Go to:  Davar site entry | Site contents | Site index | Site links | World links | USA cartoons
Dementia links | Hypocrisy links | Sanity links | Mixed links | List bottom

Go to:  Documents (07/04/1776)   Facts (02/01/2017)   Reference   News (12/06/2017)   Government (12/04/2017)   Politics (10/20/2017)   Economy (05/12/2017)   Technology (04/25/2017)   Science (02/06/2017)   Health (11/09/2017)   History (11/23/2017)   Terrorism (12/11/2017)   Beware (10/20/2017)   Books (2002)   Basics   Humor (05/25/2016)   Nature (03/17/2017)   Miscl (07/24/2017)   Texts   Video (08/15/2017)   Sites

USA  Events' Links

 Analysis  (12/06/2017)  [Archive: 2015–2009, 2003]  Go to:  List top | Next section (07/04/1776) | List bottom 
      Matt Lauer was fired a week ago for appalling behavior, not ‘toxic masculinity’  (Fox 12/06/2017)
• 
We are seeing the fruits of a movement – both political and social – underway for decades, to tear down the traditional roles of men and women in society. 
• 
Hollywood and the media not only romanticized the shift in cultures, but took it further with decades of objectification of women in film and print, and normalizing abhorrent behavior.
• 
They tore down cultural institutions like marriage and the family, and replaced it with a vacuous, relativistic idea that has shaken our society and devastated our morality.
• 
I'm talking about the war on what progressives, extreme feminists and the cultural elites (Hollywood and the entertainment industry) have branded as "toxic masculinity."
• 
Yet it is these very groups that enabled and protected the likes of Weinstein and Franken and, as revealed last week, Matt Lauer.
• 
... the left's and feminists' willingness to look the other way for decades as male allies publicly supported their causes while they privately abused women...
• 
Yet today, these enablers insist on pinning their mess on the "toxic masculinity" of every male.
• 
After decades of conditioning to objectify, and even enabling toxic masculinity because it suited their purposes, many in the liberal elite are acting shocked – shocked!..
• 
In its attempts to blame all men for certain behaviors, the left is trying to avoid the fact that it created toxic masculinity.  It created the werewolves and the vampires with their twisted views of the world and the genders and love and sex — it created the rapacious male.
• 
Combine this with the objectification of other people and the premise that we're all the random result of chance, why wouldn't you demand immediate gratification for personal gain?  One follows the other and we are in many ways seeing the inevitable end of these ideas. 
• 
It should be hoped that we will question everything we've been conditioned to: are we just finite objects eking out our 70 or 80 or 90 years on this rock spinning around the sun in space, or is each one of us a unique creation, caught between the eternities with an immortal soul, with a greater purpose than just to exist for a moment in time?
• 
When you warp the essence of who we are and bend them to fit your twisted views of reality and purpose, you quickly end up with inconsistencies and wrong conclusions about literally everything: a human being's purpose and meaning, of belonging, of the genders, of sex, of love.
• 
But let's be honest: aren't all unchecked desires in every human being brutal and ugly?  Aren't all human actions abhorrent when motivated by twisted desires and beliefs?
• 
It's about teaching them gentle strength, to have self-discipline and to serve, to be noble in a world that wants them to be anything but noble, to be non-conformists in a world that seeks to conform them to its warped views of reality.
• 
It's time that we as a society and a culture start having these conversations about who we are as human beings.  To refuse to have them is to ask for more of what we're currently seeing.
• 
See related Democratic Hero (Glenn McCoy, 11/20/2017) cartoon from USA picture album
• 
See related A Tale of Two Bills (Glenn McCoy, 07/09/2015) cartoon from Adult picture album
• 
See related Shocked (Michael Ramirez, 10/13/2017) cartoon from Adult picture album
      How an FBI official with a political agenda corrupted both Mueller, Comey investigations  (Fox 12/05/2017)
• 
How is it possible that Hillary Clinton escaped criminal indictment for mishandling classified documents despite incriminating evidence that she violated the Espionage Act? 
• 
Why did Donald Trump become the target of a criminal investigation for allegedly conspiring with Russia to influence the presidential election despite no evidence that he ever did so?
• 
The answer, it seems, comes down to one person who played a vital role in both cases: Peter Strzok, deputy director of counterintelligence at the FBI. 
• 
Strzok was exchanging politically charged texts to an FBI lawyer that denigrated Trump and lauded Clinton at the same time he was leading the bureau's criminal investigation of Clinton.
• 
He is also the one who changed the critical wording of then-FBI Director James Comey's description of Clinton's handling of classified material that resulted in no charges being brought against her. 
• 
Then, Strzok reportedly signed the document launching the 2016 investigation into Russia's meddling in the election and whether the Trump campaign played any role.
• 
After leading the FBI's probe into Trump, he then joined Robert Mueller's special counsel team as an integral investigator. 
• 
Thus, it appears that one man with a strident political agenda accomplished his twin goals of clearing Clinton and accusing Trump, evidence be damned.
• 
The messages were so politically incendiary and so threatened the integrity of Mueller's investigation that Strzok was quietly canned over the summer from the special counsel team where he was a pivotal participant.
• 
Did Mueller or anyone else notify Congress that both the Trump investigation — and the Clinton case before it — were corrupted?  Of course not.  It was covered up.
• 
Mueller surely knew that if the truth was revealed it would further discredit his Trump-Russia probe which had already taken on the stench of dead fish.
• 
Importantly, all of the anti-Trump and pro-Clinton messages should be made public.  Americans should decide for themselves whether our system of justice has been compromised by unscrupulous influences.
• 
Just how rife with political prejudice and corrupt motives is the special counsel's investigation? 
• 
Instead of choosing prosecutors who could be neutral, fair and objective, Mueller stacked his staff with democratic donors.
• 
We were supposed to simply trust Mueller's judgment, notwithstanding his own disqualifying conflict of interest under the special counsel statute that demanded his recusal.
• 
The Trump-Russia investigation is now awash in illegitimacy.  Mueller and those who work for him have squandered all credibility.
• 
It is imperative that the special counsel be dismissed, the current staff fired, and a new counsel appointed to reevaluate the evidence objectively.
• 
Do not expect Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to make these changes.  He, too, should be removed in his capacity as Mueller's supervisor.  As both a witness and prosecutor, Rosenstein has his own conspicuous and disabling conflict of interest.  Yet, he has refused to step aside.
• 
Attorney General Jeff Sessions is duty-bound to remove both Mueller and Rosenstein.
• 
The computer accounts of the entire staff need to be examined by Congress and the DOJ Inspector General.
• 
Every member of Mueller's hand-picked staff must now be examined.  The special counsel has proven he cannot be trusted with his assembled team of partisans.
• 
In the meantime, the Department of Justice must now, belatedly, reopen the Clinton email case and reexamine fairly and impartially all of the evidence to determine whether criminal charges against her should be sought.  The statute of limitations has not expired.
• 
Sadly, the FBI is no longer the respected premier law enforcement agency in America.  People like Peter Strzok have politicized the bureau, discredited its work and done immeasurable damage.  So, too, have James Comey and Robert Mueller. 
• 
President Trump is right — the FBI's "reputation is in tatters," and the Clinton probe was "phony and dishonest."
• 
See related My Badge (Glenn McCoy, 12/07/2017) cartoon from Politics picture album
      NFL owners appear poised to pay nearly $100 million bribe for nothing  (Fox 11/30/2017)
• 
NFL owners seem poised to donate nearly $100 million (including some contributions from players) over seven years to support the favorite social justice causes of the players.
• 
But in a perfect show of how incompetent they are, the owners will get nothing from the players in return.
• 
No promise to stop disrespecting the national anthem or any other meaningful concessions.
• 
Who taught these clowns to negotiate, Neville Chamberlain?  Obviously, they are used to trying to buy their way out of problems.
• 
Can you even imagine the sum total spent bailing their pampered players out of legal beefs, domestic violence and sexual misconduct issues?
• 
It would likely dwarf even Congress and Hollywood.  But do they really think this will solve their problem?
• 
Now the owners have taught the players that disrupting the business that feeds them all will bring the players more satchels of cash to toss around to pet causes, in a frenzy of virtue signaling.
• 
So the NFL owners look like they will cave in and hope, hopelessly, that this will buy them some good will.
• 
What the owners should have done is said quite simply and emphatically: "Stand for the anthem or sit for the game – period."
• 
Let them sit out the game, and play their back ups.  Most of these guys are too over-leveraged spending their newfound wealth to miss too many paychecks.
• 
Better to have one fight on principle standing up for the national anthem and flag both literally and figuratively, then to set yourself up for a series of cringing capitulations week after week and year after year.
• 
The victorious players will now see their ability to extract funds for any cause, even their own enrichment, to be greatly enhanced.
• 
... by kneeling themselves, the owners have simply ensured that they will feed a social justice crowd that knows no compromise.
• 
They would have been much better off to read to the end of that Kipling poem on Dane-geld and do the hard thing now:
• 
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld, / No matter how trifling the cost; / For the end of that game is oppression and shame, / And the nation that pays it is lost!"
• 
These wannabe social justice warriors have plenty of their own cash and plenty of time outside the playing of "The Star-Spangled Banner" to pursue whatever causes they wish.
• 
Americans should not stand for their disrespect, and I sure won't.
      America, we have it good - blessings and gratitude this Thanksgiving season  (Fox 11/26/2017)
• 
... here is my point: In America, we have it good.
• 
Our infrastructure is reliable, our gasoline is cheap, our food is affordable, and the choices endless.  We should be thankful that America is a nation whose backbone was?and largely still is?the family.
• 
Americans enjoy amenities that people from other eras would have fainted over — hot water on demand, the ability to maintain personal hygiene, smartphones, paved roads, hospitals and backyards not roaming with dangerous animals.
• 
We are blessed to be a nation of over 300,000 churches, and we still enjoy the ability to freely broadcast Christian content via the airwaves and online.
• 
America was founded on Christian principles.  In our country, problems may be addressed with peaceful elections without violent revolutions.
• 
Regarding the proliferation of churches throughout the colonies, Thomas Paine in 1776 said, "Where, say some is the King of America?  I'll tell you, friend, He reigns above!"
• 
As God has uniquely blessed America, it is only prudent to consider how to keep America in this position.
• 
We do not deserve God's hand of blessing.  But this Thanksgiving season, let's be grateful for it and humble enough to pray, realizing that the sins of this nation are causing His hand of blessing to be removed.
• 
See related Happy Thanksgiving (Michael Ramirez, 11/23/2017) cartoon from USA picture album
      Ten congressional Democrats want lenient treatment for young terrorists who murder Israelis  (Fox 11/24/2017)
• 
Palestinian terrorist leaders often use teenagers to commit acts of terror because they know the Israeli legal system treats children more leniently than adults.
• 
Now 10 Democrats belonging to the Congressional Progressive Caucus are trying to give terrorist leaders yet another reason for using young people to murder even more innocent civilians.
• 
... calling on the State Department to "prevent United States tax dollars from supporting the Israeli military's ongoing detention and mistreatment of Palestinian children."
• 
"This legislation highlights Israel's system of military detention of Palestinian children and ensures that no American assistance to Israel supports human rights violations ....  Peace can only be achieved by respecting human rights, especially the rights of children.  Congress must not turn a blind eye the unjust and ongoing mistreatment of Palestinian children living under Israeli occupation."
• 
It is well established that recruiting and using young Palestinians to wage terror on Israeli civilians is part of the modus operandi of Palestinian terrorist leaders.
• 
For decades, members of the radical Palestinian political and religious leadership have been stirring up young people to wage war against the Jews and the Jewish State.
• 
This was seen in the gruesome intifada that began in 2000, in which Palestinian teenagers committed dozens of attacks against Jewish Israelis on buses, in cafes and at nightclubs.
• 
More recently – in what has become known as the "lone-wolf" intifada – children as young as 13 have stabbed Israelis with scissors, screwdrivers and knives
• 
While noting that children between the ages of 12 and 17 are held and prosecuted by Israeli military courts, the bill fails to acknowledge that some of the most barbaric terrorist attacks against Jewish Israelis have been committed by Palestinian teens.
• 
A Palestinian in his late teens – from a nearby village controlled by the Palestinian Authority – chose a Jewish house at random and fatally stabbed three members of a family as they ate their Sabbath dinner.
• 
The Palestinian "child" murderer also wounded several other family members, while one mother hid her young children in an upstairs room until the terrorist left.
• 
... a similar attack that occurred only six years earlier when two Palestinian teens armed with knives broke into the Fogel family home in Itamar as they slept on Friday night.
• 
The "children" butchered the mother, father and three of their children – including a 3-month-old baby as she slept in her crib.
• 
In August 2016, the Israeli parliament (Knesset) passed a bill allowing imprisonment of terrorists as young as 12.
• 
"This law was born of necessity.  We have been experiencing a wave of terror for quite some time.  A society is allowed to protect itself.  To those who are murdered with a knife in the heart it does not matter if the child is 12 or 15.  We've witnessed numerous cases where 11-year-old children were suicide bombers.  Perhaps this law will also do something to protect these children from being used to slaughter people."
• 
So I ask: What do these members of Congress think Israel should do?  If children as young as 13 were roaming the streets of New York, Los Angeles or Boston stabbing elderly women as they shopped at the supermarket or waited at a bus stop, would the Democrats protest the apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators?
• 
No country in the world would tolerate terror in its cities, regardless of the age of the terrorists.
• 
Israel has a right – according to international law – to protect its citizens from constant terror attacks, including those committed by young Palestinians.  It actually has an obligation to do so.
• 
... rather than condemning the abhorrent and unlawful use of children as terrorist pawns, the 10 congressional Democrats chose to single out Israel for punishment.
• 
People of good faith on both sides of the aisle should call out this double standard for what it really is: an attack on Jewish victims of teenage terrorism and the Jewish State.
      This Thanksgiving, thank private property.  Every day, it protects us from the tragedy of the commons  (Fox 11/22/2017)
• 
Ready for Thanksgiving?  Before you eat that turkey, I hope you think about why America has turkeys for you to eat.  Most people don't know.
• 
Everyone's heard about that first Thanksgiving feast — Pilgrims and Indians sharing the harvest.
• 
They almost starved because they acted the way some Bernie Sanders fans want people to act.  They farmed collectively.
• 
But communal farming creates what economists call "the tragedy of the commons."
• 
I repeated an experiment economics teachers sometimes do to demonstrate the tragedy of the commons.
• 
I assembled a group of people, put coins on the floor in front of them and said, "I'll give you a dollar for each coin you pick up.  But if you leave them down there for a minute, I'll give you two bucks per coin, and then three bucks.  Each minute the coins increase in value by a dollar."
• 
If the group waited, they'd make more money.
• 
Did they wait?  No.
• 
As soon as I said "Go!" everyone frantically grabbed for coins.  No one wanted to wait because someone else would have gotten the money.
• 
Collective action makes people more greedy and short-sighted, not less.
• 
Then I changed the rules of the game.  I divided the floor into segments, so each person had his or her own property.  Then we played the game again.
• 
This time there was no coin-grabbing frenzy.  Now patient people anticipated the future.
• 
"I want to reap the most benefit," said one.  "(On the previous test) I wanted it now, whereas this is going up, and it's mine."
• 
Exactly.  When you own property, you want to preserve it, to allow it to keep producing good things.
• 
That beneficial pattern disappears under collectivism, even if the collectivists are nice people.
• 
The Pilgrims started out sharing their land.  When crops were ready to harvest, they behaved like the people in my experiment.
• 
Some Pilgrims sneaked out at night and grabbed extra food.  Some picked corn before it was fully ready.  The result?
• 
"By the spring," Pilgrim leader William Bradford wrote in his diary, "our food stores were used up and people grew weak and thin.  Some swelled with hunger."
• 
Adding to the problem, when people share the results of your work, some don't work hard.  The chance to take advantage of others' joint labor is too tempting.
• 
Fortunately, the Pilgrims were led not by Bernie Sanders fans or other commons-loving socialists, but by Governor Bradford, who wrote that he "began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could ... that they might not still thus languish in misery ... After much debate (I) assigned each family a parcel of land ... (T)his had very good success, because it made every hand industrious."
• 
There's nothing like private ownership to make "every hand industrious."
• 
Private property became the foundation for building the most prosperous nation in the history of the world, a place where people have individual rights instead of group plans forced on everyone.
      Trump's historic impact on the federal court system will help our nation prosper for decades to come  (Fox 11/22/2017)
• 
... the president is restoring the intended purpose of the federal judiciary – to uphold the rule of law as outlined in the Constitution.
• 
Our Founding Fathers intended for the judicial branch to be an impartial institution with the sole mission of interpreting the law and ensuring it is applied fairly to all Americans.
• 
Under the Obama administration, judges instead cast themselves as political activists pursuing a liberal-leaning agenda.
• 
Our Founders fully understood the threat that a politically saturated judicial branch posed to our God-given and legally protected American freedoms.
• 
... President Trump has already taken monumental steps to restore the integrity of the federal bench by appointing originalist judicial nominees who will apply the law as it is written, rather than in the way current political forces desire.
• 
The left and the media are panicked because they know the large-scale changes President Trump is making will have long-lasting, history-shaping effects.
• 
Federal judicial appointments are for life, and President Trump is selecting relatively young individuals, by federal court standards.
• 
In addition to serving longer terms, these judges will also bring new experiences and aptitudes into the judicial system.
• 
This can be tremendously helpful as cases involving cybercrime, data theft, and malicious use of technology become more common.
• 
While it is easy to focus on the U.S.  Supreme Court, lower and appellate court judges will make decisions that impact ordinary Americans on a daily basis for decades to come.
• 
This Trump transformation in the judiciary could establish the most pro-American, pro-individual rights federal bench in modern American history.
• 
... the Trump revolution taking place in the federal court system will help our nation continue to prosper by ensuring that our judges protect our lives, liberty and core values for decades to come.
      NFL national anthem protests are teaching our children to NOT be thankful for America  (Fox 11/22/2017)
• 
The message?  Don't be thankful for the many blessings America has given you.  Instead, act ungratefully, disrespectfully and unpatriotically.
• 
And sadly, some children are now following that example.
• 
Unbelievably, the coach said: "I felt like it was a good teaching moment for me."
• 
Teaching what?  Hatred of America?
• 
If students banded together in a planned show of disrespect for a rainbow flag – the symbol of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender pride – you'd better believe they'd be punished for intolerance.
• 
And if students held a protest objecting to radical political Islam, there's no doubt they'd be disciplined for bigotry.  The same would happen if students denounced and disrespected any country on Earth – with one exception.
• 
When student football players disrespect America, our anthem and our flag, what happens?  They get applauded by the left.
• 
On Sept.  28, football players at Monroe Township High School in New Jersey knelt during the national anthem.
• 
Two referees walked off in protest, leaving the legitimacy of the game in doubt.  Only the refs were punished, being suspended for the rest of the season.
• 
What should happen next is that a parent of any American student insulted by the disrespect for America should demand that the school enforce Monroe's bullying policy and discipline the kneelers.
• 
Normally I don't encourage making a federal case out of school disciplinary matters, but if the left keeps jumping us with culture rumbles, we have to take their own weapons to use on them.
• 
      Marc Thiessen: Yes, the Clintons should be investigated  (Fox 11/21/2017)
• 
President Trump's critics are arguing that GOP calls for the Justice Department to investigate Hillary Clinton and Democrats' ties to Russia are an effort to distract from the real Russia investigation, into potential Trump-Russia collusion.
• 
No, they are not.
• 
Ever since Watergate, the mantra of all major corruption investigations has been to "follow the money."
• 
Well, Americans of all political stripes should be outraged by the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in Washington are up to their eyeballs in Kremlin cash.
• 
This should suggest to objective observers that Russia was using its money to influence both sides in order to advance the Kremlin's interests.
• 
And it means that any full and impartial investigation of Russia's efforts to influence our political process needs to follow the Russian money flowing into the coffers of the Clintons, their foundation and their top associates.
• 
... "shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, [former President Bill] Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."
• 
In total, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One, which was acquired by the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatum.
• 
Ask yourself: How many half-a-million-dollar speeches has Bill Clinton given to Kremlin-linked banks since Hillary Clinton was defeated?
• 
How much Russian money is flowing into the Clinton Foundation's coffers today?
• 
If Donald Trump had given a $500,000 speech paid for by a Kremlin bank, and his private foundation had accepted $145 million from Vladi­mir Putin-linked oligarchs and their Western business partners, do you think that his critics would be insisting there was nothing to see here?
• 
We should all be deeply concerned by how much Russian cash was sloshing around Washington, and how much of it found its way into the bank accounts of the Clintons and those around them.
• 
And we should all, Democrats and Republicans alike, want to get to the bottom of it.
• 
As Americans, it goes against our sensibilities to encourage the Justice Department of one party to investigate the vanquished candidate of the other party.
• 
But does the fact that Clinton lost mean Americans don't deserve to know the full extent of Russia's efforts to influence our political process?
• 
They played both sides, and in so doing preyed on the singular weakness of the Clintons and those around them — greed.
• 
Any impartial investigation of Russia's efforts to meddle in our democratic process needs to include a full inquiry of the Russian money flowing into Clinton world.
      Charles Manson — America's poster child for our fascination with evil and fear  (Fox 11/20/2017)
• 
No one will miss Charlie Manson.  Yet we keep searching for his heir.
• 
As his body rots on his route to hell, it's worth remembering what he accomplished – which was to order the deaths of nine people, poison the minds of his flock of followers, and somehow trick an entire subculture of the the American population – and even today, their heirs – into believing that he possessed the secret to an enlightened path to a higher form of life.
• 
He got three dim-witted, lost-to-the-world girls to go out on consecutive nights and kill innocent victims in what Manson hoped would look like the kick-off of a race war.
• 
Manson, not the first but the most famous charlatan spiritual guru we've seen, knew how to play on our secret fears of inability and inadequacy.
• 
Have doubts about yourself?  I'll give you the answers.  But first I must inseminate you with my wisdom.
• 
Then I need your unquestioning adherence to all I say, and order you to do.
• 
He beguiled with fake mysticism, some off-key music and the promise of enlightenment – because he somehow intuited that that is what we were looking for and feared we could not find on our own.
• 
Manson actually inspired and drew a blueprint for new generations of would-be shamans, swamis and gurus, who inherited his far-off stare, his mysterious mannerisms, and his bow-before-me-and-learn way of presenting himself to the world.
• 
And we, poor fools now as in 1969, nearly 50 years after he dispatched his deadly and devoted posse to paint his insane vision of fatal paradise, still fall for the promise of enlightenment in return for slavish devotion.
• 
The answer to Manson's appeal is to return to the known, perhaps less alluring but proven tenets of goodness, faith in God, and hard work.
      Judge Andrew Napolitano: The incredible new chapter in the Hillary Clinton chronicles  (Fox 11/16/2017)
• 
The Department of Justice will soon commence an investigation to determine whether there should be an investigation (you read that nonsense correctly) of a scandal involving the Clinton Foundation and a company called Uranium One
• 
... will also be investigated to see whether there should be an investigation to determine whether she was properly investigated.  (Again, you read that nonsense correctly.)
• 
Only the government can relate nonsense with a straight face. 
• 
When President Donald Trump fired FBI Director Jim Comey last spring, the attorney general's stated purpose for recommending the firing was Comey's dropping the ball in the investigation of Clinton's email when she was secretary of state.
• 
... notwithstanding a mountain of evidence of her grossly negligent exposure of secret and top-secret materials, which constitutes the crime of espionage — the FBI director decided that because no reasonable prosecutor would take the case, it should be dropped.  Weeks later, the DOJ ratified Comey's decision.
• 
At the same time that Clinton was failing to safeguard state secrets, she was granting official State Department favors to donors to her family's charitable foundation. 
• 
There are dozens of examples of this so-called "pay to play," the most egregious of which is the Uranium One case.
• 
When the FBI got wind of the Giustra donation and Secretary Clinton's approval and the Kremlin involvement, it commenced an investigation of whether Clinton had been bribed.
• 
At some point during former President Barack Obama's second term, that investigation was terminated.
• 
At the same time that the FBI was looking into Uranium One, American and British intelligence agents were surveilling Donald Trump.
• 
After being confronted by irate Republican members of the House and Senate judiciary committees, who demanded to know why the investigations of these matters had been terminated, Attorney General Jeff Sessions revealed that he has asked career DOJ lawyers to commence an investigation of all of the above to determine whether an independent counsel should be appointed to investigate all of the above.
• 
This is the investigation to determine whether there should be an investigation.  This is also the DOJ's reluctance to do its job.
• 
Can the government investigate itself?  The short answer is yes, and it has done so in the past.  But it hardly needs an investigation to determine whether there should be an investigation.  The job of the DOJ is to investigate probable violations of federal law.  Sessions should not shy away from this and should not push it off to another independent counsel.
• 
We have one independent counsel already because his target — let's be candid — is the president of the United States.  That is a potato too hot for the DOJ.
• 
But Hillary and Bill Clinton, the FBI's tampering with the political process, and the use of intelligence-captured communications for political purposes are not.  It is profoundly the duty of the DOJ — using its investigatory arm, the FBI — to investigate all this.
• 
The evidence in the public domain of Clinton's espionage and bribery is more than enough to be presented to a grand jury.
• 
The same cannot be said about FBI involvements with the Steele dossier or the use of intelligence data for political purposes, because we don't yet know who did it, so we need aggressive investigation.
• 
But none of this presents the type of conflict that exists when the president is a target, and none of this requires an independent counsel.  All of this simply requires the DOJ to get to work.
• 
That is, unless the lawyers in the leadership of this DOJ are fearful of investigating their predecessors for fear that their successors might investigate them.
• 
Whoever harbors those fears has no place in government.
      Our culture is experiencing a hostile takeover.  We must stop rejecting God if we ever want it to end  (Fox 11/11/2017)
• 
The recent Texas church shooting, the terrorist driving a truck through a crowd in New York City, and the Las Vegas massacre may seem shocking – but to anyone who has been paying attention, they should not.
• 
Our culture is undergoing a hostile takeover.  American society used to be governed by Judeo-Christian do-unto-others morals.
• 
But we have drifted (been pushed, really) into a hedonistic YOLO (You Only Live Once) cultural morass.
• 
The upshot of this is a distinct lack of respect for human life in general, as well as a pervasive, insidious obsession with self.
• 
This is the "me" generation, the "selfie" culture, the "entitlement" mentality.
• 
And what is entitlement, except the narcissistic assumption of deserving and demanding what is not earned?
• 
Our cultural crisis is exhibited by egotistic multimillionaires demonstrating on football fields against the police instead of seeking solutions to rampant inner-city violence; coddled young people demanding free birth control and socialized health care...
• 
We've replaced our moral imperative to do what's right with a personal obsession of what's in it for ME?
• 
But no amount of self-love can fill the God-shaped hole in someone's heart.  We are created and called to love each other, and no self-absorbed spa treatment or Instagram post can supplant our innate yearning for love from God.
• 
The spirit of our time is gradually revealing in our culture a subversive, resolute, and increasing hatred toward God and Christianity, and an irresistible temptation toward evil that betrays man's innate desire for power: a longing to be God.
• 
So, like a child throwing a tantrum in a toy store, some people must deny the existence of God and his inherent goodness, and lord their power over weaker people.
• 
Society, still trading in our inherited moral capital, might verbally condemn the behavior.
• 
But that's just lip-service, because we've succumbed to the YOLO moral relativism and forgotten our metric for right and wrong.
• 
The YOLO culture seeks not content of character, but equality of outcome.
• 
Self-destructive loathing and jealousy stems from the hypocrisy that started in kindergarten, when children are taught: You are an accident of nature, and survival of the fittest is the law of the land.  Now, don't bully.
• 
Attacks against the only one who preached forgiveness and grace, goodness and love – and any who support him – will increase: He challenges the YOLO worldview taught in public school.
• 
To survive and prosper as a nation, we must reaffirm our Judeo-Christian heritage, indivisible, under God.
• 
Because if you only live once, it's survival of the fittest, and it's all about you, then laws are meaningless.
      Memo to DACA protestors: Stop shouting and start humbly persuading  (Fox 11/11/2017)
• 
Hundreds of protestors stormed the Hart Senate Office Building near the U.S.  Capitol on Thursday, hung banners and staged a loud demonstration demanding a no-strings-attached solution to allow immigrants brought to our country illegally as children to remain here.
• 
About 800,000 such immigrants have been protected from deportation since 2012 under a program begun under the Obama administration called DACA...
• 
Since DACA recipients entered the United States as children, they had no say in violating our immigration laws.
• 
As such, they comprise a totally separate category from adult illegals who willfully violate our rules.
• 
I believe a compromise can be reached.  But unruly, disrespectful activists make that process harder with their outrageous tactics.
• 
It is only reasonable for the White House to require more resources to protect our border and action to move toward a merit-based immigration system in return for continuing DACA protections.
• 
Importantly, illegal immigrants – no matter how much empathy I maintain for them – have no standing to make loud demands of the American people.
• 
Their attitudes should convey incredible gratitude that this country – unique among nations – shows such compassion to people who do not belong here legally.
• 
As a pro-DACA Latino, I urge these groups to cease using the leftist radical tactics of the so-called "Occupy" movement, and instead make a humble, reasoned case to persuade America why they should be allowed to stay.
• 
Many of these activists would respond that they are, in fact, Americans.
• 
... the term "American" can be defined in precisely six words: a citizen of the United States.
• 
It is a legal term in a country where rights are defined by laws – not by force.
• 
I am a citizen because I was born here, and I thank God daily for that good fortune.  My father was a citizen because he immigrated here legally.
• 
This concept is not difficult to understand and is not up for debate.
• 
I hope and pray that the DACA young adults are soon welcomed permanently into our country, and I humbly ask Congress and President Trump to ignore the radicals and work expeditiously toward a reasonable compromise.
• 
See related Demand Work (Paul Nowak, 04/04/2006) cartoon from USA picture album
• 
See related Guest Demonstrators (Chip Bok, 04/11/2006) cartoon from USA picture album
      Rep.  Marsha Blackburn: To save lives and money, we must cut off federal funding for sanctuary cities  (Fox 11/09/2017)
• 
Over two years ago, Kate Steinle was shot and killed on a San Francisco pier.
• 
A convicted felon illegal alien, Garcia Zarate, is currently on trial for Steinle's murder.
• 
Zarate had previously been deported five times and was to be deported again until the local sheriff's office released him because of San Francisco's sanctuary city policy.
• 
California took things a step further recently by declaring itself a sanctuary state.  New Jersey has also threatened to provide statewide amnesty.
• 
Sanctuary cities and states threaten public safety, cost taxpayers' money and encourage lawlessness.
• 
Liberals cheer sanctuary policies as compassionate, but the reality is far different.  Ask the Steinle family.
• 
Sanctuary cities endanger their citizens.  When Phoenix dropped its sanctuary city policy in 2008, its murder rate fell 27 percent the following year, and other violent crime rates also fell.
• 
Why are we protecting criminals who have already broken the law when they entered our country?
• 
In addition to being less safe, sanctuary cities cost hard-working taxpayers money.
• 
That money could be putting food on the table for struggling middle-class families.  Where is the compassion for them?
• 
Sanctuary policies are lawless, delusional and open up a Pandora's box of consequences.
• 
They promote open borders by serving as a magnet for illegals lured here by the false hope of amnesty.
• 
Every state becomes a border state and every town a border town.
• 
Further, if liberal politicians can ignore one law, what is to stop them from ignoring others?  Where does the madness end? 
• 
Kate Steinle would most likely be alive today if the law had been followed.
• 
California's decision to become a sanctuary state is similar to the open borders vision that is destroying Europe.
• 
If lawlessness prevails, we will eventually become a sanctuary country. 
      Libs think you're Stupid.  Are You?  (JWR 11/07/2017)
• 
Another mass shooting, this time in a Texas church and we hear the same old mantra from Democrat leaders and the lamestream press.
• 
It's guns.  We need more gun laws to combat right wing hate speech that's driving these incidents.
• 
What they will not tell you is that most of these mass killings are committed by jihadists, left wing psychotics and atheists.
• 
They also ignore that it is the hate speech on the left that has spurred attacks on recent innocent victims.
• 
GOP congressman Scalise was shot and almost killed at a charity baseball practice; Sen.  Rand Paul was attacked at his home by another Bernie Sanders supporter who broke five of his ribs.
• 
It is not tea party advocates knocking out total strangers on the street just because they're white.
• 
It is not right wing bureaucrats targeting conservative groups in the government agencies.
• 
In New York City, another metropolis ruled by Democrats who make it impossible for good citizens to get legal guns, an Isis fan just used a truck to mow down and kill bike riders and pedestrians.
• 
Turns out this militant had been questioned by Comey's ineffectual FBI in 2015 but as usual couldn't find enough to charge him.
• 
Seems also that this jihadist came here under a ridiculous program initiated by Democrats, of course, that allowed immigrants to come here permanently by lottery and this killer from Uzbekistan brought in 23 family members.
• 
What you will not hear from the major media about the shooting in the Baptist church in Sutherland Springs is that the killer, now known as Devin Patrick Kelley, was an atheist and Bernie Sanders supporter who was stopped while still reloading his deadly weapon by a civilian gun owner, Stephen Willeford. 
• 
That spoils the narrative so unless you're a dummy you should ignore this feeble attempt to demonize the NRA again.
• 
If there had been one civilized gun owner in any of those murder scenes, the killer's victims would have had a better chance of survival. 
• 
The celebrities who have felt comfortable threatening the life of President Trump since his election are responsible for most of the hate speech encouraging violence against conservatives.
• 
I don't recall right wing comics holding up a decapitated head of Obama or showing his dead body of the cover of a rap album but Kathy Griffin and Snoop Dog got away with that.
• 
Most of the supposed vandalism and hate tactics by conservatives have been exposed as hoaxes perpetrated by the left.
• 
Since the 2016 election, liberals and Never Trumpers have collectively lost their minds. 
• 
The entertainment industry seems to take delight in using foul language and trash talk by late night talk show hosts, movie stars and the dumb hostesses of The View but I've never put much credence in their intellectual prowess any way.
• 
But if you're one of the many Americans who laugh at their jokes and who still watch SNL then I'm sorry but the liberals may have pegged you just right.
      Ditch political correctness and wise up.  Empower cops to fight radical Islamic terrorists...  (Fox 11/07/2017)
• 
... when you're a cop looking for radical Islamic terrorists ... well, let's just say you don't look in a convent, a monastery or a rabbinical seminary.
• 
Is this politically correct?  Absolutely not.  Is it simple common sense?  Of course it is.
• 
There's no question that the vast majority of Muslims in America are peaceful, law-abiding and hardworking men and women.
• 
But there's also no question that a small subset of Muslims in this country don't fit the above description, because they support the aims of radical Islamic terrorists.
• 
And an even smaller, very tiny subset actually engages in terrorism.
• 
Finding these people after they commit terrorist acts is challenging.
• 
Finding them before they commit terrorist acts and stopping them is incredibly difficult.
• 
A basic principle of police work is that you use logic and common sense when searching for criminals of any kind.
• 
You can't search for everyone everywhere, so you narrow the field of possible suspects
• 
Where might a radical Islamic terrorist be?  Well ... wild guess ... mosques, other areas where Muslims get together, and Muslim neighborhoods.
• 
One thing's for sure: you won't find any radical Muslim terrorists who are not Muslims.
• 
Yet in New York City last week, where a radical Islamic terrorist drove his truck into innocent people on a bike path on Halloween – killing eight and injuring a dozen – police and other law enforcement officials are being handcuffed.
• 
They are being told to ignore their common sense and training, and not focus on Muslims when looking for Muslim terrorists.
• 
... the Halloween terrorist ... was radicalized here in the United States, not in his home country ... where in the U.S.  did the radicalization take place?
• 
No one lives in a vacuum.  Radicalization is a process that includes both internal and external catalysts and occurs in many environments.
• 
That principle was laid out in a report created by the New York City Police Department's Intelligence Division in 2006 titled "Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat: The NYPD Report."
• 
Mayor Bill de Blasio caved in to demands from the American Civil Liberties Union and several Muslim activist organizations, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and ordered the counterterrorism report removed from both the NYPD's website and its training manuals.
• 
And if that was not enough, the mayor also ordered the police to discontinue standard police practices of surveillance and undercover operations of the group most susceptible to radical Islamic terrorists...
• 
De Blasio's absurd action came in response to a 2012 lawsuit filed in Newark, New Jersey by Muslim advocates.
• 
They claimed that the NYPD was profiling them strictly on the basis of their religion and that they had suffered irreparable damages as a result of police actions.
• 
One of the mosques in New Jersey that claimed to have been unjustly surveilled was the Omar Mosque in Patterson.
• 
This is the same mosque attended by Sayfullo Saipov, the now-accused self-proclaimed ISIS follower who struck on Halloween.
• 
Yet NYPD Deputy Commissioner for Intelligence and Counterterrorism John Miller stated publicly that the Saipov case has nothing to do with Islam or which mosque someone attended.  How quickly he forgets.
• 
Back then, he clearly acknowledged the obvious fact that that radical Islamic terrorists have connections with Muslim communities.
• 
Here's the bottom line: We need to spend less time worrying about being politically correct and more time worrying about how to protect the American people from bloodthirsty radical Islamic terrorists who want to kill and injure as many of us as possible. 
• 
At some point, we have to let the police be the police and investigate terrorists and other criminals – regardless of religion, ethnicity or race – based on tried and true procedures.
• 
It would have been as silly to search for Mafia kingpins in mosques as it would be to try hunting down ISIS terrorists at Knights of Columbus meetings.
• 
Hopefully, the NYPD ... will be allowed to go where the evidence leads, utilizing every tool at its disposal and not bow to political correctness when investigating potential terrorists and their hideouts.
• 
Perhaps the tool most needed in fighting radical Islamic terrorism today is a strong backbone. 
      Wake up America, Islamic terrorism targets you!  (INN 11/05/2017)
• 
The claim that the perpetrator of the November 1, 2017 NYC bicycle-path-terror is a "lone wolf" ignores the wider context of Islamic terrorism, oversimplifies and underestimates the threat, alleviates the pressure off anti-US Islamic rogue regimes, and derails counter-terrorism. 
• 
The NYC bicycle-path-terror was carried out by a member of the Islamic "pack of wolves" - not by a "lone wolf" – which has been systematically brainwashed and molded by the most effective production-line of Muslim terrorists: hate-education and incitement conducted by Islamic leaders, educators, social media and imams in mosques (and in US prisons!) in Muslim countries as well as in the US.
• 
"Prison radicalization primarily occurs through anti-US sermons provided by contract, volunteer, or staff imams, radicalizing inmates who gain religious influence and extremist media... similar to that of Iran and Hezbollah....  These radicalization efforts expand beyond prison walls, resulting in potential threats to society at-large...."
• 
The NYC bicycle-path-terrorism was not an aberration, but an integral episode of 1,400 years of the intra-Islamic tectonic reality ... and the 14 centuries of Quran-sanctioned terrorism against the abode of the "infidel."
• 
In fact, terrorism has dominated Islam from the 7th century, when three of the first four Caliphs (Umar, Uthman and Ali), who succeeded Muhammad, were assassinated by fellow Muslims.
• 
... this act of terrorism was intensely integrated with – not isolated from – a fundamental pillar of Islam, the Jihad (the Strive, the Holy War), which commands Muslims to emulate previous struggles against the enemies of Islam, within the context of the eternal battle between the Abode of Islam and the Abode of the "infidel."
• 
In order to defeat Islamic terrorism, Western societies – led by the US – must rid counter-terrorism of the "lone wolf" mentality; acknowledge the inherently non-compromising nature of Islamic terrorism and confront Islamic rogue regimes (just like rogue gangs at home) militarily, not diplomatically; recognize the centrality – and obliterate the infrastructure – of hate-education and incitement in the US and other Western democracies, as well as in Muslim countries; preempt, rather than react.
      New York Times’ coverage of Mueller is peak liberal bias  (NYP 11/05/2017)
• 
A friend likens The New York Times to a 1960s adolescent who refuses to grow up.
• 
In a perpetual state of outrage, it is a newspaper of college snowflakes who embrace all forms of diversity except thought.
• 
It sees its liberal politics not as a point of view, but as received wisdom that cannot be legitimately disputed.
• 
The fixation on conformity reached a new low last week when the paper rolled out a coordinated attack on those of us who believe special counsel Robert Mueller ought to resign.
• 
In the Times' view, there are only two reasons to question Mueller's credibility: insanity or treason.
• 
And so we detractors stand accused of engaging in a conspiracy that will embolden adversaries like Russia and produce a "constitutional crisis."
• 
The animating impulse for the assault is obvious — the Times is locked into its mission of destroying President Trump, and, like Hillary Clinton, still cannot accept Trump's election as legitimate.
• 
... the paper, following a bad habit it developed during Barack Obama's presidency, is not content with advocating its positions.
• 
Behaving like a party propaganda outlet, it takes a coercive approach to anyone with a different view.  Objections are demonized as heretical.
• 
... carries the unavoidable assumption that Trump is guilty of colluding with Russia, and so critics of Mueller are subversives with unpatriotic aims.
• 
... flatly declared doubts about Mueller unwarranted because "there is no evidence to support the assertion that the Democrats hired Fusion GPS with the purpose of getting Russians to spread ‘wild allegations' about Mr.  Trump."
• 
... if the lack of evidence is sufficient to avoid investigation, why is Mueller still investigating Trump, since more than a year of FBI probes has turned up no evidence of Trump wrongdoing.
• 
The zeal to protect Mueller from any criticism raises the question of why the Times cares so much.
• 
With the mainstream media in lockstep with its jihad against Trump, why bother to smear a handful of skeptics?
• 
My great sin was to argue that Mueller's close relationship with his successor at the FBI, James Comey, was always a problem and that recent developments created a situation that was fixable only by resignation.
• 
Those added conflicts include the revelation that Clinton's campaign and the Democratic Party paid for the Russian dossier against Trump, with some of its paid sources linked to the Kremlin.
