This week GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump backed away from his previous questioning of President Obama’s birthplace. His announcement was greeted by an outpouring of venom from assorted Democratic sources.
A bevy of members of the Congressional Black Caucus took turns denouncing Trump as a racist. Rival presidential contender Hillary Clinton asserted that “this proves the man is racist to the core. Anyone who would smear America’s first black president with an insinuation that he was not born in this country is unfit for office.”
The sincerity of the outrage has to be dubious since both Obama and Clinton played key roles in giving the suspicion that Obama might have been born elsewhere life. In 1991 Obama’s publisher bragged “he is the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review and was born in Kenya.” This claim sat for 16 years until Obama corrected the record in 2007 during his ultimately successful campaign for the presidency in 2008.
The possibility that Obama might have been born elsewhere was promoted by the campaign of his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton in 2008. Former McClatchy Washington Bureau Chief James Asher says he was personally pitched the story by longtime Clinton operative Sid Blumenthal in 2008. However, Hillary says she doesn’t recall ever talking to Blumenthal on the matter at the time and insisted that “if it occurred it had to have been on Sid’s own initiative because I would never have approved anything so deplorable.”
Patti Solis Doyle, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager in 2008 until she was fired after Obama won the Iowa caucuses in 2008, acknowledged that someone with the campaign had circulated the rumor of Obama’s foreign birth, but insisted that “it was strictly a ‘lone wolf, rogue operation.’ The person believed to be responsible was summarily terminated.” Mark Penn, a Democratic pollster and Clinton 2008 strategist, also wrote a memo in March 2007, citing Obama’s “lack of American roots,” as a factor that could work against him in the campaign.”
Police Union Endorses Trump
Following a meeting of the group’s national board where two-thirds voted to support GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump, the largest police union—Fraternal Order of Police—announced its endorsement. Chuck Canterbury, the FOP’s national president, called the choice “an easy decision. The contrast between the candidates is as stark as any we’ve ever seen. Trump is for law and order. He supports civilized behavior and public safety. Mrs. Clinton appears to have sided with the enemies of these values.”
In contrast to Trump’s avid courting of the police union, Hillary Clinton disdained “to stoop so low as to try to curry favor with the armed thugs that are gunning down unarmed black men across the nation. They invited me to answer their ‘candidate’s questionnaire,’ but I refused to play their game. It is the police union that is out of step with all the other major labor organizations that have endorsed me. It is a decision that they will come to regret after November.”
The fact that FOP endorsed Hillary’s husband Bill in his 1996 race against Republican Bob Dole didn’t phase the candidate. “It was a different organization back then,” Hillary contended. “They shared America’s values. Since then they’ve been infiltrated by some of this country’s worst elements—racists and gun nuts who actually support arming citizens for self defense. Their reign of terror in the minority community will come to an end when I’m elected.”
In related news, Clinton vowed to stop raids and round-ups of illegal immigrants once she moves into the Oval Office. “The persecution of people whose only crime was breaking laws that shouldn’t exist must cease,” she declared. “Republicans in Congress will be given the opportunity to do the right thing and once Donald Trump is rejected by the voters I’m pretty sure they will come around and legislate a broad amnesty. However, my patience won’t be endless. If legislation isn’t passed within my first 100 days I will follow the lead of out great President Obama and issue the executive orders necessary to get the job done.”
Merkel Demands German Firms Hire Immigrants
Impatient at the slow progress toward integrating Middle Eastern immigrants into the German economy, Chancellor Angela Merkel demanded that businesses “step up the pace of hiring. It’s a disgrace that only 100 of the million refugees that have entered the country this year have jobs. The refusal of the private sector to offer enough jobs forces the government to bear the burdens of meeting the need to house and feed these people.”
Hans Volle, Director of Human Resources for Deutsche Tech, complained that “Chancellor Merkel’s aspirations are unreasonable. Hardly any of these refugees understand our language, a majority of them appear to be illiterate, and the level of technical skills we require is nowhere to be found. The notion that we could employ more than a tiny fraction of the refugees is pure fantasy.”
Merkel was unmoved by German industry’s lack of enthusiasm for hiring the immigrants and recalled that “German businesses weren’t so finicky during the 1940s when millions of foreign workers were brought into our factories and put to work on projects of vital importance to the country. Where is their ingenuity? Germany has done great things before and we can do them again if only we have the will to do so.”
In related news, a surprising number of “refugees” in Germany are taking “vacations” to the war-torn sites that they supposedly were fleeing when they arrived in Germany. Merkel maintained that the revelation “shouldn’t be so mysterious. You could run for your life yet still experience homesickness. The idea that these people could be jihadi infiltrators strikes me as far-fetched.”
Hillary Campaign Caught Stealing from Donors
Some supporters of Hillary Clinton are coming to rue giving out their credit card data to the campaign. It seems that individuals who thought they were agreeing to one-time charges are discovering repeated levies on their accounts in their monthly statements. Upon inspecting her recent Visa Card statements, Carol Mahre found multiple charges amounting to $94. “On the phone they asked me to give $25, which I said was okay,” Mahre recounted. “But when I looked at my bill there were three deductions of $25 and one for $19.”
