Day: November 19, 2017

In the Franken Scandal, Be Careful What You Wish For


The outing of U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN) as the latest high profile alleged abuser of women – accompanied by photographic evidence – calls for a cautious analysis. Not because there is any doubt about the veracity of the accusations by Franken’s main accuser, Leeann Tweeden. After all, Ms. Tweeden has come forward with an incriminating photo and a detailed recounting of Franken’s sexual harassment and humiliation of her in 2006, two years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate. As of this writing, Franken has issued three increasingly detailed written apologies for what he did to Ms. Tweeden which adds significant credibility to her claims.

The incriminating photo: Al Franken and Leeann Tweeden December 2006

What needs to be examined closely and critically is how the mainstream media and the powers that be – including elements of the Resistance, the Shadow Government, and the Deep State – are preparing to use this story to advance their ultimate agenda: The take down and removal from office of President Donald J. Trump.

It was surprising to see the media, and even many Democrat politicians, jump on the Franken story as soon as it broke on Thursday November 16. It was full-speed ahead to attack Franken and even to call for his resignation from the Senate. The Teflon coating that almost always protects Democrats and, until recently, most left-wing moguls and celebrities when they get in trouble, especially of a sexual harassment nature, was stripped away – and the feeding frenzy piling on of Franken was off and running.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not sorry to see Al Franken exposed for being the creep that he is. His entire career as a writer, comedian, and performer before he got into politics in 2007 absolutely reeks. Examples of his sleazy and disgusting work that have helped to lower the bar of the popular culture starting in 1975 are abundant. Until Thursday, Franken, to my knowledge, was never publicly accused of actually acting against anyone based on his immature, puerile, and sexist beliefs.

Jake Tapper interviews Leeann Tweeden CNN Nov. 16, 2017

An example of the unusual media focus on this story is the coverage of it on CNN on day one. On Thursday evening, CNN preempted the second hour of Anderson Cooper’s AC360 at 9 P.M. E.S.T. and substituted a “special edition” hour long episode of The Lead with Jake Tapper that usually airs five hours earlier.

Tapper’s special prime time show started with an uninterrupted, commercial-free replay of his entire interview with Leeann Tweeden that originally ran live on his afternoon show earlier Thursday. The fact that no commercials were shown for over 35 minutes straight was almost unprecedented. That kind of rare preemption of advertising spots is usually reserved for instances of major breaking news, like a terrorist attack or a hurricane about to make landfall on the U.S.

Amanda Carpenter

Symone Sanders

The prerecorded segment with Tweeden, with a new live intro by Tapper was followed by a live discussion featuring familiar CNN talking heads Amanda Carpenter, former communications director for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, and Symone Sanders, former press secretary for Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign and a CNN political commentator. Both of these analysts are consistently anti-Trump.

From CNN’s transcript of the program:

JAKE TAPPER: And this – this is not a partisan issue.


AMANDA CARPENTER: No.


TAPPER: Democrats are doing this to women. Republicans are doing this to women.


SYMONE SANDERS: Independents have probably done it as well, Green Party folks, people that – don’t even believe in a political system.


This is about the overall culture and system. We have – it has far exceeded a problem. (INAUDIBLE) had a really great piece in (INAUDIBLE) a couple weeks ago specifically about sexual culture, and talking about the fact that this is from the Hollywood Hills, to the boardroom, and everywhere in between. And so this is a system and we have to examine what it is about our culture or sexual culture that seems to support this. We talk a lot about rape culture, but rape should not have been the bar that is met for us to have a conversation about this, for us to do something. Because it’s not just rape, it’s those sexual microaggressions, the cat calling on the street, it’s the someone “pushing up” on you in an office in a professional setting.


None of these things are OK, but we are only now liberated to have these conversations because women have been courageous in coming forward, so now – because this is bigger than Al Franken. . .


CARPENTER: They [U.S. Senate] can vote to censure him [Franken] in a simple majority vote and take a stand on this issue. And for that matter, Donald Trump or anyone else they see fit.


SANDERS: Yes. I mean, I guess it’s just – it just troubles me because Donald – it seems like everyone else in this moment has had to account for what they’ve done and what they’ve been accused of except for the president of the United States [emphasis added.]. . .


CARPENTER: – I remember America –


SANDERS: We are America.


CARPENTER: [In 2016] I was encouraging the delegates to vote for someone else other than Donald Trump. I stood on a panel with Van Jones. He said you cannot abort your candidate at this point in time. I said it is the right thing to do and look what happened, Donald Trump became president. . .


SANDERS: Yes. Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the accusers of Donald Trump liars. And so, people that live in glass houses have a tendency not to want to try to throw stones. And that’s what we’re seeing here.


So, the president, his hands are essentially tied. If he thinks Roy Moore should step down, I’m wondering if he then is going to turn in his resignation as president of the United States of America. [emphasis added.]


TAPPER: Well, I am hearing a lot of people today saying Al Franken needs to step down, but they’re not saying the same thing about President Trump. I mean –


SANDERS: We have to address this across the board, OK? So if we are going to really attack this issue, if we really want to change the system, we have to have a certain set of standards by which we engage in this work of combating sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexual microaggression. So, we can’t have one standard for somebody and another standard for someone else.

Accusations of sexual harassment and worse that were leveled against candidate Donald Trump in the closing days of the 2016 campaign, which were never heard in a court of law and largely disappeared as soon as he was elected, clearly did not impede his path to victory in the November election. During the past year, however, the perception of him as a sexual aggressor has permeated virally especially through social media. It continues to motivate the anti-Trumpers and is now gaining new currency. The scorched earth campaign that assumes men accused of sexual misconduct are automatically guilty is expanding – apparently by design now – to include Democrats, giving it a patina of bipartisan credibility. This strategy is already being used as a tactic in the effort to destroy President Trump.

Thomas Lifson had a summary of his similar concerns about the Franken story and what it might lead to, in the November 17 American Thinker, “Al Franken’s career is collateral damage for the Dems on the way to getting Trump:”

That sinking feeling Al Franken is experiencing is the realization that his career is now a pawn in the fanatical efforts of Democrats to get President Trump out of office. . . The logical steps for getting Trump are clear.


