Inquiring minds wondering where this group’s headed need only consider their sixth recommendation:
6. Reducing the carnage: Limit the availability of high-powered firearms.
• Limit the capacity of ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.
• Ban the sale and importation of bump stocks.
• Ban the future sale and importation of military-style weapons that have no purpose except to kill large numbers of people as quickly as possible.
Who heads up this “think” tank…
…Scott Israel?!?
Even at a glance, this report is noteworthy not for what it mentions, but for that about which it says absolutelyNOTHING:
(1). The cultural corruption and moral decay behind the unrelenting, unreasoned violence in America’s ethnic enclaves which has turned urban cores into shooting galleries…handgun bans and firearm restrictions notwithstanding.
(2). The failure of both government and private individuals to correctly identify and deal with the danger posed by those with serious mental illnesses, let alone keep them from accessing firearms.
(3). The unalienable right to bear arms granted law-abiding citizens of the United States by that pesky 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.
Absent effective action on the first two and affirmative recognition of the third, everything else is just so much hot air.
Now, here’s The Gouge!
First up, Victor Davis Hanson offers an accurate assessment an awful human being, as he provides…
“In a strange attack on my criticism of former CIA director John Brennan’s lack of veracity, Ron Radosh alleges that I have engaged in a sort of conspiracy theory about the deep state. He quotes me in an article largely devoted to Jerome Corsi’s new book, which I have not read and whom I have never met, under the Daily Beast scare title, “Pro-Trump Author Says CIA Has Plan to Kill the President.”
Radosh apparently puts me in conspiratorial company for believing the following:
The distinguished historian Victor Davis Hanson, writes that “If there is such a thing as a dangerous ‘deep state’ of elite but unelected federal officials who feel that they are untouchable and unaccountable, then John Brennan is the poster boy.” He adds that “Brennan is typical of the careerist deep state.” They operate [sic] “the psychological tactic known as ‘projection.’ To square their own circles of lying, our so-called best and brightest loudly accuse others of precisely the sins that they themselves commit as a matter of habit.”
In truth, what I wrote about John Brennan’s lying was not predicated on any Trump tweet or conspiracy theory, or the theories of Jerome Corsi, but simply based on the factual record, which Radosh is apparently completely unaware of, or uninterested in:
1) In 2011, Brennan, then the country’s chief counterterrorism adviser, had sworn to Congress that scores of drones strikes abroad had not killed a single noncombatant — at a time when both the president and the CIA were both receiving numerous reports of civilian collateral deaths.
2) In 2014, John Brennan, now as CIA director, lied emphatically that the CIA had not illegally accessed the computers of U.S. Senate staffers who were then exploring a CIA role in torturing detainees. Or as he told Andrea Mitchell: “As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth…We wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do.” Brennan’s chronic deceptions drew the ire of a number of liberal senators, some of whom echoed the Washington Post’s call for his immediate resignation. After months of prevarications, but only upon release of the CIA inspector general’s report, Brennan apologized to the senators he had deceived.
3) Brennan, in May 2017, as an ex-CIA director, again almost certainly did not tell the truth to Congress when he testified in answer to Representative Trey Gowdy’s questions that he neither knew who had commissioned the Steele dossier nor had the CIA relied on its contents for any action. Yet both the retired National Security Agency director, Michael Rogers, and the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, have conceded that the Steele dossier — along with the knowledge that it was a Clinton-campaign-funded product — most certainly did help shape the Obama’s intelligence communality interagency assessments and actions, often under the urging of Brennan himself.
…The list of Brennan’s unprofessional and bizarre behavior could be expanded, such as his weird tweet in reaction to the Trump firing of compromised FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe (who would shortly be recommended for criminal referrals for misleading federal investigators by the nonpartisan inspector general): “When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America…America will triumph over you.” Andy McCabe was not “scapegoated” but found to be likely mendacious enough by the inspector general to warrant a DOJ investigation.
Brennan in 2009 falsely claimed that intelligence agencies had not missed evidence suggesting that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a.k.a. the “underwear bomber,” might blow up a U.S. airliner. In 2010, he offered a surreal redefinition of jihad (e.g., “Nor do we describe our enemy as “jihadists” or “Islamists” because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community”)…In 2011, his official statements about the Osama bin Laden raid were contradictory.
I stand by my characterization that “If there is such a thing as a dangerous ‘deep state’ of elite but unelected federal officials who feel that they are untouchable and unaccountable, then John Brennan is the poster boy.”…”
To borrow a line from Babu, John Brennan is…
Speaking of bad men, writing at NRO, Andy McCarthy highlights the MSM’s hypocrisy when it comes to…
“The media are in a lather over the Justice Department’s grand-jury investigation of contacts between several reporters and a government source — the former Senate Intelligence Committee security director who has been indicted for lying to investigators about his leaks to the press.
The same media are in a lather over the refusal of the president of the United States, at least thus far, to submit to questioning by the special counsel in the Russia investigation. The president is placing himself “above the law,” they contend, if he rebuffs prosecutors or defies a grand-jury subpoena.