• 
Because the FBI reportedly used the dossier to launch its probe of Trump and considered hiring its author, any probe faithful to Mueller's assignment would include an examination of the FBI's role in 2016.
• 
Moreover, as questions grow about whether the Obama White House used the dossier as justification for unmasking Trump associates picked up in wiretaps in an attempt to swing the election to Clinton, Mueller's probe must also examine the previous administration.
• 
But that, too, is an impossible task for him because he spent more than four years working for Obama, where he was a colleague of Clinton's.
• 
Resignation under these circumstances is not a radical idea...  a judge with Mueller's relationships and history would almost certainly be recused from overseeing those cases, so why should a special counsel investigating the president be held to a lesser standard?
• 
And if Justice Department rules required Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself from anything related to the 2016 campaign because he was a Trump surrogate, those same rules should apply to Mueller's relationship with Clinton, Obama and Comey.
• 
In the end, the Times' rabid ­defense of Mueller resembles the debacle of its 2016 campaign coverage.
• 
It never saw Trump's victory coming because it was blinded by its hatred for him and contempt for his 63 million voters.
      Islamic terror is not a law enforcement puzzle, it’s a war.  Here’s how to show we get it  (Fox 11/04/2017)
• 
On each occasion we seem to go through the same ritual — sympathy, condemnation, a parade of well-meaning statements from government officials insisting that the terrorists "will not win."
• 
... the response of our leaders, in government and the bureaucracy.  They still seem to be treating Islamist terror as a law enforcement issue, rather than what it is: a war waged on us by an ideologically-driven and globally-distributed enemy.
• 
First, we should remove all known Islamists from our country.  If they are not U.S.  citizens, they should be immediately deported.  If they are naturalized U.S.  citizens, they should first have their citizenship revoked.
• 
"Every single person who we have intelligence upon, who is known to be involved in terrorism...  we deport and send them back to where they came from.  We do not allow them to roam free on our streets and murder and maim and disfigure our children."
• 
Second, we must force the big tech companies to help our security services track down terrorists and prevent attacks.
• 
Google announced earlier this year that it can track your online browsing and your movements in the real world by combining credit card data with data from your smartphone and services like Google Maps.
• 
But when the authorities ask tech firms to help in the fight against terror, suddenly they're all about privacy.
• 
Third, we need to force Saudi Arabia to pay reparations for their role in incubating today's terror threat.
• 
Over the years, the Saudis have funded a huge number mosques in the world — and with that funding came the vile, medieval strain of Islam known as Wahhabism (or Salafism) that is at the heart of today's Islamist ideology, whether practiced by ISIS, Al Qaeda or any other of the murderous death cults.
• 
Fourth, we need to toughen our own immigration procedures, just as President Trump pledged to do this week.
• 
No more entry by lottery; extreme vetting for everyone who wants to come to America and fits the profile of a potential Islamist supporter or sympathizer — whether they have become radicalized or not.
      Judge gives deserter Bowe Bergdahl a slap on the wrist, our military members get a slap in the face  (Fox 11/04/2017)
• 
His case is a sad reminder of why we should never engage in prisoner exchanges with terrorists and why deserters should be dealt with harshly.
• 
When Bergdahl deserted in 2009, a number of search efforts for him took place that endangered the lives of U.S.  soldiers and left some severely wounded.
• 
Military investigators found that Bergdahl walked away from his unit.  His actions were planned and thought out.
• 
One soldier in his unit said that Bergdahl mailed his belongings back home to his parents before deserting. 
• 
Further, Bergdahl sent an e-mail back to his parents saying that he was ashamed to be an American.
• 
Bergdahl was charged with and later pleaded guilty to "desertion and misbehavior before the enemy." He could have received a life prison sentence.
• 
Instead, he received no prison time, a reduction in rank, a fine and a dishonorable discharge.
• 
President Trump called the decision "a complete and total disgrace to our country and to our military." Our president is right.
• 
It's a sad day for our military justice system and all those who serve in our armed forces.
• 
Bergdahl deserved and should have received prison time.  Yes, disgrace is the right word.
• 
When an American enlists in the U.S.  military, he or she takes the Soldier's Oath.
• 
The oath reads in part: "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, (and) that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same."
• 
The soldiers who risked their lives and sustained injuries searching for Bergdahl lived up to the Soldier's Oath.  Bergdahl did anything but live up to it because he was a deserter.
• 
His sentence was an insult to all those who wear the uniform of America's armed forces.
      How’s “diversity” working out for you?  (INN 11/03/2017)
• 
The reason we keep getting acts of terrorism is because we keep importing terrorists.
• 
That is not politics.  That is mathematics.
• 
... since the early 1990s we had a program named the "Diversity Visa Lottery." So each year some 50,000 people are invited into our country from hellholes all around the globe, like Uzbekistan.  Over there it is 96.3 percent Muslim, coincidentally.
• 
That is where the Manhattan murderer came from... and, along with the rest, was welcomed with smiles over the years from types like NY Gov Cuomo and NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio and Sen.  Chuck Schumer. 
• 
But that did not stop them from taking the stage to further dump on Trump and even though ashen-faced from shame, they continued to grandstand their Liberal pieties.
• 
As if none of this was their doing and if it came again between them and us, between migrants and citizens, they'd still choose the migrants.
• 
The very definition of the program, in view of the word "lottery," means that we are GAMBLING with our security.
• 
Under these terms, we don't really know who's coming. 
• 
In other words, we don't really know who we're betting on.  Democrats and even some Republicans don't care.
• 
Trump cares.  "The safety of our citizens comes first," says Trump.
• 
What a novel concept if you are a Liberal. 
• 
But the world and its experts took it to mean a Jewish problem rather than a universal problem.
• 
So nobody gave a damn.  Let the Israelis deal with it; it's got nothing to do with us. 
• 
They refused to learn... learn that, sooner or later, the same jihadists will come knocking anywhere and everywhere. 
• 
From the terror tunnels of Gaza to the streets of New York, they will come.
• 
Now even here jihadists feel they can get away with murder so long as they've got airheads like CNN's Jake Tapper to assure us that Allahu Akhabar really means peace. 
• 
Tell it to the dead, Jake. 
• 
It's a wonderful world of immigration jihad so long as they've got the fools of the world on their side – from de Blasio in New York City to Merkel in Berlin.
      Bowe Bergdahl wasn’t a victim, he’s a traitor  (Fox 11/03/2017)
• 
... Bergdahl put other soldiers in danger.  Despite his trauma, he had to realize that desertion would jeopardize those attempting a rescue operation.
• 
... the platoon that searched for Bergdahl went without food and limited water for 19 days.  Chief Petty Officer James Hatch came under fire while looking for Bergdahl.  Hatch was shot in the leg and has had 18 surgeries in the aftermath.
• 
By honoring Bergdahl in 2015, despite a full 2009 Army report indicating his desertion from duty, President Obama intentionally misled the American public and has contributed to the cynical belief you cannot trust comments emanating from the White House.
• 
When Obama's National Security Adviser Susan Rice maintained that Bergdahl represented the Army with "honor and distinction" she undermined the heroism of thousands who have defended the principles in this land of the free.
• 
Bergdahl was not a victim, albeit some will make this argument; he was an instrument to be used by President Obama in his desire to empty U.S.  military prison at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba.
• 
Five Taliban prisoners being held at Guantanamo were released in exchange for Bergdahl and three are now fighting for Al Qaeda.
• 
I have it on good authority that the Taliban were prepared to return Bergdahl for cash exclusively.  But that was not what President Obama wanted.
• 
As a consequence, the United States paid a price in spiritual loss, political legerdemain and military morale.
      After NYC terror attack, let's use common sense to protect ourselves from radical Islamic terrorists  (Fox 11/03/2017)
• 
... radical Islamic terrorists have been launching attacks here in the United States for years, with the deadliest occurring on Sept.  11, 2001.  These attacks are not going to stop unless we first admit that we have been and are under attack and – finally – take strong steps to prevent further attacks.
• 
For eight years, the Obama administration refused to even use accurate language and terminology to describe what was occurring here in the U.S., as our nation suffered violent assaults in the name of Islam.
• 
... more than 200 individuals have been charged with terrorism-related crimes in the U.S.  since 2009...
• 
These aren't "lone wolves." These are individuals working toward the same goal, via the same broad organization known as ISIS and related groups. 
• 
Our nation's population reflects more than 200 years of diversity in one form or another; we didn't need another visa program to achieve that goal.
• 
... the Schumer visa program and others aren't simply adding new ethnicities, cultures or creeds to our shores; they are giving radical Islamists from regions other than the Middle East the opportunity to enter.
• 
Once here, these radicals don't assimilate.  Instead, they connect with like-minded Islamists to plan and perpetrate acts like the ones we witnessed on Tuesday afternoon in New York.
• 
Raise your hand if you think it was good idea to allow a young disaffected Islamic man with no prospects, no ties to the U.S., and only his religious zeal to keep him going into our country. 
• 
We as a nation must disabuse ourselves of the naive notion that somehow our Western values are magically transferred to all newcomers to our shores and embraced and lived by those individuals.
• 
The Western values of respect for freedom, human dignity, tolerance and peaceful coexistence – as well as the West's Judeo-Christian system of thought that gave root to those values – are not respected in many parts of the world.
• 
As a result, the only diversity we seem to be importing from these countries – short of legitimate, heavily vetted refugees, such as Christian minorities ­– is the diversity of hate for the United States and our institutions.
• 
... we must accept that there is evil in the world and that no matter how much we would like to avoid it, evil can never be appeased.  It is voracious and ever-encroaching and it can only be stopped and destroyed by forceful action.
• 
Radical Islam is evil; it is full of hatred and seeks to destroy our way of life.  Our way of life and our system of government, is anathema to radical Islam – like oil and water, they will never mix.
• 
And so we must take a strong stance and stop acting as though common sense is the same thing as intolerance.
• 
Common sense tells us that in addition to having a realistic view of immigration, we should address the breeding grounds of hatred that we have allowed to fester within our own nation.
• 
We can no longer allow radical clerics who preach hatred of America in mosques on American soil, seeking to radicalize young Muslim men in particular.
• 
By some estimates there are dozens and dozens of radical mosques in the United States. 
• 
The venomous words of the radical clerics are ticking time bombs.  It is only a matter of time before even more hands and feet are set into motion by this incitement, and therefore only a matter of time before more American people lie dead on American streets.
• 
Diversity and tolerance are America's strengths, but we should not sacrifice innocent American lives in the name of these lofty goals.
• 
It's time the Trump administration and Congress did what the Obama administration refused: reset our nation's visa process across the board to meet America's needs and values, intensively vet all visa applicants, and limit entry from countries on the State Department terrorist watch list.
      Judge Andrew Napolitano: Mueller's ultimate target is Trump.  Here's what could happen next  (Fox 11/02/2017)
• 
... indicted a former Trump presidential campaign chairman and his former deputy and business partner for numerous felonies.
• 
Both were accused of working as foreign agents and failing to report that status to the federal government, using shell corporations to launder income and obstruction of justice by lying to the federal government.
• 
... the government revealed that a low-level former foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, George Papadopoulos, had pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI and become a government witness.
• 
The alleged crimes of Manafort and Gates appear to have nothing to do with Trump, nor have they any facial relationship to the Russians.
• 
So why were these two indicted by a grand jury hearing evidence about alleged American assistance to Russian interference with the 2016 presidential campaign?
• 
When prosecutors confront a complex series of potentially criminal events, they often do not know at the outset of their investigation where the evidence will lead them.
• 
Sometimes they come upon a person who they believe has knowledge of facts they seek and that person declines to speak with them.
• 
Such a refusal to speak to the government is perfectly lawful in America, yet it often triggers a prosecution of the potential witness so that prosecutors may squeeze him — not literally, of course — for evidence to which they believe he can lead them.
• 
The ultimate target of Mueller's investigation is President Trump.
• 
It is standard operating procedure when prosecutors have a high-level target to charge those below the target with something just to get them to cooperate.
• 
The danger of such a deal is that Manafort and Gates may offer to tell Mueller what they think he wants to hear — even if it is not truthful — so that they can have their prison exposure lessened.
• 
There is more danger in the seemingly smallest of this week's Mueller-generated events. 
• 
In a profound miscarriage of justice, federal law permits FBI agents to lie to us but makes it a crime for us to lie to them.
• 
It appears that Papadopoulos was gathering evidence for Mueller, probably by talking to his former Trump campaign colleagues while wired...
• 
Because Papadopoulos admitted under oath that he lied to FBI agents, the courts will treat his guilt as certain.  That gives Mueller great leverage with him.
• 
He also knows that if Mueller likes what he hears, a five-year prison term could be reduced to six months.
• 
Hence, Papadopoulos could be a treasure-trove for Mueller on the production of any evidence linking the Trump campaign and the Russians...
• 
Papadopoulos has already produced a wild tale about meetings with a Russian professor and a female Russian government agent in London that the FBI apparently believes.
• 
I have argued for years that squeezing defendants and witnesses by threats and promises to get them to spill the beans is a form of extortion or bribery — not much different from the extortion and bribery that the government regularly prosecutes.
• 
"You tell us what we want to hear and we will ask a judge to go easy on you.  If not, you will suffer great losses."
• 
It is bad enough that the feds can legally lie to us and get away with it, but can they also legally threaten and bribe witnesses to testify against us and get away with it?
• 
Can they do this to the president?
• 
In a word, yes.  ... Squeezing witnesses and defendants is a way of life for federal prosecutors.
• 
For the president, it is the tip of a dangerous iceberg.
      Ex-CIA officer: Mueller also needs to investigate US intel’s attempts to damage Trump  (Fox 11/02/2017)
• 
The scandalous series of memos – which contained allegations of treason and impropriety by then-candidate Trump and his campaign – took on renewed life after it was confirmed that the document was little more than a political hit job paid for by both Democratic and Republican operatives.
• 
But while the headlines may shift, Mueller's attention to a dossier-related scandal must not.  Indeed, the dossier is almost certainly connected to the most audacious crime of the 2016 campaign.
• 
America's senior law enforcement and intelligence officials were directly involved in the targeting of a democratically elected president for political assassination.
• 
By spreading the dossier throughout D.C.'s political class, the nation's spymasters virtually assured that the document's allegations would be leaked and given undue credibility.
• 
So why did they do it?
• 
Curiously, however, these spymasters also said that they gave the document no particular credence after having investigated its treasonous allegations.
• 
Why would our senior intelligence and law enforcement officials bother highlighting a debunked dossier when they knew it would leak to the press, thereby giving it a degree of credibility and life it wouldn't otherwise deserve?
• 
First, one or all of these spymasters may have been influenced by their profound dislike of Trump as a person.
• 
A second possibility is that these officials and their political chiefs may have been spooked by known or suspected connections between Trump's campaign and Russian operatives.
• 
In short, Obama officials may have been fearful that a "corrupted" President Trump would shut down any collusion investigation before the facts were known.
• 
Putting aside whether there's any truth to these fears, it would still be wildly illegal for America's spymasters to leak information to the media designed to damage a president.
• 
Officials working for the CIA and FBI are strictly regulated regarding their political activity, not to mention barred from disclosing classified or protected government information. 
• 
And that suggests a third and much more likely motivation of the intentional leakers: politics.
• 
It's reasonable to believe, then, that leaking a dossier alleging treason might severely wound Trump and his agenda for the duration of his presidency.
• 
Which begs the question: which spymaster had the greatest motivation to try to bring down the president?  And was he alone in his efforts?
• 
... Comey admitted to having the motivation, access, and ability to conduct what would effectively be a covert influence operation designed to damage the president.
• 
... there was a wholesale effort by the Obama administration to spread or disseminate classified information throughout the government and into the public domain that dealt with possible contacts between associates of Trump and the Russians.
• 
In short, there were others – many others – who were joining Comey in a similar "brief to leak" operation designed to throw sand in the gears of a Trump presidency.
• 
Regardless of who was involved or their precise motivation, one thing is certain: the spymasters' decision to spread the dossier's accusations contributed to nearly a year of political chaos that has roiled the nation.
• 
... even if one agrees that Trump is not fit to serve, voters of all stripes should be outraged by the spymasters' attempts to damage him.
• 
Indeed, one can disagree with Trump's agenda or find him personally distasteful but that does not give license to ignore unlawful behavior by America's law enforcement and intelligence communities.
• 
Said differently, we cannot support an illicit political assassination simply because it brings about misfortune to those we oppose.
• 
Accordingly, it's time for Mueller to investigate our national security community with the same ferocity that he's shown in his likely prosecution of Trump associates.
• 
It's time to investigate the scandal of America's spymasters. 
      Cal Thomas: Trump, Mueller and Manafort — Get ready for more magical thinking  (Fox 11/02/2017)
• 
Predictably, the major media are celebrating this as the beginning of the end of the nascent Trump presidency.
• 
"Will Manafort Sing?  If so, it may mark the beginning of the end of this presidency."
• 
Look for more of this wishful thinking that the establishment, the Democrats and all of the mainstream media have been hoping for since Trump won the election.
• 
What Manafort stands accused of has nothing to do with the 2016 election, or with Russian "collusion."
• 
No one, so far, has produced any evidence the Russians affected the election's outcome.
• 
This is all about overturning the results and keeping "the swamp" full for those who live in it and reject change.
• 
Real collusion might be in the significant share of U.S.  uranium sold to the Russians during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state (she signed off on the deal), followed by a $500,000 fee paid to her husband for a speech in Moscow and the millions of dollars that subsequently flowed into the Clinton Foundation from uranium investors.
• 
Special counsel Robert Mueller and Congress should investigate that Russian connection, along with the role of the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign (and the earlier Republican role) in creating an anti-Trump dossier that has been shown to be a fraud and yet was used to justify the appointment of Mueller.
• 
If the reason for Mueller's appointment is fraudulent, how can it be said that his investigation, which includes staff attorneys who made donations to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, is not tainted?
• 
Congress is the proper avenue for such investigations, not special counsels, who can "go rogue" if they wish.
• 
No matter which party controls government, the other party does all it can, by whatever means, to undermine those elected.
• 
This behavior solves no problems.  It is only about grabbing and holding onto power.
      How Many More Americans Have to Die Before We Throw Away the PC Garbage?  (Fox 11/01/2017)
• 
We've got radical Islamic terrorists ready, willing, and honored to kill us on planes, trains and automobiles with knifes, guns, explosives and trucks.
• 
And we've got federal judges, top Democrats, and bleeding heart kumbaya liberals placing Islamic sensitivity, diversity options, and political correctness over reality, American lives, and national security.
• 
If he shouted "Allahu akbar," the motive and inspiration are crystal clear.
• 
Better question is: why the heck was he here in the first place?
• 
He wasn't airlifted in by ISIS, we let him in the front door - we rolled out the red carpet for him just like we did the 9/11 hijackers.
• 
... he was issued a green card by President Obama's DHS in 2010.  Isn't that something?
• 
Did you know nearly 1.8 million green cards were issued to nationals of predominantly Muslim countries from the September 11th attacks in 2001 through 2015?
• 
Now your liberal friends might tell you this is in the spirit of inclusion, love, tolerance and diversity but here's a reality check: ISIS and the dozen-plus other radical Islamic terrorist groups exploit this diversity and blissful ignorance and use it to attack and kill Americans. 
• 
It's called "civilization jihad" and it's not just coming, it's here.  It's not Islamophobic to point out the radical problem within Islam.
• 
It's reality, it's right in front of our faces, and it's not going anywhere so either we learn to confront it, name it and keep it the hell out or we sit back, bite our tongues, twiddle our thumbs, hold hands and pretend the evil doesn't exist.
• 
We tried the blind-eye politically correct BS for 8 years and look where it's gotten us.
• 
Yet, we still have these federal judges and Democrats who prefer political correctness and feelings to our safety and national security.
• 
Enough.  How many more Americans have to die before we throw away this PC garbage and understand the threat?
      New York terror attack — We've seen the face of evil but our politicians want us to look away  (Fox 10/31/2017)
• 
... there may be a legitimate debate about whether President Trump is unfairly singling out Muslims in his efforts to make America safe.
• 
But when a terrorist kills Americans – this time, with a rental truck – and then shouts "God is great" in Arabic, the president's zeal is understandable.
• 
There is no way to protect every block in our cities, every field on our farms, every school in our suburbs.
• 
We have become accustomed to our freedom to move around as we wish, and to gather with whom we choose.
• 
We stroll our streets without paying attention to what's around us...  If we're on a bike lane, we assume no four-wheel vehicles will intrude.
• 
The problem is that terrorists – those whose perverted view equates God's greatness with acts of bloodshed – know how clueless we are, and exploit our assumption that nothing bad can happen to us.
• 
And it is that careless confidence that makes us easy prey, soft victims for determined evildoers.
• 
Even before the names of the perpetrator and the dead and injured are known, there will be warnings not to stereotype, not to sully the reputation of any faith or ideology.  Don't link radical Islam with terror.
• 
... the same de Blasio who pompously defied Trump's call to dismantle so-called sanctuary cities, making it tougher for authorities to find and corral criminals.
• 
"Don't let the terrorists change our life in any shape, manner or form," said Gov.  Andrew Cuomo, just two hours after the attack took place.
• 
That's right, New Yorkers.  Listen to your governor.  Don't take any extra precautions in how you live your lives.
• 
Don't admit that there are evil people in the world who want to kill you, then exhort God's greatness.
• 
Don't use that ugly word — war – to describe our conflict with radical Islam.
• 
Don't offend.  And don't defend.  It might upset someone.
      NYC terror attack: Halloween horror would have been much worse without top notch NYPD  (Fox 12/01/2017)
• 
The Halloween assault in Lower Manhattan was straight out of the ISIS playbook.  ... jihadi leaders have been urging the faithful to turn ordinary cars and trucks into killing machines to "mow down the enemies of Allah."
• 
... Sayfullo Saipov, 29, a green-card holder from Uzbekistan in Central Asia and resident of Florida, responded to the call.
• 
... encouraged followers to attack "large outdoor conventions and celebrations, pedestrian-congested streets, outdoor markets, festivals, festivals, parades, [and] political rallies." It even specified the ideal type, weight, and speed of a car needed for terror purposes.
• 
... numerous eye witnesses said that the man, dressed in dark clothing and carrying a pellet gun and a paint-ball gun, was screaming "Allahu Akhbar" — "God is Great" in Arabic.
• 
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo pointed out another hallmark of a vehicle assault.  The perp, he said, was one of those "lone wolves" who "meant to cause pain and harm and probably death and the resulting terror."
• 
But it takes a pack to raise a lone wolf.
• 
Even if Saipov acted alone, he was part of a growing ideological fraternity numbering in the tens of thousands who now inhabit every region of the globe.
• 
Those seeking eternal glory have staged similar attacks in at least a dozen other cities — from Nice to Paris to Barcelona to London to Jerusalem.
• 
Like the attacks in these cities, the Halloween attack in Lower Manhattan was aimed at inflicting maximum carnage.
• 
There was no shortage of targets.  The streets between West Houston and Chambers were crowded with parents picking up their costumed children prepared for an evening of trick-or-treating.
• 
Pedestrians and bikers on the Hudson River bike path were stunned and helpless as Saipov careened his weapon through the crowd.
• 
With the collapse of its self-declared "caliphate" in Syria and Iraq, ISIS is on the run.  So are its adherents.
• 
But as the extremists disperse, the terrorist threat, paradoxically, increases.
• 
American and other intelligence agencies have long warned of a likely rise in vehicle and other attacks as the frustrated, furious faithful are forced to reorient their campaign.
• 
... Islamist terrorists have carried out more than a dozen vehicular assaults since 2014 that have killed more than 170 people.
• 
Such attacks are ever more likely ... since "unsophisticated tactics such as vehicle-ramming" are hard to prevent and capable of inflicting "mass casualties if successful."
• 
Saipov might have killed even more people had the NYPD not been the nation's premier counterterrorism force.  NYPD officers showed up in force minutes after the attack began, shooting Saipov before he could kill even more New Yorkers.
• 
After being heavily, and in many instances unfairly, criticized for allegedly violating civil liberties ... shut down a particularly controversial program that the intelligence unit had run early in its existence — a so-called "demographic unit" that collected information on the location and activities of Muslims suspected of terrorist intentions.
• 
Another critic was New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who lambasted the NYPD for surveilling New Jersey-based Muslims and asked whether the spying was "borne out of arrogance, or out of paranoia, or out of both."
• 
The so-called "flash-to-bang" trajectory of lone-wolf radicalization is accelerating.
• 
An individual intent on mayhem against "soft" targets is the toughest law enforcement terrorist challenge.
      The nuclear blast of Russian collusion  (INN 10/27/2017)
• 
For a year, the Democrats, aided and abetted by a Hillary Clinton supporting media and a Deep State Establishment which includes Obama hangovers in the new Trump Administration as well as ‘Never Trump' Republicans, have been searching under every rock and stone for evidence of a Trump collusion with the Russians.
• 
Before leaving office, FBI head, James Comey contrived to appoint his friend, Robert Mueller, to be the Special Counsel to investigate links between the incoming president and the Russians, portrayed as the greatest evil on the face of the planet.
• 
Now, it seems, the nuclear storm they unleashed of Russian collusion has suddenly changed direction and is blasting the Democrats and the Establishment fully in their own faces.  In a two-pronged attack their demons have turned against them in what Trump calls "the Washington swamp."
• 
The affair is likely to include the breaking news of a huge multi-million-dollar scandal involving the Obama Administration, the FBI, the Department of Justice under the Obama presidency, Hillary and Bill Clinton and their Clinton Foundation. 
• 
Under Obama and the Clintons, the United States sold 20% of its vital uranium reserves to America's most evil enemy, Putin in the Kremlin.
• 
Today, the United States has to import uranium to power its nuclear power plants – from Russia.
• 
Part of the agreement stated that none of this uranium could leave the United States but there is evidence that much of it has left America for Europe and, almost certainly to Russia.
• 
Russia also supplies Iran with much of their uranium for their nuclear projects.
• 
And, in a pay to play quid pro quo, $145 million made its way from the Russian actors in this deal (acting for the Kremlin) into the coffers of the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was acting Secretary of State.
• 
Her husband, Bill, travelled to Moscow to give a $500,000 speech before having a private chat with Putin himself in his Moscow mansion.
• 
This, after Obama was recorded on an open mic in 2012 telling Russian Prime Minister, Dmitry Medvedev, "tell Vladimir that after my election I have more flexibility."
• 
This was the jovial atmosphere that accompanied the Obama Administration's collusion with Russia which is now being revealed to have sold off one of America's most vital strategic and security assets to "the greatest threat to any nation" according to FBI's James Comey...
• 
... the Democrats unleashed a nuclear storm when they went after Trump on trumped up charges of Russian collusion.
• 
Now they are about to reap the storm they created.  It is likely to burn and destroy several Establishment figures.
• 
If this is part of draining the swamp, so be it.
      Gregg Jarrett: The Clinton cover-up, brought to you by the same guys who are investigating Trump  (Fox 10/18/2017)
• 
Damning new evidence appears to show that Hillary Clinton used her office as Secretary of State to confer benefits to Russia in exchange for millions of dollars in donations to her foundation and cash to her husband. 
• 
But there's more.  It seems it was all covered up for years by the same three people who are now involved in the investigation of President Donald Trump over so-called Russian "collusion."
• 
... the FBI gathered a multitude of documents, secret recordings, intercepted emails, financial records, and eyewitnesses accounts showing that Russian nuclear officials directed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation and hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bill Clinton during the very time that Hillary Clinton presided over a governing body which unanimously approved the sale of one-fifth of America's uranium supply to Russia.
• 
The corrupt scheme is said to have been financed by the Russians through bribes, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering.
• 
The FBI and the Department of Justice reportedly had the evidence in their possession before the uranium sale, but kept the matter secret and never notified Congress which would surely have stopped the transfer of uranium to Russia.
• 
It is a crime to use a public office to confer a benefit to a foreign government in exchange for money.
• 
It is often referred to as "pay-to-play," but it can be prosecuted under a variety of anti-corruption laws passed by Congress.
• 
... prosecutors are required to show a "quid pro quo" or "nexus" between the payments and the benefit provided.  But it appears that the FBI already possesses all the evidence it needs to make a compelling case.
• 
If Hillary leveraged her public office as Secretary of State for personal enrichment, but also used her charity as a receptacle or conduit for money obtained illegally, that would also constitute racketeering
• 
Racketeering is the use of a business for a corrupt and illegal enterprise.  ... Frequently, they devise a dual purpose company –one which operates lawfully from the front door, but unlawfully out the back door.
• 
... more than half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she served as secretary of state donated money to her foundation.  If Clinton was peddling access, was she also peddling influence?
• 
But why has there been no prosecution of Clinton?  Why did the FBI and the Department of Justice during the Obama administration keep the evidence secret?  Was it concealed to prevent a scandal that would poison Barack Obama's presidency?  Was Hillary Clinton being protected in her quest to succeed him? 
• 
The answer may lie with the people who were in charge of the investigation and who knew of its explosive impact.  Who are they?
• 
Holder, Mueller, Comey & Rosenstein
• 
Holder was a member of the "Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States" which approved the uranium sale to the Russians in 2010.
• 
Since the vote was unanimous, it appears Holder knowingly and deliberately countenanced a deal that was based on illegal activities and which gave Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America's uranium assets.
• 
It gets worse.  Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during the time of the Russian uranium probe, and so was his successor James Comey who took over in 2013 as the FBI was still developing the case.  Rod Rosenstein, then-U.S.  Attorney, was supervising the case.
• 
There is no indication that any of these men ever told Congress of all the incriminating evidence they had discovered and the connection to Clinton.  The entire matter was kept secret from the American public.
• 
It may be no coincidence that Mueller (now special counsel) and Rosenstein (now Deputy Attorney General) are the two top people currently investigating whether the Trump campaign conspired with the Russians to influence the 2016 presidential election.
• 
Mueller reports to Rosenstein, while Comey is a key witness in the case. 
• 
It is not unreasonable to conclude that Mueller, Rosenstein and Comey may have covered up potential crimes involving Clinton and Russia, but are now determined to find some evidence that Trump "colluded" with Russia. 
      ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ actress and Hollywood conservative: Why the #Resist movement has it completely wrong  (Fox 10/18/2017)
• 
Since President Trump's election the progressives in the USA have decided that they are "the Resistance." Everywhere we look on social media we see the #Resist banner.
• 
From the virtue-signaling Hollywood celebrity to every leftist, tenured university professor, they have proudly declared themselves members of "the Resistance" club.
• 
... over the last fifty years leftist/cultural Marxist groupthink has taken over and infiltrated literally every aspect of society.
• 
That revolution was, in many ways, already won years ago and yet, they continue to fight on because for the left it won't be enough until every single one of us thinks exactly like them.
• 
The reality is that the #Resist movement is not the counter culture that they think they are.  They actually represent the status quo, and are supporters of the Establishment itself.
• 
Today's #Resist movement must be the first resistance in history that actually runs most of the nation and makes up most of the political and cultural Establishment.
• 
So, let's look at this Establishment that makes up the "Resistance" and see how very powerful and organized they are.
• 
First and foremost are academia and the education industry.  These are the Indoctrinators: from nursery school teachers, to tenured university professors and most of the administrators.
• 
They see their jobs more as social justice activism rather than teaching.  This is a "resistance" that has nearly all of academia on their side.  These are the most dangerous, for they are shaping the minds of our children and our future generations. 
• 
Then, there are The Enforcers: such as all the progressive social media giants like Facebook, You Tube and Twitter who push a leftist agenda and try to stifle conservative ideas and speech. 
• 
Add to that the high tech conglomerates such as Apple, Google, and Microsoft, the left-leaning CEOs of many huge multinational corporations, billionaires like George Soros, Ted Turner and Richard Branson, and the thousands of NGO's - all of whom spend millions promoting progressive causes.
• 
Next is the propaganda wing of the "Resistance," which just happens to be around 90 percent of the media entertainment complex, including most news channels, most newspapers, late night comedians, news anchors, ESPN and other sporting franchises and, of course, nearly all of Hollywood and most of its pundits, hangers-on and celebrities. 
• 
And last but not least, one of the wealthiest, most powerful political parties in the whole Western world: the Democratic Party and all their minions in the American civil service and the Deep State.
• 
... does it sound more like a vast, controlling, obscenely wealthy progressive network that uses every tactic at its disposal to oppose a democratic election result - from indoctrination and propaganda to the suppression of free speech and the violence practiced by Antifa.
• 
They say they are fighting "fascism" but then they use fascistic methods to bully, demonize and silence all who disagree with them.
• 
From Hillary calling Trump voters "deplorables" to the nearly militarized thugs of Antifa calling anyone with a conservative or libertarian viewpoint "Nazis," their aim is to dehumanize their opposition.
• 
Of course many of those who unthinkingly use the #Resist banner or wear pussy hats on marches or swoon to the rantings of Madonna are tragically ignorant of what they are actually supporting.
• 
... in fact, they are supporting those politicians and Establishment figures who are behind The Deep State: the powerful, and utterly corrupted part of our government that see themselves as rulers and elites, and not as representatives of the people. 
• 
The Constitution accepts that everyone is born equal but it's up to the individual whether they better themselves or not.
• 
Egalitarianism means equality of outcome and cannot freely exist without being forced on us through government mandates.
• 
For progressives this sounds great — it's the path to the utopian future they so desire (with John Lennon's "Imagine" piped through loud speakers ad nauseum).
• 
However, BIG government is required in order to enforce this global egalitarianism.  Pure Socialism, Communism and/or Fascism will soon follow.
• 
This is one of their main goals: make sure the people are helpless to fight against a tyrannical, military dictatorship.
• 
... to those who believe in leftist groupthink, egalitarianism is more important and noble than liberty.
• 
The #Resist movement is the antithesis of "resistance." They aren't the resistance, the rebellion or even anti-establishment.
• 
They are anti-freedom, pro-establishment and part of The Enforcers, right along with The Deep State. 
• 
I hope the American people can see the #Resist movement for what it actually is and treat its agenda with the derision it deserves, so we can survive this threat to the freedom and liberty of our USA. 
      Trump is not threatening the First Amendment; Americans' ignorance of what it means most definitely is  (Fox 10/16/2017)
• 
For the second time in as many months, Americans are demonstrating a profound ignorance of the First Amendment to the U.S.  Constitution.
• 
The president tweeted: "Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked.  Not fair to public!"
• 
Commentators claimed this threatened freedom of the press.
• 
"Recent reports that the president called for an increase in the U.S.  nuclear arsenal are absolutely false.  This kind of erroneous reporting is irresponsible."
• 
"With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License?  Bad for country!"
• 
But if one takes the time to actually read the tweets and understand the First Amendment, you'll find that claiming President Trump is advocating for government regulation of the press is an absolutely baseless assertion and just another inane overreaction.
• 
First, let's understand what the First Amendment actually says and what it actually does.
• 
Contrary to popular belief, our Bill of Rights does not confer rights upon individuals, nor are our rights absolute.
• 
The Declaration of Independence acknowledges that our individual, unalienable rights are endowed by our Creator, not our government.  The mandate for American government is simply to best preserve and protect our preexisting rights.
• 
Thus, the First Amendment acts as a redundancy safeguard, or a check, against the specific, limited powers given through our U.S.  Constitution to government to operate in accordance with that mandate.
• 
In other words, just in case our federal government attempts to overreach its specific, limited powers provided in Articles I through III, the Bill of Rights tells Congress precisely what government cannot do.
• 
The First Amendment reads in relevant part: "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press...." It is important to note here that the operative term is "abridging."
• 
Freedom of the press generally means that the government cannot interfere with the publication and distribution of information and opinions – not that the government may never impose restrictions.
• 
The law provides relief for defamation, including libel and slander.
• 
The Supreme Court has routinely upheld defamation laws and afforded civil liability remedies.
• 
If NBC published a provably false story with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity, President Trump (like any other public official) can file suit.
• 
This legal remedy doesn't amount to "government regulation" or remotely contravene the First Amendment's protection of freedom of the press.
• 
The president and Mattis are correct that the media bears responsibility for veracity and truthfulness.
• 
Is it really too much to require that the media are at least accurately reporting facts, even if their constitutionally protected opinions are clearly biased?
• 
If the media are allowed to publish with reckless disregard for the truth in reporting facts, at that point we have lost all credibility and the original purpose for the freedom of press. 
• 
Publish any opinion you want, mainstream media, but at least do your job and verify your facts first.
• 
See related Fake News (Mike Lester, 11/27/2016) cartoon from Media picture album
      Trump doesn’t owe Obama anything  (NYP 10/14/2017)
• 
It's nine months into the administration, and there is no rest for the hair-on-fire coverage.
• 
Whether it's Trump's move to make changes to NAFTA, decertify the Iran deal, eliminate some ObamaCare rules or cut taxes, each is greeted with a collective howl of outrage.
• 
Every report is a parade of horrors that celebrates critics as truth-telling prophets.
• 
All the code words about cruelty to the poor and benefits for the rich are trotted out, capped with warnings about race and gender impacts.
• 
The hyperbolic language is designed to stoke partisan fear and rally the resistance. 
• 
Stripped of policy fig leaves, the media reaction amounts to, "You can't do that!  That's not how Barack Obama did it!"
• 
Never mind that unemployment is at a 17-year low and the stock market is at historic highs, or that it's boom times for consumer and business sentiment.
• 
The economic recovery is going global, but Trump, we are assured, deserves zero credit.
• 
The knee-jerk anti-Trump coverage shows that the media didn't learn anything from its biased performance during the 2016 campaign.
• 
It's still shilling for Democrats, with the left's political talking points echoed in headlines, articles and broadcasts.
• 
The media's abandonment of ­basic fairness adds to the nation's deepening polarization, and makes it difficult for any open-minded citizen to understand the significance of Trump's policy changes.
• 
That's not to argue that all his changes are self-evident improvements and that none will fail.  And there is no denying that he makes mistakes and contributes to the rancor with personal attacks on critics.
• 
But policy-wise, he deserves a fair assessment of his actions.  Instead, he gets automatic denunciation, as if anything he does is either stupid or corrupt.
• 
Take, for instance, the two most important moves Trump made last week — changes to ObamaCare rules and decertifying the nuke deal with Iran.
• 
It just so happens that those two items are the signature achievements of the former president.  It is also a fact that both were sold on backs of lies to the American people, and that both are falling far short of their promised objectives.
• 
Changes are not only welcome, they are necessary.  Yet from most of the coverage, you get the idea that Trump is messing with per­fection.
• 
But still Trump is the bad guy, even though he campaigned on a promise to repeal ObamaCare.  Congress has failed, so Trump is doing exactly what Obama did on so many occasions — using executive orders.
• 
Then there's the Iran pact.  Obama committed the US to a deal that was deeply flawed, both in content and scope.
• 
In addition to paving a way for the mullahs to get nukes, it completely ignored the fact that Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism and, rather than curb the aggression, the deal has emboldened Iran.
• 
As Trump said Friday, "We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more ­violence, more terror, and the very real threat of Iran's nuclear breakthrough."
• 
His willingness to work with Congress and our allies to improve the terms are a compromise that stops short of withdrawal.
• 
That is a responsible move to bolster security for ourselves and our allies, yet Trump is reflexively denounced as reckless.
• 
What's truly reckless is the continuing bias of the media.
• 
They campaigned to defeat Trump last year, and now campaign to defeat his every action as president.
• 
• 
See related Gets Me Where I Want (Michael Ramirez, 02/25/2017) cartoon from USA picture album
      Eagle Scout: RIP Boy Scouts of America.  You were great for 100 years  (Fox 10/12/2017)
• 
The Boy Scouts of America stood for over a century on its strong foundation of Judeo-Christian values, growing boys into young men, and young men into leaders.
• 
As soon as the BSA changed the definition of the phrase "morally straight" in the generations-old Scout Oath back in 2013, allowing for homosexual membership, we all knew that this first compromise would not be the last.
• 
We all knew that it was only a matter of time before the BSA compromised itself into oblivion.
• 
The Boy Scouts has always been exclusively for boys.  As Ben Shapiro famously noted, it's in the name.
• 
There are plenty of organizations out there for all different varieties of youth.
• 
The Boy Scouts even have several co-ed programs for both boys and girls. 
• 
The girls already have the Girl Scouts.  If the Girl Scouts isn't working, why not work to fix that organization instead?
• 
There is absolutely no need for the Boy Scouts to change who they are to be "inclusive."
• 
The BSA has now effectively rendered obsolete both the Boy Scouts and the Girl Scouts.
• 
More incredibly, I have to wonder why any parent would want their young teenage girls camping in the woods with young teenage boys?  Who exactly is okay with this?
• 
It is important for boys and young men to grow together free from the distraction of girls.
• 
I suspect the Almighty Dollar now motivates BSA more than the Almighty.
• 
Suddenly membership eligibility is now opened to a whole new demographic.  Draw your own conclusions there.
• 
This is what the Left does best: target and destroy everything good in America.
• 
They cannot compete with us on ideas, so they have to eliminate everything that makes us who we are.
• 
If they were truly motivated to provide girls, homosexuals, and "transgenders," with the same experiences Boy Scouts provides, then they would form their own youth organization.
• 
But it isn't really about that, is it?
      Former Navy SEAL and FBI Special Agent: Terror tactics are advancing faster than police tactics  (Fox 10/11/2017)
• 
... the tragic outcomes of most large domestic attacks that have occurred in the U.S.  could have been mitigated using military defensive tactics in and around special events and populated areas.
• 
Why aren't there counter snipers on the roofs of buildings around Las Vegas when large open-air events occur?
• 
Why were unchecked backpacks and duffle bags allowed in and around the most populated area of the Boston Marathon in 2013?
• 
Why do stadiums and arenas funnel tens of thousands of people through the same few exits at the end of every event?
• 
Why are civilians and law enforcement officials always caught off guard when an attack happens as if it were the first time evil has visited our nation? 
• 
Police departments should shift to training the total officer capable of engaging an enemy as effective as the military would in a warzone.
• 
Patrol officers should be outfitted and armed with long guns and body armor and trained in tactics that mimic the effective direct action techniques used by military Special Forces.
