Day: March 10, 2018

'You're Fired!': The Key to the Free Market


“You’re fired!”  Those are the sweetest two words in the entire English language.  Those two words make possible everything that’s good in our daily lives: our freedom, our safety, the many modes of transportation at our disposal, the rich abundance of foods we get to choose from, the widely varied forms of entertainment we enjoy, the incredible array of medical technologies that keep us healthy, and the expansive selection of schools that educate us.

“You’re fired.”  Those are the lyrics to the Anthem of the Free Market, which is the engine that keeps us safe, healthy, well fed, entertained, and educated.  Those are the words that indicate that, in our system, there is personal accountability and responsibility and that there are negative consequences for doing a poor job.

The most obvious and familiar indicator of the free market is the profit potential that exists for success.  Whether it’s an innovative new medical device or a life-enhancing pharmaceutical, a viable large-scale alternative energy source or a great new political drama on Netflix, in a market economy, virtually unlimited profits await the inventor or company that delivers a winning product or service, and deservedly so.  Driven by hungry competitors looking to wrest their paying customers away, individual entrepreneurs and large corporations alike are motivated to perform at their best in order to stave off their adversaries.  The consumer benefits from continually improving products as a result.

The penalty for marketplace failure is financial ruin.  If the quality and value of a company’s offerings slip, then the company loses market share or goes out of business altogether.  The threat of this degree of disastrous marketplace penalty (going out of business) is an even stronger motivator than the promise of unlimited riches.  Being one of many successful entities in one’s realm is perfectly acceptable; there is no absolute requirement that you be no. 1, as long as you’re active and viable.  Mazda is a profitable and ongoing company.  It doesn’t have to overtake General Motors to be considered a successful business.  But they do have to avoid making the ill fated product and marketing decisions that sank American Motors and Studebaker.  The threat of free-market penalty is what drives it.

The concept of free-market reward and penalty applies perfectly all the way down to the individual worker level.  Any individual can be considered a small “company.”  He has his product attributes.  He is in a competitive environment against other “companies” vying for the same “customer” – perhaps a promotion or a new position.  When the individual performs well – a TV writer creating a compelling script, an engineer improving the fuel efficiency of an engine, or a research scientist synthesizing a new pain-reliever without side-effects – the company that employs them becomes stronger in its particular market sphere and either maintains or strengthens its financial standing.  Employees continue to be employed.  Money continues to be earned.  Bills continue to be paid.

It’s the fear of marketplace penalty that keeps many individuals motivated to go a good job.  Yes, of course many people do an excellent job because of personal pride and a strong work ethic, or because their innate talent and aptitude enable them to perform their responsibilities well, without undue effort.  But for many, the unpleasant prospect of losing one’s earning capacity is a prime motivator of doing a good job.

The aforementioned “unpleasant prospect of losing one’s earning capacity” is far, far more prevalent in the highly competitive for-profit private sector of a market economy than it is in the government-employed public sector.  The cliché of the uncaring, inattentive DMV worker who shuts his window and puts up a “closed” sign just as you reach his station at 30 seconds before 5:00 P.M. exists for one reason and one reason only: for the DMV worker, there is essentially no “marketplace penalty” for barely acceptable, mediocre work.  The quality of his work doesn’t affect the profitability or continued existence of his employer.  The Springfield DMV is not in free-market competition with other DMVs, and that window clerk’s performance has no real bearing on anything.  Since the employees really can’t be fired for anything other than a gross dereliction of responsibility or some horrendous personal or moral transgression, it’s easy to understand the “I don’t care, it’s 5:00 P.M., I’m closed” attitude.

The chart below is illustrative of the marked difference in year-on-year price increases between the competitive for-profit private sector and the lessened financial accountability of the government sector.  The categories that show the greatest cost increases are the areas in which government subsidies play the largest role.  When the entities involved know that “free money” in the form of government payouts are coming their way, costs tend to rise.  The competitive aspect of keeping pricing low relative to market competition is not there.

The health care and hospital services area is particularly interesting.  When government money – “someone else’s money” – pays for medical services, costs go up dramatically.  But when the individual is paying out of his own pocket and free-market rules apply, then the providers engage in fierce competition, improve their quality, and lower their costs in an attempt to woo the customer.  Nowhere is this clearer than in the areas of cosmetic surgery and corrective eye surgery.  Neither is generally covered by insurance or Medicare; customers must pay with their own free-market discretionary cash.  As in every other area of for-profit consumer product development, quality and innovation are way up, and costs are down compared to what was available just twenty years ago.

The liberal utopia of Government-Run Everything will never work.  Individuals must feel as if their own job security is directly related to the caliber of their work.  Companies must operate with the knowledge that their continued existence is not assured and that customers are not automatically going to buy their product or service – they must be won over with quality and value.  Private-sector individuals and companies can be “Fired!”  The DMV worker has no such fear, nor are the public schools worried about going out of business in the face of new competition.

While some government and public-sector portion of the economy is necessary, the more we can get the phrase “You’re fired!” into our economy, the better things will be for everyone.

“You’re fired!”  Those are the sweetest two words in the entire English language.  Those two words make possible everything that’s good in our daily lives: our freedom, our safety, the many modes of transportation at our disposal, the rich abundance of foods we get to choose from, the widely varied forms of entertainment we enjoy, the incredible array of medical technologies that keep us healthy, and the expansive selection of schools that educate us.

“You’re fired.”  Those are the lyrics to the Anthem of the Free Market, which is the engine that keeps us safe, healthy, well fed, entertained, and educated.  Those are the words that indicate that, in our system, there is personal accountability and responsibility and that there are negative consequences for doing a poor job.

The most obvious and familiar indicator of the free market is the profit potential that exists for success.  Whether it’s an innovative new medical device or a life-enhancing pharmaceutical, a viable large-scale alternative energy source or a great new political drama on Netflix, in a market economy, virtually unlimited profits await the inventor or company that delivers a winning product or service, and deservedly so.  Driven by hungry competitors looking to wrest their paying customers away, individual entrepreneurs and large corporations alike are motivated to perform at their best in order to stave off their adversaries.  The consumer benefits from continually improving products as a result.

The penalty for marketplace failure is financial ruin.  If the quality and value of a company’s offerings slip, then the company loses market share or goes out of business altogether.  The threat of this degree of disastrous marketplace penalty (going out of business) is an even stronger motivator than the promise of unlimited riches.  Being one of many successful entities in one’s realm is perfectly acceptable; there is no absolute requirement that you be no. 1, as long as you’re active and viable.  Mazda is a profitable and ongoing company.  It doesn’t have to overtake General Motors to be considered a successful business.  But they do have to avoid making the ill fated product and marketing decisions that sank American Motors and Studebaker.  The threat of free-market penalty is what drives it.

The concept of free-market reward and penalty applies perfectly all the way down to the individual worker level.  Any individual can be considered a small “company.”  He has his product attributes.  He is in a competitive environment against other “companies” vying for the same “customer” – perhaps a promotion or a new position.  When the individual performs well – a TV writer creating a compelling script, an engineer improving the fuel efficiency of an engine, or a research scientist synthesizing a new pain-reliever without side-effects – the company that employs them becomes stronger in its particular market sphere and either maintains or strengthens its financial standing.  Employees continue to be employed.  Money continues to be earned.  Bills continue to be paid.

