clinton's campaign is now calling Donna Brazile a Putin stooge. This is actually happening. https://t.co/rz5Pgigkws pic.twitter.com/YrPprKz5IK

— David Sirota (@davidsirota) November 5, 2017

The tweet cites a recent statement from Hillary's campaign supporters, in "An Open Letter from HILLARY FOR AMERICA 2016 team," that debunked Brazile's new book about all the disorder in the failed Hillary campaign:

It is particularly troubling and puzzling that she would seemingly buy into false Russian-fueled propaganda, spread by both the Russians and our opponent, about our candidate's health.

Like much that comes from Team Hillary, it pretty well asks us to stretch our imaginations, believing the absurd as the truth.

Who could forget Hillary's famous collapse at the 9/11 memorial, when she got thrown like a sack of potatoes into her Secret Service van and lost her shoe? Who could forget the odd bathroom breaks that made her, like Tonya Harding with her unlaced boot, late for her televised debate with Bernie Sanders? Who could forget the repeated cough attacks? Who could forget the strange moments of drug-like mania at press conferences?

Or that Hillary still has yet to release her medical records? Or that Hillary left her job as secretary of state after a "fall" that put her in the hospital and that her husband, Bill Clinton, said needed a long recovery?

To question these things, in the minds of the Hillaryites, is to embrace Putinism, to believe Russian propaganda rather than believe one's own eyes.

It says a lot about why Hillary Clinton lost the election. She was never straight with people. And the number-one reason she failed to win over voters in places she refused to campaign in, perhaps for health reasons there, too, is that they couldn't see her as trustworthy.

Now anyone who thinks that, friend or foe, Republican or Democrat, is a Putin Stooge. Any questions as to why Hillary Clinton lost?

ON SUICIDE WATCH:

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/11/the-hillary-billary-crime-tidal-wave.html

HILLARY CLINTON: HER PARTNERSHIP WITH PUTIN TO DESTROY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND RIG AN ELECTION

“If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and unusual punishment, the sentence I

would like to see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same 8-

by-12 cell.” ROBERT ARVAY – AMERICANTHINKERcom

Democratic Party crisis explodes in wake of Brazile revelations

By Patrick Martin
6 November 2017

The political crisis in the Democratic Party, brought to the surface with the publication Thursday of excerpts of a campaign memoir by the former interim chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Donna Brazile, erupted into mutual denunciations over the weekend.

Brazile made public an unprecedented agreement between the DNC (under previous chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz) and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign that involved Clinton paying off the DNC’s debts and providing it a monthly subsidy in return for gaining control over the appointment of DNC officials and the right of approval over key operational decisions.

The deal was concluded in August 2015, six months before the first votes were to be cast in caucuses or primaries, when the DNC was required by its own rules to remain neutral in the contest between Clinton, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders and several other candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination.

A further revelation from Brazile’s book was made public Saturday: she acknowledged discussions among leading Democrats in September 2016, after Hillary Clinton had collapsed at a ceremony in New York City marking the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, over whether Clinton should be replaced as the presidential candidate because of health concerns. Brazile writes that she herself considered Vice President Joe Biden as the logical replacement, but did not make the proposal.

Within hours of this report, 100 former Clinton campaign aides, headed by campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign manager Robby Mook, put their signatures on an open letter denouncing Brazile’s criticism of the Clinton campaign.

The “Open Letter From Hillary For America 2016 Team” makes use of the same Russia-baiting technique employed by the Democrats in their political conflict with the Trump White House, but this time directed against a former top Democrat. In assailing Brazile, the first paragraph of the open letter declares: “It is particularly troubling and puzzling that she would seemingly buy into false Russian-fueled propaganda, spread by both the Russians and our opponent, about our candidate’s health.”

The health questions about Clinton were fueled, however, not by Moscow, but by video broadcast over American cable television networks showing the candidate being lifted into a vehicle by aides and Secret Service agents, in visible distress. The characteristic duplicity of top campaign officials, who initially sought to conceal the incident, added to the ensuing furor.

Even more revealing is what is missing from the Clinton camp’s “Open Letter”: there is no reference whatsoever to the main revelation stemming from Brazile’s book—the secret joint fundraising agreement between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, six months before the first caucus in Iowa, giving Clinton effective control of the party apparatus. The Clinton aides do not dispute that this backroom deal occurred and make no attempt to justify it.

On Sunday morning, Brazile appeared on the ABC News program “This Week with George Stephanopoulos.” The host, himself a former top political aide in the White House of Bill Clinton, provided a platform for Brazile to repeat her exposure of the collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC and discuss the “Open Letter” from the former Clinton campaign officials.

She bitterly denounced the Clinton camp, both for its treatment of the DNC while she was in charge, and for their ferocious response to her new book. “George, for those who are telling me to shut up, they told Hillary that a couple of months ago,” Brazile declared. “You know what I tell them? Go to hell! I’m going to tell my story.”

Brazile also touched on a topic of intense but largely behind-the-scenes discussion in official Washington: the July 2016 murder of Seth Rich, a low-level IT staffer at the DNC, who was shot to death in what police called a failed robbery attempt. The Trump White House and ultra-right media allies, including Alex Jones of InfoWars and Sean Hannity of Fox News, have portrayed Rich, rather than Russian hackers, as the likely source for the DNC emails obtained by WikiLeaks, and his killing as a retaliatory “hit” ordered by the Clinton campaign.

Brazile reportedly suggests in her book—which will not be available to the public until Tuesday—that Rich’s death, warnings from the Obama administration about Russian hacking and repeated online threats from Trump supporters had made her extremely concerned about security issues, to the point where she had her home swept for bugs and installed multiple security devices. In her interview Sunday with Stephanopoulos, she spoke of her fears for her own personal safety. Her mention of Seth Rich, entirely unsolicited, seemed a veiled warning to the Clinton camp that more revelations about 2016 campaign skullduggery could be forthcoming.

Current DNC Chair Tom Perez was interviewed Sunday on “Meet the Press” on NBC and directly rejected the two main issues raised by Brazile. He maintained, “The charge that Hillary Clinton was somewhere incapacitated is quite frankly ludicrous,” although he did not attribute that concern to Russian propaganda.

He went on to argue that Clinton won the Democratic primary contest by four million votes, and the DNC was not in control of those elections, which are run by the state governments, while noting that the caucuses, which are controlled by the party apparatus, were mostly won by Sanders, not Clinton. Perez would concede only that “the DNC fell short during critical moments of the primary,” in terms of openly favoring Clinton over Sanders.

