Man Tortured in Anti-Trump Protest
An 18-year-old mentally challenged man was tortured for two days by Black Lives Matter-inspired criminals as ”a protest against the racist Trump Administration.” Four Chicago millenials—Jordan Hill, 18, Tesfaye Cooper, 18, Brittany Covington, 18, and Tanishia Covington, 24 beat, kicked, burned, and cut their victim while shouting “f*** Trump” and “f*** white people.”
Members of the leftist media at CNN and NBC were hesitant to judge the perpetrators too harshly. NBC News correspondent Ron Mott said “this incident strikes me as an example of youthful stupidity rather than a crime, per se. They posted a video of their interactions with this individual they took into their home. If their intent had been criminal why would they broadcast their escapade?”
CNN political commentator Symone Sanders, a former adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, blamed the assailants actions on “Trump stirring up hostility in people across the country with his hate-filled rhetoric. It is Trump who has threatened to cut off people’s welfare and force them to get jobs. That they would strike out in fear and anger is understandable.”
Sanders also dismissed racism as a motive. “First, all the people charged with this man’s mistreatment are black,” she pointed out. “There is considerable scholarly debate as to whether it is possible for a black person to be racist. Second, as I understand it, the victim was chosen because of his mental disability, not his skin color.” Sanders said that the fact that the perps appeared on their own video shouting “f*** white people” was “not relevant,” since “this is a sentiment shared by all the black people I know. It’s just the way we talk among ourselves.”
CNN host Don Lemon rebuffed his interviewee Matt Lewis’ contention that “it’s evil. It’s brutality. It’s man’s inhumanity to man” and blamed the kidnapping and torture on “the poor parenting of these misguided young people. I don’t think it’s evil. ‘Evil’ is Trump becoming this nation’s president in two weeks.”
CNN reporter Sara Ganim couldn’t stop herself from laughing at the Facebook video of the victim’s torments. “My favorite part was where they made him drink out of the toilet,” she recounted. “The retard deserved it. He voted for Trump.”
White House press secretary Josh Earnest observed that “the beating demonstrates a level of depravity that is an outrage to a lot of Americans. On the other hand, there are also a lot of Americans who would hold that the injuries inflicted on this one white man are insufficient payback for 300 years of slavery and Jim Crow laws.”
Senator Has Concerns About Education Nominee
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), ranking Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee expressed doubts about the fitness of President-Elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos.
“I appreciate that Ms. DeVos took the time to meet with me, I can’t say that I would have done the same had our roles been reversed,” Murray declared. “At our meeting she did nothing to allay my fears that she would continue to be an advocate for school choice. This pernicious ideology is founded on the absurd premise that individual parents ought to have the biggest say in their children’s education. This is against everything I and the Democratic Party have been fighting for over many years.”
“Education is far too important to be left in the hands of non-experts,” the Senator contended. “For one thing, choice will negate efforts to ensure uniformity. Independently run schools will choose diverse curricula. Parents who choose wisely will give their children an unfair advantage over parents who aren’t as astute in selecting where to send them to be schooled. Those less informed will likely default to just sending their children to the nearest public school. If no one is allowed to choose we will have a better chance at equalizing the opportunities for all.”
“An added concern of mine is that the whole thrust of the drive for school choice is anti-social at its core,” Murray continued. “Many of those who opt for non-public schools harbor deviant political ideas. Letting these parents remove their children from the social mix of the public school student body endangers these children’s future compatibility with their age cohort peers. Alienation is the inevitable outcome for children deprived of the reaffirming social network provided by a common educational experience. Saving these children from such a fate is the duty of those of us elected to protect the most vulnerable members of our society.”
Obama Orders Cuban Escapees Sent Back
In his last week before leaving office, President Barack Obama overturned a 50-year US Government policy of allowing Cuban refugees who reach our shores to remain in the country. In contrast to the “dreamers” that Obama has declared must not be sent back to Mexico even though they entered the United States illegally, Cubans arriving without visas will be expelled.
“Refugees from Mexico have a legitimate reason for coming to America,” Obama said. “Their country’s economy isn’t providing sufficient jobs or benefits to support their survival. Cubans don’t face this kind of hardship. Their government is dedicated to ensuring social justice. Everyone who wants a job is guaranteed one. Crucial social services like education and medical care are provided free of charge to all Cubans. There is no valid reason for them to want to leave and even less reason to allow these deranged individuals to stay here.”
The move is seen as a key to improving the relationship between Cuba and the United States. “For too long we have assumed an adversarial stance toward our southern neighbor,” the President asserted. “This has blinded us to the very real progress made under the rule of the Castro brothers. Though our previous policy has proven a drain on the Cuban economy by siphoning off people whom the Cuban government has borne the expense for educating and nurturing, the Castro Administration has graciously agreed to readmit its citizens that we return to them. This demonstration of goodwill in the face of the abuse our country has heaped upon Cuba over the years is an encouraging sign of the brighter future both countries can look forward to in the decades to come.”
The Media Strikes Back at Trump
Stung by the network’s public humiliation as “fake news” by Donald Trump in last week’s press conference, CNN’s top executive, Jeff Zucker, vowed to strike back.
“What Trump failed to consider is that cutting us off from direct access doesn’t affect our ability to shape how viewers will perceive him,” Zucker pointed out. “As he should know by now, his actual words and deeds pose no constraint on our reporting. And even though our audience share may be shrinking overall, we still dominate in public venues like airports and gyms. Further, there’s only one television network that is seen in Beijing, Moscow, Seoul, Tokyo, Pyongyang, Baghdad, Tehran, and Damascus — and that’s CNN. We can poison his reputation around the world and he will be helpless to prevent it. At the very least we can ensure that his foreign policy is a failure.”
CNN talking head Wolf Blitzer reminded the crazed segment of the network’s audience that “if something were to happen to Trump, Pence, Ryan, and McConnell before the transfer of power is completed a member of the Obama Administration would assume the presidency. So, it’s not too late to avert the tragic miscarriage of justice inflicted on America by Russia’s hacking of the election.”
Kyle Pope, editor of the Columbia Journalism Review, wrote an open letter from “the US press corps” in which he warned Trump that “we have the upper hand. We make the rules. We decide what is true. We decide how much airtime or column inches you and your henchmen will get. You are only one man. We are legion. You will come out the worse for identifying us as your enemies.”
Dems Assail Trump’s Immigration and Refugee Policies
Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin (D) charged that “Trump’s moves against immigrants will make America less safe. If the jihadis were angry before, they’ll surely be enraged by the Administration’s efforts to block their entry into this country. Similarly, what does he expect to happen when he cracks down on sanctuary cities that are trying to keep the feds from deporting the criminals they’ve been shielding? If they fear they can be easily deported they’ll have nothing left to lose and could go on a spree that will increase the carnage in these cities.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) in echo of Durbin’s words, remarked that “these moves threaten the fabric of our society that President Obama worked so hard to establish. Welcoming the poor and disaffected is our social obligation. America has the resources and the duty to share our wealth with all those who have less. Even more important is respecting the religious freedom of Muslims to follow their sacred teachings to spread their faith across the globe. Just because their methods are different from those that Christians have become used to doesn’t warrant excluding them from traveling to countries not yet claimed for Allah.”
New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio decried Trump’s plan to withhold federal subsidies to cities that thwart the enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws by declaring they will provide sanctuary for wanted illegal aliens. “No prior administration has sought to use financial leverage against any city’s right to select which laws they wish to enforce in their community,” the Mayor falsely alleged. “Trump makes a big deal about us harboring criminals among those we’ve granted sanctuary. What he fails to consider is that the thieves he maligns are family breadwinners. We will protect these breadwinners from Trump’s tyranny.”
Berkeley Mayor Justifies Riots
While Berkeley Mayor Jesse Arreguin expressed regret that “the anger of those opposed to allowing a hateful white nationalist to speak may have been a little too exuberant, we must acknowledge their constitutional right to prevent the airing of unacceptable views on the University campus.”
Breitbart reporter Milo Yiannopoulos’ sold-out speech had to be canceled when 150 masked men went on a rampage blocking traffic, vandalizing the University, attacking police, and assaulting individuals who came to hear the speech.
President Trump’s post-riot suggestion that “the suppression of free speech at a heavily-subsidized public university raises questions about the continued federal role in contributing to these subsidies” sparked the Mayor’s anger. “Mr. Trump’s perspective on freedom of speech is ignorantly one-sided,” he said. “Sure, he is all for the promulgation of Yiannopoulos’ twisted ideas, but what of the rights of those who don’t want to hear them? Shouldn’t the majority of the students’ preference to silence his hateful messenger rule the day?”
“Perhaps the biggest irony of the whole event is that Yiannopoulos is himself gay,” Arreguin observed. “He is a member of a group that the protesters were trying to support by shutting down his speech. He may be feeling aggrieved in the short run, but will benefit in the long run if the Trump tyranny is disrupted by the patriotic actions of those in the streets fighting for social justice. That is why I gave police the order to ‘stand down’ and let events take their natural course. A decision that I feel was vindicated by the absence of any fatalities and only a minimal $100,000 in property damage.”
A similar stance toward rioting was exhibited in Pakistan where Judge Chaudhry Muhammad Azam dismissed charges against 115 Muslim men accused of a rampage that burned the homes of 150 Christian families. “Given the unanimous testimony of the 115 accused that they did not commit a crime, I have no other option but to drop the charges,” Azam declared. “Under our law, the testimony of one Muslim is worth four times the testimony of an unbeliever. Since there weren’t enough survivors among the alleged victims to produce the requisite minimum of 460 witnesses to rebut the 115 true believers the case cannot go forward.”
In related news, a speaker at a Black Lives Matter rally against the Trump Administration drew wild cheers from the crowd when she suggested “we need to start killing people. Smashing windows and burning stuff is a good beginning, but white people won’t take us serious if we don’t kill some of them.”
Warren Condemns Trump’s Deplorable Xenophobia
Seeking to gain a leg up on other potential Democratic Party aspirants for the 2020 nomination, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (Mass) excoriated the Trump Administration’s “deplorable xenophobia in placing the interests of American citizens ahead of the interests of humanity.”
