Archive for the ‘Judges’ Category

LIFTING GENERAL FLYNN’S JUDICIAL GAG ORDER

Saturday, May 30th, 2020

 

 

GENERAL FLYNN’S JUDICIAL GAG ORDER
May 25, 2020
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  I’m sure he has a lot to say. Gen. Flynn was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency for two years (2012 – 2014) under Barack Obama, and he knows a ton about every crooked operation Mr. Obama presided over, including the Benghazi fiasco, the Ukraine regime change op, and especially Mr. Obama’s hijacking of the NSA supercomputer surveillance database known as “the Hammer,” which was set up originally to track terrorists and then used by DNI James Clapper and CIA chief John Brennan to spy on Americans, most particularly Mr. Obama’s political adversaries. It’s rumored that Mr. Obama took the database with him when he left the White House, and it is said to contain great gouts of usefully damning information about just about everyone in government, including senators, congressmen, and Supreme Court justices.

What “the Resistance” really fears more than anything is General Michael Flynn’s mouth. He’s been under a judicial gag order since his case went before Judge Emmet Sullivan’s federal district court. Understandably, Gen. Flynn wasn’t eager to complicate his unjust plight with a contempt citation. Judge Sullivan’s recent shenanigans have one object: to keep that gag order in force as long as possible. The moment Judge Sullivan confirms the DOJ’s move to dismiss the charges, as he is duty-bound to do, General Flynn will be free to offer his views to the public. That might be inconvenient in an election season.

I’m sure he has a lot to say. Gen. Flynn was head of the Defense Intelligence Agency for two years (2012 – 2014) under Barack Obama, and he knows a ton about every crooked operation Mr. Obama presided over, including the Benghazi fiasco, the Ukraine regime change op, and especially Mr. Obama’s hijacking of the NSA supercomputer surveillance database known as “the Hammer,” which was set up originally to track terrorists and then used by DNI James Clapper and CIA chief John Brennan to spy on Americans, most particularly Mr. Obama’s political adversaries. It’s rumored that Mr. Obama took the database with him when he left the White House, and it is said to contain great gouts of usefully damning information about just about everyone in government, including senators, congressmen, and Supreme Court justices.

Gen. Flynn became an antagonist to Obama & Co. when he objected to the nuclear deal they were cooking up with Iran and when he spoke out against the CIA’s 2013 Timber Sycamore op to arm and give money to Isis terrorists opposing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Mr. Obama canned Gen. Flynn in 2014. What really sealed Gen. Flynn’s fate was when he started publicly complaining about the politicization of John Brennan’s CIA. The New York Times quoted him saying, “They’ve lost sight of who they actually work for. They work for the American people. They don’t work for the president of the United States. Frankly, it’s become a very political organization.”

(more…)

Share

VIDEO BEST ARGUMENT FOR TRUMP 2020

Thursday, May 28th, 2020

 

VIDEO   CHARLIE KIRK    BEST ARGUMENT FOR TRUMP 2020 – Why Charlie Kirk believes in this president
Share

THE ROOTS OF OUR PARTISAN DIVIDE

Saturday, March 7th, 2020

 

IMPRIMIS

The Roots of Our Partisan Divide

February 2020  • Volume 49, Number 2 • Christopher Caldwell

Christopher Caldwell
Senior Fellow, The Claremont Institute and Author, The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties

Christopher Caldwell is a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute, a contributing editor at the Claremont Review of Books, and a contributing opinion writer for The New York Times. A graduate of Harvard College, he has been a senior editor at the Weekly Standard and a columnist for the Financial Times. He is the author of Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam, and the West and The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties.

The following is adapted from a talk delivered on January 28, 2020, 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.

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  And that’s our current party system: the bigots versus the totalitarians.

American society today is divided by party and by ideology in a way it has perhaps not been since the Civil War. I have just published a book that, among other things, suggests why this is. It is called The Age of Entitlement: America Since the Sixties. It runs from the assassination of John F. Kennedy to the election of Donald J. Trump. You can get a good idea of the drift of the narrative from its chapter titles: 1963, Race, Sex, War, Debt, Diversity, Winners, and Losers.

I can end part of the suspense right now—Democrats are the winners. Their party won the 1960s—they gained money, power, and prestige. The GOP is the party of the people who lost those things.

One of the strands of this story involves the Vietnam War. The antiquated way the Army was mustered in the 1960s wound up creating a class system. What I’m referring to here is the so-called student deferment. In the old days, university-level education was rare. At the start of the First World War, only one in 30 American men was in a college or university, so student deferments were not culturally significant. By the time of Vietnam, almost half of American men were in a college or university, and student deferment remained in effect until well into the war. So if you were rich enough to study art history, you went to Woodstock and made love. If you worked in a garage, you went to Da Nang and made war. This produced a class division that many of the college-educated mistook for a moral division, particularly once we lost the war. The rich saw themselves as having avoided service in Vietnam not because they were more privileged or—heaven forbid—less brave, but because they were more decent.