Significantly, neither Sanders nor any of his top aides or supporters made an appearance on any of the Sunday television talk shows. Sanders issued a statement on Brazile’s revelations suggesting that the conduct of the 2016 campaign was a diversion from the effort to mobilize opposition to the Trump administration.

The fact is that Brazile informed Sanders of the joint fundraising agreement and the takeover of the DNC by Clinton more than a year ago, and he has chosen to say nothing about it. This is part of his effort to prop up the Democratic Party and prevent the millions of working people and youth who supported his campaign from drawing the political conclusion that it is necessary to break with the Democrats in order to conduct any genuine struggle against the billionaires who dominate the US political system.

The conflict within the Democratic Party has erupted under conditions where the Republican Party is bordering on civil war, with several Republican senators denouncing Trump as a threat to American democracy—and then announcing they would retire from office rather than oppose him—and a vicious conflict developing between the party establishment and the fascist-minded elements around Trump, spearheaded by his former chief political aide and campaign manager, Stephen Bannon, now returned to his position as chief executive of the ultra-right Breitbart News.

In recent days, it has been reported that in an upcoming book titled The Last Republicans, the author cites interviews with George H. W. Bush and his son George W. Bush in which the two last Republican presidents before Trump denounce the current occupant of the White House and reveal that they refused to vote for him in 2016. In response, Trump tweeted an attack on his Republican presidential critics.

The ABC “This Week” program on which Brazile was interviewed began with the presentation of a new Washington Post/ABC News poll showing public support for Trump falling to its low point for the year, only 37 percent, with 59 percent opposing. Trump’s showing was the worst for any first-year president since modern polling began. Other polls have shown public support for the Republican-controlled Congress hitting new lows as well.

The vast majority of working people are increasingly alienated from the two-party political system in the United States, correctly regarding both the Democrats and the Republicans as tools of the super-rich and looking for an alternative. The central political question is the building of a political movement of the working class that will fight the capitalist system as a whole and advance a program to defend jobs, living standards and democratic rights, and oppose imperialist war.

WHERE THEY WILL SERVE THE BIGGEST CRIMINAL BANKS IN HISTORY.

"Apparently, it isn't politically correct to talk about such high crimes. That may be the opinion of our absentee attorney general, who has turned a blind eye not only to this shocking ad, but also to Hillary's potentially treasonous sellout of 20% of America's uranium to the Russians, for a $145-million payment to her, um, charitable foundation." By Cherie Zaslawsky

Former Democratic chairman reveals Clinton rigging of 2016 nomination campaign

By Patrick Martin
4 November 2017

The Hillary Clinton campaign used its financial resources to take control of the Democratic National Committee more than six months before the first primary vote, using the party machinery to insure Clinton won the presidential nomination, according to a new book by a top Democratic insider.

Donna Brazile, longtime vice chairman of the party, campaign manager for Al Gore in 2000, and interim chairman of the DNC from July 2016 to February 2017, makes the explosive revelation in her newly published account, Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House.

A chapter of the book was excerpted Thursday on the Politico web site, under the headline, “Inside Hillary Clinton’s Secret Takeover of the DNC.” Brazile writes that soon after she became interim chairman after the Democratic convention in July 2016, she began investigating charges of collaboration between the previous DNC chair, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and the Clinton campaign.

She discovered in the DNC files a signed agreement between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, dated August 2015, in which the Clinton campaign was given effective control of DNC decision-making in return for bailing out the DNC financially.

The DNC was near bankruptcy, and Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook agreed to pay off its $10 million debt and provide a monthly stipend, which ultimately totaled another $10 million. Brazile continues: “in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”

Brazile admits the grossly anti-democratic character of this arrangement, given that the Democratic presidential nomination was a contest between at least five candidates at that point, two of them, Clinton and Sanders, with substantial support. In all previous such contested races, the rules of the DNC had required it to remain neutral.

“The funding arrangement with HFA and the victory fund agreement was not illegal,” she claims, “but it sure looked unethical. If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity.”

Brazile is defensive about the legality of the arrangement, for good reason: it involved a brazen effort to evade restrictions imposed by federal campaign finance laws, which limit to $2,700 the amount that an individual can give to a presidential campaign.

Under the deal brokered with the DNC, wealthy donors could pump $353,400 into the party’s coffers, $10,000 to each of 32 state parties that participated in the scam, and $33,400 to the DNC itself, in each case, the maximum allowed under federal law. All these funds would be deposited in the accounts of the various state parties and the DNC. Most states would send their money back to the DNC, and the DNC would funnel the whole sum to the Clinton campaign. In the end, the state parties retained less than one percent of the $82 million raised in this effort.

Similar money trails have been a staple of both Democratic and Republican fund-raising efforts for the last several presidential election cycles, but the 2016 campaign was the first in which such flimflam was conducted before the party had selected a presidential nominee, and months before a single vote had been cast in a caucus or primary.

There are several important aspects of the Brazile account. It confirms that the DNC emails released by WikiLeaks—which the US intelligence agencies and the media claim, without providing evidence, were obtained through Russian hackers—provided an accurate picture of the collaboration between top DNC officials and the Clinton campaign. The leaked emails were damaging to Clinton because they were true, not because they were false, or “fake news.”

Some 12 million people, with a preponderance of youth and students, voted for Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries and caucuses, attracted by his claim to be a socialist and his denunciation of the grip of “millionaires and billionaires” on the US economy and political system.

But he was seeking the presidential nomination of one of the two parties controlled by the billionaires and unshakably committee to their interests, as demonstrated by the blatant purchase of the DNC for $20 million by Hillary Clinton, the favored candidate of the financial aristocracy in 2016.

The US ruling elite was shocked and surprised by the mass support for a candidate claiming to be socialist—none more so than Sanders himself. His major service to Wall Street was to divert this popular following back into safe channels, by wrapping up his campaign and throwing his support to Hillary Clinton at the convention.

Brazile notes in her memoir that she called Sanders in September 2016 to tell him about her discovery of a formal agreement between the Clinton campaign and the DNC. “I had promised Bernie when I took the helm of the Democratic National Committee after the convention that I would get to the bottom of whether Hillary Clinton’s team had rigged the nomination process,” she writes.

She described the joint fund-raising agreement between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, telling Sanders, “I’ve completed my review of the DNC and I did find the cancer,” but pleading with him, “But I will not kill the patient.”

Brazile continues: “Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were. The polls were unanimous in her winning but what, he wanted to know, was my own assessment?”

This gives a glimpse of the real politics of Sanders, who agreed to Brazile’s entreaty not to “kill the patient,” i.e., expose the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign by making public this stinking backroom deal.

