Archive for the ‘Election 2016’ Category

THE SECOND AMERICAN CIVIL WAR CONTINUES

Sunday, April 15th, 2018

 

 

©2018. William Hamilton.

Nationally syndicated columnist, William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Nebraska Aviation Hall of Fame, the Colorado Aviation Hall of Fame, and the Oklahoma University Army ROTC Wall of Fame. In 2015, he was named an Outstanding Alumnus of the University of Nebraska. Dr. Hamilton is the author of The Wit and Wisdom of William Hamilton: the Sage of Sheepdog Hill, Pegasus Imprimis Press (2017). “Central View,” can also be seen at: www.central-view.com.

 

 

On Saturday, April 14, 2018, William Hamilton <drwm.hamilton@gmail.com> wrote:

 

“Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.

The Second American Civil War Continues…

Readers may recall not long ago in this space: “What constitutes a Civil War is when certain bureaucrats within the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government, along with certain elected and appointed officials within the Legislative and the Judicial Branches of government, form a conspiracy, either formal or informal, to set aside the results of the presidential election of 2016 and to prevent the duly elected president from being able to govern effectively…”

Do not be confused about what is going on in Washington, D.C. The current tactic in the American Civil War II is to provoke President Trump into taking an action or actions that could be the basis for the charge of: Obstruction of Justice.

Note well: If and when the Democrats obtain a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, President Trump will be impeached for something like “running with scissors when his mother told him long ago not to do that.” That, however, would not get President Trump convicted by 2/3ds of the U.S. Senate. A truly substantive charge would be required.

Recall, President Nixon was not forced out of office because some over-eager campaign underlings broke into the Watergate offices of the Democratic National Committee. The burglars were caught in the act and they were on their way to being subjected to whatever punishment the Courts and the Federal Election Commission decided to mete out. But, when President Nixon tried to cover up what happened, he obstructed justice and for that Nixon was forced to resign. Nixon’s alternative was to risk being impeached by a simple majority of the House and, possibly, convicted by 2/3ds of the U.S. Senate.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – WE FIGHT – DONALD TRUMPS SPEECH TO THE NATION

Wednesday, April 11th, 2018

 

Thanks to Beverly Frassinelli for sharing this inspiring video  of a speech Donald Trump gave on October 13, 2016   Also, thanks to Beverly for sharing her prayer with us  ” May God be with him and our country in this time of peril from America’s enemies from within.”  Nancy

VIDEO –  WE FIGHT  – SPEECH BY DONALD TRUMP
TEXT OF SPEECH

We Fight…

On October 13th 2016, presidential candidate Donald Trump delivered a speech that defines this moment in our nation’s history. Part of that speech was put to a video. The entire transcript of that speech is below.

.

Transcript ] […] Our movement is about replacing a failed and corrupt political establishment with a new government controlled by you, the American People. There is nothing the political establishment will not do, and no lie they will not tell, to hold on to their prestige and power at your expense.

The Washington establishment, and the financial and media corporations that fund it, exists for only one reason: to protect and enrich itself.

The establishment has trillions of dollars at stake in this election. As an example, just one single trade deal they’d like to pass, involves trillions of dollars controlled by many countries, corporations and lobbyists.

For those who control the levers of power in Washington, and for the global special interests they partner with, our campaign represents an existential threat.

 

This is not simply another 4-year election. This is a crossroads in the history of our civilization that will determine whether or not We The People reclaim control over our government.

(more…)

Share

DIAMOND AND SILK CENSORED BY FACEBOOK

Sunday, April 8th, 2018

 

   Sample video of Diamond and Silk  www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvNREvITA5w     Nancy  

 

freedomoutpost.com/facebook-popular-pro-trump-duo-content-brand-determined-unsafe-community/

Facebook to Popular Pro-Trump Duo: “Your Content & Your Brand Has Been Determined Unsafe To The Community”

Ladies, you’ve been given an answer.  They aren’t going to answer further.  The only way to deal with them is in a class action lawsuit or get Congress to use anti-trust laws to bust them up.  The same should apply to Google and Twitter.