Step one: Establish that sexual harassment before taking office is sufficient grounds to remove someone from office. This is the necessary predicate. Franken’s departure from office will establish the purported sincerity of the Democrats in establishing this brand-new principle. . .


Step two: Apply this doctrine to Roy Moore if he should win the Senate seat for which he is running. If he loses, triumphantly announce that even the reddest of red states agrees that previous misbehavior is dispositive in removing an incumbent.


Step three: Throw Bill Clinton under the bus. . . .


Step four: As the hysteria mounts, following the blood sacrifices, demand that President Trump be impeached for actions before he took office. Failing that, tell voters that by hanging onto office, he is disgracing the nation and telling little boys to grope their little girl classmates in first grade.

Lifson was prescient in his predictions, including his step three. On Thursday evening November 16, Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat U.S. Senator from New York and a potential candidate for president in 2020, in an interview with the New York Times in effect threw Bill Clinton under the bus. The Washington Post reported Friday morning, “Why Kirsten Gillibrand saying that Bill Clinton should’ve resigned is a big deal:”

Asked directly if she believed Mr. Clinton should have stepped down [when as president he faced his own allegations of sexual impropriety], Ms. Gillibrand took a long pause and said, “Yes, I think that is the appropriate response.”

On Friday evening, the most read article at the Washington Post was “What Trump has said about assault allegations against Franken, Moore, Clinton — and himself.” The #2 article was the one on Gillibrand.

On Hannity, Fox News Channel Friday evening, with Jeanine Pirro substituting for Sean Hannity, Democrat strategist Doug Schoen, echoing the opinions of many in his party, insisted that Franken should resign. Another guest, Fox News contributor Tammy Bruce, a libertarian conservative and former feminist, commented:

What this [the Democrat Party’s reaction to the Franken scandal] is really about is the fact that the Democrats – they’re this dangerous now. They don’t care that they facilitated this [serial sexual misconduct by Bill Clinton] in the ‘90s. All they want to do now is to try to remake history so that they can pretend to be our moral betters – our moral superiors – again so that they can lecture us on the Republicans who are doing it. They do not care about the issue, they do not care about women. The bottom line here is that this is a complete meltdown – and it’s not just Gillibrand. It’s pretty much every [Democrat] throwing Clinton under the bus. . . The Democrats have been treating women like crap for decades and this is a reckoning. 

Over at CNN, April Ryan, a CNN political analyst, speaking on Don Lemon’s show, commented that President Trump’s alleged past sexual misconduct before he became president “is an albatross around the president’s neck.” In my opinion, Ryan speaks for many representatives of the MSM and the Deep State in terms of where this all goes from here. Target: Donald J. Trump.

My recommendation: Pay very close attention as this story unfolds. Be prepared to read between the lines and keep Lifson’s, and my, analysis and admonitions in mind.

Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture.  Follow Peter on Twitter @pchowka.

The outing of U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN) as the latest high profile alleged abuser of women – accompanied by photographic evidence – calls for a cautious analysis. Not because there is any doubt about the veracity of the accusations by Franken’s main accuser, Leeann Tweeden. After all, Ms. Tweeden has come forward with an incriminating photo and a detailed recounting of Franken’s sexual harassment and humiliation of her in 2006, two years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate. As of this writing, Franken has issued three increasingly detailed written apologies for what he did to Ms. Tweeden which adds significant credibility to her claims.

The incriminating photo: Al Franken and Leeann Tweeden December 2006

What needs to be examined closely and critically is how the mainstream media and the powers that be – including elements of the Resistance, the Shadow Government, and the Deep State – are preparing to use this story to advance their ultimate agenda: The take down and removal from office of President Donald J. Trump.

It was surprising to see the media, and even many Democrat politicians, jump on the Franken story as soon as it broke on Thursday November 16. It was full-speed ahead to attack Franken and even to call for his resignation from the Senate. The Teflon coating that almost always protects Democrats and, until recently, most left-wing moguls and celebrities when they get in trouble, especially of a sexual harassment nature, was stripped away – and the feeding frenzy piling on of Franken was off and running.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not sorry to see Al Franken exposed for being the creep that he is. His entire career as a writer, comedian, and performer before he got into politics in 2007 absolutely reeks. Examples of his sleazy and disgusting work that have helped to lower the bar of the popular culture starting in 1975 are abundant. Until Thursday, Franken, to my knowledge, was never publicly accused of actually acting against anyone based on his immature, puerile, and sexist beliefs.

Jake Tapper interviews Leeann Tweeden CNN Nov. 16, 2017

An example of the unusual media focus on this story is the coverage of it on CNN on day one. On Thursday evening, CNN preempted the second hour of Anderson Cooper’s AC360 at 9 P.M. E.S.T. and substituted a “special edition” hour long episode of The Lead with Jake Tapper that usually airs five hours earlier.

Tapper’s special prime time show started with an uninterrupted, commercial-free replay of his entire interview with Leeann Tweeden that originally ran live on his afternoon show earlier Thursday. The fact that no commercials were shown for over 35 minutes straight was almost unprecedented. That kind of rare preemption of advertising spots is usually reserved for instances of major breaking news, like a terrorist attack or a hurricane about to make landfall on the U.S.

Amanda Carpenter

Symone Sanders

The prerecorded segment with Tweeden, with a new live intro by Tapper was followed by a live discussion featuring familiar CNN talking heads Amanda Carpenter, former communications director for Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, and Symone Sanders, former press secretary for Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign and a CNN political commentator. Both of these analysts are consistently anti-Trump.

From CNN’s transcript of the program:

JAKE TAPPER: And this – this is not a partisan issue.


AMANDA CARPENTER: No.


TAPPER: Democrats are doing this to women. Republicans are doing this to women.


SYMONE SANDERS: Independents have probably done it as well, Green Party folks, people that – don’t even believe in a political system.


This is about the overall culture and system. We have – it has far exceeded a problem. (INAUDIBLE) had a really great piece in (INAUDIBLE) a couple weeks ago specifically about sexual culture, and talking about the fact that this is from the Hollywood Hills, to the boardroom, and everywhere in between. And so this is a system and we have to examine what it is about our culture or sexual culture that seems to support this. We talk a lot about rape culture, but rape should not have been the bar that is met for us to have a conversation about this, for us to do something. Because it’s not just rape, it’s those sexual microaggressions, the cat calling on the street, it’s the someone “pushing up” on you in an office in a professional setting.