• 
... in order for our citizenry to remain safe and alive on a daily basis as well as at special events, it is imperative that changes occur in awareness and in the way people forward think their personal defensive tactics and response procedures.
• 
The bottom line is that we are involved in a war that has never been encountered in modern recorded history.
• 
It is a war that involves growing numbers of the mentally ill and people that have been brainwashed by extreme ideologies.
• 
Combine those warfronts with the plague of learned helplessness sweeping our citizenry and you can start to get a picture of how real this new type of war actually is and how violent it has become.
      As North Korea threatens electromagnetic pulse attack, questions over lapses in US grid security rise  (Fox 09/25/2017)
• 
For more than 15 years, security and intelligence officials — including former CIA Director James Woolsey — have been raising the alarm bells about the vulnerability of the U.S.  power grid to an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack.
• 
Only now as tensions with North Korea quickly escalate — with the rogue nation refusing to back down from its nuclear testing and threats of such an onslaught — is the matter really generating attention.
• 
"We recognize that an EMP event would have extremely dire consequences for the entire country, but where the challenge comes is in attempting to quantify those impacts."
• 
Earlier this month, state news agencies in the Kim Jong Un-dictated country explicitly cautioned that it could hit the U.S.  with an EMP offensive.
• 
A hydrogen bomb detonated at a high altitude would create an EMP that potentially could abolish prominent parts of the electrical grid.
• 
The higher the bomb's detonation, the wider the scope of destruction. 
• 
... up to 90 percent of Americans could die within a year of such an attack.  All the functions communities rely upon — hospitals, water, waste, transport, telecommunications, air control, medical care — could potentially be decimated for not days or weeks, but months or years.
• 
"The military doesn't think it is their job to make the grid resilient, even though 99 percent of their missions in continental United States rely on the civilian grid.  The utilities don't think it is their job because it is a national security problem.  Besides, they don't want to come up with the money, face more regulatory burdens or fool with making over parts of the grid with uncertain technical consequences."
• 
... financing grid security — given that it doesn't fall under the responsibility of one particular office — could have been done through slight rate increases, but efforts are typically bound by red tape.
• 
"If utilities want to increase their customer rates by one cent a kilowatt hour to help invest in a new effort for counter-terrorism or EMP they have to go to a public utility commission and convince them that these rate increases are beneficial and meet certain cost/benefit conditions."
• 
... any effort to harden the U.S.  power grid ... have fallen short at the public utilities level because of "more pressing threats like physical attack security and cybersecurity."
• 
"In the end, this process has left the U.S.  with antiquated and vulnerable infrastructure."
• 
"There is no unified or specified commander charged with specifically marshalling America's resources from the government and private sector into an active defense of the power grid.  There are civil services and regulatory bodies mostly focused on energy as utilities but nothing looks like an energy version of a military defense command."
• 
"If something happens in two weeks, we wouldn't be able to close all the gaps of vulnerability.  But having looked at this issue for a number of years, we are taking appropriate action given our set of responsibilities and authorities."
• 
... beyond the North Korea threat, ... Iran, Russia and China too have assimilated EMP attack into their military creeds, posing a significant peril to the United States.
• 
"The very existence of the nation is at stake.  We are facing explicit threats to use EMP against us from the North Koreans — and there is a lot of capability to execute such an attack in the hands of other enemies."
      Trump has every right to free speech, but his timing is off  (NYP 09/23/2017)
• 
Koch's response was that he didn't lose his First Amendment rights when he became mayor.
• 
He was right, just as Donald Trump retains his free speech rights even though he lives in the White House.
• 
Naturally, the president is being called "divisive" for his attack on the relative handful of NFL players who kneel rather than stand for the National Anthem.
• 
Commissioner Roger Goodell demanded "respect" for the league and some athletes whose politics lean left are piling on.
• 
They all have free speech rights, too, but Goodell's demand for respect is odd in the current context.  Respect is a two-way street.*
• 
Players who bring their politics to work ought to find another outlet or another job, and their employers should have the guts to demand compliance with certain norms of conduct.
• 
Fans also have the right to vote with their feet.
• 
"No one goes to a ball game to watch someone blessed with athletic talent protest by insulting the views of millions of Americans who honor and love this country and its flag.  If you don't want to honor our flag and our country, stay in the locker room till the game starts."
• 
In the midst of a nuclear showdown with North Korea, Iran's continuing threats, severe hurricane damage in Florida, Texas, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands and a stalled GOP agenda in congress, Trump's plate already is more than filled.
• 
It's not clear to me how pushing a hot button in the culture wars helps him win in any of those far more critical arenas.
• 
Then again, as Koch often proved, distraction can be the best political strategy.  In that case, we should be grateful that Trump is giving the country something to argue about that isn't a matter of life and death.
      The Language of Losing  (JWR 09/18/2017)
• 
It's a truth all but entirely unacknowledged by anyone who matters in the western world.
• 
In any war, you have to be able to prioritize: You can't win everything, so where would you rather win?  Raqqa or Rotterdam?  Kandahar or Cannes?
• 
Yet, whenever some guy goes Allahu Akbar on the streets of a western city, the telly pundits generally fall into one of two groups: The left say it's no big deal, and the right say this is why we need more boots on the ground in Syria or Afghanistan.
• 
This year on 9/11 President Trump said he was committed to ensuring that terrorists "never again have a safe haven to launch attacks against our country".
• 
... the reason the west's enemies are able to pile up a continuous corpse count in Paris, Nice, Berlin, Brussels, London, Manchester, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Orlando, San Bernadino, Ottawa, Sydney, Barcelona, [Your Town Here] is because they have "safe havens" in France, Germany, Britain, Scandinavia, North America, etc.
• 
Which "safe havens" are likely to prove more consequential for the developed world in the years ahead?
• 
... after 16 years of accelerating Islamic immigration, Europe has more no-go zones, more sharia courts, more refugees, more covered women, more Muslim-dominated schoolhouses, more radical mosques, more female genital mutilation, more grooming and gang rape, more Muslim Brotherhood front groups, more Muslim mayors and legislators, more Muslim-funded Middle East Studies programs at universities
• 
In Afghanistan, we're fighting for something not worth winning, and we're losing.  In Europe, Islam is fighting for something very much worth winning, and they're advancing.
• 
... the President forbore to mention Islam at all: Instead, we were attacked by "horrible, horrible enemies" and "enemies like we've never seen before".
• 
Well, we've seen a lot of them since, and they appear to have certain things in common - things that this President was once not shy about mentioning.
• 
Yet, insofar as Islam got a look in from officialdom, it was a passing reference in the speech of Defense Secretary "Mad Dog" Mattis: "Maniacs disguised in false religious garb thought by hurting us they could scare us that day."
• 
"False religious garb" means we're back to the standard Euro-squish line that all this Allahu Akbar I'm-ready-for-my-virgins stuff is a "perversion" of the real Islam, which is a peaceful faith practiced by millions of people...
• 
Stop me if you've heard this before, but these "maniacs" are hijacking this "religious garb" in order to peddle a "false" vision of Islam.
• 
Foaming-canine-wise, Mad Dog sounds about as mad as, say, Theresa May.
• 
I take it that, even in today's politically correct military, you can't earn the epithet "Mad Dog" simply by handing out diversity awards to the Transgender Outreach Liaison Officer of the Month, and General Mattis served honorably and impressively in Afghanistan and Iraq.
• 
But, when it comes to strategic clarity, that may be the problem.
• 
In Iraq, everyone's Muslim - mainly because all the Christians got chased out on America's watch.
• 
So it's both reasonable and necessary to distinguish between Muslims — between the ones who want to kill you no matter what, and the ones who might be more flexible on that point.
• 
General Mattis' line about "maniacs disguised in false religious garb" might be politic or even sincere when advanced in Tikrit or Basra, but delivered at the Pentagon it's the most feeble dissembling 16 years into an existential struggle.
• 
And its deployment on 9/11 itself — on the home front, on sacred ground where blood was spilled — is not a small thing.
• 
It underlines that, in a profound sense, the dreary endless unwon wars in Afghanistan and elsewhere are not just a peripheral distraction from the real, central front, but an obstacle that prevents even the shrewdest and bravest of men from framing the struggle correctly.
• 
Meanwhile, there's a cold war - the remorseless incremental Islamization of the heart of Christendom.
• 
... we were more clear-sighted with the Soviets: We understood that Afghanistan was peripheral, and that what mattered was preventing our enemies from hollowing out the free world.
• 
Today, the men running this new war think Afghanistan is the be-all and end-all, and that the hollowing out of the free world by the west's enemies is not merely irrelevant but in fact evidence of our moral virtue.
• 
And incidentally the continuous protestations that hardcore incendiary extremist Islam is an unfortunate aberration would be more persuasive if western politicians ever paid the slightest attention to genuinely moderate voices within Islam.
• 
But they don't. They either ignore or consciously marginalize them. Case in point — Yahya Cholil Staquf:
• 
"Western politicians should stop telling us that fundamentalism and violence have nothing to do with traditional Islam.  That is simply wrong...  The approach you describe won't work.  If you refuse to acknowledge the existence of a problem, you can't begin to solve it."
• 
He's right.  Which is why, 16 years on, we haven't begun to solve it.
• 
Maybe in lieu of this year's speakers they could book Mr Staquf for next year's Pentagon ceremony.  Or would that be Islamophobic?
      Why Democrats are scared to death of voter fraud investigations  (Fox 09/14/2017)
• 
For anyone who dismisses concerns about voter fraud, the unhinged reaction by the left at investigating it should, at the very least, make a logical person wonder what they're so concerned about.
• 
After all, if you believe the issue is false, or at the most an irrelevant factor in end results, you should welcome confirmation of that fact.
• 
Unless, of course, one fears the actual outcome may prove how voter fraud impacts local and state races to the point of shifting the balance of power in Washington, D.C.
• 
... evealed that out-of-state voters may have changed not only the outcome of the New Hampshire U.S.  Senate race, but also could have impacted who won the state's presidential contest.
• 
Liberals usually claim if there is fraud, it's so small and isolated that it doesn't impact end results.  The margins in New Hampshire prove the falsity of that argument.
• 
... a cacophony of liberal whiners and harpies demanded a dismantling of the commission itself.
• 
Because, you know, it's just so much easier to burn down something with which you disagree. 
• 
The ACLU's farcical headline serves as a good example of how panicked the left really is: "Kris Kobach Pushes Voter Fraud Lies While Meeting With Fellow Suppression Activists."
• 
"For a problem that critics say doesn't exist, Americans seem to have a lot of stories of voter fraud or the potential for it.  They are sharing those stories with President Trump's voter integrity commission as it wades into one of the administration's thorniest fights."
• 
"Democrats have vowed to use the legislative process to try to derail the commission..."
• 
Senate Minority Leader Charles E.  Schumer of New York compared the commission to the white supremacists who marched in Charlottesville, Virginia, and said he would try to eliminate the panel as part of a must-pass bill."
• 
Why so afraid, Chuck?
• 
The issue of voter fraud must be addressed so every voter can be sure that their right as a citizen is not being erased by a fraudulent vote.
• 
Last year, this newspaper reported on a variety of fraudulent situations demanding reviews, including dead people voting in Colorado, illegals voting in Virginia, some Pennsylvania citizens voting twice, underage voters voting in the Wisconsin primary, and vote rigging in Texas.
• 
"[A] Heritage Foundation database tracking documented voter fraud now contains 492 cases and 773 criminal convictions, with untold other cases unreported and unprosecuted."
• 
"Across the country, as Heritage's database shows, voter-fraud convictions include everything from impersonation fraud and false registrations to ineligible voting by felons and noncitizens.  American voter fraud continues apace, and the United States remains one of the only democracies in the world without a uniform requirement for voter identification."
• 
Democrats and their allies are afraid of something — an end to a scheme that they have relied on for far too long.
      Trump, in DACA decision, restores constitutional sanity to immigration laws  (Fox 09/05/2017)
• 
By executive fiat, President Obama granted amnesty to immigrants living illegally in the United States. 
• 
Obama had previously admitted he had no authority to end deportations of illegal aliens when he said, "The notion that somehow I can just change the laws unilaterally is just not true."_
• 
Then he went about doing it anyway, conjuring a new breadth of hypocrisy.
• 
President Trump, is now taking the first step toward restoring sanity to the rule of law as it applies to the Constitution and immigration.
• 
... Trump is returning legislative authority to the legislature.  He is reinstating the separation of powers that are fundamental to our democracy.
• 
Under the Constitution, congress is vested with writing laws and the president is charged with executing those laws.
• 
At the end of the 19th century, the U.S.  Supreme Court declared that congress has "plenary power" (meaning full and complete) to regulate immigration.
• 
"Over no conceivable subject is the legislative power of Congress more complete."
• 
Nevertheless, Obama decided to usurp this power by unilateral directive, unconstrained by established checks and balances.
• 
... Obama bestowed a wholesale, blanket amnesty for an entire class of people.  He did so not for the reasons allowed by law, but for purposes that were purely political.
• 
Obama insisted he was forced to act because "congress failed to act." It was an appealing political argument, but utterly untrue.
• 
If a president can refuse to enforce a valid federal law, are there any limits to his powers?  What is to stop a president from rewriting other laws with which he disagrees?  Or to act where congress has declined or refused to act?
• 
Only congress is empowered to alter immigration laws that affect those who are here in the U.S.  illegally.
• 
It can either pass a new law or decline to do so.  A determination not to act is, by itself, a deliberate act.
• 
Congress considers and debates a great many bills.  Not all of them pass.  This is not a "failure" in a conventional sense, but a decision by declination.
• 
Obama twisted the law, ignored the Constitution, and abdicated his primary responsibility as chief executive.
      An open letter to Antifa  (Fox 09/01/2017)
• 
You've had quite a run spreading violence across our nation in the past few months.  And while you claim your name means you're anti-fascist, you've shown by your actions that you're really anti-American and anti-freedom.
• 
You've assaulted hundreds of President Trump's supporters at rallies.  You've vandalized property in the nation's capital after the Trump inauguration.
• 
And you've gone on an arson rampage because you were upset that former Breitbart News Senior Editor Milo Yiannopoulos was supposed to speak at the University of California, Berkeley. 
• 
In Charlottesville, you arrived on the scene with clubs and shields, prepared to commit violence.  Instead, your sick plans were superseded by the monstrous behavior of neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members and other right-wing extremists as lunatic as you are.
• 
Last Sunday, near your operational headquarters in Berkeley, you proved again that you are a nest of Marxist vipers.
• 
You went on yet another violent rampage, attacking innocent conservative men and women who were holding a peaceful rally. 
• 
If there's anything you Antifa members hate it's free speech, the Bill of Rights and the United States of America.
• 
In this, you have a lot in common with the fascists you denounce, as well as communist tyrants.
• 
You so-called anti-fascists are really nothing more than communists yourselves, aren't you?
• 
No doubt you believe that you're on a roll and that through further assaults and intimidation you'll be able to change the political climate and remake our nation into Soviet American Union.
• 
You've had a field day picking on college millennials and unarmed reporters.  You've cold-cocked Trump supporters with rocks and attacked conservative women with pepper spray.
• 
And all the while, local police were forced to look on helplessly, under orders from liberal mayors who support "the resistance."
• 
You haven't actually met the real resistance yet, but with your determination for violence and bloodshed you probably will.
• 
The real resistance consists of millions of veterans, patriots and hard-working Americans who are sick and tired of Antifa violence and suppression of free speech.
• 
... you'd be wise to heed the words of the Bible and Matthew: ‘Those who live by the sword die by the sword."
• 
Despite your name, we know you are outlaws who embrace violence and hatred of America in the same way as the communists, the Nazis, Al Qaeda and ISIS.
      Why should anyone condemn white nationalists if the left won't condemn Antifa?  (Fox 08/29/2017)
• 
Both the white nationalists and Antifa are moral degenerates who use political violence to advance their agenda.
• 
Antifa and the white nationalists are, in fact, kissing cousins, just as the Nazis and communists were.
• 
But the white nationalists and Antifa are pretty much the same, working at opposite ends of the political spectrum.
• 
One has a swastika.  The other has a hammer and sickle.  Both are symbols of repressive, murderous regimes.
• 
The only significant difference is that members of the media and much of the political left give Antifa the veneer of moral crusade that no one gives the white nationalists.
• 
Time and time again, Antifa is violent and thuggish.  They claim anyone they attack deserves it, just like the white nationalists claim minorities deserve it.
• 
... as we are seeing in Berkeley and elsewhere, the excuse of "punching Nazis" has become justification to punch anyone who is not with Antifa.
• 
The truth is that if the left does not do a better job of vocally condemning Antifa, there really well be less people on the right willing to condemn the white nationalists.
• 
And both will, as a result, have breathing room to grow when both should be stamped out.
• 
Polite society needs to shut them both down and the left needs to drop their claims of moral justification for Antifa's actions.
      Dinesh D'Souza: Democrats' big lies about white supremacy  (Fox 08/22/2017)
• 
The tragic events in Charlottesville seemed almost too good to be true from the point of view of the mainstream media and the political left.
• 
On the one side were the neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klansmen who seemed to be for Trump; on the other were the valiant leftists fighting against racism, Nazism and white supremacy. 
• 
The narrative confirms leftists in thier belief that Trump is the embodiment of fascism and white supremacy, and that racism and Nazism are on the right.
• 
... I am struck by the anomaly that the whole controversy erupted over the campaign to take down a monument to Robert E.  Lee. 
• 
Although Lee inherited a few slaves on his wife's side, he condemned slavery as a moral and political evil and looked forward to its end.  Lee also opposed secession.
• 
So how can a man opposed to slavery and secession become, for the left, a symbol of slavery and secession?
• 
... in heaping opprobrium on Lee, the left was advancing one of its big lies.  This is the lie that the South is to blame for slavery.  In this view the slavery debate was entirely a North-South debate.
• 
But in reality it was not so.  Certainly the secession debate of 1860-61 was between the North and the South.
• 
The slavery debate, however, which lasted from the 1820s through 1860, was between the anti-slavery Republican Party and the pro-slavery Democratic Party. 
• 
Part of the Democrats' big lie is to shift the blame for slavery from themselves to the South.  This licenses leftist intimidation, vandalism and even violence in the name of fighting Southern bigotry.
• 
But let's remember that most Southerners did not own slaves.  Most Confederate soldiers did not own slaves.
• 
Let's also recall that the Northern Democrats led by Stephen Douglas supported slavery with the same resourcefulness and determination as the Southern Democrats.
• 
The Democratic Party, after all, invented white nationalism and used it for almost a century to maintain their political supremacy in the South.
• 
Today the Democrats affirm every type of ethnic nationalism — black nationalism, Latino nationalism, Asian nationalism — except white nationalism.
• 
So whites can't show up to the multicultural picnic, because all these other nationalisms are mobilized against white nationalism.
• 
... Trump supports not white nationalism but American nationalism.  Trump's American nationalism, however, at least includes all Americans.
• 
In the end, we shouldn't worry too much about a bunch of rag-tag white nationalists and Klansmen who have very little power in America today.
• 
Skinheads, Klansmen and neo-Nazis don't control corporations or cultural institutions and so their influence is severely limited.
• 
The most dangerous fascism doesn't come from these losers.
• 
It comes from those who have the power to shut down free speech on campus.
• 
It comes from the studio bosses who destroy the careers of those who don't succumb to their political orthodoxy. 
• 
It comes from deans who manage billion-dollar endowments who can ruin the academic future of dissenters and make them into pariahs. 
• 
It also comes from journalists who use their power of expose and humiliate, to browbeat people into submission to political correctness and an ideological agenda.
• 
And politicians like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton who use the power of the state — the FBI, the Justice Department, the IRS — against their political adversaries. 
• 
This fascism of the institutions is far more dangerous than the fascism of the street, and this type of fascism comes entirely from the political left.
      Todd Starnes: Mitt Romney fears nation will fall apart unless Trump apologizes  (Fox 08/21/2017)
• 
These days the only collusion happening in Washington, D.C.  is between the mainstream media, Democrats and ‘Never Trump' Republicans – all hell-bent on destroying the Trump administration.
• 
And it appears the leader of the rampaging mob is none other than Mitt Romney, the failed Republican presidential candidate. 
• 
"The president must take remedial action in the extreme.  He should address the American people, acknowledge that he was wrong, apologize.  State forcefully and unequivocally that racists are 100 percent to blame for the murder and violence in Charlottesville."
• 
Let's be clear – President Trump condemned the violence on both sides in Charlottesville, Virginia.  He also repudiated and denounced by name the white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan.
• 
Let's be clear again – Romney appears to be furious because the president dared to condemn all the violence in Charlottesville — he dared to condemn the far left thugs who smacked around news reporters and tried to burn people with a flame thrower.
• 
Romney also seems outraged because President Trump dared to stand up to the cultural jihadists – hell-bent on turning American history into a steaming pile of politically correct rubble.
• 
Where was Romney when police were attacked with rocks and bottles and urine in Boston over the weekend?
• 
Where was Romney when an elderly woman was attacked and dragged through a park while she clung to an American flag?
• 
Where was Romney when Antifa caused mayhem in the state he once governed?
• 
In truth, the fury among Republicans and Democrats has nothing to do with white supremacists or Antifa or tearing down Confederate monuments.
• 
This is about silencing Donald Trump – and his supporters – the gun-toting, Bible-clinging, deplorables.
• 
Now, they are trying to convince the nation that President Trump and his supporters are a bunch of redneck, white nationalist, racist deplorables.
• 
You love America?  You're a racist.
• 
You stand for the national anthem?  Racist.
• 
You go to church on Sunday?  You're a homophobic racist.
• 
You want to secure the border?  You're a xenophobic racist.
• 
You want to make America great again?  You're a homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, cross-burning racist.
• 
They hate you, ladies and gentlemen.  They hate what you stand for.
• 
Romney wrote that unless the president renounces racism with "unprecedented candor and strength there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric."
• 
With all due respect, Romney should be much be more fearful of the great unraveling that would come if Trump is forced from office.
      Pres.  Trump, in his classically inartful way, was absolutely right  (INN 08/19/2017)
• 
I just did something fascinating.  I just watched the President's entire 14-minute impromptu news conference at Trump Tower on Monday that sparked all the latest barrage of anti-Trump screeds...
• 
Not the reportage about the conference, but the entire 14 minutes unedited, uninterrupted.
• 
I found myself agreeing with his every word.
• 
I did not find his tone or demeanor "unpresidential" in the least.  He sharply and explicitly condemned the Nazis and White Supremacists unequivocally.
• 
He also condemned the extreme leftists who premeditatedly came armed with weapons to smash up a demonstration that, rightly or wrongly, had been granted a legal permit.
• 
... but the demonstration had a permit.  Meanwhile, the Antifa Alt-Left thugs came with flame-throwers, bats, and shields, and they came to fight.
• 
All the while, the police did nothing for much too long.  Chaos and violence ensued.
• 
The media get exercised when President Trump does not parrot their scripts, but they never minded that Barack Obama would not call out leftist rioters and violent leftist organizations by name.
• 
As inner cities would burn, with innocents watching their life savings go aflame as mobs burned down their inner-city stores in cities from Baltimore to Ferguson, the Obama Administration avoided planting blame or naming hate groups.
• 
When a Jihadist murdered Americans serving our nation faithfully at Fort Hood, Obama attributed the murders to "workplace violence."
• 
Obama never could articulate the term "Radical Islamist terrorist."
• 
When Rep.  Gabrielle Giffords was shot by her own former supporter, a mentally ill clinger who had backed the Democrat, the media blamed the violence on Republicans like Sarah Palin.
• 
When Rep.  Steve Scalise was shot, and others were wounded, by a Bernie Sanders supporter who had set out to kill Republicans, the media avoided pinning blame on a left ideology and overheated rhetoric of leftist hate.
• 
But when the President of the United States rightly excoriated law-breakers and thugs on all sides of a street conflagration, he came in for a torrent of media abuse, forcing even level-headed bystanders to take cover.
• 
I came to learn, first-hand, that there are many fine, high quality, decent people in the South who truly recoil from the haters on the Right, who truly despise the bigots of today and are ashamed of the bigotry of the past, but who sincerely honor the memories of fallen war heroes of the South.
• 
They peacefully protest removing statues of Confederacy heroes like Robert E.  Lee and Stonewall Jackson because they see them as having been true military heroes and patriots who gave their everything to protect Virginia in particular, and the South in general, from being overrun by invading armies that threatened critical aspects of their way of agrarian life.
• 
Consider, as one example, the devastation and horror that General Sherman and his army wreaked upon the South, burning and looting Atlanta and other Southern cities along their march.
• 
Lee and Jackson were not politicians, they were men who felt duty-bound to serve their patrimony.
• 
I have seen the aesthetic beauty and passion that went into sculpting those monuments, and I have read the inscriptions that breathe not a word about slavery nor the social injustices of the Confederacy but of brave young boys, who never owned a slave – the vast majority of Southerners never owned slaves – but who gave their lives for their communities, for their honor, in some cases even for their women.
• 
I do believe, as President Trump tried to say in his way, that many of those at the demonstrations indeed were decent people motivated solely by wanting peacefully to preserve the heroes of their history, oblivious to the ramifications – that, sadly, their history includes much that is shameful, even if Lee solely was motivated by a soldier's rules of honor and service, as taught at West Point; even if Jackson was motivated solely by that same code of a soldier's honor and service, amplified by a religious believer's sense that he had a duty to country.
      Since when is being less bad than the Klan a major moral accomplishment?  (National Review, 08/18/2017)
• 
The greatest Nazi-killer of the 20th century was Josef Stalin.  He also killed millions of his own people and terrorized, oppressed, enslaved, or brutalized tens of millions more.
• 
The fact that he killed Nazis during the Second World War (out of self-preservation, not principle) doesn't dilute his evil one bit.
• 
Part of the problem is psychological.  There's a natural tendency to think that when people, or movements, hate each other, it must be because they're opposites.
• 
This assumption overlooks the fact that many — indeed, most — of the great conflicts and hatreds in human history are derived from what Sigmund Freud called the "narcissism of minor differences."
• 
Most tribal hatreds are between very similar groups.
• 
The European wars of religion were between peoples who often shared the same language and culture but differed on the correct way to practice the Christian faith.
• 
The Sunni–Shia split in the Muslim world is the source of great animosity between very similar peoples.
• 
The young Communists and fascists fighting for power in the streets of 1920s Germany had far more in common with each other than they had with decent liberals or conservatives.
• 
That's always true of violent radicals and would-be totalitarians.
• 
... alliances of convenience with social democrats and other progressives were a great propaganda victory for Communists around the world because they bolstered the myth that Communists were just members of the Left coalition in the fight against Hitler, bigotry, fascism, etc.
• 
This obscured the fact that whenever the Communists had a chance to seize power, they did so.  And often, the first people they killed, jailed, or exiled were their former allies.
• 
One of the only nice things about the alt-right is that its leaders are honest about the fact that they want nothing to do with traditional American conservatism.  Like the original Nazis, they seek to replace the traditional Right with their racial hogwash.
• 
The antifa crowd has a very similar agenda with regard to traditional American liberalism.  These goons and thugs oppose free speech, celebrate violence, despise dissent, and have little use for anything else in the American political tradition.
• 
In these tribal times, the impulse to support anyone who shares your enemies is powerful.  But it is a morally stunted reflex.
• 
This is America.  You're free to denounce totalitarians wherever you find them — even if they might hate the right people.
      First they came for our statues…  (INN 08/17/2017)
• 
Altogether three times, so far, Trump has been perfectly clear about his disdain for white supremacists but none of it counts for one reason.
• 
Because he is Donald Trump and they hate him and they hear him only from the filter of their own misconceptions, misinterpretations and prejudices. 
• 
Behind their high-minded moralizing lurks their animosity for one man, Trump.
• 
He asked if founders George Washington and Thomas Jefferson are next to be toppled from our heritage and erased from our memories.
• 
... and they, the vandals, sure enough call themselves Social Justice Warriors. 
• 
More to the point, they are brutes, the Radicalized Left's Foot Soldiers and Remembrance of Things Past is not for them, that is, if it does not conform to their Progressive ideology.
• 
We don't get to pull ourselves from our roots as if the good, the bad and the ugly never happened.
• 
Once we do that, we've handed ourselves over to the mobs who want the past, present and future only to themselves.
• 
They – the Progressive vandals – they come with lofty words to commit the basest acts.
• 
They had their pretext in Virginia, but nearly every college campus is now owned and operated by the Violent Left.
• 
Why is Trump wrong to call them out?
• 
To the well-fed well-paid (Soros) mobs of the Left, the game is fair so long as diversity is THEIR diversity and only when free speech is THEIR free speech, not yours or mine.
• 
That's because he won't give them the satisfaction of blaming ONLY those despicable white supremacists. 
• 
He knows the Left, equally despicable and often brutish and barbaric.  They don't want to hear this.
• 
So what's next from the Index of Forbidden Works that doomed millions from the Spanish Inquisition?  Book burning?  Mob Rule?
• 
Trump is right.  Where does it end?
      Charlottesville never had to happen — How craven local politicians led our nation into tragedy  (Fox 08/17/2017)
• 
Charlottesville is a story of liberal hubris and political opportunism and the lives they cost.  It is a tragedy that never had to happen.
• 
This spring Charlottesville's ultra-liberal city council voted to remove an equestrian statue of General Robert E.  Lee that's been standing in a park in downtown Charlottesville since 1924, and to change the park's name from Lee Park to Emancipation Park. 
• 
Charlottesville is, and has been, a liberal enclave for a long time; in twelve of the fourteen years we have lived there the Lee statue, or the Stonewall Jackson statue nearby, never raised a progressive eyebrow.
• 
But after leftwing groups like Black Lives Matter began targeting Confederate Civil War monuments for vandalism and destruction in the aftermath of Ferguson, our city council decided it could score some points with BLM types by having the statue removed — and possibly avoid a violent confrontation with those same leftwing extremist groups.
• 
Statues of dead Confederate war heroes is an issue on which we can disagree.
• 
My great-great grandfather fought for the Union in the Civil War, and was severely wounded at the battle of Stones River.
• 
But I am sure neither he nor anyone in his Wisconsin regiment would have wanted that statue removed or the name changed 150 years later; any more than Ulysses S.  Grant or Lincoln – who spoke of the need for "charity to all and malice towards none" and "to bind the nation's wounds" in the aftermath of America's bloodiest conflict – would have wanted it.
• 
It was exactly those wounds our city council decided to reopen.
• 
Certainly if Mayor Mark Signer and other council members thought they could avoid future trouble this way, they were wildly wrong.
• 
Instead what they did was to create a cause for every crackpot Neo-Nazi and KKK group looking for some free publicity to rally around, and an opportunity for every crackpot leftist group on Saturday, to get into the action.
• 
... state police then did nothing as the Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and assorted neo-Communist extremists began arriving that morning in their own riot gear, including helmets and shields, and began flailing away at the neo-Nazi extremists who responded in kind.
• 
It's still not clear who ordered the police to "stand down;" perhaps no one did.
• 
Perhaps they simply did not want to appear on YouTube or the nightly news beating up a demonstrator, whether black or white, Brown or Red.
• 
They only finally moved in when Governor McAuliffe declared "a state of emergency," and only after a car driven by a white supremacist killed a young woman, Heather Heyer, after plowing into the crowd of rioters — rioters who should never been allowed to have contact with each other, let alone allowed to battle it out in the streets of Charlottesville.
• 
Meanwhile, two state troopers were dead after their helicopter crashed.
• 
At the end of the day they were two men simply doing their duty in a futile mission set by a do-nothing governor whose attention was focused on getting applause from the media, just like our mayor and city council — and just like the commentators afterwards who have worked hard to turn these deaths into an indictment of Donald Trump.
• 
A governor with any sense of honor and integrity would resign after a debacle like this; so would a mayor.  But of course McAuliffe and Signer won't.
• 
They are symptoms, not causes, of an American political culture that has become deeply sick.
      The Problem with Ethics  (JWR 08/16/2017)
• 
After eight years of an administration too feckless to acknowledge radical Islam as the leading force behind global terrorism and so vapid as to dismiss the Fort Hood massacre as "workplace violence," we have a right to expect the new regime to condemn white supremacists and neo-Nazis for what they are.
• 
The sad reality is that we have to let bigots and racists hold rallies like the one last weekend in Charlottesville. 
• 
The very term "hate-crime" is symptomatic of the ethical confusion of our times.  With left and right more polarized than ever, each side brands the other side as evil and thereby legitimizes its own hateful rhetoric.
• 
The result is that we criminalize the motives of people we don't like and excuse the actions of people we do.  And that just leads us deeper into the quagmire of moral anarchy.
• 
... ignorance, loutishness, and racism are not illegal, nor should they be.  If we want to live with freedom, we have to tolerate those who wield their freedom irresponsibly, if not criminally.
• 
And when they do cross the line into criminality, we should let the law work the way it was meant to work.
• 
What sparked this ugly episode was the removal of a statue of Robert E.  Lee, a southern hero revered in his time for his honor and nobility.
• 
Should we ignore General Lee's support of slavery because of his other virtues?  Or should we discount his virtues because he fought for slavery?
• 
No and no.  People are complicated, and often contradictory.  That's why attributing motive is both tricky and risky.
• 
It's easy for us in our age of equality to condemn man's oppression of man, as we should.
• 
But it's also unjust to demand the same level of moral clarity from those who lived in different times with different values.
• 
Indeed, when the values of future generations undergo another sea-change – as they will – who will defend us for our beliefs and actions before the indictment of our grandchildren?
• 
What are ethics but the slippery discipline of gleaning the spirit of the law from within the letter of the law?
• 
Even more slippery is the awareness that the morality of Man is subject to human bias and shifting cultural values.
• 
We dare not excuse every historical movement merely because it seemed right in its time; but neither should we condemn all those who lacked the moral clarity of our own times.
• 
So how do we navigate these treacherous moral waters?  We look to our leaders, who have the responsibility to help us set our collective moral compass as much as they have the obligation to steer the ship of state.
• 
King Solomon says, A magic rests on the lips of the king; let his mouth not betray him in judgment.
• 
You've got the helm, Mr.  Trump.  Be very careful what you do with it.
      Dinesh D'Souza: White Nationalists Belong With Dems But Are Politically Homeless  (Fox 08/14/2017)
• 
"Who invented white nationalism?  The Democrats.  And black nationalism?  Ditto.  So don't try & blame this on the GOP."
• 
"The way that the progressive Democrats have constructed their sort of multi-cultural totem pole, they encourage every form of ethnic nationalism except white nationalism."
• 
"...  white nationalists really belong in the Democratic party but instead are "in a sense politically homeless because if they show up at the multi-cultural picnic they're Satan."
      The Google Gulag  (INN 08/12/2017)
• 
Let me Google that for you. 
• 
James Damore is FIDE chess master who studied at Princeton, MIT and Harvard.  He had been working as a software engineer at Google for four years.
• 
Danielle Brown is the new Vice President of Diversity at Google.  She has an MBA from the University of Michigan and campaigned for Hillary. 
• 
She had been working at Google for a few weeks. 
• 
James Damore wrote a memo suggesting that Google should pursue ideological diversity, end discriminatory efforts to achieve identity politics diversity and be honest about gender differences.
• 
Danielle responded by denouncing his paper.  "It's not a viewpoint that I or this company endorses, promotes or encourages."
• 
It was a difficult time because leftists at Google had to confront the horror of an original thinker in their ranks.  Some were so traumatized by his intrusion into their safe space that they threatened to quit.
• 
Pichai claimed that some Google employees were "hurting".  Social media accounts were full of bizarre claims that leftist employees were "afraid" to come to work.  But the only actual casualty was Damore.
• 
James Damore is what most people think of when they imagine a Google employee.  A brilliant original thinker with interests spread across the scientific and technological spectrum.
• 
But Danielle Brown is what Google actually is: a Hillary Clinton supporter who handled diversity at Intel and Google. 
• 
Google is a search engine monopoly that makes its money from search ads.  It began with a revolutionary idea from young engineers much like Damore.
• 
Then the engineers became billionaires.  And the company that began in a garage hired a Vice President of Diversity to get rid of the brilliant young engineers.
• 
The idea that made Google some twenty years ago was PageRank.  It was ahead of its time in utilizing social technology to rate the relevance of a page.
• 
The idea has since been cannibalized as Google's search algorithm favors its own products.  And increasingly it also favors its own political views.
• 
Google has embedded partisan attacks on conservatives into its search and news territories under the guise of "fact checks".
• 
It has fundamentally shifted results for terms such as "Jihad" to reflect Islamist propaganda rather than the work of counterterrorism researchers...
• 
Google had been previously accused of manipulating search results during Brexit. 
• 
... there's no reason to think that it will stop there until Google has completely cannibalized PageRank and replaced it with ProgRank in which search results will be dominated by left-wing sites in one category after another.
• 
Google's treatment of conservative users mirrors its internal treatment of conservative employees. 
• 
Internally, Google is a toxic environment where conservatives are threatened, blacklisted and even physically assaulted.
• 
Damore's case went public.  Countless other conservatives were forced out of Google and blacklisted by left-wing activists without their cases ever receiving public attention.
• 
Once upon a time, James Damore would have represented what was best about Google.
• 
But Google doesn't need brilliant minds.  It needs to find more ways to squeeze ad dollars out of its monopoly. 
• 
Damore was working on Google's search infrastructure.  And there's little doubt that he was wasted there.
• 
Google's goal is to streamline and shape search results for a mobile environment by giving users what it thinks they want rather than what they are actually searching for.
• 
Google isn't just politically left-wing, its product mindset has become all about forcing users to do what it thinks they should be doing. 
• 
When users search for results that Google doesn't like, it guides them to what it thinks they should be looking for.
• 
Google is approaching the ecological dead end of its technological niche.
• 
Meanwhile its Google.org philanthropy can fund pro-crime and anti-police causes.  Google Ideas, now known as Jigsaw, can try to get involved in the Syrian Civil War.
• 
And the herd of leftists it hired can police internal messaging by spamming angry social justice memes and waiting for an actual engineer to contradict them.
• 
That's what happened to James Damore.  It's happened to plenty of others before him. 
• 
When Google fired Damore, it sent a very clear message.  The message wasn't tolerance, but intolerance. 
• 
It said that its Vice President of Diversity knows more about biology than a researcher who received his biology degree in the top 3% of his class.
• 
It announced that there is no room for original thinking, heterodoxy or genius at Google.
• 
"The company was founded under the principles of freedom of expression, diversity, inclusiveness."
• 
But freedom of expression no longer comes before diversity.  It's breathing in the toxic fumes of fake inclusiveness and watching diversity vanish down the highway. 
• 
The gates of the internet cannot remain in the hands of a corporation intolerant of free speech.
• 
Google's monopoly doesn't only threaten the free market.  It threatens freedom of expression on the internet. 
• 
It's not just about James Damore.  It's about all of us.
      Trump must go on offense  (Fox 08/09/2017)
• 
Despite record job growth, the Dow over 22,000, illegal immigration down 70 percent and massive deregulation, the mainstream media still reports that Donald Trump's presidency is a failure.
• 
To put the final nail in the coffin of the opposition (Republicans, Democrats and the failing mainstream media) President Trump needs victories in three areas: legislative, the court of public opinion, and national defense and diplomacy.
• 
First, legislative – more specifically, health care.
• 
A handful of Republicans – after campaigning, raising money on and promising the repeal of ObamaCare – failed to deliver.
• 
He can propose a bill to repeal only the individual mandate and he needs to do it louder than anything else he has done to date.
• 
This would be very hard to vote against and the president would post his first legislative victory.
• 
Also in the legislative column: tax reform.
• 
What legislator would not want to go home to constituents and be able to say "we put more money in your paycheck?"
• 
... send Sarah Huckabee Sanders to the podium with an average middle class American making $50-60,000 a year, hold up his current paycheck, what he makes and what he takes home.
• 
Then you hold up a second paycheck with the same salary under Trump's tax plan highlighting the difference in the take home pay.
• 
"This is what President Trump stands for.  Congress, the bill is on your desk, make it happen."
• 
In the court of public opinion, Trump has been convicted by the mainstream media of Russian collusion.  The problem, though, is they have yet to produce any evidence for any of their criminal allegations.
• 
Here's the play: Trump challenges his largest critics on this.  Calling out Schumer, Pelosi, Waters and a few more saying that he will participate in the investigation to the fullest for 90 more days on the condition that if nothing is found, they resign their seats.
• 
If they don't respond in 10 days, he fires Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
• 
It's simply a PR play, they will NOT agree to this which gives Trump the opportunity to go on the offense and say, "The Democrats don't even believe in this investigation."
• 
Finally, national defense.
• 
Even with the 15-0 global decision against it at the UN Security Council, North Korea is going to continue to push the envelope until we do something.
• 
Sanctions will not work and will only further enrage the regime.
• 
We have a military machine unlike anyone else.  Time to use it!
• 
Park three carrier groups off the coast.  When North Korea launches another missile, we will assume – due to recent threats – that it is not a test and will shoot it down.
• 
When they fire another one we shoot that down and destroy the installation that it came from.
• 
Then shoot the next one down and destroy three more military establishments.
• 
During this time, the president needs to use his PR machine at the White House to continue to encourage Kim Jung Un to come to the table.
• 
President Trump is a different type of politician.  He made his mark by doing things aggressively and thinking outside the box.
• 
Mr.  President, do what you do best, run over your opponents and don't look back.
• 
"The Left would rather see our country fail than Trump succeed."
      Napolitano: Trump, Sessions and the Justice Department — a clash that should not be happening  (Fox 07/27/2017)
• 
How is it that parts of the DOJ cannot be controlled by the attorney general, whom Trump appointed to run the DOJ?
• 
And with a mountain of evidence of Clinton's espionage — her failure to safeguard state secrets, crimes far more treacherous than those alleged against Trump's campaign — why has she not been prosecuted?
• 
Shortly before he left office, President Barack Obama quietly changed a DOJ regulation so as to permit any federal intelligence agency ... that lawfully possesses raw intelligence data to share it with any one or more of the other intelligence agencies.  For generations, this had been prohibited.
