RUSSIAN INTERVENTION EXPOSED

Did the Russians really rig the 2016 US election? You bet they did!

Secret documents recently discovered in a bin behind a Kremlin-district 24-hour cabbage and tobacco store reveal for the first time the devious extent of Russian interference. These plans were decades in the making.

Read on, as never-before-seen communiques between Russian agents Sergei Potrov and Dimitri Bienko outline the wicked plot – beginning in 1947, on the day of Hillary Clinton’s birth:

Dearest Dimitri

I am pleased to report that phase one of Operation Cankles is total success! Soviet implantation of stupid American woman resulted in birth today of hefty girl-child destined to be unelectable candidate 70 years from now.

Child is basically just ankles and head, similar to sturdy and hard-working female stock from adored Ilmensky Mountains. In decadent America, nobody will ever vote for such a noble being.

Yours in Soviet solidarity,

Sergei

Back in Moscow, Bienko receives the news from his undercover US-based operative with communist glee:

Dearest Sergei,

You have done very well, comrade! Especially with the implantation. I trust the child has your eyebrow.

We have already begun looking at similar strategies in other western nations. When you are next on leave, ask me to show you plans for Operation Julia. Australia is next to face unforgiving Soviet wrath!

Yours,

Dimitri

As the years go by, our pair of dedicated spies continue to monitor Hillary’s progress and other events:

Dearest Dimitri,

Greetings again from Americas. Heh heh heh! Apologies for chuckles, but am watching hilarious documentary called Honeymooners. Is about domestic violence. Very good.

Am needing laugh because hips in pain from imitating the Elvis Presley. Will send you LP of the Presley once Russia has record players.

Hillary now at school and shunned by corrupt classmates in thrall of military-industrial capitalism. All proceeding exactly according to strategic project timeline.

Yours in everlasting revolution,

Sergei

Called away from Operation Cankles for a brief and triumphant mission to Dallas in 1963, Potrov soon returns to his main quest:

Read the whole thing.

Obama

US Government Attacks Drudge Report? Conservative Website Down Because Of Distributed Denial Of Service Attack, Matt Drudge Tweets

A tweet from conservative media icon Matt Drudge's verified Twitter account Thursday night appeared to accuse the government of interfering with his website, DrudgeReport.com, just hours after the Barack Obama administration announced new sanctions against Russia over election hacking.

"Is the US government attacking DRUDGE REPORT? Biggest DDoS since site's inception. VERY suspicious routing [and timing]," the tweet to Drudge's 457,000 followers read. There were no other tweets from the account at the time.

The Russian Hacking Fake News

Remember when the Obama administration told us that the attack on Benghazi was not a terrorist act, but caused by an excitable mob incited by an obscure video that nobody ever saw?   

Hillary stood over the bodies of the dead at Andrews Air force Base and swore to get the obscure little video producer who was responsible to this horrible deed.

The CIA, in the person of General Petraeus, even testified to the Congress that this was the God’s Honest Truth. 

But it was all a lie sent out by the Obama Administration to get them past the general election and distributed as Fake News by the mainstream media. 

And it worked … just long enough to get Obama a second term.

Now Team Obama is telling us that the Russians hacked the election, and the CIA is swearing to it. Another transparent lie put out by the Obama Administration to explain the election of Donald Trump and dutifully echoed by their fellow travelers in the media. 

Fake News redux.

I don’t believe it because I’m not a sucker.

There is no more reason believe that the Russians hacked the DNC and Podesta’s e-mails and passed the info on to WikiLeaks than that Benghazi was the fault of an obscure video.

WikiLeaks denies that they got the information from the Russians, claiming they got them from a disgruntled Democrat inside the DNC. 

That’s how Wikileaks got previous documents from the US government: disgruntled insiders.

Remember Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden?

You can be sure that the WikiLeaks e-mails revealed the genuinely corrupt dealings of the Clinton campaign and the true nature of the Democrat machine. Yet in Obama administration – and an obedient CIA - telling us to ignore the message and focus on the messenger. And the Fake News Media is happy to oblige.

