This Is Justice?... According to Liberal Judges It Is!

With all that's going on with the leftists and media's "witch hunt" to take down Pres. Trump, one of the more interesting stories regarding the last presidential election has faded into the background, if not been totally forgotten. The MSM certainly won't bring it to anyone's attention.

Remember the IT aide for the DNC's congressional leader, Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Imran Awan? You know, the one accused of money laundering, hacking into Congress's server and downloading truck loads of data to send it to a foreign middle-eastern country, but was caught at the airport attempting to flee the country with lots of cash?

Well, a liberal judge has decided in his case that he's "suffered enough already" and is letting him off the hook. For details on this injustice, check out this article explaining the case.  

This is what liberal justice looks like for those supporting crooked liberal congresswomen who kept him on the congressional payroll for months after he'd been arrested.

Why Michael Cohen's Plea Is A Joke

For those following daily the details of what Mueller's team of partisan hack lawyers have been doing with their "witch hunt" of finding "Russian Collusion", I offer my readers this link to a clip from Sean Hannity's show of yesterday, 8/21/18, and his guest, Mark Levin's explanation of how Cohen's plea is a Constitutional myth/fantasy.

It might, if you've not seen it, or need a refresher on this point, help clarify why these legal actions against anyone who has some connection, however remote that connection might be to Donal J. Trump, has absolutely no implications in any way to anything involving a "Russian Collusion", or "Obstruction of Justice" for Pres. Trump, or any of his campaign staff.

Feelings... Nothing More Than Feeeelings!

It seems some of today's college students feel they're correcting something by taking vandalism out on hunks of metal; once again!

While Chicago was reeling from another 60 people getting shot last weekend, a mob of “anti-racism” protesters were busy toppling a hundred-year-old Confederate statue in North Carolina, proving once again that social justice warriors would rather virtue signal at an ancient hunk of metal than address actual threats to minority communities.

Watch this MRCTV video of Brittany Hughes explaining how this action is part of the laziest "anti-racism" campaign ever!

Putting Our National Culture At Risk

The media narrative today is that America in the “xeno-phobic” Trump era is turning its back on new immigrants. But that narrative is sharply contradicted by the fact that the United States maintains the most generous immigration policies in the world. In this week’s new video, CRTV host and best-selling author Michelle Malkin explains how ill-conceived immigration policies threaten to destroy the American Dream for everyone.

A Tale of Two Individuals

Perhaps this story will adequately illustrate why I, who was the guy who didn't get recruited to a "big time" college because I chose distance running in cross-country and track during high school, feel the way I do about the current situation regarding taking a knee.

You 'graduated' high school in 2011.  Your teenage years were a struggle.  You grew up on the wrong side of the tracks.  Your mother was the leader of the family and worked tirelessly to keep a roof over your head and food on your plate.  Academics were a struggle for you and your grades were mediocre at best. The only thing that made you stand out is you weighed 225 lbs and could run 40 yards in 4.2 seconds while carrying a football.  Your best friend was just like you, except he didn’t play football.  Instead of going to football practice after school, he went to work at McDonalds for minimum wage.  You were recruited by all the big colleges and spent every weekend of your senior year making visits to universities where coaches and boosters tried to convince you their school was best.  They laid out the red carpet for you. Your best friend worked double shifts at Mickey D’s.  College was not an option for him.  On the day you signed with Big State University, your best friend signed paperwork with his Army recruiter.  You went to summer workouts.  He went to basic training.

 

You spent the next four years living in the athletic dorm, eating at the training table. You spent your Saturdays on the football field, cheered on by adoring fans.  Tutors attended to your every academic need.  You attended class when you felt like it. Sure, you worked hard.  You lifted weights, ran sprints, studied plays, and soon became one of the top football players in the country.  Your best friend was assigned to the 101st Airborne Division. While you were in college, he deployed to Iraq once and Afghanistan twice.  He became a Sergeant and led a squad of 19 year old soldiers who grew up just like he did.  He shed his blood in Afghanistan and watched young American's give their lives, limbs, and innocence for the USA.

 

You went to the NFL combine and scored off the charts.  You hired an agent and waited for draft day.  You were drafted in the first round and your agent immediately went to work, ensuring that you received the most money possible. You signed for $16 million although you had never played a single down of professional football.  Your best friend re-enlisted in the Army for four more years. As a combat tested sergeant, he will be paid $32,000 per year.

 

You will drive a Ferrari on the streets of South Beach.  He will ride in the back of a Blackhawk helicopter with 10 other combat loaded soldiers.  You will sleep at the Ritz.  He will dig a hole in the ground and try to sleep.  You will “make it rain” in the club.  He will pray for rain as the temperature reaches 120 degrees.

 

On Sunday, you will run into a stadium as tens of thousands of fans cheer and yell your name.  For your best friend, there is little difference between Sunday and any other day of the week.  There are no adoring fans.  There are only people trying to kill him and his soldiers. Every now and then, he and his soldiers leave the front lines and “go to the rear” to rest.  He might be lucky enough to catch an NFL game on TV.  When the National Anthem plays and you take a knee, he will jump to his feet and salute the television.  While you protest the unfairness of life in the United States, he will give thanks to God that he has the honor of defending his great country.