• 
When Sessions became attorney general and learned whatever it is that the FBI learned about the Russians, he concluded that he might become a reluctant witness in the FBI investigation of the Russians because he had been involved in the management of the Trump campaign.
• 
Fearing this conflict and rejecting the toughness demanded of his office, Sessions recused himself from the management of all DOJ matters involving the Russians.
• 
Then ... deputy attorney general, overreacted and appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller as an independent counsel to investigate the Russians and all related matters.
• 
Thus was born a now growing part of the DOJ, which is lawfully independent of the president and which has challenged him. 
• 
Whether Sessions stays or goes, the attorney general should not feel bound by Comey's decision to let Clinton go.  He should put the evidence of her crimes before a fresh team of prosecutors and instruct them to present it to a grand jury for indictment.
• 
And he should also identify and indict those in the Obama administration who started this mess with their leaks of raw intelligence data.
• 
The president is frustrated because he wants to do what he was elected to do.  Instead, the DOJ's lethargy and the independent counsel's zeal have him at bay.
• 
... a fair reading of the Constitution and a reasonable understanding of the separation of powers militate in favor of the doctrine of the unitary executive.
• 
That doctrine, which was well-accepted by the Framers, states succinctly that when it comes to the executive branch of the federal government, since only the president is accountable to the voters, only he can run the executive branch.
• 
The doctrine further articulates that since the consent of the governed is the base line for the government's moral legitimacy, we should not have agents in the government to whom the voters have never given consent.
      Liz Peek: Dirt on Hillary?  Who could resist?  (Fox 07/12/2017)
• 
Just to be clear: if an emissary of Borut Pahor, President of Slovenia, had emailed Hillary campaign apparatchik John Podesta last summer, offering scandalous dirt on Melania Trump, he would have turned down the meeting?  Give me a break.
• 
Weeks before the election, videos surfaced showing Clinton campaign workers strategizing on how to infiltrate and disrupt Trump rallies. 
• 
What Donald Trump Jr.  did in accepting a meeting with someone supposedly linked to the Russian government was dirty, and stupid, but it is not evidence that his father's campaign "colluded" with Russia to defeat Hillary Clinton.
• 
That said, having a Russia-linked source offer up "dirt" on Hillary Clinton would have been irresistible.
• 
... Hillary and Bill Clinton appear to have done favors for political or business allies in exchange for substantial gifts to the Clinton Foundation.
• 
"... at least 60 companies that lobbied the State Department during [Clinton's] tenure donated a total of more than $26 million to the Clinton Foundation."
• 
... Hillary helped win approval for Russia's state nuclear agency (in other words, a government entity – directed by President Vladimir Putin) to buy a controlling interest in Uranium One, one of America's largest uranium mines, in exchange for $2.35 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation.
• 
... At roughly the same time, a Russian investment bank staffed with numerous ex-KGB types paid Bill Clinton a $500,000 speaking fee
• 
... "Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was secretary of state?" Does this resonate?  Will Special Counsel Robert Mueller ask the same question?  He certainly should.
• 
The uranium deal was important, in that it concerned a large stock of a U.S.  strategic asset.
• 
Also, the Kremlin had made expanding its access to uranium globally a high priority because it was hard at work building nuclear power plants such as the Bushehr facilities in Iran and similar projects in North Korea and Venezuela.
• 
In other words, the Uranium One purchase significantly boosted Russia's business and diplomatic prospects.
• 
Money actually changed hands between Russian entities and the Clintons, and favors were done.
• 
In that context, Donald Trump Jr.  was approached by a Russian source who promised incriminating evidence about Hillary.  Who wouldn't jump at the chance?
• 
There are important challenges facing our country.  You wouldn't know it from following the mainstream media, caught up as they are in faux scandals and the ever-lasting "Russia" story.
• 
Democrats and their allies in the press cannot and will not move on from the investigations into Trump's presumed ties to the Kremlin, even if it hurts the country.
• 
To do so would legitimatize the Trump presidency, and focus voters' attentions on the popular White House agenda – health care reform, lower taxes, infrastructure spending, protected borders, a stronger military and a roll-back of decades of suffocating red tape.
• 
Democrats cannot afford that.  They especially cannot afford to have Americans looking for their answers to our challenges – they don't have any.
• 
Which is why Donald Trump, and not Hillary Clinton, is president.
      While de Blasio whined in Germany, Trump was our defender  (NYP 07/08/2017)
• 
Donald Trump goes to Germany to defend Western civilization and promote economic growth.
• 
Bill de Blasio goes to Germany to throw verbal Molotov cocktails and promote socialism.
• 
One is the leader of the free world, the other is a great pretender.
• 
His decision to join an international rabble marked by vandalism and violence to "protest" Trump, the head of his own country and a citizen of his own city, shows where the mayor's heart is.
• 
He boasted to his hosts about the diversity of New York subway riders, as if that just started on his watch.
• 
Perhaps his sneaky disappearing act will persuade enough voters that it's time to find an alternative.
• 
Until they do, they're stuck with a mayor who neglects their cares to become a pet rock of the international left.  In his phone call, he said his role was to "set a tone and say we are not going to be intimidated by President Trump."
• 
Under that definition of his job, New York can go to hell and it's not his problem.  He's got more important things to do. 
• 
In contrast to the mayor's embarrassing trip, Trump was on a serious mission to combat terrorism and shape international trade rules to create more jobs for Americans.
• 
As he had in his Mideast visit, where he rallied Muslim nations, the president demonstrated a strong sense of purpose about confronting global threats to freedom.
• 
"The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive.  Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost?
• 
"Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders?  Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?"
• 
Unlike his predecessor, Trump doesn't travel to apologize for America and surrender to multi-cultural sensitivities.
• 
He was elected to slam the brakes on the poisonous ideas that redistribution of wealth and managing decline are the president's chief duties.
• 
... gradually, and sometimes by fits and starts, Trump's America First agenda is emerging as a coherent doctrine that sees faith and family as a bedrock of national peace and prosperity.
• 
... we are engaged in a battle "for family, for freedom, for country and for God."
      Why Trump backers aren't swayed by media attacks, with or without Fox  (Fox 07/06/2017)
• 
And guess what?  They don't much care about wrestling videos and insulting cable news hosts.
• 
They think the president is doing just fine, that the media are out to get him, and that most of what obsesses the press is just noise.
• 
"What I do hear from my conservative friends — most still ardent Trump supporters — is a collective yawn at the Washington maelstrom.  Few care about his tweets — even about Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough and the CNN body slam.  The whacking of James Comey?  About time.  President Obama's appointee anyway.  Mr.  Trump's asking if Mr.  Comey could drop the Michael Flynn investigation?  It was a simple question, not obstruction of justice.  The Comey testimony?  Vindication for Mr.  Trump!  Mr.  Comey is a leaker, he lied under oath, and he's going down.  He'll be lucky if he doesn't serve prison time."
• 
"For many conservatives, they support Mr.  Trump because he's their de facto leader in a cultural war.  Liberals mock Christianity and demean Christian morals.  Conservatives respect our police and military, while liberals romanticize street thugs.  Conservatives' tax dollars help pay for public schools and colleges that indoctrinate liberal values."
• 
The president's attacks on media figures, even if sometimes tasteless, are seen by some people as slamming a group of elitists that doesn't respect them. 
      Napolitano: Why our Supreme Court justices unanimously agreed about Trump's travel ban  (Fox 06/29/2017)
• 
Lower federal courts had consistently ruled that the president's behavior was animated by an anti-Muslim bias...
• 
The Supreme Court unanimously saw it differently.  Here is the back story.
• 
I have argued for months that both the first travel ban executive order, signed Jan.  27, and the second one, signed March 6, were lawful and constitutional because the courts have ruled that the Constitution gives the president exclusively the final say on foreign policy and because they have ruled that immigration is one of the tools he can use to effectuate that policy.
• 
Moreover, Congress has expressly authorized the president to suspend immigration from stated countries for finite periods of time to enhance national security.
• 
In order to do this and pass judicial muster, the president's lawyers in the Department of Justice need only show that the president has a rational basis for his order.
• 
The traditional Judeo-Christian view of governmental decisions that limit the liberties or opportunities of many because of the anticipated behavior of a few is that those decisions are unjust and need not be obeyed.
• 
... we have come to the political and legal consensus that individual worthiness is personal and is not a characteristic of a group, and we have condemned other countries' governments for punishing the many because of the fear or behavior of a few.
• 
Yet the issue before the high court regarding the president's executive order is not its wisdom or morality or justness.  The issue is its lawfulness and its constitutionality.
• 
Bear in mind that there has been no trial in any of these cases.  The rulings appealed from were all preliminary in nature, based not on cross-examined evidence but on the judges' feel for the cases and their understanding of the law.
• 
... the Supreme Court ruling ....  did invalidate all injunctions imposed by the lower courts against the enforcement of the second order.
• 
In so doing, it ... created exceptions provide that immigrants from the six countries are exempt from the travel ban if they can show that they have a "relationship" with a person or entity in the U.S.
• 
... the Supreme Court will hear oral argument on the power of the president to use immigration travel bans as an instrument of foreign policy in October and will probably rule before Christmas.
• 
And this troublesome business of banning people from coming here because of their place of origin will be with us for a long time.
      Trump made a mistake naming Sessions as attorney general  (NYP 06/13/2017)
• 
Watching Attorney General Jeff Sessions try to bat away Democrats' smears and innuendo Tuesday, I had two reactions:
• 
One, he's been an honorable public servant who deserves better than an inquisition.
• 
Two, President Trump made a mistake in naming him attorney general.  It's an error that helped to set a national disaster in motion.
• 
The opposition is ruthless and without principle, but it couldn't get as far as it has without the president's inadvertent help.
• 
Start with the Dems, and their desperate hunt for collusion with Russia, obstruction of justice, or just jaywalking — anything remotely resembling a crime will do.
• 
Their fury knows no bounds, with character assassination now routine because they can't handle the truth about the 2016 election.
• 
No matter what question they ask or what insult they throw, the goal is always the same: overturn Trump's victory. 
• 
Either way, for them it's a win-win.  They win if Trump's agenda is stalled, and they win bigger if he gets impeached.
• 
It's a dirty business, but, unfortunately for the people who want the nation to change course, they're making progress.
• 
They still don't have an agenda of their own that will move the economy forward or protect America from terrorism, but they have managed to muddy the waters so much that Trump's popularity is sinking.
• 
They will continue their burn-it-down, blow-it-up strategy as long as it works.
• 
Some of the blame has to go to Sessions...  Sessions knew almost from day one that he would have to recuse himself from any investigation of the campaign because of Justice Department regulations.
• 
That fact alone should have persuaded Sessions to turn down the job, or persuaded Trump to name someone else.
• 
The entire Trump presidency ... now hangs in the balance of an unrestrained independent investigation, instigated by the president's enemies, all because the president picked an AG who could have no role in the most important decision of the young administration.
• 
Sessions said his recusal was required by regulations because he had been a campaign adviser and a Trump surrogate, and the ethics rules prohibit him from involvement in any investigations of the campaign.
• 
With that knowledge, he and Trump should have re-thought his taking the job.
• 
... it seems likely that Trump didn't know about the rules and that they never discussed the implications of Sessions' role in the campaign.
• 
The case is a perfect example of how Trump, the ultimate outsider, is bedeviled by the culture of insiders.
• 
A fundraising email sent under Trump's name captured the frustration.  "If you told me this would happen in America, I wouldn't believe you."
• 
"The losing political party is using a conspiracy theory — without having a single shred of evidence — to DERAIL a constitutionally-elected president."
• 
There is much truth in the charges, yet truth alone is not nearly enough to win the day.
• 
The president needs to find solutions that get the public back on his side, and he needs to find them fast.
      'This is war': Florida sheriff urges citizens to arm themselves in case of attack  (Fox 06/10/2017)
• 
"Folks, now more than ever is the time for our citizens to be prepared to serve as the first line of defense, not only for them, but for their families."
• 
"What's next is to fully understand that this is war, and you better be prepared to wage war to protect you, your family, and those around you if attacked."
• 
... attackers rely on people running, hiding, and waiting for help, rather than fighting back.
• 
"What they don't count on is being attacked themselves, having to become defensive to save their own lives."
• 
... calling 911 means officers are on their way, but ... "Until they arrive, it's up to you and those with you to neutralize or eliminate the threat."
• 
encouraged people to take self-defense classes, and urged those with concealed weapons permits to carry their guns with them at all times.
• 
"No matter who you are or what your position is on guns, there's no denying the fact that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun or a knife is an armed and well-prepared citizen or law enforcement officer."
      Sean Hannity: Comey reveals himself to be a Deep State political hack  (Fox 06/09/2017)
• 
Comey confirmed several times that the president and the White House did not ask him to stop the Russia investigation.
• 
Comey said multiple times that President Trump was not and never was under investigation
• 
We also learned that Comey was selectively leaking information to the press to try and damage the president
• 
Comey admitted that Lynch was able to pressure him into toning down his own language when speaking publicly about Hillary Clinton's email investigation. 
• 
Comey has failed the American people at every single turn.  He disrespected our Constitution.  He didn't care about equal application of the rule of law.  He created a two-tiered justice system, one for Hillary and Bill Clinton, and one for the rest of America, by ignoring the many, many crimes we know she committed.
• 
From whitewashing Hillary Clinton's illegal email server to ignoring the Clinton Foundation's pay-to-play schemes, Comey has been a no-show.
• 
He was obsessed with Russia, but only when it came to Trump.
• 
He couldn't care less when the Clintons gave Moscow control of 20 percent of our uranium.
• 
Sadly, James Comey is nothing more than a partisan and a political hack, and his testimony once again proved that.
• 
And the disgruntled, fired employee admitted he leaked details of his own memo, allegedly written after meeting with Trump, hoping that it would bring about a special counsel.
• 
From clearing Clinton, to obeying Loretta Lynch's orders to soft-peddle the server investigation to his inexcusable treatment of the president, James Comey has proven time and time again that he is unfit to serve our country.
• 
The real story is how Deep State dolts like James Comey have been manipulating facts, leaking information and blocking the duly elected president from doing his job.
• 
See related Hillary's Private Server (Mike Lester, 07/06/2016) cartoon from Government picture album
      Cal Thomas: The secular progressives reveal [again] why they are not fit to lead anything  (Fox 06/06/2017)
• 
For sheer hilarity and hyperbole it's hard to beat a recent headline on a Washington Post editorial ... "Trump turns his back on the world," it screamed.
• 
A close second goes to the headline on a New York Times piece by columnist David Brooks: "Donald Trump Poisons the World."
• 
Dishonorable mention goes to former presidential adviser David Gergen, who said on CNN that Trump had committed "one of the most shameful acts in U.S.  history."
• 
The secular progressives have again revealed their diminished capacity, which ought to disqualify them from leading anything, especially the country.
• 
The central argument supporting "climate change" has been that a "scientific consensus" exists on the subject.  Two things about this.
• 
The first is that climate scientists who disagree on that consensus have been largely shutout of the debate.  Their papers and ideas are blocked from mainstream scientific journals and, thus, are not subject to peer review.  Politics appears to have overshadowed science.
• 
Second, there have been numerous cases in the not too distant past where an empirical conclusion among scientists was touted as rock-solid truth, but which later, after further examination, proved to be dead wrong.
• 
Newsweek magazine featured a cover story in 1975 about "global cooling." That was supposed to be a scientific consensus.
• 
President Trump should counter his critics by convening a White House conference on climate.
• 
In addition to the apostles of climate change, he should invite scientists — and only those specializing in climate science — that have been marginalized from the debate.
• 
These would include MIT climate scientist Dr.  Richard Lindzen, who claims believing that CO2 controls the climate "is pretty close to believing in magic."
• 
None of those participating in the proposed conference should be academics or scientists who receive federal grants or have other connections to government.  This might give them a conflict of interest and reduce their credibility.
• 
Let's have a high-level debate on this issue and settle it once and for all.
      Did Russia interfere with our election?  Yes.  Did it elect Trump, absolutely not  (Fox 05/30/2017)
• 
Did the Russians try to interfere with last November's Presidential election?  Without a doubt.
• 
Were there conversations between Russian representatives and members of the Trump campaign team?  Very likely.
• 
Did the Russians succeed in altering the outcome of the election in any way, or was the Trump campaign complicit in their attempts?  Absolutely not.
• 
What do I base this conclusion on?  Having an actual understanding of how campaigns are run and won, what's possible, and what's impossible. 
• 
But let's be honest, there are some who are so disappointed and stunned by the choice Americans made, so disbelieving of the results, they are remarkably susceptible to believing almost anything.
• 
The Democrats, along with too many in the news media, keep obsessing on creating a nexus between the Trump campaign and Russian operatives.
• 
The truth is that no one has given a credible explanation of what the Russians actually did, or even could do, to change or affect the outcome.
• 
... I asked the host what he thought the Russians did to help Trump.  He mentioned that they ran very negative stories about Hillary on Russian TV.
• 
I'm going out on a limb on this one, but I'm guessing for most Americans the main source of their political news is not broadcast in Moscow. 
• 
... if these problematic revelations really did hurt the Clinton campaign, there are two parties that are responsible: The Russians for hacking and leaking, and the Clinton campaign for colluding with the DNC in the first place.
• 
But not the Trump campaign.
• 
... there seems to be little empirical evidence that exposing the DNC/Clinton exchanges had any real impact on the race.
• 
Let's be clear, the "witch hunt" now underway has absolutely nothing to do with getting to the bottom of the facts, and everything to do with the 2018 elections.
• 
And until someone comes up with a single piece of evidence that proves the Russians coordinated with the Trump campaign resulting in the change of a single vote, how about we start worrying about real issues.
      Judge Jeannine Pirro: Heroin dealers deserve prison, not sympathy  (Fox 05/27/2017)
• 
Imagine this for a moment – your child is dead.  This person that you have raised from birth and have focused every important thought of your life for over two decades is gone from the world forever.
• 
Because despite your efforts, your attention, and your devotion, you could not stop the fateful call of the heroin that ended your child's life.  And destroyed yours.
• 
The deadly poison that is heroin made its way to your small town from Mexico, where it was grown and processed, later to be trafficked to your neighborhood where its target customers were someone's children, parents, brothers and sisters.
• 
... the last presidential administration decided that it would treat these so-called "non-violent, low-level drug offenders" with leniency to help them avoid potentially long prison sentences required by law.
• 
Everywhere you look on the subject, you see another editorial, documentary, or pundit talking about the tragedy of the convicted "non-violent, low-level drug offender" who has been separated by his family because he is serving a long sentence in prison.
• 
You wonder why the drug trafficker arrested and convicted for dealing over 20,000 doses of black heroin is considered a non-violent, low-level drug offender.
• 
And the heroin that your child used violently ripped the very life of your child away, then, with equal violence, utterly destroyed the entire purpose of your own life, turning it into a nightmare from which you can never wake up. 
• 
Under President Trump and Attorney General Sessions, the Department of Justice is going to charge major drug traffickers based on the exceedingly large amounts of deadly poison they are peddling in our neighborhoods.
• 
These drug traffickers will no longer be treated with kid gloves – they will be treated like the merchants of death that they are.
• 
Of course, that is not to say you are without sympathy for the parents who, through no fault of their own, has to see their child in prison for ten years.
• 
... despite their child's disastrously wrong choices, they will be able to welcome him home one day.
• 
You will never have the same opportunity.
      Manchester attack: Nations around the world must stop appeasing the Islamists  (Fox 05/23/2017)
• 
"Dozens of innocent people, beautiful young children savagely murdered in this heinous attack upon humanity."
• 
An untold number of children and their parents were massacred by Islamic radicals - killed in the name of the religion of peace. 
• 
In response – there have been candlelight vigils and calls for peace and understanding – but the Muslim jihadists do not want peace.  They want death. 
• 
The time has come to eliminate this evil from the face of the planet.  The time has come for nations around the world to stop appeasing the Islamists.
• 
"We must drive out the terrorists and extremists from our midst, obliterate this evil ideology, and protect and defend our citizens and people of the world."
• 
"All civilized nations must be united in this effort."
• 
And we must do our part in the United States.  We must secure our borders, we must investigate those who come here from the birthplace of this radical ideology and we must do whatever is necessary to prevent American blood from being shed on American soil.
• 
Yet, there are still apologists for the radical Islamists - from Hollywood to the halls of Congress.
• 
They seem to think we can win over the hearts and minds of the jihadists with bouquets of flowers and gentle hugs. 
• 
The Presbyterians and the Lutherans are not the ones strapping on backpacks filled with nails and blowing themselves up.  The Methodists and Baptists aren't beheading people.  The Catholics are not flying jetliners into buildings.
• 
How many more children must die at the hands of radical Muslims - slain in the name of the religion of peace?
• 
See related Let\\\'s Hug It out! (Glenn McCoy, 06/22/2016) cartoon from Terror picture album
• 
See related Hillary Solution (Sean Delonas, 09/19/2016) cartoon from Terror picture album
      'F*** Trump' chant led by California Democratic Party Leader: What's next?  (Fox 05/22/2017)
• 
Outgoing California Democratic Party Chairman John Burton performed the only action left to an impotent, leftist, cadre head in a lawful society.  He shouted.
• 
He likely would've preferred some kind of violent action, but instead he simply advocated for one.
• 
... as they were flashing their hands in applause for his service to the party, he put his middle finger in the air and lead a chant, "F** Donald Trump!"
• 
Perhaps more remarkable was the eager willingness of the crowd to join in with him, chanting, while House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Obama's Former Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis looked on, laughing it up in the background.
• 
Why should this astonish anyone?  This is the party recently all-in for a woman who unapologetically called half the country "deplorables."
• 
Since the government removed the Bible and prayer from our schools, our nation has been educating young people to believe that life happens purely by accident and that evolution dictates that survival of the fittest is the supreme law of the land (contradicting the foundational values of our representative republic). 
• 
Therefore, when Democrats are so easily convinced that some people just don't have the same value as other people, and that they can be written off as "irredeemable," which literally means they are worthless...
• 
Democrats view Trump as deplorable, irredeemable, and therefore no insult is too great ... no threat is too bold ... and, of course, no commentary too lewd or crass for general consumption.
• 
It is this egregious disdain for the humanity of others that comprises the basis for today's Democratic party. 
• 
Unfortunately, great damage is already accomplished.  Thanks to government schooling, our youth believe that socialism is just like grandpa with candy (witness the popularity of Bernie Sanders), never having been taught the truth: that socialists are responsible for about one hundred million deaths last century.
• 
After all, if I have a right to health care, then I'm entitled to take it by force, if necessary.
• 
And if I'm angry, survival of the fittest dictates I can loot and set fire.
• 
The famous quote from Ronald Reagan,"The trouble with our liberal friends isn't that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't true," has become The trouble with leftists is they don't respect human life.
• 
And when they lose respect for human life, as the Democrat's Party has finally done, not only are they anti-American, because our constitution preserves everyone's rights to life and liberty, but they become downright dangerous.
• 
First and foremost, we need to be teaching our children that they have value and purpose, and that no life is truly deplorable.
• 
What is more evil than the systemic devaluation of human life, such as we see with international terrorism (and, also, from within the Democrat party)?
      Dems are gunning for Trump — here's how he can survive  (NYP 05/21/2017)
• 
... Trump, having twice called the special-counsel investigation a "witch hunt," must now discipline himself to avoid getting burned at the stake.
• 
He pulled off one of the great political upsets in history to get to the White House, but may need ­another miracle to finish what he started.
• 
The most important ­development is that Democrats have been rewarded for their wild accusations that Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to meddle in the election.
• 
... despite the lack of known evidence, the appointment of Robert Mueller as special counsel raises the ante in dramatic fashion.
• 
The case is now considered a criminal probe and the White House has no control over where it goes.
• 
Even the GOP advantage in Congress will be neutered because criminal investigations take precedence over hearings.
• 
Having demanded a special counsel, they will use the existence of one as proof that Trump must be guilty of something and noisily drown out any discussion of his America First agenda.
• 
They aim to make the Washington circus the main focus and block Trump from making good on his promises to expand economic opportunity for middle- and working-class Americans.
• 
And most of the media will keep throwing their forces into the battle to destroy the president they loathe.
• 
The history of special counsels is that they always manage to find something, thanks to having no restrictions on time or money and how far afield they can go.
• 
Keeping the ball rolling, even if nothing major turns up against Trump, would allow Dems to paint every day as Watergate.
• 
Because his problems are more political than legal, politics is also the solution.  It starts with presidential discipline, both in word and deed.
• 
The bottom line is that some pieces of a successful presidency are in place, but the progress is fragile and could be swamped by the Washington circus.
• 
Trump's goal must be to avoid any more hint of scandal and ­instability so he can earn enough support to finish the revolution he started.
• 
If he can do that, everything is still possible.
      American Revolution II  (Fox 05/21/2017)
• 
The American Revolution – American Revolution I – was fought to secure independence from British colonialists.
• 
American Revolution II is being fought today to undermine the presidency of Donald Trump and return to a corporate structure the Left finds desirable. 
• 
The call for revolution is heard in the political precincts of the Democratic Party where the prevailing sentiment is "Resistance."
• 
No matter the issue – even when Trumpians try to appease Dems with their modified version of ObamaCare – the response is rejection.
• 
One might assume that on matters such as national security, the revolutionary guard might be willing to compromise at least temporarily, but you would be wrong.  The fight is relentless.
• 
For the Revolutionaries, the 2016 election was illegitimate despite Trump's Electoral College victory.
• 
The radical agenda that worries about where grown men should urinate has taken its battle to every corner of the culture.
• 
Trump made a point of challenging political correctness which the Left translates as racist, but for average Americans, Trump's position resonates as common sense.
• 
Even gestures designed to forestall attacks within the United States – like the immigration ban from eight war-torn nations where documentation of new arrivals doesn't exist – were interpreted as a blanket ban against Muslims, and yet another illustration of the President's bigotry.
• 
In the febrile mindset of the Revolutionaries, Trump is a danger – presumably a danger to the Republic itself – though they are the ones promoting violence on American campuses when voices are invited that challenge left-wing suppositions about the nation.
• 
Of course, most of the self-described Robespierres could not possibly define the evil that drips so naturally from their lips.  Trump is the embodiment of the evil and every act, however benign, is further evidence of fascistic leanings.
• 
In the case of American Revolution I the umbilical cord was cut, but America grew strong; in the case of American Revolution II the nation's institutions are being tested and it is hard to see a positive outcome over the horizon.
      More indications Intel assessment of Russian interference in election was rigged  (Fox 05/12/2017)
• 
... there is a far more important story that surfaced this week that no one is talking about: a mysterious hand-picked group of analysts chosen to write a damning intelligence assessment that found Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win.
• 
... there are compelling reasons to believe this ISA was actually a politicized analysis that violated normal rules for crafting intelligence assessments to ensure this one reached the bottom line conclusion that the Obama administration was looking for.
• 
... the ISA reflected the views of only three intelligence agencies — CIA, NSA and FBI – not all 17.
• 
Clapper did not explain why the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department's intelligence bureau did not participate. 
• 
... ISA was suspicious because it reached unusually clear judgments on a politically explosive issue with no dissenting views. 
• 
... two dozen or so "seasoned experts" were "handpicked" from the contributing agencies" and drafted the ISA "under the aegis of his former office"...
• 
... their conclusions "were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me."
• 
Hand-picking a handful of analysts from just three intelligence agencies to write such a controversial assessment went against standing rules to vet such analyses throughout the Intelligence Community within its existing structure.
• 
The idea of using hand-picked intelligence analysts selected through some unknown process to write an assessment on such a politically sensitive topic carries a strong stench of politicization. 
• 
FBI Director James Comey said in testimony to the House Intelligence Committee the conclusion that Russia tried to affect the outcome of the election to help Trump win was based on logic, not evidence.
• 
So we now know this was a subjective judgment made by a hand-picked group of intelligence analysts.
• 
One has to ask how these hand-picked analysts were picked.  Who picked them?  Who was excluded?
• 
... the conclusions of these hand-picked intelligence analysts were later vetted and approved by Clapper and three other intelligence agency heads.
• 
A major problem with this process is that it gave John Brennan, CIA's hyper-partisan former director, enormous influence over the drafting of the ICA.
• 
Given Brennan's scathing criticism of Mr.  Trump before and after the election, he should have had no role whatsoever in the drafting of this assessment.
• 
Instead, Brennan probably selected the CIA analysts who worked on the ICA and reviewed and approved their conclusions.
• 
While I believe Russian cyber warfare operations are a serious threat to our security and democratic system including our elections, I find it difficult to believe Russia meddled in the election as part of a scheme to help Trump win because this assumes the Putin government believed Trump had a reasonable chance of winning when the entire mainstream media and almost all U.S.  political prognosticators thought otherwise.
• 
But I find it ever harder to believe the Intelligence Community's "logical" conclusion that Russia meddled in the election to help Trump win since this conclusion was the result of intelligence officials breaking the rules on producing Intelligence Community assessments.
• 
An assessment purporting to be an objective and authoritative analysis of such an extremely controversial subject should have went to extra mile to consider points of view from all intelligence agencies and intelligence experts and not be limited to a small group of analysts hand-picked through some unknown process.
• 
There also should have been dissenting views and an annex with evaluations of this assessment by outside reviewers.
      Trump can win the cyber war  (by following Churchill's approach) (Fox 05/11/2017)
• 
As reported by South Korea's Yonhap News Agency, North Korea recently sent out a "new combination of mysterious random numbers" thought to be coded orders to its spies in South Korea.  The random encrypted numbers were sent out over a radio broadcast.
• 
Further, the U.S.-Korea Institute's "38 North" program now tells us that North Korean scientists have actually developed a quantum encryption device. 
• 
What Kim Jong Un's regime is now doing from a cyber standpoint should be a "red flag" to America's entire national security structure.
• 
Whoever is first to master the science of quantum computing and random number generation will likely have a "leg up" in winning the cyber war, as these random numbers are the roots of every encryption algorithm.
• 
It could be the great equalizer and enable a small country with less advanced technology in other areas, and with bad economic conditions, to gain a real strategic advantage.
• 
Combine it with ballistic missile and nuclear technology, and you've got a big problem on your hands.
• 
While the North Korean "working system" is still most probably in a lab, the fact that they have this technology and are working with random number generated codes should be a real wake-up call for the United States.
• 
Today there is strong evidence that the science of quantum computing can provide for the generation of truly random numbers.
• 
From a U.S.  national security standpoint, having this technology would make it almost impossible for our enemies to hack us.
• 
If, on the other hand, a country such as North Korea were to get this technology first, it would make it much more difficult for us to disrupt them from attacking us.
• 
Cyber warfare is the most complicated national security threat that the U.S.  has ever faced because technology is changing so quickly.
• 
Cyber attacks are killing us both economically and from a national security standpoint.
• 
"Secure encrypted communications have always been a cornerstone of preserving freedom and this is becoming more true in this emerging interconnected world of ours."
• 
At the beginning of World War II, Nazi Germany's "Enigma Code" appeared unbreakable.
• 
... the British brought together the best cryptographers and mathematicians and in the end, under the genius of Alan Turing, built a machine to crack the Nazi's Enigma machine.
• 
While a number of the British codebreakers were already assembled at Bletchley Park when he became Prime Minister in May of 1940, it was Churchill's personal involvement and leadership that made a big difference.
• 
Churchill made sure they had whatever resources they needed and that the best minds were recruited to the effort.
• 
Further, he engaged directly with the cryptanalysts and would even visit personally to boost their morale.  Sir Winston knew the stakes and that his personal leadership was required.
• 
Ike called the effort of "priceless value" and said it "saved countless British and American lives and, in no small way, contributed to the speed with which the enemy was routed and eventually forced to surrender."
• 
President Trump to bring together America's best minds in the science of quantum computing and random number generation.  Let's get our very best cryptologists, mathematicians and physicists together at one location like the Brits did at Bletchley Park.
• 
Make sure they have the resources they need.  They should continue to work there until the job is done.
• 
Today, whoever wins the "Cyber War" will have the upper hand in current and future conflicts.
• 
And whoever masters the science of quantum computing and random number generation will likely win the "Cyber War." Losing this war is not an option.
      Bill Bennett: Trump, DeVos get it right — Feds' role in your child's education is shrinking.  Finally!  (Fox 05/11/2017)
• 
Students of history know that governments rarely give up power without a fight.  To paraphrase Edmund Burke, those who have been intoxicated with power never willingly abandon it.
• 
Yet, last year, the federal government passed a new education law which returns a significant amount of power and decision-making authority to states, districts and schools.
• 
The law explicitly bars the Department of Education from dictating or influencing standards or curricula at the federal level, and states and districts have a wide range of new liberties when it comes to developing accountability systems, testing and content.
• 
But with this newfound freedom from Washington comes a newfound responsibility for excellence at the state and district level.  We cannot confuse local control with laissez faire.
• 
State and local leaders must embrace this opportunity and lift expectations, not relax them.
• 
For years, states have been in compliance mode – overly focused on meeting detailed federal criteria – and that mindset has lulled some states into complacency.
• 
Authority over American education has undergone a seismic shift.  Now the states and locales have both the power and the accompanying responsibility to improve our nation's performance.
• 
In addition, states now have a genuine partner at the federal level in the Trump administration who will not overreach federal authority and seek to exert influence through federal funds or Title IX bathroom threats.
• 
In fact, the administration went so far as to issue an executive order to study previous overreach into our schools by Washington in the hopes of reversing the federal power grab.
• 
When was the last time that happened in federal education policy?
• 
The focus of the administration and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is in the right place: empowering states to better employ market forces and create choices for the benefit of students.
• 
And while school choice and local control are important, they are only two of the elements necessary for serious education reform.
• 
We can't take our eyes off the importance of high-quality content and curricula as well as rigorous accountability systems.
• 
We know what works in education, but for years, states, districts, superintendents and teachers have had their focus distracted and hands tied by burdensome federal regulations.
• 
For years, they have been asking for relief.  Now they have it.  We cannot squander this opportunity. 
      Veteran suicide: A personal story of our great national disgrace  (Fox 05/10/2017)
• 
Vets died on fake waiting lists.  Fraud was committed because there wasn't the money to treat our heroes.  So, government employees committed criminal acts to make them go away.  Vets died.  Obama chose to fire or punish none of the VA employees involved. 
• 
The media said nothing. 
• 
President Trump signed a powerful Executive Order last week that received very little fanfare in the media.  Trump created a new office to reform the VA and root out bad employees.
• 
... patriotic vets being mistreated and dying because of government incompetence, indifference or criminal negligence, just doesn't interest liberal journalists or media executives.
• 
Liberals are right when they complain "we have two Americas." We do.  This country is badly divided.
• 
On one side, we have salt of the earth patriots, with generations of family members willing to sacrifice their lives and limbs for a country they love and greatly appreciate. 
• 
And on the other side we have the media elite - spoiled brat liberal intellectuals who would never even consider dying for their country; spend all of their time and energy complaining about their country; don't find America exceptional; and have no one in their entire family who has ever served in the military.
• 
... President Trump is on the right track.  "Draining the swamp" starts with the VA.  Because hero vets dying in battle is a tragedy.  But allowing our heroes to die at the hands of the VA is a national disgrace.
      Trump stirs pot with talk of blowing up Senate rules  (Fox 05/03/2017)
• 
As a gridlocked Congress threatens to stall the legislative promises that catapulted him to office, President Trump has raised hackles on the Hill by suggesting longstanding Senate rules simply be scrapped to cripple Democratic opposition.
• 
... seeming to suggest the legislative filibuster be ended to take advantage of Republicans' control of Congress. 
• 
"And maybe at some point we're going to have to take those rules on, because, for the good of the nation, things are going to have to be different."
• 
"You can't go through a process like this.  It's not fair.  It forces you to make bad decisions.  I mean, you're really forced into doing things that you would normally not do except for these archaic rules."
• 
Trump attributed the flaws in a spending bill panned by many conservatives to Democratic influence.
• 
Currently, Senate rules allow the minority party — Democrats, at present – to subject a bill to a 60-vote test.
• 
In modern terms, the minority party can "filibuster" by rallying more than 40 votes against a bill during this phase.
• 
There are currently 46 Democrats in the Senate, and two independents who caucus with the Democrats.
• 
Trump's solution: "Either elect more Republican Senators in 2018 or change the rules now to 51%."
• 
The idea of lowering the vote threshold for controversial legislation to 51 senators is groundshaking in the Senate, as it would sap power from the minority party; Republicans and Democrats typically trade that status every few cycles.
• 
It was only in 2013 that then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid triggered the so-called "nuclear option" to eliminate filibusters on most federal judicial nominees.
• 
That elimination of Senate precedent paved the way for McConnell to do the same for Supreme Court nominees in 2017, when Democrats threatened to hold up the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch.
• 
Whether or not the minority should have the ability to obstruct and delay votes has been a topic of debate from the earliest days of America, dating back to colonial assemblies and the Constitutional Convention.
• 
The Senate in 1789 adopted a centuries-old British parliamentary rule allowing a member to make a motion "to move the previous question" – in other words, end debate and take a vote on the actual measure.
• 
But the rule was done away with in 1806, a year after Vice President Aaron Burr urged its removal based on infrequent use.
• 
"Of the two rights (of debating and voting) that of voting is the higher and more important."
• 
"We ought to have both, and debate certainly in ample measure; but, if we are forced to choose between them, the right of action must prevail over the right of discussion.  To vote without debating is perilous, but to debate and never vote is imbecile."
• 
The cloture rule – Rule 22 – was introduced in 1917, requiring a two-thirds majority to end debate; however, that standard often proved difficult to attain.
• 
The threshold was altered in 1975 to its modern incarnation, requiring three-fifths of the Senate – or 60 members.
• 
"No, if you believe in limited government and extended debate, the 60-vote requirement is your friend more than it's your foe.  We won't always be in this position – you've got to take the long view."
      Just fracking wrong: How much freedom is too much?  (Fox 05/01/2017)
• 
Free speech and hate speech are becoming alarmingly close neighbors in these Divided States of America.  That's not good for anyone.
• 
"If the oil and gas industry puts fracking wells in our neighborhoods, threatening our lives and our children's lives, then don't we have a moral responsibility to blow up wells and eliminate fracking and workers?"
• 
... changed the quotation to "don't we have a moral responsibility to take action to dissuade frackers from operating here?"
• 
"I wouldn't have a problem with a sniper shooting one of the workers" at a drilling site.
• 
"For a newspaper to publish an outright call to violence, no matter what the issue, is just plain irresponsible and crosses a very bright line.  And the journalistic felony is compounded if the same paper then changes a quote in an effort to soften it.  Altering someone's quotes is absolutely forbidden in the news business."
• 
"On college campuses, and now here in Colorado, so-called resistance protesters think that having a different opinion [is akin] to an actual act of violence."
• 
"They say it is unsafe for you to voice an opinion that is different from mine.  Yet those who are claiming that your opinion is violence have actually engaged in violence or are claiming that violence is justified against someone who disagrees with them."
      Trump's first 100 days: Our next Supreme Court pick will be the kicker  (Fox 04/25/2017)
• 
Those who want to preserve our constitutional republic spent a lot of time and energy getting Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court.
• 
... the public should realize that it is President Trump's next pick that will provide the opportunity to finally solidify a conservative majority that will protect the Bill of Rights and enforce the Constitution's limits on the power of the federal government.
• 
... getting a proven constitutionalist such as Gorsuch to replace Scalia was vital.
• 
But we must not forget that one of the other generally conservative justices, Anthony Kennedy, is often more mercurial when it comes to such issues.
• 
It was Kennedy's fifth vote that extended habeas corpus rights to foreign alien terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay...
• 
It was Kennedy that created a nonexistent right to gay marriage ... on an issue that heretofore was a matter entirely within the province of the states.
• 
... Kennedy joined the liberal justices to rewrite the eminent domain provision of the Fifth Amendment to allow private property to be seized by government for transfer to another private owner, instead of for a public purpose as the plain text of the amendment says.
• 
... Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in a 4-to-3 decision that allowed the University of Texas-Austin to continue to discriminate on the basis of race in its admissions process in blatant violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• 
As Justice Clarence Thomas said in his dissent, the decision "rests on pernicious assumptions about race." It will perpetuate racial discrimination for years to come.
• 
The same could be said of Chief Justice John Roberts. 
• 
... it was Roberts who provided the disappointing fifth vote ... to uphold the constitutionality of the individual mandate in Obamacare forcing Americans to purchase health insurance.
• 
If it is a liberal justice who leaves the Court, then replacing that justice with a conservative who believes in applying the Constitution as written would, obviously, provide an extra vote that could make the difference in cases where Anthony Kennedy (or perhaps Chief Justice John Roberts) sides with the remaining three liberal justices.
• 
Whoever the next departing justice is, President Trump must make sure the next Supreme Court justice is someone who believes in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights 100 percent of the time, not just when it is convenient to achieve the particular policy goal the justice wants.
• 
And President Trump will need someone who doesn't care what the New York Times, MSNBC, or the Washington cocktail circuit says about him or her.
• 
He needs a rock-solid, principled lawyer who understands that the U.S.  Supreme Court is the last defense against an increasingly powerful, oversized, busybody government that seems to believe it has the right to dictate every aspect of our lives.
      A physicist's take on the March for Science  (Fox 04/21/2017)
• 
As a theoretical physicist, I was excited to hear about Saturday's nationwide March for Science.
• 
But after learning who is leading it and why, I am disappointed to report it is but a brazen attempt by political activists to hijack science.
• 
I can't bear seeing the organizers and partners of the so-called March for Science trying to politicize it.
• 
Bill Nye, the march's highly visible co-chairperson, is barely even a scientist. 
• 
... and hosted a PBS kids show, in which he cleverly branded himself "The Science Guy."
• 
In science-related debates, Nye consistently defends a strident, liberal position.  (I'd also call him out if he were a strident conservative.)
• 
The march's flagrant political bias is also plain in its choice of partners – for instance, the Union of Concerned Scientists, a group of fiercely anti-nuke, anti-Trump lobbyists.
