wnd--2020-08-05--Media 'fact-checkers' rely 'on partisan news sources or liberal gatekeepers'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]
A growing response to today ’ s chaotic information landscape sounds inviting and elegantly simple : appoint experts to “ fact-check ” news stories , blogs , speeches , studies , opinions , and political ads .
Information they deem to be false is corrected or even removed from public view , in the name of the public good .
Since Donald Trump ’ s election these “ fact-checkers ” have gained increased prominence .
Pressure has mounted for news outfits and big tech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Twitter – to police political discourse .
At the same time , many people , notably conservatives , are demanding that the tech giants back off such perceived censorship .
Tensions on both sides were on display last week as a House Judiciary subcommittee grilled top Silicon Valley executives .
That discord is likely to persist because in large part the fact-checking solution is illusory .
Many such efforts fail because they amount to a circular feedback loop of verification .
The fact-checkers are like-minded journalists or often liberal Silicon Valley gatekeepers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sources and political activists to control narratives on a wide variety of issues and controversies .
This small group of players exerts an oversized influence , using fact checks to shape and censor information .
Twitter recently sparked controversy by taking the unprecedented step of adding a disapproving “ fact-checking label ” to some of President Trump ’ s tweets .
The social media site publicly explained that Trump ’ s May 26 posts contained what its fact-checkers deemed to be “ potentially misleading information about voting processes.
” Trump had said widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be “ substantially fraudulent.
” While the definition of “ substantially ” is in the eye of the beholder , the United States , in fact , has a long and ongoing history of ballot fraud .
Nevertheless , Twitter ’ s label warned that Trump ’ s claims were “ unsubstantiated according to CNN , Washington Post , and others … Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.
” Like many questionable “ fact checks ” at issue , Twitter ’ s critique wasn ’ t really a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past reporting from selected partisan news sources to claim that a prediction about what could happen in the future is untrue -- before it even happens or doesn ’ t happen .
It was , in short , a Democratic Party talking point .
Google has stoked criticism for inserting its judgment and opinions between internet users and their search results .
In February , the search engine announced it was fighting “ disinformation ” about coronavirus by partnering with the World Health Organization ( WHO ) .
Google explained that user searches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s online information .
One big problem : WHO itself was guilty of factual misinformation in multiple instances .
For example , the agency admitted it had wrongly called the global risk of the virus emanating from China virus “ moderate ” at a time when it had actually been “ very high.
” Critics say the partnership with WHO reflects a trend by Big Tech fact-checkers to present often controversial global organizations as nonpartisan purveyors of objective fact .
Over at Facebook , censorship of accounts and ideas has included a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lab in Wuhan , China , that was under investigation as a possible source of the COVID-19 outbreak .
Facebook claimed the documentary was “ false.
” But an investigation by this reporter revealed that one of the authorities Facebook referenced in discrediting the documentary was a scientist who worked at the Wuhan lab .
Facebook did not respond to an emailed request for an interview with CEO Mark Zuckerberg or a representative .
Fact-checking organizations have grappled internally with the obvious but usually unspoken challenge in all such efforts : It is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of fact-checkers has true expertise on all of the topics they litigate .
Yet they do so every day .
As the labels applied to the Trump tweets illustrate , today ’ s brand of “ fact-checking ” is rarely cut and dry , such as verifying the date an event occurred .
Now , fact checks are frequently used to litigate matters of opinion or debate , and to proclaim the truth about facts that are unknown , or can not possibly be known , at the time .
They commonly provide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they claim is necessary to assess a factual claim , rather than a simple assessment of whether a statement is correct or incorrect .
As a result , many factually correct statements are deemed to be “ half true ” or “ mostly false.
” Keeping this in mind , the biggest inherent flaw with efforts to fact-check information may lie in the qualifications , bias , and conflicts of interest among the ranks of the fact-checkers themselves .
One example is the fact-checking nonprofit First Draft , started by Google at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Google is owned by Alphabet , Inc .
Alphabet executives and employees comprise a politically active group that ranks among the largest political donors to Democrats in the country .
During the 2016 campaign , Alphabet was led by an ardent Hillary Clinton supporter and campaign volunteer , executive chairman Eric Schmidt .
First Draft is also supported by an array of liberal companies and nonprofits , including the Ford Foundation and George Soros ’ Open Society Foundations .
First Draft tends to fact-check topics in a vein that ’ s consistent with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This is particularly true when it comes to controversies about vaccine safety and climate change , where First Draft appears to give little consideration to opposing scientific views and information .
In April , First Draft uncritically referred readers to an article perpetuating the false story that President Trump had literally encouraged “ people to drink bleach.
” Among the group ’ s original organizers is its digital director , Alastair Reid , who has frequently tweeted and retweeted anti-American rhetoric and progressive positions .
For its part , First Draft says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guided in part by the specific requirements of our funding partnerships ” but “ our donors understand that First Draft retains operational and editorial independence .
Our decisions are driven by the organization ’ s mission and values.
” Similar issues surround NewsGuard , an Internet browser tool that rates the trustworthiness of news sources on search engines and social media sites .
Created in 2018 , it is funded in part by one of the largest PR , advertising , and data collection firms in the world : Publicis Groupe .
Publicis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major issues and controversies from gender to race and climate .
NewsGuard states that besides its founders Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz , “ other investors play no role in the determination of ratings.
” Its analysts have given a green light of trust to openly partisan sources such as Media Matters for America .
Last November , NewsGuard reached out to RealClearInvestigations , questioning its use of anonymous sources to reveal the identity of an intelligence community “ whistleblower ” whose allegations helped lead to Trump ’ s impeachment .
But when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ similar queries about use of anonymous leaks by other news organizations , such as the New York Times , Washington Post , CNN , NBC , and BuzzFeed , NewsGuard did not reply .
The clearest example of conflicts in play regarding fact checks may be found by examining Facebook ’ s new oversight board , which was recently created to temper criticism over its decisions to flag certain content and accounts .
According to Facebook , members of the oversight board “ were chosen for their expertise and diversity ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of interest that could compromise their independent judgment and decision-making.
” They all “ have expertise in , or experience in advocating for , human rights.
” But 18 of the 20 members of Facebook ’ s oversight board members have ties to Soros ’ Open Society Foundations , which have spent billions of dollars on global initiatives aggressively advocating for the progressive side on topics ranging from immigration policy and climate to abortion , gender , and racial policies .
The pervasive Soros connections on Facebook ’ s oversight board may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Soros is such a prolific financier among global groups that advocate for positions he supports , that his name is bound to turn up when the chosen fact checkers are primarily activists and advocates for progressive positions .
The result is a group whose expressed viewpoints and causes are far from neutral .
By contrast , however , no members of the Facebook board have known public positions on the conservative side of hot-button controversies .
One measure of the problems in “ objective ” fact-checking is the vastly disparate treatment accorded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – the conservative Media Research Center and the liberal Media Matters .
Founded in 1987 by Brent Bozell , the Media Research Center , characterizes itself as a media watchdog , and uses a blog called “ Newsbusters ” to call out what it views as liberal bias in the mainstream media .
Media Matters is a nonprofit founded in 2004 by right-wing operative-turned-left-wing operative David Brock as a counterpoint to Media Research Center .
Today , it ’ s linked to a web of political action committees , nonprofits , LLCs and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agendas in the news .
So the two groups are bookends in the increasingly partisan media landscape .
But they are not treated the same by the so-called objective press .
The liberal Media Matters is is frequently relied upon by journalism organizations and the mainstream media as if it were an accurate , nonpartisan source of news and information .
An extensive search found no such treatment accorded to the Media Research Center .
The credibility afforded to Media Matters by some appears to have evolved over time .
Back in 2009 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Media Matters for a “ falsehood , ” citing a deceptive claim and press release .
But fast forward to June 4 , 2020 and an article in the same publication places Media Matters ’ “ editor-at-large ” Parker Molloy among a group of “ journalists , legal analysts and other experts ” -- without disclosing the controversial group ’ s partisan affiliation .
The article goes on to quote Molloy as claiming there is “ honestly no reason to believe there ’ s some sort of liberal/progressive bias at social-media companies.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just trying to ‘ work the refs ’ as a way to push these companies into adopting a pro-conservative bias.
” What to Do ?
Democrats and Republicans alike have stepped forward to say they have issues with some of today ’ s fact-checking and censorship efforts ahead of the 2020 election .
But they differ on which political side they think has the edge , or what should be done about it .
Democrats tend to press for more censorship .
Republicans are pushing to lift liability protections for social media platforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or shape content .
The Department of Justice recently issued recommendations to reform the law .
It includes ideas to strengthen censorship of content deemed harmful , providing transparency regarding the decisions , and addressing the concentration of information in the hands of just a few .
Sens .
John Thune , a South Dakota Republican , and Brian Schatz , a Democrat from Hawaii , recently introduced the bipartisan Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act , or the PACT Act .
It would require Google , Facebook , Twitter and other online @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes to how they shape and moderate content .
It would also subject them to certain civil lawsuits they are currently exempted from .
On the other hand , eliminating liability protections could result in furthering the public perception that Big Tech is controlling what they are allowed to see and read , as companies could reasonably argue that they would have a heightened obligation to censor even more information due to the risk of being sued .
For now , the trend to “ fact-checking ” information the public accesses online and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 election .