Campaign manager Robby Mook attributed the unauthorized charges to “simple human error. As everyone knows the campaign has been hit hard by pneumonia. Hillary hasn’t been the only one afflicted with memory loss and neurological seizures. It’s easy to see how this could’ve happened. Thankfully, the overcharges were all of relatively small amounts the loss of which should not result in any major hardship for the victims. At worst it’s a case of petty theft, not even a felony. And it pales in comparison with the much bigger stakes of this election.”
Keeping the cumulative overcharges under $100 may be a key to the scheme avoiding scrutiny. Roger Mahre, Carol’s lawyer son, speculated that “a lot of people don’t look carefully at small charges on the credit card bill. So, it wouldn’t surprise me that this scam goes largely unnoticed.”
Whether the overcharges are just random mistakes or a conscious strategy is a good question. The New York Times reported that Hillary Clinton’s first campaign for president in 2008 was forced to reimburse $2.8 million in unauthorized credit card charges. Obama’s campaign was forced to reimburse $900,000. And this was just in response to donors who questioned the charges. There’s no telling how many donors might have been unaware of the thefts.
MSNBC talking head Chris Matthews wondered whether “we are making too much of this whole business. Most of the money these people are spending is wasted on unessential junk. Is the redirection of some of these squandered resources toward the important objective of aiding the election of a person who will advance the progressive agenda really a bad thing? I would have to say that on balance that it is not.”
Democrat VP Candidate Says “Denouncing KKK Is Not Enough”
Democratic vice-presidential candidate Tim Kaine insists that Trump’s multiple denunciations of the Ku Klux Klan and its former leader David Duke “is not enough. Neither Trump nor Pence will use the word ‘deplorable’ in their efforts to evade being pinned down on this issue.”
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer was similarly adamant about the GOP candidates’ refusal to use the word “deplorable” as he badgered Pence in an interview. “Why not say deplorable?” Blitzer demanded to know, rejecting Pence’s determination not to engage in name calling.
“We hear the Republicans saying they don’t want the support of Duke and the Klan, yet they decline to take the logical step of labeling them ‘deplorable,’” Blitzer observed. “The only conclusion I can come to is that they don’t want to use the same terminology that Hillary Clinton used to denounce half of Trump’s supporters. This allows them to continue to portray Mrs. Clinton as insensitive. That’s pure politics aimed at heading off our attempt to neutralize her characterization by showing that both sides belittle those they disagree with.”
CNN followed up the interview of Pence with the headline “Pence Won’t Deplore Duke,” a turn of phrase that Blitzer proudly called “ingenious. It doesn’t really matter what Trump or Pence say or don’t say. We control the narrative. The American people will see and hear what we want them to.”
Meanwhile, CNN’s Ashleigh Banfield and Dylan Byers declared that widespread popular distrust of the media “threatens democracy.” Byers, citing a recent Gallup poll indicating that only 32% of Americans trust the media to report the news accurately, worried that “a loss of faith in the press could deal a mortal blow to the way the nation is governed. We are the voice of government. We have the awesome responsibility to ensure that its message gets through to the people. The scoffing and ridicule heaped upon us by the targets of our message runs the risk of severing this vital link.”
Byers dismissed accusations that the media might bear a share of the responsibility for this loss of faith, saying “the people don’t know enough to pass judgment on whether our reporting is accurate. It’s like a parishioner doubting whether what his priest is relaying to him is God’s will. Going down that path of disbelief endangers us all.”
Hillary Clinton is the leading member of a generational cohort of elite liberals who brought fascist themes into mainstream liberalism. She and her cohort embody the maternal side of fascism—which is one reason why it is not more clearly recognized as such.
Hillary Clinton is conventionally viewed by her supporters as a liberal—or by conservative opponents as a radical leftist in liberal sheep’s clothing; but it is more accurate to view her as an old-style progressive and a direct descendant of the Social Gospel movement of the 1920s and 1930s.
Hillary increasingly draped herself in the rhetoric of the movement—the youth movement, the women’s movement, the antiwar movement—and gravitated toward others who believed that both her generation and her gender had a rendezvous with destiny.
After graduation from college, Hillary was offered an internship by her hero Saul Alinsky—famed author of Rules for Radicals—about whom she wrote her thesis: “There is Only the Fight: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.” In an unprecedented move, Wellesley College sequestered the thesis in 1992, even refusing to divulge the title until the Clintons left the White House.
Alinsky would invent his famous “method” of community organizing, borrowing tactics from Al Capone’s mobsters, University of Chicago sociologists and John L. Lewis’s union organizers. His violent, confrontational rhetoric often sounded much like that heard from Horst Wessel or his Red Shirt adversaries in the streets of Berlin. Alinsky joined forces with the CIO—then chockablock with Stalinists and other communists—learning how to organize in the streets. In 1940, he founded the Industrial Areas Foundation, which pioneered the community activism movement. He became the mentor to countless communist activists—most famously Cesar Chavez—laying the foundation for both Naderism and the Students for a Democratic Society.
Alinsky believed in exploiting middle-class mores to achieve his agenda, not flouting them as the long-haired hippies did. Alinsky believed that working through friendly or vulnerable institutions in order to smash enemy redoubts was the essence of political organization. He worked closely with reformist and left-leaning clergy, his chief patrons. He mastered the art of unleashing preachers as the frontline activists in his mission of “rubbing raw the sores of discontent.”