• 
... defends the march by deliberately confusing attacks on his political agenda with attacks on the scientific method: "Nowhere is the attack more ferocious than on the issue of global warming, where the Trump administration has taken a wrecking ball to the modest but important policies put in place by President Obama."
• 
The march's official website isn't reassuring either.  ... "Political decision-making that impacts the lives of Americans and the world at large should make use of peer-reviewed evidence and scientific consensus, not personal whims and decrees."
• 
Like wizards uttering a magical incantation, lobbyists routinely invoke the existence of a "scientific consensus" to lend an aura of infallibility to their political stands.
• 
Science is never settled.  As Albert Einstein once observed, "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong."
• 
Einstein knew whereof he spoke.  As a young physicist in Switzerland, he confronted a stubborn scientific consensus – supported by a mountain of peer-reviewed evidence – that decreed Newtonian physics was settled science.
• 
In 1905, when Einstein dared to challenge it – to publish the special theory of relativity – the scientific establishment promptly reared up against him.
• 
Prominent Nazi physicists even accused him of promulgating disreputable "Jewish science."
• 
There is enormous room for improving science education in our nation's public schools, colleges, grad schools, media, and – yes – political institutions.
• 
But the March for Science – lobbyists claiming that supporting the scientific method is equivalent to supporting their political agendas – is a very big, very public step in the wrong direction.
      Hey, Facebook, it's time to put our safety before your algorithms  (Fox 04/20/2017)
• 
The murder of an innocent man in Cleveland shown on Facebook by the perpetrator is but the latest distressing outrage exposing the horrific flipside of social media.
• 
... major international companies pulled millions of advertising dollars from Google/YouTube after they discovered that their brands' logos were appearing alongside terrorist and bigoted videos broadcast by the video behemoth.
• 
And they left unanswered one critical question: Why does the Social Media giant allow such content to be posted in the first place?
• 
... YouTube still carries an expanding library of how-to-use readily available materials to build a bomb, a remote cellphone detonator, homemade flamethrower, or make napalm...
• 
Along with Twitter's spotty record, YouTube's failure to tackle hateful postings in a consistent and serious way, have helped our domestic bigots to have an out-sized impact during the contentious and divisive Presidential campaign last year.
• 
Social Media companies did not invent hate, but they have yet to take seriously their responsibilities to help degrade the online bigots from further infecting the mainstream of our culture.
• 
... Messaging Apps.  These apps have emerged as critical tools for terrorists when they want to evade authorities.  By using off the shelf encryption, terrorists in France and Belgium went dark in before they unleashed their carnage.
• 
... What's App has refused to cooperate with British authorities who discovered that the House of Commons terrorist, Khalid Massoud used their encrypted app for his last communications before launching the murderous outrage.
• 
It is past due for the social media service providers to take their responsibilities seriously.  Algorithms are no substitute for ethics.
• 
If they fail to take more effective action look for Washington to begin to consider the dreaded R word — regulation.
      Donald Trump is right about NATO, alliance burden sharing  (Fox 04/15/2016)
• 
As a former Pentagon spokesman who's been stationed in both Europe and Asia over a 20-year military career, I believe Donald Trump is 100 percent correct to insist that our allies share the burden of collective defense.
• 
While Americans should be proud of our historical role to advance global freedom — defeating Nazism and imperialism during World War II, communism during the Cold War, and battling jihadist terror networks today, we can't be the world's policeman forever.
• 
We can't afford it. 
• 
Nope, we're $19 trillion in debt and our own national infrastructure is crumbling.  Literally. 
• 
Anybody remember the I-35W Bridge in Minneapolis?  On a bright, sunny August day in 2007, it collapsed into the Mississippi River during rush hour, killing 13 and injuring 145. 
• 
Anybody seen current pictures of once mighty and prosperous industrial cities like Detroit; Gary, Indiana; or Akron, Ohio? 
• 
Or urban decay in places like Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, Milwaukee, Oakland, Los Angeles and Ferguson? 
• 
Isn't it time to do some nation-building at home?
• 
Meanwhile, aside from natural disasters, our top allies don't worry about physically crumbling cities.
• 
And that's thanks to the American taxpayer underwriting their massive security bills since the 1940s.
• 
NATO is an alliance of 28 nations with a population of more than 910 million.
• 
America makes up over 1/3 the population, yet pays nearly three quarters of the defense expenditures.
• 
Even getting past the massive trade deficits with allies like Japan, we're funding a system that makes our allies nicer places to live than here.
• 
They're modernizing while we're struggling to keep ours on-line. 
• 
But beyond the lopsided financial burden, our allies aren't pulling their weight on the battlefield either.
• 
A running joke during my Pentagon days was that "International Security Assistance Force" (ISAF) in Afghanistan, actually stood for "I Saw Americans Fighting."
• 
In the Middle East, it's even worse.  While we spend billions to defend Saudi Arabia and other Gulf State allies, we get practically nothing.
• 
Though they've signed up to fight ISIS, the vast majority of airstrikes are American.
• 
The Saudis ought to pay the bills, especially considering the role their hardline clerics play in creating jihadist networks in the first place.
• 
Let's recall that 15 of 19 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis.
• 
While the Soviet Union was the biggest threat during the Cold War, it no longer exists.
• 
Today's greatest long-term threats to Europe and America are radical Islam-inspired terrorism and unchecked immigration, which by the way, go hand in hand.
• 
Next is nuclear proliferation and rogue nations like Iran and North Korea.
• 
Then the rise of China, busily hacking and cheating its way to superpower status.
• 
They don't have to conquer us if we internally collapse. 
• 
Bottom line, our allies must get serious about defense.
• 
If they can't pull their own weight, why should we go broke carrying them on our backs?
      Think United Airlines scandal is bad?  Try the IRS scandal  (Fox 04/12/2017)
• 
"A picture is worth a thousand words" as the old saying goes.  And a picture in the media is worth a million words...and billions of dollars!
• 
The media decides what makes the headlines.  The media just turned the United Airlines scandal into the biggest news story of the year.
• 
One customer being beaten and dragged off a plane went viral and destroyed a billion dollar brand. 
• 
This scandal was so powerful because it could have been anyone of us.
• 
What if that poor beaten and bleeding man being dragged from the plane was you?
• 
Your husband?  Your son?  Your dad?
• 
But I have a much worse story than this.  A similar story, except far more widespread.
• 
The difference is the media never made it a headline.  They barely covered it at all.
• 
It's also a story of a CEO and terrible abuse of his own customers.  The CEO is former President Barack Obama.
• 
The customers in this case were conservative taxpayers.  The company that committed the terrible crimes against thousands of our fellow citizens was the IRS. 
• 
That's why the media never cared.  That's why the media never covered it.  Obama was (and still is) their hero.
• 
They don't want the wrongdoing, abuse and corruption of government to make headlines all over the world.
• 
Now President Donald Trump has the opportunity to expose the most widespread criminal conspiracy in U.S.  political history.
• 
I have stumbled upon this "political scandal of a lifetime" because I'm a witness.  I was one of the victims.
• 
Now I'm asking President Trump to get involved in seeing that justice is served.
• 
The IRS scandal is not about one man being abused by a cold, ruthless bureaucracy.
• 
The victims of IRS abuse suffered for years.  And there are no lawsuits possible — because government employees are protected by law from lawsuits.
• 
The media never covered the new developments in the IRS scandal involving thousands of abused customers.
• 
This was a massive criminal conspiracy to persecute, punish, intimidate and bankrupt GOP donors, activists and critics of Obama.
• 
It was meant to weaken and starve Obama's political opposition.  It was meant to scare anyone away from writing a check to conservative candidates or causes.
• 
And it worked. 
• 
Lower-level IRS employees didn't do this by themselves.  They were just following orders.
• 
Orders given by the Obama White House to destroy conservatives.
      Greg Gutfeld: How to explain Trump to your liberal friends [not that they'll listen]  (Fox 04/11/2017)
• 
He's been compared to every madman, every destructive movement, every consequential thing that's happened in this universe since the Big Bang.
• 
People who never raised an eyebrow or their voice about Ebola or Isis or MS-13 are now concerned about this guy.
• 
Logic tells you this reaction can only be wrong.  In the realm of emotional debate, nothing is ever as evil, or as great, as you want it to be.
• 
The truth is almost always situated in some realistic middle that's upsetting to a few and boring to many.
• 
The idea that a businessman, an eager reality show host moving into his eighth decade, might actually be a madman ... Maybe that's plausible to a liberal, but only if you ignore some obvious facts. 
• 
This is a man who was born and bred in New York City, where even the conservatives are liberal.
• 
For President Trump to fulfill your nightmares, you have to ignore an entire fabric of politically benign living.
• 
The right didn't trust Obama because he lived a unexamined life of romanced, unchallenged progressivism.  He was a card-carrying Leftist.
• 
Trump lived a public life of transparent opinion while navigating the most liberal, cosmopolitan city on earth — ever.
• 
So here I offer some soothing reasons why you don't have to worry ... much. 
• 
1.  The Syrian strike reveals that Trump's response, even to ghastly attacks, is a firm "just enough."
• 
I compare it to smacking a dog's nose with a newspaper, or spanking an unruly child in aisle 3 of Walmart.  It's not an act of war.  It's an act of "Yo, we're back."
• 
You can damn Trump for changing his mind, but you would have damned him for doing the opposite.
• 
... you can explain what it means: "This strike is exactly the perfunctory minimum we will perform to maintain a persona of resolute toughness without igniting an actual conflict with people we're perhaps on the same side with when fighting ISIS."
• 
That's all it is — the comfortable middle ground between the impotence of doing nothing and the hysteria of escalation.  Yes, America, you elected a centrist.
• 
2.  Pragmatism prevails, as was predicted by many who refuse to give in to apocalyptic notions about Trump.
• 
The guy is a non-ideological technocrat who is willing to shift gears to clobber the conspiratorial, transient opinions of his sweatiest ideological henchmen when hard facts enter the room.
• 
3.  Economic nationalism will also show itself out, as global deals and coalitions call for cooperation.
• 
The world's top dog, like it or not, should say "me first." But "me" means the whole thirsty world gets a drink, because sooner or later, all bad things make their way to us, as all our good things make their way to them.
• 
4.  Even perceptions of force are enough.
• 
Illegal crossings into our country have dropped dramatically, to a nearly two-decade low.  Why is that?  Perception.  Trump is a metaphorical wall.
• 
5.  Trump's white nationalist fanboys are deeply wounded.
• 
Yes, it's finally dawning on these geeks that daddy used them the way the Dems often used their radical minions
• 
6.  Trump made it safer for honest people.
• 
Trump, to his credit, redefined the literality of language and the context of public conversation.  This is both off-putting and freeing.
• 
For years, the left (the comedian's default political stance) inevitably devoured their own when it came to violations of sensitive speech.
• 
If you crossed the ever-changing line — as defined by humorless scolds running campus groups — you were damaged goods.
• 
By turning the debates into a comedy roast, Trump's ripe ripostes, which would sink most politicians, elevated him.
• 
He revived the First Amendment.  You could hate the stuff he said, but he reminded you that saying it and hating it are compatible.
• 
In American life, and in this ridiculously enduring republic, no one is as great or as bad as you wish them to be.
• 
And demonizing them only clouds your ability to reason.
• 
Ultimately, you fail to engage in an argument when it matters.
• 
Lighten up.  Give it time.  He's more you than me.
      United Airlines is innocent  (Fox 04/11/2017)
• 
United is taking the vast brunt of the public outrage but the blame is totally misdirected. 
• 
The fact that a passenger was removed from a flight was not disturbing.  This happens all the time on overbooked flights, including 3,765 cases where United involuntary denied boarding to passengers in 2016.
• 
However, the manner in which the 69-year-old passenger was forcibly removed was deeply disturbing but the manner was not United's responsibility.
• 
It was a Chicago Aviation Department security officer that physically removed the passenger, not United Airline officials.
• 
Cell phone footage shows the man kicking and screaming as he is violently removed from the aircraft.
• 
An airport cop responsible for the excessive force has already been suspended.
• 
But the mob rage continues to foment with proverbial twitter pitchforks aimed squarely at the airline. 
• 
United could have certainly been more sympathetic instead of coldly apologizing for having to "re-accommodate" customers, with no mention of the brutalized passenger.
• 
But businesses are understandably cautious to issue public relations statements that could lead to legal liability, especially before all the facts are out.
• 
The deeper problem here is also that social media mobs rush to judgment and quickly express anger.
• 
... we are more willing to share anger with strangers, whereas happiness is more likely shared with close friends.  Outrage is also often generously rewarded with re-tweets, likes, supportive comments, sympathy and feelings of vindication.
      Gorsuch confirmed: Why our new justice may be even better than Scalia  (Fox 04/07/2017)
• 
Gorsuch's nomination was one of the most significant actions of the Trump presidency so far, and his confirmation will now have profound implications for our nation over the next several decades.
• 
1.  He as a proven record defending religious liberty.
• 
The First Amendment to the U.  S.  Constitution declares, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
• 
This amendment is deeply significant because it declares that every citizen is free to hold his or her own convictions about ultimate reality, align his or her life with those convictions, and do so openly and without fear.
• 
2.  He will interpret the law rather than arbitrate morality.
• 
In a 2009 speech entitled, "Mullahs of the West: Judges as Moral Arbiters," the late Justice Scalia lamented that many Americans have placed their faith in Supreme Court justices to give our nation moral guidance.
• 
Yet, the Constitution of the United States specifically guards against giving the justices such mullah-like power; it gives the "We the People" the right to decide questions of moral profundity.
• 
This progressive view contends that judges have the right to reinterpret the Constitution in light of "the times."
• 
We are not saying that the Constitution might never need to be revised or updated again in light of "the times."
• 
Instead, we are saying that our Founding Fathers made clear amendment to the Constitution must reflect the will of the people; an amendment requires an overwhelming Congressional majority and ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures.
• 
3.  He may be willing to reject unconstitutional precedents.
• 
The most contentious debate, however, concerns the legal principle of stare decisis.
• 
A Latin phrase, stare decisis means that judges should respect legal precedents by letting them stand instead of overturning them.
• 
It is important to note, however, that stare decisis is not found in the Constitution or the Bill or Rights; it is not the law of the land, but a "rule of thumb."
• 
4.  No Need for Mullahs on the Supreme Court
• 
He will defend religious liberty.
• 
He will confine himself to interpreting the law rather than setting himself up as a moral arbiter.
• 
And he may be willing to overturn bad legal precedents in which former jurists set themselves up as moral arbiters.
• 
In so doing, he will send a message to the political community that we have no need for mullahs at 1 First Street in Washington. 
      Bill O'Reilly: Trump, Gorsuch and you — Democrats push an opposition agenda based on hate not what's best  (Fox 04/04/2017)
• 
It is really all about hating Trump, not partisan politics.
• 
There's no doubt that Judge Neil Gorsuch is qualified so sit on the Supreme Court and he will.
• 
Republicans in the Senate must prevail on the judge or the entire Party and the president will be greatly damaged.  And that's exactly what the Democratic Party wants.
• 
The strategy is simple, oppose every change the president wants to make.  Everything he wants to do.
• 
Create as much mayhem as possible and then tell the American people Mr.  Trump doesn't know how to govern.
• 
Meanwhile, the American people get hammered because worthy persons like Judge Neil Gorsuch are disparaged and innovative policies are sabotaged.
• 
I mean, did you watch any of the Gorsuch hearings?  I don't want to compare the judge to Jesus but it was exactly the same thing.
• 
Democratic senators acting like pharisees — trying to trap the judge into saying something controversial.  Trying to paint the man as someone not worthy of being on the court.
• 
So, we now have an opposition agenda primarily based on hatred not what's best for the country.  Just listen to the rhetoric on the left.  It is vitriolic in the extreme.
• 
The Trump haters justify their behavior by saying the president is destroying the country, the issues of illegal immigration, global warming, national security have created fury on the left.
• 
Finally, many Republicans opposed President Obama's agenda.  There was little common ground there but five GOP senators voted to confirm the very liberal Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court.
• 
President Obama got his trade authority.  And debt limits were raised.
• 
The system was strained under Mr.  Obama but it functioned.
• 
Now political hatred is directly threatening our Republic and we the people will pay a huge price if things don't change.
      Gregg Jarrett: Sanctuary cities won't find refuge in law  (Fox 03/28/2017)
• 
For now, it is worth cutting through the posturing and considering how we got here - and what the law actually says.
• 
What Is A "Sanctuary City"?
• 
More than 300 cities and counties have sanctuary policies.  For some, it is simply a political statement.  They have taken no real action to give sanctuary to people who are there illegally.
• 
But other cities like San Francisco actively protect illegal immigrants.  They refuse to turn over people who committed low-level crimes to federal agents for deportation.  And when ICE asks for a "hold" on a prisoner, the city ignores it.  Often they walk free.
• 
That is what led to the tragic shooting death of Kate Steinle in July of last year.  Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez of Mexico was in the U.S.  illegally.  He had 7 felony convictions and was deported 5 times.  He kept slipping back through our border, seeking refuge in the safe haven of San Francisco.
• 
Sanchez was in the custody of the San Francisco Sheriff on drug charges when ICE issued a detainer for him requesting that he be held until the feds could pick him up.  Instead of handing him over, the Sheriff followed the city's sanctuary policy by ignoring immigration authorities.  He opened the jail doors setting the prisoner free.  Sanchez then shot Steinle to death as she was walking with her father on a San Francisco pier.
• 
President Obama refused to take action against cities like San Francisco that shield illegal immigrants even after arrests or criminal convictions.  He deliberately ignored existing federal law.
• 
The Illegal Immigration Reform Act of 1996 requires states and municipalities to cooperate with federal authorities on immigration requests:
• 
"A state or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict... sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual."
• 
That same law allowed President Obama to withhold federal financial support from those cities that continue to thwart the law.  Yet, he took no action.  If he had, perhaps Kate Steinle would be alive today. 
• 
The Supremacy Clause of the U.S.  Constitution gives primacy to federal law over contrary state or local laws.
• 
Did any of that matter to President Obama?  Obviously not. 
• 
President Trump, even before Sessions' explicit warning, had promised to take a different course than his predecessor, vowing to withhold federal dollars from cities that protect people who are here illegally.
• 
What would that mean?  For a large metropolitan area such as San Francisco, it could lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal money upon which it relies.
• 
Politicians love to take public stands on their idealistic principles, however misguided they may be.  Until, of course, you hit them in the wallet.
• 
When faced with budgetary catastrophes like the loss of millions of dollars, they often exhibit a sudden change of heart.  Funny how that works. 
• 
If the carrot and stick approach fails to force city officials to abide by the law, perhaps President Trump should begin charging people with crimes.
• 
He can do so under another federal statute which makes it a felony to shield someone who is here illegally:
• 
"Any person who, knowing that an alien has come to the U.S.  in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection such alien in any place, including any building... shall be imprisoned not more than 5 years."
• 
Five years behind bars might give city officials pause to rethink their sanctuary philosophy.
• 
But there's an added punishment written in the law: if someone dies because a city official decided not to comply with federal law, as in the Steinle case, the maximum penalty is life behind bars.
• 
I'm pretty sure that'll get the attention of some sheriffs, police chiefs and mayors.
• 
Whether President Trump and his Department of Justice will decide to criminally prosecute city officials who thumb their noses at federal law is unknown.
• 
How many innocent victims like Kate Steinle have to die before people realize that most laws exist for a reason –to protect citizens. 
• 
I have a feeling that Ronald Reagan might have done it.  Maybe President Trump will channel his inner-Reagan and make the right decision.
• 
If he doesn't, how can he call himself the "law and order" president?
• 
See related Murder (Michael Ramirez, 07/08/2015) cartoon from USA picture album
      Religious freedom, not money, should drive West in dealing with Saudi Arabia  (Fox 03/28/2017)
• 
During the past 20 years, eight British universities — among them Oxford and Cambridge — have taken more than $292 million from Saudi Arabia and other Islamic governments.
• 
These contributions represent "the largest source of external funding to UK universities."
• 
This phenomenon is also not isolated to the United Kingdom: Harvard alone has received more than $30 million from the Saudi government.
• 
Stop and think about this.
• 
Money used to fund professorships, scholarships and centers of study is coming from regimes with long histories of violating religious freedoms.
• 
As well-intentioned as the contributors might be, it is clear these contributions are not arriving without strings attached.
• 
A cynic might say that they are buying off professors and universities in order to advance their own agenda, even while forbidding similar activities within their own countries.
• 
They are happy to exploit Western freedoms in order to strengthen their own theocracies.
• 
Saudi Arabia also plays a significant role in the establishment of mosques — the centerpieces of Muslim communities — across the world.
• 
According to a hearing conducted before the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Homeland Security in 2003, the vast majority of mosques in the United States were then under Saudi influence.
• 
In all, it is estimated that Saudi Arabia has spent more than $100 billion to spread the country's worldview. 
• 
Saudis want and enjoy freedoms around the world, but we must ask ourselves: Where is the equal religious freedom offered by the Saudi government toward people of Buddhist, Hindu or Christian faith, or even atheists, in their own country?
• 
Rather, Saudi Arabia remains one of the most oppressive regimes in the world when it comes to freedom of conscience. 
• 
... Saudi Arabia "continues to prosecute, imprison and flog individuals for dissent, apostasy, blasphemy and sorcery."
• 
... right now an extremist religious preacher wanted by the Indian government — who has received massive funding from the U.K.  and Saudi Arabia — enjoys safe haven in Saudi Arabia.
• 
And while cases like these freely happen in Saudi Arabia, the Kingdom is allowed to funnel billions of dollars to countries to promote their brand of Islam — that exportation certainly contributed to the 9/11 attack on New York.
• 
This hypocrisy must end.  The free exportation of extremist ideologies — religious or atheistic — is what drives people to violence and the curtailment of freedoms.
• 
The international community must adopt a reciprocal approach to religious tolerance in response to those nations that abuse our freedoms while forbidding freedom among their own.
• 
It is high time that the West, with its evolved understanding of freedom of conscience and liberty, begins to ask for this kind of reciprocity in bilateral relations with nations.
• 
The act would forbid a national of any country that limits the free exercise of religion from spending money in the United States to promote a religion.
• 
Religious tolerance and the freedom of conscience and belief are cornerstones of human rights affecting all other rights.
• 
We must hold nations accountable for the safeguarding of these freedoms, and those who restrict them ought not to be able to freely promote their ideology — in any form — abroad.
• 
America needs to act and not be focused on economic considerations only.
      Freedom Caucus drives dagger into heart of young Trump presidency  (Fox 03/24/2017)
• 
It is hard to overestimate the damage the Freedom Caucus has done to the fledgling presidency of Donald Trump, and to the country.
• 
By blocking the American Health Care Act of 2017, the conservative group has guaranteed that Americans will struggle forward under the burden of Obamacare.
• 
In the next few months insurers will announce their premium hikes for the coming year; chances are, given the continuing withdrawal of major companies from the marketplaces and the ongoing failure of the bill to attract enough young and healthy participants, the new rates will not be pretty.
• 
Last year premiums went up 25%; it's likely the increases will be higher this year.
• 
Republicans will own those higher rates.
• 
Their failure to repeal the financial underpinnings of Obamacare and start replacing that failing program with an approach that encourages competition and that embodies numerous other common sense reforms will mean that families hit by ever-higher costs will blame the GOP.
• 
Voters elected Donald Trump and a GOP Congress to get this job done – the number one promise of every Republican campaign since 2010.
• 
Now the Republican Party inherits the Sisyphean task of managing Obamacare's inevitable decline.  They are no longer critics; they are now the producers of the show.
• 
Of course, the damage is not limited to healthcare reform.  The undermining of the House leadership is profound and clouds prospects of tax reform, infrastructure spending and other important jobs to be done.
• 
It is the young Trump presidency, however, that takes the biggest hit here.
• 
Trump was elected because people across the political spectrum thought he could fix some of our problems.
• 
He was the businessman who could import common sense to Washington, and the deal maker who could bring people together.
• 
He made big promises; a country tired of stalemate and disappointment believed that he could bring back jobs, reduce our debt, build the wall, find a better healthcare solution.
• 
His credibility and credentials now lie in tatters.
• 
Who is to blame?  House Speaker Paul Ryan will be dragged through the mud for failing to win enough votes.
• 
Nancy Pelosi mocked Trump for bringing the bill to the floor before he had the votes; that won't sit well with a president who likes winning.
• 
So far, he is blaming Democrats, but he will doubtless find others – including perhaps the Speaker – to chastise for the loss.
• 
As an outsider, President Trump has to rely on some seasoned hands to move bills through Congress; notwithstanding this recent defeat, Vice President Pence, chief of staff Reince Priebus and Paul Ryan are an excellent and necessary team.
• 
Relying on executive orders, as Obama did, produces unsustainable measures easily overturned by the courts.
• 
Outraged Republicans should save most of their ire for the Freedom Caucus.
• 
The group of 30-odd conservatives are patting themselves on the backs this evening; joining their celebration are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.
• 
The Trump White House is apparently going to move on to the other items on the agenda.
• 
The country will watch to see if the administration can bring tax reform about.
• 
With Democrats obstructing every move, nothing will be easy.  But with Democrats and the Freedom Caucus standing in the way of the Trump agenda, nearly everything becomes impossible.
• 
      Cal Thomas: What the heck's the matter with Maryland?  (Fox 03/24/2017)
• 
The police report of the incident is so graphic that it cannot be printed in full, but the facts are these: Henry Sanchez, 18, a Guatemala native who has a pending "alien removal" case against him, and 17-year-old Jose Montano, who came to America from El Salvador eight months ago, have been charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offenses.
• 
The two are alleged to have dragged the 14-year-old girl into a boy's restroom where they raped and sodomized her after she repeatedly screamed "no."
• 
Compounding the physical and possible long-term psychological damage to the girl is the response of school authorities and state legislators.
• 
"Ensuring a safe, secure and welcoming learning environment for all of our students is a top priority.  Our staff remains vigilant in the monitoring of our school each and every day."
• 
Apparently not.
• 
Among the many questions that should be asked is why Sanchez and Montano — both old enough to be seniors — were placed in a freshman class in the first place?
• 
Equally "stupid" is a bill in the legislature that would declare Maryland a "sanctuary state."
• 
One of the things the left claims to always be concerned about are the rights of minorities and the disenfranchised.
• 
One hears that argument invoked often in debates over transgender individuals and which bathroom they can use.
• 
If that works for liberals in this case, what about the right of a teenage girl to be protected against a violation of her person by illegal immigrants?
• 
A corollary argument is that most illegal immigrants are not violent criminals.
• 
We hear the same argument when it comes to Muslims, that not all members of the religion should be judged by the acts of a violent few.
• 
Ask the victims or relatives of people who have died or been injured by radical Islamists how they feel about that argument.
• 
In the case of the young Rockville High School girl, ask her and her parents, siblings and other relatives if they are OK with allowing people like Sanchez and Montano into their child's school.
• 
If convicted of the rape charges, they should be punished and then deported.
• 
School officials and legislators who have helped create the environment that has allowed such a horrible incident to occur must be held accountable by the citizens of Montgomery County, Maryland, and voters statewide.
      Erick Erickson: The freakout over Gorsuch is beyond the bounds of reason [GOP, I'm talking to you]  (Fox 03/23/2017)
• 
Yes, Neil Gorsuch said he would walk out of Trump's office if Trump had asked him to overrule Roe v.  Wade.
• 
The man is supposed to defend the independence of the third branch of government and you want him to agree to that?
• 
But Gorsuch has a history of rejecting stare decisis when he thinks the courts have gotten it wrong.  Stare decisis is the concept that judges must give due deference to precedent
• 
Gorsuch also has a paper trail and track record of not giving deference to bureaucrats.  In fact, Gorsuch is to the right of Scalia on that issue and believes unelected bureaucrats are not allowed to make law.
• 
Likewise, Gorsuch takes a more restrictionist view of Presidential power than Scalia, which both sides should like.
• 
Then there is the issue of Gorsuch's true feelings.  We know what he thinks.  Long before Gorsuch was nominated for a spot in the federal judiciary he advocated for the position that when a private person takes the life of another person, regardless of that person's form or condition, it is murder.
• 
Every person who has ever been nominated for the Supreme Court has been intentionally nebulous and intentionally deferential.
• 
Calm down, Republicans.  Gorsuch has a paper trail.  It is conservative, it is pro-life, and it is not deferential to the prior Supreme Court cases that got it wrong.
      Newt Gingrich: Like Andrew Jackson, Donald Trump is an intensely American president  (Fox 03/23/2017)
• 
President Trump gave a historic speech last week honoring President Andrew Jackson.
• 
True to current form, the media largely either missed or maligned it.
• 
He was the first president to do so since Ronald Reagan in 1982. 
• 
... Presidents Trump and Jackson have a tremendous amount in common.
• 
First, President Trump earned the respect of the Americans who elected him largely by being an outsider and a disruptive force chosen to break up existing Washington power structures.
• 
"It was during the Revolution that Jackson first confronted and defied an arrogant elite.  Does that sound familiar to you?," President Trump said.
• 
Second, both men are intensely American figures who focus nearly all their energy on wresting power away from the ruling class and returning it to normal Americans.  This is expressed in both men's populist messages and actions.
• 
Finally, President Trump, like President Jackson, is heavily criticized by the elites of the day.
• 
"Andrew Jackson rejected authority that looked down on the common people.  First as a boy, when he bravely served the Revolutionary cause.  Next, as the heroic victor at New Orleans where his ragtag – and it was ragtag – militia ... drove the British imperial forces from America in a triumphant end to the War of 1812.  He was a real general, that one."
• 
"And, finally, as President – when he reclaimed the people's government from an emerging aristocracy."
• 
"Jackson's victory shook the establishment like an earthquake.  Henry Clay, Secretary of State for the defeated President John Quincy Adams, called Jackson's victory ‘mortifying and sickening'."
• 
"Oh, boy, does this sound familiar.  Have we heard this?  This is terrible.  He said there had been ‘no greater calamity' in the nation's history."
• 
President Trump's speech placed the movement that elected him into the context of American history.
• 
Over the nearly 250 years that our Republic has grown and changed, the American people have periodically rejected what they sensed as "an emerging aristocracy" and felt the need to elect someone like Trump or Jackson who can shake "the establishment like an earthquake."
• 
In the context of Jackson, President Trump's America First budget makes perfect sense.  His budget supports the priorities and interests of the American people – not those of unelected bureaucrats.
• 
... Trump pledged a "new economic model" for manufacturers that calls for fewer regulations and lower taxes, so more Americans can find jobs to support their families.
• 
Finally, channeling Jackson is perfect for repealing and replacing Obamacare — which will return health care decisions back to the people, doctors and states.
• 
"His opponents regarded his presidency as unimaginable, until he beat them."
• 
As his administration continues to grow and change, I suspect President Trump will continue to be a disruptive force in Washington on behalf of normal Americans.
• 
And his presidency will be every bit as historic as President Jackson's.
      Gregg Jarrett: Sorry Dems, Judge Gorsuch is un-Borkable  (Fox 03/21/2017)
• 
Gorsuch's credentials are too impeccable, his intellect too keen and his temperament too even to fall victim to the kind of debasement that felled Judge Robert Bork and coined an infamous phrase. 
• 
If the Gorsuch confirmation hearings have proven anything, it's that his opponents have no powder in their guns.
• 
His rulings have been fair, his legal mind agile, and his fidelity to the law unimpeachable.
• 
It has been 30 years since the shameful treatment of Bork, a brilliant, albeit conservative U.S.  Court of Appeals judge whom President Ronald Reagan nominated to the Supreme Court.
• 
The ensuing Senate approval process in 1987 devolved into a detestable campaign of lies and vilification, which diminished the stature of the Senate and forever altered the discourse in judicial confirmation hearings.
• 
"Originalism" is the belief that judges should attempt to interpret the original words of those who authored the Constitution, as they were understood at the time they were written.
• 
It eschews the growing practice among liberal judges to make law by "legislating from the bench" and interpreting the founding fathers' words through the lense of modern mores.
• 
Bork was an early advocate of originalism and became the first Supreme Court nominee to openly support what was then a new brand of judicial conservatism during a confirmation hearing. 
• 
A bitter and divisive ideological war was waged against Bork in the Senate, as Democrats grossly misrepresented the nominee's views and smeared his good name with unconscionable deceit.
• 
"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution," Kennedy bellowed, spinning a fantastic fable that bore no resemblance to the truth behind Bork's judicial philosophy.
• 
The stunned jurist remarked, "There was not a line in that speech that was accurate."
• 
While Bork possessed a sterling legal mind, his personality and demeanor were ill-suited for the battle.
• 
... Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have tried their level best to oppose Gorsuch with exaggerated or unfounded claims.
• 
During questioning, they have all but accused the nominee of pledging allegiance to President Trump, favoring wealthy corporations over the "little guy," authoring policy on torture, promising to overturn Roe v.  Wade, and even uttering a sexist question while teaching a law school class on ethics.
• 
There is no evidence any of it is true, and repeatedly Gorsuch refused to take the bait or otherwise respond with enmity, as Bork did.
• 
"American liberals have become addicted to the courtroom, relying on judges and lawyers rather than elected leaders and the ballot box, as the primary means of effecting their social agenda on everything from gay marriage to assisted suicide to the use of vouchers for private school education," Gorsuch wrote.
• 
"This overweening addiction to the courtroom as the place to debate social policy is bad for the country and bad for the judiciary."
• 
"The great project of Justice Scalia's career was to remind us of the differences between judges and legislators," Gorsuch said at a memorial lecture in honor of the late justice.
• 
Judges must apply the law as it is, focusing backward, not forward, he said.  They should not decide cases based on their own moral convictions.
• 
In an opinion last year, he offered a more concise guiding principle, "Judges judge best when they judge least."
• 
In his opening statement, he described Scalia as a mentor who "reminded us that words matter –that the judge's job is to follow the words that are in the law– not replace them with words that aren't."
• 
In answers to Senators' questions, Gorsuch consistently pledged strict devotion to the law as written and originally intended, not as others may hope or imagine.
• 
In so doing, he adhered to his convictions in a way that is rarely seen among leading jurists. 
• 
An expected contest of judicial philosophies, like the fight, becomes a farce.
• 
Any hope of honesty and transparency in the confirmation hearing is lost to the trick of an evasive technique.
• 
And everyone departs the arena none the wiser.  Least of all, the American public.
• 
Inevitably, some in the Senate chamber will vote against Gorsuch.
• 
They will do it because it is politically prudent or electorally expedient. 
• 
But when Neil Gorsuch is confirmed to the Supreme Court, he will bring with him the potential to become one of its giants.
• 
He appears beholden to no one and cares only about following the law, wherever it may take him, as he made plain in response to one Senator's question:
• 
"A good judge doesn't give a wit about politics or the political implication of his decision."
• 
"My job is not to write the laws, but to apply and interpret those laws.  Whether mighty or meek, rich or poor...everyone is protected by our laws equally."
      Neil Gorsuch and the Senate's convoluted Supreme Court confirmation dance  (Fox 03/20/2017)
• 
There is no question that Judge Gorsuch is exceptionally qualified.  His background and character are unimpeachable.
• 
The non-partisan American Bar Association has given him its highest possible rating.
• 
Like Justice Scalia, Judge Gorsuch believes in the rule of law, not judge-made law.
• 
He believes that the judiciary is vested only with the power to interpret statues, not create them.
• 
As Justice Scalia wrote, this distinction is critical because it determines who governs: an unelected committee of judges with life tenure or the people's representatives.
• 
The Democrats are still smarting over their unforeseen loss of the presidency and over Judge Merrick Garland's failed nomination.
• 
They've already worked publically to discredit Judge Gorsuch and have even previewed their attack on the nominee.
• 
The American people can and should be concerned about Judge Gorsuch's judicial philosophy.  The way a judge thinks about judging matters.
• 
Is he or she someone who feels constrained by the words Congress has written?
• 
What about the Constitution?  Is he or she a believer in original meaning of someone who believes that the Constitution is living, evolving even?
• 
... the so-called "Ginsburg Rule." This rule preserves judicial impartiality by preventing judicial nominees from commenting on potential issues.
• 
... a nominee must not comment about "any specific case that may come before her."
• 
Justice Ginsburg also clearly indicated that she would not comment on potential matters in her introductory statement:
• 
"A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecast, no hints for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process."
• 
Justice Ginsburg made good on that promise.  She deflected well over thirty questions from senators on both sides of the aisle...
• 
She reminded the senators that asking for a signal on a potential case "is something you must never ask a judge to do."
• 
Every nominee to follow has invoked the "Ginsburg Rule" and refrained from answering questions that implicate issues that might come before the Supreme Court.
• 
When the senators doggedly insist upon more fulsome answers to questions — and they will — keep in mind that their questions may violate the Ginsburg Rule.
• 
... Supreme Court nomination hearings should be the epitome of civility.  They should be a learning opportunity for the American people.
• 
Given the full-court press by Democrats, we're likely to see politics as usual on full display Monday.
      How North Korea could kill 90 percent of Americans  (03/29/2017)
• 
The mainstream media, and some officials who should know better, continue to allege North Korea does not yet have capability to deliver on its repeated threats to strike the U.S.  with nuclear weapons.
• 
False reassurance is given to the American people that North Korea has not "demonstrated" that it can miniaturize a nuclear warhead small enough for missile delivery, or build a reentry vehicle for an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of penetrating the atmosphere to blast a U.S.  city.
• 
Yet any nation that has built nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, as North Korea has done, can easily overcome the relatively much simpler technological challenge of warhead miniaturization and reentry vehicle design.
• 
Even if it were true that North Korea does not yet have nuclear missiles, their "Dear Leader" could deliver an atomic bomb hidden on a freighter sailing under a false flag into a U.S.  port, or hire their terrorist allies to fly a nuclear 9/11 suicide mission across the unprotected border with Mexico.
• 
The notion that North Korea is testing A-Bombs and H-Bomb components, but does not yet have the sophistication to miniaturize warheads and make reentry vehicles for missile delivery is absurd.
• 
On April 7, 2015, at a Pentagon press conference, Admiral William Gortney, then Commander of North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD), responsible for protecting the U.S.  from long-range missiles, warned that the intelligence community assesses North Korea's KN-08 mobile ICBM could strike the U.S.  with a nuclear warhead.
• 
In February and March of 2015, former senior national security officials of the Reagan and Clinton administrations warned that North Korea should be regarded as capable of delivering by satellite a small nuclear warhead, specially designed to make a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack against the United States.
• 
According to the Congressional EMP Commission, a single warhead delivered by North Korean satellite could blackout the national electric grid and other life-sustaining critical infrastructures for over a year — killing 9 of 10 Americans by starvation and societal collapse.
• 
Two North Korean satellites, the KMS-3 and KMS-4, presently orbit over the U.S.  on trajectories consistent with surprise EMP attack.
• 
The U.S.  must be prepared to preempt North Korea by any means necessary — including nuclear weapons.
• 
Launch a crash program to harden against EMP attack the U.S.  electric grid to preserve American civilization and hundreds of millions of lives. 
• 
Revive President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), the unfairly derided "Star Wars."
• 
Space-based missile defenses could still render nuclear missiles obsolete and offer a permanent, peaceful, solution to problems like North Korea.
      Republicans and entitlements  (JWR 03/17/2017)
• 
The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away, but for governments it's not that easy.
• 
Once something is given — say, health insurance coverage to 20 million Americans — you take it away at your peril.
• 
This is true for any government benefit, but especially for health care.
• 
The genius of the left is to keep enlarging the entitlement state by creating new giveaways that are politically impossible to repeal.
• 
People hated Obamacare for its highhandedness, incompetence and cost.  At the same time, its crafters took great care to create new beneficiaries and new expectations.  Which makes repeal very complicated.
• 
Moreover, the idea that you can eradicate Obamacare root and branch is fanciful.  For all its catastrophic flaws, Obamacare changed expectations.
• 
Does any Republican propose returning to a time when you can be denied health insurance because of a pre-existing condition?
• 
It's not just Donald Trump who ran on retaining this new, yes, entitlement.  Everyone did.  But it's very problematic.
• 
If people know that they can sign up for insurance after they get sick, the very idea of insurance is undermined.  People won't sign up when healthy and the insurance companies will go broke.
• 
So what do you do?  Obamacare imposed a monetary fine if you didn't sign up, for which the Ryan bill substitutes another mechanism, less heavy-handed but still government-mandated.
• 
The purists who insist upon entirely escaping the heavy hand of government are dreaming.  The best you can hope for is to make it less intrusive and more rational, as in the Ryan plan's block-granting Medicaid.
• 
Or instituting a more realistic age-rating system.  Sixty-year-olds use six times as much health care as 20-year-olds.
• 
Premiums better reflecting risk constitute a major restoration of rationality.  (It's how life insurance works.)
• 
Under Obamacare, the young were unwilling to be swindled and refused to sign up.  Without their support, the whole system is thus headed into a death spiral of looming insolvency.
• 
Rationality, however, has a price.  The CBO has already predicted a massive increase in premiums for 60-year-olds.  That's the headline.
• 
There is no free lunch.  GOP hard-liners must accept that Americans have become accustomed to some new health care benefits, just as moderates have to brace themselves for stories about the inevitable losers in any reform.
• 
Unless, of course, you go the full Machiavelli and throw it all back on the Democrats.
• 
Upside: You reap the backlash.  Downside: You have to live with your conscience.
      Will we be adults or children?  The ugly truth about America's spending  (Fox 03/17/2017)
• 
You can already hear the howling. 
• 
Oh the humanity, Trump is killing Big Bird.
• 
The world is in danger of climate destruction, Trump is ending payments to the Green Climate Fund that pays off foreign governments to support radical environmental proposals under the false flag of global warming.
• 
The world is on the brink of chaos as the United States contribution to the United Nations is cut to the same level as every other Security Council member pays.
• 
Here is the ugly truth.