…The oddity — a very human oddity — is that the press is extraordinarily attuned to its own need for protection, but scoffs at the notion that someone with greater responsibilities should have comparable protections.
James A. Wolfe, who was indicted on Thursday, is a textbook swamp creature. According to the New York Times, he is a former army intelligence analyst who 30 years ago latched on to the Senate Intelligence Committee as a staffer. A non-partisan staffer, of course. The Senate Intelligence Committee, a pillar of the Beltway establishment, is nothing if not self-congratulatory about its cross-the-aisle comity. It doesn’t do much, but rest assured that what little it does is awesomely bipartisan…except to the extent it is admirably non-partisan.
Wolfe eventually rose to the post of security director, responsible for receiving, maintaining and managing all classified intelligence shared with the committee by U.S. spy agencies (or is it informant agencies?). So, what’s a good, upstanding, bipartisan, non-partisan Washington bureaucrat to do in such a coveted slot? Why, selectively leak classified information to favored journalists, that’s what.
In the case of Wolfe, who is 57, these journos most prominently included Ali Watkins, a 26-year-old Times reporter with whom he was romantically involved for three years — mostly while she was working her way to the Gray Lady as a national-security reporter for the Huffington Post, Politico, McClatchy, and BuzzFeed. The indictment alleges that the couple exchanged “tens of thousands of electronic communications, often including daily texts and phone calls,” as well as “encrypted cell phone applications.”
Now, sit down because I know you’ll be shocked to hear this: Wolfe’s bipartisan, non-partisan intelligence leaks from the bipartisan, non-partisan Senate Intelligence Committee had a decidedly anti-Trump flavor.
…When interviewed by the FBI on December 15, Wolfe denied knowing Watkins’s sources until he was confronted with pictures showing the two of them together. He then conceded that he had lied and acknowledged having had a personal relationship with Watkins, but denied giving her non-public information or investigative leads. He flatly denied contacts with other reporters, though he had evidently been in regular contact with them.
Wolfe has been charged with three counts of lying to investigators.
These allegations appear airtight and, in the aggregate, carry a potential 15 years’ imprisonment.
…In the course of the investigation, the Justice Department used subpoenas to obtain records from telecommunications companies pertaining to the journalists. It appears that investigators were cautious in their approach — for example, they acquired “metadata” records showing with whom and when Ms. Watkins was having email and phone contacts; but they did not seek the content of the communications. To the extent they seized message content, it appears to have been on Wolfe’s end — likely through government devices issued to him by the committee for official business.
Nevertheless, the specter of investigators rifling though journalists’ communication records causes the media consternation.It is thus worth observing that, contrary to popular belief, the press does not have a sweeping privilege insulating reporters from investigation or from being compelled to disclose information to the grand jury…”
As Wilford Brimley’s character noted in Absence of Malice (a great movie if you’ve never seen it) in response to reporter Sally Field’s attorney claiming she had a constitutional right to protect her sources of confidential information illicitly leaked, “That’s a lot of horse-pucky; the First Amendment doesn’t say that.”
Keep in mind, this is the same MSM which hardly raised an eyebrow when the FBI took the truly unprecedented step of seizing all Michael Cohen’s files, without any regard for the sanctity of attorney-client privilege.
For more on the subject of bad men, also courtesy of NRO, David French rightly suggests…
“The “scandal-free” Obama administration sure liked to lie a lot.This morning, America awoke to yet another revelation that Obama officials misled Congress about their dealings with Iran.
A Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigationsreport allegesthat the administration secretly sought to give Iran access — albeit briefly — to the U.S. financial system by sidestepping sanctions kept in place after the 2015 nuclear deal, despite repeatedly telling Congress and the public it had no plans to do so.Specifically, the Obama Treasury Department issued a license that would have allowed U.S. banks to participate in a scheme to convert $5.7 billion in Iranian funds into U.S. dollars and then euros. The American banksdeclined to participate, “citing the reputational risk of doing business with or for Iran.”(Bankers…concerned about their reputation?!?) The license wasn’t unlawful, but, to quote the Associated Press, it “went above and beyond what the Obama administration was required to do under the terms of the nuclear agreement.”
In other words, the Obama administration tried to do Iran an immense financial favor, one not required by the deal itself, to uphold the mythical “spirit” of the agreement (yes, that’s their off-the-record excuse).Iran had reportedly complained that it “wasn’t reaping the benefits it envisioned,” and the Obama administration(incredibly and inexplicably!) attempted to help — even though it had publicly assured Americans that “Iran will be denied access to the world’s most important market and unable to deal in the world’s most important currency.”
Keep in mind, this attempted favor happened even as the Obama administration’s pie-in-the-sky hopes for the deal were crumbling before the world’s eyes.It was the administration’s hope that lifting sanctions, bringing Iran back into international markets, and providing it with immense sums of cold, hard cash would somehow make the jihadist regime want to “fully rejoin the community of nations.” Commerce and forbearance would work their magic, Iran would moderate, and we’d have peace in our time.