It’s the fear of marketplace penalty that keeps many individuals motivated to go a good job.  Yes, of course many people do an excellent job because of personal pride and a strong work ethic, or because their innate talent and aptitude enable them to perform their responsibilities well, without undue effort.  But for many, the unpleasant prospect of losing one’s earning capacity is a prime motivator of doing a good job.

The aforementioned “unpleasant prospect of losing one’s earning capacity” is far, far more prevalent in the highly competitive for-profit private sector of a market economy than it is in the government-employed public sector.  The cliché of the uncaring, inattentive DMV worker who shuts his window and puts up a “closed” sign just as you reach his station at 30 seconds before 5:00 P.M. exists for one reason and one reason only: for the DMV worker, there is essentially no “marketplace penalty” for barely acceptable, mediocre work.  The quality of his work doesn’t affect the profitability or continued existence of his employer.  The Springfield DMV is not in free-market competition with other DMVs, and that window clerk’s performance has no real bearing on anything.  Since the employees really can’t be fired for anything other than a gross dereliction of responsibility or some horrendous personal or moral transgression, it’s easy to understand the “I don’t care, it’s 5:00 P.M., I’m closed” attitude.

The chart below is illustrative of the marked difference in year-on-year price increases between the competitive for-profit private sector and the lessened financial accountability of the government sector.  The categories that show the greatest cost increases are the areas in which government subsidies play the largest role.  When the entities involved know that “free money” in the form of government payouts are coming their way, costs tend to rise.  The competitive aspect of keeping pricing low relative to market competition is not there.

The health care and hospital services area is particularly interesting.  When government money – “someone else’s money” – pays for medical services, costs go up dramatically.  But when the individual is paying out of his own pocket and free-market rules apply, then the providers engage in fierce competition, improve their quality, and lower their costs in an attempt to woo the customer.  Nowhere is this clearer than in the areas of cosmetic surgery and corrective eye surgery.  Neither is generally covered by insurance or Medicare; customers must pay with their own free-market discretionary cash.  As in every other area of for-profit consumer product development, quality and innovation are way up, and costs are down compared to what was available just twenty years ago.

The liberal utopia of Government-Run Everything will never work.  Individuals must feel as if their own job security is directly related to the caliber of their work.  Companies must operate with the knowledge that their continued existence is not assured and that customers are not automatically going to buy their product or service – they must be won over with quality and value.  Private-sector individuals and companies can be “Fired!”  The DMV worker has no such fear, nor are the public schools worried about going out of business in the face of new competition.

While some government and public-sector portion of the economy is necessary, the more we can get the phrase “You’re fired!” into our economy, the better things will be for everyone.



Source link

Joe Patrice Defends Fascist Thugs


Last year, Joe Patrice took to his blog at “Above The Law” to call for the firing of a pair of tenured professors who wrote an op-ed that offended him.  This week, Patrice used his blog to defend a group of thuggish students who disrupted a speech by Christina Hoff Sommers.

A self-described equity feminist, Sommers is best known for her harsh criticism of the modern feminist movement.  Sommers has pushed back against claims of widespread wage discrimination against women, along with feminist claims of a pervasive rape culture on college campuses.

Sommers was invited to speak at Lewis and Clark Law School by the local chapter of the Federalist Society.  Prior to her arrival, a coalition of far-left student groups campaigned to prevent her from speaking on campus, calling Sommers “a known fascist” and describing her appearance as an “act of aggression and violence.”

After failing to get her appearance canceled, these students showed up at her speech waving signs and chanting.  A large blonde woman wearing a windbreaker that read, “Stay woke,” marched a group of students to the front of the room, and led them in a call and response chant:

“We choose,” “we choose.” “To protest,” “to protest.” “Male Supremacy,” “male supremacy.” “Not give it,” “not give it.” “A platform,” “a platform.” “Christina Sommers,” “Christina Sommers.” “Has repeatedly,” “has repeatedly.” “Deligitimized,” “deligitimized.” “The suffering of women,” “the suffering of women.” “Worldwide,” “worldwide.” “We believe,” “we believe.” “Our siblings,” “our siblings.” “And our comrades,” “and our comrades.” “Woman are not,” “woman are not.” “Liars with victim mentalities,” “liars with victim mentalities.” “Rape culture is not a myth,” “rape culture is not a myth.” “Microaggressions are real,” “microaggressions are real.” “The gender wage gap is real,” “the gender wage gap is real.”

After the chanting was finished the singing began:

What side are you on friends?

What side are you on?


No platform for fascists

no platform at all


We will fight for justice

till’ Christina’s gone

The disruptive students were so obnoxious that Sommers couldn’t deliver her remarks or hold a Q&A session.

Following the incident, I searched in vain for someone who would defend the disruptive students’ thuggish behavior.  Their behavior was so bad that nobody seemed willing to defend them – but then one man rose to the challenge.  Like a 19th-century mountaineer attempting to scale Everest without oxygen, Joe Patrice took to his blog to defend the indefensible.

According to Patrice, Sommers was herself part of a nefarious right-wing conspiracy to suppress free speech.  Conservative student groups invite provocative speakers, and then conservatives off campus use the disruptive protests to justify a crackdown on campus speech.

From the outset, the goal was to hack the very concept of free speech.  They’d tried their hands at seeking more restrictions on free speech in the 1960s, but too many Americans balked at the idea of fiddling with constitutional freedoms just to “solve” the problem of civil rights protesting and anti-war students.  But what if they could turn the very ideal on its head?  What if the protestors played the role of the tyrannical government enforcers (somehow?) and it was instead the mild-mannered conservatives who were the true free speech heroes?

Patrice argues that the students who prevented Sommers from speaking were merely exercising their First Amendment rights, “If everyone just ignores people like Sommers, she can’t complain that students exercising their free speech rights are violating the real free speech.  Frankly, it’s my personal worldview.”

Frankly, Joe, your personal worldview is moronic.  The First Amendment does not grant an unlimited right to make noise.  Playing the Sean Hannity show so loud that it wakes up one’s neighbors may be an expression of one’s deeply held political beliefs, but it isn’t constitutionally protected speech.  Contrary to what Joe believes, you can be prosecuted for disrupting a public meeting or shouting down a speaker.

In 2011, ten college students were convicted of disrupting a speech by Israeli then-ambassador Michael Oren.  The students had conspired beforehand to disrupt Oren’s speech.  When Oren tried to speak, a conspirator would stand up and start screaming slogans.  Once that conspirator had been removed, another conspirator would stand up and start screaming.  The students were convicted of conspiring to disrupt a public meeting.  The students appealed their convictions on First Amendment grounds and lost.

At heart, Joe Patrice is an authoritarian.  Like every authoritarian, Patrice doesn’t believe that the public should be allowed to hear opinions he disagrees with.  The First Amendment makes it impossible for the government to censor Sommers, but that doesn’t stop Patrice from embracing extra-legal means of censoring his opponents.