None of these things are OK, but we are only now liberated to have these conversations because women have been courageous in coming forward, so now – because this is bigger than Al Franken. . .


CARPENTER: They [U.S. Senate] can vote to censure him [Franken] in a simple majority vote and take a stand on this issue. And for that matter, Donald Trump or anyone else they see fit.


SANDERS: Yes. I mean, I guess it’s just – it just troubles me because Donald – it seems like everyone else in this moment has had to account for what they’ve done and what they’ve been accused of except for the president of the United States [emphasis added.]. . .


CARPENTER: – I remember America –


SANDERS: We are America.


CARPENTER: [In 2016] I was encouraging the delegates to vote for someone else other than Donald Trump. I stood on a panel with Van Jones. He said you cannot abort your candidate at this point in time. I said it is the right thing to do and look what happened, Donald Trump became president. . .


SANDERS: Yes. Sarah Huckabee Sanders called the accusers of Donald Trump liars. And so, people that live in glass houses have a tendency not to want to try to throw stones. And that’s what we’re seeing here.


So, the president, his hands are essentially tied. If he thinks Roy Moore should step down, I’m wondering if he then is going to turn in his resignation as president of the United States of America. [emphasis added.]


TAPPER: Well, I am hearing a lot of people today saying Al Franken needs to step down, but they’re not saying the same thing about President Trump. I mean –


SANDERS: We have to address this across the board, OK? So if we are going to really attack this issue, if we really want to change the system, we have to have a certain set of standards by which we engage in this work of combating sexual assault, sexual harassment, sexual microaggression. So, we can’t have one standard for somebody and another standard for someone else.

Accusations of sexual harassment and worse that were leveled against candidate Donald Trump in the closing days of the 2016 campaign, which were never heard in a court of law and largely disappeared as soon as he was elected, clearly did not impede his path to victory in the November election. During the past year, however, the perception of him as a sexual aggressor has permeated virally especially through social media. It continues to motivate the anti-Trumpers and is now gaining new currency. The scorched earth campaign that assumes men accused of sexual misconduct are automatically guilty is expanding – apparently by design now – to include Democrats, giving it a patina of bipartisan credibility. This strategy is already being used as a tactic in the effort to destroy President Trump.

Thomas Lifson had a summary of his similar concerns about the Franken story and what it might lead to, in the November 17 American Thinker, “Al Franken’s career is collateral damage for the Dems on the way to getting Trump:”

That sinking feeling Al Franken is experiencing is the realization that his career is now a pawn in the fanatical efforts of Democrats to get President Trump out of office. . . The logical steps for getting Trump are clear.


Step one: Establish that sexual harassment before taking office is sufficient grounds to remove someone from office. This is the necessary predicate. Franken’s departure from office will establish the purported sincerity of the Democrats in establishing this brand-new principle. . .


Step two: Apply this doctrine to Roy Moore if he should win the Senate seat for which he is running. If he loses, triumphantly announce that even the reddest of red states agrees that previous misbehavior is dispositive in removing an incumbent.


Step three: Throw Bill Clinton under the bus. . . .


Step four: As the hysteria mounts, following the blood sacrifices, demand that President Trump be impeached for actions before he took office. Failing that, tell voters that by hanging onto office, he is disgracing the nation and telling little boys to grope their little girl classmates in first grade.

Lifson was prescient in his predictions, including his step three. On Thursday evening November 16, Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat U.S. Senator from New York and a potential candidate for president in 2020, in an interview with the New York Times in effect threw Bill Clinton under the bus. The Washington Post reported Friday morning, “Why Kirsten Gillibrand saying that Bill Clinton should’ve resigned is a big deal:”

Asked directly if she believed Mr. Clinton should have stepped down [when as president he faced his own allegations of sexual impropriety], Ms. Gillibrand took a long pause and said, “Yes, I think that is the appropriate response.”

On Friday evening, the most read article at the Washington Post was “What Trump has said about assault allegations against Franken, Moore, Clinton — and himself.” The #2 article was the one on Gillibrand.

On Hannity, Fox News Channel Friday evening, with Jeanine Pirro substituting for Sean Hannity, Democrat strategist Doug Schoen, echoing the opinions of many in his party, insisted that Franken should resign. Another guest, Fox News contributor Tammy Bruce, a libertarian conservative and former feminist, commented:

What this [the Democrat Party’s reaction to the Franken scandal] is really about is the fact that the Democrats – they’re this dangerous now. They don’t care that they facilitated this [serial sexual misconduct by Bill Clinton] in the ‘90s. All they want to do now is to try to remake history so that they can pretend to be our moral betters – our moral superiors – again so that they can lecture us on the Republicans who are doing it. They do not care about the issue, they do not care about women. The bottom line here is that this is a complete meltdown – and it’s not just Gillibrand. It’s pretty much every [Democrat] throwing Clinton under the bus. . . The Democrats have been treating women like crap for decades and this is a reckoning. 

Over at CNN, April Ryan, a CNN political analyst, speaking on Don Lemon’s show, commented that President Trump’s alleged past sexual misconduct before he became president “is an albatross around the president’s neck.” In my opinion, Ryan speaks for many representatives of the MSM and the Deep State in terms of where this all goes from here. Target: Donald J. Trump.

My recommendation: Pay very close attention as this story unfolds. Be prepared to read between the lines and keep Lifson’s, and my, analysis and admonitions in mind.

Peter Barry Chowka is a veteran reporter and analyst of news on national politics, media, and popular culture.  Follow Peter on Twitter @pchowka.



Source link

Colin Kaepernick Needs the Truth


On the same day that GQ — sometimes known as Genuflecting Quarterbacks — named Colin Kaepernick as its “Citizen of the Year,” several mainstream media outlets — including Christian websites — reported that some Christian players in the NFL who support Kaepernick’s protest of “systemic oppression and… police brutality toward black people” are frustrated at the criticism directed at Mr. Kaepernick. They are especially frustrated that the out-of-work quarterback isn’t getting more support from the Christian community within the NFL.