Alinsky’s methods inspired the entire 1960s generation of New Left agitators (Barack Obama, for years a Chicago community organizer, was trained by Alinsky’s disciples).
Hillary turned down Alinsky’s job offer in order to attend Yale Law School. He told her it was a huge mistake, but Hillary responded that only by marching through America’s elite institutions could she achieve real power and change the system from within. Hillary helped edit the Yale Review of Law and Social Action, which at the time was a thoroughly radical organ supporting the Black Panthers and publishing articles implicitly endorsing the murder of police. One article, “Jamestown Seventy,” suggested that radicals adopt a program of “political migration to a single state for the purpose of gaining political control and establishing a living laboratory for experiment.” An infamous Review cover depicted police as pigs, one with his head chopped off.
Hillary volunteered to help the Panthers’ legal team, even attending the trial to take notes to help with the defense. She did such a good job of organizing the student volunteers that she was offered a summer internship in the Berkeley, California law offices of Robert Treuhaft, one of Bobby Seale’s lawyers. Treuhaft was a lifetime member of the American Communist Party who had cut his teeth fighting for the Stalinist faction in the California labor movement.
The most revealing aspect of Hillary’s career prior to her arrival in Washington was her advocacy for children. Clinton wrote articles advocating the rights of children to “divorce” their parents. Hillary Clinton’s writings on children show a clear, unapologetic and principled desire to insert the state deep into family life—a goal that is in perfect accord with similar efforts by totalitarians of the past. She condones the state’s assumption of parental responsibilities because she is opposed to the principle of parental authority in any form. Clinton’s writings leave the unmistakable impression that it is the family that holds children back, the state that sets them free.
Selections from “Liberal Fascism,” by Jonah Goldberg (Brave New Village chapter)
By John Semmens — Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s daughter went on ABC’s The View talk show to express her dismay at polls showing that a huge majority of Americans consider her mother untrustworthy.
“I realize that some of the things coming out from the emails she tried to conceal are raising questions, but I know my mother and I’m certain that if anything thing she did was wrong in some technical sense that she did it for a good reason,” Chelsea explained. “What a lot of people don’t understand is that her job as the nation’s top diplomat often required her to deliberately lie in order to protect the country. It should be understandable that it might be hard to turn this skill off and on from one situation to another.”
She contrasted “the patriotic motives behind the untruths my mother has spoken with the greed-based dissembling that businessmen like Donald Trump habitually deploy to market their wares. The billions that Trump made via this tactic were deliberate and dwarf the hundreds of millions my parents have incidentally acquired in the course of their careers in public service.”
“There is no one I trust more than my mom,” Chelsea continued. “Her efforts combined with those of my father have built up a hefty inheritance that will ensure that my material needs and those of my children will be met for the foreseeable future. I am proud of the entrepreneurship they’ve shown in extracting such generous fees for speeches. I doubt the self-proclaimed ‘deal maker’ could come close to matching their profit margin.”
The former First Daughter said she has “no qualms about entrusting the care of my children to my mother in the event anything happens to me. They are safely out of the womb and fully protected as persons under our laws—a distinction my mother has had occasion to point out during the past year.”
In related news, Chelsea herself showed she has learned from her parents’ example. In an appearance at an event hosted by College Progressives at Penn State University, students were offered an opportunity to see and hear Chelsea speak for a $500 per head admission. Photos with the former First Daughter were available for $1,000 a pop. And for an additional $2,700, attendees would be granted access to a special reception with her afterwards.
Mentioning Hacked DNC Emails Called “Unfair”
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) called GOP mention of the content of the Democratic National Committee’s emails hacked and published by Wikileaks “unfair. It’s like a football team purloining a copy of the other team’s playbook and using that to win a game. It’s cheating. It’s dishonest.”
Pelosi brushed aside email content revealing that the DNC cheated by rigging their primaries against Hillary Clinton’s main rival for the nomination Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt), saying “since when do two wrongs make a right? We are calling on the GOP to turn aside from a tit-for-tat. Attempting to get even by mimicking disreputable tactics escalates the conflict. This is a chance for the GOP to take the high road.”
The former House Speaker’s plea addressed to the current House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc) urged that “Democrats and Republicans must present a united front in the face of the threat posed by Donald Trump. This outsider does not understand the unwritten rules and long standing traditional ways the two Parties interact. He will mercilessly batter us with evidence that was never meant for anyone to see.”
Ryan’s responded that “I have no authority to issue the cease-and-desist order that Rep. Pelosi is requesting. For one, the RNC is an independent body outside the span of the Speaker’s reach. For two, I can’t see that there could be any justification for suspending freedom of speech on the grounds that it makes Democrats uncomfortable.”
Pelosi characterized Ryan’s response as “misogynistic and callous. Here we have the first woman with a realistic chance to become president and all he can do is prattle on about freedom of speech. Where are his priorities. When we add in the toll the stress of the campaign is taking on Hillary’s heath it’s like he’s kicking her when she’s down. Is there no chivalrous bone in his body?”
In related news, Clinton ended her long press conference drought this week as she was mercilessly grilled for 89 seconds by media hounds demanding to know “how was your Labor Day weekend?” and “are you ready to be president?”
Bill Clinton Calls “Make America Great Again” a Racist Message
Former President Bill Clinton made an effort to stir opposition to Donald Trump’s promise to “make America great again” by claiming its intent is “racist. These are code words understood by all white people as a pledge to put blacks down.”