The evidence indicates the backgrounds and interests of those involved in the effort are serving to complicate rather than purify an increasingly fact-challenged information landscape .
[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]
By Sharyl Attkisson
Real Clear Investigations
A growing response to today’s chaotic information landscape sounds inviting and elegantly simple: appoint experts to “fact-check” news stories, blogs, speeches, studies, opinions, and political ads. Information they deem to be false is corrected or even removed from public view, in the name of the public good.
Since Donald Trump’s election these “fact-checkers” have gained increased prominence. Pressure has mounted for news outfits and big tech companies – including Google, Facebook, and Twitter – to police political discourse. At the same time, many people, notably conservatives, are demanding that the tech giants back off such perceived censorship. Tensions on both sides were on display last week as a House Judiciary subcommittee grilled top Silicon Valley executives.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
That discord is likely to persist because in large part the fact-checking solution is illusory. Many such efforts fail because they amount to a circular feedback loop of verification. The fact-checkers are like-minded journalists or often liberal Silicon Valley gatekeepers, who frequently rely on partisan news sources and political activists to control narratives on a wide variety of issues and controversies. This small group of players exerts an oversized influence, using fact checks to shape and censor information.
Twitter recently sparked controversy by taking the unprecedented step of adding a disapproving “fact-checking label” to some of President Trump’s tweets. The social media site publicly explained that Trump’s May 26 posts contained what its fact-checkers deemed to be “potentially misleading information about voting processes.”
Trump had said widespread mail-in ballots in the 2020 election would be “substantially fraudulent.” While the definition of “substantially” is in the eye of the beholder, the United States, in fact, has a long and ongoing history of ballot fraud.
Nevertheless, Twitter’s label warned that Trump’s claims were “unsubstantiated according to CNN, Washington Post, and others … Experts say mail-in ballots are very rarely linked to voter fraud.”
Do you trust the so-called 'fact-checkers' in the media? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 0% (0 Votes) 100% (31 Votes)
Like many questionable “fact checks” at issue, Twitter’s critique wasn’t really a fact check at all. It used past reporting from selected partisan news sources to claim that a prediction about what could happen in the future is untrue -- before it even happens or doesn’t happen. It was, in short, a Democratic Party talking point.
Google has stoked criticism for inserting its judgment and opinions between internet users and their search results. In February, the search engine announced it was fighting “disinformation” about coronavirus by partnering with the World Health Organization (WHO). Google explained that user searches about COVID-19 would be directed to WHO’s online information. One big problem: WHO itself was guilty of factual misinformation in multiple instances. For example, the agency admitted it had wrongly called the global risk of the virus emanating from China virus “moderate” at a time when it had actually been “very high.”
Critics say the partnership with WHO reflects a trend by Big Tech fact-checkers to present often controversial global organizations as nonpartisan purveyors of objective fact.
Over at Facebook, censorship of accounts and ideas has included a fact check of a documentary about the lab in Wuhan, China, that was under investigation as a possible source of the COVID-19 outbreak. Facebook claimed the documentary was “false.” But an investigation by this reporter revealed that one of the authorities Facebook referenced in discrediting the documentary was a scientist who worked at the Wuhan lab.
Facebook did not respond to an emailed request for an interview with CEO Mark Zuckerberg or a representative.
Who’s Pulling Strings and Calling Shots?
Fact-checking organizations have grappled internally with the obvious but usually unspoken challenge in all such efforts: It is unrealistic to expect that any appointed group of fact-checkers has true expertise on all of the topics they litigate. Yet they do so every day.
As the labels applied to the Trump tweets illustrate, today’s brand of “fact-checking” is rarely cut and dry, such as verifying the date an event occurred. Now, fact checks are frequently used to litigate matters of opinion or debate, and to proclaim the truth about facts that are unknown, or cannot possibly be known, at the time. They commonly provide what they call the “context” they claim is necessary to assess a factual claim, rather than a simple assessment of whether a statement is correct or incorrect. As a result, many factually correct statements are deemed to be “half true” or “mostly false.”
Keeping this in mind, the biggest inherent flaw with efforts to fact-check information may lie in the qualifications, bias, and conflicts of interest among the ranks of the fact-checkers themselves. One example is the fact-checking nonprofit First Draft, started by Google at the beginning of the 2016 election cycle. Google is owned by Alphabet, Inc. Alphabet executives and employees comprise a politically active group that ranks among the largest political donors to Democrats in the country. During the 2016 campaign, Alphabet was led by an ardent Hillary Clinton supporter and campaign volunteer, executive chairman Eric Schmidt.
First Draft is also supported by an array of liberal companies and nonprofits, including the Ford Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. First Draft tends to fact-check topics in a vein that’s consistent with its major donors’ opinions and interests. This is particularly true when it comes to controversies about vaccine safety and climate change, where First Draft appears to give little consideration to opposing scientific views and information. In April, First Draft uncritically referred readers to an article perpetuating the false story that President Trump had literally encouraged “people to drink bleach.” Among the group’s original organizers is its digital director, Alastair Reid, who has frequently tweeted and retweeted anti-American rhetoric and progressive positions.
For its part, First Draft says “certain projects and initiatives may be guided in part by the specific requirements of our funding partnerships” but “our donors understand that First Draft retains operational and editorial independence. Our decisions are driven by the organization’s mission and values.”
Similar issues surround NewsGuard, an Internet browser tool that rates the trustworthiness of news sources on search engines and social media sites. Created in 2018, it is funded in part by one of the largest PR, advertising, and data collection firms in the world: Publicis Groupe. Publicis is active on the progressive side of major issues and controversies from gender to race and climate.
NewsGuard states that besides its founders Steven Brill and Gordon Crovitz, “other investors play no role in the determination of ratings.” Its analysts have given a green light of trust to openly partisan sources such as Media Matters for America.
Last November, NewsGuard reached out to RealClearInvestigations, questioning its use of anonymous sources to reveal the identity of an intelligence community “whistleblower” whose allegations helped lead to Trump’s impeachment. But when RealClearInvestigations asked NewsGuard if it was posing similar queries about use of anonymous leaks by other news organizations, such as the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC, and BuzzFeed, NewsGuard did not reply.
The clearest example of conflicts in play regarding fact checks may be found by examining Facebook’s new oversight board, which was recently created to temper criticism over its decisions to flag certain content and accounts. According to Facebook, members of the oversight board “were chosen for their expertise and diversity” and “must not have actual or perceived conflicts of interest that could compromise their independent judgment and decision-making.” They all “have expertise in, or experience in advocating for, human rights.”
But 18 of the 20 members of Facebook’s oversight board members have ties to Soros’ Open Society Foundations, which have spent billions of dollars on global initiatives aggressively advocating for the progressive side on topics ranging from immigration policy and climate to abortion, gender, and racial policies.
The pervasive Soros connections on Facebook’s oversight board may be no more than a matter of odds. Soros is such a prolific financier among global groups that advocate for positions he supports, that his name is bound to turn up when the chosen fact checkers are primarily activists and advocates for progressive positions. The result is a group whose expressed viewpoints and causes are far from neutral. By contrast, however, no members of the Facebook board have known public positions on the conservative side of hot-button controversies.
Genesis
One measure of the problems in “objective” fact-checking is the vastly disparate treatment accorded two of the most established partisan outfits – the conservative Media Research Center and the liberal Media Matters.
Founded in 1987 by Brent Bozell, the Media Research Center, characterizes itself as a media watchdog, and uses a blog called “Newsbusters” to call out what it views as liberal bias in the mainstream media.
Media Matters is a nonprofit founded in 2004 by right-wing operative-turned-left-wing operative David Brock as a counterpoint to Media Research Center. Today, it’s linked to a web of political action committees, nonprofits, LLCs and other groups that partner to advance their agendas in the news.
So the two groups are bookends in the increasingly partisan media landscape. But they are not treated the same by the so-called objective press. The liberal Media Matters is is frequently relied upon by journalism organizations and the mainstream media as if it were an accurate, nonpartisan source of news and information. An extensive search found no such treatment accorded to the Media Research Center. The credibility afforded to Media Matters by some appears to have evolved over time. Back in 2009, the Columbia Journalism Review called out Media Matters for a “falsehood,” citing a deceptive claim and press release. But fast forward to June 4, 2020 and an article in the same publication places Media Matters’ “editor-at-large” Parker Molloy among a group of “journalists, legal analysts and other experts” -- without disclosing the controversial group’s partisan affiliation. The article goes on to quote Molloy as claiming there is “honestly no reason to believe there’s some sort of liberal/progressive bias at social-media companies.” He adds, “Conservatives are really just trying to ‘work the refs’ as a way to push these companies into adopting a pro-conservative bias.”
What to Do?
Democrats and Republicans alike have stepped forward to say they have issues with some of today’s fact-checking and censorship efforts ahead of the 2020 election. But they differ on which political side they think has the edge, or what should be done about it.
Democrats tend to press for more censorship. Republicans are pushing to lift liability protections for social media platforms that engage in heavy-handed tactics to limit or shape content. The Department of Justice recently issued recommendations to reform the law. It includes ideas to strengthen censorship of content deemed harmful, providing transparency regarding the decisions, and addressing the concentration of information in the hands of just a few.
Sens. John Thune, a South Dakota Republican, and Brian Schatz, a Democrat from Hawaii, recently introduced the bipartisan Platform Accountability and Consumer Transparency Act, or the PACT Act. It would require Google, Facebook, Twitter and other online platforms to disclose their practices when it comes to how they shape and moderate content. It would also subject them to certain civil lawsuits they are currently exempted from.
On the other hand, eliminating liability protections could result in furthering the public perception that Big Tech is controlling what they are allowed to see and read, as companies could reasonably argue that they would have a heightened obligation to censor even more information due to the risk of being sued.
For now, the trend to “fact-checking” information the public accesses online and on the news is gaining momentum approaching the 2020 election. The evidence indicates the backgrounds and interests of those involved in the effort are serving to complicate rather than purify an increasingly fact-challenged information landscape.
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Investigations.]