The utter hypocrisy of Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg is so obvious a child could see it.  Yep, you read the headline correct.  A popular pro-Trump duo, who have over 1.2 million likes on their page and nearly 1.25 million followers were told by Facebook that their content and their brand were “determined unsafe to the community.”

OK, I’ll let you know, the duo is none other than Diamond and Silk, two black women who made headlines during the 2016 presidential election for their support of Donald Trump.  The two ladies were applauded by millions who seemed to appreciate their candor and humor in their commentary.

Diamond And Silk have been corresponding since September 7, 2017, with Facebook (owned by Mark Zuckerberg), about their bias censorship and discrimination against D&S brand page. Finally after several emails, chats, phone calls, appeals, beating around the bush, lies, and giving us the run around, Facebook gave us another bogus reason why Millions of people who have liked and/or followed our page no longer receives notification and why our page, post and video reach was reduced by a very large percentage. Here is the reply from Facebook. Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:40 PM: “The Policy team has came to the conclusion that your content and your brand has been determined unsafe to the community.” Yep, this was FB conclusion after 6 Months, 29 days, 5 hrs, 40 minutes and 43 seconds. Oh and guess what else Facebook said: “This decision is final and it is not appeal-able in any way.” (Note: This is the exact wording that FB emailed to us.)

(more…)

Share

THE REIGN OF THE ELITES IS CRUMBLING IN EUROPE, TOO

Thursday, April 5th, 2018

 

ON THE RUN EVERYWHERE  – THE REIGN OF THE ELITES IS CRUMBLING IN EUROPE, TOO
 – – Wednesday, March 21, 2018

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The natives are restless everywhere, and they’re frightening the elites. The political parties of the social democrats, and even the Socialists, are crumbling all across Europe. A new version of class war is shaping a new kind of politics, and the implications are worldwide.

Trying to find clues to what’s ahead for America by examining the entrails of European politics is a fool’s errand. Europe, even with its treasures of arts, literature and music, is after all what the first settlers escaped from.

Barack Obama and his friends set out to “transform” America into a version of the European welfare state, but the republic was saved, at least for a while, by the bell that tolled in November 2016.

The Trump phenomenon, with all its populist bells and whistles, echoes across Europe. The Socialist Party in France was the governing majority only two years ago, and last year it won only 7 percent of the vote. The party has all but disappeared in the parliament. Germany’s prevailing Social Democrats fell to winning only 20 percent in elections this year, and the Democratic Party in Italy didn’t do much better.

The story is similar in Poland, Hungary and the Czech State, with echoes in Spain, the Netherlands and Scotland, where liberal, leftist, and progressive (pick a label) parties were kings of the mountain only yesterday.

It’s not difficult to discern the reasons why, observes the perceptive John O’Sullivan in National Review, “because so many agonized social democrats have already done so.” The liberal parties, much like the Democrats in the United States, abandoned their base among those who take pride in their blue-collar origins. “The crumbling happened,” he writes, “because social democrats, who were increasingly progressive middle-class intellectuals, usually working in the public sector, lost interest in blue-collar issues and were actively hostile to the conservative social values — patriotism, hard work, church — that appealed to workers as much as to the [property class]. Eventually the workers noticed and began to drift off to other parties.”

The socialist parties, like the Democrats and other liberals (or “progressives”) here in America, forgot who they were, where they came from and where they promised to go. Extreme environmentalism, radical feminism, undisciplined immigration and aggressive gay rights replaced the values and interests of the European working class. David Goodheart, a reformed leftist and a prominent British journalist and author, identifies this phenomenon as a division of the “somewheres,” locally rooted workers, and the “anywheres,” rootless professionals at home wherever they go. The disaffected “somewheres” were replaced in the blue-collar base by those gays, feminists, minorities and highly educated professionals. So far there aren’t enough of them to make up for the shrinkage.