Frankly, I don’t doubt that the Russians are reading our e-mails. I am ready to believe that the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians and about 1000 odd hackers in pajamas read all 30,000 of Hillary’s e-mails that she deleted so that we would not read about the solicitation of bribes to the pay-for-play Clinton Foundation. 

But I don’t have any faith that the Russians were the source of the WikiLeaks revelations.

The infallibility of the CIA was exploded several decades ago:

And anyone who believes that is even more gullible than my grandchildren who still believe in fairies. I suspect that many in the press spreading the Fake News don’t believe in it either. But they’re willing to spread the Fake News if it helps the Left and hurts the Right. After all, that’s their side, and lying for the cause is what they do.

As for Obama?

Why a is academia such a hellhole of foul mouthed bigots?

A professor at Georgetown University went into an unbelievable foul-mouthed meltdown that lasted 31 days after a Muslim ex-colleague said she voted for Donald Trump.

"professor" C. Christine Fair

C Christine Fair, an associate professor at the Center for Peace and Security Studies, was incensed after Asra Q Nomani, 'lifelong liberal', wrote an article about voting for Donald Trump as a Muslim immigrant.

In her Washington Post article, Nomani said she was motivated by a distaste for Obama's edging around using the phrase 'Islamic extremism', the cost of Obamacare and what she saw as Obama's failure to help poor and rural Americans.

According to Nomani, on November 22, 12 days after her article was published, Fair began a sustained period of abuse on Twitter and Facebook.

In a letter of complaint to the university, Nomani said that Fair told her 'F**K YOU, GO TO HELL', and called her a 'wench', a 'fraud' and a 'fame-mongering clown show'.

Nomani added that Fair had called her 'chutiya,' or 'the equivalent of a "f**ker" in my native Urdu', and 'bevkuf', another Urdu word meaning 'idiot'.

What is revealing about this and other rants by college professors is that they appear to have no idea that these foul mouthed, and very public, expressions of hate at anyone on the Right wrong.  This appears to be the "new normal" in academia.  

Years of political correctness and Left-wing indoctrination have made violence - verbal and physical - acceptable on too many college campuses as long as the victims are to the Right of the enforcers.  These are the Commissars of the uniculture that rules the campus.  

In Wake of Trump, Democrats Suddenly Discover Freedom of Association

Well, well.

Suddenly, it seems, the left has discovered freedom of association. After years of telling religious people that they had a moral and legal obligation to throw out their religion and serve same-sex weddings, provide contraception, and fund abortion, the left now realizes that the ability to pick and choose those to whom you give your services is actually rather vital.

Don’t expect it to last.

Of course artists should be able to turn down clients. So should religious bakers. But you won’t see the left acknowledge that. The only freedom to turn down clients is the freedom for leftists to turn down conservative and religious clients, not the other way around.

Merry Christmas

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

He was in the beginning with God.

All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.

In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.

And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Glory be to God and to His son Jesus who came to Earth to be a propitiation for our sins. 

German politician faces resignation calls after preventing police sharing image of Berlin truck killer

There are millions of people in German just like him

Green Party Member

A German politician is facing calls to resign over allegations that he prevented police from sharing pictures of the Berlin truck terrorist when he was at large.

Reports in Germany claim that Till Steffen prevented law enforcers in Hamburg from releasing pictures of Anis Amri, despite him being the most wanted man in the world after Monday's terror attack.

Amri, 24, was named as a suspect on Wednesday after his wallet was found in the lorry which ploughed into a crowd of people at a Berlin Christmas market, killing 12 people.

Trump is a Conservative

Matthew Continetti on "Street Corner conservatism"

I have been thinking about Gavin lately because his life and thought so perfectly capture the conservatism of Donald Trump. When you read Gavin, you begin to understand that the idea of Trump as a conservative is not oxymoronic. Trump is a conservative—of a particular type that is rare in intellectual circles. His conservatism is ignored or dismissed or opposed because, while it often reaches the same conclusions as more prevalent versions of conservatism, its impulses, emphases, and forms are different from those of traditionalism, anti-Communism, classical liberalism, Leo Strauss conservatism in its East and West Coast varieties, the neoconservatism of Irving Kristol as well as the neoconservatism of William Kristol, religious conservatism, paleo-conservatism, compassionate conservatism, constitutional conservatism, and all the other shaggy inhabitants of the conservative zoo.