“The main targets of Donald Trump’s vow to bring law and order to our inner cities are black youths,” Clinton asserted. “Look at what he’s saying about black gangs killing each other in Chicago. Clearly, these are the people who will be suppressed by Trump’s knee-jerk support for law enforcement.”
“What is his promise to bring jobs back to the inner cities other than a subtle effort to re-institute black servitude?” Clinton asked. “It would undo the liberation of millions from dreary lives of daily toil just to put food on the table and a roof over their heads. I urge every voter to seriously weigh whether they really want to go backward or whether they are willing to trust Hillary to further the progress made during the Obama Administration.”
President Obama also weighed in on the topic and predicted that “voters will reject Trump’s ‘wacky’ idea. America is as great as its ever been right now. I can’t conceive of a way to make it any better than to continue the progress we have achieved over the last eight years.”
Ironically, a promise to make America great again isn’t a new one. Bill Clinton made this same promise when he ran for president in 1992.
New ISIS Commander Was Trained by US
It turns out that Gulmurod Khalimov, the new ISIS military commander, was one of the “moderate” terrorists who received training from the US State Department. From 2003-2014 Khalimov participated in five counter-terrorism training courses in the United States and in Tajikistan, through the Department of State’s Diplomatic Security/Anti-Terrorism Assistance program.
Department spokeswoman Pooja Jhunjhunwala insisted that Khalimov had “been properly vetted.” The thoroughness of this so-called vetting was called into question by the revelation that he had appeared in a video in which he called Americans pigs and boasted “we will find your towns, we will come to your homes, and we will kill you.”
Jhunjhunwala maintained that “the Administration was fully aware of Khalimov’s threat, but went ahead with the training as a show of sportsmanship. One of the things President Obama is trying to overcome is the perception that the United States is just a big bully. We outgun these jihadis by a considerable margin. Training a few of their leaders is meant to restore a measure of gallantry on the battlefield. It’s sort of like handing your opponent his dropped sword so the duel can continue.”
Secretary of Defense Ash Carter added that “Khalimov only rose to power because Russia’s attacks on ISIS are killing people we trained at great expense. The Administration considers this a hostile act of interference with its aims for the Middle East region. Russia must mend its ways or face retaliation.”
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump labeled the Obama foreign policy “a disaster” and the Department’s various arguments in defense of it “stupid. It’s just one more illustration of the kind of failed leadership provided by Obama and how horrible it will be for our country if Hillary Clinton is allowed to continue it.”
Clinton called Trump’s open criticism of President Obama “disgraceful and unpatriotic. Our country is at war with these terrorists. It is every American’s duty to stand behind our President and show their support. To do less is to invite our enemies to divide and conquer us.” Averring that “President Obama has been far too lenient with his critics,” Clinton assured voters that she “will take sterner measures to crack down on disloyalty.”
In related news, Clinton declined an invitation to meet with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto on the grounds that his prior meeting with Trump “marks him as a man of such astoundingly poor judgment that he cannot discern the difference between an unfit poseur and a legitimate claimant to the office of president.”
Meanwhile, Mexican Senator Armando Ríos Piter is pushing an initiative that “would disavow the Treaty of Guadalupe and resume the state of war that existed between the United States and Mexico prior to its signing in 1848. The gringos stole half of our country. We will call upon the tens of millions of our compatriots residing in the United States to carry out ‘lone wolf’ attacks until the Norte Americano occupiers vacate our land.”
Dem Adviser Minimizes Risk of Vote Fraud
Democratic operative James Carville sought to reassure Americans that the scope of any potential election fraud is too small to be concerned about.
“It has been my experience that the maximum number of fraudulent votes from any one voting machine is around 100,” Carville said. “I know of no presidential election that has ever been decided by 100 votes one way or the other. It would take an army of hackers to rig enough machines to reach a decisive impact on the outcome. And I just can’t imagine that anyone would be willing to go to such lengths to steal an election.”
Arizona Congressman Trent Franks released the following tribute to commemorate the life of legendary conservative leader Phyllis Schlafly upon her passing at age 92:
“My dear friend Phyllis Schlafly has gone on to receive her Heavenly reward. I think it is important for all of us to acknowledge that the conservative landscape we now see never would have come about apart from the life, love, brilliance and courage of Phyllis Schlafly.
“This grand lady maintained her place on the firing line of truth and freedom since the days when conservatives had to search each other out in a crowded room, and now due in great part to her efforts, conservatives dominate the political discourse in our country.
“The legacy she leaves behind with six children, 16 grandchildren, and three great-grandchildren is a testament to her love of life and her commitment to its protection and cultivation. Our Earthly loss is Heaven’s gain as another champion of life, truth, and liberty passes on into Glory.”
– Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
It was revealed this week that suspected brain damage was a key factor in FBI Director James Comey’s decision to recommend against indicting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her serial lawbreaking and security breaches regarding her emails.
“In the interview with our agents the former Secretary came across as a person of seriously diminished mental capacity,” FBI spokesman William Dodge explained. “She couldn’t recall ever having been briefed on security matters—despite being shown her signature on a document affirming she had. She professed not to know that the letter ‘C’ on emails meant ‘confidential. She couldn’t remember who she asked to set up her private off site server. She ‘misplaced’ a dozen mobile devices that had classified communications on them. She couldn’t even remember the name of the ambassador killed in Benghazi. It was clear to us that Secretary Clinton would likely plead ‘not guilty by reason of diminished mental capacity.’”