Last year, Joe Patrice took to his blog at “Above The Law” to call for the firing of a pair of tenured professors who wrote an op-ed that offended him.  This week, Patrice used his blog to defend a group of thuggish students who disrupted a speech by Christina Hoff Sommers.

A self-described equity feminist, Sommers is best known for her harsh criticism of the modern feminist movement.  Sommers has pushed back against claims of widespread wage discrimination against women, along with feminist claims of a pervasive rape culture on college campuses.

Sommers was invited to speak at Lewis and Clark Law School by the local chapter of the Federalist Society.  Prior to her arrival, a coalition of far-left student groups campaigned to prevent her from speaking on campus, calling Sommers “a known fascist” and describing her appearance as an “act of aggression and violence.”

After failing to get her appearance canceled, these students showed up at her speech waving signs and chanting.  A large blonde woman wearing a windbreaker that read, “Stay woke,” marched a group of students to the front of the room, and led them in a call and response chant:

“We choose,” “we choose.” “To protest,” “to protest.” “Male Supremacy,” “male supremacy.” “Not give it,” “not give it.” “A platform,” “a platform.” “Christina Sommers,” “Christina Sommers.” “Has repeatedly,” “has repeatedly.” “Deligitimized,” “deligitimized.” “The suffering of women,” “the suffering of women.” “Worldwide,” “worldwide.” “We believe,” “we believe.” “Our siblings,” “our siblings.” “And our comrades,” “and our comrades.” “Woman are not,” “woman are not.” “Liars with victim mentalities,” “liars with victim mentalities.” “Rape culture is not a myth,” “rape culture is not a myth.” “Microaggressions are real,” “microaggressions are real.” “The gender wage gap is real,” “the gender wage gap is real.”

After the chanting was finished the singing began:

What side are you on friends?

What side are you on?


No platform for fascists

no platform at all


We will fight for justice

till’ Christina’s gone

The disruptive students were so obnoxious that Sommers couldn’t deliver her remarks or hold a Q&A session.

Following the incident, I searched in vain for someone who would defend the disruptive students’ thuggish behavior.  Their behavior was so bad that nobody seemed willing to defend them – but then one man rose to the challenge.  Like a 19th-century mountaineer attempting to scale Everest without oxygen, Joe Patrice took to his blog to defend the indefensible.

According to Patrice, Sommers was herself part of a nefarious right-wing conspiracy to suppress free speech.  Conservative student groups invite provocative speakers, and then conservatives off campus use the disruptive protests to justify a crackdown on campus speech.

From the outset, the goal was to hack the very concept of free speech.  They’d tried their hands at seeking more restrictions on free speech in the 1960s, but too many Americans balked at the idea of fiddling with constitutional freedoms just to “solve” the problem of civil rights protesting and anti-war students.  But what if they could turn the very ideal on its head?  What if the protestors played the role of the tyrannical government enforcers (somehow?) and it was instead the mild-mannered conservatives who were the true free speech heroes?

Patrice argues that the students who prevented Sommers from speaking were merely exercising their First Amendment rights, “If everyone just ignores people like Sommers, she can’t complain that students exercising their free speech rights are violating the real free speech.  Frankly, it’s my personal worldview.”

Frankly, Joe, your personal worldview is moronic.  The First Amendment does not grant an unlimited right to make noise.  Playing the Sean Hannity show so loud that it wakes up one’s neighbors may be an expression of one’s deeply held political beliefs, but it isn’t constitutionally protected speech.  Contrary to what Joe believes, you can be prosecuted for disrupting a public meeting or shouting down a speaker.

In 2011, ten college students were convicted of disrupting a speech by Israeli then-ambassador Michael Oren.  The students had conspired beforehand to disrupt Oren’s speech.  When Oren tried to speak, a conspirator would stand up and start screaming slogans.  Once that conspirator had been removed, another conspirator would stand up and start screaming.  The students were convicted of conspiring to disrupt a public meeting.  The students appealed their convictions on First Amendment grounds and lost.

At heart, Joe Patrice is an authoritarian.  Like every authoritarian, Patrice doesn’t believe that the public should be allowed to hear opinions he disagrees with.  The First Amendment makes it impossible for the government to censor Sommers, but that doesn’t stop Patrice from embracing extra-legal means of censoring his opponents.



Source link

Bill and Hillary: Today's Julius and Ethel Rosenberg?


In a recent interview on Secure Freedom Radio, I discussed with Frank Gaffney some of my research at Judicial Watch into Bruce and Nellie Ohr, the dynamic Democrat duo who lie at the heart of the Hillary Clinton-DOJ-FBI-Fusion GPS conspiracy (the “Clinton Conspiracy”) to throw the presidential election to Hillary and, failing that, to undermine the Trump presidency with fabulist claims of “Russian-Trump collusion.”  A historical analogy occurred to me in our talk: Bill and Hillary Clinton are the 21st-century equivalent of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

The Clinton Conspiracy has everything one could ask for in a Cold War spy thriller: high politics; disinformation; a torrid love affair between two central co-conspirators; a key Russian-speaking Stalin apologist operative using a ham radio, apparently, for furtive communications; a patriotic senior government official learning of the illegal operations and blowing the whistle; and even the attempted overthrow of a sitting U.S. president.  The problem, of course, is that this isn’t fiction.

Both Julius Rosenberg and Ethel Rosenberg (née Greenglass) joined the Young Communist League in their youth in the 1930s.  Julius was hired as a civilian employee by the U.S. Army in 1940 and worked in the Signal Corps as an electrical inspector stationed at Fort Monmouth, N.J., where he had access to highly classified research on missile guidance systems, radar, communications, and electronics.  He was let go in 1945 after his communist connections were discovered.

Julius recruited other communist sympathizers into his espionage ring, including William Perl, who provided the complete design plans for America’s first jet plane, the Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star, along with wind-tunnel data on the F-86 Sabre, which enabled the Soviets to accelerate their development of second-generation jet fighters.  Julius also obtained and passed to the Soviets the complete plans for a missile proximity fuse, an advanced version of which was used by the Soviets to shoot down Francis Gary Powers’s U-2 spy plane years later.  Julius also recruited, via his wife Ethel, her brother David Greenglass, who was working at Los Alamos on the Manhattan Project, as well as another U.S. nuclear scientist, Russell McNutt.  For the latter recruitment, Rosenberg earned a $100 bonus from his Soviet paymasters.

The nuclear engineers he turned proved devastating.  Using their information, passed by Julius to the Soviets in 1945, the USSR was rapidly able to advance its own nuclear weapon design, enabling the Soviets to detonate their first atomic weapon shockingly quickly – on August 29, 1949 – launching the world into a nuclear arms race.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg’s treachery was discovered in 1950, after David Greenglass was arrested and incriminated them.  David’s co-conspirator wife, Ruth, also provided information critical to implicating Ethel in Julius’s spying.  The Rosenbergs were subsequently charged that year with espionage.  They were tried; convicted; and, as a result of their refusal to cooperate with authorities, sentenced to death.  They were both electrocuted on June 19, 1953.

In his sentencing statement, Judge Irving Kaufman noted: “In the light of the circumstances, I feel that I must pass such sentence upon the principals in this diabolical conspiracy to destroy a God-fearing nation, which will demonstrate with finality that this nation’s security must remain inviolate[.]”