wnd--2020-08-05--Sweden's top virus expert: 'No point in wearing a face mask'

Sweden 's top epidemiologist says that with his nation 's coronavirus numbers declining significantly , he sees little value in the use of face masks .
`` That Sweden has come down to these levels is very promising , '' said Anders Tegnall in a report by Fortune .
Tegnell has stated that Sweden 's decision not to do a full lockdown was the better choice since the virus could be around for years and shutting down society is n't sustainable .
Tegnell is the state epidemiologist for the Public Health Agency of Sweden .
The World Health Organization , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China 's coverup of the outbreak , has advised the widespread use of masks .
Sweden 's health department said COVID-19 cases hit a peak in June , and now the infection rate has fallen .
`` The curves are going down and the curves for the seriously ill are beginning to approach zero , '' Tegnell said , according to Fortune .
Meanwhile , Tegnell said the rise in cases in other European countries that thought they had the virus under control is `` worrying . ''
Spain , Romania and Belgium @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rebound .

Sweden's top epidemiologist says that with his nation's coronavirus numbers declining significantly, he sees little value in the use of face masks.
"That Sweden has come down to these levels is very promising," said Anders Tegnall in a report by Fortune.
Tegnell has stated that Sweden's decision not to do a full lockdown was the better choice since the virus could be around for years and shutting down society isn't sustainable.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Tegnell is the state epidemiologist for the Public Health Agency of Sweden.
The World Health Organization, which has been criticized for aiding in China's coverup of the outbreak, has advised the widespread use of masks.
Sweden's health department said COVID-19 cases hit a peak in June, and now the infection rate has fallen.
"The curves are going down and the curves for the seriously ill are beginning to approach zero," Tegnell said, according to Fortune.
Is wearing a face mask effective in stopping the spread of COVID-19? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 8% (56 Votes) 92% (664 Votes)
Meanwhile, Tegnell said the rise in cases in other European countries that thought they had the virus under control is "worrying."
Spain, Romania and Belgium are among the nation's experiencing a rebound.


wnd--2020-08-04--Woman doctor who survived Muslim 'grooming gangs' estimates victims total 500,000

A doctor who survived being sexually groomed by gangs in the United Kingdom while a youth estimates there are 500,000 victims like her .
The testimony from Dr. Ella Hill , a pseudonym , was published by the free speech video podcast `` Triggernometry , '' noted the U.K. charity Christian Concern .
Tim Dieppe , Christian Concern 's head of public policy , explained the problem is that most of the grooming gang perpetrators are Muslims , and politicians and law enforcement officials fear retaliation if they focus on the problem .
Dieppe said Hill 's estimate of `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of grooming gangs over the last 40 years '' is `` believable . ''
He cited a report by the Independent newspaper of London that nearly 19,000 children were identified as victims of sexual exploitation in 2018-19 .
`` We know that Sarah Champion , MP for Rotherham , once claimed there could be as many as a million victims .
At the very least , over 40 years , across the whole country , in multiple towns , the total number of victims is likely to be in the hundreds of thousands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face is blurred out in the video because she still feels `` threatened and vulnerable , '' Dieppe explained .
He defined a `` grooming gang crime '' as `` a racially and religiously aggravated group or network-based rape . ''
She said she was targeted during her late teens , some 20 years ago , by a Pakistani Muslim gang in Rotherham .
`` She was raped , beaten , tortured , strangled , almost drowned to death , and almost suffocated to death .
She was trapped like this for over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she was covered in bruises .
The gang threatened to kill her parents and to kill her .
She survived an attempted 'honor killing ' which left her hospitalized for a week .
At that point the police advised her parents to move her away , which they did , '' Dieppe said .
She repeatedly was referred to derogatorily by names such as `` white whore . ''
`` Her abusers would also claim that they were allowed to abuse her according to Islamic teaching , '' Dieppe reported .
She appealed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and each time was told there was nothing officers could do .
`` This is despite her presenting with bruises and alleging serious crimes against her abusers .
She still has visible scars today .
Her medical notes record that she stated that her ex-boyfriend tried to kill her , '' he said .
Hill explained that her Christian faith gives her a strong belief that you should `` love your enemies , '' and she supports a charity for Pakistanis .
But the British government still must deal with the issue , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2018 described the child grooming gangs as one of the most shocking crimes ever .
But the government refused to publish the report .
Even a petition with 100,000 names failed to spur its release .
`` Hill makes clear that she believes that the government was scared that if the report were published then it would provoke anti-Muslim attacks , '' Dieppe said .
`` We are sacrificing girls on the altar of political correctness . ''

A doctor who survived being sexually groomed by gangs in the United Kingdom while a youth estimates there are 500,000 victims like her.
The testimony from Dr. Ella Hill, a pseudonym, was published by the free speech video podcast "Triggernometry," noted the U.K. charity Christian Concern.
Tim Dieppe, Christian Concern's head of public policy, explained the problem is that most of the grooming gang perpetrators are Muslims, and politicians and law enforcement officials fear retaliation if they focus on the problem.
Dieppe said Hill's estimate of "as many as 500,000 predominantly white victims of grooming gangs over the last 40 years" is "believable."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Her testimony:
He cited a report by the Independent newspaper of London that nearly 19,000 children were identified as victims of sexual exploitation in 2018-19.
"We know that Sarah Champion, MP for Rotherham, once claimed there could be as many as a million victims. At the very least, over 40 years, across the whole country, in multiple towns, the total number of victims is likely to be in the hundreds of thousands," he said.
Hill's face is blurred out in the video because she still feels "threatened and vulnerable," Dieppe explained.
He defined a "grooming gang crime" as "a racially and religiously aggravated group or network-based rape."
She said she was targeted during her late teens, some 20 years ago, by a Pakistani Muslim gang in Rotherham.
"She was raped, beaten, tortured, strangled, almost drowned to death, and almost suffocated to death. She was trapped like this for over a year, most of which time she was covered in bruises. The gang threatened to kill her parents and to kill her. She survived an attempted 'honor killing' which left her hospitalized for a week. At that point the police advised her parents to move her away, which they did," Dieppe said.
She repeatedly was referred to derogatorily by names such as "white whore."
"Her abusers would also claim that they were allowed to abuse her according to Islamic teaching," Dieppe reported.
She appealed to police multiple times for help, and each time was told there was nothing officers could do.
"This is despite her presenting with bruises and alleging serious crimes against her abusers. She still has visible scars today. Her medical notes record that she stated that her ex-boyfriend tried to kill her," he said.
Hill explained that her Christian faith gives her a strong belief that you should "love your enemies," and she supports a charity for Pakistanis.
But the British government still must deal with the issue, he said.
A review commissioned in 2018 described the child grooming gangs as one of the most shocking crimes ever.
But the government refused to publish the report.
Even a petition with 100,000 names failed to spur its release.
"Hill makes clear that she believes that the government was scared that if the report were published then it would provoke anti-Muslim attacks," Dieppe said.
"We are sacrificing girls on the altar of political correctness."