Trump has always been careful to distinguish himself from what he calls “normal conservative.” He has defined a conservative as a person who “doesn’t want to take risks,” who wants to balance budgets, who “feels strongly about the military.” It is for these reasons, he said during the campaign, that he opposed the Iraq war: The 2003 invasion was certainly risky, it was costly, and it put the troops in a dangerous position, defending a suspicious and resentful population amid IEDs and sniper attacks. The Iraq war, in this view, is an example of conservative writers and thinkers and politicians following trains of logic or desire to un-conservative conclusions.

Nor is it the only example. Fealty to econometric models, Trump says, has led many conservatives as well as liberals to embrace a “dumb market” that gives mercantilist powers in Asia advantages over U.S. industry and labor. The rush to pass comprehensive immigration reform as a result of the elite consensus that immigration is an unmitigated good set the Republican Party leadership against its own voters. The desire to restrain entitlement spending through cuts rather than prolonging the lifespan of these programs through economic growth demoralizes Republican voters who count on their checks to arrive each month.

Indeed, Trump was so at variance with the mainstream of the intellectual conservative movement on these issues that he modified his political identity. “I really am a conservative,” he said last February. “But I’m also a commonsense person. I’m a commonsense conservative. We have to be commonsense conservatives. We have to be smart.” Common sense in this understanding is opposed to the theoretical and academic analysis that has led conservatives to nonsensical and unpopular positions because they are beholden to speculative conclusions or to creedal dogma.

Trump’s politics are grounded not in metaphysics but in what he understands to be the linguistic root of the term conservative. “I view the word conservative as a derivative of the word conserve,” he has said. “We want to conserve our money. We want to conserve our wealth. We want to conserve. We want to be smart. We want to be smart where we go, where we spend, how we spend. We want to conserve our country. We want to save our country.”

The conservatism of Donald Trump is not the conservatism of ideas but of things. His politics do not derive from the works of Burke or Disraeli or Newman, nor is he a follower of Mill or Berlin or Moynihan. There is no theory of natural rights or small government or international relations that claims his loyalty. When he says he wants to “conserve our country,” he does not mean conserve the idea of countries, or a league of countries, or the slogans of democracy or equality or freedom, but this country, right now, as it exists in the real world of space and time.

Read the whole thing.

Massive Recall Issued for Ineffective “COEXIST” Bumper Stickers

WASHINGTON — The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will recall over 550,000 units of the popular “COEXIST” bumper sticker due to an ineffective and unsustainable message of world peace, U.S. safety regulators said on Tuesday.

“After an estimated 300 billion incidents of human suffering and death due to war, religious intolerance, racism, genocide, and homophobia, from the years of 50,000 B.C.E. through 2016, this sticker needs to be pulled from retail shelves and all automobiles immediately,” the NHTSA said in a statement online.

“NHTSA likes the sticker,” the statement continued. “We believe it looks really cool in a tie-dye color scheme. In the current geopolitical climate, however, our in-house engineers predict this trend in which everybody dies will not slow down in the foreseeable future.”

The graphic, spelling “Coexist” through religious and political symbols, has garnered thousands of complaints from consumers for inefficacy, despite regular appearance on the rear bumpers of cars owned by progressive Americans.

“I had a feeling something wasn’t working back there. I heard some rattling on NPR about crises in Europe, the Middle East, Africa… even America,” said Subaru Outback owner Wayne Darvy of Burlington, Vt. “How can sticker companies just sit back and profit from a clearly unattainable mantra? I feel duped.

The Wonderful Gloom of the Left

Ever since Brexit, and particularly ever since Trump’s victory in November, the sneering classes have embarked on a never ending gloomfest, combined with the sort of pejorative name calling that they would unhesitatingly oppose if it weren’t directed at (old) white males. This has caused the rest of us a certain amount of glee and allowed us to coin the extremely useful word Schadenboner (or 𝕾𝖈𝖍𝖆𝖉𝖊𝖓𝖇𝖔̈𝖓𝖊𝖗 – it looks even better mit die umlauts in fraktur).