It becomes increasingly evident with every passing day that Hillary Clinton was at the heart of a massive, coordinated effort to use disinformation manufactured by Christopher Steele (the “Steele dossier”) to implicate falsely Donald Trump and his campaign in some sort of “collusion” with the Russian government.  She then used Glenn Simpson to channel this disinformation through various conduits into our national security establishment in order to have a counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign launched.  The contents of that “dossier” and the existence of that investigation were then leaked by the same Christopher Steele to the media during the campaign in an effort to damage Donald Trump’s electoral chances.

FBI director James Comey knowingly and illegally signed off on FISA warrant applications to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page, despite admitting later that the information in the “dossier,” which formed the crux of the evidence to obtain the warrant, was “salacious and unverified.”  Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe also signed the applications for the warrant despite having the same knowledge about the dubious dossier.  Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr fed information from his wife, co-conspirator Nellie Ohr, a Stalin apologist working for the dossier-purveyor Fusion GPS, to the Justice Department without informing Justice of his wife’s indirect employment by the Hillary Clinton campaign – a clear conflict of interest.  Nellie, by the way, mysteriously obtained a ham radio license during the campaign soon after patriotic NSA director Admiral Mike Rogers became aware of illegal surveillance being conducted of Trump campaign officials by the National Security Division of the Justice Department.  He eventually blew the whistle.

Meanwhile, two lovebirds, the incessantly texting FBI deputy director of counterintelligence, Peter Strzok, and senior FBI attorney Lisa Page, yielded invaluable information in their communications about the whole conspiracy, or, as they cutely phrased it, the “insurance policy” against Trump’s election.  Think of them as an unwitting David and Ruth Greenglass.

So where does Bill Clinton figure into our Julius and Ethel Rosenburg comparison?  Well, that brings us to a wholly separate Clinton conspiracy involving Russia.  It was sort of a prequel to the election-throwing conspiracy.  It involved Bill Clinton receiving a $500,000 speaking fee for giving an hour-long talk in Moscow and the Clinton Foundation receiving $145 million in donations in exchange for Russia taking control of twenty percent of the vital U.S. uranium stock.  The money came from parties associated with a convoluted series of transactions involving the acquisition of the Canadian company Uranium One, which controlled the U.S. uranium reserves, by the Russians.  Hillary approved the deal in her pivotal role on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.  And to think that Julius got only $100 for recruiting Russell McNutt.  What a rube!

The U.S. presidential election lies at the heart of our republic.  Putting aside the Uranium One scandal, Hillary’s and her cohorts’ attempt to undermine that election is as serious an attempt to “destroy our God-fearing nation” from within as has ever been attempted in our history.  Everyone involved in that plot should face a punishment that will “demonstrate with finality that this nation’s security must remain inviolate.”  Bill Clinton’s role in the Uranium One deal was its own kind of treachery.

William F. Marshall has been an intelligence analyst and investigator in the government, private, and non-profit sectors for over 30 years.  Presently he is a senior investigator for Judicial Watch, Inc.  (The views expressed are the author’s alone and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.)

In a recent interview on Secure Freedom Radio, I discussed with Frank Gaffney some of my research at Judicial Watch into Bruce and Nellie Ohr, the dynamic Democrat duo who lie at the heart of the Hillary Clinton-DOJ-FBI-Fusion GPS conspiracy (the “Clinton Conspiracy”) to throw the presidential election to Hillary and, failing that, to undermine the Trump presidency with fabulist claims of “Russian-Trump collusion.”  A historical analogy occurred to me in our talk: Bill and Hillary Clinton are the 21st-century equivalent of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

The Clinton Conspiracy has everything one could ask for in a Cold War spy thriller: high politics; disinformation; a torrid love affair between two central co-conspirators; a key Russian-speaking Stalin apologist operative using a ham radio, apparently, for furtive communications; a patriotic senior government official learning of the illegal operations and blowing the whistle; and even the attempted overthrow of a sitting U.S. president.  The problem, of course, is that this isn’t fiction.

Both Julius Rosenberg and Ethel Rosenberg (née Greenglass) joined the Young Communist League in their youth in the 1930s.  Julius was hired as a civilian employee by the U.S. Army in 1940 and worked in the Signal Corps as an electrical inspector stationed at Fort Monmouth, N.J., where he had access to highly classified research on missile guidance systems, radar, communications, and electronics.  He was let go in 1945 after his communist connections were discovered.

Julius recruited other communist sympathizers into his espionage ring, including William Perl, who provided the complete design plans for America’s first jet plane, the Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star, along with wind-tunnel data on the F-86 Sabre, which enabled the Soviets to accelerate their development of second-generation jet fighters.  Julius also obtained and passed to the Soviets the complete plans for a missile proximity fuse, an advanced version of which was used by the Soviets to shoot down Francis Gary Powers’s U-2 spy plane years later.  Julius also recruited, via his wife Ethel, her brother David Greenglass, who was working at Los Alamos on the Manhattan Project, as well as another U.S. nuclear scientist, Russell McNutt.  For the latter recruitment, Rosenberg earned a $100 bonus from his Soviet paymasters.

The nuclear engineers he turned proved devastating.  Using their information, passed by Julius to the Soviets in 1945, the USSR was rapidly able to advance its own nuclear weapon design, enabling the Soviets to detonate their first atomic weapon shockingly quickly – on August 29, 1949 – launching the world into a nuclear arms race.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg’s treachery was discovered in 1950, after David Greenglass was arrested and incriminated them.  David’s co-conspirator wife, Ruth, also provided information critical to implicating Ethel in Julius’s spying.  The Rosenbergs were subsequently charged that year with espionage.  They were tried; convicted; and, as a result of their refusal to cooperate with authorities, sentenced to death.  They were both electrocuted on June 19, 1953.

In his sentencing statement, Judge Irving Kaufman noted: “In the light of the circumstances, I feel that I must pass such sentence upon the principals in this diabolical conspiracy to destroy a God-fearing nation, which will demonstrate with finality that this nation’s security must remain inviolate[.]”

It becomes increasingly evident with every passing day that Hillary Clinton was at the heart of a massive, coordinated effort to use disinformation manufactured by Christopher Steele (the “Steele dossier”) to implicate falsely Donald Trump and his campaign in some sort of “collusion” with the Russian government.  She then used Glenn Simpson to channel this disinformation through various conduits into our national security establishment in order to have a counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign launched.  The contents of that “dossier” and the existence of that investigation were then leaked by the same Christopher Steele to the media during the campaign in an effort to damage Donald Trump’s electoral chances.

FBI director James Comey knowingly and illegally signed off on FISA warrant applications to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page, despite admitting later that the information in the “dossier,” which formed the crux of the evidence to obtain the warrant, was “salacious and unverified.”  Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe also signed the applications for the warrant despite having the same knowledge about the dubious dossier.  Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr fed information from his wife, co-conspirator Nellie Ohr, a Stalin apologist working for the dossier-purveyor Fusion GPS, to the Justice Department without informing Justice of his wife’s indirect employment by the Hillary Clinton campaign – a clear conflict of interest.  Nellie, by the way, mysteriously obtained a ham radio license during the campaign soon after patriotic NSA director Admiral Mike Rogers became aware of illegal surveillance being conducted of Trump campaign officials by the National Security Division of the Justice Department.  He eventually blew the whistle.