This collapse of the social-democratic parties seemed like manna from heaven for parties on the European right, or at least a gift from the left. The Conservatives in Britain, for example, celebrated what they reckoned was their “permanent victory.” But they had not reckoned with the iron law, first identified in the United States but a law that applies everywhere, that “nothing recedes like success.”

Decisive victories in national elections in the United States were confidently said at the time to have buried the Democrats forever after George McGovern lost 49 states in 1972, and again after Walter Mondale carried only his home state of Minnesota in 1984. Mr. Mondale would have lost that but for the kindness of Ronald Reagan, who declined to make a late appearance in Minneapolis that his pollsters said would push him over the top. With the election won he wouldn’t embarrass a man in his home state. In the event he lost the state by only 10,000 votes. No presidential candidate is likely ever again to have the opportunity to win every state.

The French political scientist Pierre Manent sees the turmoil in loyalties and long-standing ties as pitting “populist demagogy of the left against the fanaticism of the center” in a struggle that will only become more bitter. The center, or the elites, will try to keep out the barbarian horde but the voters will keep trying to go around the establishment center, and will finally break it down.

The elites everywhere regard themselves as much aggrieved. They think themselves entitled to control everything because they’re wiser, smarter, of a higher morality, and thus entitled. The barbarian horde everywhere is not always right, but the elites in Europe, as in the United States, are learning that the horde will be accommodated, the hard way or the easy way

Share

THE POLITICIZATION OF THE FBI

Wednesday, March 14th, 2018

 

IMPRIMIS

The Politicization of the FBI

February 2018 • Volume 47, Number 2

Joseph E. diGenova  Former U.S. Attorney


Joseph E. diGenovaJoseph E. diGenova is a founding partner of diGenova & Toensing, LLP. He received his B.A. from the University of Cincinnati and his J.D. from Georgetown University. He has served as United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, Independent Counsel of the United States, Special Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives, Chief Counsel to the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, and Counsel to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee).


 

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on January 25, 2018, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series. 

Over the past year, facts have emerged that suggest there was a plot by high-ranking FBI and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials in the Obama administration, acting under color of law, to exonerate Hillary Clinton of federal crimes and then, if she lost the election, to frame Donald Trump and his campaign for colluding with Russia to steal the presidency. This conduct was not based on mere bias, as has been widely claimed, but rather on deeply felt animus toward Trump and his agenda.

In the course of this plot, FBI Director James Comey, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, FBI Deputy Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok, Strzok’s paramour and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, FBI General Counsel James Baker, and DOJ senior official Bruce Ohr—perhaps among others—compromised federal law enforcement to such an extent that the American public is losing trust. A recent CBS News poll finds 48 percent of Americans believe that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia collusion probe is “politically motivated,” a stunning conclusion. And 63 percent of polled voters in a Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll believe that the FBI withheld vital information from Congress about the Clinton and Russia collusion investigations.

I spent my early legal career as a federal prosecutor. I later supervised hundreds of prosecutors and prosecutions as a U.S. Attorney and as an Independent Counsel. I have never witnessed investigations so fraught with failure to fulfill the basic elements of a criminal probe as those conducted under James Comey. Not since former Acting FBI Director L. Patrick Gray deep-sixed evidence during Watergate has the head of the FBI been so discredited as Comey is now.

(more…)

Share

FORMER OBAMA OFFICIALS FORM ANTI-TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY THINK TANK

Monday, March 12th, 2018

 

Fred Fleitz, author of this article, was ICON’s guest speaker on October 17, 2017.
 To View the video of his talk, “The Growing National Threat From Iran”  please click on  www.iconlectureseries.com/archives/3215
Thanks to Janie Wagstaff for sharing.  Nancy

Former Obama officials form anti-Trump national security think tank

Share

SUSAN RICE’S SUSPICIOUS EMAIL TO HERSELF

Tuesday, February 13th, 2018

 