As ABC News reported,

Eric Reid and other Christian players who support Colin Kaepernick’s social justice movement want believers on the opposite side of the controversial anthem protest to ask themselves a simple but powerful question: What would Jesus do?

Reid — then a teammate of Kaepernick — was quick to join the back-up quarterback last year in taking a knee during the National Anthem. Reid would later tell the AP that his faith was instrumental in his decision to kneel. Referencing Proverbs, Reid declared that he wanted to be a “voice for the voiceless.” He added,

We all have a love for people. The Bible tells us love your brother as yourself so that’s why we’re doing it. We have to speak up for those who can’t do it for themselves. My faith is ultimately what led me to start protesting and it’s what continues to drive me. Faith without works is dead. I feel like the past year before we started protesting, the Lord has prepped me for this moment.

Reid — one of three NFL players who took a knee during the NFL’s Veteran’s Day celebration — expressed particular frustration with his Christian colleagues,

I do see some hypocrisy with the people that call themselves Christians. If you know Jesus, he went into the house of God and turned over the tables and was angry and said they made the house of God into a marketplace so I would say this is something that He would do.

Baltimore Ravens tight end, Ben Watson — a long-time outspoken Christian in the NFL — was also critical of Christians who put “politics above the gospel, empathy and understanding.” He added,

We talk about what Jesus would do. Let’s think about that. How should I Biblically look at this situation? Is my response as an American going against what my response should be as a Christian?… Being kind is not predicated on what you can do for me. Justice is not predicated on if I experienced injustice or not. We can advocate for people who have experiences that we don’t even have. True justice is blind and righteous. Christians should be about expanding and promoting the gospel. If you listen or think about the subject matter that players and people are concerned about, you could not as someone who reads scripture turn a blind eye to it.

Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins, who often raises his fist during the anthem, wants the Christian community to be more united.

As big as we are, as much influence as we have on policy and politics, if the Church ever got behind really being for equality and really being for justice, it would show up, it would come. But a lot of times we don’t show the empathy, we don’t take the time to listen and we’re just as segregated as the world is right now.

I’m not sure about the “Christian cred” of these other professionals, but I’ve long admired and respected the words and deeds of Ben Watson. As I’ve noted before, more than once Mr. Watson has boldly and articulately stood for the truth on some of the most important moral issues of our time — namely marriage and abortion. However, I think he needs to reexamine his approach to Colin Kaepernick and his protest and get his coworkers to do the same.

For example, when it comes to “What Would Jesus Do?” in this situation, of course, I can’t say for sure how Jesus would deal with a modern-day millionaire “social justice warrior,” but from what Scripture reveals, I imagine He would begin and end with what He always did: the truth.

As He did with the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus might start by asking Mr. Kaepernick about his spouse. The woman of Samaria told Jesus, “I have no husband.” Likewise, Mr. Kaepernick would have to reply that he has no wife. Yet, as was the case with the Samaritan woman, Mr. Kaepernick is steeped in an immoral (sinful) relationship.

It is well known that for several years now Kaepernick has been “dating” (often known as “living in sin” with) Nessa Diab. Ms. Diab is a “radio and TV personality.” Specifically, she is an MTV host. That alone should send shudders down the spine of any spiritually “woke” individual. As if we needed direct clarification, Diab has openly spoken of her sexual exploits with Kaepernick.

What’s more, while Kaepernick claims to be a Christian, Diab is a Muslim and a raging liberal. (While this seems very contradictory, Islam and liberalism do have much in common.) Before trying to understand his kneeling protests, maybe Mr. Watson should speak to Colin about being “unequally yoked” and the sin of fornication.

What if Diab gets pregnant? Will they kill yet another black baby? Will they bring yet another American child into the world who doesn’t have a married mother and father? In other words, instead of being part of any a solution to what really plagues the American black community, Mr. Kaepernick is part of the problem and is very likely about to make things even worse.

What if, while standing among the crowds of urban youth — where he so often finds himself — instead of talking about the myth of “systemic oppression and police brutality,” Mr. Kaepernick would speak of the importance of marriage, family, and sexual morality? And more importantly, what if he lived those truths himself?

Again, Kaepernick kneels for a lie and is living his life according to multiple lies. Instead of trying to “understand” a lie, Mr. Kaepernick’s Christian friends should tell him the truth.

Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.

www.trevorgrantthomas.com

Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

On the same day that GQ — sometimes known as Genuflecting Quarterbacks — named Colin Kaepernick as its “Citizen of the Year,” several mainstream media outlets — including Christian websites — reported that some Christian players in the NFL who support Kaepernick’s protest of “systemic oppression and… police brutality toward black people” are frustrated at the criticism directed at Mr. Kaepernick. They are especially frustrated that the out-of-work quarterback isn’t getting more support from the Christian community within the NFL.

As ABC News reported,

Eric Reid and other Christian players who support Colin Kaepernick’s social justice movement want believers on the opposite side of the controversial anthem protest to ask themselves a simple but powerful question: What would Jesus do?

Reid — then a teammate of Kaepernick — was quick to join the back-up quarterback last year in taking a knee during the National Anthem. Reid would later tell the AP that his faith was instrumental in his decision to kneel. Referencing Proverbs, Reid declared that he wanted to be a “voice for the voiceless.” He added,

We all have a love for people. The Bible tells us love your brother as yourself so that’s why we’re doing it. We have to speak up for those who can’t do it for themselves. My faith is ultimately what led me to start protesting and it’s what continues to drive me. Faith without works is dead. I feel like the past year before we started protesting, the Lord has prepped me for this moment.

Reid — one of three NFL players who took a knee during the NFL’s Veteran’s Day celebration — expressed particular frustration with his Christian colleagues,

I do see some hypocrisy with the people that call themselves Christians. If you know Jesus, he went into the house of God and turned over the tables and was angry and said they made the house of God into a marketplace so I would say this is something that He would do.

Baltimore Ravens tight end, Ben Watson — a long-time outspoken Christian in the NFL — was also critical of Christians who put “politics above the gospel, empathy and understanding.” He added,

We talk about what Jesus would do. Let’s think about that. How should I Biblically look at this situation? Is my response as an American going against what my response should be as a Christian?… Being kind is not predicated on what you can do for me. Justice is not predicated on if I experienced injustice or not. We can advocate for people who have experiences that we don’t even have. True justice is blind and righteous. Christians should be about expanding and promoting the gospel. If you listen or think about the subject matter that players and people are concerned about, you could not as someone who reads scripture turn a blind eye to it.