Read the whole thing.

As a proud (former) Michigander I'm rather glad she moved

After she found out that Trump was elected ...

That’s how it felt for Margaret Smiley, a 24-year old analyst at a health-care start-up in Manhattan. After casting an absentee ballot for the state of Michigan, Smiley just this week changed her permanent address and voter registration to New York. “This election just moved me to support the fact that I will never be moving back,” she says.

It just felt like my identity had been taken out from under me.Margaret Smiley

It was a thought she had already been entertaining for some time, but still, Election Night felt like a punch to the gut: She expected Michigan, which had gone blue in every presidential election she’d been alive to witness, would do the same this time around. When news outlets began calling the state for Trump, “I can’t really describe the feeling, but it just felt like my identity had been taken out from under me — like this really steady rug of the values that I held and what I considered to be important as an American, as a Michigander, was just completely swept out from under my feet.”

There was also a more intimate sense of anger. “I feel personally hurt by my neighbors, by my friends, by my teachers, by my coaches,” Smiley says — all the people who defined her childhood in the “very, very conservative” town of Rockford, Michigan, a suburb of Grand Rapids with a population of around 6,000 people. “All the values of the Midwest — working hard and doing good and being kind — how can you turn your back on that … and vote for someone who has acted against and represents everything that is fundamentally against those values?”

Thank you for not coming back.

Congress: Obama Admin Fired Top Scientist to Advance Climate Change Plans

The Obama administration is anti-science.

The Press vs. The People

Via Liberty Blitzkreig, data from UC Santa Barbara



What does this graphic tell you?

Considering Donald Trump received 63 million votes and won the election, what does the above graphic tell you? It tells you, in no uncertain terms, that 63 million Americans have effectively no voice within the mainstream press. It tells you that the media is entirely disconnected from, and oblivious to, the concerns of about half the voting public. This actually speaks to a lot of what’s going on — for example, it explains the continued rise of alternative media sites such as this one.

By labeling independent news sites such as Liberty Blitzkrieg “fake news,” the mainstream press is simply trying to come up with any excuse possible to justify its historic failure, as well as promote censorship in a pathetic attempt to regain its former position of cultural influence. Unfortunately for them, this fabricated narrative has it all backwards.

The press' disconnect, it's contempt, for the American public isn't new, but the last election puts it in stark contrast.   The press used the election as an exercise to try to shame the American people into voting for Hillary!   If you voiced support for Trump you were deplorable, and irredeemable.  You were labelled a sucker falling for an obvious con by a huckster. 

Meanwhile ...

The America you lived in had race relations rubbed raw.  The America you lived in was shipping jobs overseas as fast as corporate CEOs could find factory space in Mexico or China.  The America you lived in had universities where Far Left ideological conformity was strictly enforced and males were branded as rapists for existing.   The America you lived in had sky-high gas prices while the government was doing its best to keep vast areas of land off-limits for exploration.  The America you lived in had food prices rising daily but your paycheck was stuck at zero growth.  The America you lived was giving up its leadership status in the world while it's President was telling you to get off your high horse because of the Crusades.   The America you lived in got warm in the summer and cold in the winter and sea levels were pretty much where they had been all your life, but the newspapers were screaming that the earth was drowning ... and it was your fault..  

In an alternative universe the press was telling you that you never had it so good thanks to the wise policies of its leaders ... and if you disagree you're racist.  That race relations where great except for those racist cops out killing innocent young black men who had their hands up begging the cops "don't shoot."  That America was great, had always been great so "Make America Great Again" is stupid slogan, or ... America was never great and doesn't deserve to be great because slavery; pick one.  The press was telling you to vote for Hillary because she has lady parts and that's critically important.  That Trump is Hitler and voting for him made you a Nazi.  The press was dutifully reporting Obama's claim that America had never been more respected in the world, Obama killed Osama and that ISIS was on the run.  In that universe the State of the Union was never better, jobs were being created at a record pace and unemployment had never been so low.  

After the election the press was telling you that Trump won - not because you wanted change - but because the FBI, because of "fake news," and that Putin "hacked" the election. 