Some of Sanders’s former campaign aides have vocally denounced the DNC and the Clinton campaign in the wake of Brazile’s revelations. Mark Longabaugh, a former adviser, called the DNC-Clinton deal “outrageous,” while former campaign manager Jeff Weaver called it “egregious” and “undemocratic,” while described the fundraising scheme as “a laundering operation.”

But Sanders himself continued to downplay the revelation, suggesting that to focus on the 2016 campaign was a diversion from opposing the policies of the Trump administration. After President Trump tweeted about the Brazile book, calling for a Justice Department investigation, Sanders responded, also on Twitter, “We won't be distracted from your efforts to give billionaires tax cuts, take health care from millions and deny climate change.”

The FBI and the Deep-State. James Comey. Eric Holder. Loretta Lynch. The Clintons. Barrack Obama. The leftist news media. Real collusion, with a real crime.

"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now." ---- Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com

JUST FOLLOW THE MONEY.... RIGHT

INTO THE PHONY CLINTON CHARITY

FOUNDATION!

Rep. DeSantis: ‘We Know Now Without a Shadow of a Doubt’ Hillary and Democrats Colluded with Russia

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2017/11/02/rep-desantis-we-know-now-without-a-shadow-of-a-doubt-hillary-and-democrats-colluded-with-russia/

33349

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

by DAN RIEHL2 Nov 2017Washington, DC9,925

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) spoke with Breitbart News DailySiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Thursday regarding a proposed Mueller amendment to limit the special counsel investigation to between March 2015 and the present, and also tax reform in the House.

“We know now without a shadow of a doubt that the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, paid Fusion GPS and Steele to acquire this dossier, which required colluding with Russian operatives and Russian nationals. So, they produced this dossier and I believe, yesterday I called for the FBI, the Justice Department to declassify all the FISA applications involving Trump associates because what I think happened is, I think they used the information from this dossier to be able to get surveillance on Trump and his associates.”

“And then the fruits of that,” he continued, “formed the basis of what had been leaked to the press over the first three or four months of Trump’s White House.”

DeSantis also discussed the Uranium One scandal and the pending tax reform bill in detail. The full audio is available below.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

LISTEN:

There is an answer to Hillary’s question, “What Happened?”  And yes, it should be considered a dumb question rather than a book title.  But the short answer to her question is:  She fooled almost the entire left, f...

October 30, 2017

The Mother of All Scandals

By David Prentice

There is an answer to Hillary’s question, “What Happened?”

And yes, it should be considered a dumb question rather than a book title. But the short answer to her question is: She fooled almost the entire left, for over two decades. Oh wait, that was a book title, not a question.

And therein lies her biggest problem. She’s not really asking the question as she should be, she’s not reflecting. Instead, she’s wagging a finger and blaming everyone else for her loss.

Back to the Clintons fooling the left. Let’s start counting the ways. She was not just smart, she was the smartest woman ever. She was fully competent and capable in everything. She fought bravely for all the right issues. She was more qualified to be President than anyone who preceded her. She was, and is, the bright moral compass pointing the way forward to the left (who they believe should be all of us). She was the Yin to her husband’s Yang. They were the best power couple ever, a beacon of truth shining in the darkness.

Except they weren’t. She has proved that over time, and her book tour is confirming it.

And the left is about to melt down as she and hubby finally are revealed for who they are. Who are they? In a nutshell, they are the left’s version of Elmer Gantry: frauds who love adulation, and even more, love money, power, and fame. If you think the left melted down when Trump won, wait until they have the scales fall from their eyes as this new scandal engulfs her and her party.

Because this is the mother of all scandals.

Trump has used his branding genius on this scandal already. He called it this generation’s Watergate. Which has to grate on the left, the media has once again been duly trolled. After all, nothing was worse than Richard Nixon. Ever. Now, most have heard the media scoundrels use the term dog-whistle. It’s overused, and abused on the left, a smirk, a knowing wink and they all come alive, cackling when they use it. Well, Trump just whistled for them. "Watergate, Modern Age."

Watergate. The Holy Grail of the left’s media triumph.

But he has done more than just dog-whistle, or throw the media a tweet to drive them crazy. He’s been slowly amassing information and evidence about the mother of all scandals. Tom Clancy at his best could not have written a more exciting thriller. Which is what we are watching.

I have a burning question. What did the President (Trump) know, and when did he know it? Because if there has ever been a more exquisite time to bear down and stay on this scandal, it’s now. My take: He has slowly amassed a giant dossier of evidence, but this one isn’t fake, it’s very real. He announced it. Listen to the dog-whistle.

“Watergate, Modern Age.”

Trump has many sides, and one of them is his rough and tumble, shoot from the hip side. Say things that shouldn’t be said, tweet at four in the morning to drive his enemies crazy. Keep moving, keep pressing, never back down. Never surrender to political correctness. Show them shiny objects as distraction, but stay the course.

Another side, seldom paid attention to, is his ability to craft a long-term strategy. Couple that with his highly developed instincts about how to implement that strategy, and you have one formidable opponent on your hands. One who loves to win. One who formulates a goal, and pursues it relentlessly.

Ask his GOP primary opponents. Ask Hillary. On second thought, don’t, because she will never know what happened to her, because she never wanted to know what was happening. She was too busy luxuriating in her ill-gotten gains. While she was breaking out rare champagne on her campaign plane, Trump was busy visiting the battleground states. While she celebrated prematurely, he was in Grand Rapids, Michigan in the early morning of November 8, with a final push to eke out that state’s electoral votes.

It’s this side of Trump that we are witnessing.

The left’s being fooled began a long time ago, but the country began to see it when they had a massive hissy fit about Hillary losing. Safe spaces and therapy were all they had to comfort them. And “resisting.” We all have witnessed their psychosis for the better part of a year now. One ugly toddler tantrum after another. And it’s not just their leaders and media stooges.

As a nation we have just endured, and will continue to endure the Weinstein scandal, and have seen the squalid underbelly of the left’s cultural greats. The collusion to hide just how ugly, hypocritical, and immoral the culture of the left, as embodied by Hollywood, is out there for the entire country to see. This is who the left is. Ugly, hypocritical, greedy, and without conscience.

And on the left they’re shocked, shocked to see just how squalid they all are. All the actors and actresses who benefited from their silence suddenly are not so silent. So brave, all these years later. But they put up with everything they preen on about hating, and put up with it for decades while making money and having fame. The left has been in CYA mode for weeks now over this scandal, trying so hard to get people to look elsewhere, anywhere but linking it to one of the Democratic Party’s most faithful fundraisers and bundlers. He was the Clinton’s good friend. This was a big wound to the left, and will fester.