“Hillary warned us of the transcendent evil that Trump poses to the progressive values President Obama strove to embed in our government’s policies,” Warren screeched in her Senate tirade against the confirmation of Sen. Jeff Sessions as the new US Attorney General. “By confirming Sessions the Senate has embedded diametrically opposed values. Putting Americans ahead of immigrants is, as the US Ninth Circuit Court has ruled, unconstitutionally denies them their human right to seek sustenance wherever they might find it.”
Warren took offense that one of Sessions’ comments urging American corporations to hire Americans did not derail his confirmation. “I am ashamed that my GOP colleagues have elevated a racist to be the nation’s top law enforcement officer,” she said. “My only consolation is that the Republican Party will pay dearly at the polls when voters rise up to oust these moral cretins from power in the next election.”
CNN Chief Boasts Daily “Two-Minute Hate” of Trump Boosts Morale
CNN president Jeff Zucker admitted that “having the President of the United States impugn our integrity at every opportunity has battered the psyches of many of our network’s employees. We are the ones who determine the facts. We are the ones who impugn the integrity of those who don’t advance the progressive agenda. Trump’s rejection of our traditional role is a reversal that has hit us hard.”
“Our morale since that black day in November has been in the dumpster,” Zucker observed. “But we are turning it around. Thanks to a suggestion emailed to us by a viewer, we have instituted a daily ‘two-minute hate’ of Trump that has seemed to revive flagging spirits around the network. Wolf and Jake tell me it that it’s like a hit of crack that has helped restore their focus and given them the energy to persevere in our mission.”
“I don’t like to think of myself as someone who can hate another person,” CNN reporter Jake Tapper said. “It’s not a feeling I came close to experiencing in eight years of covering the Obama Administration. Not even the Republicans inspired such an intense animosity. They were powerless and cowed by the fear that a bad report from us could destroy their reputations. There was no need to hate them, but Trump, obviously, is different. The daily hate is energizing. My biggest regret is that we didn’t think of doing this before this monster was elected.”
Sweden in Throes of Islamic Crime Wave
Sweden has long been admired by the left as a model society. This Scandinavian “Eden” has avoided getting embroiled in foreign wars. They were even able to get along with the Nazis when so many other countries couldn’t. Their socially tolerant attitudes led them to admit hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants.
This past week, US President Donald Trump referenced “what’s going on in Sweden” in support of his efforts to exercise greater scrutiny over who is allowed into America. The media characterized Trump’s statement as “false” or “delusional” since there have been no large scale jihadi terrorist attacks in Sweden.
However, large scale attacks aren’t the only dangerous consequence of Sweden’s generosity toward Muslim immigrants. Since allowing hundreds of thousands of them into the country crime rates have soared, the streets have become unsafe, and frequent disorder has become a mounting problem.
Per Jimmie Akesson and Mattias Karlsson, leaders of the Swedish Democrats Party, sided with Trump. “The situation is worse than he portrayed in his speech,” Karlsson contended. “Police officers, firefighters and ambulance personnel are regularly attacked. Anti-Semitism has risen. Jews in are threatened, harassed and assaulted in the streets. Cars left unguarded are routinely set on fire. Muslim men comprise 2% of the population in Sweden, but commit 77% of the rapes. The government officials who brought this on with their careless immigration policies are in a state of denial about the Hell they’ve unleashed on our citizens.”
Sweden’s justice and migration minister Morgan Johansson denounced Akesson and Karlsson for spreading what he insisted was “an inaccurate and unflattering picture of our country. The damage done to tourism from these unwanted reports of immigrant unrest goes far beyond the damage done by the Muslim rioters and criminals. Millions, perhaps billions, in revenues are at stake if this view is allowed to influence people’s decision to visit Sweden. I can think of no punishment too severe for what these two have done.”
Of course, Sweden isn’t the only European country to have suffered from excessive Muslim immigration. Germany’s domestic security and intelligence agency reports that the number of radical Islamists in the country has risen by over 1500% since 2013. In Denmark, a Dane is going on trial for blasphemy because he burned a Koran. The Danish government defended the action as “essential if we hope to head off the kind of rioting that occurred after a Danish newspaper published cartoons lampooning Muhammad in 2005. It is better that one man be publicly punished for this offense than that thousands suffer another outbreak of religious violence.”
Obama to Receive “Profiles in Courage” Award
The Kennedy Presidential Library’s annual “Profiles in Courage” Award for 2017 will go to former President Barack Obama. The Award, named after the 1957 Pulitzer Prize winning book ghost written for then Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John F. Kennedy, is given to individuals displaying extraordinary political courage by taking an unpopular course of action. The award ceremony will take place in May, when former First Daughter Caroline Kennedy and grandson of the late JFK Jack Schlossberg, bestow the prize.
“Faced with unrelenting adulation and widespread demands that he declare himself ‘president for life,’ President Obama courageously agreed to follow the law and step down after two terms,” Schlossberg said. “This gracious emulation of our nation’s first chief executive put him at odds with the majority of Americans who clearly would have supported his continuation in office as a down payment on the reparations for slavery that he has championed during his political career. That he would exit the presidency in a move that his core constituency would characterize as ‘acting white’ demonstrated an ‘off-the-charts’ level of personal fortitude.”
Obama is the third former president to win the award. In 2001, former President Gerald Ford was honored for the unconditional pardon he granted to Richard Nixon in 1974 for “all offenses that has committed or may have committed or taken part in” while president. In 2014, former President George H.W. Bush was honored for joining with Democrats to break his 1988 campaign pledge of “no new taxes.”
The speed with which the “Profiles in Courage” award was made to Obama mirrored that of his winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009. Ironically, the United States was constantly at war for his eight years as president when bragged that he was “really good at killing people” with drone strikes. Schlossberg expressed confidence that there wouldn’t be any similar embarrassment over the “Profiles” award since “the refusal to seize power can’t be undone now that he has surrendered the reins to his successor.”
Dems May Look to “Transracials” to Boost Non-White Staff
Struggling to make the racial composition of staffers more closely resemble the general population, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is urging more of the 93% who are Caucasian “to look deep into themselves to see if they may be Black, Latino, or Muslim.”
“We have made great strides incorporating transsexuals into the workforce to help boost the female cohort of our staff,” Schumer remarked. “This got me to thinking that there must be a contingent of transracials out there who could help us meet our non-white quota. Maybe Rachel Dolezal was out ahead of the curve on this. I mean, the people that mocked her for declaring herself to be Black may have missed the boat. Who’s to say she is wrong? If a person with a penis can declare himself a woman, then why can’t a person with pale skin declare himself Black? There’s probably more physical evidence for a white person being biologically part Black than there is for a man being part woman.”
Meanwhile, the woman formerly known as Rachel Dolezal has finalized her transition to Black by adopting the name Nkechi Amare Diallo—a West African name that means “gift of god.” Perhaps if more of the Congressional staffers were to simply adopt African names the concerns of Sen. Schumer would be assuaged.
FBI Director Declares Privacy Not a Right
Fresh off the Wikileaks revelation that the US Government is spying on everyone and his vow to complete the remaining six years of his ten year term, FBI Director James Comey blandly informed the American people that “privacy is not a right to which citizens are entitled.”
“I’m not saying that Americans don’t enjoy a considerable degree of privacy,” Comey said, “but let’s be clear, this is a privilege extended by the government to those who are not under suspicion of criminal or anti-government activities. Government has a moral right and duty to monitor everyone who might represent a threat. To carry out this duty it is imperative that no device have encryption that thwarts government surveillance—as about 40% of devices now do.”
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif) cited President Trump’s objections to being wire-tapped as “prima facie evidence of his unfitness to hold office. Rather than support the surveillance that Director Comey points out is essential to fighting crime and detecting security threats, Trump is siding with this country’s enemies. If, as he says, he is innocent of any wrongdoing he should have no objection to being monitored by the FBI, CIA, NSA, or whoever is trying to keep an eye out for America.”
“Let’s be clear,” Schiff demanded. “Nowhere in the Constitution does it say citizens have a right to privacy. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say government may not spy on the population. That a man elected to the presidency would attempt to argue the opposite is, in my opinion, a cause for concern.”
Former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), however, disagreed with Schiff, calling Comey’s view “a further precarious step on the ‘slippery slope’ toward totalitarianism. It is shocking that a government official would openly tout a virtually unrestrained invasion of privacy. It is even more shocking that the media are not vociferously opposing such a position. I’m no fan of Donald Trump, but in this case he seems to be on the right side of a critical issue.”
Turkey Warns Europe
Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned European governments against moves aimed at resisting Islamization of their countries. “Allah has decreed that all the world belongs to Islam,” he declared. “Acceptance of this reality is the path of peaceful submission to Allah’s will. Efforts to reject this reality will only lead to open warfare and the massacre of the unbelievers.”
Erdogan’s bellicose stance was prompted by the European Union’s decision to allow employers to ban head scarves in their workplaces. “They try to portray it as a safety measure,” Erdogan said. “But the lives that would be saved by such a restriction will be dwarfed by the number of infidels who will be slaughtered because of this affront.”
Erdogan’s first step in retaliation for the “affront” was to instruct Turkey’s Interior Minister Suleyman Soylu to implement an increase in refugees crossing into Europe from Turkey to 15,000 per month. “Let me point out that all of these Muslims will have access to knives, clubs, and stones,” Soylu reminded. “Some will obtain guns. Others will choose to drive vehicles into pedestrians on the streets. It isn’t a question of whether Europe will submit to Islam, but rather when and how they will submit. Will it be peaceful or will it require the deaths of millions before Islam rules all the land?”
Senator Dubs 1973 Roe vs. Wade “Super Precedent”
In an attempt to disqualify prospective Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif), the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, anointed 1973’s Supreme Court decision on Roe vs. Wade a “super precedent” that ought to be “immune from being overturned.”
