Trump's White House Prepares for Battle

As more and more evidence is revealed by those investigating the "investigators", it is becoming clear that the 2016 presidential campaign was messed with in an unprecedented manner, not by the Russians as the media is leading the public to believe, but by the Obama Administration itself.

How can I say this? Well, based on the various facts I've been able to assemble, I believe the following is basically accurate. (I believe future investigative findings will support this theory.)

In the 2008 campaign Hillary held a secret meeting with Democrat candidate Sen. Obama. I believe he made a deal with her to allow him to take the nomination then, in exchange for her being given the position of Secretary of State after being Senator of New York which Obama aided her in getting during his first term. This would allow Hillary time in the first term to establish her cadre of followers/ supporters/collaborators in Congress she gathered. It would allow her to use the Clinton Foundation Initiative to establish her "war chest" for her future campaign for the presidency.

Then, after being re-elected, Obama would appoint her as S.O.S., after establishing her credibility as someone more than just the First Lady, where she could expand her contacts around the world for more broad support and contributions to her "war chest." However, due to some unexpected outcomes during her term as S.O.S. - ie: Libya & Benghazi - Obama was more reluctant to provide public support to her during her bid for the White House in 2016; especially after news got out about her email server and her "right-hand aide" Humma Abedin's spouse - Cong. Weiner - and the Hillary emails on his laptop. Of course, it didn't help her campaign either when John Podesta allowed his computer to be hacked which revealed how the Hillary campaign was being run, and then there was how it was revealed that then DNC Chair Cong. Wasserman-Shultz rigged the nomination against Sen. Bernie Sanders.

In the process, and in order to control the narrative for her, Obama had his intelligence cronies - Brennan, Clapper, Comey, et al - engage in spying on Trump's campaign after Hillary and Obama agreed she would provide the meme of Russian collusion as an "insurance policy" in an effort to eliminate any possibility of Trump winning.

After the shock of election night, Hillary's operatives within her network she'd established, opened the floodgates to put into motion the impeachment process. In essence, it was a psyops campaign, with the help of the media, to convince the public he was a Russian collaborator; Putin's puppet. Their next step in the plan was to strategically target seats in the House to take back control to implement the impeachment process led by Nancy Pelosi as Speaker.

Another twist in the game was the outcome of the Mueller report which frustrated the Dems to the point of losing it, is Chariman Nadler demands the fully unredacted report, as well as Trump's tax returns and all other docs which could indict him as a crook of any kind. With the appointment of A.G. Barr, they knew their plan was falling apart. So, Congress and the media (D) go after Barr!

This article from The Morning Call now provides us with the legal defense the White House is now mounting against this unprecedented attack on a sitting president who's been framed by the Hillary political machine; the chief of which is still on tour touting that the election was stolen from her.

How typical! Just like that "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her husband back in the '90s! No wonder she didn't win the election.

The Cause Behind Crime?

A lack of a father figure. He, he, he, he, he... that's all, folks!

Is that why this story is of no surprise to me?

Fascist Facebook Bans "Hate"

The banning by Facebook of certain so called "hate" - "dangerous people" or organizations - is nothing more than a political purge to keep the arena of ideas from having a platform to compete on. The only "hate" is what the leftists decide they don't like hearing because it makes them look like fools and idiots. If that's not fascist, then I must already be living on Mars.

If such a statement seems a bit "over the edge", then I suggest that you to watch this video here by Paul Joseph Watson. Don't know who he is? Then read this article here about it. Beyond doing that, it's up to you to decide.

= = = = = = = = = = =

EXPOSED! Clinton’s Russian plot to “slaughter Donald Trump”

May 3, 2019

·         linkedin

·         twitter

·          

·          

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s two-year investigation is over and a redacted version of the final report has been released to the public and Congress — and now there’s now a massive spotlight on how big of a role Hillary Clinton’s team had on spreading the Russia collusion lies.

A recently resurfaced email from December of 2015, leaked by WikiLeaks, reveals that Hillary’s team spoke about a plan to “slaughter Donald Trump” by “connecting” him to Russia.

In fact, Hillary’s team laid the foundation for spreading misinformation and lies about alleged Trump-Russia collusion years before Trump secured the Republican nomination and won the election.

In other words, Hillary conspired to simultaneously bring down the president while maintaining the illusion that she only lost the election because of Russian interference.

Mueller’s report clearly stated that he found no evidence of collusion between President Donald Trump and Russia during the 2016 election.

Attorney General William Barr also announced earlier this month that the Department of Justice would not be charging the president with obstruction of justice or any other crimes.