wnd--2020-08-04--New York Times quietly scrubs blatant Chinese propaganda

Hundreds of advertorials filled with Chinese communist propaganda published by the New York Times in an financial deal with Beijing have been quietly deleted .
The Washington Free Beacon reported the Times ' move to end its partnership with the Communist Party organ China Daily is part of `` a society-wide reckoning about the cozy relationships between the Chinese government and American institutions , from the NBA to Harvard University . ''
`` We made the decision at the beginning of this year to stop accepting branded content ads from state run media , which includes China Daily , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Times has run more than 200 propaganda articles in the last decade , `` some of which sugar-coated China 's human rights abuses , '' the Free Beacon said .
At the same time , the paper has run stories about Chinese government oppression .
But a 2019 video ad the Times posted on its website promoted Xinjiang tourism by depicting the oppressed Uyghur people as content under Chinese rule .
U.S. papers such as the Times , the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal have received millions of dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to millions of unassuming Americans , '' the Free Beacon said .
In Congress , the China Task Force has been spearheading efforts to rein in the distribution of Chinese propaganda .
A member of the task force , Rep. Jim Banks , R-Ind.
, said he hopes the other news outlets `` follow suit and start putting American values over communist bribes . ''
The Free Beacon previously found that China Daily failed to follow federal disclosure requirements about its relationship with U.S. media outlets .
Banks and 34 other congressional Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Justice Department investigate the outlet .
China Daily responded by submitting a revised disclosure of its U.S. activities since 2016 .
It revealed previously undisclosed details about its ties with U.S. media .
Among them were that the Post and the Journal each received more than $ 100,000 per month to run print versions of Chinese propaganda articles , the Free Beacon reported .
A Post spokesman told the Free Beacon his paper has not published any China Daily advertorials since 2019 .
But the spokesman but did not clarify whether or not @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Hundreds of advertorials filled with Chinese communist propaganda published by the New York Times in an financial deal with Beijing have been quietly deleted.
The Washington Free Beacon reported the Times' move to end its partnership with the Communist Party organ China Daily is part of "a society-wide reckoning about the cozy relationships between the Chinese government and American institutions, from the NBA to Harvard University."
"We made the decision at the beginning of this year to stop accepting branded content ads from state run media, which includes China Daily," a Times spokeswoman told the Free Beacon.
The Times has run more than 200 propaganda articles in the last decade, "some of which sugar-coated China's human rights abuses," the Free Beacon said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
At the same time, the paper has run stories about Chinese government oppression.
But a 2019 video ad the Times posted on its website promoted Xinjiang tourism by depicting the oppressed Uyghur people as content under Chinese rule.
U.S. papers such as the Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal have received millions of dollars in exchange for "disseminating Chinese propaganda to millions of unassuming Americans," the Free Beacon said.
In Congress, the China Task Force has been spearheading efforts to rein in the distribution of Chinese propaganda.
A member of the task force, Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., said he hopes the other news outlets "follow suit and start putting American values over communist bribes."
The Free Beacon previously found that China Daily failed to follow federal disclosure requirements about its relationship with U.S. media outlets.
Banks and 34 other congressional Republicans followed up with a demand that the Justice Department investigate the outlet.
China Daily responded by submitting a revised disclosure of its U.S. activities since 2016. It revealed previously undisclosed details about its ties with U.S. media.
Among them were that the Post and the Journal each received more than $100,000 per month to run print versions of Chinese propaganda articles, the Free Beacon reported.
A Post spokesman told the Free Beacon his paper has not published any China Daily advertorials since 2019. But the spokesman but did not clarify whether or not the relationship has been formally terminated.


wnd--2020-08-04--Christophobic attacks grow in America

Christophobic attacks grow in America

With violence in the streets of many of our most prominent cities , there is an underlying sub-theme that is also troubling .
Christophobia , which attacks anything Christian , is surely on the march .
Perhaps the latest example is the burning of Bibles in recent Portland protests .
On Aug. 2 , the Washington Examiner noted , `` Portland protesters were filmed burning Bibles and the American flag as protests continue in the city for more than two months .
Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz responded to a Friday video of people burning what was described as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , saying , 'This is who they are . '
'' In reference to this bonfire , journalist Ian Miles Cheong , managing editor of Human Events , tweeted , `` I do n't know what burning the Bible has to do with protesting against police brutality . ''
And he added , `` Do not be under the illusion that these protests and riots are anything but an attempt to dismantle all of Western civilization and upend centuries of tradition and freedom of religion . ''
How interesting to note that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse .
The late Mark Hatfield , a long-time senator from the state of Oregon , was known for years as an outspoken follower of Jesus .
I suppose in the history of the world there is no book so attacked as the Bible .
The famous French skeptic , Voltaire , predicted that within a century or so after his death the Bible would no longer be in circulation .
But within 50 years of his death , a Bible society purchased Voltaire 's printing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predictions – and instead of publishing skeptical books , they published the Bible .
Today , more than 240 years after Voltaire 's death , the Bible remains the bestselling book on earth , with 20 million copies sold in America alone annually – despite the Christophobes burning copies of the Word of God on the streets of Portland .
When was the last time you saw a book by Voltaire ?
But the bias against things Christian continues unabated in our time .
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called recently for the removal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Damien , who served lepers in Hawaii and contracted the disease because of his self-sacrifice .
Why ?
What did Father Damien do other than offer his life as a sacrifice of the Lord on behalf of those in great need ?
He was white and therefore , says AOC , was an example of `` white supremacy . ''
The attack on Christ in modern America can be seen in all the recent attacks against churches and church statues .
In his Denison Forum ( July 15 ) , commentator Jim Denison @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Florida to California were burned and vandalized over the weekend . ''
The attack on Christianity can also be seen in the responses to churches reopening in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic .
Several of the governors on the left have a double standard toward churches .
Abortions are allowed ( and abortion is considered `` essential '' ) , but not church services – even if those church services practice social distancing and require the wearing of masks .
America 's churches were once viewed as oases of good for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic , we have seen a bias against churches .
David Barton , founder and director of WallBuilders , said in a recent TV interview for D. James Kennedy Ministries : `` When you look at the debate that is going on with COVID , we 're saying , 'What are essential services ? '
Well in the minds of a lot of governors , churches are not essential . ''
Kelly Shackelford , the founder and director of First Liberty Institute , also spoke to our ministry , noting , `` There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the churches , there 's been clear discrimination .
All people have to do is look at the experts even saying , 'Well , you ca n't sing at church , but oh yeah , the protests , we 're OK with that because that 's important , ' which belies an understanding that they have that the church is not important – that religious freedom is not important . ''
When a church in Nevada recently asserted equal rights with casinos and liquor stores , the state balked .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Supreme Court – where the church lost .
The case is Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak .
Chief Justice John Roberts disappointed conservatives once again , casting his deciding vote with the liberal justices to favor casinos over churches .
Listen to the brilliance of Justice Neil Gorsuch 's dissent : `` In Nevada , it seems , it is better to be in entertainment than religion .
… But there is no world in which the Constitution permits Nevada to favor Caesars Palace over Calvary Chapel . ''
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ church need to remember this warning from the Word of God in Proverbs 21:30 : `` There is no wisdom , no insight , no plan that can succeed against the Lord . ''

With violence in the streets of many of our most prominent cities, there is an underlying sub-theme that is also troubling. Christophobia, which attacks anything Christian, is surely on the march.
Perhaps the latest example is the burning of Bibles in recent Portland protests.
On Aug. 2, the Washington Examiner noted, "Portland protesters were filmed burning Bibles and the American flag as protests continue in the city for more than two months. Republican Texas Sen. Ted Cruz responded to a Friday video of people burning what was described as a 'stack of Bibles' on Twitter Saturday, saying, 'This is who they are.'"
In reference to this bonfire, journalist Ian Miles Cheong, managing editor of Human Events, tweeted, "I don't know what burning the Bible has to do with protesting against police brutality." And he added, "Do not be under the illusion that these protests and riots are anything but an attempt to dismantle all of Western civilization and upend centuries of tradition and freedom of religion."
How interesting to note that the focus of the ceaseless attacks in Portland has been the Mark O. Hatfield Federal Courthouse. The late Mark Hatfield, a long-time senator from the state of Oregon, was known for years as an outspoken follower of Jesus.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
I suppose in the history of the world there is no book so attacked as the Bible. The famous French skeptic, Voltaire, predicted that within a century or so after his death the Bible would no longer be in circulation.
But within 50 years of his death, a Bible society purchased Voltaire's printing press – on which he made such predictions – and instead of publishing skeptical books, they published the Bible. Today, more than 240 years after Voltaire's death, the Bible remains the bestselling book on earth, with 20 million copies sold in America alone annually – despite the Christophobes burning copies of the Word of God on the streets of Portland. When was the last time you saw a book by Voltaire?
But the bias against things Christian continues unabated in our time. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called recently for the removal of the statue in the Capitol of Father Damien, who served lepers in Hawaii and contracted the disease because of his self-sacrifice. Why? What did Father Damien do other than offer his life as a sacrifice of the Lord on behalf of those in great need? He was white and therefore, says AOC, was an example of "white supremacy."
The attack on Christ in modern America can be seen in all the recent attacks against churches and church statues. In his Denison Forum (July 15), commentator Jim Denison reported, "A number of churches from Florida to California were burned and vandalized over the weekend."
The attack on Christianity can also be seen in the responses to churches reopening in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.
Several of the governors on the left have a double standard toward churches. Abortions are allowed (and abortion is considered "essential"), but not church services – even if those church services practice social distancing and require the wearing of masks.
America's churches were once viewed as oases of good for society. But in the recent coronavirus pandemic, we have seen a bias against churches.
David Barton, founder and director of WallBuilders, said in a recent TV interview for D. James Kennedy Ministries: "When you look at the debate that is going on with COVID, we're saying, 'What are essential services?' Well in the minds of a lot of governors, churches are not essential."
Kelly Shackelford, the founder and director of First Liberty Institute, also spoke to our ministry, noting, "There's a clear attack on religious freedom, the churches, there's been clear discrimination. All people have to do is look at the experts even saying, 'Well, you can't sing at church, but oh yeah, the protests, we're OK with that because that's important,' which belies an understanding that they have that the church is not important – that religious freedom is not important."
When a church in Nevada recently asserted equal rights with casinos and liquor stores, the state balked. This is a case that went all the way to the Supreme Court – where the church lost. The case is Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley v. Sisolak. Chief Justice John Roberts disappointed conservatives once again, casting his deciding vote with the liberal justices to favor casinos over churches.
Listen to the brilliance of Justice Neil Gorsuch's dissent: "In Nevada, it seems, it is better to be in entertainment than religion. … But there is no world in which the Constitution permits Nevada to favor Caesars Palace over Calvary Chapel."
Those who engage in attacking Christ and the church need to remember this warning from the Word of God in Proverbs 21:30: "There is no wisdom, no insight, no plan that can succeed against the Lord."