“When you add in testimony from her chief aides describing her as ‘often confused’ and ‘frequently disoriented’ it appeared that taking the matter to trial would have been a highly risky undertaking,” Dodge said. “Win or lose, a trial would have shown that from 2009 to 2013 the US State Department was being headed by a person who was either cavalierly indifferent to the law or too impaired to have been entrusted with such a demanding position of responsibility. When we include the rather substantial indications that Secretary Clinton may have inappropriately used her government position to solicit monetary rewards it was clear that the Administration’s reputation could have sustained significant negative impact. Rather than invite this trauma, Director Comey opted for saving the nation from it, much in the same way that former President Ford did by pardoning Nixon.”
In related news, attorneys for Hillary Clinton are said to be preparing a lawsuit challenging a potential loss at the polls, citing the Americans with Disabilities Act as the basis. “Based on the resumes of the candidates, Secretary Clinton is clearly the most qualified of the job applicants,” claimed lead attorney Susan Moore. “If voters pass over her to put a less qualified person in the White House it would be a clear violation of the law barring employers from discriminating against the disabled. We hope it won’t have to come to this. Voters could spare the nation the disruption and substantial monetary penalties they would be liable for by simply electing her president on November 8th.”
Democrat VP Candidate Lashes Out at Trump & Media
Hillary Clinton’s running mate Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va) took offense at GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s “exploitation of tragedy” in his argument against sanctuary cities. In sanctuary cities, government officials have ordered police to ignore federal law against illegal immigration. Some of the illegal immigrants protected by sanctuary cities have gone on the kill Americans. In remarks given at a rally in Arizona this week Trump invited parents of children killed by illegal immigrants to speak to the crowd.
Kaine labeled Trump’s inclusion of these grieving parents “political pandering at its worst. Using surviving family members to argue against the policy decisions of any level of government strikes me as disloyal and disruptive. I’m not saying these parents didn’t suffer a real loss, but we need to keep a balanced perspective. The number of people killed by undocumented residents is very small compared to the number killed by home-grown urban gangs or racist cops.”
Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon called Kaine’s complaint “ironic, considering that the Democrats have sided with the Black Lives Matter propaganda that seeks to elevate dangerous confrontations between police and armed criminals as evidence of racism. All of the victims whose parents participated in the Trump rally in Arizona were innocent, unarmed individuals going about their own business. None of them would have been killed if this country’s immigration laws had been enforced. Allowing the parents to speak out against the injustice and ineptitude of the Democratic Party’s policies is a step toward righting the wrongs of those policies so that other families won’t have to suffer from continued injustice and ineptitude at the hands of a Clinton Administration.”
Kaine also told an audience in Pennsylvania that “it is every voter’s right to know whether a candidate is honest enough and fit enough to take on the demanding tasks of the presidency. One of the ways of examining these questions is by reviewing the communications, financial records, and health reports of each candidate.”
Kaine contrasted Trump with Clinton, saying that “Secretary Clinton’s communications have been thoroughly vetted by the FBI and pronounced free of indictable offenses. She has released her tax returns. And she has demonstrated her physical fitness on TV. Meanwhile, Trump is being given a free pass on any scrutiny by a corrupt and curiously uninquisitive media.”
Hillary Vows Tough Stance Against Cyberattacks
Calling cyberattacks (hacking into computers) “just as bad and just as much of a threat to this nation as the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor,” Democratic presidential candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised that she “would respond just as forcefully as President Roosevelt did 75 years ago.”
Clinton told the largely VFW audience in Ohio that “I can attest from personal experience that having your email hacked can be devastating. The recent hacks of my emails published by Wikileaks have aided forces hostile to the continuation of the policies put in place by President Obama. By damaging my chances at the polls these anti-American spies have proven they are a greater threat than the misguided suicide bombers that my opponent would have voters believe is our country’s primary enemy.”
The candidate asserted that “while military options won’t be our first course of action we must reserve our right to use force if force is necessary. I hope that diplomatic pressure will be sufficient to compel Ecuador to turn Assange over to us. I’m confident that with enhanced interrogation we will be able to extract the identities of the Russian agents who breached my emails. Then we can issue an ultimatum designed to bring Russia to heel.”
Vice-President Joe Biden attempted to bolster Hillary’s position by pointing out that “I’ve got a military aide with me carrying a briefcase. That briefcase has the nuclear codes in it and, if I needed to, I could open it up and launch a nuclear strike on anyone who threatens America.”
The audience response to Clinton’s and Biden’s remarks was polite, but tepid. Ninety year old WWII veteran Joe Middling admitted he was “unpersuaded that the travails suffered by Secretary Clinton represent as clear and present a danger as the kamikazes we had to face at Okinawa. Maybe I lack the computer savvy to appreciate her message, but an ultimatum to Russia seems kind of risky to me. Couldn’t she just buy them off with another uranium deal? And should Biden be bragging that he can nuke someone? That sounds kinda nuts to me.”