So where did the lies start? The entire so-called “witch hunt” and false rumors of collusion began with Hillary’s team.

In the email from Brent Budowsky to John Podesta, who served as Hillary’s 2016 campaign manager, they came up with a plan to link Trump to Russia. It also included an idea on how to downplay Hillary’s role in the rise of the Islamic State terrorist group when she served as secretary of state.

After some back and forth, Brent wrote to Podesta: “Best approach is to slaughter Donald for his bromance with Putin, but not go too far betting on Putin re Syria.”

But this wasn’t the only action Hillary and her team took to push the Russian collusion narrative.

As the 2016 presidential election was ramping up, Hillary and the Democratic National Committee paid Fusion GPS roughly $9 million to fund the now infamous (and debunked) dossier by former British spy Christopher Steele.

As detailed by The New York Post, Hillary used her connections to elevate the dossier to the highest levels of the Obama administration.

The FBI, which was led at the time by James Comey, used the dossier as an excuse to wiretap the Trump presidential campaign.

This triggered the two-year, $35 million Russian meddling probe from Mueller — which only resulted in the president being vindicated.

And it all started with Hillary Clinton’s team.

Martin Walsh is an editor for I Love My Freedom and a contributor for The American Mirror and The Horn News. His work has been featured in various conservative media outlets, such as LifeZette, Independent Journal, and Media Equalizer.

Democrats Are Panicing - No Holds Barred

No Holds Barred: Having absolutely no limits or restrictions as far as the levels and nature of one's hostilities and offense; taking to an especially ruthless or vicious manner.

Instead of retelling the situation of the circus in Congress - with buckets of KFC and props of a plastic chicken - this week, I'm going to let the Wall Street Journal provide the details.

May 5th Update: Having found confirmation of what I thought was the case regarding A.G. Barr checking with Mueller about his report summary, here's the truth of it. Especially revealing are the paragraphs in the center of the article. 

So, while the liberals are doing their best to save their asses by framing the narrative with accusations that the A.G. was covering up something by putting out his summary before anyone had a chance to go through Mueller's two volumes, their using the old play book tactic of obfuscating and distracting the real issue in order to keep feeding their support base with more lies.

= = = = = = = = = = = =

WSJ today - 5/02/19

 

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

A Real Attorney General

Washington pile-ons are never pretty, but this week’s political setup of Attorney General William Barr is disreputable even by Beltway standards. Democrats and the media are turning the AG into a villain for doing his duty and making the hard decisions that special counsel Robert Mueller abdicated.

Mr. Barr’s Wednesday testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee was preceded late Tuesday by the leak of a letter Mr. Mueller had sent the AG on March 27. Mr. Mueller griped in the letter that Mr. Barr’s four-page explanation to Congress of the principal conclusions of the Mueller report on March 24 “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Mueller team’s “work and conclusions.” Only in Washington could this exercise in posterior covering be puffed into a mini-outrage.

Democrats leapt on the letter as proof that Mr. Barr was somehow covering for Donald Trump when he has covered up nothing. Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, the Democratic answer to Rep. Louie Gohmert, accused Mr. Barr of abusing his office and lying to Congress, and demanded that he resign. The only thing she lacked was evidence.

Mr. Barr’s four-page letter couldn’t possibly have covered all the nuances of a 448-page report. It was an attempt to provide Mr. Mueller’s conclusions to Congress and the public as quickly as possible, while he took the time to work through the entire document to make redactions required by law and Justice Department rules.

This is exactly what he promised to do in his confirmation hearing. Even Mr. Mueller’s complaining letter admits that Mr. Barr’s letter wasn’t inaccurate, a fact Mr. Barr says Mr. Mueller also conceded in a subsequent phone call. The Mueller complaint, rather, was that there was “public confusion about critical aspects” of his investigation.

Translation: Republicans were claiming vindication for Donald Trump, and Mr. Mueller was taking hits in the press for not nailing the worst President in history. Having been hailed for months as a combination of Eliot Ness and St. Thomas More, Mr. Mueller and his team of prosecutors seem to have been unnerved by some bad press clips.

Mr. Barr told the Senate Wednesday that he offered Mr. Mueller the chance to review his four-page letter before sending it to Congress, but the special counsel declined. Mr. Mueller worked for Mr. Barr, and that was the proper time to offer suggestions or disagree. Instead, Mr. Mueller ducked that responsibility and then griped in an ex-post-facto letter that was conveniently leaked on the eve of

 

Bill Barr gets smeared for refusing to duck and cover like Loretta Lynch.