(more…)

Share

VIDEO – PARDON ROGER STONE

Friday, February 14th, 2020

Share

IS DONALD TRUMP ‘PROFOUNDLY UNCONSERVATIVE’?

Saturday, January 18th, 2020

 

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Is Donald Trump ‘profoundly unconservative’?

No. It doesn’t match his shrinking regulations and limiting government

by Allan H. Ryskind   Allan H. Ryskind, a former editor and owner of Human Events, is the author of “Hollywood Traitors” (Regnery, 2015)

December 31, 2019

Prominent liberal Fareed Zakaria insists that Donald Trump “has been profoundly unconservative” because he’s abandoned what “Republicans used to call the core of their agenda — limited government.” But it’s hard to take the charge seriously, even though some conservatives have sent his piece around for comment to see if he’s onto something. Yet no politician in recent memory has restricted the reach of government at both the federal and state level more than the current occupant of the Oval Office.

Mr. Trump’s drastic shrinking of federal economic regulations, opening vast expanses of federal lands for energy exploration, drawing overseas businesses home with tax breaks and passing major tax cuts for corporations and individuals have generated an explosion of well-paying jobs, personal wealth and soaring wages, as well as the lowest level of unemployment for minorities on record. Some 7 million new jobs have been created during Mr. Trump’s presidency and more than 100 million American shareholders have watched the market jump 55 percent since his election.

You’d think Mr. Zakaria would be celebrating Mr. Trump’s low-tax, pro-growth economic agenda as not only core Republicanism but virtually Reaganesque. Increasing prosperity by stimulating market forces without enacting high taxes and big government programs is, of course, how conservatives try to keep government limited.

Mr. Zakaria concedes that Mr. Trump has delivered what conservatives have wanted in the realm of “social and cultural policy,” such as “appointing judges, tightening rules related to abortion and asylum, etc.” but suggests they have little to do with taming the Leviathan.

Really? Stacking the courts with judges steeped in the philosophy of federalism is, of course, precisely the way to limit government on both the economic and cultural fronts. Mr. Zakaria may ignore the threat, but Democratic Party presidential candidates, along with their media support groups, are panicked over the president’s court selections.

(more…)

Share

ROUGH MEN VERSUS SOFT LAWYERS

Sunday, December 1st, 2019

 

 

“Central View,” by William Hamilton, J.D., Ph.D.  William Hamilton, is a laureate of the Oklahoma Military Hall of Fame, 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. Dr. Hamilton’s Formula for Failure in Vietnam: The Folly of Limited Warfare was published on November 20, 2019.  To order, call toll free: (800) 253-2187 “Central View,” can also be seen at: www.central-view.com.

Rough men versus soft lawyers

When it comes to President Trump’s thinking about the Navy’s strange prosecution of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher and some other SEALs, this quote from George Orwell comes to mind: “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.”

Yes, our Navy SEALs, Delta Force operators, Army Rangers and Special Forces are very rough men who take exception to the beheading of innocents and to putting pilots in cages and setting fire to them. In fact, our rough men, who reek of macho-male toxicity, have been visiting violence on those who would do us harm.

That, however, did not sit well with some female lawyers inside the Navy’s JAG Corps who decided our rough men should be brought to heel. Apparently, thinking the ends justify the means, they got NCIS investigators to coach and shape the testimony of interviewees. They used malware to listen in on discussions between Chief Petty Officer Gallagher and his lawyer. They hid a video clearing Gallagher of murder. And when a Navy Corpsman, under a grant of immunity, confessed that he killed the POW, not Gallagher, they pressed the case anyway. The presiding judge had to admonish the prosecutors for misconduct.

Then, after Gallagher was tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by a jury of his peers and acquitted of all charges except for posing in a photo showing a dead terrorist, the Navy tried to give the team of prosecutors Navy Medals of Achievement for losing their case-in-chief. Is it any wonder that these antics drew the attention of the Commander-in-Chief of our Armed Forces?

(more…)

Share

MUSLIM CANDIDATES THAT WON POLITICAL OFFICE IN 2018

Tuesday, November 12th, 2019
 I sent this article out after the 2018 election and felt that after last weeks’s Virginia election where several Muslim women candidates were elected, that this article re Muslims being elected throughout the country needed to be sent out again.  Several years ago I sent out an article stating that Muslims were being encouraged to run for office in  the U.S.  and that is exactly what is happening.  As many of you know, Sharia Law is not compatible with our U.S. Constitution because Sharia Law states that no other law is above Sharia Law.  This is especially troubling because many Muslim candidates insist on taking their oath of office with their hand on the Koran.  Sharia Law is  the foundation of the Koran.  Think about that for a moment !  Please share .   Nancy      

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Just How Many Muslims Won Political Office In 2018? The Numbers May Surprise You!