The Senator rejected the possibility that killing a person without a previous finding of guilt by a jury might be contradictory to the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. “I am dismayed by Judge Gorsuch’s view that the intentional taking of a human life by private persons is always wrong,” Feinstein lamented. “Surely, he must be aware that there are instances of life that is unworthy of life. The right of individuals to make such a determination and implement the necessary remedy was established by the revolutionary Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court ruling. It is appalling that a person who cannot recognize this eternal truth has been nominated for a seat on that Court.”
Feinstein also ridiculed Gorsuch’s support of the Little Sisters of the Poor’s resistance to fund abortion, calling it “a callous trampling of the rights of women granted by the Courts. The idea that nuns would be permitted to deviate from the policies mandated by our democratically-elected government is a travesty. Society has a right to insist that certain core values be recognized and enforced. We need justices who understand this and can be relied upon to rule in favor of preserving these values. Mr. Gorsuch is not a person we can rely on to do this.”
Neither was Feinstein assuaged by Gorsuch’s contention that legislatures, not judges, should make the laws. “When it comes to the law, legislators are amateurs,” the Senator asserted. “Statutes enacted by legislative bodies are riddled with errors. We must be able to count on the expertise of our judiciary to amend the laws and correct these errors.”
Congresswoman Defends Government Surveillance of Trump
This week’s revelation by Democratic operative Evelyn Farkas that the Obama Administration had the Trump campaign under surveillance and shared the information gathered with the Hillary Clinton campaign sparked a spirited defense from long-time California Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters.
“Many small-minded people focus on the illegality of spying on American citizens for political gain as if that is more important than the fact that a traitor has become this nation’s president,” Waters said. “President Obama put in place an organization that contains a kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life. That’s going to be very very powerful and that database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before.”
While this colossal invasion of privacy would seem to dwarf the 1972 Watergate scandal in which a small contingent of GOP burglars invaded Democratic Party offices in Washington, DC in pursuit of political files they believed would aid the reelection of President Nixon, Waters contends that “by resigning Nixon essentially confessed to his crimes. In contrast, President Obama left after a scandal-free two full terms in office. No one in the media accused him of any crime. My only regret is that is that the effort he put into accumulating the database was not sufficient to prevent Trump and the Russians from rigging the election in his favor.”
Ironically, thus far, the only solid evidence linking Russia to the 2016 election is the $35 million the Putin Government paid Hillary Campaign Chairman John Podesta in 2011 when he was an adviser to her while she was at the State Department. This is probably not the “Russia conspiracy” that Podesta had in mind when he criticized the media for “not playing it up enough during the campaign.”
Chelsea Clinton Gives Career Advice
Former First Daughter Chelsea Clinton touted herself as “a working model of what a young woman needs to do to succeed in today’s world. I know that a lot of women in my generation are pretty bummed about my Mom’s loss to Donald Trump. But they need to get off their duffs and get going. Just do what I did.”
“One thing that I highly recommend for others is to get a job with a major television news outlet,” she suggested. “These jobs are very rewarding. My starting salary at NBC News was $600,000. This type of salary will enable any young woman to make a major dent in her student-loan debt.”
“Another good way to get ahead is to serve on corporate boards,” Chelsea recommended. “I’m on two. Expedia pays me $40,000 per year plus $250,000 in stock options. Inter Active Corporation pays me a $300,000 annual retainer. The work is not arduous and doesn’t take much time—just a couple of meetings a year. You don’t even have to say anything at the meetings. You just have to be there. Nod a few times to show interest in what’s being said. It’s a great gig.”
“And don’t overlook the opportunity in doing books,” she added. “Find someone who will write what you tell them to write. The publisher will pay for you to go on a book tour, so you get free travel. You get to go on TV and sit in book stores for a few hours signing autographs in a bunch of different cities. It’s great.”
“Now people are encouraging me to run for president,” Chelsea boasted. “Naturally, I wouldn’t expect everyone to rise as rapidly as I have. Not everyone is blessed with the same set of skills I have. But everyone can try a little harder. If you want money, ask for money. If you want more time for yourself, take it. Men have monopolized these tactics for too long. It’s time women get their fair share. I’ve shown them how to do it.”
Merkel Explains Terror Policy
Facing a tough reelection campaign, German Chancellor Angela Merkel struggles to convince voters that her open borders approach to Muslim immigrants hasn’t been a disaster. In an interview published in a German magazine this week she insisted “we will never accept terror.”
Some of her critics have contended that “admitting millions of Muslims is a defacto acceptance of terror.” Merkel rebuffed this criticism, saying that “last year only 22 Germans were murdered by Islamic immigrants. In a population of 80 million this is a minuscule casualty rate. Considering that the fear of being attacked by Islamic fanatics has deterred many Germans from unnecessarily leaving home, it’s possible that more lives were saved by having fewer traffic fatalities than were lost by these murders. So, clearly, terror does seem to have some potential positive offsets.”
“My bigger concern is that Germans are not reproducing at a high enough rate to replace those that die of old age,” the Chancellor lamented. “These immigrants will solve that problem. Their willingness to bear children will more than offset our birth dearth. Surely, the loss of a few dozen individuals at the hands of the terrorist portion of the immigrants is not too high a price to pay.”
“I urge all citizens who are concerned about their safety to do what I do,” Merkel advised. “First, forego all unnecessary travel. For the occasions in which this is not possible, beef up your security detail. Never travel on public transit. Always ride in vehicles with bulletproof glass and body armor. Avoid public places like shopping malls, theaters, stadiums, parks, schools, libraries, and the like. Shop by phone or the Internet and have your purchases delivered whenever you can. Have a member of your domestic staff run all errands outside the home. In short, if you are sensibly cautious your chance of being murdered by a terrorist or a common criminal should be acceptably low.”
Obama Taking “Symbolic Reparations”
Stung by critics who say that former President Barack Obama is showing inordinate greed by accepting fat payments from Wall Street for brief speeches, former Presidential Press Secretary Josh Earnest argued that “one of the President’s greatest regrets during his time in office was his inability to establish a public program of reparations for America’s historic mistreatment of racial minorities. Rather than just shrug off his disappointment he has decided to individually extract payments to compensate for those injustices.”
“We mustn’t overlook the fact that the $400,000 per speech fees are being paid by white men to a black man,” Earnest pointed out. “We’re confident that every aggrieved person of color will view this as an important symbolic representation of the intent of the reparations movement. Even though they may not personally benefit a member of their race will benefit and that has to make them feel good.”
Earnest took a similar view of the $65 million book deal Barack and his wife landed with Random House for their memoirs. This payoff is four times as large as the one snared by Bill Clinton and six times higher than the one George W. Bush received. “A black man getting paid more than a pair of white men is but another example of President Obama’s tireless efforts to balance the scales of justice,” he contended. “The vicarious satisfaction he is providing to the African-American community is immeasurable.”
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) called the huge payments “troubling for Democrats. Wall Street has been one of our more reliable sources of campaign money. President Obama raised more money from Wall Street than any other candidate in history and Hillary was a close second. The millions that the former President is now on track to absorb will be dollars that could be better spent on promoting the election of more Democrats. Unless he is going to share some of these fees with the Party I’d have to categorize this as short-sighted and self-serving.”
Sen. Bernie Sanders (S-Vermont) was more blunt, saying “it makes him look like a greedy bastard. Cozying up to Wall Street was what doomed Hillary Clinton’s campaign. How can those of us pushing for social justice gain traction when the most prominent representatives of our philosophy take money from our class enemies? The only mitigating factor may be Lenin’s prediction that the capitalists will furnish the rope we use to hang them.”
GOP Health Care Bill Called “Death Sentence for Millions”
The House passage of the American Health Care Act, the GOP’s alternative to Obamacare, was labeled a “death sentence for millions” by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass), “people will die.”
Warren’s view was bolstered by the lamentations of individuals who now fear for their lives if the AHCA becomes law. Mega-celebrity Cher expressed her dismay that the AHCA may not cover her asthma therapy. “How will I get my medicine without Obamacare?” she demanded to know. She dismissed the suggestion that as a millionaire many times over she could easily afford to pay out-of-pocket as “unfair. It is the government’s obligation to take care of everyone’s health. The notion that I should pay because I can afford it denigrates my value as a human being.”
Similarly, model and wife of musician John Legend, Chrissy Teigen blamed Trump “for causing a crippling anxiety that requires me to get botox injections to relax life-threating tensions brought on by this manically insane, incompetent president and this dumpster fire administration.”
“The testimony of these esteemed members of society is evidence that the GOP is on the wrong track when it comes to the health of this country,” Warren declared. “If the well-being of the best of us is threatened just try to imagine how much worse it will be for ordinary people who depend on the government to care for them.”
The Senator was particularly peeved that “the AHCA moves away from vital government mandates that are essential to ensuring that every person gets the health care that experts have determined they need to have. The bill would allow individuals more latitude to decide what coverage they want. It will remove penalties for not purchasing what Obamacare has designated as mandatory services. People could simply decide not to buy insurance without facing a substantial fine. This is the road to anarchy.”
With medical treatment the third leading cause of death in America the Senator’s premise that having the government coerce people into submitting to an approved list of treatments leads to better outcomes is dubious. While it is true that trauma care in emergency rooms clearly saves the lives of many who would otherwise have died, medical errors, the toxic side effects of prescription drugs, and hospital-incurred infections kill many others.
Trump Gets Preferential Treatment in White House Dining Room
Appalling repression in the White House dining room came to light when the media exposed the scandalous story of how President Trump gets more and better food than other diners. In a Time magazine article it was revealed that at White House dinners Trump gets Diet Coke (everyone else gets water), Trump gets Thousand Island dressing (everyone else gets vinaigrette), Trump gets two scoops of ice cream (everyone else gets one).
CNN’s Jeanne Moos saw this as “unjustifiable discrimination—the kind that makes you wonder whether Trump thinks he’s king.” In support of this theory, Moos cited the fact that “Vice-President Pence doesn’t get any ice cream. He’s only allowed a ‘fruit plate.’ What has he done to get on Trump’s bad side?”
Cristeta Comerford, the White House Executive Chef since 2005, denied there was any discrimination: “anyone who asks is given the same option to choose as the President. You want something other than water? Just ask. You want a different salad dressing? We have many from which you can choose. You want two scoops of ice cream, three scoops, whatever? Just ask.”