 

Mr. Barr’s testimony. Quite the stand-up guy. Mr. Barr has since released the full Mueller report with minor redactions, as he promised, and with the “context” intact. Keep in mind Mr. Barr was under no legal obligation to release anything at all. Mr. Mueller reports only to Mr. Barr, not to the country or Congress.

Mr. Barr has also made nearly all of the redactions in the report available to senior Members of Congress to inspect at Justice. Yet as of this writing, only three Members have bothered— Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and ranking House Republican on Judiciary Doug Collins. Not one Democrat howling about Mr. Barr’s lack of transparency has examined the outrages they claim are hidden.

Democrats are also upset that Mr. Barr concluded that Mr. Trump did not obstruct justice regarding the Russia probe. But in that decision too Mr. Barr was behaving as an Attorney General should. Mr. Mueller compiled a factual record but shrank from a “prosecutorial judgment.” Mr. Barr then stepped up and made the call, however unpopular with Democrats and the press.

***

Contrast that to the abdication of Loretta Lynch, who failed as Barack Obama’s last Attorney General to make a prosecutorial judgment about Hillary Clinton’s misuse of classified information. Ms. Lynch cowered before the bullying of then FBI director James Comey, who absolved Mrs. Clinton of wrongdoing while publicly scolding her. That egregious break with Justice policy eventually led Mr. Comey to reopen the Clinton probe in late October 2016, which helped to elect Mr. Trump.

All of this shows again the risks of appointing special counsels. They lack the political accountability that the Founders built into the separation of powers. Mr. Mueller, in his March 27 letter, revealed again that like Mr. Comey at the FBI he viewed himself as accountable only to himself.

This trashing of Bill Barr shows how frustrated and angry Democrats continue to be that the special counsel came up empty in his Russia collusion probe. He was supposed to be their fast-track to impeachment. Now they’re left trying to gin up an obstruction tale, but the probe wasn’t obstructed and there was no underlying crime. So they’re shouting and pounding the table against Bill Barr for acting like a real Attorney General.

The Coming Campaign

With the Democratic candidate field growing almost every day now, and with over twenty in the race thus far, I thought this would be a good time to review why the Democratic Party has so many candidates and why their platform planks are going to bring out the worst in politics this next presidential campaign.

While I could spend an hour typing up a storm on listing those specific platform planks, it would be much more impactful and effective in communicating them through a short video which covers them concisely. So, please, take a moment, watch this video and pay close attention to each of the points that this spokesperson makes in explaining them.

Selective Omission

What most people never really stop and think about, or realize, is that the Media (D) has gotten very crafty in how they deal with current issues which promote their agenda and leave out evidence, facts, or information which completely negate the whole assertion on their part.

"Like what?", you ask.

Well, how about the biggest issue of the past two and a half years; Russian collusion to rig the election.

As we all know, the Media's (D) been pounding the claim that the reason Hillary lost to Trump was because Trump, his campaign, or both, were working with Russia to rig her loss in 2016. Actually, if one does some real hard recall, or research to find it online, it was Trump who made the claim during the campaign that he was the one concerned that the election could be rigged in favor of Hillary.

So, who but Pres. Obama from the Rose Garden points out how ridiculous such a concern by Trump is in this video from Real Clear Politics on October 18, 2016. Watch it for yourself!

Why do I focus on this? Because it reveals how the Media (D) has intentionally ignored this fact. Instead, they have ranted and raved on CNN, MSNBC and other liberal stations almost 24/7 for the past several years that the dossier proved that it was Trump who rigged the election.

And yet, even after the whole thing was proven a hoax once the Mueller report came out, the liberals - now in power in the House of Congress - is like a dog refusing to let it go and out to destroy a President who's making serious and siginficant changes to our seriously corrupt political culture.

Say what? If this says anything, it is that the liberals honestly believe that we "deplorables" are that stupid to believe them when they make their claim about something when it comes to their power and control issues.

The Future of Education: A View From the Inside

I've worked in public education for forty years now; 30 years full-time, and after retiring, 10 years of substituting in a few other districts around the area where I live.

I've seen the gradual shift over these years from bad to worse. The main elements I've learned which have impacted education have been the federal government, the local, state and national teacher's unions, the judicial system and the gradual removal of any control of disciplinary actions by the classroom teacher.

Most of us are already fairly familiar with the fact that, during the Carter Administration of the late '70s, at the start of my teaching career, Congress approved a new bureaucracy which was supposed to improve the quality of education; the Dept. of Education. And, although I suspected that it would not accomplish that goal, we now know from the results of the last 40 years since its inception, I was correct in my suspicion.