Many of you are familiar with a couple of congressional seats that were picked up by Muslim women and the first Muslim state attorney general put into office in Minnesota.  What you may not realize is just how many political offices were filled by electing Muslims in 2018.  Even more concerning is the high percentage of Muslims voting and their openness to promote the fact that they want to “change” our culture and society.

First, the information comes from JETPAC, which stands for Justice Education Technology Political Advocacy Center.  According to their Mission Statement:

Jetpac (Justice Education Technology Political Advocacy Center) seeks to build a strong American Muslim political infrastructure and increase our community’s influence and engagement.

We will take our place at the table across all levels of government.

Our philosophy of change is rooted in a community-based approach, grassroots mobilization, civics training, and technology application. We have developed our own training curriculum, as well as proprietary social media technology and automation tools, to give our Fellows the skills and resources they need to win elections. (emphasis mine)

One wonders if some of those tools involve voter fraud, especially after what we witnessed in Minnesota.

Let’s break down the Muslim wins from federal to the local level, and then we’ll sort them by states.

Federal

Rashida Tlaib (D) MI 13th Congressional District WON
Keith Ellison (D) MN Attorney General WON
Ilhan Omar (D) MN 5th Congressional District WON
Andre Carson (D) IN 7th Congressional District WON

State

Sheikh Rahman (D) GA State Senate District 5 WON
Safiya Wazir (D) NH State House Merrimack 17 District WON
Robert Jackson (D) NY State Senate District 31 WON
Nasif Majeed (D) NC State House District 99 WON
Mujtaba Mohammed (D) NC State Senate District 38 WON
Mohamud Noor (D) MN State House District 60B WON
Jason Dawkins (D) PA State House District 179 WON
Hodan Hassan (D) MN State House District 62A WON
Charles Fall (D) NY State House District 61 WON
Ako Abdul-Samad (D) IA State House District 35 WON
Aboul Khan (R) NH State House Rockingham 20 District WON
Abdullah Hammoud (D) MI State House District 15 WON
Abbas Akhil (D) NM State House District 20 WON

County

Sam Baydoun (D) MI Wayne County Commission District 13 WON
Sadia Gul Covert (D) IL Dupage County Board District 5 WON
Sabina Taj MD Howard County Board of Education WON
Mohammad Ramadan NJ Passaic County Board of Education WON
Cheryl Sudduth CA West County Wastewater District Director WON
Babur Lateef VA Prince William County School Board WON
Assad Akhter (D) NJ Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders WON
Abdul “Al” Haidous (D) MI Wayne County Commission District 11 WON

Municipal

Salman Bhojani TX Euless City Council Place 6 WON*
Dawn Haynes NJ Newark Public Schools School Board WON*
Yasir Khogali MI City of Plymouth District Library Board WON
Mohamed Khairullah NJ Prospect Park Mayor WON
Mohamed Al-Hamdani OH Dayton Public Schools Board of Education WON
Mo Seifeldein VA Alexandria City Council WON
Maimona Afzal Berta CA Franklin-McKinley School Board WON
Jihan Aiyash MI Hamtramck Public School Board WON
Javed Ellahie CA Monte Sereno City Council WON
Hazim Yassin NJ Red Bank City Council WON
Haseeb Javed VA Manassas Park City Council WON
Farrah Khan CA Irvine City Council WON
Ali Taj CA Artesia City Council WON
Alaa Matari NJ Prospect Park Borough Council WON
Alaa “Al” Abdel-Aziz NJ Paterson City Council Ward 6 WON
Aisha Wahab CA Hayward City Council WON
Ahmad Zahra CA Fullerton City Council District 5 WON
Salim Patel NJ Passaic City Council WIN
Sabina Zafar CA San Ramon City Council WIN
RELATED:  Sheila Jackson Lee: Trump Needs To Stop ICE’s “Gestapo”-Like Raids

Judiciary

(more…)

Share

ERIC HOLDER TAKES VIRGINIA

Friday, November 8th, 2019

 

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Eric Holder Takes Virginia

The Democratic plan to dominate state legislatures has its first electoral success.

By Kimberley Strassel      November 8, 2019

Analysts are reading Tuesday’s tea leaves, predicting what the off-year election results mean for the presidential race. But one victory is beyond dispute. Former Attorney General Eric Holder will be celebrating this week for a decade.