Moos contended that “the chef’s response is too convenient to be credible. We need to know who pressured her to come up with this unbelievable alibi. Was she cowed into submission by the very public firing of the FBI Director? Or was her subservient status as a woman of color within a racist administration sufficient to extract the desired cover story? This incident would seem to bolster calls for an independent prosecutor to investigate Trump.”
Study Shows Journalists Have Defective Brains
A study conducted for the London Press Club by neuroscientist Tara Swart found that journalists have a below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking.
“It’s kind of ironic when you think about it,” Swart observed. “Here we have a profession that is entrusted to inform the general population and sees itself as a guardian of truth. Yet, this study shows their brains are operating at a lower level than those of the average person.”
CNN’s Jim Acosta challenged the study calling it “the worst slander of a profession in the annals of world history. It could hardly be more obvious that Swart is on Putin’s payroll. What she sees as a lack of creative and flexible thinking is refuted by the daily creativity we have shown in generating scandals against Trump and the flexibility we have demonstrated in shifting the focus of public discussion using unverified sources.”
Acosta bragged that “some of our best ideas are born during ‘happy hour.’ Because Trump never imbibes he cuts himself off from this tried and true well of inspiration that writers have used for centuries. Look at the great journalist Hunter Thompson. I’d take his lubricated output over Trump’s soberest thoughts any day of the week.”
Apprised of Acosta’s remarks, Swart replied that “while Mr. Acosta was not part of the group we studied, his comments are consistent with our findings.”
Democrat Enraged Over Revived Interest in Rich Murder
Long-time Democratic Party operative John Podesta proclaimed former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s speculation that DNC staffer Seth Rich may have been assassinated “disgusting.”
“After so much time has passed I think it’s likely that we’ll never know why this young man died,” Podesta asserted. “The DC police forgot to ask for surveillance tapes from all the CCTVs in the vicinity of the shooting. They forgot to seek witnesses at the bar Seth visited just before he died. They have his laptop, but since he didn’t have it with him when he was shot I don’t see how it could shed any light on the crime. There just aren’t any more clues to be found.”
Gingrich contended that “the absence of any evidence that Rich was robbed casts doubt over the hastily offered theory that the murder was part of a robbery gone wrong. Since that theory hasn’t solved the case perhaps other theories of the crime should be considered. The emergence of a claim by Kim Dotcom that he worked with Rich to forward DNC emails to Wikileaks and that Rich might have been murdered in retaliation is a plausible alternative theory that, in my opinion, merits examination.”
An alternate theory that might explain Podesta’s rage at the renewed interest in the fate of Seth Rich might be the revelation in one of his emails published by Wikileaks, where he wrote that he was “definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.” If, as Dotcom claims, Rich was the Wikileaks source, his murder could be “an example” aimed at discouraging other potentially disloyal Democrats.
This week, Former FBI Director James Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday. While he confirmed that there is no evidence of any wrongdoing by Trump, he raised the issue of “whether a person so creepy and obnoxious deserves to be president. He is so different in every way from President Obama that I got a queasy feeling just being in the same room with him. I just didn’t know how to react, so I joined the parade of government insiders who have been leaking confidential matters to the media in the hope that someone would rid the nation of this meddlesome interloper.”
“Let me compare and contrast my experience with the previous administration to help make my point,” Comey continued. “When Attorney General Lynch told me that President Obama wanted the FBI to ease up on the Clinton email matter, the directions were clear. When Trump said he hoped that since General Flynn had done nothing illegal that further maligning of his reputation could be dropped, I didn’t know what to do. Was this some sort of code instructing me to have the man ‘whacked?’ I think everyone with experience in government can see how confusing Trump’s behavior is for all of us.”
Under questioning from Sen Rubio (R-Fla), Comey defended his acquiescence to Lynch’s pressure to go easy on Clinton, saying that “compared to how we looked the other way at Holder’s request when hundreds of weapons were delivered to Mexican gangs and subsequently used to murder hundreds of people, it seemed like brushing off Clinton’s unsecure email system and unauthorized deletion of government records was a minor issue.”
After the testimony, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn) contended that “this clearly puts the option of impeachment into play. I mean, how much longer are the Republicans going to sit on their hands given the ammunition this heroic patriot has handed us? Even if there is no evidence of a crime, per se, the impression that there is something that is just not right has to be factored in. We’ve already seen that Trump is out-of-step with the world on climate. Comey has portrayed him as out-of-step with the way things have traditionally been done in government. Is this the kind of person we want as our president for the next three-and-one-half years?”
Dems Respond to Attempted Massacre of GOP Lawmakers
This week’s rifle assault by former Sanders for President volunteer James Hodgkinson on Republican members of congress practicing for the annual charity baseball game with their Democratic colleagues severely wounded House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La) and injured several others. The assault had apparently been planned after the New York Times published the location of the GOP practice back in April.
Law enforcement authorities profess themselves baffled and unable to conceive of a motive for the attack. Hodgkinson’s Internet post asserting “Trump is a Traitor. Trump Has Destroyed Our Democracy. It’s Time To Destroy Trump & Co.” and the fact that he was a member of “Terminate the Republican Party” Facebook Group was described by Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe as “too ambiguous and vague to provide much of a clue.”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) blamed Republicans “for instigating the cycle of violence when they smeared President Bill Clinton for having sex with a White House intern. That a nation’s ruler would have sexual liaisons with a variety of women is a time-honored tradition extending back to David and Bathsheba. More recently President Kennedy hooked up with many nubile young women. This right of rulers was disrespected by Republicans when they impeached our president for being a normal head-of-state.”
“The cycle was reinvigorated when the GOP refused to support President Obama’s transformation of the United States,” Pelosi continued. “At virtually every turn they resisted him—claiming that his programs were unwise or too expensive. Then there was the misogynistic denial of Hillary Clinton’s rightful claim to the presidency. We shouldn’t be surprised that the GOP’s racist, anti-progressive and sexist attitudes have spurred downtrodden individuals like Mr. Hodgkinson, who no doubt was upset by the injustice done to Secretary Clinton, to take desperate measures.”
Malcolm Harris, who writes for The Washington Post called Hodgkinson’s sniper attack “an act of self-defense. As Rep. Pelosi so aptly pointed out, the Republican health care bill will literally kill Americans. So they shouldn’t be surprised if some of their intended victims try to preempt this threat. What saddens me is that Hodgkinson wasn’t a better marksman.”
In Nebraska, Chelsey Gentry-Tipton, chairwoman of the state Democratic Party’s Black Caucus, found the shooting and its aftermath humorous, saying that “watching the congressman crying on live TV about the trauma they experienced—why is this so funny? I’m having a hard time feeling bad for them.”
European Union Threatens Poland, Hungary
The absence of Islamic terror attacks in Poland and Hungary has been attributed to these countries’ refusal to take in an adequate portion of the flood of Muslim refugees that have swarmed into Europe over the last few years. The leaders of Hungary and Poland think this is a good thing. Hungarian Prime Minster Viktor Orban called these migrants “a poison” and said “every single migrant poses a public security and terror risk.” Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydło called the European Union’s policy of allowing mass migration from the Middle East “folly.”
EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos slammed the governments of both countries “for not bearing their fair share of the grief that accompanies free migration. It is the policy of the European Union that all member states must accept an allocation of this grief as assigned by the Brussels authorities. Failure to do so will force us to impose sanctions.”
Polish Interior Minister Mariusz Blaszczak vowed his country will “choose the lesser danger of enduring EU sanctions over inviting savages to roam among us assaulting our women, attacking gays, and bombing our public places. We have seen the consequences in countries that have welcomed these migrants—rapes in Sweden, murders in London, nightly riots in Paris—and we say ‘no thanks.’”
Former US President Barack Obama said “this latest deterioration of the unity we all worked so hard for during my administration is disheartening. It’s frustrating that there is no court that can overturn Poland and Hungary’s racist anti-immigration policies like the US courts that have thwarted Trump’s similar animus against Muslims in America. I wish I could do more than urge Chancellor Merkel and President Macron to be patient. We’re working to unseat Trump and install a progressive alternative, but it will take time.”
In related news, the last remaining police station in the Järva area (a suburb of Stockholm with a majority Muslim population) is slated to be closed because “it is too dangerous for police.” Stockholm area regional police chief Ulf Johansson said “we can no longer justify putting our officers’ lives in danger. The area is too violent even for armed police to dare venture outside the building.” As for the Swedes still living in the area, he suggested that “as I understand it, they have the option of converting, submitting to Muslim rule, or moving—if they can get out without being killed. They will, of course, have to leave their non-portable property behind.”
Iran to Contest Trump Travel Ban
Iran, the world’s top terror sponsor, expressed its “profound disappointment in the US Supreme Court’s decision to allow the Trump Administration to reinstate its ban on travel from Muslim countries to the United States,” and announced its appeal to the World Court at the Hague.
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said “our appeal will be founded on the concept of fairness. The United States can project its military power around the world. It has the most weapons and the widest array of means with which to deliver them. Our only viable means of countering this is to infiltrate our warriors into America as refugees, immigrants, and visitors. If the battle for the future of the world is to be a fair one we cannot allow one side to neutralize opposition by such an inequitable policy.”
American Civil Liberties Union spokesman Bertram Petty acknowledged that “Iran’s case is innovative, but not without merit. Iran is a big underdog when matched against US military might. Their long-shot chance at victory hinges on their ability to smuggle jihadis and suicide bombers inside the US borders. If the Trump Administration’s travel ban is allowed to stand Islam’s odds of winning would be greatly diminished—perhaps impossible. I could easily see the World Court vacating the ban in order to produce a more level playing field.”
CIA Director Mike Pompeo called Petty’s speculations “insane. This is not some sporting contest where the winner gets a trophy. It is civilization against vicious murderers. Petty might just as well argue that home security systems unfairly deter or impede criminals from breaking into your home to rob, rape and murder you. The travel ban is a moderate countermeasure aimed at deterring and impeding terrorists who will not shy away from the most barbaric atrocities in their quest to impose their will on the world.”