In related news, Clinton insisted that Trump’s recent meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto was “a failure. Not only did he not come back with a check to pay for his silly wall. He also overlooked the bigger strategic picture. We need to keep the border open to help the United States to acquire the manpower to strengthen the progressive transformation initiated by President Obama. Importing more fecund Latinos will lessen the reproductive burden on Americans. More Americans will be free to pursue their transgender dreams without guilt. More Americans will be able to have their homes cleaned and lawns mowed at a reasonable price. And more will turn out to vote for progressive candidates and policies.”
IRS Identifies ID Theft, Does Nothing
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report this week indicating that the IRS had discovered more than a million cases of identity theft but failed to notify any of the victims.
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen defended the lack of effort to inform the taxpayers whose identities were stolen as “not the agency’s job. Look, in the vast majority of these thefts the stolen IDs are merely being used by undocumented residents to obtain employment. There is no negative impact on the government. If a person’s ID is stolen and someone else uses it to get a job that means that more cash will be flowing to the government because two separate individuals will be paying taxes under the same Social Security number. What’s the harm in that?”
Koskinen brushed off fears that more income being reported under the same SSN could trigger problems for a taxpayer. “If someone gets audited all he has to do is prove that the extra income wasn’t his,” Koskinen reassured. “As for the possibility that at some future date two separate claims for SS benefits might be filed, well, that wouldn’t be the IRS’ problem. Social Security benefits are handled by another agency.”
Kerry Says Media Blowing Terrorism Out of Proportion
This week, US Secretary of State John Kerry took the media to task for exaggerating the threat of terrorism. “I can’t open a newspaper or turn on the TV without having to see some story about suicide bombers or Allahu akbar murderers shooting up a shopping mall,” Kerry complained. “Its so repetitive it’s tiresome.”
“It’s not as if we’re talking about an existential threat to the United States,” Kerry contended. “The number of people killed in these attacks is relatively small. Most, I would assume, are covered by insurance as are the businesses damaged by the explosions. Life goes on. We need to learn to live with this.”
The Secretary suggested that media coverage “should be briefer and less sensational. Unless someone important is among the casualties I can’t see the point in stirring up needless anxiety. If they feel they have to cover a bombing or massacre reporters could point out that the President and the nation’s leaders are safe. This will help calm people and allay their fears.”
Voters Will Have to Elect Hillary to See a Press Conference
Striving to snag the curious vote, Clinton’s lead press secretary, Brian Fallon, urged “those who are so eager to see Hillary give a press conference can elect her president. Presidents always have press conferences. As the head of government she’ll have a lot to say to the press.”
Fallon justified the campaign’s dearth of media interaction as “just building up the suspense and anticipation. I hear that there is some speculation that the multiple questions and flashing cameras will spark a seizure. Well, the only way to find out is to get her into office and see.”
Sean Hannity is already blaming innocent people for Donald Trump’s impending loss in the November election. And he’s blaming them for Mrs. Bill Clinton’s inevitable judicial nominations.
He’s calling out Sen. Ted Cruz, Glen Beck, Jeb Bush and railing against others who are not thrilled with Trump for these future disasters.
“They will own it,” Hannity claims of the leftists who will ride Mrs. Clinton’s appointments to the U.S. court system
Hannity also says he will “enthusiastically” vote for Trump. Beck is thoroughly assessing Trump’s many weaknesses. While Hannity points fingers, Beck is taking the high road.
Today Beck noted that Trump has four field offices in the (former) battleground states of Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio and North Carolina, Mrs. Bill has over 100. This is as much the Republican Party’s fault as Trump’s though.
Hannity’s railing is inaccurate and inexcusable. No three men have the power to defeat Trump in this election.
Hannity would do well to look in the mirror and realize he has not done his job in advancing the conservative movement. Sure, he talks about being a conservative. But he also says, “I interview the candidates and let the people decide.” Does that sound like an ardent advocate of conservatism to you?
The people decide elections no matter what Hannity does.
And if Hannity was such a great conservative, why does he devote so much air time to liberals and RINOs? Why isn’t he educating listeners on conservative principles? Why isn’t he focusing on conservative guests? Won’t they get ratings for him? Why didn’t he get behind the few patriot conservatives in the presidential race and advocate for one of them winning the nomination?
Hannity, who frequently has said pro-abortion RINO Rudy Giuliani “governed as a conservative,” either doesn’t get it or refuses to acknowledge a great deal of inconvenient truths. Tragically for America, Mrs. Bill Clinton will win the election because:
- More than 50 million American boys and girls are enrolled in public schools and most of them are daily indoctrinated in secular humanism, socialism and revisionary history.
- The same can be said of the 20 million-plus students in colleges and universities and …
- Some 140,000 law school students.
- The media and the public education system are constantly teaching people of radical left-wing politics.
- Television and the movies are indoctrinating audiences in left-wing policies and misinformation.
- The ACLU and countless other radical left-wing groups are re-writing the Constitution.
- The courts are running roughshod over individual freedoms and the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court is about to swing hard Left, and Americans may never see it recover.
- More than 90 percent of America’s daily newspapers are spewing misinformation and poisoning the climate against conservatives and Christians.
- Virtually every large metropolitan city in the nation is a leftist cocoon, dominated by groupthink and closed off, by gatekeepers, to the Constitution and Judeo-Christian values.
- The Department of Justice and the IRS are running interference for far-left policies and crimes committed by leftists.
- Infighting in the inept Republican Party between those who still believe in the GOP platform and those, like Trump, who do not?