Instead, it's done what most other bureaucracies do; suck into the oblivion of the federal government, billions of tax dollars hiring thousands of employees which, from their distant cubicles, somewhere in Washington, D.C. thousands of miles away, exercise their infinite wisdom making regulations that, instead of making learning for students more efficient, impose all sorts of demands on state, and districts, which only accomplish the need to spend more time to fill out paperwork by teachers and administration to meet those demands. It has generated more complex requirements for the teacher  and programs to teach in order to meet the increasing diversity of students flowing into the schools. As is typical for all federal bureaucracies, it has never proposed ideas for actually making things more efficient, or cutting back on growing its number of employees over the decades it's existed.

The national teacher's union clearly is simply a political action entity - always liberal - which, because of its hundreds of thousands of members strong clout, exercises its will on Congress and the Dept. of Education by  lobbying them on their decisions for new and weirder laws and curriculum as the years have passed. 30 years ago, we wouldn't have even dreamed that children would be learning about the details of how to how to put a condom on a cucumber to prevent STDs. Now, it's the norm.

The judicial system has played a part in this deteriorating behemoth as well. With the shift by the federal government of moving away from supporting large institutions for mentally disturbed or dysfunctional individuals, many parents with children who needed proper care - which included receiving an education - due to their disabilities, organized and filed lawsuits in court to force school districts to accommodate these children during the '80s. 

In some rulings made by judges in various cases, they've imposed legal requirements for inclusive experiences of these disabled children, but without mandating any increase in funding for these programs on the state's legislature. Consequently, there was a gradual increase in the number of special education programs which the school district had to fund in creative ways, while taking from other programs such as vocational ed programs. 

As my career moved through the years, I saw more and more aides, often one adult to one child in a wheelchair, or laying on a matt in a room, tending to them during the school day. In my opinion, I doubted these children actually learned anything which really made a difference in their future, but since it was legally required, the schools had to provide the services. Now, it's a major share of the district's budget every year.

Another trend I witnessed occur over the decades was the size of district administration; a direct result of the Dept. of Education's new fangled programs required under federal laws passed by Congress. When a new superintendent came into the district and streamlined the administration by cutting staff and sending the funds to the classrooms, things actually improved. However, when that one left, and another replaced him, or her, the administration grew again and a greater share of the district's budget was eaten up to pay their ever expanding salaries which never taught any students, instead, they just harassed the teacher to carry out their edicts or monitor the program they were responsible for running. Of course, just like most of our politicians, they promised the moon, but delivered a clod of dirt.

Over these years students have become more aware of just how much power they actually have because of various social attitudes which have evolved and become dominant since my time in school as a student. We're all familiar when we were growing up that we conducted ourselves when interacting with a teacher in the classroom with respect and a willingness to comply with their directions because they were our elders. Not today! More and more of them just sit and look at you after being directed to do whatever the situation requires, and stare at you; daring you to make them, or worse yet, telling you to "F" yourself. Administrative policies and dealings with these students rarely result in any significant consequences for these offenders. Now, the state of CA is considering a law which restricts the number of suspensions for most student offenses to two per year, rather than having a program to remediate, or rehabilitate the growing occurrences of more and more severe instances of assault and disruption. As a result, the learning environment in the classroom has suffered for those students who are actually trying to learn.

Finally, just the other day while substituting in a new school near where I live, I witnessed the difference at the beginning of the day that contrasted the degree of change our school culture has gone through. When I started my career in the classroom, it was expected that every student would stand, put their hand over their heart on their chest, and participate in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the United States flag to start the day. During the span of years I taught, there was a big state-wide debate which the legislature passed a bill on regarding the flag salute issue of whether it was required. Just the other day, I witnessed half of the class of 20 students who sat quietly in their chair as the other half of the class stood as us "old fogies" and veterans would expect. It caused me to check into the law the legislature passed years ago during the debate that raged and learned that the law only requires that a student not be disrespectful or disruptive during the flag salute, but are not required to even stand with, face the flag with their arms by their side, and show any respect to our symbol we veterans served, and some who gave the ultimate sacrifice to defend.

I firmly believe that the greatest foe our nation is dealing with when it comes to changing the direction our nation's education is headed in is our collective morals as a people. Yet, as we've no doubt seen in various forms of communications, any reference in public schools over the last 40 years has been completely removed; and thus we've witnessed the rise of charter schools.More and more parents are paying private school tuition as a result in order to give their children a chance for a future, yet more recently, we've seen a rise in the dialogue of the nation that this is just "white privilege", as though they have no right to exercise any independent choice for them.

Ladies and gentlemen, if this is the path our nation is on doesn't change, then we truly are headed for ruination in the future!