• 
We are twenty trillion dollars in debt.  We have hit the debt ceiling and the federal government is taking what is called "extraordinary measures" to keep us solvent until Congress either balances the budget at current levels or raises the ceiling again.
• 
The Congressional Budget Office reports that overall federal government spending has increased by approximately $1.13 Trillion over the past decade, while tax revenues have increased by $699 Billion with the result being a more than doubling of our national debt during the previous ten years.
• 
The most alarming part of our nation's interest costs, is that they are completely dependent upon demand for our government debt on the open market.
• 
... the only rational choice is to aggressively cut the discretionary budget now.
• 
And that is what President Trump is proposing, difficult, but doable budget cuts beginning the process of reflecting the needs of the nation, not just the wants.
• 
One of the big differences between and adult and a child is that a child cannot distinguish the difference between a want and a need.  But America can no longer afford to be fiscal children.
• 
America simply can no longer afford to pretend that we can continue on the current path, President Trump's budget is a good starting point on our national decision of whether we are going to be adults addressing our nation's true needs or children disconnected to the looming debt crisis.
      Deterrence and human nature  (JWR 03/16/2017)
• 
Deterrence is the strategy of persuading someone in advance not to do something, often by raising the likelihood of punishment.
• 
The alternative view insists that innately nice people respond better to discussion and outreach.
• 
History is largely the story of the tensions between, and the combination of, these two very different views of human nature — one tragic and one therapeutic.
• 
Take illegal immigration.  The Trump administration believed the answer was to persuade people not to come illegally into the United States, and to convince those who are already residing here illegally and who have broken American laws to go home.
• 
So his proposed wall on the border with Mexico and beefed-up patrols are a sort of insurance policy in case immigrants do not heed appeals to follow the law.
• 
The early result of that proposed deterrent policy is that in just two months, attempted illegal entries into the U.S.  have fallen dramatically.
• 
Past approaches to illegal immigration were largely therapeutic.  Bilateral talks with Mexico, sanctuary cities, de facto amnesties and non-enforcement of immigration laws supposedly would ensure that immigration was orderly and a positive experience for both hosts and guests.
• 
Instead, the border effectively became wide open and chaos ensued.
• 
Currently, there are no real repercussions on campus for students who disrupt public discourse or prevent invited speakers from presenting lectures.
• 
If the intent of universities was to persuade students to respect free speech, then their therapeutic policies seem an utter failure.
• 
University laxity is seen by protestors as weakness to be held in contempt rather than magnanimity to be appreciated.
• 
The tragic view would hold that had the University of California expelled students for recently disrupting free speech — and had it encouraged law enforcement to arrest miscreants for destroying property and using violence against others — such deterrence would have prevented such unrest in the future.
• 
Did the Obama administration's euphemistic effort to eradicate the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" — along with Obama's apology tour and therapeutic Cairo speech — win hearts and minds in the Middle East?
• 
Or did such outreach convince radicals that the U.S.  was hardly to be feared, thus encouraging anti-American sentiment?
• 
In the past eight years, the U.S.  has backed off the red lines and deadlines it issued to Syria, Russia and Iran.
• 
Did such equivocation earn America appreciation and respect for circumspection — or contempt for empty rhetoric?
• 
There is no clear-cut divide between deterrence and therapy.  Each at times has its place in warning or wooing people and nations.
• 
But in general, anytime a government errs on the side of therapy and communicates to individuals and foreign powers that laws are flexible, that punishment is iffy and that consequences are negotiable, it gets less of what it wants.
• 
It is unfortunate but true that North Korea is deterred more by U.S.  military strength than by United Nations resolutions.
• 
In much the same way, radical campus lawbreakers probably respect (and fear) the local district attorney a lot more than the college president.
• 
In other words, the more we feel we have entered a 21st-century therapeutic utopia, the more tragic that human nature seems not to have changed all that much from the Stone Age.
      Make no mistake, disclosing Trump's tax returns [and anyone else's] is a felony  (Fox 03/17/2017)
• 
One can argue about whether public officials should be expected to release their tax returns.
• 
Frankly, as a former public official at the Federal Election Commission, I believe we've gone way too far in denying officials any semblance of a private life.
• 
I don't care what President Donald Trump's tax returns show, and I don't think they are any of my (or anyone else's) business.
• 
I am interested in the principles and policies that candidates and elected officials stand for, not how much income they earned or taxes they paid.
• 
Others feel differently, of course.  But there is no question that the White House is right about what it said ... "It is totally illegal to steal and publish tax returns."
• 
Section (a)(3) makes it unlawful for any person who receives an illegally disclosed tax return or return information from printing or publishing that return or that information.  That is also a felony.
• 
American citizens are forced by law to file tax returns and to provide the federal government with highly sensitive, highly confidential financial information.
• 
The First Amendment doesn't immunize government employees from prosecution for disclosing confidential tax information.
• 
... under U.S.  v.  Williams (2008), "calls to commit a specific crime are generally not constitutionally protected."
• 
The key issue was balancing privacy concerns against the interest in publishing matters of public importance.
• 
It would be up to a court to determine whether the interests of both the government and citizens in maintaining the privacy and confidentiality of tax returns outweighed the public's interest in obtaining financial information on elected officials.
• 
... "the government seeks to restrict disclosure of private tax information to the press ... given the compelling governmental interests in maintaining a workable tax system, it is difficult to say that this regulation is unreasonable."
• 
The rule of law is a vital principle that is a fundamental part of who we are as a nation.  Part of that principle is the concept that no one is above the law.
• 
All of us – from the lowliest citizen to the president – are entitled to expect that the financial information we are forced to provide to the government will be kept confidential.
• 
When that expectation is broken, the government has an obligation, at a minimum, to go after those in government who violated the law.
      Andrew Napolitano: Did Obama spy on Trump?  (Fox 03/16/2017)
• 
Obama would not have needed a warrant to authorize surveillance on Trump.
• 
Obama was the president and as such enjoyed authority under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to order surveillance on any person in America, without suspicion, probable cause or a warrant.
• 
FISA contemplates that the surveillance it authorizes will be for national security purposes, but this is an amorphous phrase and an ambiguous standard that has been the favorite excuse of most modern presidents for extraconstitutional behavior.
• 
FISA was enacted in the late 1970s to force the federal government to focus its surveillance activities — its domestic national security-based spying — on only those people who were more likely than not agents of a foreign government. 
• 
The mass spying that these judges have ruled FISA authorizes is directly counter to the wording, meaning and purpose of FISA itself, which was enacted to prevent just what it has in fact now unleashed.
• 
We now know indisputably that this secret FISA court — whose judges cannot keep records of their own work and have their pockets and briefcases checked by guards as they enter and leave the courthouse — has permitted all spying on everyone all the time.
• 
When FISA was written, telephone surveillance was a matter of wiretapping — installing a wire onto the target's telephone line, either inside or outside the home or business, and listening to or recording in real time the conversations that were audible on the tapped line.
• 
Today the National Security Agency has 24/7 access to the mainframe computers of all telecom providers and all computer service providers and to all digital traffic carried by fiber optics in the U.S.
• 
Thus, in 2016, when Trump says the surveillance of him took place, Obama needed only to ask the NSA for a transcript of Trump's telephone conversations to be prepared from the digital versions that the NSA already possessed.
• 
... if President Obama last year wanted transcripts of Trump's calls made at any time, the NSA would have been duty-bound to provide them, just as it would be required to provide transcripts of Obama's calls today if President Trump wanted them.
• 
But if Obama did order the NSA to prepare transcripts of Trump's conversations last fall under the pretext of national security — to find out whether Trump was communicating with the Russians would have been a good excuse — there would exist somewhere a record of such an order.
• 
For that reason, if Obama did this, he no doubt used a source on which he'd leave no fingerprints.
• 
Enter James Bond.
• 
Sources have told me that the British foreign surveillance service, the Government Communications Headquarters, known as GCHQ, most likely provided Obama with transcripts of Trump's calls.
• 
So by bypassing all American intelligence services, Obama would have had access to what he wanted with no Obama administration fingerprints.
• 
Thus, when senior American intelligence officials denied that their agencies knew about this, they were probably being truthful.
• 
Adding to this ominous scenario is the fact that three days after Trump's inauguration, the head of GCHQ, Robert Hannigan, abruptly resigned, stating that he wished to spend more time with his family.
• 
I hope the investigations of Trump's allegation discover and reveal the truth — whatever it is.  But the lesson here is terribly serious.
• 
We face the gravest threat to personal liberty since the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 proscribed criticism of the government.
• 
We have an unelected, unnamed, unaccountable elite group in the intelligence community manipulating the president at will and possessing intimate, detailed knowledge about all of us that it can reveal.
• 
We have statutes that have given the president unconstitutional powers that have apparently been used.
• 
And we have judges on secret courts facilitating all this as if the Constitution didn't exist.
• 
For how much longer will we have freedom?
      Gregg Jarrett: 4 things you need to know about the rulings against Trump's latest travel ban  (Fox 03/16/2017)
• 
1.) Legally, what did the 2 judges find wrong with the revised travel ban?
• 
The judges relied not on the detailed language of the executive order, but on several of the remarks President Trump made as a candidate on the campaign trail.
• 
The judges largely ignored the President's justification stated specifically in the ban that he was acting in the interest of national security to protect American citizens from potential terrorists because the 6 banned nations are state sponsors of terrorism (as identified by Congress and President Obama in an anti-terrorism law) and those governments do not assist the U.S.  in vetting applicants with background checks.
• 
2.) How unusual is it for a judge to rely so heavily on campaign rhetoric?
• 
After first claiming he would institute a Muslim ban, he later changed his stance to say that he would ban entry from countries that pose a terrorist threat.
• 
But these two judges ignored his revised position and accused the President if using national security as a pre-text for banning Muslims.
• 
In doing so, the judges were pretending to read President Trump's mind.  It smacks of judicial activism and appears contrary to established law on judicial review.
• 
This was also unusual.  In an unsolicited filing, five Republican-appointed judges on the 9th Circuit (the same court which last month ruled against President Trump's first travel ban) wrote this in a published opinion:
• 
"Whatever we as individuals may feel about the President or the executive order, the President's decision was well within the powers of the presidency."
• 
These five judges all but accused their colleagues of judicial activism and overreach because they don't like President Trump or his policies.  The five judges recognized that the President has both constitutional (Article 1, Section 8) and statutory authority (the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act) to dictate immigration as it applies to national security threats. 
• 
4.) So, what happens next?
• 
The ruling by the judge in Hawaii can be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Maryland ruling would be appealed to the 4th Circuit.  They could be reversed on appeal.  Or not.
• 
But all of this may turn out to be moot.  The main part of the travel ban will expire after 90 days.
      John Stossel: Our ignorant mainstream media — four incredible examples  (Fox 03/15/2017)
• 
Every day I see things that are wrong or that so miss the point I want to scream.
• 
1.  Storm Coverage
• 
... the media reverted to breathless hype: "monster storm ... very dangerous." Here I blame my beloved free market: Predicting scary weather works.  Viewers tune in.
• 
What galls me more is the reporters' government-centric thinking.  "Everything is closed," they say.  "Employees can't get to work."
• 
But the corner grocery stayed open.  So did many gas stations and restaurants.
• 
Why is it that when government buildings close, so many private businesses stay open?  Because their own money is at stake.
• 
2.  The Deep State
• 
Monday, The New York Times ran the headline "What Happens When You Fight a 'Deep State' that Doesn't Exist?"
• 
The article explained that unlike Egypt or Pakistan, America doesn't really have a powerful deep state, and to claim that it does "presents apolitical civil servants as partisan agents."
• 
Give me a break.  "Apolitical civil servants"?
• 
A deep state absolutely exists.  Some call it "administrative state" or "regulatory state."
• 
These are the people who crush innovation and freedom by issuing hundreds of new rules.
• 
Regulators, if they don't pass new rules, think they're not doing their job.
• 
The Times calls these 20 million people "apolitical".  Please.  Most are just as partisan as you or I.
• 
Maybe more so, as leaks and signs of bureaucratic resistance to presidential edicts demonstrate.
• 
People who choose to work for, say, the EPA, tend to be environment zealots.
• 
This should surprise no one.  Somehow, New York Times reporters don't see it.
• 
3.  "Chief of EPA Bucks Studies"
• 
... front page claimed President Donald Trump appointee Scott Pruitt is "at odds with the established scientific consensus."
• 
That makes Pruitt sound like an anti-science idiot.  But the headline is bunk.
• 
Pruitt only said that he does not agree that man is "the primary contributor to global warming."
• 
That's "at odds" with Times reporters and government flunkies on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but many scientists say there is so much uncertainty to climate measurements that no one can know if man's greenhouse gases are the "primary" cause of warming.
• 
4.  John Oliver
• 
... expecting Oliver to at least mention Venezuela's caps on corporate profits, abolition of property rights, media censorship, regulation of car production "from the factory door to the place of sale," etc.  In other words: socialism.
• 
But no, Oliver didn't mention any of that.
• 
He mocked President Maduro's speeches but said Venezuela was in trouble because its economy depends on oil and oil prices dropped.  What?
• 
Kuwait, Nigeria, Angola and other countries exported more oil than Venezuela.  But they survived the price drop without experiencing the misery that Venezuela suffers.  The suffering was created by socialism.
• 
America's leftists cannot see the horrors of socialism even when they are right in front of them.
      Parents, quit caring more about the White House than your own house  (Fox 03/11/2017)
• 
The opinions of our nation's new commander in chief are as varied as DNA.
• 
Somewhere between the celebratory blowing of horns and warning sirens, it is easy to get caught up in what's happening at the White House instead of in our own home.
• 
Right now in America our greatest strength and weakness is the family unit.
• 
What happens in the American cornerstone, our house, will be the foremost factor that determines our nation's ascent or decline.
• 
Divorce rates hover around 50 percent.  The United States pornography industry brings in more money than the NFL, NBA and MLB combined and has infiltrated the institution of marriage, morality and adolescent minds.
• 
Children raised in single-parent homes are on the rise.  Many of our inner cities are becoming the dens of crime due to lack of discipline and leadership from parents.  Absentee fathers are the norm.
• 
Disregard for law and public servants is not only commonplace but also celebrated.
• 
Racism, on both sides of the fence, has become rampant.
• 
The murder of churchgoers, police officers, law-abiding civilians, people of color and children at school is so common it is no longer shocking.
• 
Further, vitriolic rhetoric toward others because their opinion or convictions stemming from a different faith, culture, orientation or religion fills our vocabulary and false characterizations such as labeling rioters as protesters, terrorists as militants, looters as activists or all Christians as bigots and all Muslims as extremists misconstrue truth.
• 
The taproots of these destructive mores are the breakdown of the family, and their cure lies not in the White House but in our own house.
• 
Looking outward is always easier than looking inward and assessing blame is always easier than accepting it.
• 
Does Washington need an overhaul and should we work to facilitate it?  Yes.
• 
However, we have the ability and first responsibility to start that change in our own four walls.
• 
It is time to take the first, long hard look at the man in the mirror.
• 
Start with respect. We need to re-learn the art of honoring others' opinions when they don't align with our own.
• 
If we taught this lost art in our homes, we could do away with the majority of racial, gender, political and social injustice we want the government to cure.
• 
Reinforce the concept of listening. Listening is much more than hearing.  It is to give attention, to act upon and to intently make a positive effort to take notice of someone's words.
• 
For too long we as Americans have been so busy thinking of a response or rebuttal that we fail to hear the legitimacy of others' thoughts.
• 
Demonstrate the skill of communication. As Americans we are good at talking but not communicating.  Communication requires respect, empathy and humility. 
• 
When our homes are filled with respectful dialogue, we are then ready to be heard in the public square.
• 
Be a place of love. Love is the greatest gift one can receive or give.  It is not based on performance, commonality or reciprocity.
• 
In a time when our televisions and social media accounts are filled with anger, violence and hate, we must ensure that the prevailing characteristic of our home – the only component that makes life worth living – is love.
• 
I will continue to vote; I will not be silent.
• 
I will strive for reform, and I will pray for whoever is president regardless of whether or not he or she received my vote.
• 
But, I will spend less time pontificating about leaders that are far away and spend more time developing the leaders who sit at my own table.
• 
And above all, I will not forget the greatest ability I posses to influence this great nation lies not in the White House but my own house.
      The war against Trump  (03/08/2017)
• 
... the Democrats and their media accomplices have declared all-out war on the Trump White House.
• 
Under the guise of "resistance" – as though the Trump was the head of an occupying army rather than an elected president — they have set out to destroy his administration.
• 
They are not "sore losers," as many had surmised when their hysterical attacks on Trump as an American Hitler began, they are an army of saboteurs bent on destroying the government the voters preferred.
• 
Their general, Barack Obama, is an unrepentant radical who abused the office of the presidency when he was in power, and as ex-president is now leading a war to overthrow his successor.
• 
Abetted by a corrupt media, funded by the anti-American billionaire George Soros, egged on by Obama's corrupt attorney general, Loretta Lynch, and a collusive press, the left has launched vile and violent demonstrations in the streets, rancid witch-hunts in the halls of Congress posing as "confirmation hearings," and treasonous intelligence leaks.
• 
... none of this would have been possible without the active collusion of the Washington Post, the New York Times and the media networks who have promoted the false narrative of an alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians to fix with the election.
• 
There is zero evidence of such collusion but plenty of evidence that Obama and his cohorts have disregarded the Constitution and the law to spy on reporters they don't like, to use the IRS and other government agencies to take down their opponents and undermine the democratic system.
• 
... the source of this civil war mentality is a profound rejection of the American idea.
• 
This is the idea that we are equal citizens regardless of our origins, and that we are accountable as individuals for what we do.
• 
The left's creed – identity politics – is an anti-American, racially charged determination to reject individual accountability and individual freedom, and to establish in their place group privileges, and racial/gender hierarchies.
• 
This collectivist, racial creed is the heart and soul of today's Democratic Party and its allies in the mainstream media.
• 
It is the inspiration for the war Democrats have declared on the newly elected government of Donald Trump.
• 
"Through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other....  When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice....  Whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots, we all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American Flag."
• 
This is the American creed, and it is the voice of the American people who elected Trump in November 2016.
      'A Day Without Women': Who are the women who won't be marching?  (Fox 03/08/2017)
• 
Like millions of other American women, A Day Without Women will be a day like any other.
• 
I would no more participate in a protest than I would stick needles in my eye.  Why?  Because I'm not a joiner.
• 
As author William Powers notes, "When a crowd adopts a point of view en masse, all critical thinking stops."
• 
But don't you understand the plight of American women, you ask?  Actually, no.
• 
I don't think women have a plight.  I think individual women, and individual men, have their own respective plights.
• 
But do I think American women, as a whole, are oppressed?  Of course not.
• 
When it comes to women in America, progress is the operative word.  ... But it's a relative term — how to improve something is entirely subjective.
• 
Yet when we talk about women in America, progress is never defined, debated or qualified.  The topic is misleading right out of the gate.
• 
That's because women on the left have the power, and they have a specific message to sell.  They want people to believe that women in America get the short end of the stick.
• 
Americans who don't share this negative view of women represent the silent majority.
• 
They know our country isn't perfect, but they know something else, too.  They know American women are the most fortunate human beings on the planet.
• 
If that sounds wrong to the naked ear it's because Americans have been conditioned to believe otherwise.
• 
Just last year, in an ironic twist of fate, Hillary Clinton said, "I do think if you tell people something long enough, with great passion, they get perhaps inclined to believe it."
• 
Indeed they do, and that's exactly what feminists like Clinton have done.
• 
They've defined progress for us by calling it liberation — from men, from children, from society's constructs, from just about anything that makes women feel morally obligated to someone or something other than themselves.
• 
But most women don't agree with that definition of progress.  Feminists do.
• 
They've spent decades trying to convince women that America needs to rearrange itself so women can be unshackled, free and presumably happy.
• 
But it didn't work.  ... "As women have gained more freedom, more education, and more power, they have become less happy."
• 
That's because most women don't want what feminists want.  So rather than participate in A Day Without Women, this silent majority will continue forth with their lives and watch the spectacle from the sidelines.
• 
And marvel at the irony of women who want to be heard while wearing a ‘pussy hat.'
      Bill O'Reilly: Wiretaps, collusion and chaos — Can we tamp down the madness?  (Fox 03/07/2017)
• 
... there are only two facts in this whole swamp of accusations.  Only two!
• 
First, the calls between General Michael Flynn and the Russian ambassador were tapped by somebody.
• 
So, who tapped the call?  We don't know.
• 
Second fact.  President Obama allowed Attorney General Loretta Lynch to change the way U.S.  intelligence agencies share unconfirmed data.  That happened in January, just a few days before President Obama left office.
• 
So, why did President Obama change the intel standards?  We don't know.
• 
But Donald Trump apparently believes it was to sabotage his incoming administration.
• 
That's it.  That's the only factual information we can give you.
• 
All the rest is blather, opinion, propaganda, speculation.
• 
So, any fair-minded person has to acknowledge that there is no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, at least at this point.  Correct?
• 
Now, onto the tapping.  In order for that to legally happen, a judge would have to issue a FISA warrant.
• 
President Trump has asked for an investigation into the alleged tapping.  We assume that will happen but this whole thing is terrible for the country.
• 
America's credibility is being damaged all over the world.  And the federal government's ability to even operate is being impeded.
• 
So, for the good of the country, perhaps we should tamp down the madness a bit.
• 
Let Congress do its job and investigate.  Okay?
      Sean Hannity: Americans deserve to know if Obama had Trump spied on  (Fox 03/07/2017)
• 
The alt-left propaganda media is colluding with these leakers and deep state bureaucrats with the sole purpose of stopping President Trump's agenda, to try and delegitimize the president with the hopes of eventually removing him from power.
• 
This is no paranoid conspiracy theory.  There's a disturbing pattern going on here.
• 
There are countless reports of various federal agencies under President Obama looking into activities of or intercepting communications with people associated with the Trump campaign.
• 
... "in its final days, the Obama administration expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government's 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections."
• 
Why would President Obama wait seven years and 11 months to issue that order?
• 
Because he wanted as much information – true or not - to be available to his appointed deep state shadow government officials so they could leak it to the press with maximum cover.
• 
So if the surveillance was ordered, steps were also taken to help ensure that whatever was revealed would get to the alt-left propaganda media. 
• 
"This is the difference between being correct and being right."
• 
"I think the president was not correct, certainly, in saying that President Obama ordered a tap on a server in Trump Tower.  However, I think he's right in that there was surveillance and that it was conducted at the behest of the attorney — of the Justice Department through the FISA court."
• 
... what happened to Flynn and what we are now seeing with all these other intelligence leaks represents the tip of the iceberg.
• 
This accusation that President Trump made is serious.  We need to get to the bottom of it.
• 
We need to know where the information came from and who leaked it.
• 
And we need to know what role, if any, former President Obama played in this sordid affair. 
      The truth about Trump's new travel restrictions  (Fox 03/07/2017)
• 
One would think everyone in America, citizens and legal residents alike, would be clapping for the redrafted and narrowly tailored executive order President Trump signed on Monday.
• 
It plainly aims to protect all of us from radical Islamic terrorism.
• 
Watch what happens next.  The first outcry, despite public exhaustion with Democratic outrage over everything, will be that the president has no intent to protect America, that he is trying to single out Muslims for exclusion.
• 
Then watch the outrage pivot.  Next will come filings of frivolous lawsuits, all aimed at undermining the EO as poorly crafted, probing probity and fairness of extensive vetting for foreign nationals, implying that the EO presents previously unmentioned due process and equal protection concerns.
• 
The real aim of these attacks will be to drag the issue back into federal district court — any court, but preferably an activist one — to block the EO again.
• 
And why, you may fairly ask, would anyone do this and place our national security at risk again?
• 
Answer: To keep the issue alive, to further undermine and embarrass an outspoken president with whom those on the Left viscerally disagree.
• 
They disagree with his enforcing national sovereignty, elevating border security, identifying foreign terrorist groups by name, religious and national affiliation, bluntly talking about patriotism or putting America "first," subjecting foreigners to "extreme" vetting, raising respect for law enforcement, restoring defense budgets and respecting tradition.
• 
Mostly, they want to keep litigating — long sigh — their election loss.
• 
The real irony is this: Whether Trump's detractors, hoping for another temporary restraining order and possible redraft, choose to litigate the language or intent behind this EO or just keep fussing, fuming and staging more outrageous outrage, the Left loses.
• 
Why?  Because this EO is becoming symbolic.  It now represents something more than protection from six bastions of exportable terrorism.
• 
It represents America's desire to protect herself, a desire to preserve America's innate sovereignty, enduring identity and future.
• 
Behind this embattled EO is a broadening consensus that President Trump, if uncharacteristically vocal, fast-paced and emotionally reflexive, is right.
• 
It is time for America to protect America, and this EO says it all.  We are not going to back off that priority.
• 
We know the price: In a world where every human foible triggers new outrage and another demand for resignation, where politics prevents members of Congress from standing for a brave patriot's devastated widow and where no good deed goes unpunished — standing for truth is getting harder.
• 
This EO reminds us that we need to keep standing. 
      An angry doctor's plea: Stop bickering and fix the ObamaCare mess  (Fox 03/06/2017)
• 
One of the biggest issues of the 2016 election was the state of health care in the U.S. 
• 
Republicans ran on a platform of repealing and replacing a failing ObamaCare system. 
• 
Democrats touted ObamaCare as an overwhelming success.
• 
Neither party has really addressed the issues surrounding the law — patients are experiencing higher costs, diminished access and poorer quality care.
• 
I have seen my patients go without medicines, miss important preventative care milestones and struggle to find access to high quality care.
• 
Copayments continue to increase — deductibles are rising (more than $12,000 in some cases) to the point where an average family simply cannot utilize insurance except in catastrophic circumstances.
• 
Lawmakers on both sides are putting their OWN interests ahead of the health of the American people. 
• 
Money, special interest groups and concerns over re-election (as well as power moves within Congress) dominate the thinking in Washington. 
• 
We have seen press conferences and heard promises.  Instead of acting quickly, lawmakers took a week long vacation.
• 
Currently, we see each party circling the wagons and digging in without any interest in compromise — leaving millions of Americans without any type of legitimate health care.
• 
As a physician, I am fed up and angry.  My job is to heal and to PREVENT disease.
• 
I can no longer do my job with the government sticking its large (and quite ignorant) nose into my exam room or operating suite.
• 
Most of our current health care regulations were crafted by non-physicians — by those who have the financial resources to obtain health care anywhere and anytime they want it.
• 
Interestingly, while the ACA was touted by Democrats as a great success, Congress voted to exempt themselves from purchasing ObamaCare.
• 
It's now time to act.  Congress would be wise to listen to both doctors and patients as they move to fix our broken system.
• 
... government intrusion has increased paperwork, increased cost, diminished efficiency and limited quality.
• 
Insurers have pulled out in many counties across the country leaving many areas with only ONE choice for a health care plan.
• 
Back in the 1920s, this was called a monopoly.
• 
When the ACA was initially crafted and passed in Congress, it was done without a single Republican voice.  In fact, Republicans were unable to even see the thousands of pages of legislation until 30 days before the vote.
• 
Congressional leaders such as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi would not allow debate or discussion.
• 
Ultimately the law was passed and signed by the president and thus began the destruction of modern medicine.
• 
... Democrats such as Nancy Pelosi continue to believe that ObamaCare actually works — which demonstrates the profound disconnect between the Washington elite and the average American.
• 
Patients are caught in the middle of the ObamaCare debate.  Many are losing insurance due to high costs and others are finding little continuity of care as more physicians are no longer found "in network."
• 
Patients are not getting the time and attention that they need when they do come to the office for a visit.
• 
... only 27 percent of an office visit is spent actually talking to a patient ... the rest of the time is consumed with government mandated electronic paperwork.
• 
Health care systems now put an emphasis on billing and charge capture rather than on the health of their patients.
• 
While physician numbers are static, the rise of hospital and practice administrators has risen nearly 3,000 percent.
• 
The long-term bond between doctor and patient has been shown to improve health outcomes but is no longer the centerpiece of care.
• 
We must demand action in Washington.  It is no longer acceptable to allow lawmakers to behave like toddlers fighting over a toy when it comes to our health care.
• 
It's time to end political positioning and inter (as well as intra) party squabbling and PUT PATIENTS FIRST.
• 
... it is critical that Congress involve physicians ... as well as actual patients in the development of a new health care law that will provide effective care for all Americans.
• 
WE must change the focus of American medicine to PREVENTION of disease on the front end rather than spend trillions of dollars on the TREATMENT of disease on the back end.
      Peter Schweizer: Trump vs.  Clintons' Russia ties  (guess who always got a free pass) (Fox 03/03/2017)
• 
Many of those sounding the loudest alarm bells over Russian influence in U.S.  politics were curiously silent when far greater concerns were raised about the Clintons. 
• 
Investigating the business ties between Russia and those in President Donald Trump's orbit is a legitimate exercise.
• 
Examining these relationships is worth doing.
• 
Still, those pushing the narrative of troubling ties to Russia lose all credibility by wholly ignoring the far deeper and more troubling relationships the Clintons and their closest aides have maintained with Russian government officials for years, including while they were in public office.
• 
Unlike the revelations so far concerning Russian ties in the Trump camp, the Clinton deals involved hundreds of millions of dollars and enormous favors that benefitted Russian interests.
• 
Bill and Hillary Clinton received large sums of money directly and indirectly from Russian officials while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.
• 
Bill Clinton was paid a cool $500,000 (well above his normal fee) for a speech in Moscow in 2010.
• 
Who footed the bill?  An investment firm in Moscow called Renaissance Capital, which boasts deep ties to Russian intelligence.
• 
Then there is the glaring fact that the Clinton Foundation also scored $145 million in donations from nine shareholders in a Canadian uranium company called Uranium One that was sold to the Russian government in 2010.
• 
The deal required the approval of several federal government agencies, including Hillary Clinton's State Department.
• 
The deal allowed Rosatom, the Russian State Nuclear Agency, to buy assets that amounted to 20 percent of American uranium.
• 
Rosatom, by the way controls the Russian nuclear arsenal.
• 
Equally troubling: some of those donations were hidden and not disclosed by the Clintons.
• 
The only reason the hidden donations ever came to light is because we uncovered them by combing through Canadian tax records.
• 
Everyone got what they wanted in this deal: the uranium investors made a nice profit; the Russians acquired a strategic asset; and the Clinton Foundation bagged a lot of money.
• 
It seems strange that while some in Congress are eager to investigate the activities of General Mike Flynn and his contacts with Russia, they have no interest in looking into a transaction in which the Clinton Foundation received a staggering $145 million.
• 
It's that kind of inconsistency that saps all credibility from those raising these issues.
• 
Beyond the Clintons themselves, there is also the troubling case of one of their closest aides, John Podesta.  He served as Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign chairman.
• 
Podesta didn't just have conversations with Russian officials.  He went into business with the Russian government while he was advising Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.
• 
In short, John Podesta was business partners with the Russian government and Vladimir Putin.
• 
When John Podesta went to the White House in January 2014 to serve as counselor to President Obama, he failed to disclose his board membership in one of the Joule entities on his financial disclosure form. 
• 
None of the individuals in Trump's orbit who have Russian ties — Paul Manafort, Carter Page, and General Mike Flynn — are serving in the Trump White House.
• 
Had Hillary Clinton won the presidency, John Podesta would certainly have played a central role.
• 
Would the same people who are currently sounding the alarm bells about Russian influence in American politics have cared?  I doubt it.
      Keith Ablow: Donald Trump and the incredible power of psychological truth  (Fox 03/03/2017)
• 
As a healer, I help people accept stark truths about their lives and the lives of others.
• 
These truths and insights may call upon them to act boldly, often in spite of their own anxiety and despite the fact that others will experience pain.
• 
In some ways, seeing one's life clearly requires an almost arithmetic assessment of it.
• 
President Trump is practicing the political version of this arithmetic: psychological truth and healing.
• 
When Trump tells the citizens of the United States that people who are in our country illegally and commit crimes must leave, he is the same as the therapist who tells a patient, "If your boyfriend is hitting you, you need to make him leave your apartment."
• 
The breakup might result in sadness and anger, but that is no reason not to act.
• 
When Trump says trade deals with the United States can't be to the detriment of the U.S.  economy, he is the corporate psychologist who tells a pair of business partners, "If one of you is trying to steal from the other, this isn't a partnership, it's a scam.  That would make one of you a thief and the other a chump.  And you both had better aspire to being more than that."
• 
When Trump tells our citizens that the borders of the United States need to be enforced vigorously, with a wall to defend the more porous of them, he is no different from the therapist who tells the owners of a house that is repeatedly robbed that they not only need to get an alarm system, but they also need to wonder why they don't already have one.
• 
Because if they don't value themselves enough to defend their property, that's a much bigger problem than the robberies themselves.
• 
It all adds up to what people do to prevent being victimized.  It's all arithmetic.
• 
When Trump tells our citizens that companies that leave our country and American workers behind — and then sell their goods back into the United States — need to pay a price for their bad faith, he is no different from the sports psychologist who tells a team that its departing quarterback, who takes the team's playbook with him mid-season, shouldn't be able to walk back onto the field in another uniform, to a hero's welcome.
• 
There's got to be a price to pay for that betrayal, whether they once liked the guy or not.
• 
Otherwise, the team can start feeling like losers who deserve to be abandoned.
• 
When Trump tells our citizens that states can't choose to ignore federal drug and immigration laws and expect to receive financial support from the federal government, he is no different from the psychologist who tells the board of directors of a parent company that they need to stop funding subsidiaries that show utter contempt for corporate policies and procedures.
• 
Yes, it might be a tough stance that causes conflict, but what is the alternative?  Anarchy that ends up eroding the credibility of the board and the very foundation of the corporation?
• 
It all adds up to what a company is willing to do for cohesion and survival.  It's all arithmetic.
• 
Healing or governing via psychological truth is not always pretty.
• 
President Trump knows this truth, governs with it and, despite all the tough emotions it is bound to bring up along the way, can ultimately heal America with it.
      Gregg Jarrett: No, Ms.  Pelosi, Attorney General Sessions did not commit perjury  (Fox 03/02/2017)
• 
Napoleon Bonaparte once said, "from the sublime to the ridiculous is but a step."
• 
There is nothing sublime about Nancy Pelosi.  Ridiculous, however, is an apt description.
• 
... the former Speaker of the House denounced Attorney General Jeff Sessions as a liar, pronounced him guilty of perjury, and demanded his resignation.
• 
What did Sessions do to deserve her condemnation?  By his account, he told the truth.
• 
When asked by Senator Al Franken during his confirmation hearing about "a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between Trump surrogates and intermediaries for the Russian government," Sessions responded as follows:
• 
"I'm not aware of any of those activities.  I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with Russians, and I'm unable to comment on it."
• 
In a subsequent questionnaire issued by Senator Patrick Leahy, Sessions answered "no" when asked the following:
• 
"Several of the President-elect's nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties.  Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after Election Day?"
• 
As posed, the questions specifically ask Sessions about any exchange of information with the Russians pertaining to the presidential campaign and any discussion of the election itself.
• 
The attorney general insists he responded honestly.  That is, he never spoke with a Russian official about either subject.
• 
"I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign.  I have no idea what this allegation is about.  It is false."
• 
Sessions says he had more than 25 conversations with foreign ambassadors in 2016 as a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  Twice he spoke with the Russian Ambassador Sergey Kisylak.
• 
Sessions insists he talked with Kishlak only in his capacity as a Senator and never about the campaign or election. 
• 
Someone might want to tell Pelosi that speaking with the Russian ambassador to the United States is neither exceptional nor incriminating
• 
After all, Kisylak is stationed here.  His job is to communicate with U.S.  officials.  Senators take meetings with foreign diplomats all the time.
• 
Case in point: Democratic Senator Claire McCaskell.  After criticizing Sessions for meeting with the Russian ambassador and claiming she had never done so in her 10 years on the Armed Services Committee, it turns out that her own tweets betrayed her
• 
The record shows she bragged on social media about two of her meetings with him.
• 
Don't be ashamed, Claire.  It is not a crime to speak to a Russian.
• 
Importantly, there is no evidence to suggest that the attorney general has been untruthful.
• 
The only dishonesty comes from Pelosi who has deliberately misrepresented the known facts and defamed Sessions by branding him a liar. 
• 
Pelosi is in desperate need of a primer on perjury.  As a non-lawyer, she might want to take careful notes. 
• 
Under federal law, 18 USC 1621, perjury is knowingly and willfully making a false statement under oath.  It is as simple as that.
• 
You don't need to be a great thinker to comprehend the plain meaning of the statute.
• 
If Sessions was acting in his capacity as a United State Senator and did not discuss the election campaign, then he did not commit perjury.
• 
In other words, his statements to the Judiciary Committee were truthful, not lies as Pelosi claims.
• 
Yet, armed with no evidence whatsoever, she has convicted Sessions without the benefit of a trial.
• 
Her accusations are not just baseless, given the known facts, but contemptible. 
• 
Perhaps Nancy Pelosi is the one who should resign.  For being irresponsible.  For leveling reckless recriminations and slurs.
• 
Her only defense may be incompetence.  It is the oft-used excuse of the Fool. 
      Andrew Napolitano: The truth  (and nothing but the truth) about leaks (Fox 03/02/2017)
      Trump just delivered the best speech of his political career  (NYP 02/28/2017)
• 
Donald Trump gave the best speech of his short political life last night, and it had nothing to do with grand oratory.
• 
He was thoroughly presidential, speaking plainly and yet masterfully in projecting an optimistic vision of the America he aims to build.
• 
His speech was well written, and well delivered, chock full of initiatives and full of changes in mood.
• 
Trump was aggressive when he wondered how Democrats opposed to border control would feel if they talked to an American who lost his job and maybe a loved one because of an illegal immigrant.
• 
The president's goals are huge, but this was no mere laundry list of government spending and imposition.
• 
Instead, Trump infused his core principles — fixing immigration and trade, broad tax cuts, repealing ObamaCare and rebuilding the military — with unifying themes that would make America more fair, more just, more prosperous and, yes, great again.
• 
"I am asking everyone watching tonight to seize this moment and — believe in yourselves.  Believe in your future.  And believe, once more, in America."
• 
It was a not-so-subtle request that citizens keep the pressure on Congress to deliver Trump's agenda.
• 
It is one of the virtues of single-party rule — the same voters put Trump and GOP congressional leaders there, and they have the right to demand action, not talk.
• 
Trump, as he did in the campaign, again displayed an ability to rise to the occasion and seize the momentum from his critics and opponents.
• 
Democrats underestimate him at their peril.  Then again, maybe they are trying to destroy him because they don't underestimate him — they fear him.
• 
Put it this way: If the Trump of last night is the Trump who shows up to the Oval Office every day, he will be an extraordinary force with the potential to reshape the political landscape of both parties.
• 
Not boxed in by ideology or doctrinal straitjackets, he wants to get big things done for all Americans.
• 
Unions allied with Dems are already drifting in his direction because of his commitment to good-paying jobs.
• 
Sure, he can be his own worst enemy, but there will be no stopping him if he can bottle last night's approach.  "The time for trivial things is over," he said at one point in an appeal to Democrats.
• 
Some of them grumbled, but most Americans would agree with him that it's time to get on with doing big things for the country.  He's ready to lead the way.
      Trump has masterfully raised the stakes for Debbie Downer Democrats  (Fox 03/01/2017)
      Trump-Reagan parallels are scary, but not for the reasons critics think  (Fox 02/24/2017)
• 
The extraordinary assaults by media, celebrities and jealous politicians against Trump have been unending.
• 
Their attacks include questioning his mental health, repeatedly comparing him to Hitler, declaring him a fascist, insisting he's a modern-day Manchurian candidate, that he's a traitor (because Russians!), and on and on.
• 
The striking thing about the nature of the attacks is that they're all personal.  They are accusations meant to instill in the listener a sense of danger, provoking an existential fear of the president of the United States.
• 
Reagan withstood similar vitriol by the same and usual suspects.
• 
Democratic Rep.  William Clay of Missouri charged that Reagan was "trying to replace the Bill of Rights with fascist precepts lifted verbatim from Mein Kampf.
• 
... wrote in Esquire that the voters who supported Reagan were like the "good Germans" in "Hitler's Germany."
• 
After being attacked relentlessly by fellow Republicans during the campaign, Hollywood making their condemnation known, and the media working overtime to demonize Reagan, it shouldn't be surprising that, within 90 days of his taking the oath of office, the president was shot by a lunatic.
• 
The now-freed John Hinckley believed murdering Reagan would impress actress Jodie Foster.
• 
"I will admit to you that the reason I'm going ahead with this attempt now is because I just cannot wait any longer to impress you."
• 
"I've got to do something now to make you understand in no uncertain terms that I am doing all of this for your sake ....  Jodie, I'm asking you to please look into your heart and at least give me the chance with this historical deed to gain your respect and love," concluded the letter, written just hours before he went to the Washington Hilton, shooting the president and several others.
• 
There's nothing in Foster's history indicating she expressed a loathing for Reagan.  At the time of the shooting, she was a 19-year-old student at Yale.
• 
But it's arguable that the overall media environment had become so toxic, a man with an already tenuous relationship with reality thought shooting the president would be a good idea and appreciated.
• 
After all, the critics all agreed that Reagan was a doltish, unhinged fascist who would start World War III simply because he was dumb.  And evil, of course.
• 
So far, the drumbeat against Trump is virtually identical.
• 
In the middle of the campaign, The Washington Post delivered an editorial titled, "Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy."
• 
The usual Hitler-fascist accusations are a daily narrative.
• 
"A growing number of Democrats are openly questioning President Trump's mental health..."
• 
NPR also decided to get into the act just a few days ago with an article that mused, "At 70, Trump is the oldest American president to ever take office.  Couple his age with a family history of dementia.  ..." Yeah, subtle.
• 
The New Republic, a leftist rag, chimed in with its obscene suggestion that the president is possibly suffering from an undiagnosed case of syphilis.  Because ... why not?
• 
"President Trump reaches 32 days, won't be shortest U.S.  president." So, they were expecting (hoping?) for him to not be president at this point in time?