I confidently predict that the editors of the Virginian Pilot will look at the graphic above and congratulate themselves on their wisdom.  They will see no disconnect between the press and the public because to them, the public are poor, stupid, uneducated rubes who need to be led by their betters.  And they are your betters. 

The fake news about fake news

Why the obsession with fake news? Readers with long memories will note that the mainstream media did not use this term to describe the work of Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, and Jayson Blair, or the reporters who vilified and maligned the Duke Lacrosse Team, or the disgusting fabrications Rolling Stone told about fraternity life at the University of Virginia, or the myths parroted on CNN that Michael Brown shouted “hands up, don’t shoot” before he was killed in Ferguson. Nor was fake news a problem in 2012 when a man named Floyd Corkins said he shot an employee of the conservative Family Research Council in the arm because the Southern Poverty Legal Center had accused it of being a hate group. And yet four years later, when an armed man showed up at a D.C. pizzeria after reading online that it might be connected to human trafficking, the mainstream media’s quest to anathematize fake news intensified. (Luckily, no one was harmed.)

What makes the controversy salient is the uncertain social position of the mainstream media. The press, Tom Wolfe wrote, is a Victorian Gentleman, the arbiter of manners and fashion, the judge of right conduct and good breeding. But the fragmentation of the media landscape, the decentralization of the Internet and social media, and the rise of Donald Trump have set this Victorian Gentleman back on his heels. Long ago he changed his job description and went from telling his readers what had happened to telling them what to think. And the fact that so many people now have the means to disagree with him, to challenge him, to speak unmediated and uncensored, is profoundly disturbing to his sense of authority and self-worth.

There always have been and always will be cynics, fabulists, and crazies, because these human types express durable traits of our nature. But the free-speech zone of the World Wide Web is the result of human artifice, and thus contingent in space and time. It would be folly, and injurious to freedom, if the oligarchs that own social-media platforms allowed the Victorian Gentleman to reassert his preeminent status through censorship of speech that disturbs his liberal, affluent, entitled cocoon.

Intel Agencies and Russian Intent: Ain't Buying it

Via The Diplomad 2.0

There's all sorts of press reporting out there that now--surprise!--our myriad intelligence agencies, the same ones that refused to brief Congress, have reached a unified conclusion that not only did the Russians hack into the DNC, they did it with the INTENT of making Donald Trump president.

Yes, about that bridge you want to buy, please sign right here and have the money wired to my account . . .

We saw our fearless president in one of his rambling, seemingly endless press conferences, continue to try to stick the shiv into Trump's ribs. All sorts of nonsense of how he stood up to Putin on Russian hacking some months ago and told him to "cut it out." Right. And that after those blood-curdling words from the American president, we saw a decline and maybe even a stop to Russian hacking efforts . . . right. Obama, of course, told us that the intel agencies had concluded that the Russian goal was to make Trump president . . . right.

Don't buy it.

I have been around intel agencies and intel briefings almost my entire adult life. Most intel is garbage. Some of it is very good but that usually is very narrowly focussed and has to do with hard facts: e.g., "Army divisions X and Y have been put on alert and all leaves cancelled." The intent? Ah, well, that's a matter for conjecture and speculation unless--extremely rare--you have a reliable source right inside the other guy's highest and most inner circle who can tell you what is being said and planned for those divisions. As I said, very rare.

Just days ago, as noted, the heads of our intel agencies declined to send briefers to Congress to provide the intel on Russian hacking of the elections. Leaked reports indicated that the FBI and CIA were at logger-heads over the issue of Russian hacking. Now, suddenly, unanimity. Right.

Now, suddenly, we know the Russians, under direct orders from Putin, hacked with the intent of turning the election over to Trump.

Fake news.

Don't forget that this odious misadministration has a long track record of fiddling with intel. Political pressure was brought, for example, to declare us as winning against ISIS, when the intel showed we were not. The CIA and others were forced to find that climate change is a greater threat than terror.