 

To the players of the NFL:  We are the people who buy your tickets, watch you on TV, and wear your jerseys.  We anxiously wait for Sundays so we can cheer for you and marvel at your athleticism. Although we love to watch you play, we care little about your opinions until you offend us. You have the absolute right to express yourselves, but we have the absolute right to boycott you.  We have tolerated your drug use and DUIs, your domestic violence, and your vulgar displays of wealth.  We should be ashamed for putting our admiration of your physical skills before what is morally right.  But now you have gone too far. You have insulted our flag, our country, our soldiers, our police officers, and our veterans. You are living the American dream, yet you disparage our great country.  I encourage all like minded Americans to boycott the NFL.

Here's a great video to watch on this topic.

National boycott of the NFL for Sunday, is November 11th, Veterans Day Weekend. Boycott all football telecast, all fans, all ticket holders, stay away from attending any games, let them play to empty stadiums. Pass this post along to all your friends and family. Honor our military, some of whom come home with the American Flag draped over their coffin.

8/23/18 Update: Here's the latest development on this issue from Bill O'Reilly's site.

Trump Demands ESPN Air National Anthem During 'Monday Night Football'
President Donald Trump's campaign is demanding ESPN show the national anthem during Monday Night Football games. On Wednesday, an email signed by the president was sent to supporters asking them to sign a petition. "I’m calling on you to join me in denouncing this SPINELESS surrender to the politically correct liberal mob," read the email, signed by Trump. ESPN president Jimmy Pitaro announced last week that the network will not air the anthem during MNF games this season, which has been the standard in the past. There may be exceptions as the season rolls along, but otherwise, the network will not show that portion of the game. CBS Sports will also reportedly not show the anthem portion of pregames. ESPN declined to comment on Trump's demand and petition.

Joke of the Day

 

Bill and Hillary are at a Yankees home game, sitting in the first row, with the Secret Service people directly behind them.

One of the Secret Service guys leans forward and whispers something to Bill.

At first, Clinton stares at the guy, looks at Hillary, looks back at the agent, and shakes his head "no".  

The agent then says, "Mr. President, it was a unanimous request of the entire team, from the owner  to the bat boy." 

Bill hesitates but begins to change his mind when the agent tells him the fans would love it.

Bill shrugs his shoulders and says, "Ho-Kay! If that is what the people want.  C'mere Hilly baby." 

With that, Bill gets up, grabs Hillary by her collar and the seat of her pants, lifts her up, and tosses her right over the wall onto the field

She gets up kicking, swearing, screaming, "Bill you"!$#@&!".

The crowd goes absolutely wild.  

Fans are jumping up and down, cheering, hooting and hollering, and high-fiving.  

Bill is bowing, smiling and waving to the crowd.

He leans over to the agent and says, "How about that; I would have never believed how much everyone would enjoy that!" 

Noticing the agent has gone totally pale, he asks what is wrong. 

The agent replies, "Sir, I said they want you to throw out the first 'pitch'."

An Intelligent Analysis on Climate Change

How Do You Tell If The Earth's Climate System "Is Warming"?

Francis Menton August 09, 2018

The earth's climate system "is warming."  True or false?  The answer is that there is no definitive answer.  And if someone tells you there is, then that person doesn't know what he or she is talking about.

A more precise answer to the question is that whether the earth's climate system "is warming" or "is cooling" entirely depends on who gets to pick the start date for the analysis.  If you are the one who gets to pick the start date, then you can make it so that the system is either warming or cooling, whichever you would like for your purpose of the moment.  

But of course, there are many people out there today with a lot invested in the proposition that the climate system "is warming."  That proposition is a key tenet of global warming alarmism.  To "prove" the point that the system "is warming," advocates use the simple trick of picking a start point to their liking, making for a presentation that appears to support their position.  Have you been fooled by this simple trick?  The advocates leave it up to you to figure out that if you picked a different start point, you could just as easily make an equally convincing presentation showing that the climate system "is cooling."  A lot of seemingly intelligent people can't figure that out, and get taken in by the scam.

I raise this point today because it appears that, as part of the campaign to suppress disfavored political speech, Google has begun within the past few days adding a legend at the bottom of YouTube videos that express politically incorrect views in the field of climate science.  For example, here is the legend that they have added to a video made for Prager University by eminent MIT atmospheric physicist and climate skeptic Richard Lindzen:

"Multiple lines of scientific evidence show that the climate system is warming."

The quote comes from the first two sentences of this Wikipedia entry with the title "Global warming."   Well, Wikipedia says it, so I guess it must be true!

According to this post at BuzzFeed on August 7, others who have been subject to having the same legend affixed to their work include Tony Heller of the Deplorable Climate Science Blog, Mark Morano of Climate Depot, and the Heartland Institute.  (So far, nothing comparable has happened to the Manhattan Contrarian; but then, I don't make YouTube videos.)