The big shoe dropped when Trump branded the Uranium One scandal in his impromptu press conference. It had to be covered. And Hillary Clinton has now responded. With denials. Sarah Huckabee Sanders has doubled down, saying:

"I think that this further proves if there was anyone that was colluding with the Russians to influence the election look no further than the Clintons and the DNC. Hypocrisy at the highest level and a new low in politics. Everything the Clinton campaign and DNC were falsely accusing the president of doing the past year they were doing it themselves."

And now the FBI witness has been cleared to speak to Congress.

And now there are calls for new congressional investigations. And calls for special counsels to investigate the Uranium One deal.

And the Republicans have grown a spine, joining in these calls. The theory of evolution is proven. Jellyfish evolve.

As the weekend began Friday night, the reaction came: word was leaked that a charge has been referred to a grand jury by Special Counsel Mueller, with an indictment and arrest expected as early as today. It is a choreographed diversion, providing an excuse for Hillary’s media allies to avert their gaze from the unfolding trap. The question is, is it the “deep state” Mueller trying to shift away from the Clinton scandals that have erupted, or is Mueller simply doing his job well?

Leaks over the weekend also suggest this is about Manafort’s associations with the Podesta Group, and not Trump. Leaks suggest it is about illicit money transfers, aka money laundering, back in 2012 and even in earlier years. Obviously, that has nothing to do with Trump.

Either way, all of Trump’s ducks are lining up. Even if Mueller is indicting someone to obfuscate and change the news cycle, the jig is up. There is too much information exploding about Uranium One, and it’s not going away. If he indicts Manafort over his ties to the Podesta Group, then the news cycle is about to explode. I suspect this is what is happening, but we should know today.
Trump’s position looks good, he looks happy when he talks, and has for many weeks. He is in control. He sees the long game, and knows he is holding all the cards. It appears he has entrapped them all in this scandal called Uranium One. The FBI and the

Deep-State. James Comey. Eric Holder. Loretta

Lynch. The Clintons. Barrack Obama. The leftist

news media. Real collusion, with a real crime.

And it really is the mother of all scandals. Allowing the sale of 20% of US uranium for money. The biggest breach in national security since the Rosenbergs gave away the atomic bomb secrets to the Soviet Union.

All of Trump’s ducks are lining up. Trump looks happy when he talks, and has for many weeks. He is in control. He sees the long game, and knows he is holding all the cards.

It appears he has entrapped them all in this scandal called Uranium One. The FBI and the Deep-State. James Comey. Eric Holder. Loretta Lynch. The Clintons. Barrack Obama. The leftist news media. Real collusion, with a real crime.

And it really is the mother of all scandals.

Allowing the sale of 20% of US uranium for

money. The biggest breach in national security

since the Rosenbergs gave away the atomic bomb

secrets to the Soviet Union.

VIDEO:

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S LEADING LAP

DANCERS:

Hillary, Billary, Cosby, Buttman Affleck, Oliver Stone, Harvey Weinstein and their boy Obomb….. new definitions of

degradation and sleaze.

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-sleazeters-hillary-clinton-says.html

Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom

THE LIFE OF HILLARY CLINTON: AMORAL PSYCHOPATH and GLOBAL

LOOTER OF THE POOR….. But she served Obama’s crony bank$ter$ well!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/08/j-marsolo-cheesy-life-of-hillary.html

THE DIRTY DEALS of DIRTY HILLARY….. looting anything that moves!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/09/monica-showalter-dirty-deals-of-dirty.html

Donald Trump Challenges Jeff Sessions: ‘Where Is Our Justice Department’ on Hillary Clinton?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/03/donald-trump-justice-department-hillary-clinton/

39625

AP Photos

by CHARLIE SPIERING3 Nov 201720,012

President Donald Trump signaled frustration with the Justice Department’s failure to respond to the ongoing scandals involving the Clinton family, the DNC, the FBI, and the “phony” Russian sourced dossier.

“A lot of people are disappointed in the Justice Department, including me,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday morning before leaving for his trip to Asia.

Trump said that the Justice Department should be investigating Democrats and the Clintons, sharing several observations on Twitter.

“This is real collusion and dishonesty,” Trump wrote on Twitter Thursday night, responding to Donna Brazile’s revelation that Hillary Clinton’s campaign was controlling DNC operations and fundraising well before winning her primary.

“Major violation of Campaign Finance Laws and Money Laundering – where is our Justice Department?” Trump wondered.

The president appears unhappy with Attorney General Jeff Sessions failure to investigate the Clintons, despite recent revelations about their “crooked” behavior.

Trump said he thought Clinton’s “deleted E-mails, Uranium, Podesta, the Server, plus, plus…” all deserved closer scrutiny.

“People are angry,” Trump continued on Twitter. “At some point the Justice Department, and the FBI, must do what is right and proper. The American public deserves it!”

Trump also spoke about his frustration with the Justice Department in an interview with WMAL’s Larry O’Connor.

“The saddest thing is because I’m the President of the United States, I’m not supposed to be involved in the Justice Department, I am not supposed to be involved in the FBI,” Trump said. “I’m not supposed to be doing the kinds of things I would love to be doing and I’m very frustrated by it.”

Trump indicated that he wanted the Justice Department to investigate the Clintons.

“I look at what’s going on with the Justice Department, well, why aren’t they going after Hillary Clinton with her emails and dossier?” he asked. “It’s very discouraging to me. To be honest, I’m very unhappy about it.”

Trump signaled frustration with Attorney General Jeff Sessions for failing to target the Clintons.

“Everybody is asking why the Justice Department (and FBI) isn’t looking into all of the dishonesty going on with Crooked Hillary & the Dems,” Trump wrote on Twitter.

The president, however, appeared to be aware that he could not order the Justice Department to investigate.

“As a president, you’re not supposed to be involved in that process,” he admitted to Ingraham. “But hopefully are doing something. At some point, maybe we’re going to have it out.”

Bitter Hillary Supporters Blast

Donna Brazile, Elizabeth

Warren on Twitter over

Rigged Primary Revelation

2366

The Associated Press

by LUCAS NOLAN3 Nov 20177,145

Following Donna Brazile and Elizabeth Warren’s allegations that the DNC rigged the 2016 primary elections against Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton supporters took to Twitter to express their anger.

Former interim chair of the Democratic National Committee, Donna Brazile, recently claimed that Hillary Clinton’s team took control of the DNC before she won the primary elections against Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren corroborated Brazile’s claims, leading to many Hillary Clinton supporters expressing their anger at the two Democratic politicians via Twitter.

Failed Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean incorrectly stated that “no one has said the primaries were rigged.” Despite Warren herself agreeing to exactly that on video.

Many were quick to point out Dean’s mistake,

Other users attacked Warren and Brazile for daring to speak ill of Clinton.

Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

The Democrats’ Brand is Imploding

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/the_democrats_brand_is_imploding.html

By Thomas Lifson

Just about all the associations the Democrats counted on to burnish their appeal to the public are in the process of discrediting themselves. The theory of branding tells us that associating one brand with another desirable brand helps it take on some of the luster. That’s why you see so many product endorsements, for instance.

For decades we have seen images of prominent Dems and Hollywood icons together, so much so that the brands are somewhat intertwined, meaning people feel sort of the

same way about one as about the other. Somewhat glamorous, or at least familiar. People we enjoy. Sometimes, even people we admire or even trust.

So, when one falls out of favor, the other tends to follow. That’s why scandals lead to cancellation of endorsements.

Hollywood is only the first citadel of evangelical liberalism, eager to mingle its brand with the Democrats so as to bring about political recruits. The #MeToo ethic of speaking out is spreading, and the details get gorier.

The key to understand the real impact of the spreading disillusionment is that many of the abusers coming to light were widely known to be harassers and were tolerated in the larger community. Everyone bought in, and were equally hypocritical, preaching their feminism as liberal intersectional dogma requires.

Now, it is turning out that a wide swath of supposedly enlightened progressive media figures have been somewhere on the spectrum between cad and criminal. Even in the refined (aka, pretentious) reaches of liberal media, purported intellectuals have behaved like brutish cave men.

Meanwhile, the Clinton Machine is being exposed for its Uranium One perfidy. There is evidence, and it is going to be revealed to Congress. Despite all the chaff thrown into the air around the AG’s purported inactivity (in truth: if something is underway, we do not know about it), facts and evidence are coming out. Nothing will happen overnight, if all the i’s are being dotted and t’s crossed.

Donna Brazile is the first Democrat insider to squeal on Hillary to try to save herself from taint and maybe legal jeopardy. There is every danger of the dam breaking, as it has with sexual abuse in Hollywood.

All of these associations are going to get worse before they get better. It takes time for brands to change, but they do.

The Democrats may be in as big brand trouble as the NFL.

Hillary Clinton Merits a Special Counsel

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/11/hillary_clinton_merits_a_special_counsel.html

By Daniel John Sobieski

Rigging the Democrats’ nomination is just the icing on the cake when it comes to activity meriting a thorough investigation of criminal activity by the woman who, only a year ago, was presumed to become the 45th president. Don’t forget Uranium One, Fusion GPS, keeping classified emails on an unsecured private server, deleting 33,000 emails under subpoena, and, well, you get the idea. Unfortunately, our AWOL AG Jeff Sessions, whose face was last seen on the side of a milk carton, does not. So, we are left with the absurdity of a special counsel looking into Trump-Russia collusion, where there is none, while overlooking the multiple Clinton elephants in the room.

The revelation that both the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign were funneling money through a law firm to Fusion GPS to produce a slimy and fake dossier on Trump culled from foreign sources was bad enough. Now we find, courtesy of the one truthful and remorseful Democrat on this planet, former DNC Chairperson Donna Brazile, that the DNC was bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton, who probably violated multiple FEC campaign laws in rigging the primaries against Bernie Sanders and shifted cash around in a manner that could only be called -- what’s the word Robert Mueller would use? Ah, yes, money-laundering:

In an excerpt from her upcoming book, Brazile says she discovered a document that explained why the Clinton campaign had such a stranglehold on the DNC. It was published in Politico Thursday.

“When I got back from a vacation in Martha’s Vineyard,” she wrote, “I at last found the document that described it all: the Joint Fund-Raising Agreement between the DNC, the Hillary Victory Fund, and Hillary for America.”

The agreement—signed by Amy Dacey, the former CEO of the DNC, and Robby Mook with a copy to Marc Elias — specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.

Hillary Clinton staged a political coup worthy of a banana republic. Brazile has confirmed that Hillary Clinton was engaging in money-laundering to help her campaign.

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign manager, Jeff Weaver, on Monday criticized a Hillary Clinton campaign fundraising scheme that state party leaders told Politico has been used as a self-serving “money-laundering” conduit.

Despite Clinton’s pledges to rebuild state parties, Politico found that less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by the Victory Fund has stayed in the state parties’ coffers.

“Secretary Clinton is looting funds meant for the state parties to skirt fundraising limits on her presidential campaign,” Weaver said. “We think the Clinton campaign should let the state parties keep their fair share of the cash.”

Sanders’ and Clinton’s primary campaigns both raised about $26 million in April, but Politico documented how the Hillary Victory Fund, a supposedly joint fundraising committee, has been exploited to inflate her presidential primary campaign.

“Secretary Clinton has exploited the rules in ways that let her high-dollar donors like Alice Walton of Wal-Mart fame and the actor George Clooney and his super-rich Hollywood friends skirt legal limits on campaign ontributions,” Weaver added. “If Secretary Clinton can’t raise the funds needed to run in a competitive primary without resorting to laundering, how will she compete against Donald Trump in a general election?”

Turns out that even with money-laundering, Hillary couldn’t win. On a recent edition of Fox News Sunday. House Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-SC, noted that in addition to laundering her campaign cash through her wholly-owned subsidiary, the DNC, Hillary Clinton used a law firm to funnel cash to Russia-linked Fusion GPS:

Gowdy said, “I’m not an election law expert, but the good news is you don’t have to be to understand the absurdity believing you can just launder all of your campaign money by just hiring a law firm. Imagine if you and I were running for Congress, and we just hired a law firm and said ‘Hey, you go to all the opposition, you go buy all the television, you go buy all the bumper stickers, you go hire all the experts, and we will launder all of this through a law firm. I can’t think of anything that defeats the purpose of transparency laws more than that.”

He continued, “I am interested in that, and I am also interested in sharing some memory tricks with folks at the DNC because no one can remember who paid 10 million dollars to a law firm to do oppo research. I find that stunning. $10 million and no one can remember who authorized it, who approved it. So you’ve got two issues, a memory issue and then the lack of transparency by laundering money through a law firm.”

And did we forget the Clinton Foundation? As

Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett notes, it was

used in an influence peddling scheme to enrich

the Clintons and advance their political ambitions,

colluding with the Russians to, among other

things, sell 20 percent of our uranium supplies to

interests and donors aligned with Moscow:

It is against the law for the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee to funnel millions of dollars to a British spy and to Russian sources in order to obtain the infamous and discredited Trump “dossier.” The Federal Election Campaign Act (52 USC 30101) prohibits foreign nationals and governments from giving or receiving money in U.S. campaigns. It also prohibits the filing of false or misleading campaign reports to hide the true purpose of the money (52 USC 30121). This is what Clinton and the DNC appear to have done.