Meanwhile, two lovebirds, the incessantly texting FBI deputy director of counterintelligence, Peter Strzok, and senior FBI attorney Lisa Page, yielded invaluable information in their communications about the whole conspiracy, or, as they cutely phrased it, the “insurance policy” against Trump’s election.  Think of them as an unwitting David and Ruth Greenglass.

So where does Bill Clinton figure into our Julius and Ethel Rosenburg comparison?  Well, that brings us to a wholly separate Clinton conspiracy involving Russia.  It was sort of a prequel to the election-throwing conspiracy.  It involved Bill Clinton receiving a $500,000 speaking fee for giving an hour-long talk in Moscow and the Clinton Foundation receiving $145 million in donations in exchange for Russia taking control of twenty percent of the vital U.S. uranium stock.  The money came from parties associated with a convoluted series of transactions involving the acquisition of the Canadian company Uranium One, which controlled the U.S. uranium reserves, by the Russians.  Hillary approved the deal in her pivotal role on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.  And to think that Julius got only $100 for recruiting Russell McNutt.  What a rube!

The U.S. presidential election lies at the heart of our republic.  Putting aside the Uranium One scandal, Hillary’s and her cohorts’ attempt to undermine that election is as serious an attempt to “destroy our God-fearing nation” from within as has ever been attempted in our history.  Everyone involved in that plot should face a punishment that will “demonstrate with finality that this nation’s security must remain inviolate.”  Bill Clinton’s role in the Uranium One deal was its own kind of treachery.

William F. Marshall has been an intelligence analyst and investigator in the government, private, and non-profit sectors for over 30 years.  Presently he is a senior investigator for Judicial Watch, Inc.  (The views expressed are the author’s alone and not necessarily those of Judicial Watch.)



Source link

Gun Confiscation Begins in Illinois


It is no longer a conspiracy theory spawned by deplorable bitter clingers, but a creeping reality spawned by shootings law enforcement could have prevented but didn’t.  The Illinois House has passed legislation requiring 18- to 20-year-olds to give up certain legally purchased and legally owned forearms:

A bill requiring 18-20 year olds to hand over or transfer ownership of heretofore legally possessed “assault weapons” is gaining sponsors in the Illinois Senate after passing the House last month.


The bill, HB 1465, was sponsored in the House by Rep. Michelle Mussman (D-Schaumburg) and passed by a vote of 64-51 on February 28.


After being introduced in the upper house by Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago), the bill has added seven co-sponsors in the last week.  Notable among them was Sen. Jim Oberweis (R-Sugar Grove), the NRA “A” rated 2014 Republican nominee for U.S. Senate.


The NRA-ILA described the weapons covered by HB 1465 as “commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.”  The bill also requires 18-20-year-olds to forfeit ownership of any magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.

Gun confiscation is here.  First they will come for the young, who can go to war with guns but can no longer go hunting with them or protect their families.  If you are a 20-year-old single mom with a restraining order against a violent ex-boyfriend, well, you’ll just have to trust your life to 911 as your door is being kicked in.  Meanwhile, the government wants you to give it your guns:

Fox 2 reports that critics of Mussman’s bill were taken aback by “the idea that the government would confiscate property.”  Mussman responded to these concerns by assuring them “authorities will not visit homes to pick up weapons.”  Rather, “a first offense for getting caught with prohibited firearms would be a misdemeanor offense.”

That is what you call a distinction without a difference.  If there is another shooting law enforcement fails to prevent, rest assured that the misdemeanor will become a felony, the voluntary turn-in will indeed become a door-knock, and the requirement to give up your weapons and your Second Amendment rights will expand to other groups such as veterans and seniors deemed unfit because of stress and age to own firearms.  President Trump recently rolled back an Obama-era executive order attempting to accomplish that last one.

Restricting the right to purchase and own a firearm sounds good, but age and maturity don’t always coincide, and the fact is that most mass shooters have been over 21.  Again, if you can carry a gun to defend your country, you should be able to own one to defend yourself and your family.  This legislation is naïve, dangerous, and arguably an unconstitutional ex post facto law.

“Passing a law that makes it illegal for a 20-year-old to purchase a shotgun for hunting or adult single mother from purchasing the most effective self-defense rifle on the market punishes law-abiding citizens for the evil acts of criminals,” an NRA spokesman told the Hill

Any law that requires an individual to be 21 or older to buy a firearm “effectively prohibits” adults aged 18-20 from buying a firearm “deprives them of their constitutional right to self-protection.”…


The bill that will now head to the Illinois Senate, HB 1465,


•Makes it unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge to, any person under 21 years of age.


•Makes it unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to knowingly possess an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge 90 days after the effective date of the bill.  Provides exemptions and penalties.


•Provides that it is unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, a large capacity ammunition feeding device to a person under 21 years of age.


•Provides that it is unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device within the State.


Republican gubernatorial candidate Jeanne Ives voted no on the measure, and expressed her concern about the issue earlier this week when Illinois Review asked her about raising the age buying a gun to age 21.


“What other rights are we going to raise to age 21?” Ives answered.  “The age is arbitrary.  The average age of a mass shooter is somewhere in the 30s.”

It is typical of gun-control zealots that their answer to the slaughter invited by gun-free zones is to create more gun-free victims.  Those who fear an armed citizenry are typically those who believe that all rights are on loan from an all-powerful government.  The Founders wisely wrote the Second Amendment to protect the other nine in the Bill of Rights.

Critics of the Second Amendment say they are not going after guns used for legitimate activities such as hunting.  But when the Founders wrote the Second Amendment, it was because the British were coming, not because it was the start of deer season.  As Fox News contributor Judge Andrew Napolitano notes:

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer[.] … It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us.  If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis had, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.

The AR-15 is a defensive weapon, such as when it was used by a 15-year-old, who grabbed his father’s and used it to ward off home invaders:

Not only did this brave 15-year-old defend his home against 2 burglars, but also his 12-year-old sister who was in the house with him.  He grabbed his father’s AR-15 and shot one of the burglars multiple times.  They got away but had to go right to the hospital where the minor was arrested and the adult who was shot was flown to a different hospital.

In the hands of British redcoats, the musket was an assault weapon.  In the hands of a law-abiding American, even those between 18 and 20, an AR-15 is what the Second Amendment is all about.

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.

It is no longer a conspiracy theory spawned by deplorable bitter clingers, but a creeping reality spawned by shootings law enforcement could have prevented but didn’t.  The Illinois House has passed legislation requiring 18- to 20-year-olds to give up certain legally purchased and legally owned forearms:

A bill requiring 18-20 year olds to hand over or transfer ownership of heretofore legally possessed “assault weapons” is gaining sponsors in the Illinois Senate after passing the House last month.


The bill, HB 1465, was sponsored in the House by Rep. Michelle Mussman (D-Schaumburg) and passed by a vote of 64-51 on February 28.


After being introduced in the upper house by Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago), the bill has added seven co-sponsors in the last week.  Notable among them was Sen. Jim Oberweis (R-Sugar Grove), the NRA “A” rated 2014 Republican nominee for U.S. Senate.