Trump Speech Defending “Western Values” Denounced
President Trump’s defense of “western values” in his speech in Poland this week was condemned by a pair of left-wing magazines. The New Republic’s Jeet Heer called it “a paean to white grievance.” The Atlantic’s Peter Beinart called it “an outburst of racial and religious paranoia.”
“Mr. Trump’s unapologetic praise of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness puts ‘white values’ ahead of alternative perspectives,” Heer complained. “His pledge of support for the dignity of every human life is a thinly-veiled jab at a woman’s right to abort her unwanted child. His assumption that it is the hope of every soul to live in freedom insults those who place obedience to the collective above selfish individualism.”
As an illustration of how wrong Trump’s views are, Heer contended that “Trump’s aversion to the steady creep of government bureaucracy that he says drains the vitality and wealth of the people completely misses the mark. It is the bureaucracy’s intervention that prevents those who produce wealth from hogging it all for themselves. It is the bureaucracy that ensures a fairer distribution to all regardless of their role in production.”
Beinhart found “Trump’s assumption that the freedom engendered by white philosophers and politicians encourages creativity and innovation is offensive to the artistic output achieved by persons-of-color living under alternative philosophies and politics. His placement of faith and family ahead of government as the center of our lives rejects the gains that secular progressivism have brought to modern life.”
“Worse still is Trump’s selective endorsement of faith,” Beinhart added. “The faith Trump values is the ‘turn-the-other-cheek’ variety espoused by Jesus. Well, what about the faith Mohammed espoused? How can we consider ourselves culturally diverse if we insist on portraying a faithful Muslim fighting for Islam as an unacceptable life style? Isn’t their genuinely held belief that it is their obligation to convert or slay unbelievers just as valid as a belief that we must do unto others as we would wish them to do unto us?”
Lynch Defends Ending Clinton Email Investigation
Obama Administration Attorney General Loretta Lynch clarified her previous denial of communication with the Clinton campaign with a contention that “there was nothing improper about my assurances that I would not allow the probe into Secretary Clinton’s emails to go too far. Should an AG allow any investigation to go too far? I think promising to prevent that investigation from going too far placed reasonable limits that helped avert a situation where Republicans would be able to gain an unfair advantage during the campaign.”
“As a matter of fact, it was FBI Director James Comey who decided not to forward the case to me back in July of 2016,” Lynch pointed out. “While it looked like he laid out considerable grounds for a potential prosecution for a lengthy series of illegal actions on the part of Secretary Clinton, he decided not to recommend prosecution because he saw no intent.”
“Technically, the applicable statutes do not require that we prove intent in order to indict or prosecute someone for illegally using classified information,” Lynch admitted. “That sailor who took photos of the submarine he served on so he could show his children had no intent to subvert national security but he was sent to jail. Then, too, it seems pretty obvious that Secretary Clinton’s intention was to hide some of her questionable emails from prying eyes. I guess different venues can lead to different application of the same laws. All I can say is that the effect on America from incarcerating one lowly sailor is inconsequential. That would not have been the case with Secretary Clinton. She is a very important person and her fate has major consequences for this country. I think taking that into consideration was what probably drove Director Comey to do what he did.”
Seattle Councilman Says Hosing Excrement off Sidewalk “Racist”
Councilman Larry Gossett bristled at a request for funds to clean human excrement from Seattle’s city streets near the Third Street courthouse, calling it “racist. It’s all part of a pattern of disrespect toward the minority community.”
The request for $8,000 to pay for the cleaning came from King County Sheriff John Urquhart who complained that “public defecation is only part of the problem. The homeless denizens of the area have been assaulting and harassing citizens reporting for jury duty. The jurors are asking judges to excuse them because they’re afraid to come to the courthouse.”
Gossett insisted that “putting the discomfort of white jurors who have access to indoor toilets ahead of the rights of the homeless who do not sends the wrong message to our children.” The Councilman vowed to personally participate in a “sh*t-in” if the funds are appropriated, claiming “it’s turning the other cheek as Jesus asked us to do.”
Councilman Ronald Wussman proposed renaming the street to “Turd Street” as a “compromise,” pointing out that “the new name would serve to alert everyone to the hazards without unnecessarily disrupting the habitat or the behavior of those dwelling in it. In a way, the new name might be seen as an acknowledgment of the contributions this segment of society has made to our community.”
Congresswoman Negotiating Whether to Cooperate with Investigation
Former Democratic National Committee Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (Fla) is in the midst of deciding whether or not to cooperate with DC police investigating possible violations of national security laws by her former top information technology (IT) aide, Imran Awan. Awan and several of his relatives are accused of abusing access granted by their Democratic Party employers to obtain and sell classified information.
Thus far, Wasserman-Schultz has been refusing to turnover computers used by Awan so police can examine them. She has claimed exemption from law enforcement saying that “according to the Constitution, members of congress are privileged from arrest. I am not some ordinary bumpkin who can be compelled to undergo police investigation. I’m part of the government. I have superior rights.”
The clause she cited may not be as broad an exemption as she imagines, though. The privilege from arrest applies only to attendance at a congressional session and the trip to and from that session. Further, there is no privilege in cases of “treason, felony, and breach of the peace.” Inasmuch as hiring ITs who purloin classified information and sell it might reasonably constitute both treason and felony offenses, Wasserman-Schultz’s obstruction of the investigation into these crimes would not seem to be privileged.
“Regardless of the nuances of the law, the computers are in my possession,” the Congresswoman boasted. “Secretary Clinton was allowed to delete part of her emails and smash all her phones rather than be subjected to the kind of invasion of privacy they’re trying to impose on me. As I see it, if they want to see these devices I need a non-revocable grant of full immunity. Then maybe I’ll turn them over.”
McCain Kills GOP Health Care Bill
Just days after receiving brain surgery to remove a malignant tumor, Sen. John McCain (R-Az) returned to the senate in time to cast his vote killing the so-called “skinny” repeal of Obamacare. McCain joined fellow Republicans Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine) to vote with all 48 Democrats for a 51-49 margin against the bill.
The Senator cited “bipartisanship” as his primary motivation. “The original Obamacare legislation was enacted without a single Republican vote,” he pointed out. “For us to repeal any part of it without a single Democratic vote would only continue to spur rancor between the aisles of congress.” McCain said he was “confident that my reach across the aisle on this day will inspire both sides to work together for the good of the American people.”
McCain acknowledged that the “skinny” repeal “would have offered some relief to those suffering from the high premiums and high deductibles Obamacare has inflicted on them, but it wouldn’t have solved all of the ACA’s deficiencies. Worse, it would have sent us back toward a system where individuals would be left free to choose not to buy insurance or to buy plans that do not require the coverage of essential services like gender reassignment surgery. The imprudent may think they don’t need this option, but if we allow them to bypass paying for this coverage they’ll be left holding the bag if the itch to switch ever strikes them.”
“We all know that Obamacare has its faults,” McCain continued. “Fortunately, essential personnel working in government are exempt and have been awarded superior coverage by President Obama’s executive order. This puts members of congress in a position to exercise judgment without the pressures and biases that would accompany any decision that had a direct effect on our own health. It is my hope that a leisurely and dispassionate discussion between Republicans and Democrats will produce a comprehensive reform.”
A teary-eyed Senate Minority Leader praised McCain’s vote. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) called it “the most courageous act I have ever personally witnessed. He has sacrificed his political future to rescue former President Obama’s signature legacy. His stand for bipartisanship will forever protect the Affordable Care Act from repeal or adulteration as long as Democrats remain solidly against every GOP attempt to alter it.”
Deputy Chairman of the Democratic Nation Committee Rep. Keith Ellison (Minn) vowed to be one of those Democrats and “stand strong against Republican efforts to derail the progress President Obama has bestowed upon America. We need a truly comprehensive health care system like they’ve had in Cuba for the last 50 years. And I won’t rest until we do.”
Meanwhile, former House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and former Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va) admitted that “all the votes to repeal Obamacare while Obama was president were just for show. We knew he would veto whatever we passed. The Democrats in the senate cooperated by refraining from filibustering the repeal. We placated our base. The Democrats got to portray us as cold-hearted bastards. It was a win-win for both parties.”
Congresswoman Has Plan to Avert War with North Korea
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif) has a simple plan for deescalating tensions between the US and North Korea: “give them what they want.” she acknowledged that “we may not know specifically what that is, but surely it has to be a better option than going to war.”
“Look, Korea is a small, far away country,” Waters observed. “From what I understand it is a very poor place. We could probably feed, house, and clothe everyone in it for less than it would cost to bomb them. If we could ensure Kim that all the material needs of his people could easily be met via a generous foreign aid package, what reason would he have for wanting nuclear weapons?”
In support of her recommendation, the Congresswoman cited “the pacifying effects that our domestic welfare program has had upon the poor in our own country. We don’t see any of them trying to get nuclear weapons or threatening to turn America into ashes. I’d say this experience provides the guidance we need to construct a more successful foreign policy.”
Former President Barack Obama’s National Security adviser, Susan Rice, hailed Waters’ suggestion, calling it “a breath of fresh air. As both Presidents Clinton and Obama realized, a nuclear armed North Korea would be in a better position to demand social justice from the West. The disproportionate distribution of wealth that currently exists between our two countries needs to be rectified. The ability of North Korea to do serious damage to the United States is a key element in forcing a long overdue reallocation. That Trump would attempt to turn this leverage into an excuse for a military response that would defend an unjust status quo is a crime against humanity.”
Study Shows More Registered Voters than Adult Citizens
Data from the U.S. Census Bureau analyzed by Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project found that there are 3.5 million more registered voters in America than there are citizens if voting age. More than 40% of these “ghost voters” were found in two California counties—700,000 in Los Angeles County and 800,000 in San Diego County.
Of course, not every citizen eligible to vote actually registers to vote. So, the potential over-registration is even larger than these figures imply. The potential for election fraud would seem to be huge. Nevertheless, Democrats adamantly deny that any significant fraud is taking place. The Brennan Center for Justice contends that it has conclusively proven that allegations of widespread fraud are “baseless.” And the New York Times asserts that “there is essentially no voter fraud in America.”