So let's investigate the question of whether the earth's "climate system" is or is not warming.  You could, for example, look at the chart presented by Wikipedia in that entry.  Here it is:

That looks rather dramatic.  On the other hand, the whole vertical scale of the chart is only about 1.5 deg C; and they picked 1880 as their start date.  (The slope here is also greatly accentuated by some very large and questionable "adjustments" that have made earlier years cooler and more recent years warmer.  You can read my eighteen part series "The Greatest Scientific Fraud Of All Time" for much more detail.  But those details are not critical for understanding the current issue.)

Does your skeptical mind possibly think, when they use that phrase "century scale," is that just a bias-free description of the issue at hand, or is it instead a hand-wave to provide a fake justification for picking a preferred start date?  Why do we need to go back 138 years when we are considering a question phrased in the present tense -- whether the climate "is" warming?  Wouldn't the present tense normally be used to cover a much shorter period, like a year or two or three at most?  So you ask, what has the climate system been doing during that time?  For the answer, how about looking for temperature data to the far more accurate UAH satellite-based serieswhich provides monthly data points going back to 1979.  Here is the latest chart from that source:

This time, you get to pick the start date.  To cover the last few years, how about picking early 2016?  After all, these last couple of years should be a much better indicator of whether the climate "is" warming or cooling than the entire last 138 years.  Really, what do temperatures more than 100 years ago, or even 30 or 40 years ago, have to do with the question of whether the earth's climate "is" warming?  So we look at the UAH chart, and we find our answer: since early 2016 temperatures have fallen by more than 0.5 deg C.  Thus, once we get to pick our preferred start time, it is obvious that the climate system "is cooling."  

Or, you can pick a different start date to your liking.  How about 1998?  That will give you an entire 20 year run.  It's hard to say that the verb "is" should cover a period of more than 20 years.  On the UAH series you can see that temperatures have also fallen about 0.4 deg C since early 1998.  Again, even on this substantially longer scale, the earth "is cooling."  (Note, however, that there is a significant difference between the Wikipedia chart and the UAH satellite series as to what has happened since 1998.  On the Wikipedia chart the latest reading (2017?) is up about 0.3 deg C from 1998; while on the UAH series, the latest reading (July 2018) is down about 0.4 deg C from the then-records set in 1998.  That's those "adjustments" in the surface temperature record that I was talking about.  I would say that there is no credible position that the heavily adjusted surface temperature record that Wikipedia relies on should be used for this purpose over the far more accurate and un-tampered UAH satellite record.)

But how about if we decide that there is something to this "century-scale" thing?  Let's agree that we're going to go back many, many decades to determine if the earth "is warming."  But if we're going to do that, where do we stop?  If you want, you can go back a hundred million years; or even a billion.  And if you follow this subject a little, you probably know that the 1700s and 1800s are a very suspect era to start a series like this, because those centuries are a known cold period sometimes referred to as the "Little Ice Age."  Picking a date in the "Little Ice Age" as the start point to prove warming is what's called "cheating."  Let's pick something more fair.  How about going back a nice round millennium?  Was that time warmer or cooler than now?

OK, they didn't have networks of thermometers set up around the globe in the 11th century, let alone the highly accurate satellites that we have today.  But scores of scientists have done hundreds of studies based on many sorts of "proxies" to determine at least whether it was warmer or cooler at that time than today.  It turns out that the evidence is rather overwhelming that it was warmer.  Actually, this is what is known as the "Medieval Warm Period."  But picking a date in that period as your start date for deciding whether the earth "is warming" is no more fair or unfair than picking a date in the "Little Ice Age."  

Here is a compilation of dozens of studies reaching the conclusion that the Medieval Warm Period was warmer than the present:  "More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was real, global, & warmer than the present."  Examples:

• "Paper finds Medieval Warm Period in Arctic was much warmer than the present."  
• "Medieval Warming Exceeds Modern Warming, Per New Research Using 120 Proxies."   
• "Earth was warmer in Roman and Medieval Times say German researchers." 

There are literally dozens more, if you follow the links.  The conclusion is inescapable: on a centuries-scale basis, the earth's climate system "is cooling."

And by the way, if you want to keep going back farther and farther, you can keep finding time periods that were warmer than the present.  Examples:  the Roman Warm Period, from around 250 BC to 450 AD; and the Holocene Climate Optimum, about 5000 to 3000 BC.

So here's the real answer to the question of whether the earth's ciimate system "is warming":  

• If your start date is June 2018, it "is warming."
• If your start date is January 2016, it "is cooling."
• If your start date is January 1998, it "is cooling."
• If your start date is 1880, it "is warming."
• If your start date is the year 1000, it "is cooling."
• If your start date is the Dark Ages, it "is warming."
• If your start date is Roman times, it "is cooling."

In short, the question is completely meaningless.

It's hard to believe that the supposed geniuses at Google could be taken in by a scam so obvious and so transparent.

But that's the world we live in.