Philadelphia Eagles safety Malcolm Jenkins, who often raises his fist during the anthem, wants the Christian community to be more united.

As big as we are, as much influence as we have on policy and politics, if the Church ever got behind really being for equality and really being for justice, it would show up, it would come. But a lot of times we don’t show the empathy, we don’t take the time to listen and we’re just as segregated as the world is right now.

I’m not sure about the “Christian cred” of these other professionals, but I’ve long admired and respected the words and deeds of Ben Watson. As I’ve noted before, more than once Mr. Watson has boldly and articulately stood for the truth on some of the most important moral issues of our time — namely marriage and abortion. However, I think he needs to reexamine his approach to Colin Kaepernick and his protest and get his coworkers to do the same.

For example, when it comes to “What Would Jesus Do?” in this situation, of course, I can’t say for sure how Jesus would deal with a modern-day millionaire “social justice warrior,” but from what Scripture reveals, I imagine He would begin and end with what He always did: the truth.

As He did with the Samaritan woman at the well, Jesus might start by asking Mr. Kaepernick about his spouse. The woman of Samaria told Jesus, “I have no husband.” Likewise, Mr. Kaepernick would have to reply that he has no wife. Yet, as was the case with the Samaritan woman, Mr. Kaepernick is steeped in an immoral (sinful) relationship.

It is well known that for several years now Kaepernick has been “dating” (often known as “living in sin” with) Nessa Diab. Ms. Diab is a “radio and TV personality.” Specifically, she is an MTV host. That alone should send shudders down the spine of any spiritually “woke” individual. As if we needed direct clarification, Diab has openly spoken of her sexual exploits with Kaepernick.

What’s more, while Kaepernick claims to be a Christian, Diab is a Muslim and a raging liberal. (While this seems very contradictory, Islam and liberalism do have much in common.) Before trying to understand his kneeling protests, maybe Mr. Watson should speak to Colin about being “unequally yoked” and the sin of fornication.

What if Diab gets pregnant? Will they kill yet another black baby? Will they bring yet another American child into the world who doesn’t have a married mother and father? In other words, instead of being part of any a solution to what really plagues the American black community, Mr. Kaepernick is part of the problem and is very likely about to make things even worse.

What if, while standing among the crowds of urban youth — where he so often finds himself — instead of talking about the myth of “systemic oppression and police brutality,” Mr. Kaepernick would speak of the importance of marriage, family, and sexual morality? And more importantly, what if he lived those truths himself?

Again, Kaepernick kneels for a lie and is living his life according to multiple lies. Instead of trying to “understand” a lie, Mr. Kaepernick’s Christian friends should tell him the truth.

Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.

www.trevorgrantthomas.com

Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America

tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com



Source link

Robert Mueller Is the Cover-Up


Friendship is a beautiful thing, and it’s really good to know that Robert Mueller, Comey, Brennan, and Clapper have known each other for many years.  They’re loyal friends. 

Mueller is a former top FBI dude, who helped to clear Bill Clinton after that impeachment mess, and like Mr. Comey, he did his very best.  Clapper was the single most powerful man in the “intelligence” “community,” a centralized directorate (as the Soviets used to call it), which was George W. Bush’s principal response to 9/11/01. 

Now don’t get me wrong: I’m sure all these brave men (or persons, I should say) made great contributions to the safety and welfare of all of us.  But here they are at the peak of their careers, each one of them, and Democrat candidate Hillary is suddenly exposed to the world with her email fiasco as SecState.  Violating the very first rule of intelligence and statecraft, to protect your country’s secrets.  And she obviously sold secret and sensitive information to Clinton Foundation “donors” around the world, including old friend Vladimir Putin (who now owns 20 percent of U.S. uranium, or possibly more), the Muslim Brotherhood (friends of Huma), the Iranians (who sponsor half the terror attacks in the world), the Chinese (who want more of our secret high tech), and probably the French (who understand bribery and just wanted to get access to Hillary as POTUS). 

We’ve seen how Bill sold U.S. rocket-launching secrets to the Chinese for campaign money…or personal money.  It’s so hard to tell the difference. 

Well, skip that. 

So the wife of the perp becomes a senator from the State of New York, which is well known for the purity of its politics.  Why did she become senator?  Was she a resident of N.Y. State?  Was she the best qualified person to represent the Great State (etc.)?  Or did the N.Y. machine just pick her and scare everybody else away? 

So Hillary has violated any number of laws all of her adult life, ever since she was hired by the Senate Watergate Committee to lynch Richard Nixon – which worked just as it was meant to.  Nixon resigned, but for the Democrats, he should have been hanged, drawn, quartered, waterboarded, and made to read the NYT op-ed page for extra punishment.  I know Democrats who still hate Richard Nixon with a hellish fury.  Nixon is the gift that keeps on giving.  Hillary’s major role in the persecution of President Nixon – a duly elected POTUS – was to urge that all his constitutional rights be taken away.  That was the young Hillary right after law school. 

The major difference from Watergate today is that no sane and sentient human being believes the NYT or the WaPo anymore.  They have permanently blown their cover. 

And yet the Axis of NYT-WaPo tells us that Donald Trump is just suspected of nefarious dealings with the Russians, which presumably caused the Russians to break into Hillary’s ridiculous emails and the DNC file system, sending truthful (but wicked) information to WikiLeaks, to be dumped at strategic moments of the election campaign. 

Notice well that nobody claims that the Hillary dumps were false.  They were true enough.  That’s why they hate Trump and his imaginary Russian sources.  It’s the truth that hurt Hillary. 

So that’s their problem.  It’s not that Hillary isn’t a crook, as proven by an endless number of leaked sources, including her ridiculous email setup.  This was arguably treason by the U.S. secretary of state in a time of war – a war that the Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas refused to name, because that might kick in the constitutional provisions for declaring war and living with the reality of treason. 

So Trump catches wind of that swamp stink and fires Comey, Clapper, and Brennan.  Comey then plants a bomb in the media alleging that Trump had Moscow ladies of the night peeing on Obama’s bed. 

Seriously. 