The NRA-ILA described the weapons covered by HB 1465 as “commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms.”  The bill also requires 18-20-year-olds to forfeit ownership of any magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition.

Gun confiscation is here.  First they will come for the young, who can go to war with guns but can no longer go hunting with them or protect their families.  If you are a 20-year-old single mom with a restraining order against a violent ex-boyfriend, well, you’ll just have to trust your life to 911 as your door is being kicked in.  Meanwhile, the government wants you to give it your guns:

Fox 2 reports that critics of Mussman’s bill were taken aback by “the idea that the government would confiscate property.”  Mussman responded to these concerns by assuring them “authorities will not visit homes to pick up weapons.”  Rather, “a first offense for getting caught with prohibited firearms would be a misdemeanor offense.”

That is what you call a distinction without a difference.  If there is another shooting law enforcement fails to prevent, rest assured that the misdemeanor will become a felony, the voluntary turn-in will indeed become a door-knock, and the requirement to give up your weapons and your Second Amendment rights will expand to other groups such as veterans and seniors deemed unfit because of stress and age to own firearms.  President Trump recently rolled back an Obama-era executive order attempting to accomplish that last one.

Restricting the right to purchase and own a firearm sounds good, but age and maturity don’t always coincide, and the fact is that most mass shooters have been over 21.  Again, if you can carry a gun to defend your country, you should be able to own one to defend yourself and your family.  This legislation is naïve, dangerous, and arguably an unconstitutional ex post facto law.

“Passing a law that makes it illegal for a 20-year-old to purchase a shotgun for hunting or adult single mother from purchasing the most effective self-defense rifle on the market punishes law-abiding citizens for the evil acts of criminals,” an NRA spokesman told the Hill

Any law that requires an individual to be 21 or older to buy a firearm “effectively prohibits” adults aged 18-20 from buying a firearm “deprives them of their constitutional right to self-protection.”…


The bill that will now head to the Illinois Senate, HB 1465,


•Makes it unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge to, any person under 21 years of age.


•Makes it unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to knowingly possess an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge 90 days after the effective date of the bill.  Provides exemptions and penalties.


•Provides that it is unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, a large capacity ammunition feeding device to a person under 21 years of age.


•Provides that it is unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device within the State.


Republican gubernatorial candidate Jeanne Ives voted no on the measure, and expressed her concern about the issue earlier this week when Illinois Review asked her about raising the age buying a gun to age 21.


“What other rights are we going to raise to age 21?” Ives answered.  “The age is arbitrary.  The average age of a mass shooter is somewhere in the 30s.”

It is typical of gun-control zealots that their answer to the slaughter invited by gun-free zones is to create more gun-free victims.  Those who fear an armed citizenry are typically those who believe that all rights are on loan from an all-powerful government.  The Founders wisely wrote the Second Amendment to protect the other nine in the Bill of Rights.

Critics of the Second Amendment say they are not going after guns used for legitimate activities such as hunting.  But when the Founders wrote the Second Amendment, it was because the British were coming, not because it was the start of deer season.  As Fox News contributor Judge Andrew Napolitano notes:

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer[.] … It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, with the same instruments they would use upon us.  If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis had, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.

The AR-15 is a defensive weapon, such as when it was used by a 15-year-old, who grabbed his father’s and used it to ward off home invaders:

Not only did this brave 15-year-old defend his home against 2 burglars, but also his 12-year-old sister who was in the house with him.  He grabbed his father’s AR-15 and shot one of the burglars multiple times.  They got away but had to go right to the hospital where the minor was arrested and the adult who was shot was flown to a different hospital.

In the hands of British redcoats, the musket was an assault weapon.  In the hands of a law-abiding American, even those between 18 and 20, an AR-15 is what the Second Amendment is all about.

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.



Source link

Two Opposing Black Views of America


I had a fascinating phone conversation with a black longtime friend.  Though we’ve had passionate political clashes over the years, including periods of not speaking, we remain friends.  He is a clergyman and college professor in his 70s.

While discussing black movies FencesGet Out, and Black Panther, my friend said something outrageous.  He said it is impossible for a white person in America not to be racist because racism is entwined in all things American.  Folks, he sincerely believes his absurd view of America.

He went on to recount horrific incidences of racial injustice: a black boy sharing an elevator with a white girl igniting a race riot, black inventions stolen, and black businesses destroyed.  These events happened in the 1920s.  And yet the passion with which my friend reported them was as if they had happened yesterday.

My friend’s anger at America is as if eight years of Obama never happened and Oprah is not worth three billion dollars.  He believes that police routinely murder young black men.  He believes that America’s evil white power structure labors 24-7, scheming to undermine blacks economically and culturally.

In his circles of black academia, his erroneous beliefs are deemed inarguably true.  His colleagues think any black who doesn’t subscribe to these obvious truths is either an idiot or an Uncle Tom.

Throughout our phone conservation, my friend repeatedly referred to whites as “crackers.”  It never dawned on him that his derogatory use of the term “cracker” is as racist as whites calling us the N-word.

My friend was even annoyed by praises showered upon Billy Graham in response to his death.  Though he would deny it, my friend has a deep hatred for whites.  And yet I have witnessed God use him to bless people.  I’ve come to realize that neither facts nor truth can penetrate my friend erroneously viewing white Americans as blacks’ nemesis.  Therefore, I am praying for God to heal his vengeful heart against white Americans.

On the bright side, I caught an interview with black Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, a hero of mine.

Justice Thomas said he is worn down by what is going on in our country’s culture.  Justice Thomas said, “At some point, we’re going to be fatigued with everybody being the victim.”  Justice Thomas recounted a conversation he had with a young black woman who said, “I am really tired of having to play the role of being black.  I just want to go to school.”

Folks, I know where this black sista is coming from.  She just wants to be an American pursuing her dreams without being forced to carry the baggage of viewing herself as a victim of her skin color.  Isn’t this what civil rights pioneers fought, suffered, and died to achieve?

Decades ago, we allowed leftists to infiltrate public education, transforming our kids into their operatives.  Consequently, black Millennials who have never suffered an ounce of racism believe that racial loyalty requires them to riot in the streets demanding racial justice.  Leftists have our kids hating and fighting a war with a nonexistent enemy.

If a black awakens on a sunny morning, grateful to be born in the greatest land of opportunity on the planet, viewing the world as his oyster, knowing that between him and God, they can achieve great things – leftists will call that black an Uncle Tom traitor to his race.  Leftists have decreed that we black Americans must view ourselves as victims in this evil, eternally racist country.

Clarence Thomas grew up in extreme poverty, familiar with feeling cold and hungry.  He was sent to live with his grandfather.  Justice Thomas said regarding his grandfather, “He is the single greatest human being I’ve ever met.”  Clarence’s grandfather would not allow him or his brother to wallow in their bad circumstances, whine, or complain.

With only nine months of education, Clarence’s grandfather never saw himself as a victim.  He never knew his father, and his mother died when he was 7.  His grandmother, who was a freed slave, took him in.  And then she died.  His uncle, a hard man with 13 kids, took him in.  And yet Clarence’s grandfather never complained.