• 
As media rhetoric boils, last week a middle-schooler was arrested for throwing a 2x4 piece of wood at the presidential motorcade in Florida.
• 
Now with the benefit of history, where are the responsible journalists and statesmen calling for the daily vitriolic personal attacks to stop?
• 
The media should complain all they want about Trump's policies, but focusing on demonizing the president personally isn't politics, it's a danger to us all.
      Andrew Napolitano: The chickens have come home to roost  (Fox 02/23/2017)
• 
... members of the intelligence community — part of the deep state, the unseen government within the government that does not change with elections — now have acquired so much data on everyone in America that they can selectively reveal it to reward their friends and harm their foes.
• 
Their principal foe today is the president of the United States.
• 
Liberty is rarely lost overnight.  The wall of tyranny often begins with benign building blocks of safety — each one lying on top of a predecessor — eventually collectively constituting an impediment to the exercise of free choices by free people, often not even recognized until it is too late.
• 
In the pre-Revolutionary era, British courts in London secretly issued general warrants to British government agents in America.  ... They authorized agents to search where they wished and seize what they found.
• 
The use of general warrants was so offensive to our Colonial ancestors that it whipped up more serious opposition to British rule and support for the revolutionaries than the "no taxation without representation" argument did.
• 
And when it came time for Americans to write the Constitution, they prohibited general warrants in the Fourth Amendment, the whole purpose of which was to guarantee the right to be left alone by forcing the government to focus on bad guys and prohibit it from engaging in fishing expeditions.
• 
FISA established a secret court and permitted it to issue warrants authorizing spying on agents of foreign governments when physically present in the United States.
• 
Never mind, the argument went, that FISA has no requirement of showing any probable cause of crime or even articulable suspicion on the part of the foreign target; this will keep us safe.
• 
Besides, the government insisted, it can't be used against Americans.
• 
That argument was bought by presidents, members of Congress and nearly all federal courts that examined it.
• 
We don't know whether the authors of this scheme really wanted federal spies to be able to spy on anyone at will, but that is where we are today.
• 
... FISA has morphed so as to authorize spying down a slippery slope of targets, from foreign agents to all foreigners to anyone who communicates with foreigners to anyone capable of communicating with them.
• 
The targets today are not just ordinary Americans; they are justices on the Supreme Court, military brass in the Pentagon, agents in the FBI, local police in cities and towns, and the man in the Oval Office.
• 
The British system that arguably impelled our secession in 1776 is now here on steroids.
• 
Enter the outsider as president.  Donald Trump has condemned the spying and leaking, as he is a victim of it.
• 
Trump's former national security adviser, retired Lt.  Gen.  Michael Flynn, himself a former military spy, spoke to the Russian ambassador to the United States in December via telephone in Trump Tower.
• 
It was a benign conversation.  He knew it was being monitored, as he is a former monitor of such communications.
• 
But he mistakenly thought that those who were monitoring him were patriots as he is.  They were not.
• 
They violated federal law by revealing in part what Flynn had said, and they did so in a manner to embarrass and infuriate Trump.
• 
Why would they do this?
• 
Perhaps because they feared Flynn's being in the White House, since he knows the power and depth of the deep state.
• 
Perhaps to send a message to Trump because he once compared American spies to Nazis.
• 
Perhaps because they believe that their judgment of the foreign dangers America faces is superior to the president's.
• 
Perhaps because they hate and fear the outsider in the White House.
• 
The chickens have come home to roost.  In our misguided efforts to keep the country safe, we have neglected to keep it free.
• 
We have enabled a deep state to become powerful enough to control a powerful president.
• 
We have placed so much data and so much power in the hands of unelected, unaccountable, opaque spies that they can use it as they see fit — even to the point of committing federal felonies.
• 
Now some have boasted that they can manipulate and thus control the president of the United States by selectively revealing and concealing what they know about anyone, including the president himself.
• 
This is a perilous state of affairs, brought about by the maniacal passion for surveillance ... all with utter indifference to the widespread constitutional violations and permanent destruction of personal liberties.
• 
This is not the government the Framers gave us.  But it is one far more dangerous to human freedom than the one from which they seceded in 1776.
      Christians are genocide victims and should get priority in refugee order  (Fox 02/21/2017)
• 
This weekend, ISIS released a video calling for the full elimination of Christianity in Egypt. 
• 
ISIS warned us three years ago, "[we will] break your crosses, and enslave your women .  .  .  If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market."
• 
Now, the Christian population in Syria stands at less than 500,000, significantly less than the 2 million it was just five years ago.
• 
Iraq's ancient churches and monasteries are in rubble across the Nineveh Plain, and countless people have been displaced and lives have been lost.
• 
In Egypt, terrorists must feel especially emboldened: The parliament even passed a law governing the building or renovation of churches in the country.
• 
While politicians, pundits and judges spar over whether religious minorities ought to still be prioritized in the latest iteration of President Trump's executive order on refugees, Islamic extremists continue to follow through on genocidal threats against Christians.
• 
It is a settled fact that Christians from Syria to Nigeria continue to face an existential threat from varying kinds of Islamic extremists, and this is why both houses of Congress voted unanimously in 2016 to support a genocide resolution against ISIS for the atrocities the terrorist organization has committed against Christians, Yazidis and other religious minorities in the Middle East.
• 
Similar resolutions were passed by the Council of Europe, the European Parliament, the UK House of Commons, the Australian Parliament, the Canadian Parliament, and the French National Assembly.
• 
Even Secretary of State John Kerry broke with President Barack Obama to make his own official declaration of genocide against ISIS, noting that Christians had been subject to atrocities "for their faith alone."
• 
Yet, despite this widespread acknowledgement of the genocidal threat faced by Christians, only 77 Syrian Christians were admitted into the United States between January and November 2016, compared to 13,210 Muslims.
• 
Of course, no one is suggesting that the Islamic community is not deserving of assistance as well.
• 
It's just that the Christian, Yazidi and other minority communities have faced the threat of genocide in the Middle East — of total eradication.
• 
... "unlike some others, Middle East Christians have nowhere else to go ... present policy does not take into account the uniquely precarious situation of displaced Christians ... Christians are profoundly disadvantaged."
• 
In a less apoplectic time, the prioritization of threatened, religious minorities in President Trump's executive order would have been applauded by Republicans and Democrats alike. 
• 
It still should be.
• 
After all, federal law, as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, advises that religious persecution ought to be taken into account when it comes to questions of asylum.
• 
It is ethical and legal for the United States government to provide special assistance to those religious minorities who have been displaced, whose children have been sold into slavery, whose places of worship have been destroyed, and whose countless family members have been thrown into mass graves.
• 
In an attempt to engage in a political fight with the president, some of our leaders threaten their own moral authority.
• 
While trying not to discriminate, they would inadvertently choose to discriminate against some of the most vulnerable people in the world, those who have faced the threat of genocide.
• 
She told told me, "I lived in America.  You are wonderful people.  You care for your pets so well.  Can you please care for your Christian brothers and sisters who are suffering?  Why are you so silent in the face of our genocide?"
• 
As our leaders debate, I hear her words in my head, "Please help us.  Raise your voice for us.  Our children are dying."
• 
See related Iraqi Christians (Glenn McCoy, 08/08/2014) cartoon from World picture album
      Presidents' Day: The secret Trump could learn from George Washington  (Fox 02/20/2017)
• 
On this Presidents' Day, one of many American traditions we owe to George Washington, let's reflect on another tradition he established – the farewell address.
• 
Today, "Washington" has morphed from a towering person of character into a tumultuous seat of political power, where Donald Trump has replaced Barack Obama in the White House.
• 
More than 6,000 words long, it warns against excessive partisanship, foreign entanglements and regional differences.
• 
In a text that has been essentially forgotten by Americans, despite a recent book and news stories about it, one omission from the national memory is particularly glaring. 
• 
Washington believed that Judeo-Christian values formed the foundation for America's future success.
• 
Washington had previously written that America could never hope to be a "happy nation" unless it humbly imitated the "Divine Author" of Christianity.
• 
In his Farewell Address, he restated this theme, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."
• 
These spiritual values were not evident in Obama's Farewell Address.
• 
But they were accented in the inauguration of America's 45th president.
• 
In his Inaugural Address, the newly sworn in president spoke of "righteousness" and declared America would be "protected by God," echoing themes of virtue and providential care extolled by Washington in his First Inaugural Address.
• 
The Trump era commenced with a record number of Inaugural prayers — three more than the official number of Inaugural Balls.
• 
For many from Judeo-Christian faith traditions, this likely came as a welcome change.
• 
Obama's Farewell Address ended an era.  An epoch began with Trump's unexpected electoral victory.
• 
If Washington's spiritual legacy from his last words to the nation is heeded, according to our Founding Father, we may be well on the way to "political prosperity" as a "happy nation."
• 
So here's my prayer for the new president: When he finally bids farewell to the nation, may he have been as successful in emulating the spiritual values of Washington as he has been in the art of the deal.
      The media doesn’t call the shots — Trump does  (NYP 02/19/2017)
• 
The media smart set fixates on creating a narrative that explains the big picture of events and offers gripping examples.
• 
In that spirit, then, here's a narrative to help them understand President Trump's recent burst of activity:
• 
He's serving notice that he, and not the media, sets the nation's agenda.
• 
And that when journalists behave like opponents, he will treat them like opponents, punching back harder than they punch him.
• 
The emerging media narrative was that the White House was in chaos, riven by infighting, leaks, an unhappy president and an unhappier first lady.
• 
Trump knows better than most that perception, even if it's wrong, can quickly harden into accepted fact.
• 
He sensed danger and decided to take matters into his own hands.
• 
Nobody speaks for Trump better than Trump, which is not always a virtue.  But Thursday, he made a wise game-day decision to do his solo version of a reset.
• 
The president was deliberate in making his points, talking for more than 20 minutes about what he's done to keep his campaign promises and how he's unfairly depicted.
• 
His impressive litany of action includes canceling the Asian-Pacific trade deal, green-lighting two pipeline projects and jawboning firms like General Motors and Walmart to spend and hire.
• 
He talked about rebuilding the military, hosting leaders from Japan, Israel, Canada and Great Britain, strengthening borders and immigrant vetting, targeting the Islamic State and nominating Judge Neil Gorsuch for the ­Supreme Court, calling him a "true defender of our laws and our Constitution."
• 
That was Trump the agenda setter.  Then came Trump the media basher.
• 
He contrasted public optimism with relentless press criticism, saying big outlets on both coasts don't speak "for the people, but for the special interests and for those profiting off a very, very ­obviously broken system.  The press has become so dishonest that if we don't talk about [it], we are doing a tremendous disservice to the American people."
• 
That was the start of a sustained media attack like nothing America has ever seen.
• 
He called much coverage "dishonest" and "fake news." He accused some of "hate" and "venom" and singled out individual reporters, anchors and outlets.
• 
It was an extraordinary use of the bully pulpit, yet accounts calling it a nonstop rant don't do it justice.
• 
Many journalists clearly enjoyed the raucous informality, which included back-and-forth exchanges where some freely talked over the president.
• 
Contrast that with the previous eight years of news conferences, where President Barack Obama generally delivered long lectures to an amen chorus.
• 
There was contrast, too, in Trump spending 50 minutes taking more than 40 questions, all spontaneous and none arranged in advance.  It was a scrum to be called on, and no topic was off-topic — he answered them all.
• 
He also made errors, repeated himself frequently and some answers raised more questions.  But the overall performance was incredibly effective at creating a very different narrative about his tenure for the TV audience — the people he cares about most.
• 
Expect those two themes — he is putting America First and much of the media is dishonest — to be the pillars of his presidency, as they were the pillars of his campaign.
• 
That's why he's taking his show on the road, and likely will do so regularly.
• 
As legendary New Yorker Ed Koch often said about his own criticisms of the press and judges, he didn't lose his First Amendment rights when he became mayor.
• 
So it is with Trump.  He's free, like all Americans, to speak his mind.
• 
His words carry more weight as president, but attempts to silence him are truly un-American.  The White House is not a coddled college safe space.
• 
Something else Koch said also is relevant.  He once called a journalist who was a partisan critic a "politician with a press pass."
• 
That's how Trump sees much of the media, and he's more right than wrong.
• 
Many tried to block his election, and now are trying to destroy his presidency.
      Erick Erickson: The intelligence community vs.  Trump.  We're watching a low level coup, America  (Fox 02/16/2017)
• 
A lot of people who think Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning are American heroes are under the impression Donald Trump and members of his administration are traitors.
• 
Hollywood celebrities are openly calling for a military coup.
• 
Political commentators are comparing Donald Trump's election to 9/11 or Pearl Harbor because, allegedly and with no evidence, Russia stole the election.
• 
The president grows more suspicious of the intel community by the way and he has good reason to do so.
• 
The left is in a nonstop state of agitation calling for mass resistance.
• 
Trump supporters are looking to settle scores.
• 
Democrats have every incentive to play up unproven allegations that the Russians tampered with the election.
• 
Republicans have every reason to play up the theory that the intelligence community is out to get the President.
• 
The wisest course of action is for Attorney General Jeff Sessions to name an independent counsel to examine two questions and for both sides to stand down on the matter while the investigation is ongoing.
• 
First, did the Trump campaign collaborate with the Russians to affect the election?
• 
Second, are some members of the intelligence community leaking to undermine the President?
• 
We need answers to both.  The first to satisfy the left and the second to satisfy the right.
• 
What seems most plausible to me is that the Trump team individuals with known ties to Russia probably were in communication with the Russians about their other business dealings, not Trump.
• 
As the New York Times is reporting and everyone is ignoring, there is plenty of evidence of communications, but no evidence at all of coordination.
• 
If both sides will not cooperate on defusing this situation, we are in for some seriously rocky times.
• 
Concurrently to all of this, Mitch McConnell needs to hurry the hell up and get the rest of the cabinet and Neil Gorsuch confirmed.
• 
The executive departments need stability and we need someone on the Supreme Court who can break 4-4 decisions on controversial matters. 
• 
The left is going to have to get over their phony "stolen seat" talking point.
• 
The right is going to have to concede the left has legitimate concerns about the Russian mess.
• 
The constant inflaming of grievances by political organizations is going to do us all in.
• 
I have to wonder, though, why every story still has to note that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL of Trump-Russian collaboration.
• 
Given the open hostility for the president that the intelligence community has, one would think they would have produced some actual proof of something other than innuendo by now, if there was something to produce.
• 
But they have not.
      Relax, Trump is stone cold sane  (Fox 02/15/2017)
• 
Let me issue the standard disclaimer of psychiatrists who discuss the mental health of public figures: I have not personally examined President Trump.
• 
Now, let me put to rest the concerns of Sen.  Al Franken and political commentators ... and anyone else who publicly or privately has questioned the president's sanity:
• 
Donald Trump is stone cold sane.
• 
When a man acquires billions of dollars through complex real estate transactions, invests in many countries, goes on to phenomenal success in television and turns his name into a worldwide brand, it is very unlikely that he is mentally unstable.
• 
When the same man obviously enjoys the love and respect of his children and his wife, who seem to rely on him for support and guidance, it is extraordinarily unlikely that he is mentally unstable.
• 
When the same man walks into the political arena and deftly defeats 16 Republican opponents and then the Democratic heir-apparent to a two-term president's administration, the odds of that man being mentally unstable become vanishingly thin.
• 
And when that very same man attracts to his team the kind of intellect and gravitas represented (to name just a few) by Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Dr.  Ben Carson, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Secretary of Defense James Mattis ... he cannot be mentally deranged.  Period.  It is a statistical impossibility.
• 
Those who assert otherwise are political opportunists, or fools, or both (and I am thinking here, in particular, of Sen.  Franken).
• 
President Trump is the first human being to win this nation's highest office without having been elected to any other office or serving as a general.
• 
Most political pundits thought his quest was pure folly.  Most journalists assessed his chances as zero.  So who was laboring under quasi-delusional thinking?  Answer: Not Donald J.  Trump.
• 
A mentally unstable man would be unlikely to deliver superior products across multiple industries, don't you think?
• 
The stock market has hit record high after record high since Trump's election, and if you think that's an accident, or that investors have all been fooled, it's time to start wondering about your own capacity for rational thought.
      America's spies anonymously took down Michael Flynn.  That is deeply worrying  (02/14/2017)
• 
The United States is much better off without Michael Flynn serving as national security adviser.  But no one should be cheering the way he was brought down.
• 
The whole episode is evidence of the precipitous and ongoing collapse of America's democratic institutions — not a sign of their resiliency.
• 
Flynn's ouster was a soft coup (or political assassination) engineered by anonymous intelligence community bureaucrats.
• 
The results might be salutary, but this isn't the way a liberal democracy is supposed to function.
• 
Unelected intelligence analysts work for the president, not the other way around.
• 
Far too many Trump critics appear not to care that these intelligence agents leaked highly sensitive information to the press — mostly because Trump critics are pleased with the result. 
• 
Members of the unelected, unaccountable intelligence community are not the right someone, especially when they target a senior aide to the president by leaking anonymously to newspapers the content of classified phone intercepts, where the unverified, unsubstantiated information can inflict politically fatal damage almost instantaneously.
• 
These leaks are an enormous problem.  And in a less polarized context, they would be recognized immediately for what they clearly are: an effort to manipulate public opinion for the sake of achieving a desired political outcome.
• 
It's weaponized spin.
• 
... no matter what Flynn did, it is simply not the role of the deep state to target a man working in one of the political branches of the government by dishing to reporters about information it has gathered clandestinely.
• 
It is the role of elected members of Congress to conduct public investigations of alleged wrongdoing by public officials.
• 
What if Congress won't act?  What if both the Senate and the House of Representatives are held by the same party as the president and members of both chambers are reluctant to cross a newly elected head of the executive branch who enjoys overwhelming approval of his party's voters?
• 
In such a situation — our situation — shouldn't we hope the deep state will rise up to act responsibly to take down a member of the administration who may have broken the law?
• 
The answer is an unequivocal no.
• 
In a liberal democracy, how things happen is often as important as what happens.
• 
Procedures matter.  So do rules and public accountability. 
• 
"Normally intercepts of U.S.  officials and citizens are some of the most tightly held government secrets.  This is for good reason.  Selectively disclosing details of private conversations monitored by the FBI or NSA gives the permanent state the power to destroy reputations from the cloak of anonymity.  This is what police states do."
• 
Those cheering the deep state torpedoing of Flynn are saying, in effect, that a police state is perfectly fine so long as it helps to bring down Trump.
• 
It is the role of Congress to investigate the president and those who work for him.
• 
If Congress resists doing its duty, out of a mixture of self-interest and cowardice, the American people have no choice but to try and hold the government's feet to the fire, demanding action with phone calls, protests, and, ultimately, votes.
• 
That is a democratic response to the failure of democracy.
• 
Sitting back and letting shadowy, unaccountable agents of espionage do the job for us simply isn't an acceptable alternative.
• 
Down that path lies the end of democracy in America.
      Bill O'Reilly: A stunning display of dishonesty from the national press and radical left  (Fox 02/14/2017)
• 
Last week, about 680 undocumented aliens were arrested by ICE officials countrywide.
• 
Many of them have already been deported.  The coordinated raids targeted aliens who had committed crimes in the USA — mostly felonies.
• 
Seventy five percent of those taken into custody had convictions, including homicide and rape. 
• 
Many of the arrested non-felons were associating with the criminals.
• 
But those facts have largely gone unreported by the American press.  And by the radical left, which is actively misleading you.  Here are a just a few examples:
• 
Here are a just a few examples:
• 
"What took place yesterday with raids and personal homes is part of the cog of the Trump deportation machine."
• 
"... how inhumane this is to be breaking down people's doors and separating parents from their children."
• 
"This is Donald Trump really executing his campaign plan.  He is trying to be a tough guy, so, he will go after, you know, the maids, the moms, the people that are working in the shops instead of going after the hard-core criminals."
• 
Now, the false news reporting, actually reached the level of hysteria.
• 
There were newspaper headlines screaming things like "The Trump deportation regime has begun," "Immigrant community on high alert fearing Trump's deportation force."
• 
That bannered the fact that raids were targeted at illegal aliens who had committed serious crimes.
• 
Committed them.
• 
That is not press bias.  That is blatant dishonesty.
• 
In the year 2013, the Obama administration removed from this country more than 434,000 illegal aliens, the highest number in history, which goes all the way back to 1892.
• 
Did you see any anti-Obama demonstrations?  Did you see any screaming headlines in the national media?
• 
No, you did not.  Even after President Obama said this:
• 
"What we should be doing is setting up a smart, legal immigration system, that doesn't separate families but does focus on making sure that people who are dangerous, you know, people who are gang bangers, are criminals, that we are deporting them as quickly as possible."
• 
And that is exactly what President Trump is doing.  Exactly.
• 
But the illegal immigration issue has been set up by the media to demonize Mr.  Trump, as a racist and a brutalizer of the poor.
• 
That is what is really going on here.  A set up.  It is flat out disgraceful.
• 
If the federal government cannot remove aliens who commit serious crimes in this country, then, we don't have an effective federal government.
• 
Yet, the far left and the press, knowing full well that the ICE raids last week were directed at dangerous people, chose not to report that.
• 
Instead, [they were busy] smearing President Trump.
• 
We have now reached a low point in American journalism.
• 
As for the far left, they are people who do not want any immigration enforcement.  They want open borders.  They want alien criminals protected.  They want anarchy.
• 
Why?  Because they don't like America as it stands now.
      Sean Hannity: President Trump's immigration raids just another promise kept  (Fox 02/14/2017)
• 
Once again, there is collective hysteria from the alt-radical left over the fact that over the last week, federal immigration officials arrested 680 mostly dangerous individuals in a series of raids.
• 
From press accounts, you would think they were all virtuous, wonderful people just trying to make a better life for their children.
• 
In fact, the vast majority of these people were, in addition to being here illegally, convicted of serious crimes.
• 
"Of those arrested, approximately 75 percent were criminal aliens convicted of crimes including, but not limited to, homicide, aggravated sexual abuse, sexual assault of a minor, lewd and lascivious acts with a child, indecent liberties with a minor, drug trafficking, battery, assault, DUI and weapons charges."
• 
Amid all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, President Trump reminded us that he was just doing what he said he would do.
• 
"We have really done a great job.  We're actually taking people that are criminals, very, very hardened criminals in some cases, with a tremendous track record of abuse and problems, and we're getting them out," Trump said.
• 
"And that's what I said I would do.  I'm just doing what I said I would do."
• 
Of course, these facts didn't matter to the abusively biased alt-left media, which went into breathless hysteria.
• 
"We begin tonight with the growing battle over immigration in this country.  Hundreds of undocumented immigrants were arrested this week across the nation in what authorities insist are routine law enforcement operations."
• 
On top of that, the media is now actively working to help and protect illegal alien law breakers.
• 
USA Today has put out an article with the headline, "What to do if immigration officers come knocking at your door?"
• 
Imagine if the tables were turned and a conservative outlet had encouraged law-breaking?
• 
President Trump made it very clear he was going to deport criminal illegal immigrants, and it was one of his key campaign promises.  But he was not the first president to make such a pledge. 
• 
"It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it," Clinton said in 1995.
• 
Ten years later, then-Sen.  Obama had this to say:
• 
"We all agree on the need to better secure the border and to punish employers who choose to hire illegal immigrants," the future president said.  "You know, we are generous and welcoming people here in the United States, but those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law."
• 
Just two years ago, Obama as president elaborated.
• 
"Today, our immigration system is broken, and everybody knows it," Obama said.  "Even as we are a nation of immigrants, we're also a nation of laws.  Undocumented workers broke our immigration laws, and I believe that they must be held accountable.  If you're a criminal, you'll be deported."
• 
Where was the outrage over those statements?
• 
The left wants to play the race card while the president wants to stop drugs and criminals from pouring across the border.
• 
... an estimated 820,000 of the projected or estimated 11 million illegal immigrants living in America are convicted criminals.
• 
In fiscal 2015, 36.6 percent of the over 70,000 federal sentences meted out were for crimes committed by illegal aliens.
• 
This is beyond a serious problem.  It is impacting every single American.
      Press confronts the reality of a messy Trump presidency that breaks the rules  (Fox 02/13/2017)
• 
The media are finally coming out of denial.
• 
This is Donald J.  Trump, and he ain't going to change.
• 
All the talk about how he would change his style once he got to the White House (which Trump himself encouraged now and then) was misguided.
• 
His bombastic, combative and sometimes frenetic approach to life is what got him elected, so of course he's going to stick with it.
• 
And when aides tell him he needs to change, he'll obviously think that he heard that advice throughout the campaign he was expected to lose.
• 
Now it's true that actually becoming president is the ultimate reality check.  And that's true for any new White House occupant.
• 
Harry Truman famously said of Dwight Eisenhower, "He'll sit here, and he'll say, ‘Do this!  Do that!' And nothing will happen.  Poor Ike — it won't be a bit like the Army."
• 
And that was inevitable for a real estate mogul who ran his company with an iron hand.
• 
A president has to deal with all these checks and balances — Congress, the courts, the opposition party, the media and special interests, as well as other world leaders.
• 
And things move far more slowly than in the corporate world.
• 
But anyone who thought Trump would adopt a measured, stately approach doesn't understand the man.
• 
To be sure, he'll have to adapt to the unique challenges of the presidency.
• 
But his bam-bam-bam approach, including the tweeting at all hours, revs up his supporters.
• 
And his detractors aren't likely to warm to him even if he starts reading boring speeches.
• 
"Being president is harder than Donald Trump thought, according to aides and allies who say that he's growing increasingly frustrated with the challenges of running the massive federal bureaucracy."
• 
But wouldn't any new president face an attitude adjustment when confronting the magnitude of domestic and world problems?
• 
Every new president makes mistakes — you could look it up — and tries to grapple with only a fraction of his team in place.
• 
Obviously there have been a number of unforced errors, including the rushed travel ban, and policy zig-zags.
• 
But Trump's voters didn't elect him to preside over a tidy organizational chart.
• 
They want results, and unlike the process-obsessed press, they don't particularly care how he gets there.
      Dr.  Keith Ablow: Should Trump stop robots from stealing jobs?  (Fox 02/13/2017)
• 
Why does our culture seem to applaud every technological advance uncritically, without considering its impact on the employment of human beings?
• 
I have the same nagging question about self-driving vehicles, which everyone seems to be waiting for with bated breath.  How many jobs will remain for taxi drivers and Uber drivers and traffic cops?
• 
There now are "dark factories" that manufacture products without needing people to put them together or package them.  The factories can run without lights, because no human being is inside.
• 
Sure, people are employed to create the technology and build the machines and factories that operate automatically to churn out product.
• 
And there are lots of folks in America who aren't trained or can't be trained to participate in designing and implementing new technologies of that order.
• 
Millions are tradesmen and craftsmen and service people.
• 
They are among President Trump's "forgotten people."
• 
Silicon Valley inventors and entrepreneurs are very quick not only to defend their version of human rights, but also to make a buck without regard to whether their products erode human self-worth, autonomy and the ability to make a living.
• 
It would seem wise for companies ... to consider the impact of mechanization on their workers, not just their bottom lines.
• 
And because companies may be too self-serving in that regard, it might be wise for consumers to mount some opposition to the ones that decide machines are better at doing jobs than people are. 
• 
There are lots of folks who won't buy meat because they decry the slaughter of animals.
• 
There are lots of folks who won't buy from companies because their politics aren't aligned.
• 
Why aren't more people unwilling to buy from companies that are racing to deploy machines that put them out of work?
• 
I think it's because technology is inherently fascinating.  It has the pull of an addictive drug on the psyches of human beings.
• 
We want more and more and more of it, without thinking very much about whether we are improved by it.
• 
We humans don't want to turn out to have been "too clever by half," inventing things that ultimately dispirit and defeat us.
      Clinton reminds us why we’re lucky she lost the election  (NYP 02/12/2017)
• 
Thank you, Hillary Clinton.  Thank you for reminding America about the importance of Donald Trump's victory and of the awful consequences if you had won.
• 
Her support for the ruling isn't surprising — Clinton said she was for open borders at one point — but the gutter sniping was telling.
• 
The activist judges who based their ruling on their liberal politics instead of the Constitution are the same kind she would appoint to the Supreme Court and all other federal courts if she were in the Oval Office.
• 
... Clinton's taunt, the court ruling, nonstop demonstrations and congressional hijinks combining to illustrate why Trump's election was crucial.
• 
It was a necessary course correction and a dramatic rejection of an arrogant government that both overreaches and underperforms.
• 
... the hysterical, hateful reaction in many quarters to everything Trump says and does is absolute proof that the ruling elite deserved a comeuppance.
• 
The establishment was drunk on power, political and cultural, and never yielded an inch voluntarily or had the decency to admit error.
• 
Its rage reflects its sense of entitlement.
• 
A black conservative and Republican, Scott read aloud on the Senate floor messages he received after supporting Jeff Sessions for attorney general.
• 
He was called a "house Negro," "a disgrace to the black race" and an "Uncle Tom," among other vile epithets that included the N-word, Scott said.
• 
He added, "I just wish that my friends who call themselves liberals would want tolerance for all Americans, including conservative Americans."
• 
Trump's education secretary, Betsy DeVos, also got a taste of liberal hate when Black Lives Matter protesters and teachers union members blocked her entry into a Washington, DC, public school.
• 
This unhinged rage is the new America — only it's not new.
• 
It was hiding in plain sight, hinted at by the contempt that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, tenured radicals, college snowflakes and the Democratic media openly held for those who don't share their worldview.
• 
Modern liberals' contempt for others is essential to their sense of superiority and justifies violence in the streets, threats and simple rudeness.
• 
Contempt for others lets mayors think they can disobey immigration laws and judges think there is no law but theirs.
• 
Still, there are reasons why the Court of Appeals ruling could be a blessing in disguise for Trump.
• 
First, the jubilation among Democrats and their media handmaidens reveals how their hatred for Trump and his supporters overshadows any concern for national security. 
• 
The Constitution and laws give the president wide authority to ­decide whether the entry of "any class of alien" would harm the United States.
• 
Effectively claiming that authority for itself, the court grossly oversteps and obliterates the separation of powers.
• 
It also opens itself to public fury if the ruling opens the door to terrorists.
• 
The second benefit is that the ruling offers Trump a sobering lesson about the difficult road ahead.
• 
Nothing can be taken for granted and every inch of progress will require intense preparation and a willingness to battle on multiple fronts.
• 
The executive order, though sensible in its goals, was especially vulnerable because it was rushed before Trump's team was in place.
• 
As a candidate and president, Trump has endured slings and arrows unprecedented in modern times.
• 
The onslaught is also harming America, but the madness will be bearable if he finishes the revolution he started.
      The Ninth Circuit’s Putsch – America watches as activist judges issue rambling, misguided opinion  (Fox 02/10/2017)
• 
The U.S.  Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, has issued one of the most ill-conceived, poorly reasoned opinions in memory, even for that notoriously activist Circuit.
• 
It will not sit well with most Americans, for good reason.
• 
Whether motivated by antipathy for the president, love of limelight, or just fundamentally misconceiving their role, the Court stumbles into embarrassing contradictions, makes baseless assumptions, shows indifference to law and history.
• 
The job was simple: Decide whether, given the President's Article II prerogatives and authority as "Commander in Chief," a single federal judge – one of 3,294 – can issue a sweeping, conclusory, nationwide "temporary restraining order" (TRO) halting implementation of a national security Executive Order (EO).
• 
They played to the street, and tried a legalistic putsch.  ... the appellate court seemed intent on a political smack down of the President, making headlines, even if that required twisting the law.
• 
Did the States show any permanent harm, likelihood of winning on constitutional issues, balance public interest?  The States could not do this, and the court never asked. 
• 
... the appellate court put the burden on the United States, not on the States that had snatched a blank TRO, nobbling the president.
• 
If President's objective was to stop accidentally importing terrorism from countries where it is plentiful, what about the "hardship" of future terrorist attacks?
• 
Did the court pause to track terror events in Europe from those countries?  No.
• 
Did they note the public striving by ISIS to get into America?  No.
• 
Did they consider "hardship" suffered by victims of foreign-inspired terrorism in Boston, San Bernardino, Orlando, Texas, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, even Seattle – where the district judge sits?  No.
• 
So, where was all this permanent, "irreparable damage" to the States?  Their "economy" and "public universities."
• 
Why, because students and professors were delayed in return?  How many were really from Libya, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, or Yemen?
• 
Finally, the court says: Universities "suffered the loss of visa application costs."
• 
Exactly 160 dollars per visa.  And ... for this we risk national security?
• 
The court says: The EO "purports to prioritize refugee claims of certain religious minorities."
• 
Stop.  The court inserted that word "certain" – that word is not in the EO.
• 
This actually matters.  The EO does not give priority to "certain" groups, but to all religiously persecuted minorities.
• 
Moreover, "prioritizing" foreign entrants and "religious minorities" violates nothing.  Those with a "well-founded fear" of religious persecution often get priority.
• 
Prioritizing national origin and religious persecution as a basis for entry is NOT new. 
• 
... the district court did not play it straight.  Appellate court asserted review, but did not call out the lower court.  Why not?
• 
Then on to "standing." States have none, but the Ninth Circuit gave it anyway.
• 
States asserted the necessary "personal stake," only states possess no "personal" rights under the Constitution.  Oops.
• 
... did the President reach the necessary "significant risk" determination, not whether he was right on national security?  That is not their job.  Another error.
• 
The court defaults to conclusory statements and "declines to modify the TRO," already admitted not to be a TRO.  The court adds they are doing this to protect "those in the United States unlawfully." Wow!
• 
So the counter-veiling interest, which outweighs the President's national security determination, is partially for those here "unlawfully?" Convoluted in the extreme.
• 
They did not help America forestall terrorism, help Americans understand larger issues.
• 
They lofted legal platitudes, with embarrassing contradictions, calculated for headlines, more controversy, and placing the president in the wrong.
• 
Meantime, we can all pray that we do not encounter another terrorist event in the near term – of the kind thwarted this week in Turkey, planned by un-vetted terrorists from Syria, one of those seven countries about which we need not worry.
      Gregg Jarrett: It’s no surprise that bad judges got it wrong on Trump's executive order  (Fox 02/10/2017)
• 
The best you can say about the 9th Circuit Court's decision upholding the temporary halt to President Trump's immigration ban... is that the court is consistent.  Consistently wrong. 
• 
The Plaintiffs have "Standing" to Sue
• 
This is such a Gumby-type stretch it is almost laughable. 
• 
The 3 judge panel hypothesizes that one of Washington state's public universities would suffer irreparable harm because a couple of visiting scholars may be denied entry to the U.S.  and that some researchers might have trouble traveling to and from the 7 countries targeted by Trump's ban.
• 
"Due Process" Extends to Aliens
• 
Equally astonishing is how the 9th Circuit seems to imply that U.S.  constitutional protections attach not only to citizens and non-citizen residents, but aliens who are not even here in the U.S.  Well, that is a new and novel concept.
• 
If the 9th Circuit had its way, the whole world could invoke our constitutional protections. 
• 
"No Evidence" of Terrorism
• 
This is the most offensive part of the judges' decision.  The court claims, incorrectly, there is "no evidence" that anyone from the 7 nations has committed a terrorist act. 
• 
First, that is demonstrably wrong.  More than 2 dozen plots have been stopped.
• 
Either the court is uninformed or the judges seem to think foiled plots are not good enough.
• 
Does an attack have to be successful to constitute a viable threat?  Of course not.
• 
The president is authorized and duty-bound to take preemptive action to protect the lives of Americans.  ... If the president fails to take action, he is in dereliction of his sworn oath.
• 
Second, these judges are not even entitled to see most of the "evidence" of a threat.
• 
They do not have security clearance for the classified intelligence information upon which the president bases his order. 
• 
The 1952 Statute Ignored
• 
That is, the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act which gives the president the power to decide who can and cannot enter the U.S.
• 
The fundamental job of these judges is to decide whether President Trump has authority under that law to exclude "any class of aliens" considered to be "detrimental to the interests of the United States".
• 
The judges do not address it, probably because they could conjure no way around it.
• 
Instead, they seem obsessed over whether the president is exercising his authority wisely.
• 
It is not their constitutional role to make policy judgments.  ... Clearly, these judges are politicizing what is supposed to be purely legal. 
• 
Campaign Speeches as Evidence of Intent
• 
The court asserts that Trump's campaign speeches can be considered as evidence of the intent to discriminate against Muslims.  Which is absurd.
• 
Discrimination should be determined from the language of executive order itself. 
• 
What happens next
• 
The case goes back down to the lower district court for a full hearing on all these matters.
• 
Will Trump appeal the 9th Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court?
• 
He could, but I doubt the high court would even take the case.  SCOTUS rarely accepts petitions to review temporary, interim orders.
• 
Trump can always accelerate the implementation of his new stricter vetting program.  ... There would no longer be a controversy for a court to resolve. 
• 
There's an old saying attributed to Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr: "hard cases make bad law."
• 
So do bad judges. 
      Four reasons why Betsy DeVos will be a welcome remedy for our nation's education woes  (Fox 02/10/2017)
• 
This week, Democrats made history by forcing Vice President Mike Pence to cast the deciding vote for Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.
• 
Why did Democrats decide to engage in all-out war against an education secretary?
• 
Some Democrats and mainstream media outlets have focused their opposition on claims that Mrs.  DeVos having "radical" views.
• 
Other Democrats and media outlets have opposed Mrs.  DeVos because she lacks experience as a government bureaucrat or school administrator. 
• 
But are these the real reasons Democratic opposition heightened to a fever pitch?  No.
• 
... the overheated Democratic opposition is motivated by:
• 
Some of their party's most deep-pocketed and powerful interest groups — teachers' unions — who realize that they will no longer have a near-monopoly on education.
• 
Their party's upper-middle-class suburbanite constituency, who understand that DeVos' charters and vouchers will be attractive to families with financial disadvantages, ethnic minority heritage, or ideological and religious convictions that differ from the mainstream.
• 
In other words, private schooling will be accessible to children who are very different than the Democratic Party's upper-middle-class suburbanites.
• 
In response to the Democratic Party's powerful interest groups and upper-middle-class suburbanite constituency, here are four reasons why DeVos may turn out to be a welcome remedy to our nation's educational ills.
• 
1.  Liberation from Bureaucracy.
• 
DeVos' educational philosophy could enable her to liberate American education from encroachment by federal bureaucracy. 
• 
Her stated educational philosophy suggests that she will not turn Democratic encroachment into Republican encroachment; instead, she will reduce federal encroachment in order to empower families, local communities, and states.
• 
2.  Freedom of Thought
• 
Much ado has been made about Secretary DeVos' Dutch Calvinism.  But that's misguided.
• 
... it places an especially high value on education, but emphasizes that a pluralistic society should be tolerant enough to allow diverse families and communities to build their own educational institutions and choose which institution(s) their children can attend.
• 
3.  Empowerment for the Financially-Disadvantaged
• 
DeVos' educational philosophy would allow financially-disadvantaged children to choose the education that fits their unique needs and abilities.  In the current system, the government taxes citizens in order to provide education, but then dictates and determines how the tax money can be used. 
• 
Under DeVos' potential system of vouchers and charters, however, citizens will be able to exercise more influence over their own child's education.
• 
4.  Facilitation by a Philanthropist
• 
... Secretary DeVos has devoted her life energies and financial resources to the cause of education and has interacted extensively with politicians and educational policy makers.
• 
Hope for our Children's Education
• 
We already know that DeVos will be an imperfect Secretary of Education — just as all prior secretaries of education have been.  Yet, there are good reasons to believe that she will be successful.
• 
She holds a philosophy of education that can reduce bureaucracy, increase free thinking, and empower the financially disadvantaged.
• 
So let's just step back for a moment, cool our fevered brows, and pull for Betsy DeVos as she tries to reform our nations' education system.
      The Ninth Circuit gets it wrong  (Fox 02/09/2017)
• 
Both the judge in Washington State and the San Francisco-based circuit court have now refused to recognize the authority of Congress and the president to make this national security decision.
• 
Neither the judge in Washington State nor the court has offered anything approaching a detailed discussion of 8 U.SC.  §1182 (f), the law which specifically gives the president authority to suspend the entry of any aliens into the U.S.  if he believes their entry would be "detrimental to the interests of the United States."
• 
Unless this statutory provision is unconstitutional, the president has acted completely within the law.
• 
... it then proceeds to give no deference to the president's policy determination that a temporary suspension is necessary to ensure that adequate vetting procedures are in place.
• 
The court also gives no deference to the decision of Congress to delegate its plenary power over immigration to the president on this issue.
• 
The Ninth Circuit also claims that there is "no evidence that any alien from any of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States."
• 
Last year the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest released information showing that at least 60 people born in the seven countries had been convicted — not just arrested, but convicted — of terror-related offenses in the United States since Sept.  11, 2001.
• 
Instead of discussing the relevant statute under which the president acted, the Ninth Circuit instead engages in an extensive discussion of its concern that the executive branch is failing to provide due process to aliens barred from entry into the United States.
• 
The court's apparent opinion that other aliens who don't live in the U.S.  have due process rights if they are refused entry can only be true if they have a constitutional right to enter the U.S.
• 
That is an absurd proposition yet that is the end result of the court's opinion: that a foreign alien can demand a hearing and due process rights if one of our embassies refuses to give the alien a visa.
• 
... the only Federal judge to get it right is Nathaniel Gorton of the District Court of Massachusetts.
• 
He analyzed the relevant statute, 8 U.S.C.  §1182(f), and concluded that the EO is fully within the president's authority: "the decision to prevent aliens from entering the country is a 'fundamental sovereign attribute' realized through the legislative and executive branches that is 'largely immune from judicial control.'"
• 
Contrary to the Ninth Circuit, Gorton says the EO is "facially legitimate and bona fide."
• 
The Ninth Circuit's ruling has as little basis in the law as the original decision by the district court judge.
• 
It is just another example of arrogant federal courts grabbing power from the legislative and executive branches in violation of basic separation-of-powers principles. 