wnd--2020-08-05--Record economic growth expected to be confirmed

( WASHINGTON EXAMINER ) -- The economy is on course for a record jump in gross domestic product in the @ @ @ @ @ be announced shortly before November ’ s election .
`` I certainly think it will @ @ @ @ @ said Doug Holtz-Eakin , the president of the center-right economic think tank American Action Forum @ @ @ @ @ economic policy adviser to Sen. John McCain 's 2008 presidential campaign .
The existing record @ @ @ @ @ 16.7 % annual rate set in the first quarter of 1950 .
Several projections expect @ @ @ @ @ quarter of 2020 , which will be announced on Oct. 29 , just days before @ @ @ @ @ to eclipse that figure .

(WASHINGTON EXAMINER) -- The economy is on course for a record jump in gross domestic product in the third quarter, which will be announced shortly before November’s election.
"I certainly think it will be double digits," said Doug Holtz-Eakin, the president of the center-right economic think tank American Action Forum who was also the chief economic policy adviser to Sen. John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign.
The existing record for GDP growth is the 16.7% annual rate set in the first quarter of 1950. Several projections expect GDP growth in the third quarter of 2020, which will be announced on Oct. 29, just days before the Nov. 3 election, to eclipse that figure.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-05--Missing Marine landing craft found off California

( FOX NEWS ) -- The Marine amphibious assault vehicle that sank off the Southern California coast while carrying eight @ @ @ @ @ during a training exercise last week was found with human remains after an intensive search @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday .
The landing craft sank 385 feet after taking on water during a ship-to-shore @ @ @ @ @ San Clemente Island on Thursday .
The Marines and the sailor were heading back to @ @ @ @ @ sunk .
The Marines and the corpsman had been presumed dead after they had been @ @ @ @ @ hours .
The Navy Undersea Rescue Command confirmed the remains through the use of an @ @ @ @ @

(FOX NEWS) -- The Marine amphibious assault vehicle that sank off the Southern California coast while carrying eight Marines and a Navy corpsman during a training exercise last week was found with human remains after an intensive search effort, the military said Tuesday.
The landing craft sank 385 feet after taking on water during a ship-to-shore maneuver off the coast of San Clemente Island on Thursday. The Marines and the sailor were heading back to their ship when the vessel sunk.
The Marines and the corpsman had been presumed dead after they had been missing for more than 40 hours. The Navy Undersea Rescue Command confirmed the remains through the use of an underwater remote-controlled video system.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-06--Michigan governor: Racism is a 'public health crisis,' issues executive order

( NATIONAL REVIEW ) -- Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer , a Democrat , signed an executive directive on Wednesday ordering @ @ @ @ @ implicit bias training.
” Executive directives allow the Michigan governor to establish procedures or basic @ @ @ @ @ state ’ s executive branch .
According to the directive , current state employees will @ @ @ @ @ implicit bias training ” by the end of this year , while new employees must @ @ @ @ @ of the hiring process .
While various bias training initiatives have been implemented by government @ @ @ @ @ some research shows that the impact of these initiatives is negligible .

(NATIONAL REVIEW) -- Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, signed an executive directive on Wednesday ordering state employees to undergo “implicit bias training.”
Executive directives allow the Michigan governor to establish procedures or basic policy for employees of the state’s executive branch. According to the directive, current state employees will be required to undergo “implicit bias training” by the end of this year, while new employees must complete the training as part of the hiring process. While various bias training initiatives have been implemented by government offices in recent months, some research shows that the impact of these initiatives is negligible.
Whitmer’s directive also called “to combat racism as a public health crisis.”
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-06--Could these evangelical Democrats change the party?

( POLITICO ) -- When Hillary Scholten decided to leave her job as a civil rights attorney to run for @ @ @ @ @ question what her party affiliation would be .
She had been a policy adviser in @ @ @ @ @ of Justice , quit in protest of President Donald Trump ’ s immigration policies and @ @ @ @ @ Democrat .
After moving back to her home state of Michigan , she called up @ @ @ @ @ discuss running .
The two met for coffee and the strategist seemed impressed .
Scholten @ @ @ @ @ against housing discrimination on behalf of people living with HIV/AIDS , many of whom identified @ @ @ @ @ she worked as an immigrant rights attorney at a local legal aid center .
Her @ @ @ @ @ of the party were deep .
The conversation took a turn , however , when @ @ @ @ @ faith .
She ’ s an evangelical Christian , and it was clear the strategist @ @ @ @ @ off-brand for a Democrat .

(POLITICO) -- When Hillary Scholten decided to leave her job as a civil rights attorney to run for Congress, there was no question what her party affiliation would be. She had been a policy adviser in Barack Obama’s Department of Justice, quit in protest of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies and has long been a registered Democrat.
After moving back to her home state of Michigan, she called up a local party strategist to discuss running. The two met for coffee and the strategist seemed impressed. Scholten had started her career fighting against housing discrimination on behalf of people living with HIV/AIDS, many of whom identified as LGBTQ. Later, she worked as an immigrant rights attorney at a local legal aid center. Her credentials on the progressive wing of the party were deep.
The conversation took a turn, however, when Scholten started talking about her faith. She’s an evangelical Christian, and it was clear the strategist saw her overt Christianity as off-brand for a Democrat.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-06--Michelle Obama says she's suffering 'low-grade depression'

( BUSINESS INSIDER ) -- Former First Lady Michelle Obama on Wednesday said she has been `` dealing with some form of low-grade depression '' this year , attributing it , in part , to the `` hypocrisy '' of the Trump administration .
`` Not just because of the quarantine , but because of the racial strife , and just seeing this administration , watching the hypocrisy of it , day in and day out , is dispiriting , '' Obama said on the latest episode of `` The Michelle Obama Podcast '' while speaking with NPR anchor Michele @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I 'm unusual in that , '' Obama added .
`` But I 'd be remiss to say that part of this depression is also a result of what we 're seeing in terms of the protests , the continued racial unrest , that has plagued this country since its birth .
I have to say that waking up to the news , waking up to how this administration has or has not responded , waking up to yet another story of a Black man or a Black person somehow being dehumanized , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accused of something , it is exhausting .
And it has led to a weight that I have n't felt in my life , in a while . ''

(BUSINESS INSIDER) -- Former First Lady Michelle Obama on Wednesday said she has been "dealing with some form of low-grade depression" this year, attributing it, in part, to the "hypocrisy" of the Trump administration.
"Not just because of the quarantine, but because of the racial strife, and just seeing this administration, watching the hypocrisy of it, day in and day out, is dispiriting," Obama said on the latest episode of "The Michelle Obama Podcast" while speaking with NPR anchor Michele Norris.
"I don't think I'm unusual in that," Obama added. "But I'd be remiss to say that part of this depression is also a result of what we're seeing in terms of the protests, the continued racial unrest, that has plagued this country since its birth. I have to say that waking up to the news, waking up to how this administration has or has not responded, waking up to yet another story of a Black man or a Black person somehow being dehumanized, or hurt or killed, or falsely accused of something, it is exhausting. And it has led to a weight that I haven't felt in my life, in a while."
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-06--Barack Obama whips out his race card