Instead, it was already clear that Iran wasn’t moderating one inch. It was pocketing its financial rewards and redoubling its international support for terrorism.It was still America’s enemy. It was still trying to kill American troops. So naturally, the Obama administration tried to increase its bribe.
We also can’t forget the extent to which the entire agreement was built on an edifice of lies. Remember this, from a New York Times profile of Obama deputy national-security adviser Ben Rhodes?
The way in which most Americans have heard the story of the Iran deal presented — that the Obama administration began seriously engaging with Iranian officials in 2013 in order to take advantage of a new political reality in Iran, which came about because of elections that brought moderates to power in that country — was largely manufactured for the purpose for selling the deal.Even where the particulars of that story are true, the implications that readers and viewers are encouraged to take away from those particulars are often misleading or false. Obama’s closest advisers always understood him to be eager to do a deal with Iran as far back as 2012, and even since the beginning of his presidency.
The Iran deal was a deceptive dereliction of duty from the outset, resting on a fundamentally flawed understanding of Iran, the Middle East, and the world. The world’s greatest power confronted a third-tier nation with a fourth-tier military, and practically begged to avoid conflict…”
Here’s the juice…along with the Iran deal in a nutshell:
Since we’re on the subject of Progressives sacrificing country for self, just when CNN‘s Jim Acosta couldn’t make himself look any more biased, he now also seems determined to demonstrate his ignorance:
Yeah, just like “two-thirds of the American people” sided with him during the Lewinsky scandal; a statistic, which if accurate, only serves to confirm most U.S. citizens were ignorant of the facts…largely due to the deliberately deceptive spin from Bill and his shills in the MSM.
Moving on, for anyone still wondering why we gave up on the FOX Sports website some time ago, this screenshot from the day after the Caps first Stanley Cup win says it all:
Hells bells, we don’t even follow hockey anymore, let root for the Caps; but nothing except FIFA, NASCAR and UFCsticks out like a sore thumbeven to us!
Which brings us to today’s installment of the Environmental Moment, as FOX Business‘ Julia Limitone suggests…
“Pope Francis will meet with some of the world’s leading oil company executives next week to talk about the dangers of climate change.
Former Shell Oil President John Hofmeister told FOX Business he isn’t expecting any miracles.
“The energy companies will hear the Holy Father’s view,” Hofmeister said to Stuart Varney on Varney & Co. on Friday. “But I think the Holy Father and his associates need also to learn about the scale, scope and importance of energy to poor people all over the world.”
The conference, which is being called the “Energy Transition and Care for Our Common Home,” will be a follow-up to the pope’s 2015 encyclical on climate change that called for a transition away from fossil fuels.
But Hofmesiter said the pope’s ideology makes “no common sense.”
“There are still 2 billion people in the world that have almost zero access to energy as we know it,” he added.”
“A Bend woman who generated global headlines as the victim in a brutal alleged road rage attack last weekend was charged Friday as the aggressor in a separate alleged road rage incident. Megan Lea Stackhouse, 34, was charged Friday in Deschutes County Circuit Court with fourth-degree assault for allegedly punching a woman in the face after twice crashing into her on Mother’s Day.
Stackhouse is the former president of the Human Dignity Coalition in Bend. She and her fiancee, Lucinda Mann, have accused Jay Allen Barbeau, 49, of Redmond, of beating Stackhouse in the head and breaking her arm with his bare hands, and knocking Mann unconscious by throwing her to the ground.
…But in May, Stackhouse is said to have been the one who lashed out violently and terrified another driver, according to court records.Her alleged victim in that case, Cheryl Norton, told The Bulletin on Friday she was shocked when she read Stackhouse had been a road rage victim to a man with no prior criminal history. Norton said the woman who crashed into her on Mother’s Day and punched her in the face was “imposing and very aggressive.”
Friday afternoon, Deschutes District Attorney John Hummel formally charged Stackhouse with misdemeanor assault. “Victim in one road rage case, defendant in another,” he said. “I know it’s odd.” (Maybe,…maybe not, as we note below.)
At 5:54 p.m. on May 13, Bend Police responded to a call of a crash and assault outside an apartment complex in south Bend. Norton told The Bulletin she was pulling into her daughter’s apartment complex at Blakely Road and Porter Place when Stackhouse T-boned her car. Stackhouse refused to give Norton her insurance information, then drove off, but came back and rear-ended her car, Norton said…At one point, Stackhouse walked up and punched Norton in the left side of her face, Norton said.
Reached Friday, Stackhouse said Norton was lying. “I did not do that,” Stackhouse said. Stackhouse said she called police that day, and it was Norton who fled the scene. Stackhouse said Friday she did not want to discuss the Mother’s Day incident and that it was irrelevant to what happened June 1. “I feel like I’m being slandered here,” she said. “I have not been convicted.”…”
No, but youhave been charged!
TLJ has a friend who gets into more confrontations than the rest of her acquaintances combined. Some would say she’s unlucky, but the undeniable logic of Occam’s Razor indicates she’s likely the cause of the contests.
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.