Given the confidence that Democratic partisans have that there is no election fraud it is puzzling that they hold such animosity toward President Trump’s Election Integrity Panel. If the evidence is so overwhelmingly against the idea that fraud exists wouldn’t the Panel end up confirming their contention?
California Secretary of State Alex Padilla rejected the need for investigation saying “it makes as much sense as the Administration’s suggestion that global warming be the topic of a policy debate. It seems that every informed person but Trump knows that global warming is proven science. Likewise, every properly informed person but Trump knows there is no election fraud. Bucking this consensus is a waste of time and money.”
Padilla explained the apparent over-registration endemic in his state as “an enigmatic anomaly. Even if we could figure out why there are millions of bogus registrations there is no proof that any of these resulted in ballots being cast.”
The absence of “proof” may owe a lot to procedures barring use of photo IDs as a step toward verifying the identity of those casting ballots at the polls or by mail. Even the matching of signatures on mailed ballots with signatures on voter registration forms has been challenged by the ACLU as “disenfranchising.”
ACLU spokesman Bertram Petty said “requiring a voter to prove his or her identity is humiliating. It puts procedural technicalities ahead of the obvious truth that a human being has a natural right to elect those who rule him. To deny a person the right to vote because he doesn’t reside in the district or isn’t a citizen is a violation of his human rights. So, what we are saying is that, in the big picture, all the ID rigmarole is aimed at suppressing the vote.”
Justice Dept Declines to Press Charges Against IRS Official
Assistant Attorney General Kevin Boyd announced that the Trump Administration will not be pursuing charges against former IRS executive Lois Lerner for discriminating against conservative organizations seeking tax-free status from the Agency.
While conceding that Lerner’s refusal to testify on the grounds it would be self-incriminating was, in effect a “smoking gun,” Boyd insisted that “the prosecution of a government functionary for carrying out the wishes of the president would be excessively punitive and set a dangerous precedent. A person entering the ranks of an administration shouldn’t have to be second-guessing every decision—is it right, is it wrong, is it legal or illegal. That would slow the gears by which the president’s will prevails in the making of policy.”
“Ideally, the chief executive is the one who should be held accountable,” Boyd argued. “Difficult as this might be given that the president can order enemies to be killed, nevertheless, it is a basic principle of our Constitution. The proper remedy would be impeachment. Since the person responsible for the IRS’ illegal acts is no longer in office the entire matter is now moot.”
Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Tex), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, called the decision not to pursue the case “terrible. It sends the message that the same legal, ethical, and Constitutional standards we all live by do not apply to Washington political appointees—who will now have the green light to target Americans for their political beliefs and mislead investigators without ever being held accountable for their lawlessness.”
Weiner Pleads for Leniency
Former congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) asked a Manhattan federal court to grant him leniency after his conviction for sending obscene emails and texts to an under-aged 15-year-old girl last year. Prosecutors are seeking a sentence of 21 to 27 months for a charge that carries a maximum of 10 years in prison.
Weiner’s lawyers argued that “the girl was the instigator of the crime. She preyed upon the weaknesses of a man who was widely known as a sex pervert. Now she’s written a book and will profit from the experience. So, to say that she was an innocent victim is false.”
A second mitigating factor cited was “the fact is, Mr. Weiner’s wife has already suffered enough. Her political career has been crushed. She’s lost the confidence and affection of former Secretary of State, and the only person she truly loves, Hillary Clinton. Under the State of New York’s community property law, her suffering ought to be credited against her husband’s legal liability.”
A third mitigating factor cited was that “given the narrow margin of her loss, it could be argued that the untimely revelation of Mr. Weiner’s misdeeds tipped the scales against Mrs. Clinton in her run against Donald Trump for the presidency. Surely, the misery now being experienced by this dedicated public servant and her supporters is sufficient punishment without putting Mr. Weiner behind bars.”
Lastly, Weiner’s lawyers argued that “putting this man in jail will deprive his son of his father’s presence. The boy’s development would be stunted without the daily interaction and guidance his father would be able to provide if he is allowed to go free. Who will teach the boy how to be a man? Who will teach the boy the difference between right and wrong? For the sake of this young boy’s future he needs his father.”
Sanders’ “Medicare for All Act” Gains Support
Vermont Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for All Act” has been gaining support from a growing number of Democrats. His bill would establish a single-payer health care system and outlaw private medical practice.
“The current system is too complicated and confusing,” Sanders contends. “My bill would simplify everything by placing all the responsibility and control in the hands of the government. Disputes over what care is warranted would be eliminated. The decisions regarding who can be treated will be consolidated in a single authority. Everyone would get the care that best serves the collective needs of society. No individual would be permitted to opt out or seek to obtain care outside the system. All—rich and poor alike—would be subject to the same standardized therapies. No resources would be wasted on persons of no social value.”
Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis) was enthusiastic. “Having the government totally control who gets treatment and who doesn’t will work to bring about greater social solidarity and compliance,” she said. “Once everyone realizes that their access to care depends solely on the government they will be more motivated to cooperate with the government lest they render themselves ineligible as ‘socially undesirable elements.’ Not even the rich will be allowed to dodge the regime by purchasing services not covered from private practitioners because there will no longer be any private doctors.”
Baldwin admitted that “even were this bill to become law we couldn’t immediately prevent people from going outside the country’s borders to seek care outlawed by the nationalized system, as many living under Canada’s single-payer system have done. But looking down the road to the next Democratic Administration a presidential executive action could ban travel for medical reasons for being inconsistent with the intent of the single-payer law. And NSA could monitor private communications to spot likely offenders before they could escape the country.”
Trump Tax Plan “Death Blow” to High-Tax States
A feature of the Trump Administration’s proposed tax reform plan that has stirred fear among governors of high-tax states is the elimination of deductions for state income and property taxes. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) called it a “death blow” for his state.
“New York has traditionally relied on high taxes to fund the services we provide for our population,” the Governor pointed out. “Resistance to these tax high rates has been moderated by the fact that deductions from federal taxes has helped pass some of the burden onto to states that have lower taxes. If we lose that deduction more New Yorkers will object to our state’s taxes.”
Cuomo complained that the Trump plan’s replacement of state tax deductions with larger standard deductions ($12,000 for single filers and $24,000 for joint filers) “is unfair to our residents. Right now, the average deduction for state taxes for Manhattan residents is nearly $25,000. Trump’s plan would allow the same standard deduction for filers living in all states. A perk that has been enjoyed by New Yorkers for decades would be dissipated into a universally shared equal benefit. How will people afford to live in New York if they’re to be treated the same as residents in other states?”
New York Republican Reps. Dan Donovan and Peter King joined Cuomo’s complaint asserting that “to treat New Yorkers like everyone else is unAmerican. Our state has grown accustomed to a special status. New York City would not be a world-class city without the tax-subsidy the current code allows. We will ally with Republicans from other high-tax states and Democrats to make sure Trump’s plan is killed.”
California is the biggest high-tax state. It currently receives a $100 billion subsidy per year under the current tax code. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) called the subsidy “critical to sustaining my state’s status as the wealthiest in the United States. I cannot abide a tax reform that would change this even if it treats all states equally. California voters didn’t elect me to achieve fairness to other states. They expect me to defend our entitlements and that’s what I’m going to do.”
Feinstein also cited a recent report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) showing that illegal immigration costs American taxpayers $135 billion per year as further inspiration for her opposition to Trump’s proposal. “As a sanctuary state, California has to bear a disproportionate share of this cost,” the Senator observed. “If we lose the federal deduction for state taxes our ability to continue as a haven for these immigrants would be threatened.”ave with the states. We are left with no choice except to take the applicants’ word for whether they are citizens.”
Serial Sexual Harasser Sees Right-Wing Conspiracy
Hollywood big shot Harvey Weinstein took a hint from his good friend Hillary Clinton and blamed a vast right-wing conspiracy for a recent New York Times article detailing his long history as a serial sexual harasser. Hurt that his generous donations to Democratic politicians and payoffs to his victims weren’t sufficient to suppress this information, the bloated movie mogul lamented that his reputation may have been “irretrievably damaged.”
“The unfairness of it all just boggles my mind,” Weinstein admitted. “Others have done far worse and come away smelling like a rose. Bill Clinton raped a woman and committed perjury, but is still admired enough to land half-million dollar speaking gigs. I never raped anyone. Why am I being singled out?”
A clue to Mr. Weinstein’s anomalous fate may have been Hillary’s offhand disparagement of his “measly $600,000 donation to the Clinton Foundation. Others have given much more. Harvey certainly had the means to give more. If he had I might not have suffered the injustice of being denied the presidency. Ironically, if I had won I could’ve pardoned Harvey and put this whole ugly episode behind us.”
In a bid to placate the women he has offended and curry favor with the courts, Weinstein vowed to “channel my anger by driving the NRA out of business” and reminded everyone that he is “making a movie about Trump that is so damning that he will resign in disgrace.” Whether either of these actions will deter lawyers in pursuit of monetary compensation for the aggrieved women Weinstein degraded seems doubtful.
Massacre in Vegas Spurs Gun Control Effort
Like clockwork, the murderous rampage in which a sniper shot more than 500 people, killing 58 of them, from a Las Vegas high-rise hotel last Sunday has inspired renewed calls for gun control legislation. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) called for “Republicans to join Democrats in order to pass legislation that will once-and-for-all disarm those who have no need for guns.”
From what we know about the alleged shooter it seems unlikely that any gun legislation would be effective in deterring this type of crime. After all, murder is already illegal and carries the most severe penalties under existing laws. A person willing to violate the law against murder does not seem likely to be deterred by adding a weapons violation, especially when mass killers usually are killed in shootouts with law enforcement officers or commit suicide. Another inconvenient fact is that some of the places in the US with the strictest gun control laws and very low rates of National Rifle Association (NRA) membership have disproportionately high rates of gun violence.