Barack Obama whips out his race card

Former President Barack Obama once again pulled out the race card for political gain , consequences be damned .
This time at the funeral of civil rights icon John Lewis , Obama compared President Donald Trump to not one but two racial segregationists , former Birmingham , Alabama , Commissioner of Public Safety Bull Connor and former Alabama Gov .
George Wallace .
The inconvenient truth that Connor and Wallace were Democrats is , apparently , of no relevance to Obama , his fellow Democrats or most of the media .
About Connor , Obama said , `` Bull Connor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witness , with our own eyes , police officers kneeling on the necks of Black Americans . ''
The longtime former Bronx Rep. Charles Rangel , whose district included Harlem , also employed the Republicans-are-like-Bull Connor meme .
Rangel , though , used it on then-President George W. Bush , who also spoke at Lewis ' funeral .
In 2005 , Rangel criticized Bush 's response to Hurricane Katrina by saying , `` George Bush is our Bull Connor . ''
For those who have forgotten or never knew , Connor is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '60s , turned water hoses and sicced dogs on civil rights protesters .
`` You can never whip these birds if you do n't keep you and them separate , '' Connor said in 1963 .
`` I found that out in Birmingham .
You 've got to keep your white and the black separate . ''
Yes , Obama just compared Trump to that man .
Never mind that Trump signed the First Step Act that , so far , has allowed more than 3,000 inmates convicted for crack cocaine – mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reconsidered and over 2,000 released .
Never mind that Trump posthumously pardoned Jack Johnson , the first black heavyweight champion , who was the victim of a racially motivated prosecution .
TRENDING : Biden botches Declaration of Independence yet again in softball interview About Wallace , Obama said , `` George Wallace may be gone , but we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators . ''
In 1963 , Wallace defied federal officers by literally standing in front of the door of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prevent the university from integrating .
That same year , in his gubernatorial inaugural speech , Wallace said , `` In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth , I draw a line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny , and I say , segregation now , segregation tomorrow and segregation forever . ''
Yes , Obama just compared Trump to Wallace , the governor who tried to stop blacks from getting an education at a public school that blacks qualify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a proponent of school choice , allowing black students , K-12 , to take their public school dollars to whatever school they qualify for as an alternative to poor urban public schools .
Since Obama compared Trump to two dead racist Democratic segregationists of the 1960s , it is only fair to ask about Obama 's relationship with two living racist anti-Semites .
During his first six years , Obama invited the anti-Semitic , race-hustling , Tawana Brawley-lying Rev .
Al Sharpton to the White House 72 times by December 2014 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not available on public record . )
This would be the same Sharpton who , in 1991 , fueled a rage in Brooklyn 's Crown Heights , which experienced several days of violent protests in which Jews were attacked by blacks .
A few days earlier , Sharpton was recorded on tape bellowing , `` If the Jews want to get it on , tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house . ''
As to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan , a smiling Sen. Obama , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America 's most notorious anti-Semite – and segregationist .
( `` What the Muslims Want '' No .
10 on the Nation of Islam official website reads : `` We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited . ''
) Photographer Askia Muhammad admitted that he did not show the photo to the public until 2018 , after Obama left office .
Asked whether the photo would have made a difference in Obama 's 2008 presidential race , Muhammad said : `` I insist .
It absolutely would have made a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether the Obama-Farrakhan picture would have mattered , consider what Democratic lawyer Alan Dershowitz said after seeing the photo : `` Louis Farrakhan is a virulent anti-Semite .
He 's called Judaism a 'gutter religion . '
He 's anti-American .
He is a horrible , horrible human being .
`` And if I had known that the president had posed smilingly with ( Farrakhan ) when he was a senator , I would not have campaigned for Barack Obama .
It would have influenced my decision .
Look , I threatened to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were elected as chairman because of his association with Farrakhan .
You do n't associate with a bigot .
You do n't associate with an anti-Semite . ''
Democrats , such as Obama , can `` associate '' with racists and bigots like Sharpton and Farrakhan and , with a straight face , denounce Trump 's alleged racism and bigotry .
And Obama knows that our left-wing media , of which MSNBC host Sharpton is a part , will not call him out .

Former President Barack Obama once again pulled out the race card for political gain, consequences be damned.
This time at the funeral of civil rights icon John Lewis, Obama compared President Donald Trump to not one but two racial segregationists, former Birmingham, Alabama, Commissioner of Public Safety Bull Connor and former Alabama Gov. George Wallace. The inconvenient truth that Connor and Wallace were Democrats is, apparently, of no relevance to Obama, his fellow Democrats or most of the media.
About Connor, Obama said, "Bull Connor may be gone, but today we witness, with our own eyes, police officers kneeling on the necks of Black Americans." The longtime former Bronx Rep. Charles Rangel, whose district included Harlem, also employed the Republicans-are-like-Bull Connor meme. Rangel, though, used it on then-President George W. Bush, who also spoke at Lewis' funeral. In 2005, Rangel criticized Bush's response to Hurricane Katrina by saying, "George Bush is our Bull Connor."
For those who have forgotten or never knew, Connor is the segregationist Alabama lawman who, in the '60s, turned water hoses and sicced dogs on civil rights protesters. "You can never whip these birds if you don't keep you and them separate," Connor said in 1963. "I found that out in Birmingham. You've got to keep your white and the black separate."
Yes, Obama just compared Trump to that man. Never mind that Trump signed the First Step Act that, so far, has allowed more than 3,000 inmates convicted for crack cocaine – mostly black men – to have their sentences reconsidered and over 2,000 released. Never mind that Trump posthumously pardoned Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion, who was the victim of a racially motivated prosecution.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
About Wallace, Obama said, "George Wallace may be gone, but we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators." In 1963, Wallace defied federal officers by literally standing in front of the door of the University of Alabama in a failed attempt to prevent the university from integrating. That same year, in his gubernatorial inaugural speech, Wallace said, "In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw a line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say, segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever."
Yes, Obama just compared Trump to Wallace, the governor who tried to stop blacks from getting an education at a public school that blacks qualify to attend. Never mind that Trump is a proponent of school choice, allowing black students, K-12, to take their public school dollars to whatever school they qualify for as an alternative to poor urban public schools.
Since Obama compared Trump to two dead racist Democratic segregationists of the 1960s, it is only fair to ask about Obama's relationship with two living racist anti-Semites.
During his first six years, Obama invited the anti-Semitic, race-hustling, Tawana Brawley-lying Rev. Al Sharpton to the White House 72 times by December 2014. (Any visits after that time are not available on public record.) This would be the same Sharpton who, in 1991, fueled a rage in Brooklyn's Crown Heights, which experienced several days of violent protests in which Jews were attacked by blacks. A few days earlier, Sharpton was recorded on tape bellowing, "If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house."
As to Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, a smiling Sen. Obama, in 2005, took a photograph with America's most notorious anti-Semite – and segregationist. ("What the Muslims Want" No. 10 on the Nation of Islam official website reads: "We believe that intermarriage or race mixing should be prohibited.") Photographer Askia Muhammad admitted that he did not show the photo to the public until 2018, after Obama left office. Asked whether the photo would have made a difference in Obama's 2008 presidential race, Muhammad said: "I insist. It absolutely would have made a difference."
If in doubt about whether the Obama-Farrakhan picture would have mattered, consider what Democratic lawyer Alan Dershowitz said after seeing the photo: "Louis Farrakhan is a virulent anti-Semite. He's called Judaism a 'gutter religion.' He's anti-American. He is a horrible, horrible human being.
"And if I had known that the president had posed smilingly with (Farrakhan) when he was a senator, I would not have campaigned for Barack Obama. It would have influenced my decision. Look, I threatened to leave the Democratic Party if Keith Ellison were elected as chairman because of his association with Farrakhan. You don't associate with a bigot. You don't associate with an anti-Semite."
Democrats, such as Obama, can "associate" with racists and bigots like Sharpton and Farrakhan and, with a straight face, denounce Trump's alleged racism and bigotry. And Obama knows that our left-wing media, of which MSNBC host Sharpton is a part, will not call him out.
Hypocrisy, anyone?