Democrats on Tuesday won total control of Virginia’s government, adding both chambers of the General Assembly to the governor’s mansion. They will redraw Virginia’s legislative district lines after next year’s census. The Old Dominion was already moving left, though the redistricting power likely cements Democratic dominance over Virginia for the next 10 years.

This was Mr. Holder’s plan. While most prominent Democrats spent the months following Donald Trump’s election plotting future runs, Mr. Holder was launching the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, committed to domination of electoral mapmaking through the courts and legislatures. The NDRC spent its first years aggressively litigating legislative maps it didn’t like, to great success. Virginia’s election was the first test of the electoral piece of Mr. Holder’s strategy, and it will now serve as the model by which Democrats attempt to gain redistricting power in 11 other key states next year.

The NDRC claims its efforts are aimed at simple “fairness in the electoral system.” It says it’s working to overturn gerrymanders that “disenfranchise” voters. Don’t be fooled. Mr. Holder’s group has never engaged in blue states where Democrats routinely draw maps to disadvantage Republicans, such as Maryland, Massachusetts or New Jersey.

The NDRC is instead the Democratic version of the GOP’s success of a decade ago, the Redmap Project. Democrats, flush from Barack Obama’s 2008 victory, tuned out the state legislatures. Republicans used their inattention, along with a sweeping cash advantage and a backlash against the Obama presidency, to flip 21 state chambers in 2010, allowing them to dominate map-drawing after that year’s census. That power helped consolidate Republican control of state chambers and the U.S. House. Republicans might be flattered by Mr. Holder’s imitation—if they weren’t so busy getting crushed.

The Holder “sue to blue” litigation strategy has already yielded major gains for Democrats, as state judges struck down maps drawn by Republicans and required changes that ultimately aided the Democrats. Example: Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court—which is chosen through partisan elections and has a Democratic majority—in 2018 overruled the U.S. House maps drawn by the Republican legislature and produced its own version. The new maps helped Democrats flip three net seats. In Virginia, federal judges redrew the state legislative map to aid candidates running this week.

(more…)

Share

THE SUPREME COURT’S REAL BLOC IS LIBERAL

Thursday, October 17th, 2019

 

 

www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/the-supreme-courts-real-bloc-is-liberal

WASHINGTON EXAMINER

The Supreme Court’s real bloc is liberal

by Fred Barnes   October 10, 2019

To President Franklin Roosevelt’s dismay, a Supreme Court bloc of six conservative justices struck down key parts of the New Deal in the 1930s. But by 1945, there was an FDR bloc. He had appointed all nine justices. For much of the 1960s, a liberal bloc was in command.

It’s hardly a surprise when a group of Supreme Court justices makes a point of voting alike. But today’s liberal bloc is different than those of the past. The four liberal justices are not in charge, yet they play a more prominent role than most minorities. This is no accident. They plot to speak with one voice and usually succeed. They’re motivated, cohesive, and disciplined. As a result, they punch above their weight.

The liberalism of all four is reliable, though not identical. Judging by their written opinions, comments and questions at oral arguments, and what they say in interviews and speeches, Sonia Sotomayor is the most liberal, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg close behind. Stephen Breyer is third, followed by Elena Kagan.

The most significant difference among the four is their readiness to compromise and make deals. Breyer and Kagan are the dealmakers. To attract the fifth vote and prevail in a significant case is their fondest dream. They agreed to drop the requirement that states expand Medicaid to get Chief Justice John Roberts’ vote to uphold Obamacare. And they voted with him on the Medicaid maneuver.

(more…)

Share

SUPREME COURT DECLINES TO HEAR CASE PROMOTING ISLAM IN PUBLIC SCHOOL

Thursday, October 17th, 2019

 

CLARION PROJECT

Supreme Court Declines to Hear Case Promoting Islam in

Public School

October 17, 2019

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case of a Christian high school student in Maryland who, despite threats of receiving a failing grade, refused to deny her faith by making a written profession of the Muslim conversion prayer known as the shahada.

The shahada states“There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”

Caleigh Wood, an eleventh-grader in La Plata High School, a public school in La Plata, Maryland, was represented in the case by the Thomas Moore Law Center, nonprofit public interest law firm know for defending First Amendment rights – particularly those that violate the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

As part of the school’s “World History” curriculum, the La Plata High School high school students were taught extensively about Islam and required to list the benefits of the religion.

Wood and other students were forced to view a series of pro-Islamic PowerPoint slides, including one that stated, “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian.”

The curriculum also taught:

  • “Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”
  • Jihad is a “personal struggle in devotion to Islam, especially involving spiritual discipline.”
  • “To Muslims, Allah is the same God that is worshiped in Christianity and Judaism.”
  • “Men are the managers of the affairs of women.”
  • “Righteous women are therefore obedient.”
  • (more…)
Share
Search All Posts
Categories