Facts and logic did not dissuade Schumer from accusing the NRA with complicity in gun-related deaths. “The NRA has bought the votes of congressmen who oppose reining-in this evil organization,” he argued. The Senator rebuffed “the right to bear arms” as “an obsolete concept. When the Second Amendment was adopted ordinary citizens needed firearms to hunt for food or to defend themselves when help was hours or days away. Well, everyone I know buys their food at a grocery store or restaurant. And with 911, help is only minutes away. The need for individuals to have personal arms just isn’t there anymore.”
Schumer hailed late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel as an example of how civilized people should behave. “He didn’t go out and buy himself a bunch of guns,” the Senator pointed out. “He just beefed up his armed security detail. Not only are the guns protecting Mr. Kimmel in the hands of trained professionals, he is also providing jobs for ex-military and retired police. I call that a win-win solution for America.”
While Schumer expressed outrage that the NRA would provide campaign contributions to legislators who oppose gun control he seemed unperturbed by Planned Parenthood donating to legislators who oppose abortion. Since 1973—the year the US Supreme Court created a universal right to abortion—there have been 1.5 million gun-related deaths vs. 55 million abortion-related deaths. Some of the gun-related deaths were accidental. Some were suicide. But all of the children killed by abortion were intentional homicide.
Statistically, the votes “bought” to oppose abortion have taken a far greater toll on human lives than any votes “bought” by the NRA.
Presidential Library Won’t Include Obama Documents
The Obama Presidential Library revealed that it won’t be providing any original documents written by Obama. Instead of having the former president’s manuscripts, documents and letters from his tenure in office—items presidential centers around the country all have—the Obama Library will have space for outdoor functions and picnics, a basketball court, recording studio, sledding hill, children’s play garden, and more. The decision has scholars puzzled and disappointed.
University of Chicago Professor of Black Studies Richard Buttkiss could hardly contain his dismay that “the written words of the greatest man to ever walk the Earth will not be available for historians to directly access. It’s as if the apostles had been barred from hearing Jesus speak. It seems like the world will be denied the opportunity to advance to a higher state of consciousness.”
Obama Foundation CEO David Simas explained that “President Obama did not want his legacy to be defined by a sterile preservation of his actual words, but to be a living record that evolves to meet the changing needs of an America on the move. What he wrote or said is not as important as what he meant or intended. By sloughing off the detritus of the past this President’s library will remain eternally relevant.”
Simas advised those who want to keep up with this evolving legacy “to buy his forthcoming books. The genius of this approach is that rather than rely on fallible outsiders to sift through an archive of old documents to craft a history of his era, President Obama will be cornering the market by blocking access to obsolete artifacts. A not insignificant byproduct will, of course, be the higher profits he will garner from book sales and speaking engagements as the sole source of insight for his term in office.”
Carter Offers Self as “Human Shield”
This week, former US President Jimmy Carter offered himself to North Korea’s communist government to “act as a human shield against an attack by the Trump Administration” contending that “even a madman like Trump would surely pull back if he knew an innocent American’s life was at stake.”
Fortunately for the ex-president, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un rebuffed the offer. “Our might is supreme,” Kim boasted. “We have no need for shields—human or otherwise. Mr. Carter, like all of my enemies, will die at a time and place of my choosing. Even those who to attempt to hide like my brother did will be found and killed by my unstoppable assassins.”
Evidence of Russian Influence Seeps Out
This week evidence showing Russian bribery aimed at manipulating US Government policies began to trickle into the media sphere. It seems that the State Department’s 2010 decision to permit a Russian-owned uranium firm to acquire 20% of the US supply of this nuclear resource proceeded amid a flurry of donations to the Clinton Foundation.
While FBI field agents uncovered the bribery trail, then Director, Robert Mueller successfully suppressed the investigation obtaining a Department of Justice (DOJ) “gag” order that is still in effect today. This past week, Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for current DOJ Attorney General Jeff Sessions to lift the gag order, but was rebuffed by the Trump appointee.
“There are many complicated issues to consider,” Sessions said. “For one, there is the reputation and privacy of current and formerly highly placed government officials to be taken into account. Right now Robert Mueller is a special counsel looking into other matters. His effectiveness on that assignment could be impeded if he were to be queried on the uranium deal. Another factor that looms large in my mind is whether the Statute of Limitations may have expired on any crimes committed so long ago. Raising issues that couldn’t be tried in court because of this would be fruitless and embarrassing.”
Grassley declared “Sessions’ refusal to lift the suppression of evidence by his AG predecessor is an unacceptable infringement on Congress’ responsibility to scrutinize the actions of the executive branch. Why he is honoring an illegal gag order defies understanding. If we are to ‘drain the swamp’ we must have access to witnesses holding crucial evidence.”
Salacious Smear of Trump Funded by Dems
After a year of trying to hype the Fusion GPS “dossier” on Donald Trump into alleged “proof” of his illicit collusion with Russia the Democrats have seen the escapade backfire big time. An expose in the Washington Post, of all places, disclosed that the Democratic National Committee paid up to $9 million for the political hit piece. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, chair of the DNC at the time these payments were made, and Hillary Clinton, Democratic candidate for president at that time, both denied any knowledge of the payments.
Clinton pointed out that “we spent a billion dollars on the campaign. In that context, a $9 million payment to an obscure opposition research outfit was peanuts. Why would I be expected to have any knowledge of it?”
Well, there were a series of progressively desperate tweets from the candidate starting in August 2016 and periodically repeated up to October 31 querying the absence of media coverage of Trump’s supposed collusion with Russia to rig the election. Despite Hillary’s efforts, though, media outlets refused to publish any of the dossier’s content on the grounds that the charges couldn’t be independently verified.
Editors at the Los Angeles Times—one of the 98% of newspapers that endorsed Clinton for president—dismissed the question of who paid for the smear, saying that “who paid is not as pertinent as the seriousness of the charges made in the dossier.” As for the lack of corroboration of any of the “serious” charges, the Times editors asserted that “the leveling of even false allegations in a political campaign is protected freedom of speech. The media must bear a large share of the responsibility for its refusal to go public with the dossier’s details when it could have made a difference in the election’s outcome. A finicky aversion to publish allegations out of an overwrought fear that they might later be proven untrue may have saddled the nation with a man unfit to hold the office of president.”
Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper attempted to rescue the situation by arguing that “the absence of evidence behind the dossier’s claims doesn’t preclude the possibility that they might be true. I mean, no one’s produced definitive evidence verifying the existence of ‘big foot,’ but that doesn’t prove the creature doesn’t exist. Our spying on Trump and his associates was never 24/7. They had unobserved moments where they could’ve done the things the dossier said they did. Until they come forward with a persuasive accounting for every minute of their time over the last few years I think we have to assume they’ve got something to hide.”
Former Clinton spokesperson and current CNN contributor Brian Fallon said “the latest kerfuffle over whether the dossier is factual is irrelevant. The more important thing about these types of campaign documents is ‘are they effective.’ If I had known about it before the election I would’ve shouted it to the rooftops. The campaign’s failure to do that exhibited a timidity unbecoming of someone who truly wants to wield political power. In my book, you use every weapon you have to win. After you win no one will dare question whether your tactics were dirty. And if they do, you’ll have numerous tools you can use to make them regret raising the issue.”
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders called the recent turn of events “ironic. The scheming of the Democrats reminds me of the whole Watergate affair. Rather than take their issues to voters as President Trump did, they put their energy into concocting a false narrative aimed at muddying up their opponent. Nixon paid ‘plumbers’ to spy on his 1972 election opponent. Even though he was heavily favored to win and did win, his underhanded tactics eventually brought him down. While Mrs. Clinton’s underhanded tactics didn’t win her the election, they may yet bring her down to a worse place than merely being an ‘also ran.’”
Candidate Discovers She’s Black
Noted Native-American fabulist Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass) made an early bid to lock up the Black vote for a prospective 2020 presidential run by discovering that in addition to being part Cherokee she is also part Black.
“Just this last week I was told by a ninth cousin that our great-great-great grandmother was a slave who was serially raped by John Calhoun back in the 1850s and bore him more than a dozen children,” Warren told a Black audience earlier this week. “I am proud to say that I am one of the descendants of one of those children.”
The Senator alleged that “this bond of blood makes me especially qualified to represent those of us who have been oppressed because of the color of our skin. I wish that I would have known of my heritage earlier in my life. I could have opened some more doors for myself. But maybe the momentum from this later realization can open the door of the White House to this belatedly aware biracial woman.”
Warren pledged to “focus on the continuing mistreatment of my people we see in our public institutions. I will work to remove math from the public school curriculum. Studies have shown that Blacks fail this subject at far higher rates than their share of the school population. In this age of computers it is a skill no longer needed to live in modern America. Likewise, I will work to free the Black men who disproportionately fill our prisons. Not acting white shouldn’t be a crime. True diversity realizes the subjectivity of values and doesn’t impose a moral code that is unsuitable for subsets of our society.”
Rev. Al Sharpton, a member of the audience Warren was addressing professed himself to be “tepidly optimistic” about her candidacy. “While I like her program I am not persuaded she would be an authentic spokesperson for Black liberation. I’m thinking maybe Michelle Obama would be a better vehicle for our message, though I do have my reservations concerning her demand that all men be neutered.”
Socialist Students Reject Food Drive Challenge
At Kent State University in Ohio, two left-wing student clubs—the Young Democratic Socialists of America (YDSA) and the Socialist Collective (SC)–rejected a challenge from Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) and Turning Point USA (TPUSA) to see which organization could gather the most food for poor people in a campus-wide canned food drive.
YDSA chapter co-chair, Ethan Comeriato, explained “While in the short run the food drive would benefit the public our participation would detract from our long-term goal of helping the poor through socialism. The flaw in all charitable giving is that the giver has the option to refuse. In the progressive America toward which we are working the option to refuse will be replaced by government control of all resources. Rather than having to rely on individual generosity to care for the less well off, government experts will dole out the necessities of life for the collective benefit of all.”
Comeriato also labeled the challenge “a capitalistic trick aimed at supporting the false consciousness of individualism. By making the collection of food a competition it obscures the reality that the poor have every right to seize the food they need from those who have a surplus. This is a dangerous idea spewed by dangerous organizations. If the challenge entailed breaking into the homes of the rich and confiscating food for distribution to the poor we’d be all-in.”