Most often the penalty for violating this law is a fine, but in egregious cases, like this one, criminal prosecutions have been sought and convictions obtained. In this sense, it could be said that Hillary Clinton is the one who was conspiring with the Russians by breaking campaign finance laws with impunity.

But that’s not all. Damning new evidence appears to show that Clinton used her office as Secretary of State to confer benefits to Russia in exchange for millions of dollars in donations to her foundation and cash to her husband. Secret recordings, intercepted emails, financial records, and eyewitness accounts allegedly show that Russian nuclear officials enriched the Clintons at the very time Hillary presided over a governing body which unanimously approved the sale of one-fifth of America’s uranium supply to Russia.

Hillary Clinton was the godfather, or is it godmother, that ran multiple criminal enterprises. The existence of a special counsel investigating Trump-Russia collusion is based on a fake dossier she controlled the financing of. Paul Manafort and his co-defendants could make the “fruit of a poison tree” argument, that since the dossier that sparked the investigation into collusion and resulting indictments was politically motivated and financed, and its unverified contents may have been used by the FBI to obtain FISA warrants, anything that resulted from it should be summarily dismissed.

As for Marc Elias, the attorney for Perkins & Coie –t he DNC’s law firm -- who carried out the hiring of Fusion GPS, his involvement in legally and ethically dubious activity on behalf of the

Thanks also for the pn=gs.

Thomas Democrats could lead to serious trouble. Remember he sat between former DNC Chair and Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and John Podesta as they invoked the Sergeant Schultz (no relation) defense regarding Fusion GPS

Did DNC and Team Hillary attorney Marc Elias lead John Podesta and Debbie Wasserman Schultz into a perjury trap? According to CNN, the two testified to congressional investigators that they did not have any knowledge of the funding for the Fusion GPS dossier that prompted an FBI probe into Donald Trump campaign figures.

In recent closed-door interviews with the Senate intelligence committee, Podesta and Wasserman Schultz said they did not know who had funded Fusion GPS, the intelligence firm that hired British Intelligence Officer Christopher Steele to compile the dossier on Trump, the sources said.

Podesta was asked in his September interview whether the Clinton campaign had a contractual agreement with Fusion GPS, and he said he was not aware of one, according to one of the sources.

Sitting next to Podesta during the interview: his attorney Marc Elias, who worked for the law firm that hired Fusion GPS to continue research on Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign and DNC, multiple sources said. Elias was only there in his capacity as Podesta’s attorney and not as a witness.

Whether or not this testimony was under oath, it is a crime to provide false testimony to Congress.

Indeed it is. Add it to the list of crimes that go uninvestigated and unprosecuted as AG Jeff Sessions contemplates his navel. A special counsel needs to be appointed and a grand jury empanelled to investigate this list of crimes that would make a mafia don proud. Justice should be blind and not brain-dead. If there is a double standard at play here, there is no equal justice under the law.

Daniel John Sobieski is a free lance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.

All the news that's fit to overthrow the Republic

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/all_the_news_thats_fit_to_overthrow_the_republic.html

By Cherie Zaslawsky

James O'Keefe of Project Veritas did a fine job of exposing the culture of anti-Trump bias behind the scenes at the New York Times, but the paper of record just...well, trumped him.

How?

On November 1, the Times ran a full-page incendiary ad calling for mass protests to end the "nightmare" of the "Trump/Pence regime" by joining in Antifa-style riots beginning on November 4. So the Times not only is anti-Trump, but stands in direct opposition to our Constitutional Republic and the rule of law – something not even Project Veritas uncovered.

Ask yourself: during the prior administration, would the Times have printed an ad by an extremist group on the right calling for protesters to "end the nightmare" and proclaiming that "the Obama-Biden regime must go"? And if it had printed such an ad, what do you think would have happened next?

By the way, just who exactly sees Trump's agenda to make America safe, strong, prosperous, and great again as a nightmare? Isn't this what everyone wants? On second thought, perhaps it's a nightmare to people who want America to be unsafe, weak, poor, and in the tank – i.e., people who hate this country and want to take it down.

And the ad isn't just about Trump. It reads: "The Trump/Pence regime must go!" Wait a minute. This isn't a third-world country where we have a dictatorship and can oust it only by force. If and when people are unhappy with our leaders, we vote them out of office. And in those extremely rare cases where a president is impeached or steps down for whatever reason, the vice president becomes the president. We don't simply let a riotous rabble kick them both out of office because these malcontents don't like their policies.

And yet we've heard no official response to the Times for running this ad.

Let's put this in perspective.

Recently, presumably under Special Counsel Robert Mueller's directive, federal agents stormed into Paul Manafort's home at 5:00 A.M., barging into the bedroom where he and his wife were sleeping. They ransacked the place, although Manafort had been cooperating with Mueller's investigation and had turned over whatever was requested. Manafort's alleged offense? Improperly filing foreign tax documents and possibly owing additional taxes from business dealings he had overseas a number of years before he joined the Trump campaign – and therefore seemingly of no relevance to Mueller's investigation into possible Russian collusion in the 2016 election.

Compare that to The New York Times, with its iconic reputation and millions of readers, printing a full-page ad paid for by the Soros-affiliated RefuseFascism group, calling for the overthrow of our legitimately elected president. And vice president. That would leave us with President Paul Ryan...

And yet, amazingly, I haven't heard a word about the feds storming the Times and arresting every editor who allowed that ad to end up in print.

That's sedition, folks. Last I heard, it was a serious felony – a kissing cousin of treason.

Apparently, it isn't politically correct to talk about

such high crimes. That may be the opinion of our

absentee attorney general, who has turned a blind

eye not only to this shocking ad, but also to

Hillary's potentially treasonous sellout of 20% of

America's uranium to the Russians, for a $145-

million payment to her, um, charitable foundation.

In fact, the whole mainstream media has been silent regarding the Times' seditious pamphleteering. However, Alex Jones on Infowars held up the ad on air, bringing it to his viewers' attention. You'll never guess what followed. The very next morning, a dozen or more publications, including Newsweek and Salon, accused him of making it up! They stated categorically that the New York Times ran no such ad.

This is twilight-zone stuff.

The ad is for real – you can view it in The New York Times digital version as well as in the November 1 print edition. Your library may have a copy – mine does – and the scandalous ad is there for all to see.

I suppose these other publications figured that most of their readers wouldn't bother to fact-check. Yet it is truly mind-bending that they all rushed to deny the reality and to discredit Alex Jones for exposing the very real and violence-inciting ad that the premier newspaper in the country displayed so prominently.