Whenever young Clarence wanted to complain, his grandfather would say, “You have to play the hand you’re dealt.”  Clarence’s grandfather became a great businessman, including owning his own farm.

Justice Thomas has a bust in his office with his grandfather’s favorite quote: “Old Man Can’t is dead.  I helped bury him.”  Justice Thomas said that is the mindset his grandfather grew up with. 

Isn’t Justice Thomas’s self-reliant mindset far superior to and more empowering than bitterly viewing oneself as a victim, placing one’s success or failure in the hands of someone other than himself?  Justice Thomas marveled that he grew up in a world of total illiteracy only to find himself in the Library of Congress.  Justice Thomas is expressing the greatness of America, folks.

Why isn’t Justice Thomas’s grateful and hope-filled vision of America, a land ripe with opportunity, being touted by civil rights activists, inspiring black youths to make right choices to become all they can be?  Instead, leftists demand that black Americans view themselves as victims.  I choose to live in Justice Thomas’s America.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Help Lloyd spread the Truth
http://LloydMarcus.com

I had a fascinating phone conversation with a black longtime friend.  Though we’ve had passionate political clashes over the years, including periods of not speaking, we remain friends.  He is a clergyman and college professor in his 70s.

While discussing black movies FencesGet Out, and Black Panther, my friend said something outrageous.  He said it is impossible for a white person in America not to be racist because racism is entwined in all things American.  Folks, he sincerely believes his absurd view of America.

He went on to recount horrific incidences of racial injustice: a black boy sharing an elevator with a white girl igniting a race riot, black inventions stolen, and black businesses destroyed.  These events happened in the 1920s.  And yet the passion with which my friend reported them was as if they had happened yesterday.

My friend’s anger at America is as if eight years of Obama never happened and Oprah is not worth three billion dollars.  He believes that police routinely murder young black men.  He believes that America’s evil white power structure labors 24-7, scheming to undermine blacks economically and culturally.

In his circles of black academia, his erroneous beliefs are deemed inarguably true.  His colleagues think any black who doesn’t subscribe to these obvious truths is either an idiot or an Uncle Tom.

Throughout our phone conservation, my friend repeatedly referred to whites as “crackers.”  It never dawned on him that his derogatory use of the term “cracker” is as racist as whites calling us the N-word.

My friend was even annoyed by praises showered upon Billy Graham in response to his death.  Though he would deny it, my friend has a deep hatred for whites.  And yet I have witnessed God use him to bless people.  I’ve come to realize that neither facts nor truth can penetrate my friend erroneously viewing white Americans as blacks’ nemesis.  Therefore, I am praying for God to heal his vengeful heart against white Americans.

On the bright side, I caught an interview with black Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas, a hero of mine.

Justice Thomas said he is worn down by what is going on in our country’s culture.  Justice Thomas said, “At some point, we’re going to be fatigued with everybody being the victim.”  Justice Thomas recounted a conversation he had with a young black woman who said, “I am really tired of having to play the role of being black.  I just want to go to school.”

Folks, I know where this black sista is coming from.  She just wants to be an American pursuing her dreams without being forced to carry the baggage of viewing herself as a victim of her skin color.  Isn’t this what civil rights pioneers fought, suffered, and died to achieve?

Decades ago, we allowed leftists to infiltrate public education, transforming our kids into their operatives.  Consequently, black Millennials who have never suffered an ounce of racism believe that racial loyalty requires them to riot in the streets demanding racial justice.  Leftists have our kids hating and fighting a war with a nonexistent enemy.

If a black awakens on a sunny morning, grateful to be born in the greatest land of opportunity on the planet, viewing the world as his oyster, knowing that between him and God, they can achieve great things – leftists will call that black an Uncle Tom traitor to his race.  Leftists have decreed that we black Americans must view ourselves as victims in this evil, eternally racist country.

Clarence Thomas grew up in extreme poverty, familiar with feeling cold and hungry.  He was sent to live with his grandfather.  Justice Thomas said regarding his grandfather, “He is the single greatest human being I’ve ever met.”  Clarence’s grandfather would not allow him or his brother to wallow in their bad circumstances, whine, or complain.

With only nine months of education, Clarence’s grandfather never saw himself as a victim.  He never knew his father, and his mother died when he was 7.  His grandmother, who was a freed slave, took him in.  And then she died.  His uncle, a hard man with 13 kids, took him in.  And yet Clarence’s grandfather never complained.

Whenever young Clarence wanted to complain, his grandfather would say, “You have to play the hand you’re dealt.”  Clarence’s grandfather became a great businessman, including owning his own farm.

Justice Thomas has a bust in his office with his grandfather’s favorite quote: “Old Man Can’t is dead.  I helped bury him.”  Justice Thomas said that is the mindset his grandfather grew up with. 

Isn’t Justice Thomas’s self-reliant mindset far superior to and more empowering than bitterly viewing oneself as a victim, placing one’s success or failure in the hands of someone other than himself?  Justice Thomas marveled that he grew up in a world of total illiteracy only to find himself in the Library of Congress.  Justice Thomas is expressing the greatness of America, folks.

Why isn’t Justice Thomas’s grateful and hope-filled vision of America, a land ripe with opportunity, being touted by civil rights activists, inspiring black youths to make right choices to become all they can be?  Instead, leftists demand that black Americans view themselves as victims.  I choose to live in Justice Thomas’s America.

Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Help Lloyd spread the Truth
http://LloydMarcus.com



Source link

Everybody Knows


Everybody knows that the dice are loaded, that the fight is fixed.  Everybody knows there two kinds of “public servants” in America: those who are held accountable for their actions and those who are not.  The unaccountables are almost always Democrat.

Everybody knows that the king and queen of all unaccountables are Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Their careers have been a crescendo of criminality for which they have never been held to account.  The Clintons offend locally and globally.  They build from local crimes like rape, intimidation, corruption, and perjury (some say worse) to global ones like diverting tens of millions of dollars from the sickest and poorest people to their bank accounts.  Hillary tossed around top national secrets like a Caesar salad.

The pinnacle of their careers as global unaccountables is the Uranium One scandal.  It took four years of collusion with the Russians.  They were abetted by many, including Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, who knew and looked the other way.  Uranium in Wyoming is like potatoes in Idaho: there’s a lot of it.  Hillary’s Russian reset meant that the Clintons sold all the uranium in Wyoming to the Russian government for at least $150 million to the Clintons’ foundation.

Everybody knows that Barack Obama is doubly unaccountable.  He is unaccountable by physiognomy and by exquisite hypocrisy.  Holder and Lynch, both also double-unaccountables, subverted the justice system as Obama’s attorneys general, criminally conspired in multiple ways for political ends.  Everybody knows that Obama knew about the illegally obtained FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump.  National security adviser Susan Rice is a numbskull who was valued for race and for lying straight-faced.  Susan’s parting prose was a note to self: we did really good, and were very honest.  Now do I get my chocolates and long-stemmed rose?  Everybody knows.

Power corrupts.  Power plus unaccountability turns sophisticated people into incompetent criminals and the uneducated into destructive, foul-mouthed brats.  The Obama administration produced multitudes of both.  They enjoyed eight years of unparalleled unaccountability thanks to a lapdog legacy press.