- The ineptness of the GOP and refusal of the Boehners, Ryans and McConnells who betrayed voters and — like the noblemen of Scotland who rode away from William Wallace’s battlefield — refused to fight Obama and the leftists?
In response, we’ve got Dennis Prager, the Heritage Foundation, Mark Levin and out-numbered conservatives in rural America. What about Rush Limbaugh? He spends more time blowing his own horn than actually educating Americans about conservatism. While the professors of the Left hold classes daily in countless settings, too few people are educating the nation on conservative principles.
So, Mr. Hannity, do you still wish to rail against three individuals for the approaching Republican loss? We are now on the verge of 24 years of Democrats in the White House over a 32-year period. And Cruz and Beck have little to do with it. Cancel guest appearances by McCain and Beckel. Focus on conservative education.
By – Semi-News — A Satirical Look at Recent News
Revelations that the Hillary Clinton-led US State Department granted favors to governments, corporations, and individuals that made donations to the Clinton Foundation have stirred concerns that a Clinton presidency might be tainted by corruption. Foundation president Donna Shalala urged that “we take a more balanced look at the totality of the situation.”
“On the surface, the proximity of the donations and actions taken by Secretary Clinton does appear suspicious,” Shalala admitted. “However, Hillary has repeatedly said that all the actions she took would have been taken regardless of any donations that were made to the Foundation. Clearly donors weren’t buying influence. At worst, they were merely moved up in the queue of those seeking favors from Secretary Clinton.”
“What is being overlooked is that extracting money from those seeking the State Department’s approval for arms purchases, trade deals, and business permits helps boost the American economy,” Shalala added. “Over 90 percent of the money flowing into the Foundation is plowed back into the US economy in the form of salaries, rent, travel, accommodations and overhead. We employ 2,000 of the best and brightest people in this country to manage the activities of the Foundation. The money they spend stimulates economic growth. Less than 10% of the Foundation’s resources flow out of the country as aid for needy foreigners. So, if we consider the big picture, the Foundation is an economic dynamo.”
“Given the economic benefits generated by the Foundation, we need to ask ourselves whether an inordinate squeamishness about how some transactions may have gone down should be permitted to undermine all the good that we have done,” Shalala said. “A better approach, in my opinion, would be to expand upon its success by electing Hillary Clinton president. Think about how much more she could do having the entire government under her control rather than just one department.”
Obama Administration Press Secretary Josh Earnest echoed Shalala’s view, saying that “there’s a real danger that excessive scrutiny could kill the goose that’s laying the golden eggs. A slavish devotion to propriety must not derail genuine progress toward a more socially just future. Tolerating a small amount of vigorish isn’t too big a price to pay for ensuring that the right people wield the levers of power in government.”
More Clinton Email Questions
The latest 14,900 emails recovered by the FBI came from the 33,000 that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deleted on the grounds that they were personal rather than work-related. Oddly, one of the topics discussed in many of them was Benghazi, which would seem to be “work-related” and as such legally required to be preserved and archived.
Hillary for President campaign manager Robbie Mook urged that “we not jump to hasty conclusions. If you will recall, Secretary Clinton admitted she authored many emails dealing with planning her daughter’s wedding. While we all know about the attack on Ambassador Stevens that occurred in Benghazi what a lot of people fail to recognize is that Benghazi could well have been a site under consideration for the wedding and/or honeymoon. Under such circumstances it should not be surprising that many of the Secretary’s personal emails might include the word ‘Benghazi’ within the text.”
On top of this, more than a third of the emails involving Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin that were surrendered by the State Department in response to a Freedom of Information Act filing were 100% redacted. The content was deemed by the State Department as “too sensitive for public disclosure.” Not even members of Congress are trusted to view the material. Ironically, one of the emails that wasn’t redacted was a panicky message from Abedin regarding “burn bag” communications that she had left in an unlocked automobile. Burn bag communications are so secret that the reader is supposed to burn them after reading as a precaution against them falling into the wrong hands.
Clinton’s treatment of her so-called “personal” emails showed a far higher level of precaution against them falling into the wrong hands. FBI forensic analysts found that Clinton’s server showed evidence of having been cleaned by “BleachBit”–a software program that goes far beyond mere deletion of unwanted files. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) called the use of such software “a greater length than any reasonable or honest person would go to conceal emails dealing with wedding plans or yoga routines as Secretary Clinton has insisted was her only intent.”
Long time Clinton aide Cheryl Mills took umbrage at Gowdy’s remarks calling them “sexist. Rep. Gowdy’s belittling of wedding planning and yoga reveals an ugly subtext of misogyny lurking just beneath the surface. We think every female voter will understand the importance of keeping discussions of these topics away from prying eyes. Gowdy’s gaffe will send another ten million women to the polls to vote for Hillary.”
In related news, a US Army training presentation includes slides with photographs of “insider threats to national security.” One of those photographs is of Hillary Clinton. Maj. Thomas Campbell, a U.S. Army Training, and Doctrine Command spokesman, confirmed that the photo is genuine and said “the possibility that one of these inside threats could be the next Commander-in-Chief is FUBAR.”
NY Times Reporter Slams Hannity for “Unethical” Behavior
New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters slammed radio talk show host Sean Hannity’s “unethical behavior” regarding how he is covering the current presidential candidates.