One more thing: Notice the use of the word "regime" in "The Trump/Pence regime must go!" Americans don't speak of presidential "regimes." That is Soros-speak. Remember that he's a regime changer – someone who prides himself on using his billions to topple regimes across the world, leaving millions of people in chaos and misery.

President Trump doesn't have a "regime"; he has an administration. And until he replaces one of the key office-holders of that administration – his attorney general – we can expect more unchecked lawlessness and more open calls for insurrection that our own press apparently sees fit to promote.

Who's chanting 'lock her up' now?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/11/whos_chanting_lock_her_up_now.html

By Robert Arvay

When Trump-supporters at his rallies chanted, "Lock her up!" – referring, of course to "Crooked Hillary" – many Democrats were incensed at what they regarded as sloganeering and poor taste. Now, with the latest revelations, they may well join the chorus.

Welcome to the party, Democrats. Better late

than never. Hillary tried to steal the election, but

ironically, she stole it from the Democrats. She

actually stole their money, their organization, and

their most politically savvy potential candidate,

Joe Biden, who might otherwise today be the

sitting president of the United States.

Hillary Clinton has become the J.R. Ewing of the Democratic Party. The fictional character on the hit TV series Dallas (1978-91), J.R. was the wealthy financial schemer who delighted in destroying his rivals and anyone else whom he randomly decided to ruin. Hillary Clinton is every bit the sociopathic,

sadistic schemer Ewing was. Able to look a

grieving mother in the eye and lie to her, saying

her son, a true American hero, was killed

at Benghazi because of a video instead of by

Clinton-Obama malfeasance, Hillary revealed to

many of us a peek into the dark depths of

depravity that is the Clinton soul.

Perhaps her followers will now take a retrospective look and conclude, How could we have been fooled? Or will they?

The sad fact is that many Democrats were not the least bit fooled. Just as "everyone knew" about Harvey Weinstein but said nothing, Democrats had long ago learned to avoid, at all costs, offending the Clintons, while pretending to like them. They sold their political souls to a devil, and they are paying the political price. Pray for them that they lose no more soul than that.

Someday, there will be a TV series about Hillary. An apt title for it would be The Left Wing.

Stay tuned, because this is not over yet.

It is rumored that the reason that the New York Times included the Weinstein scandal in its "news fit to print" category was to dry up his cash flow to the Clintons. Donna Brazile's book, Hacks, (referring to Hillary Clinton's subversive takeover of the Democratic Party), is a second major indication that the partisan machinery Hillary hijacked is beginning to catch her among its cogs and gears. If so, she may expect it to be as merciless as she is.

Hillary once openly declared that if she does in fact go to prison, "I won't be the only one." She will almost certainly drag down others with her, beginning with her closest accomplices and confidants.

If the Constitution did not forbid cruel and

unusual punishment, the sentence I would like to

see imposed would place both Bill and Hillary

Clinton in the same 8-by-12 cell.

In the meantime, let us momentarily join, arm in arm, with our Democrat enemies, and with one united voice, chant...

Democrats Drive Toward the Cliff and Hit the Gas

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2017/11/06/democrats-drive-toward-the-cliff-and-hit-the-gas-n2405198?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=

Kurt Schlichter

Posted: Nov 06, 2017 12:01 AM

Democrats Drive Toward the Cliff and Hit the Gas

We’ve long called the GOP “The Stupid Party,” and it certainly deserves the nickname, but what’s the right family-friendly adjective for the Democrat Party? “The Moronic Party?” “The Mind-Bogglingly Nuts Party?” What moniker best reflects a party you dare not trust with power? These people are to governing as Kevin Spacey is to babysitting.

Just look at the Democrats’ governor’s race in the Commonwealth of Virginia – to the extent that it’s a race and not one of those weird pilgrimages where the marchers flog themselves every step of the way. Not that Democrats don’t deserve flogging – and it’s only a matter of time before that perversion comes out in the context of some high visibility Hillary supporter/pervert in Hollywood or the media – but what’s happening in Virginia is pretty pathetic even for them. Which makes it all the more delicious.

This Ralph Northam guy – “Hi, I’m Governor Ralph!” – ought to be winning by a mile, or for wussy metric system-loving Democrats, 1.6 kilometers. Virginia is a purple state, meaning it’s growing dumber and more parasitical, at least in the northern part next to Washington where it is infested with government parasites of both the Democrat and the “Oh well I never!” Republican Trumpaphobe varieties. Northam should be the perfect fake moderate candidate Dems like to run in such places. He has the kind of generic face a politician needs – you won’t notice him or remember him. He also makes sure he mentions he did a hitch in the Army, because a Democrat who doesn’t hold our military in contempt is unusual and that’s part of his fake moderate pose. Of course, the guy who let Bowe Bergdahl walk was also in the Army.

His opponent Ed Gillespie is a Republican of the sort who was initially baffled and scared by Trump and alarmed at the people Trump motivated – you know, normal people. But he’s adapted, and he’s suddenly found that despite what the likes of Jeb! think, normal voters oppose stuff like illegal alien gang members murdering American citizens. Gillespie slammed Northam over the youthful Dreamers of MS-13, and that’s when the fun began.

So, the “Latino Victory Fund” that was totally completely absolutely not in any way affiliated with Northam’s campaign started running this ad where some white cisgender guy in a pick-up with a “Don’t tread on me” plate and a Gillespie bumper sticker starts trying to run over little Latin and Muslim kids. We know the Muslim kid is Muslim because the “Latino Victory Fund” consulted the Big Book of Stereotypes and stuck a scarf around her head since all Muslims do that or something.

Basically, the point of this ad is that if you’re a white cisgender male who likes America, you want to run down little Latin and Muslim kids because that’s totally something that happens.

Oh wait, that never happens. In fact, what happens is guys like the one driving that truck go to foreign countries in uniform and protect Muslims, often from other Muslims. But facts are racist or something.

What also recently happened was an illegal alien ran over a Muslim girl in Virginia, which kind of messes up the whole narrative. And then the Muslim Schumer visa lottery immigrant – Refugees welcome! – in New York ran over a bunch of people in a pick-up truck, including five Argentines. So, current events made the ad a bit awkward.

Soon even the liberal media interrupted its regularly scheduled cheerleading for the Virginia Democrats by tepidly, and with lots of whataboutism (which is okay again, apparently), musing that, “Yeah, maybe this ad is not a great idea.” But make no mistake – the ad was right in line with mainstream Democrat thinking, to the extent “Democrat thinking” is even a thing.

Earlier in the week, a Democrat honchoette – uh oh, I assumed something’s gender! – sent out a memo saying straight cisgender white males need not apply for DNC jobs. Don’t worry though – discriminating on the basis of race isn’t racist because of all that privilege guys in pick-up trucks wield in our society. By the way, the DNC’s “No dogs or Irishmen or any other people whose ancestors came from Europe” memo was signed by one Madeline Leader, whose signature block helpfully and hilariously included “their” preferred pronouns: “They/them/theirs.”