That’s what set off this whole witch hunt, and Oliver Cromwell would have been ashamed of these goofballs.  When the English witch-hunters went after suspects, waterboarding was the least of their methods of interrogation. 

Along the way, the Brits got involved in this story of high crimes and misdemeanors, because if you believe that that old MI6 guy Chris Steele didn’t tell his fellow spooks over there about dumping Moscow prostitute stories into the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA, not to mention the top of the DNC, you’d better think again.  The U.K.-E.U. role in all this is never talked about – a mighty suspicious gap in the story.  Chris and his old MI6 buds probably passed the story around just for laughs. 

So Trump and Russia allegedly colluded, according to the Steele “dossier,” which was freely passed around D.C. for months while no “respectable” news outlet would publish it. 

Now, that phoney-baloney “dossier” looked mighty suspicious to the Monsters of the Deep, like Comey, who instantly demanded a special counsel to pursue Trump and anybody associated with him.  The “special counsel,” an invention of the Watergate plot against Nixon that violates every principle of the U.S. Constitution, turned out to be…guess who! 

Yes!  It’s former FBI boss Robert Mueller, who got Bill Clinton out of all that trouble with the Chinese missile secrets. 

Mueller’s integrity is unquestionable.  See?  Proof of that is his close friendships with Comey, Clapper, Brennan, and the rest.  Friends of Bill and Hillary.  This man’s integrity is above suspicion. 

Now, let’s suppose that all these characters are monument of human integrity, fierce defenders of the United States and its Constitution.  Like Hillary, Bill, the Obamas, and all. 

I know it’s hard to believe all that, but try your best. 

Now Robert Mueller has recruited for his honest and even-handed process a posse of Democrat lawyers who have proven their prosecutorial zeal for scapegoats like Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart. 

The obvious kicker in all this is that Robert Mueller is part and parcel of the Hillary Cover-Up.  We know more about Hillary’s misdeeds, thanks to all those WikiLeaks plus FOIA exposures of misfeasance and malfeasance galore, going back to the Bill Clinton and Paula Jones days, when Hillary ran the Bimbo Eruptions intimidation campaign.  We have huge amounts of believable evidence about these crooks and corruptocrats, going back to Arkansas and the rest. 

The single most important facts is that nobody has ever been prosecuted for these crimes.  That fact by itself throws serious doubts on the entire justice system of the United States.

The farcical Mueller witch hunt against POTUS Trump is going to slather the whole U.S. Justice Department with that same stinky swamp water.  It’s inevitable. 

You can’t put a close friend of the perps in charge of the “special counsel” – a made-up name that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or the Federalist Papers.  It’s just an eructation of swamp gas from the Watergate years, meaning nothing. 

And when Robert Mueller comes out with his solemn report on the Moscow prostitutes and Trump’s golden showers, you can expect every single liberal paper to cheer itself hoarse. 

Because “justice” is not what this is about. 

Friendship is a beautiful thing, and it’s really good to know that Robert Mueller, Comey, Brennan, and Clapper have known each other for many years.  They’re loyal friends. 

Mueller is a former top FBI dude, who helped to clear Bill Clinton after that impeachment mess, and like Mr. Comey, he did his very best.  Clapper was the single most powerful man in the “intelligence” “community,” a centralized directorate (as the Soviets used to call it), which was George W. Bush’s principal response to 9/11/01. 

Now don’t get me wrong: I’m sure all these brave men (or persons, I should say) made great contributions to the safety and welfare of all of us.  But here they are at the peak of their careers, each one of them, and Democrat candidate Hillary is suddenly exposed to the world with her email fiasco as SecState.  Violating the very first rule of intelligence and statecraft, to protect your country’s secrets.  And she obviously sold secret and sensitive information to Clinton Foundation “donors” around the world, including old friend Vladimir Putin (who now owns 20 percent of U.S. uranium, or possibly more), the Muslim Brotherhood (friends of Huma), the Iranians (who sponsor half the terror attacks in the world), the Chinese (who want more of our secret high tech), and probably the French (who understand bribery and just wanted to get access to Hillary as POTUS). 

We’ve seen how Bill sold U.S. rocket-launching secrets to the Chinese for campaign money…or personal money.  It’s so hard to tell the difference. 

Well, skip that. 

So the wife of the perp becomes a senator from the State of New York, which is well known for the purity of its politics.  Why did she become senator?  Was she a resident of N.Y. State?  Was she the best qualified person to represent the Great State (etc.)?  Or did the N.Y. machine just pick her and scare everybody else away? 

So Hillary has violated any number of laws all of her adult life, ever since she was hired by the Senate Watergate Committee to lynch Richard Nixon – which worked just as it was meant to.  Nixon resigned, but for the Democrats, he should have been hanged, drawn, quartered, waterboarded, and made to read the NYT op-ed page for extra punishment.  I know Democrats who still hate Richard Nixon with a hellish fury.  Nixon is the gift that keeps on giving.  Hillary’s major role in the persecution of President Nixon – a duly elected POTUS – was to urge that all his constitutional rights be taken away.  That was the young Hillary right after law school. 

The major difference from Watergate today is that no sane and sentient human being believes the NYT or the WaPo anymore.  They have permanently blown their cover. 

And yet the Axis of NYT-WaPo tells us that Donald Trump is just suspected of nefarious dealings with the Russians, which presumably caused the Russians to break into Hillary’s ridiculous emails and the DNC file system, sending truthful (but wicked) information to WikiLeaks, to be dumped at strategic moments of the election campaign. 

Notice well that nobody claims that the Hillary dumps were false.  They were true enough.  That’s why they hate Trump and his imaginary Russian sources.  It’s the truth that hurt Hillary. 

So that’s their problem.  It’s not that Hillary isn’t a crook, as proven by an endless number of leaked sources, including her ridiculous email setup.  This was arguably treason by the U.S. secretary of state in a time of war – a war that the Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas refused to name, because that might kick in the constitutional provisions for declaring war and living with the reality of treason. 

So Trump catches wind of that swamp stink and fires Comey, Clapper, and Brennan.  Comey then plants a bomb in the media alleging that Trump had Moscow ladies of the night peeing on Obama’s bed. 

Seriously. 