• 
After the decision was announced, President Trump tweeted, "the security of our nation is at stake." He is right.
      Andrew Napolitano: What every American wants to know about federal judges  (Fox 02/09/2017)
• 
Last week, in a public courtroom in the federal courthouse in Seattle, the states of Washington and Minnesota — after suing President Donald Trump, alleging injury caused by his executive order that suspended the immigration of all people from seven foreign countries — asked a federal judge to compel the president and all those who work for him to cease enforcing the order immediately.
• 
After a brief emergency oral argument, the judge signed a temporary restraining order, which barred the enforcement of the president's order everywhere in the United States.
• 
The president reacted with anger, referring to the judge as a "so-called judge," and immigrant rights groups praised the judicial intervention as a victory for the oppressed.
• 
The president meant, I think, that Judge James L.  Robart had not acted properly as a judge by second-guessing him — that he had acted more like a politician; and the immigrant rights groups felt, I think, that the United States was once again a beacon of hope for refugees.
• 
A 1952 federal statute permits the president to suspend the immigration status of any person or group whose entry into the United States might impair public health or safety or national security.
• 
Trump exercised that authority in accordance with the 1952 law when he signed his Jan.  27 order banning all immigration from the seven named countries.
• 
When the president exercises powers granted to him by the Constitution or federal statues or when Congress passes bills, one cannot simply sue the government in federal court because one does not like what has been done.
• 
That is so because the Constitution has preconditions for a lawsuit in federal court.  One of those preconditions is what lawyers and judges call "standing."
• 
Standing means that the plaintiff has alleged and can most likely show that the defendant has caused the plaintiff an injury in fact, distinct from all others not in the case.
• 
Hence, it is curious that the plaintiffs in the Seattle case were not people whose entry had been barred by Trump's order but rather the governments of two states, each claiming to sue in behalf of people and entities resident or about to be resident in them.
• 
The court should have dismissed the case as soon as it was filed because of long-standing Supreme Court policy that bars federal litigation alleging harm to another and permits it only for the actual injury or immediate likelihood of injury to the litigant.
• 
Nevertheless, the Seattle federal judge heard oral argument on the two states' emergency application for a temporary restraining order against the president.
• 
... the judge asked a lawyer for the Department of Justice how many arrests of foreign nationals from the seven countries singled out by the president for immigration suspension there have been in the United States since 9/11.
• 
When the DOJ lawyer said she did not know, the judge answered his own question by saying, "None."
• 
... the judge asked a lawyer for the Department of Justice how many arrests of foreign nationals from the seven countries singled out by the president for immigration suspension there have been in the United States since 9/11.  When the DOJ lawyer said she did not know, the judge answered his own question by saying, "None."
• 
There have been dozens of people arrested and convicted in the United States for terrorism-related crimes since 9/11 who were born in the seven countries.
• 
Yet even if the judge had been correct, his question was irrelevant — and hence the answer meaningless — because it does not matter to a court what evidence the president relied on in this type of order.
• 
This is the kind of judicial second-guessing — substituting the judicial mind for the presidential mind — that is impermissible in our system.
• 
These rules and policies — the requirement of standing before suing and the primacy of the president in making foreign policy — stem directly from the Constitution.
• 
Were they not in place, then anyone could sue the government for anything and induce a federal judge to second-guess the president.
• 
That would convert the courts into a super-legislature — albeit an unelected, unaccountable, opaque one.
• 
I am not suggesting for a moment that the courts have no place here.  Rather, they have a vital place.
• 
It is to say what the Constitution means, say what the statutes mean and determine whether the government has exercised its powers constitutionally and legally.
• 
It is not the job of judges to decide whether the government has been smart or prudent, though.
• 
One of the arguments made by the state of Washington to explain why it had standing was laughable.
• 
Washington argued that corporations located in Washington would suffer the irreparable loss of available high-tech-qualified foreign employees if the ban were upheld.
• 
When pressed to reveal what entity Washington was trying to protect, it enumerated a few familiar names, among which was Microsoft.
• 
Microsoft?  The government of the state of Washington is suing to protect Microsoft?!
• 
Microsoft could buy the state of Washington if Starbucks were willing to sell it.
• 
The rule of law needs to be upheld.  Carefully paying attention to constitutional procedure protects personal freedom.
• 
In similar environments, the late Justice Antonin Scalia often remarked that much of what the government does is stupid but constitutional and that the courts' only concern is with the latter.
      The emasculated West's death wish  (JWR 02/08/2017)
• 
One of the most important stories related to the September 11 attacks was the one that was deliberately left largely untold.
• 
That story is the response of some Muslims in America to the massacre of nearly 3,000 people by Islamic supremacists in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.
• 
According to a Washington Post article published on September 18, 2001, in Jersey City, New Jersey, across the river from the destroyed World Trade Center, "Within hours of the two jetliners plowing into the World Trade Center, law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate-style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river."
• 
The New York Post reported on September 15, 2001, that Muslim Americans in Patterson, NJ were also seen celebrating the attacks.
• 
Word-of-mouth reports abounded in the weeks and months following September 11 of spontaneous celebrations carried out that day in Dearborn, Michigan, in Virginia and other Muslim American communities.
• 
The most notable aspect of the published reports of the celebrations was that there were so few of them.
• 
After all, the notion that any Muslim Americans would celebrate the jihadist attack was certainly newsworthy.
• 
The stories were suppressed at the time by political leaders.
• 
Then president George W.  Bush rushed to defend and uphold Islam as a "religion of peace," almost immediately after the attacks
• 
Obama dumped the Bush-era term, "War on Terror," for the even more meaningless phrase, "Overseas Contingency Operations."
• 
The US federal government's actions were far from unique in the Western world.
• 
In Europe, almost every mention of Islamism has been barred.  Those that have criticized it have been subjected to criminal prosecutions and convictions.
• 
On the surface at least, placing a spotlight on the actions of one community, or adherents of one specific religion flies in the face of everything that the nations of the West have come to understand about how racism and bigotry takes root in a society.
• 
The problem with this well-intentioned position was self-evident from the start.  It is not bigoted to point out the bigotry of others and to confront and challenge it.
• 
It is bigoted not to do so.  Even worse, it is dangerous.
• 
It is impossible to solve a problem like Islamic radicalism by ignoring it.  To the contrary, by ignoring it, you ensure that it will grow.
• 
Armed with box cutters and informed by a bigoted, supremacist ideology, 19 Islamic terrorists viewed themselves as heroes as they used crude weapons to commit murder on a scale never seen before on American soil.
• 
And after they did so, far from being condemned across the board in the Islamic world, they were celebrated as heroes by a very large number of Muslims not only in the Middle East but in the US and throughout the Western world.
• 
The one thing that joins them to those directing them from thousands of kilometers away is their shared belief in the supremacy of radical Islam over all other ways of life.
• 
Their common faith in the justice of acts of mass murder against non-believers is so strong that it bridges the gap between the real and virtual worlds.
• 
... so long as the intellectual shackles of political correctness block the US and other Western governments from taking concerted action against the creed of Islamic supremacism and its adherents inside their own borders, the virtual terrorism command ISIS now controls will last until it morphs into an even more deadly threat in the months and years to come.
      The tears seen round the world  (INN 02/06/2017)
• 
He cried.  The poor, broken man stood there, in his signature pose, his glasses sitting on the tip of his nose, his eyes looking out above the frames and his voice choked with emotion.
• 
In a voice packed with emotion the man decried the "mean-spirited, un-American" executive order issued by President Trump temporarily restricting the visas of would-be immigrants from seven Muslim countries...
• 
Who is Charles Schumer kidding?  What exactly was he trying to convey?
• 
Was he really so deeply distressed at the prospect that perhaps one of those temporarily barred, so-called refugees, would be closely vetted and found to harbor ill intentions?
• 
Or, perhaps, his humanity simply could not bear the thought that people from countries seeking to harm the United States will have to answer some serious questions before being allowed to enter and roam free amongst us?
• 
I have a few questions for you, Mr.  Schumer.  I would like you to answer the following questions which bother every normal person who is not a bleeding-heart liberal bent on continuing the destruction of the United States by following the path trampled by President Trump's predecessor.  I hope you don't mind.
• 
Do you lock your windows and doors at night or do you leave them open?  Do you have an intercom in your residence?  Have you installed security cameras so that intruders are seen and caught prior to causing you or members of your family any harm?
• 
Based on your contention that barring harm-intentioned immigrants from our shores is ‘un-American and ill spirited', how can you take precautions to stop illegal intruders from your home?  Can you answer these for me?
• 
Most of the Moslem countries in the world forbid Israelis from entering their countries.  Many of them also forbid any Jew from setting foot in their lands.
• 
I don't remember seeing you shed one tear for those Jews barred from Yemen, Iraq, Syria and the rest.  Why not?
• 
I don't remember seeing you tear-up from the horror stories relating how the Yazidi population is being slaughtered, abused, beaten and sold into slavery by the ISIS murderers.
• 
It is interesting, Mr.  Schumer, that the prior occupant of the White House did as he pleased, including banning refugees from Iraq, yet you didn't spit out a single protest.
• 
Where is your concern for me, for an American citizen who is not comfortable with your ‘let-every-one-in' attitude?
• 
Why are we, the American citizens, obligated to be fearful for our lives and security because people like you, who live under heavy security don't really take our needs into consideration?
• 
And why am I obligated to foot the bill for illegal immigrants of which many have come to our shores with the precise intent of harming or killing me or you?
• 
How could a man of your stature support and vote for a corrupt woman who compromised sensitive national secrets, sacrificed the lives of four innocent Americans in Libya, sold state favors for heavy cash, pocketed millions of dollars designated for a supposed charitable fund?
• 
Save your tears for the brave Ambassador and Marines who were thrown to the wolves by your candidate.
• 
If anything is to be dubbed as ‘un-American', Mr.  Schumer, it is your tearful reaction.
      Gregg Jarrett: Why the law is on Trump's side with his immigration ban  (Fox 02/06/2017)
• 
President Trump may have lost the early legal skirmishes over his executive order on immigration, but in the end he will likely win. 
• 
The overwhelming weight of history and the law is on his side.
• 
The president does have the authority to ban the entry of foreigners, as long as he has what is called a "rational basis" to believe they pose a threat to the nation's security.
• 
He does, and his order is designed to accomplish precisely that.
• 
The seven nations targeted by Trump in his immigration ban were originally identified in an anti-terrorism law signed by President Obama.
• 
Unlike other Muslim-majority nations that have a history of terrorism, these seven countries do not assist the U.S.  in providing background checks and other vetting of immigrant applicants.
• 
Thus, it is not only "rational" to deny entry, it is imperative for the safety of Americans.
• 
The U.S.  does not have the resources to properly vet all these individuals on its own.
• 
The Trump administration lawyers haven't even been given a chance to appear in court to say, "good morning, your honor." All of that may change once both sides are represented in court.
• 
Take a look at judge Robart's decision.  It is largely devoid of any legal reasoning or sound analysis.  Its brevity is exceeded only by its lack of logic as applied to the law.
• 
Absence of Standing to Sue
• 
Washington State does not have "standing" to sue on behalf of its residents because they have suffered no "actual harm" from Trump's order.
• 
In order to sustain a lawsuit, the plaintiffs must demonstrate their alleged injury is direct and real, not merely hypothetical.  The harm must be imminent and irreparable, not speculative. 
• 
So how have Washington residents been harmed?  Lawyers for the state suggest their economy will be adversely impacted because the ban may prevent immigrants from working for Washington-based companies.  Taxes might be reduced and its education system could be affected. 
• 
However, all of that is pure conjecture.  It might happen, but it might not.  Hence, it does not constitute immediate "actual harm." On that basis alone, the lawsuit should be dismissed. 
• 
Foreigners Do Not Enjoy Constitutional Rights
• 
The claim by Washington State that the immigration ban violates the First Amendment (freedom of religion) or the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments (equal protection clause) may seem, at first blush, like a reasonable argument.
• 
Until you consider that our Constitution applies only to citizens and those on American soil
• 
A man in Somalia may wish to invoke our Constitution to claim his freedom of religion is being infringed, but until he arrives here he enjoys none of its privileges and protections.  He has no right to assert discrimination, religious or otherwise.
• 
And the state of Washington has no legal right to represent him in court.  It can only represent its own residents.
• 
The President Has Authority to Dictate Immigration
• 
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate immigration.
• 
In 1952, Congress passed a law empowering the president to deny entry into the U.S.  to "any class of aliens" considered to be "detrimental to the interests of the United States."
• 
In other words, a threat to America and in the interests of national security.
• 
... the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that Congress and the president have "plenary power" to regulate immigration.
• 
Past presidents, including Carter and Obama, have issued orders similar to Trump's. 
• 
The president's authority to deny entry to a large class of aliens is a broader power which supersedes individual visa considerations.
• 
Trump's Executive Order Is Temporary
• 
Lost in all the legal tumult is the fact that President Trump's executive order is only temporary: It applies for just 90 days for people in the seven designated countries that are sources of terrorism and 120 days for "refugees." (The Syrian ban is "indefinite," but that could change, too.)
• 
Unwise To Attack a Federal Judge
• 
True to form, President Trump launched a Twitter attack on Judge Robart's decision, calling him a "so-called judge" who issued a "ridiculous" decision.
• 
I agree, the decision is ridiculous to the extent it is based on scant legal analysis and completely contravenes long established law. 
• 
Nevertheless, it is unwise and counterproductive to personally insult or demean a judge by questioning his legitimacy.
• 
Judges tend to be a collegial group.  An attack on one may be viewed as an attack on all. 
• 
A better strategy would be to compliment the Boston judge who affirmed Mr.  Trump's executive order.
• 
In a 21 page decision issued on February 3, Judge Nathaniel M.  Gorton eloquently explains the power of the president embedded in sturdy constitutional principles.
• 
It is a thoughtful and comprehensive treatise on how our laws and the courts have spoken in unison on immigration authority.
• 
If any of these immigration cases ever reach the Supreme Court, Judge Gorton's opinion may be the foundation for their decision.
      Rogue judges undermine our sovereignty.  Here's how Congress can stop them  (02/05/2017)
• 
... if Congress fails to strip the courts of jurisdiction over immigration, radical judges will give affirmative immigration rights to foreign nationals.
• 
Congress and Trump's Justice Department must fight back against the courts once and for all, or we will no longer remain an independent, sovereign, and safe country.
• 
... over the weekend, a federal district judge issued an injunction against the executive order and reinstated as many as 60,000 visas for foreign nationals that were covered under the order.
• 
This act, along with those of several other judges (in my view, an impeachable offense), is astounding, unprecedented, and create a national emergency for the following six reasons:
• 
1.  Allows ANY and ALL refugees to enter the U.S.
• 
Words cannot describe how radical this opinion is.  It's on par with redefining marriage, and in some ways, even worse.
• 
2.  Stops President Trump from executing the law, which Congress passed
• 
Pursuant to the letter and spirit of existing statute, the entire purpose of the refugee program is to protect religious and ethnic minorities, not individuals caught in Islamic civil wars.
• 
3.  Circumvents Congress' authority.  Invents new constitutional right for non-citizens
• 
... not only overturning Trump's executive order, but they are also saying that even if Congress were to pass a similar law it would be unconstitutional.
• 
4.  Encourages ‘judge shopping' to assert tyrannical authority over congressional and executive branches
• 
That a puny district judge, an institution created by Congress, can overturn national sovereignty and laws passed by Congress defending that sovereignty, represents the final frontier in judicial tyranny...
• 
5.  Ignores American history, law, and tradition
• 
Judge Robart literally shredded our laws, history, and tradition on immigration since our colonial times and replaced it with his personal beliefs on turning America into Eurabia.
• 
He refused to even recognize passed settled law and gave no reason for ignoring it.
• 
6.  Furthers what modern courts have done at chipping away American sovereignty
• 
Even though Judge Robart's order was the most radical decision so far, most other courts have also chipped away at the right of a nation to exclude.
• 
This is very dangerous and demonstrates why Congress must take away this power from the courts (a power courts themselves said for 200 years they never had).
• 
The solution
• 
For all of the above reasons, Congress must use its Article III Sec.  II power and immediately move to strip lower courts of jurisdiction to grant rights to any foreign national to enter or remain in the country against the law unless statute explicitly preempts the president's action.
• 
Alternatively, Congress, which has complete control over the administrative procedures of the courts, could prevent lower courts from issuing nationwide injunctions against immigration enforcement acts outside of their respective districts and circuits.
• 
Finally, the House should bring articles of impeachment against Judge Robart (and others) and finally make an example of these rogue judges.
• 
Reasonable people can disagree about certain constitutional questions, but this judge openly violated the Constitution and made no effort to respect the law.
• 
He threw out the sovereignty of a nation without addressing a single statute, constitutional clause, and 200 years of the most settled case law, permitting Congress and the president to exclude entire classes of immigrants in a much more sweeping policy than what Trump enacted.
• 
We are not debating immigration policy here; we are debating whether we are a nation at all.
      No borders.  No nations.  No clue.  (Fox 01/30/2017)
• 
Do you lock your front door at night?  Hater!
• 
Do you have an alarm system at your house?  Xenophobe!
• 
Do you ask who's ringing your doorbell before letting a visitor in?  Rotten bigot!
• 
That, essentially, is the reaction from the politically charged left to President Trump's executive order about admitting people from certain countries into the United States.
• 
The unhinged outrage from Trump-haters – and there are a lot of them – puts the interests of non-Americans over the security of our citizens.
• 
And the administration's botched roll-out of the new restrictions gave opponents just the excuse they needed to bellow.
• 
Reduce the argument to a personal level.
• 
A homeowner is permitted to refuse entry to anyone he or she doesn't want in, right?
• 
Security systems are intended to keep unwanted visitors out and let the homeowner know who is outside.
• 
Lots of apartment dwellers have an intercom that rings when someone outside wants to visit.
• 
Are those precautions divisive, discriminatory or unconstitutional?
• 
Really?  Let anyone go anywhere without asking who they are, why they want to come here and what their past actions tell us about them?
• 
The notion that America must be open to anyone who decides to visit flies in the face of 21st century reality.
• 
Those who disagree with the president's executive order have taken full advantage of those rights, and rightly so.
• 
But their argument that the United States, alone among all countries, cannot restrict who comes in from beyond its shores is, quite simply, specious.
• 
The protests against anything this president does will continue, and that's fine as long as they're peaceful.
• 
But let's at least admit that they are not about the issues, but the issuer-in-chief.
      Newt Gingrich: The left should be scared to death after Trump's first week  (Fox 01/27/2017)
• 
The elite left and their propagandists in the media are already in hysterics over President Trump's first week in office, but for most Americans there are no surprises here.
• 
The president is doing exactly what he has said he would do for the last two years on the campaign – immediately get to work focusing on jobs, immigration and shrinking government.  And guess what: He's going to continue.
• 
While the media has obsessed over how many people were at the inaugural ceremony, the president has signed orders to shield people, states and businesses from future financial damage wrought by ObamaCare and other pending Obama regulations.
• 
In a time when heroin and opioid abuse is devastating communities across the nation, and a time when people who want to kill us and destroy our society are trying to infiltrate our county, what reasonable person would say hiring up to 10,000 more U.S.  Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and up to 5,000 more U.S.  Border Patrol agents is a bad idea?
• 
The president is immediately working to end the catch-and-release policies of so-called sanctuary ... where instead of immediately turning criminal aliens who are released from police custody over to immigration officials, the crooks are let back out on the streets.
• 
Leaders in cities granting asylum to such criminals are going to have to explain to their residents why the imagined rights of criminal noncitizens are more important than receiving federal funds to build infrastructure, hospitals, or improve their schools.
• 
And I can't wait to see Mayor Rahm Emanuel explain to the people of Chicago – where 4,000 people were shot last year – why it's important to put more criminals on the streets of the Windy City.
• 
The left is also understandably alarmed by Trump's announced investigation into voter fraud in America.
• 
President Trump wants to make sure that to vote in this country you must be both alive and a legal citizen.
• 
I think those are two reasonable criteria to vote, but they pose real problems for the left.
• 
All of these actions are perfectly in-line with what President Trump campaigned on – and what the American people elected him to do.
• 
So, of course his liberal and establishment critics are shocked, baffled and anxious.
• 
Actually doing the things you said you would do during a campaign is completely outside liberalism and unthinkable to the traditional Washington establishment.
• 
The last time the country witnessed a president come to office and immediately begin working to enact the will of the American people was in 1981, when President Ronald Reagan took office.
• 
Within weeks of his inauguration, Reagan proposed some of the most aggressive tax and budget reforms Congress had ever seen.
• 
He was reacting directly to the country's concern over a failing economy and a sense of American decline that was felt worldwide.
• 
The left and the establishment were scared in 1981, they were scared in 1994, and they are scared today – for good reason.
      Stop dropping the H*  (Hitler) bomb and other crucial lessons for 2017 on Holocaust Memorial Day (Fox 01/27/2017)
• 
January 27th marks International Holocaust Memorial Day.  It is the anniversary of the liberation of the infamous Auschwitz-Birkenau Death Camp, by Soviet forces.
• 
The "liberation" was too late for 1 million Jews who were gassed, experimented on or worked to death along with hundreds of thousands of Russian POWs, Gypsies and Poles, murdered there.
• 
Historians till this day question why US and British bombers which flew over the death camp never dropped their payloads on the gas chambers and crematoria when they were in full use, murdering and incinerating innocents.
• 
January 27th is the day that the United Nations and governments on three continents pause from their overwhelming indifference to the fate of 14 million living Jews to remember 6 million dead Jews.
• 
There are important core lessons about the price humankind can pay when civilized people react only with indifference and apathy in the face of evil.
• 
For one, we should remember that hateful words have consequences.  Hitler's genocidal hatred for Jews did not arise out of a vacuum.
• 
Hitler first openly expressed his ideas of ridding Germany of the Jews in 1919, twenty years before he unleashed WWII.
• 
Secondly, it takes deeds, not mere words to defeat evil.  Hitler could have been stopped in the 1920s before he rose to power.
• 
Academic degrees and social status should never be confused with ethics and morality. 
• 
German lawyers rushed to join the Nazi Party to write a new canon of law legalizing racism, anti-Semitism, theft and ultimately murder.
• 
In 2017, there are crucial lessons about today's evil we should be drawing from the past.
• 
Ask the Yezidis, the ethnically-cleansed Christians of Iraq and the Syrian children choked to death by Assad's chemical weapons.
• 
Ask the Iranian people who took to the streets of Tehran during the Green Revolution and were rewarded with stone-cold silence from then President Obama and other world leaders.
• 
Ask the hundreds of thousands of suffering silent victims in North Korea's Gulag as the leader in Pyongyang escalates his nuclear threats from Seoul and Tokyo, to Los Angeles.
• 
On this Holocaust Memorial Day, I beseech Americans to stop dropping the H*(for Hitler) bomb on America's political divide.
• 
Love him or hate him, President Donald Trump is no Hitler.
• 
Denouncing the democratically elected leader of our country and his cabinet as Nazis denigrates the victims of the past and could cripple our ability to confront and defeat future tyrants and terrorists.
      Andrew Napolitano: Trump has committed the most revolutionary act I've seen in 45 years  (Fox 01/26/2017)
• 
Within four hours of becoming president of the United States, Donald Trump signed an executive order intended to limit immediately the effects of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) in ways that are revolutionary.
• 
With the stroke of a pen, the president assaulted the heart of the law that was the domestic centerpiece of his predecessor's administration.
• 
How did this happen?  How can a U.S.  president, who took an oath to enforce the laws faithfully, gut one of them merely because he disagrees with it?
• 
When ObamaCare went through Congress in 2010, all Democrats in Congress supported it and all congressional Republicans were opposed.
• 
The crux of their disagreement was the law's command that everyone in the United States obtain and maintain health insurance — a command that has come to be known as "the individual mandate."
• 
Republicans argued that Congress was without the authority to compel people to enter the marketplace by purchasing a product — that such decisions should be freely made by individuals and that that freedom was protected from governmental interference by the Constitution.
• 
To ensure compliance with the individual mandate, the law provided that the IRS would collect the fair market value of a bare-bones insurance policy from those who did not obtain and maintain one.  The government would then take that money and purchase a health insurance policy for that individual who rejected the law's command.
• 
... a 5-4 majority in the Supreme Court characterized the money collected by the IRS from noncompliant individuals as a tax.
• 
This is profoundly significant for constitutional purposes because though Congress cannot regulate anything it wants, Congress can tax anything it wants, as long as the tax falls equally on those in the class of people who are paying it.
• 
This unheard-of characterization of a non-tax as a tax was necessary to salvage ObamaCare before the high court because a different 5-4 majority in the same case ruled that the Republican congressional argument was essentially correct — that the commerce clause does not empower Congress to compel commercial activity.
• 
Trump argued that the government cannot compel commercial activity, even as part of a large regulatory scheme, because the Constitution protects everyone's right to purchase a lawful good or not to purchase one.
• 
The Obama mantra that you could keep your doctor and your health insurance under ObamaCare proved to be patently false, Trump argued.
• 
When Trump promised that as president — on "day one" — he would begin to dismantle ObamaCare, some Republicans, many members of the press and most Democrats laughed at him.
• 
They are laughing no longer because the first executive order he signed on Jan.  20 directed those in the federal government who enforce ObamaCare to do so expecting that it will soon not exist.
• 
He ordered that regulations already in place be enforced with a softer, more beneficent tone, and he ordered that no penalty, fine, setoff or tax be imposed by the IRS on any person or entity who is not complying with the individual mandate.
• 
Then he ordered a truly revolutionary act, the likes of which I have never seen in the 45 years I have studied and monitored the government's laws and its administration of them.
• 
He ordered that when bureaucrats who are administering and enforcing the law have discretion with respect to the time, place, manner and severity of its enforcement, they should exercise that discretion in favor of individuals and against the government.
• 
This is radical coming from any president in the modern era of government-can-do-no-wrong.
• 
It recognizes the primacy and dignity of the individual and the fallibility of the state.
• 
It is utterly without precedent since Jefferson's presidency.
• 
Trump's revolutionary act is a breeze of freedom on a sea of regulation.
• 
It recognizes something modern governments never admit — that they can be and have been wrong.
• 
It is exactly as Trump promised.
      Trump defied the polls, press and pundits to win White House  (NYP 01/22/2017)
• 
We were eyewitnesses to a revolution, a rising up of people who felt shunned, betrayed and left behind.
• 
They called themselves "deplorables and irredeemables," turning Hillary Clinton's slurs into a rallying cry as they threw off the yoke of the old political order and trusted the nation to a true outsider.
• 
Donald John Trump is the most unlikely revolutionary ever to stalk western civilization. 
• 
His life was his brand and it was more grandiloquent than any opera. 
• 
He was a rich celebrity who had it all, but it wasn't enough.
• 
For his daring, he was mocked and made the butt of endless jokes, especially about his hair.
• 
Perhaps their laughter blinded the savants, for they missed the birth of a phenomenon.
• 
From the moment Trump stepped off that escalator in June of 2015 to join the race, producers at television news programs realized that the more they turned their cameras on him, the more viewers they got.
• 
So that's what they did, and in a flash, Trump's rallies were bursting at the seams as thousands showed up when other candidates were lucky to draw hundreds.
• 
The scoffers ... consoled themselves by thinking it was a bread-and-circus act, that people were turning out just to gawk at a rich buffoon.
• 
They reassured each other that when the voting started, the unwashed rabble would come to their senses and Trump would crash and burn like a cheap hot-air balloon.
• 
Then they, the all-knowing elite, would go about their business of anointing a respectable Republican who would dutifully lose the general election to Clinton.  That's the way the world worked.
• 
To this day, most of the professional scoffers still write off Trump's stunning upset as the revenge of an angry white working class stewing in hate.
• 
There was a desperate hunger among millions upon millions of Americans for a bold leader and he aimed to feed it.
• 
He didn't take crap from anyone and said what those voters were thinking about jobs, trade, immigration and so much more.
• 
His slogan, Make America Great Again, was so in-your-face that there was no mistaking its meaning.
• 
It was nationalist and populist, and the fact that those ideas offended the tender sensibilities of the political and media elite was a bonus.
• 
Trump's no-bulls–t approach struck a deep chord in the hearts of Americans who felt abandoned by both political parties and their government.
• 
Their patience and their bank accounts were exhausted.
• 
None of them was fooled by happy-talk statistics about jobs when the economy they lived in still dragged along the bottom.
• 
Throw in the nightmares spawned by the medieval butchery of the Islamic State, including a spate of homeland slaughters, and a huge slice of the electorate was primed to put someone very, very different in the Oval Office.
• 
His fierce determination to succeed now stands to benefit the nation.
• 
... the areas of his signature focus — unchecked illegal immigration, a decline of good-paying manufacturing jobs and a depleted military — are fundamental to a national revival.
• 
Who knows what challenges China, Iran, Russia and the Islamic State will present.
• 
Donald Trump is the new sheriff in town ... Say a prayer for him and the exceptional nation he leads.
      Why Jeff Sessions as our next attorney general should reassure, not alarm, all Americans  (Fox 01/22/2017)
      Cal Thomas: Why the Trump era could be the start of something big [YUGE even]  (Fox 01/19/2017)
      Five lessons for Commander in Chief Donald Trump from the Iraq 'Surge'  (Fox 01/19/2017)
• 
President-elect Trump ... will operate in an environment where Islamic extremists and other anti-U.S.  actors are emboldened by the status quo, and where the roadblocks to victory are disheartening and numerous.
• 
The national interest should always prevail over public opinion and short-term political calculations.
• 
Recognize when your policy is failing and be willing to change it.
• 
There is no viable substitute for American military power in certain crises. 
• 
Military action is a critical component – not the totality – of a successful anti-Islamic extremist campaign.
• 
Securing the peace demands continued effort.
      Thank God for Barack Obama [he cleared the field for Donald Trump]  (Fox 01/19/2017)
      Obama's Chelsea Manning decision: President's dangerous move reveals scary take on our national security  (Fox 01/18/2017)
      Greg Gutfeld: Stone Age liberals  (Fox 01/17/2017)
      To preview the Trump presidency, look at the confirmation hearings for his cabinet picks  (Fox 01/15/2017)
• 
..., nominees presented a stark contrast to Senate Democrats.
• 
On one side, Americans saw well-prepared, highly dignified appointees appear before elected officials from both parties.
• 
On the other side, hostile questioners from the left grilled the nominees, almost reflexively manufacturing attacks on character and asserting gaps in knowledge...
• 
Realism seemed to permeate, even about Russia, China and the long road back to domestic tranquility and global American leadership.
• 
So, what are we seeing?  And what does it mean?  What does the solid performance of these appointees, against a shaky backdrop, foretell? 
• 
First, these Trump appointees are demonstrating high respect for process and truth, something for which every American should be glad. 
• 
Second, we are learning something intangible about the future of this administration.  Whether Democrats continue their stubborn resistance and inglorious slide, or choose to arrest it, is really secondary. 
• 
Primary is what we are learning about the quality of preparation, patience and temperament of those who will soon lead major departments. 
• 
The unspoken message is heartening.  The nominees are not newbies.  Nor are they misaligned with their assigned missions.  They are seasoned professionals.  And they are acting that way.
• 
They are proving candid and deep, sensible, at times even sage.  They know the ropes, their fields, the challenges that lie ahead of them – and respect Congress.  Or at least that is the distinct impression they leave.
• 
The tables have somehow begun to turn.  Senate Democrats cannot digest reality.
• 
Exhaustive witness preparation and performance tells you what lies ahead. 
• 
... we know how the Trump Aaministration will conduct policy – they will go after — and get — results. 
• 
Extrapolate and you see where the Trump team is going.  They take nothing for granted, do not jump to conclusions or assume knowledge.
• 
They are about outcomes, even before the mission burdens them. 
• 
They are about self-control, self-awareness, self-discipline, and self-effacing presentation – in a word, leadership. 
      Bobby Jindal: Trump's pick for Education Secretary wants everyone to get a great education...  (Fox 01/13/2017)
• 
In politics they say that no good deed goes unpunished.  That is never truer than on the issue of school choice.
• 
President-elect Donald Trump's nominee to be the Secretary of Education, Betsy Devos, has committed an unpardonable sin.
• 
Yes, she has tried to help millions of disadvantaged families have the ability to send their kids to better schools.  This is of course reprehensible behavior on her part that must not be rewarded.
• 
Oh, and there is one more thing, she has spent millions of dollars of her own money in order to try to help these kids be able to achieve their dreams.  How awful.
• 
In Louisiana we enacted the biggest school choice statewide program in the country.
• 
But let's be clear, this is Holy Grail for the American Left.  They will fight to the last gasp to stop anyone from delivering equal opportunity in education.
• 
They attacked me for it every waking hour after we got our program enacted, in the same irrational and nasty manner they are now attacking Betsy.
• 
Yes, the hard Left and the teachers unions are vilifying Betsy DeVos for exactly the reasons I listed above.
• 
They believe that allowing the money to follow the child is an attempt to destroy public education and ultimately the United States. 
• 
These people are not rational.  They are protecting a one size fits all monopoly that creates winners and losers in our education system.
• 
The winners are kids whose families have money and the losers are those who do not.
• 
If you are born to affluent parents – good news, you will either live in a ZIP code with good performing public schools, or, they will put you in an expensive private school.  You are all set. 
• 
If you are born to middle class parents, they are likely going to either make sure they live in an area with decent public schools, or they may save and scrimp and send you to a private school.
• 
But, if you are born to poor parents, or one parent who is struggling to make ends meet, you may be out of luck.  Your parent or parents don't have the resources to move, and they certainly don't have the money to send you to a better school.
• 
And the chances are pretty strong that your local public schools are failing, and there is a decent chance that you are an ethnic minority.
• 
So, one would logically assume that every bleeding heart liberal in America is rooting for you, and wants you to be able to go to a better school.  Right?
• 
Because they care about people more than money, they certainly want you to have a choice.  Right? 
• 
No, wrong.
• 
The Democratic Party and the American Left opposes equal education opportunity.
• 
These people are illogical and really should not be teaching anyone anything anywhere.
• 
Which brings me back to Betsy Devos.  She has fought tirelessly for decades to give disadvantaged kids the opportunity to receive a great education.
• 
That is the sum total of why these Luddites on the Left are attacking her. 
• 
You really have to hand it to Donald Trump here.  Instead of picking an education bureaucrat, he picked a person who sees the bigger picture and knows that American education must get out of the Stone Age and move into the 21st century. 
• 
... there will be a lot of folks to testify at Betsy's confirmation hearing, and many will be raging liberals who are desperate to protect the Stone Age monopoly that is America's education system. 
• 
Not one of these people, not one, will have done as much in his or her life to improve the lives of kids in need as Betsy has.
• 
And most of them are total hypocrites who do not practice what they preach when it comes to their own children. 
• 
Remember that while they rage.  Also remember that it's not the kids they are fighting for, it's the antiquated government monopoly that they are protecting.
• 
What we have now is a closed government system that is failing.
• 
What we need is an open system that allows for change, choice, and innovation. 
• 
Donald Trump clearly understands what is at stake, and that's why he picked a reformer who cares about helping those kids who are currently being left behind.
      Democrats wage anti-Trump offensive for their own gain  (NYP 01/08/2017)
• 
The Washington mob aims to make sure the election never ends and that Trump can never govern.
• 
There are no modern precedents to the scandalous attempts to smear and undermine the president-elect.
• 
Nearly nine weeks after his victory and less than two weeks before he takes the oath, the voter-nullification plot is growing more vile.
• 
It began when the Clinton campaign and her donors tried to overturn results in key states, then tried to steal the election outright by intimidating electors of the Electoral College.
• 
When all that failed, the establishment forces that opposed Trump all along ... switched their goal to thwarting his presidency.  One example: They aim to deny confirmation to as many as eight Cabinet picks.
• 
This is not mere politics.  This is half the country going rogue in a fit of madness.
• 
Most alarming is the newest recruit to the confederacy.
• 
The intelligence community, including leaders of the FBI and CIA, is pushing the Russian hacking narrative in unscrupulous ways.
• 
"Let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."
• 
Is Schumer suggesting CIA analysts would stay silent about a terrorist plot?  Would they feed Trump misinformation to get back at him?
• 
Going public with classified information, which the leakers did, is a crime, but these days it's acceptable if it serves the left's political purpose.
• 
As for the report itself, there's not much there, at least in the version made public.  It is full of assertions that Vladimir Putin wanted to hurt Clinton and help Trump, but zero evidence is offered.  I repeat: zero evidence.
• 
Instead, the 25-page document serves up a dog's stew of innuendo and anecdotes.
• 
Examples include that Russian television operating in America said nice things about Occupy Wall Street.
• 
Well, so did President Obama and half the Democratic Party.  Is Obama a Russian agent?
• 
The report cites the fact that Russian TV anchors are required to have social-media accounts as proof of Putin's evil intent.
• 
Here's a fact that really matters and it's not in the report: The FBI concluded that Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee without ever inspecting its computers.
• 
None of this is normal.  And it's no excuse that Trump himself often veers outside the lines.  He won the election fair and square, period.
• 
Asked if she believed hacking cost Clinton the election, Pelosi declared to reporters: "You were accomplices in this.  Every single day you reported there was an e-mail that was embarrassing to the Clinton operation, without saying we know this because of a disruption by a foreign power of our election system.  You knew that."
• 
Wow, so journalists are "accomplices" when they report embarrassing news.  Nothing could be more Putin-like than her view of the media's job.
• 
To be clear, it may be true that Putin ordered that the e-mails of John Podesta and the DNC be stolen and given to WikiLeaks.
• 
But officials also admit that Russia hacked our government and industries for years and always pushes negative propaganda about America, including during the 2012 campaign.
• 
So why the sudden DefCon outrage, especially when the intelligence report concludes there was no attempt to change vote tallies?
• 
It's a dumb overreaction, or part of the effort to thwart a president the establishment doesn't want.  Either way, intelligence leaders are proving they are part of the swamp that must be drained.
• 
By all means, America needs better cybersecurity and a retaliation policy to act as a deterrent.
• 
The current president has no interest in the issue, so perhaps we'll get better policies when we get a new president.
      Was Friday's declassified report claiming Russian hacking of the 2016 election rigged?  (Fox 01/07/2017)
• 
... noted that the declassified report represents the views of only three intelligence agencies, not seventeen.
• 
... questioned why the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) did not co-author or clear the report and why it lacked dissenting views.
• 
... a longer report ordered by President Obama that concluded Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign to undermine the 2016 president election, hurt Hillary's candidacy and promote Donald Trump through cyber warfare, social media and the state-owned Russia cable channel RT.
• 
Although the report's authors said they have high confidence in most of these conclusions, they were unable to include any evidence for classification reasons.
• 
As someone who worked in the intelligence field for 25 years ... I am concerned both intelligence assessments were rigged for political purposes.
• 
Since it came out only a month before the presidential election and was co-authored by only two intelligence agencies, the October memo looked like a clumsy attempt by the Obama White House to produce a document to boost Clinton's reelection chances.
• 
Its argumentation was very weak since it said the alleged hacking of Democratic emails was "consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts" but did not say there was any evidence of Russian involvement.
• 
Friday's declassified intelligence report on Russia hacking is even more suspicious.
• 
Given how politically radioactive the issue of Russian interference in the U.S.  presidential election has become, why wasn't the January 6 Russia report an intelligence community-coordinated assessment?
• 
Why were several important intelligence agencies and their experts excluded?
• 
Although the report made serious accusations of Russian interference in the election, it did not back them up with evidence.
• 
... the report made some dubious arguments that Russia succeeded in influencing the election using its RT cable channel, a Russian propaganda tool that is only taken seriously in the United States by the far left.
• 
It's also troubling that the unclassified report does not mention the extremely weak internet security of Clinton's private email server...
• 
... the exclusion of key intelligence players and the lack of dissenting views give the appearance that the conclusions of this report were pre-cooked.
• 
... the entire purpose of this report and its timing was to provide President Obama with a supposedly objective intelligence report on Russian interference in the 2016 election that the president could release before he left office to undermine the legitimacy of Trump's election.
• 
Adding to the Trump team's concerns time intelligence agencies were are playing political games over possible Russian interference in the election is the fact that at the same time these agencies were refusing to brief Congress about their findings on this issue they were constantly being leaked to the news media.
• 
The new intelligence report on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election broke so radically with the way objective and authoritative intelligence community assessments are supposed to be produced that it appears to have been rigged to support a pre-ordained set of conclusions to undermine President-elect Trump.
• 
... o forge new policies to protect our nation against the many serious threats it faces, including radical Islam, cyber warfare, nuclear proliferation, Russia, China and other threats.
• 
Intelligence agencies were led astray by the Obama administration's partisanship and national security incompetence.
• 
... over time, the outstanding men and women Trump has named to top national security posts will ensure that America's intelligence agencies have Trump's confidence and produce the hard hitting and objective intelligence he will need to defend our nation.
      Dr.  Keith Ablow: Thanks for finally speaking out about Black on white violence, Mr.  Obama but...  (Fox 01/07/2017)
• 
The racial divide fanned by Barack Obama and former Attorney General Eric Holder has a new highlight reel, courtesy of four black adults in Chicago who allegedly held hostage a white man with special needs and humiliated, beat, slashed him, while screaming slurs about white people and Donald Trump.
• 
The video of their alleged crimes was streamed live on Facebook.
• 
Not everyone, of course, will agree that the President should be held to account for this hate crime, and the President did condemn it.
• 
But I think that when the President of the United States and former Attorney General repeatedly accused police officers (who were merely doing their jobs) of racial prejudice and when he failed to strongly condemn riots in Baltimore and elsewhere he set the stage for acts of perceived retribution by violent minority individuals.
• 
No President of the United States in recent history has ever shown more of an inclination to look the other way when cities burn, police officers are killed or, for that matter, when terrorists commit crimes against our nation (and are then set free by him from Guantanamo Bay).
• 
Because no President in recent history seems to have been gripped by such deep conviction that America — and, particularly, white America has so much about which to be ashamed and so much payback coming.