Way to expand the Democrat base!

But at least Northam’s campaign had nothing to do with the creeps behind that ad. Phew. That was close because…oh, wait. Northam’s campaign totally had something to do with the “Latino Victory Fund.” Basically, Northam lied about Virginians, then lied about lying about Virginians, and then got caught lying. Is he being advised by a campaign manager who works out of a van down by the river, or is his campaign manager merely aspiring to someday have a van he can live in down by the river?

It gets better. When Northam tried to lie about opposing sanctuary cities – he said he does, though he totally doesn’t – some other bunch of leftists called him racist and cut ties with him. Don’t you just love blue-on-blue conflict?

The sanctuary city shuffle is going to be gold for the GOP in 2018. Pro Tip: If you are a Democrat south of the Mason-Dixon Line, it really never pays to get anywhere near issues involving the nullification of federal laws. That’s just not a good look for the Party of the Confederacy.

So, now the race has gone from a Northam lead to Gillespie tied or slightly ahead. And since conservative voters in Virginia often over-perform on election day, Gillespie might just take it. Richmond radio host Jeff Katz, who talks to normal Virginians every day, told me he agrees and says the Democrats are “desperate and scared.” If Gillespie pulls off an upset, the howls of liberal agony will reach a glorious crescendo. I just hope some enterprising cameraman – I mean “camera-them” – gets plenty of video of shattered Northam volunteers, teary-eyed and broken by the will of the normals. They will make a nice supplement to our YouTube memories of November 8, 2016 – whenever we’re sad, we’ll always have the humiliation of Felonia von Pantsuit to cheer us up.

So, what have we learned? Well, we’ve learned that maybe it’s a bad idea to accuse members of the group making up 70% of the population of being psychotic child murderers. But have Democrats learned that?

No. They don’t want to learn that. So they won’t.

But they should. Here’s a strategy idea. Just spit-balling, but maybe it’s better not to alienate the majority of voters in order to cater to…who? Who buys these magic beans? Gyno-hat wearing nitwits from Fairfax County who think that everyone outside the Beltway is a couple swigs of home-brewed corn liquor away from molesting unwary canoeists?

While President Trump remains popular among those he was always popular with, these folks might not have been super-primed to go out and pull the lever for Ed Gillespie in light of his ties to the establishment. But wow – way to energize them to go out and pull that lever to tell Northam and the rest of Team They/Them/Theirs to go Weinstein themselves.

In the liberal echo chamber, all this nutty stuff about genocidal normals and pick-your-own-pronouns probably plays. If Northam was running for governor of Berkeley, he’d be a shoe-in – or at least a Birkenstock-in. And he should have been a shoe-in in Virginia. All he had to do was keep up the scam that he was really a reasonable moderate who didn’t represent a party that had gone utterly insane.

But they just can’t help revealing who they really are. Democrats not only reject the idea of a big tent, but actively seek to shrink their party so it fits into a politically correct pup tent, and then, when the few sufficiently woke intersectional remaining members of the party are inside, they want to set the tent on fire.

The GOP should, and deserves to, get destroyed in 2018, but it won’t, if only because the alternative is so stark raving dumb. Congratulations, Democrats. You’re the Stupider and Crazier Party.

The Mexican Invasion and Occupation: Mexico & Dems Build the LA RAZA UNIDOus Mex Welfare State

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

AUSTRALIA CONFISCATED 650,000 GUNS - MURDERS AND SUICIDES PLUMMETED!

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.

What Australia did

Australia's program saved a lot of lives

Watch: 18 charts that explain gun violence in America

Was this article helpful?

IN THIS STORYSTREAM

Las Vegas shooting: at least 50 killed, hundreds injured

CNN’s Cuomo Questions If Guns Keep Americans Safe — ‘You Give No Dignity to the Dead By Abusing the Facts’

Twenty-six dead in Texas church massacre: A society ravaged by pathological violence

By Kate Randall
7 November 2017

How to get labeled a Putin stooge

By Patrick Martin
6 November 2017

Former Democratic chairman reveals Clinton rigging of 2016 nomination campaign

By Patrick Martin
4 November 2017

Rep. DeSantis: ‘We Know Now Without a Shadow of a Doubt’ Hillary and Democrats Colluded with Russia

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) spoke with Breitbart News DailySiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Thursday regarding a proposed Mueller amendment to limit the special counsel investigation to between March 2015 and the present, and also tax reform in the House.

The Mother of All Scandals

Donald Trump Challenges Jeff Sessions: ‘Where Is Our Justice Department’ on Hillary Clinton?

President Donald Trump signaled frustration with the Justice Department’s failure to respond to the ongoing scandals involving the Clinton family, the DNC, the FBI, and the “phony” Russian sourced dossier.

Following Donna Brazile and Elizabeth Warren’s allegations that the DNC rigged the 2016 primary elections against Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton supporters took to Twitter to express their anger.

The Democrats’ Brand is Imploding

Democrats Drive Toward the Cliff and Hit the Gas

No comments:

Blog Archive

Search This Blog

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

AUSTRALIA CONFISCATED 650,000 GUNS - MURDERS AND SUICIDES PLUMMETED!

Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted.

What Australia did

Australia's program saved a lot of lives

Watch: 18 charts that explain gun violence in America

Was this article helpful?

IN THIS STORYSTREAM

Las Vegas shooting: at least 50 killed, hundreds injured

Twenty-six dead in Texas church massacre: A society ravaged by pathological violence

By Kate Randall 7 November 2017

How to get labeled a Putin stooge

By Patrick Martin6 November 2017

Former Democratic chairman reveals Clinton rigging of 2016 nomination campaign

By Patrick Martin4 November 2017

Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) spoke with Breitbart News DailySiriusXM host Alex Marlow on Thursday regarding a proposed Mueller amendment to limit the special counsel investigation to between March 2015 and the present, and also tax reform in the House.

The Mother of All Scandals

President Donald Trump signaled frustration with the Justice Department’s failure to respond to the ongoing scandals involving the Clinton family, the DNC, the FBI, and the “phony” Russian sourced dossier.

Following Donna Brazile and Elizabeth Warren’s allegations that the DNC rigged the 2016 primary elections against Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton supporters took to Twitter to express their anger.

The Democrats’ Brand is Imploding

Democrats Drive Toward the Cliff and Hit the Gas

No comments:

Search This Blog

By Kate Randall
7 November 2017

By Patrick Martin
6 November 2017

By Patrick Martin
4 November 2017