That’s what set off this whole witch hunt, and Oliver Cromwell would have been ashamed of these goofballs.  When the English witch-hunters went after suspects, waterboarding was the least of their methods of interrogation. 

Along the way, the Brits got involved in this story of high crimes and misdemeanors, because if you believe that that old MI6 guy Chris Steele didn’t tell his fellow spooks over there about dumping Moscow prostitute stories into the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA, not to mention the top of the DNC, you’d better think again.  The U.K.-E.U. role in all this is never talked about – a mighty suspicious gap in the story.  Chris and his old MI6 buds probably passed the story around just for laughs. 

So Trump and Russia allegedly colluded, according to the Steele “dossier,” which was freely passed around D.C. for months while no “respectable” news outlet would publish it. 

Now, that phoney-baloney “dossier” looked mighty suspicious to the Monsters of the Deep, like Comey, who instantly demanded a special counsel to pursue Trump and anybody associated with him.  The “special counsel,” an invention of the Watergate plot against Nixon that violates every principle of the U.S. Constitution, turned out to be…guess who! 

Yes!  It’s former FBI boss Robert Mueller, who got Bill Clinton out of all that trouble with the Chinese missile secrets. 

Mueller’s integrity is unquestionable.  See?  Proof of that is his close friendships with Comey, Clapper, Brennan, and the rest.  Friends of Bill and Hillary.  This man’s integrity is above suspicion. 

Now, let’s suppose that all these characters are monument of human integrity, fierce defenders of the United States and its Constitution.  Like Hillary, Bill, the Obamas, and all. 

I know it’s hard to believe all that, but try your best. 

Now Robert Mueller has recruited for his honest and even-handed process a posse of Democrat lawyers who have proven their prosecutorial zeal for scapegoats like Scooter Libby and Martha Stewart. 

The obvious kicker in all this is that Robert Mueller is part and parcel of the Hillary Cover-Up.  We know more about Hillary’s misdeeds, thanks to all those WikiLeaks plus FOIA exposures of misfeasance and malfeasance galore, going back to the Bill Clinton and Paula Jones days, when Hillary ran the Bimbo Eruptions intimidation campaign.  We have huge amounts of believable evidence about these crooks and corruptocrats, going back to Arkansas and the rest. 

The single most important facts is that nobody has ever been prosecuted for these crimes.  That fact by itself throws serious doubts on the entire justice system of the United States.

The farcical Mueller witch hunt against POTUS Trump is going to slather the whole U.S. Justice Department with that same stinky swamp water.  It’s inevitable. 

You can’t put a close friend of the perps in charge of the “special counsel” – a made-up name that appears nowhere in the U.S. Constitution or the Federalist Papers.  It’s just an eructation of swamp gas from the Watergate years, meaning nothing. 

And when Robert Mueller comes out with his solemn report on the Moscow prostitutes and Trump’s golden showers, you can expect every single liberal paper to cheer itself hoarse. 

Because “justice” is not what this is about. 



Source link

Snowflakes and the Great William Gladstone


The meaningful, if unstated, question is whether the Beatles, the enormously successful rock band formed in Liverpool, northern England, in 1960 can save William Gladstone, the British politician and leader of the Liberal Party who served as prime minister for 12 years in nonconsecutive four terms between 1868 and 1894, the only British prime minister to serve four terms.

Now, students at the University of Liverpool, led by a 20-year-old named Alisha Raithatha, are petitioning the university to have Gladstone’s name removed from a dorm, a hall of residence, which also carries the name of Roscoe, in a building which is currently being demolished to be redeveloped. Raithatha may be regarded as one of the increasing number of “snowflakes” among British students, youngsters who are part of and live according to the prescriptions of grievance culture, judging the past by the standards of today, more prone to take offence than previous generations, disinviting or preventing controversial speakers at their universities. The sad situation now is, as Professor Robert George has said, “too few have courage to stand up to those who want to shout down dissenting speech.”

Snowflakes are falling and keep falling all over the political place, bringing with them an atmosphere of self-righteousness, temper tantrums, and unwillingness to engage in any robust debate on issues not to their liking. The snowflakes are attempting to “decolonize” the English Department at Cambridge University in England, to remove the 19th century imperialist, though generous philanthropist, Cecil Rhodes from Oriel College, Oxford, to influence the BBC TV production of Howard’s End by incorporating black characters who never appear in the famous novel by E.M. Forster published in 1910. Curiously, a sentence from the book seems relevant to present circumstances: “Actual life is full of false clues and signposts that lead nowhere. We nerve ourselves for a crisis that never comes.”

The issue of past slavery is a compelling one in Britain as in the U.S. One surprising target in recent years has been and remains Lord Nelson, the heroic and widely admired admiral, whose tall statue in Trafalgar Square, London, is the welcome home for pigeons who rest on his head. Snowflakes have called for the removal of the statue. The pigeons should not suffer because Nelson used his seat in the House of Lords to support friends who ran slave plantations in the West Indies. And now in New York City, Italian-Americans and others may soon be saying Goodbye Columbus to the great 16th century Admiral from Genoa.

The Liverpool snowflakes were “horrified” that were living in a building that was made unpleasant by the name of Gladstone. The students evidently lack any real knowledge of this austere figure, educated at Eton and Oxford, member of Parliament at age 23, a reformer who switched parties from conservative to liberal, and grew more radical with age. In many ways he laid the basis of the British welfare state, introduced the secret ballot for voting, expanded in 1884 the vote to working men in rural areas, critic of imperialism, and a person who spent a lifetime trying to obtain Home Rule for Ireland, a project that was defeated in the House of Lords in 1893. 

The snowflakes did not know all this, but they perhaps know that William’s father, Sir John Gladstone, owned sugar plantations in the Caribbean, British Guyana, and Jamaica, for which he was compensated with £100,000 for losing hundreds of slaves when slavery was abolished in 1833. As an MP, William Gladstone, who favored banning the slave trade, had also favored owners getting compensation as well as calling for the improvement of the conditions of the slaves.

Instead of Gladstone, the snowflakes suggested the name of their building should be changed to Jon Snow, a Channel 4 newsreader. Paradoxically, Snow, now 70, had been expelled from the university in 1970 while a law student there for participating in a demonstration against the university’s investments in apartheid South Africa. However, later in 2011 he got an honorary degree from the university.