“Every profession has its norms and boundaries for assessing the way its members should handle their trade,” Peters proclaimed. “Journalists have an ethical obligation to live up to these norms and respect these boundaries. It has been agreed by the majority within our profession that it is our journalistic duty to do whatever we can to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president. Hannity has flouted this agreement by urging voters to do the exact opposite of what every responsible journalist wants them to do.”
“Every minute of Hannity’s show that fails to condemn Trump’s candidacy is a lost opportunity to do the right thing,” Peters insisted. “Even worse, allowing Trump to speak and praising him for it constitutes millions of dollars in free advertising. This is unfair to Hillary Clinton who must traipse across the country to solicit the donations she needs to buy TV and radio ads to counter the free advertising Hannity and his ilk are providing to her unfit opponent.”
“The stakes of this election couldn’t be higher,” Peters contended. “If alt-right extremists like Hannity succeed in getting their man into the White House the public airwaves will continue to be polluted by anti-social rants. It is more important than ever that we elect Hillary. She will appoint the people we need to the FCC and the courts to ensure that broadcast communications are permanently cleansed of nonconforming counterrevolutionary opinions.”
Hillary Hammers Trump’s Pitch to Black Voters
GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s bid to woo black votes by persuading them that Democratic policies have ruined their lives was denounced by rival candidate former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a major policy speech she gave in Reno, Nevada this week.
“Democrats and blacks have been together for a long time,” Clinton told a crowd that easily surpassed double digits. “It’s kind of like we have a ‘common law marriage.’ It’s outrageous for an outsider like Trump to try to alienate our mutual affections. Sure there have been some rough patches. Every marriage has rough patches. Bill and I have had some rough patches, but we’ve always stuck together. Each of us has been there to aid and abet the other’s dreams and aspirations. Blacks and Democrats need to stick together for the same reason.”
“Trump promises to put black people to work,” Hillary pointed out. “But whites putting black people to work sounds like slavery to me. The Democratic Party has freed black people from the burdens of work. Democrats have enacted laws to ensure that if your man walks out on you the government will put a roof over your head and food on the table. Thanks to legislation championed by the Democratic Party no one has to do hard labor to survive.”
“Trump promises to make the streets safe by locking up criminals,” Hillary observed. “But this is a thinly veiled declaration of war against the black man. As we have seen ‘law and order’ leads to a racially imbalanced prison population. Democrats are against laws and enforcement that fall disproportionately on racial minorities. The prison population should mirror the free population. I will work toward achieving this goal.”
“I caution blacks not to buy into Trump’s idea that acting white is the way to a better life,” Hillary warned. “From our nation’s earliest days it has been the Democratic Party that has taken care of blacks. Republicans have been the ones ready to cast them out into the world to fend for themselves. Voters should remember this on election day.”
In related news, Will Quigg, a grand dragon of the California Ku Klux Klan chapter, endorsed Hillary Clinton for president. “History has shown that Democrats have been the Party with the guts to keep the blacks in their place, they even fought a war to preserve white rights,” Quigg reminded. “LBJ’s Great Society plan to concentrate the blacks in public housing compounds and fatten them up on food stamps keeps them from taking the jobs that belong to whites.”
State Department Warns Americans to Avoid Traveling
The State Department issued a warning to US citizens advising them to avoid foreign travel for the “foreseeable future.” The warning was sparked by what the Department characterized as “an unfortunate misunderstanding of a recent multi-million dollar payment to Iran.”
“We thought we were paying off an amount due Iran from the cancellation of the Shah’s 1979 purchase of jet fighters,” explained Payton Moore, Undersecretary for Islamic Relations. “The government of Iran thought we were paying ransom for four Americans they were holding prisoner until a plane delivering the $400 million in cash arrived in their country. Now the Iranian government has instructed police and military units to take more American ‘criminals’ into custody for future exchanges.”
The misunderstanding was confirmed when Iranian Minister of Commerce, Mehdi Ghazanfari, bragged that “the exchange of American spies for cash compensation is the most efficacious investment available to us. The return excedes that of any other industry that we could conceivably undertake.”
The Minister recommended expanding the scheme to include “arresting Iranians with relatives who are American citizens. The loyalty of anyone with family in the United States is suspect. We can test their loyalty to Iran by inducing them to invite family members for a visit. We can then arrest the visiting Americans and earn a generous profit by ransoming them back to the US government.”
Ghazanfari hastened to point out that “this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to export Muslim refugees to countries where they can collect welfare benefits. As the Quran tells us, it is every Muslim’s right to receive the jizya from the kafirs. The benefits aren’t as robust as they ought to be, but as more Muslims attain citizenship in the western countries they will use their votes to remedy this deficiency.”
In related news, the US State Department announced that “as a courtesy to former Secretary Hillary Clinton” it won’t be releasing her 2009-2013 appointment calendar until after the November election. Department spokesman Herman Hushman called it “a simple case of helping out an alumna of the agency during a difficult time in her life.”
Zimbabwean Olympians Face Punishment
Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe had the nation’s entire Olympic team arrested on their return home from the Rio games, saying “we have wasted the country’s money on these rats we call athletes.”
The dictator is said to be weighing whether to compel the athletes “to do hard labor until they have earned enough to reimburse the government” or “to have them publicly executed to provide a better show than the feeble performances they turned in at the Olympic games.”