Look, the Russians and Chinese and others have been running intel and misinformation operations against us and our allies for decades. This Obama administration has taken a very soft stance on all of this, up until Hillary Clinton lost the election on November 8. Suddenly, the administration, Hollywood, the media, and, of course, the Democratic political class are in a patriotic uproar over foreign intervention in our elections. Prior to those elections we were assured by Obama and minions that our system was solid as a rock and that it could not be tampered with.

What happened to change things? Clinton lost. That was not supposed to happen! Now, suddenly, our election system is highly vulnerable AND our whole election, it is more than implied, has been thrown to Trump by these foreign actors.

Take it from me: this is bogus. The intel agencies know nothing of the kind. They might be able to say we have been subjected to hacking, I am sure we have, but the intel lads and lassies have no idea beyond speculation, much of it politically motivated, as to what the Russians or others intended. In addition, is there any evidence that shows that blue collar workers in Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc., voted for Trump based on the information "provided" by the Russians?

We have a situation today wherein the media and Obama seek to get us to forget what the "hacks," be they Russian or otherwise, revealed. I would note that the Russians did not make Hillary put an illegal unsecure private server in her bathroom closet and stuff it with highly sensitive information. The Russians did not make DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz try to rig the primaries against Bernie Sanders. The Russians did not have CNN personnel passing presidential debate questions to the Hillary camp, and on and on.

Is there foreign interference in our elections? You bet.

The biggest offender? Not Russia, but Mexico. Mexican officials publicly called on Mexicans in the US to oppose Trump; Mexico's over fifty--yes, fifty--consulates in the US (here) are hot beds of political activity and activism. Millions of illegal and legal aliens largely from Mexico and Central America vote, yes vote. We need to have an in-depth investigation into Mexico's interference in our elections, an interference that goes well beyond revealing embarrassing DNC texts.

There. That's an investigation the GOP should endorse, and the new SecState should take up the issue of Mexican interference in our elections.

Not the Onion

You can't make this stuff up!

View from the Left

Trump and the rage of the Brahmandarins

As I was perusing Trump’s cabinet list in the Times of London the other day, I was struck not so much by the names — some ‘feck yeah!’, some ‘well, OK’, some ‘meh’ — as by what wasn’t there. The ‘Brahmandarins™’ had been left behind, as it were. Allow me to expand.

...

Sometime in 2008, I had an eye-opening encounter at a fundraiser for a scientific cause. A lawyer for a major donor, after various patronizing remarks after our scholarly pursuits, told some of us in intimate conversation that of course we should support Obama. (Interestingly, the usual appeal to ethnicity was not made.) One of us asked the lawyer what would be his ‘performance benchmark’ for a successful presidency. Tellingly, the otherwise so voluble lawyer was left at a loss for words. Eventually, his argument boiled down to ‘Obama is one of us’. Which “us”? Not scientists, obviously. Nor Jews, obviously (the lawyer, my colleague, and myself are all Jewish). No — Brahmandarins, members of the New Class.

Peggy Noonan recently coined the phrase “patronized by our inferiors”. At the time I couldn’t come up with anything as concise and withering, but the whole framing of the argument struck me as a hybrid between the Cosa Nostra and “mean girls” cliques at the middle school my daughter was then attending. Around the same time, I discovered Thomas Sowell’s priceless “Vision of the Anointed” whose subtitle “Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy” could be emblematic of the entire phenomenon. A critique that had built itself up in my head, in inchoate fashion, was laid out here in concise, crystal-clear prose.

Fast-forward to the present. In the last several Presidential elections, Brahmandarin D candidates (Obama, Hillary) were pitted against Kshatriyas (McCain) or Vaishyas (Romney, Trump). Unsurprisingly, Brahmandarin presidents tend to appoint cabinet and senior aides from among the Brahmandarin caste, while Trump’s appointments came almost exclusively from the Vaishyas (Exxon CEO Tillerson for State, various other execs), and Kshatriyas (Mattis, Flynn, Kelly). It doesn’t matter that most of these people have real-world achievements to their names than a Robbie Mook type can only dream of: they are “ignorant” (read: insufficiently subservient to New Class shibboleths), “hate-filled”, etc. — All short-hand for “not one of us”.

Democrats are still in denial (as seen on Fakebook)