This call for change of name in the case of Gladstone resembles that a few years ago when the Colston Girl’s School in Bristol, west England, had to grapple with the call to change the name of the school because of the link to Edward Colston, a prominent slave trader in the 17th century.  He had shipped 100,000 African slaves to the West Indies and America, but was also a leading philanthropist in Bristol and had financed the creation of the school. The Colston name remains.

In the case of Gladstone in Liverpool, the Beatles may come to the rescue. One of their well-known songs is “Penny Lane,” written in 1967 probably by Paul McCartney. Penny Lane is a bus terminus and a shopping area in Liverpool where McCartney and John Lennon used to meet.  The possible problem is not the sexual allusions in the song, but that the area is named after James Penny, a slave ship captain, a local slave trader who opposed the abolition of the slave trade.

Liverpool public authorities are not likely to entertain, and thousands of Beatle fans would agree, any call to remove the name Penny Lane, “in my ears and in my eyes.”  It must remain, irrespective of past slavery. Similarly, Liverpool University authorities should act in similar fashion. And perhaps the remaining Beatles might write another song, Gladstone is my bag.

The Liverpool snowflakes should go back to their dorm and their studies and be informed of the amusing words of Benjamin Disraeli on Gladstone, his fierce political rival, “he had no single redeeming defect.” From a meteorological point of view, snowflakes are light and pleasant, but in mass they are dangerous, and may cause a blizzard and obstruction. Liverpool should take care. 

The meaningful, if unstated, question is whether the Beatles, the enormously successful rock band formed in Liverpool, northern England, in 1960 can save William Gladstone, the British politician and leader of the Liberal Party who served as prime minister for 12 years in nonconsecutive four terms between 1868 and 1894, the only British prime minister to serve four terms.

Now, students at the University of Liverpool, led by a 20-year-old named Alisha Raithatha, are petitioning the university to have Gladstone’s name removed from a dorm, a hall of residence, which also carries the name of Roscoe, in a building which is currently being demolished to be redeveloped. Raithatha may be regarded as one of the increasing number of “snowflakes” among British students, youngsters who are part of and live according to the prescriptions of grievance culture, judging the past by the standards of today, more prone to take offence than previous generations, disinviting or preventing controversial speakers at their universities. The sad situation now is, as Professor Robert George has said, “too few have courage to stand up to those who want to shout down dissenting speech.”

Snowflakes are falling and keep falling all over the political place, bringing with them an atmosphere of self-righteousness, temper tantrums, and unwillingness to engage in any robust debate on issues not to their liking. The snowflakes are attempting to “decolonize” the English Department at Cambridge University in England, to remove the 19th century imperialist, though generous philanthropist, Cecil Rhodes from Oriel College, Oxford, to influence the BBC TV production of Howard’s End by incorporating black characters who never appear in the famous novel by E.M. Forster published in 1910. Curiously, a sentence from the book seems relevant to present circumstances: “Actual life is full of false clues and signposts that lead nowhere. We nerve ourselves for a crisis that never comes.”

The issue of past slavery is a compelling one in Britain as in the U.S. One surprising target in recent years has been and remains Lord Nelson, the heroic and widely admired admiral, whose tall statue in Trafalgar Square, London, is the welcome home for pigeons who rest on his head. Snowflakes have called for the removal of the statue. The pigeons should not suffer because Nelson used his seat in the House of Lords to support friends who ran slave plantations in the West Indies. And now in New York City, Italian-Americans and others may soon be saying Goodbye Columbus to the great 16th century Admiral from Genoa.

The Liverpool snowflakes were “horrified” that were living in a building that was made unpleasant by the name of Gladstone. The students evidently lack any real knowledge of this austere figure, educated at Eton and Oxford, member of Parliament at age 23, a reformer who switched parties from conservative to liberal, and grew more radical with age. In many ways he laid the basis of the British welfare state, introduced the secret ballot for voting, expanded in 1884 the vote to working men in rural areas, critic of imperialism, and a person who spent a lifetime trying to obtain Home Rule for Ireland, a project that was defeated in the House of Lords in 1893. 

The snowflakes did not know all this, but they perhaps know that William’s father, Sir John Gladstone, owned sugar plantations in the Caribbean, British Guyana, and Jamaica, for which he was compensated with £100,000 for losing hundreds of slaves when slavery was abolished in 1833. As an MP, William Gladstone, who favored banning the slave trade, had also favored owners getting compensation as well as calling for the improvement of the conditions of the slaves.

Instead of Gladstone, the snowflakes suggested the name of their building should be changed to Jon Snow, a Channel 4 newsreader. Paradoxically, Snow, now 70, had been expelled from the university in 1970 while a law student there for participating in a demonstration against the university’s investments in apartheid South Africa. However, later in 2011 he got an honorary degree from the university.

This call for change of name in the case of Gladstone resembles that a few years ago when the Colston Girl’s School in Bristol, west England, had to grapple with the call to change the name of the school because of the link to Edward Colston, a prominent slave trader in the 17th century.  He had shipped 100,000 African slaves to the West Indies and America, but was also a leading philanthropist in Bristol and had financed the creation of the school. The Colston name remains.

In the case of Gladstone in Liverpool, the Beatles may come to the rescue. One of their well-known songs is “Penny Lane,” written in 1967 probably by Paul McCartney. Penny Lane is a bus terminus and a shopping area in Liverpool where McCartney and John Lennon used to meet.  The possible problem is not the sexual allusions in the song, but that the area is named after James Penny, a slave ship captain, a local slave trader who opposed the abolition of the slave trade.

Liverpool public authorities are not likely to entertain, and thousands of Beatle fans would agree, any call to remove the name Penny Lane, “in my ears and in my eyes.”  It must remain, irrespective of past slavery. Similarly, Liverpool University authorities should act in similar fashion. And perhaps the remaining Beatles might write another song, Gladstone is my bag.

The Liverpool snowflakes should go back to their dorm and their studies and be informed of the amusing words of Benjamin Disraeli on Gladstone, his fierce political rival, “he had no single redeeming defect.” From a meteorological point of view, snowflakes are light and pleasant, but in mass they are dangerous, and may cause a blizzard and obstruction. Liverpool should take care. 



Source link