 
On Her Last Day in Office, Obama National Security Advisor Rice Sent Suspicious Letter About Obama, Comey, Trump-Russia Collusion Meeting
February 12, 2018/by The Daily Wire
On Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sent a letter to former Obama national security advisor Susan Rice asking her to explain an email she sent to herself on the last day of her duty in the White House. That email was an email from Rice to . . . Rice. And it explained that President Obama had held a briefing on January 5 regarding supposed Trump-Russia collusion. According to the letter:
“If the timestamp is correct, you sent this email to yourself at 12:15 pm, presumably a very short time before you departed the White House for the last time. In this email to yourself, you purport to document a meeting that had taken place more than two weeks before, on January 5, 2017.”
Here’s what Rice wrote:

(more…)

Share

SUSAN RICE’S SUSPICIOUS EMAIL TO HERSELF

Tuesday, February 13th, 2018

 

 
On Her Last Day in Office, Obama National Security Advisor Rice Sent Suspicious Letter About Obama, Comey, Trump-Russia Collusion Meeting
February 12, 2018/by The Daily Wire
On Monday, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Senators Charles Grassley (R-IA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sent a letter to former Obama national security advisor Susan Rice asking her to explain an email she sent to herself on the last day of her duty in the White House. That email was an email from Rice to . . . Rice. And it explained that President Obama had held a briefing on January 5 regarding supposed Trump-Russia collusion. According to the letter:
“If the timestamp is correct, you sent this email to yourself at 12:15 pm, presumably a very short time before you departed the White House for the last time. In this email to yourself, you purport to document a meeting that had taken place more than two weeks before, on January 5, 2017.”
Here’s what Rice wrote:
Share

THE COST OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

Tuesday, February 6th, 2018

 

Please share this article .  The Republicans have not made the case in terms of the cost of illegal immigration.  It is up to us, the grassroots, to get this information out.
Also, if the information in this article alarms you, please call or write  your representatives and tell them to Build That Wall !   Nancy

The Cost of Illegal Immigration

Share

THE DEMISE OF JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS AND THE 2016 ELECTION

Monday, February 5th, 2018

 

IMPRIMIS

The 2016 Election and the Demise of Journalistic Standards

May/June 2017 • Volume 46, Number 5/6

Michael Goodwin
The New York Post


Michael GoodwinMichael Goodwin is the chief political columnist for The New York Post. He has a B.A. in English literature from Columbia College and has taught at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. Before joining the Post in 2009, he was the political columnist for The New York Daily News, where he served as executive editor and editorial page editor and led its editorial board to a Pulitzer Prize. Prior to that, he worked for 16 years at The New York Times, beginning as a clerk and rising to City Hall Bureau Chief. He is the co-author of I, Koch and editor of New York Comes Back.


The following is adapted from a speech delivered on April 20, 2017, in Atlanta, Georgia, at a Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar.

I’ve been a journalist for a long time. Long enough to know that it wasn’t always like this. There was a time not so long ago when journalists were trusted and admired. We were generally seen as trying to report the news in a fair and straightforward manner. Today, all that has changed. For that, we can blame the 2016 election or, more accurately, how some news organizations chose to cover it. Among the many firsts, last year’s election gave us the gobsmacking revelation that most of the mainstream media puts both thumbs on the scale—that most of what you read, watch, and listen to is distorted by intentional bias and hostility. I have never seen anything like it. Not even close.

It’s not exactly breaking news that most journalists lean left. I used to do that myself. I grew up at The New York Times, so I’m familiar with the species. For most of the media, bias grew out of the social revolution of the 1960s and ’70s. Fueled by the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements, the media jumped on the anti-authority bandwagon writ large. The deal was sealed with Watergate, when journalism was viewed as more trusted than government—and far more exciting and glamorous. Think Robert Redford in All the President’s Men. Ever since, young people became journalists because they wanted to be the next Woodward and Bernstein, find a Deep Throat, and bring down a president. Of course, most of them only wanted to bring down a Republican president. That’s because liberalism is baked into the journalism cake.

(more…)

Share
Search All Posts
Categories