YAL chapter president, Kevin Cline, expressed his disappointment of the rebuff, saying “the purpose of our challenge was to extend an olive branch to our ideological counterparts on campus, open up a mutual dialogue and friendly channels of communication, and accomplish some good for our community in the process.”
“Socialists cannot be friendly with capitalists,” Comeriato replied. “These exploiters of the working class must be dispossessed and punished for their crimes against humanity. As Marx proved so long ago, those who resist the revolution for social justice must be reeducated or liquidated, as the people’s tribunals will decide. There is no point to a dialogue with Cline or his ilk when it is people like him that we mean to publicly hang as an example to everyone that we are serious about transforming our country.”
NBC Sexual Predator Seeks $30 million Payoff
Former “Today Show” star Matt Lauer is threatening to sue NBC for the $30 million balance owed for the one-and-a-half years remaining on his contract with the network. Lauer was summarily fired earlier in the week following a raft of accusations that he sexually assaulted several women in his office.
Lauer’s lawyer, Marvin Tushman maintains that “the firing is a breach of contract. Nothing that my client did was outside the bounds of normal behavior at the network. He wasn’t the only one groping and boffing women at 30 Rock. For the NBC brass to make an issue of it after all these years and to single out Matt while letting others skate is manifestly unfair.”
Tushman argued that “since this kind of behavior from the talent was tolerated over such a long period it created a sort of ‘easement right’ that Matt thought was a perk of the job. The fact that he was allowed to install a special door locking device to prevent his female visitors from escaping implies that management was okay with what he was doing. That none of these women publicly complained until recently was quite naturally interpreted by Matt as implied consent. And why not? He’s a handsome and powerful man. Why wouldn’t he think his attentions were wanted?”
A prospective lawsuit isn’t Lauer’s only option for blunting the financial impacts of his unemployment. He is rumored to be pitching a “tell all” book deal with several publishers. “I’m thinking that ‘Lauer’s Ladies’ might be a good title for both a book and a movie,” the former “Today Show” host mused.
In related news, Fox News personality Geraldo Rivera sort of apologized to Bette Midler after she posted a video from 1991 in which she accused him of drugging and groping her in the 1970s. “We newsmen work in a flirty business,” he asserted. “I like to think of myself as more of a caresser or fondler than a groper. As I recall, Bette was unconscious at the time. So her characterization of me as a ‘groper’ seems harsh and unfair, but I’m a big enough man to take responsibility and I apologize if she feels that I violated her.”
Trump Recognizes Jerusalem as Israeli Capital
After three previous presidents neglected to abide by legislation ordering the United States to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, President Trump obeyed the law by announcing that we will be moving our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
The move was denounced by Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah who contends that “this humiliation of 1.5 billion Muslims is immoral and illegal. Allah has given all the world to the Muslims. Trump’s attempt to claim Jerusalem for Satan and his Jewish demons contradicts the eternal laws written in the Quran. Death and sorrow will be the payment extracted from the Jews and their allies.”
Nasrallah’s statement was followed by the vandalization of a Kosher restaurant in Amsterdam. Reinier van Dantzig, who heads the the left-leaning Democrats 66 Party’s faction on the Amsterdam City Council blamed “Trump’s kowtowing to Zionist extremists and ignoring the sensitivities of the Muslim minority that lives among us.” Herman Loonstein, who heads the Federative Jewish Netherlands group, condemned van Dantzig’s statement. “It is not the Jew who owns the restaurant, nor the government of Israel, nor the President of the United States that is responsible,” he said. “It is the man who smashed the windows. Placing the blame where it doesn’t belong was the cowardly and obscene tactic of the Nazis for their Kristallnacht atrocity. We must not emulate their example.”
Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) also denounced Trump’s decision calling it “an invitation to violence. It’s not so much a question of what is right, but what is prudent. Twenty years ago, I was an idealistic young woman who voted for the law mandating the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital because it was the right thing to do. I now oppose this because it is the prudent thing to do. Over the last two decades Islam has become much more deadly in its assault against other faiths. Rather than inflame Muslims by challenging their right to rule the world, the safer course is to entangle them in unending negotiations—as has been the policy of our government under the three successive administrations prior to the current one.”
Presidential Press Secretary Sarah Sanders pointed out that “all of the violence carried out by Islamic extremists—the World Trade Center attack, the Orlando nightclub massacre, and the San Bernardino shootings, to name some prominent examples—has occurred during a period in which the United States has refused to recognize the capital chosen by the Israeli government. It doesn’t seem to me that the era of appeasement has been much of a factor in mitigating Islamic violence. Maybe it’s time to try a strong stand and do the right thing.”
In related news, Gerard Araud, the French ambassador to the U.S., took the occasion of December 7 to blame “the refusal of the United States to stop Hitler before his troops invaded France in 1940 led directly to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. If the Americans had come to our aid earlier Japan would not have dared to attack them.” The Ambassador failed to mention that in 1938 France and England assisted Hitler in dismembering Czechoslovakia in the infamous Munich Agreement.
Exempting Anyone from Funding Abortions “Unconstitutional”
In an op ed for the left-wing Sacramento Bee, Crystal Strait, president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, blasted the Trump Administration’s rollback of an Obama policy mandating that religious organizations must include abortion in the health insurance offered to employees, calling it “a violation of women’s constitutional rights to ‘life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.’”
“Few things are more stifling to freedom than the burdens of motherhood,” Strait wrote. “Preventing a woman from obtaining an abortion condemns her to a life of subservience to another person. This is tyranny. That President Trump would authorize a change in regulations that exempts groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor from paying for the abortions of pregnant women who work with them, illegally and immorally undermines the grant of freedom given by former President Obama.”
Strait argued that “couching the new rules as an expansion of the freedom of those with religious objections to opt out of financing what they view as ‘murder’ twists the plain meaning of freedom and allows religious prejudices to trample every woman’s right to have someone else pay for this necessary health benefit. Saying that women are free to purchase their own abortions or that others are free to donate funds to aid the poor to get abortions dodges the fundamental issue. Government has the obligation to mandate universal access to our basic rights—either by funding them with tax dollars or compelling employers to fund them.”
Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards suggested that “the kind of backsliding on this fundamental human right we have seen from the Trump Administration might have been averted if more women who have had abortions would do more bragging about them. On the surface, the procedure can seem scary. The fact that there are people who vocally condemn it can be daunting. Words of encouragement from women who have survived the procedure and gone on to fruitful and productive lives should persuade others who might otherwise hesitate to take the plunge.”
Dems Appalled by Corporate Response to Tax Cut Bill
This week, Congress passed and President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The measure reduces taxes on corporations from 35% to 21% and on 80% of taxpaying individuals by smaller percentages. Democratic rhetoric attacking the the legislation predicted a “massive transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich” that would lead to “Armageddon” and “the end of the world.”
Contrary to these predictions, the immediate response by numerous corporations was to announce widespread employee bonuses and plans for substantial increases in investment and hiring. AT&T says it will pay $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 employees. Wells Fargo said it will raise its minimum wage to $15 an hour, and make $400 million in donations to community and nonprofit organizations next year. Boeing, Fifth Third Bancorp, and Comcast each announced additional investments.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) labeled these actions “an unfair exploitation of a socially unjust law for purely political gain. The notion that private companies should be the ones deciding whether employees get raises or bonuses rejects everything the President Obama was trying to achieve. And the idea that corporations should be the ones determining how much to invest or whether to make charitable contributions is anti-democratic.”
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-NY) called the legislation “fundamentally unfair. The 50% of Americans who currently have no jobs and pay no income taxes get nothing from this bill. It is a thinly veiled trick to try to compel those who are not in the workforce to give up their free time and get jobs if they want to get a tax cut or corporate bonus. This stinks. The GOP will pay dearly at the polls next November for this cruel tyranny over the most vulnerable segments of society.”
Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló contends that “the money this bill gives to corporations and taxpayers is the rightful property of the poor. And none are poorer than Puerto Ricans. Our island is bankrupt and in greater need of these scarce resources than the businesses and individuals who worked to produce them.” Rosselló vowed to “mobilize every Puerto Rican voter to elect the kind of representatives and senators who can be counted on to expropriate the profiteers and redirect money to support programs that benefit the poorest among us.”
Meanwhile, New Jersey Governor-Elect Phil Murphy (D) says “the legislation is unconstitutional because parts of it are hand-written.” The irony, of course, is that the original Constitution itself is entirely hand-written.
In related news, Bureau of Labor statistics showing the lowest unemployment rate for Blacks in 17 years and the lowest ever for Hispanics greatly dismayed Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) characterized it as “just more evidence of the complete failure of the Trump Administration to solve the nation’s economic problems. Minorities that previously got along without having to endure wage-slavery were herded into the rat-race by Trump’s maniacal destruction of unnecessary regulations. We are clearly headed for dark times in this country if we don’t take the necessary action to neutralize this enemy of freedom.”
Differing Attitudes about Vote Fraud
A study by New York University Professor John Kane, published in the latest Public Opinion Quarterly found that Republicans have different attitudes about vote fraud than Democrats do.
“The gist of the findings are that Republicans are more concerned with election integrity while Democrats are more concerned with winning,” Kane said. “In the battery of survey questions we asked, Republicans consistently came down in favor of integrity regardless of whether this would benefit their Party’s candidates. In contrast, Democrats were less interested in integrity if it would mean fewer of their candidates would win.”
J. Christian Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation contends that “Kane’s study understates the difference between the Parties. Democrats aren’t just ‘less interested’ in integrity. They are flat out in favor of winning by whatever means necessary.”
One of Kane’s Democratic poll respondents appeared to confirm Adams’ contention by pointing out that “strict adherence to majority rule should not impede the transformation to a progressive government. Lenin didn’t balk at overthrowing a democratically elected government in order to achieve true socialism. If freely cast ballots stray from the path necessary to accomplish our goals supplementing them with correctly marked ballots is a less bloody method that our reactionary opponents ought to be more thankful we are using.”