wnd--2020-08-06--Joe Biden's transition could be to 'lawless disorder'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
By his own admission , Joe Biden concedes he is merely a placeholder , telling a fundraising audience in May : “ I view myself as a transition candidate.
” This “ transition ” increasingly means a statist agenda that empowers a political rodeo of radical officeholders , reverses our country back toward globalism , and encourages street-level chaos across our land .
In any administration , personnel choices often compel policy .
In the case of Biden , his woke orbit is dominated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s “ Unity Task Force ” recommendations -- compiled with the input of prominent progressives -- read like a wish list from the faculty lounges of Ivy League schools in consultation with the University of California system .
The manifesto calls for suspending all deportations of illegal migrants and the effective crippling of the American energy industry .
TRENDING : Biden botches Declaration of Independence yet again in softball interview These are not your parents ’ Democrats .
In fact , the effective “ kitchen cabinet ” of Biden ’ s advisers would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recently as a decade or two ago .
For example , Biden promises to place Robert Francis O ’ Rourke as the effective gun czar of a Biden administration .
O ’ Rourke threatens to confiscate millions of firearms from lawful gun owners , including forcible seizures of the most popular rifle in America .
Rep. Ilhan Omar , a member of the so-called “ Squad ” of most progressive House members , openly gloated recently about how far left she moved Biden ’ s platform .
This radicalism extends to potential vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , two Californians reportedly on the shortlist of applicants include Sen. Kamala Harris , who affirms taxpayer-funded health care for illegal migrants , and Rep. Karen Bass , who has lavishly praised the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro .
But while Biden points to a progressive future of extremists , he also portends a regression backward toward the globalism that was the hallmark of his half-century in the Washington swamp .
Biden personifies the D.C. foreign policy establishment , which clamors for the return of a globalist commander-in-chief .
Biden has supported countless @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , President Trump fulfills his campaign promises and pursues an America First foreign policy of realism and restraint .
As Biden repeatedly sent our warfighters abroad , he also sent our jobs overseas , and mostly to China .
When vice president , Biden actually asserted in a 2011 speech that “ a rising China is a positive , positive development , not only for China , but for America.
” As Biden uttered that Pollyanna nonsense to his Davos-oriented CEO fanboys , industrial heartland America endured devastation .
Specifically , our nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 12-year period from the time Biden proposed Beijing ’ s inclusion as a most-favored trading member of the WTO in 2001 , per analysis from the Economic Policy Institute .
Biden ’ s domestic “ transition ” sadly points to a place of lawless disorder .
As chaos spread across Democratic-led cities , Joe Biden remained ensconced and mostly silent in his Delaware home .
He has repeatedly equivocated regarding violent rioters , referring to them at one point as “ peaceful protesters.
” The police departments of America clearly disagree , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Police Organizations , which represents over 240,000 officers nationwide , enthusiastically endorsed President Trump for reelection .
( That same group had endorsed the Obama-Biden ticket in 2008 and 2012 . )
In addition , more than 100 police agencies have refused to bolster Milwaukee Police Department security efforts at the upcoming Democratic National Convention because they are understandably concerned with officers ’ safety after that city ordered restrictions on tear gas and other crowd control measures .
As the greatest republic in world history , we clearly deserve far better than all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ acquiescence .
We will choose the 2020 candidate ready to reject radicalism , embrace sovereignty , and enforce the rule of law – because this much we know : Your way of life would not be safe in Joe Biden ’ s radicalized America .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Steve Cortes
Real Clear Politics
By his own admission, Joe Biden concedes he is merely a placeholder, telling a fundraising audience in May: “I view myself as a transition candidate.” This “transition” increasingly means a statist agenda that empowers a political rodeo of radical officeholders, reverses our country back toward globalism, and encourages street-level chaos across our land.
In any administration, personnel choices often compel policy. In the case of Biden, his woke orbit is dominated by agitators. The presumptive nominee’s “Unity Task Force” recommendations -- compiled with the input of prominent progressives -- read like a wish list from the faculty lounges of Ivy League schools in consultation with the University of California system. The manifesto calls for suspending all deportations of illegal migrants and the effective crippling of the American energy industry.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
These are not your parents’ Democrats. In fact, the effective “kitchen cabinet” of Biden’s advisers would have been ostracized by the party as recently as a decade or two ago. For example, Biden promises to place Robert Francis O’Rourke as the effective gun czar of a Biden administration. O’Rourke threatens to confiscate millions of firearms from lawful gun owners, including forcible seizures of the most popular rifle in America. Rep. Ilhan Omar, a member of the so-called “Squad” of most progressive House members, openly gloated recently about how far left she moved Biden’s platform. This radicalism extends to potential vice presidential candidates as well. For example, two Californians reportedly on the shortlist of applicants include Sen. Kamala Harris, who affirms taxpayer-funded health care for illegal migrants, and Rep. Karen Bass, who has lavishly praised the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
But while Biden points to a progressive future of extremists, he also portends a regression backward toward the globalism that was the hallmark of his half-century in the Washington swamp. Biden personifies the D.C. foreign policy establishment, which clamors for the return of a globalist commander-in-chief. Biden has supported countless calamitous international armed interventions. In contrast, President Trump fulfills his campaign promises and pursues an America First foreign policy of realism and restraint.
As Biden repeatedly sent our warfighters abroad, he also sent our jobs overseas, and mostly to China. When vice president, Biden actually asserted in a 2011 speech that “a rising China is a positive, positive development, not only for China, but for America.” As Biden uttered that Pollyanna nonsense to his Davos-oriented CEO fanboys, industrial heartland America endured devastation. Specifically, our nation lost 3.2 million jobs to China over a 12-year period from the time Biden proposed Beijing’s inclusion as a most-favored trading member of the WTO in 2001, per analysis from the Economic Policy Institute.
Biden’s domestic “transition” sadly points to a place of lawless disorder. As chaos spread across Democratic-led cities, Joe Biden remained ensconced and mostly silent in his Delaware home. He has repeatedly equivocated regarding violent rioters, referring to them at one point as “peaceful protesters.” The police departments of America clearly disagree, which explains why the National Association of Police Organizations, which represents over 240,000 officers nationwide, enthusiastically endorsed President Trump for reelection. (That same group had endorsed the Obama-Biden ticket in 2008 and 2012.) In addition, more than 100 police agencies have refused to bolster Milwaukee Police Department security efforts at the upcoming Democratic National Convention because they are understandably concerned with officers’ safety after that city ordered restrictions on tear gas and other crowd control measures.
As the greatest republic in world history, we clearly deserve far better than all this. We will not settle for acquiescence. We will choose the 2020 candidate ready to reject radicalism, embrace sovereignty, and enforce the rule of law – because this much we know: Your way of life would not be safe in Joe Biden’s radicalized America.


wnd--2020-08-06--Nadler and his 'radicals' compared to occupiers in Seattle 'protest zone'