The FBI, the DOJ, all the top-tier unaccountables, forgot that the deplorables existed and never doubted that Hillary Clinton could buy and lie her way into the presidency.  It was her turn.  Still, it can’t hurt to wiretap the opposing campaign.  Besides, it’s so much fun to do whatever you want.  It was Woodstock for the D.C. unaccountables.  The top DOJ-FBI administrators, meaning people who were not competent enough to be real agents and lawyers, had the time of their lives playing cops and spies.  Hillary’s $12 million passed through Nellie Ohr at Fusion GPS.  Her husband, Assistant Attorney General Bruce Ohr, met with Christopher Steele, the cover-story author of the pee-pee dossier on Trump.  Ohr, who still works at the Justice Department, reported all the fun to Sally Yates.  Everybody came out to play.  McCabe spied; Comey danced and lied; John McCain lent a hand.  Strzok and Page were special beaux, they took their meetings without their clothes.  Everybody knows: Carter Page is not a spy; he’s just the one they chose.

If they had kept their oath to defend the Constitution and accepted the results of a lawful election, all these misdeeds, and many others yet to be revealed, would not have come to light.  Everybody knows that Hell hath no fury like scorned politicos.  They molded their outrage into an absurd charge that Trump had colluded with the Russians to fix the election.  Rat Rosenstein brought in Mueller, who was given a fishing license that will never expire.

Collusion?  By personality, Donald Trump is the last person who would secretly collude with anybody.  Everybody knows that Trump would not collude with Christ Himself if the chance arose.  Collusion is for people who lack confidence in their ability to accomplish a purpose and turn to underhanded methods.  If there is one defining feature to Donald Trump’s personality, it is tremendous confidence in the belief that he can accomplish his goals. Collusion is sneaky behavior that gives the other collaborators great power.  Trump would not grant that kind of power to anybody.  He would never believe he has to.  Furthermore, collusion involves concealment.  Everybody wishes Trump would try a little concealment now and then.  Mr. President, hide something from us once in a while, please.

This is a psychological theory about Jeff Sessions’s removing himself from seeking justice for the American people regarding all the crimes of the Clinton-Obama regime: he has PTSD.  Unaccountables get to slander and insult accountable politicians in the most vile terms whenever they choose.  Accountables always calmly defend themselves, no matter how unreasonable or inflammatory the abuse, because they have honor and integrity.  Sessions is a first-rank accountable who has been unjustly vilified as a racist for decades.  Avoidance is a major cluster of symptoms in PTSD.  He may just be burned out from the abuse.

Everybody knows it’s now or never; everybody knows that it’s truth or lies.  That’s how it goes.  Everybody knows.

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded, that the fight is fixed.  Everybody knows there two kinds of “public servants” in America: those who are held accountable for their actions and those who are not.  The unaccountables are almost always Democrat.

Everybody knows that the king and queen of all unaccountables are Bill and Hillary Clinton.  Their careers have been a crescendo of criminality for which they have never been held to account.  The Clintons offend locally and globally.  They build from local crimes like rape, intimidation, corruption, and perjury (some say worse) to global ones like diverting tens of millions of dollars from the sickest and poorest people to their bank accounts.  Hillary tossed around top national secrets like a Caesar salad.

The pinnacle of their careers as global unaccountables is the Uranium One scandal.  It took four years of collusion with the Russians.  They were abetted by many, including Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller, who knew and looked the other way.  Uranium in Wyoming is like potatoes in Idaho: there’s a lot of it.  Hillary’s Russian reset meant that the Clintons sold all the uranium in Wyoming to the Russian government for at least $150 million to the Clintons’ foundation.

Everybody knows that Barack Obama is doubly unaccountable.  He is unaccountable by physiognomy and by exquisite hypocrisy.  Holder and Lynch, both also double-unaccountables, subverted the justice system as Obama’s attorneys general, criminally conspired in multiple ways for political ends.  Everybody knows that Obama knew about the illegally obtained FISA warrant to spy on Donald Trump.  National security adviser Susan Rice is a numbskull who was valued for race and for lying straight-faced.  Susan’s parting prose was a note to self: we did really good, and were very honest.  Now do I get my chocolates and long-stemmed rose?  Everybody knows.

Power corrupts.  Power plus unaccountability turns sophisticated people into incompetent criminals and the uneducated into destructive, foul-mouthed brats.  The Obama administration produced multitudes of both.  They enjoyed eight years of unparalleled unaccountability thanks to a lapdog legacy press.

The FBI, the DOJ, all the top-tier unaccountables, forgot that the deplorables existed and never doubted that Hillary Clinton could buy and lie her way into the presidency.  It was her turn.  Still, it can’t hurt to wiretap the opposing campaign.  Besides, it’s so much fun to do whatever you want.  It was Woodstock for the D.C. unaccountables.  The top DOJ-FBI administrators, meaning people who were not competent enough to be real agents and lawyers, had the time of their lives playing cops and spies.  Hillary’s $12 million passed through Nellie Ohr at Fusion GPS.  Her husband, Assistant Attorney General Bruce Ohr, met with Christopher Steele, the cover-story author of the pee-pee dossier on Trump.  Ohr, who still works at the Justice Department, reported all the fun to Sally Yates.  Everybody came out to play.  McCabe spied; Comey danced and lied; John McCain lent a hand.  Strzok and Page were special beaux, they took their meetings without their clothes.  Everybody knows: Carter Page is not a spy; he’s just the one they chose.

If they had kept their oath to defend the Constitution and accepted the results of a lawful election, all these misdeeds, and many others yet to be revealed, would not have come to light.  Everybody knows that Hell hath no fury like scorned politicos.  They molded their outrage into an absurd charge that Trump had colluded with the Russians to fix the election.  Rat Rosenstein brought in Mueller, who was given a fishing license that will never expire.

Collusion?  By personality, Donald Trump is the last person who would secretly collude with anybody.  Everybody knows that Trump would not collude with Christ Himself if the chance arose.  Collusion is for people who lack confidence in their ability to accomplish a purpose and turn to underhanded methods.  If there is one defining feature to Donald Trump’s personality, it is tremendous confidence in the belief that he can accomplish his goals. Collusion is sneaky behavior that gives the other collaborators great power.  Trump would not grant that kind of power to anybody.  He would never believe he has to.  Furthermore, collusion involves concealment.  Everybody wishes Trump would try a little concealment now and then.  Mr. President, hide something from us once in a while, please.

This is a psychological theory about Jeff Sessions’s removing himself from seeking justice for the American people regarding all the crimes of the Clinton-Obama regime: he has PTSD.  Unaccountables get to slander and insult accountable politicians in the most vile terms whenever they choose.  Accountables always calmly defend themselves, no matter how unreasonable or inflammatory the abuse, because they have honor and integrity.  Sessions is a first-rank accountable who has been unjustly vilified as a racist for decades.  Avoidance is a major cluster of symptoms in PTSD.  He may just be burned out from the abuse.

Everybody knows it’s now or never; everybody knows that it’s truth or lies.  That’s how it goes.  Everybody knows.



Source link