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
If you wondered how America got to be a place where mobs on the street are considered to be “ peaceful protesters , ” you didn ’ t have to look any further than last week ’ s House Judiciary “ hearing ” with Attorney General William Barr .
The Democrats in control of the hearing were just as disrespectful and thuggish on Capitol Hill as their namesakes were two months ago in Seattle ’ s Capitol Hill Occupied Protest zone .
Rep. Jerry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ radicals represented congressional decorum to the same extent that the goons throwing Molotov cocktails in Seattle and Portland represent “ peaceful protest.
” The fish rots from the head down .
TRENDING : Biden botches Declaration of Independence yet again in softball interview The hearing got started with Nadler accusing Barr of twisting the Justice Department “ into a shadow of its former self '' and the tenor never improved .
The Democratic inquisitors adopted the strategy of using their five minutes of questioning to instead browbeat Barr and then scold him for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Reclaiming my time ” became the Democratic equivalent of “ shut the hell up !
” Occasionally , Barr ’ s exasperation boiled to the surface .
“ This is a hearing , ” he told Rep. Lou Correa after being cut off in the middle of an answer .
“ I thought I was the one who was supposed to be heard.
” Of course , Nadler and his gang don ’ t value politeness much .
They mostly grew up in the 1960s and ’ 70s or later and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that began with the antiwar movement .
As I have argued in my new book , “ How We Got Here , ” the roots of our contemporary decadence can be traced directly back to Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground terrorist organization .
Although the Weather Underground disbanded , it didn ’ t disappear — rather its members and its revolutionary ideas were dispersed into every aspect of society .
The Democrats in Congress who now praise violence against the most fundamental institutions of Western society — its courthouses and its police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system largely invented by Ayers in his role as the unofficial curriculum guru of public education .
But Ayers always intended a two-pronged attack on society to bring about the communist revolution he envisioned .
Violence on the streets was also an integral part of the plan .
The revolutionary goal could be summed up in the title of a 1968 resolution put out by Students for a Democratic Society ( the predecessor of Weather Underground ) .
The resolution was titled enthusiastically “ The Elections Do n't Mean S -- - — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Power Is In The Street . ''
That power — the power of the street — has been multiplied exponentially since then as the Internet , smartphones and a complicit media have been harnessed by radicals to greatly simplify the organizing and messaging of protests as a political tool .
It is so effective that the few remaining moderate Democrats are terrified of falling victim to the left-wing mob themselves — so much so that they have turned a blind eye to the destruction in our cities .
It was just a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told a reporter that the violence used by antifa in Portland was “ a myth that ’ s being spread only in Washington , D.C. ” Not one Democrat on the committee challenged that blatantly false statement .
Instead they doubled down on blaming Barr and President Trump for the violence .
Barr had the guts to comment on this unholy alliance between Capitol Hill Democrats and the radicals on the streets .
“ What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the Democratic Party , are not coming out and condemning the violence and the attack on federal courts , ” he declared .
It ’ s not hard to see why Democratic elected officials are running scared .
Just two years ago , Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ambushed longtime Democrat powerbroker Joe Crowley in a House primary election that was supposed to be routine .
Instead , AOC routed Crowley by 15 percentage points .
This year , in case establishment Democrats didn ’ t get the message , progressive candidate Jamaal Bowman crushed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York City House district by a similar margin .
The “ Justice Democrats ” represented by Bowman and Ocasio-Cortez are part of the political arm of Black Lives Matter and antifa in the same way that Sinn Fein was the political arm of the Irish Republican Army .
In a new wrinkle , Justice Democrats are running radical candidates against incumbent moderate Democrats to press their leftist agenda on climate change , defunding police , wide-open immigration and wealth redistribution .
The success of Ocasio-Cortez and Bowman on the one hand , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the other , have changed the game — hopefully not permanently — for Democratic Party politics .
Anything is fair game for them to turn into a weapon to hurt Republicans , and nothing seems capable of deterring them from their cancel-culture revolution .
Perhaps most concerning from last Tuesday ’ s hearing was a little-noted thrust by freshman Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell to try to intimidate Bill Barr into committing to holding the release of the so-called Durham Report until after the November election .
The misnomer is important .
There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Report.
” John Durham is the U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut .
He has been tasked by Barr to probe the origins of the bogus Trump-Russia investigation and to charge those who improperly used the Steele dossier for political purposes .
We don ’ t need another rehash of the Horowitz Report ( written by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz ) , which laid bare the multiple offenses committed against Trump but resulted in zero legal action taken .
This time , we need accountability — indictments , prosecutions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the federal officials who broke the law .
In a very real sense , the modern FBI , the intelligence community , and the liberal bureaucrats in the Justice Department are even more important to the success of the Ayers revolution than the front people in Congress .
They , plus the radical district attorneys being salted across the nation by George Soros-funded election campaigns , have the power to use the full weight of the government to still dissent and to punish opposition .
We saw that most powerfully in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2016 election when James Comey , John Brennan , and James Clapper conspired to keep Donald Trump out of the White House , and to remove him by any means necessary if he somehow defeated their anointed candidate , Hillary Clinton .
If Durham is true to his own oath of office , he will not write a report , but will rather issue indictments to those responsible for persecuting Carter Page , Gen. Michael Flynn , George Papadopoulos , Paul Manafort , Roger Stone , Donald Trump Jr. and of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other Democrats are worried about is that if the American public finally learns the incontrovertible truth that Barack Obama and his vice president , Joe Biden , participated in an illegal campaign to prevent Trump from winning in 2016 , then Biden is toast in 2020 .
It ’ s no coincidence that Comey , disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok , Mueller puppeteer Andrew Weissmann and several other anti-Trump conspirators have books coming out prior to the election .
This is a continuation of the full-court press to remove Trump from the White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is an actual court unsealing indictments against the “ higher loyalty ” crowd in time for voters to make an informed decision about the real election interference that took place in 2016 .
Fortunately , Barr stood firm against the attempt to bully him .
He is no Jeff Sessions .
As Barr rightly pointed out , the outcome of Durham ’ s investigation against alleged coup plotters is about crimes , not about politics , and therefore should not be affected by department policy against public announcements that could have an undue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any report will be , in my judgment , not one that is covered by the policy and that would disrupt the election , ” the attorney general said .
Turns out that depends on what the meaning of “ disrupt ” is .
For Democrats , anything that leads to the reelection of Donald Trump is a disruption .
That ’ s why , for as long as they can get away with it , Democrats are going with the party line that the targeting of Trump by the Obama administration is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Nadler ) “ a myth that ’ s being spread only in Washington , D.C. ” Something ’ s being spread in Washington , D.C. , that ’ s for sure , but it ’ s way more pungent than a myth .
My guess is that since there are so few bulls in the nation ’ s capital these days , it must be coming from the tail end of the Democrat donkeys .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Frank Miele
Real Clear Politics
If you wondered how America got to be a place where mobs on the street are considered to be “peaceful protesters,” you didn’t have to look any further than last week’s House Judiciary “hearing” with Attorney General William Barr.
The Democrats in control of the hearing were just as disrespectful and thuggish on Capitol Hill as their namesakes were two months ago in Seattle’s Capitol Hill Occupied Protest zone. Rep. Jerry Nadler and his band of duly elected radicals represented congressional decorum to the same extent that the goons throwing Molotov cocktails in Seattle and Portland represent “peaceful protest.” The fish rots from the head down.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The hearing got started with Nadler accusing Barr of twisting the Justice Department “into a shadow of its former self" and the tenor never improved. The Democratic inquisitors adopted the strategy of using their five minutes of questioning to instead browbeat Barr and then scold him for trying to respond or to defend himself. “Reclaiming my time” became the Democratic equivalent of “shut the hell up!”
Occasionally, Barr’s exasperation boiled to the surface. “This is a hearing,” he told Rep. Lou Correa after being cut off in the middle of an answer. “I thought I was the one who was supposed to be heard.”
Of course, Nadler and his gang don’t value politeness much. They mostly grew up in the 1960s and ’70s or later and are the spawn of the social revolution that began with the antiwar movement. As I have argued in my new book, “How We Got Here,” the roots of our contemporary decadence can be traced directly back to Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground terrorist organization. Although the Weather Underground disbanded, it didn’t disappear — rather its members and its revolutionary ideas were dispersed into every aspect of society. The Democrats in Congress who now praise violence against the most fundamental institutions of Western society — its courthouses and its police — are the result of a corrupt system largely invented by Ayers in his role as the unofficial curriculum guru of public education.
But Ayers always intended a two-pronged attack on society to bring about the communist revolution he envisioned. Violence on the streets was also an integral part of the plan. The revolutionary goal could be summed up in the title of a 1968 resolution put out by Students for a Democratic Society (the predecessor of Weather Underground). The resolution was titled enthusiastically “The Elections Don't Mean S--- — Vote Where the Power Is — Our Power Is In The Street."
That power — the power of the street — has been multiplied exponentially since then as the Internet, smartphones and a complicit media have been harnessed by radicals to greatly simplify the organizing and messaging of protests as a political tool.
It is so effective that the few remaining moderate Democrats are terrified of falling victim to the left-wing mob themselves — so much so that they have turned a blind eye to the destruction in our cities. It was just a few days before the hearing when Chairman Nadler told a reporter that the violence used by antifa in Portland was “a myth that’s being spread only in Washington, D.C.”
Not one Democrat on the committee challenged that blatantly false statement. Instead they doubled down on blaming Barr and President Trump for the violence. Barr had the guts to comment on this unholy alliance between Capitol Hill Democrats and the radicals on the streets.
“What makes me concerned for the country is this is the first time in my memory the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning the violence and the attack on federal courts,” he declared.
It’s not hard to see why Democratic elected officials are running scared. Just two years ago, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ambushed longtime Democrat powerbroker Joe Crowley in a House primary election that was supposed to be routine. Instead, AOC routed Crowley by 15 percentage points. This year, in case establishment Democrats didn’t get the message, progressive candidate Jamaal Bowman crushed old-school Eliot Engel in a neighboring New York City House district by a similar margin.
The “Justice Democrats” represented by Bowman and Ocasio-Cortez are part of the political arm of Black Lives Matter and antifa in the same way that Sinn Fein was the political arm of the Irish Republican Army. In a new wrinkle, Justice Democrats are running radical candidates against incumbent moderate Democrats to press their leftist agenda on climate change, defunding police, wide-open immigration and wealth redistribution. The success of Ocasio-Cortez and Bowman on the one hand, and the normalization of violence represented by antifa on the other, have changed the game — hopefully not permanently — for Democratic Party politics. Anything is fair game for them to turn into a weapon to hurt Republicans, and nothing seems capable of deterring them from their cancel-culture revolution.
Perhaps most concerning from last Tuesday’s hearing was a little-noted thrust by freshman Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell to try to intimidate Bill Barr into committing to holding the release of the so-called Durham Report until after the November election.
The misnomer is important. There is no such thing as a “Durham Report.” John Durham is the U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut. He has been tasked by Barr to probe the origins of the bogus Trump-Russia investigation and to charge those who improperly used the Steele dossier for political purposes. We don’t need another rehash of the Horowitz Report (written by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz), which laid bare the multiple offenses committed against Trump but resulted in zero legal action taken. This time, we need accountability — indictments, prosecutions, convictions, and perhaps even jail time for the federal officials who broke the law.
In a very real sense, the modern FBI, the intelligence community, and the liberal bureaucrats in the Justice Department are even more important to the success of the Ayers revolution than the front people in Congress. They, plus the radical district attorneys being salted across the nation by George Soros-funded election campaigns, have the power to use the full weight of the government to still dissent and to punish opposition.
We saw that most powerfully in the run-up to, and aftermath of, the 2016 election when James Comey, John Brennan, and James Clapper conspired to keep Donald Trump out of the White House, and to remove him by any means necessary if he somehow defeated their anointed candidate, Hillary Clinton. If Durham is true to his own oath of office, he will not write a report, but will rather issue indictments to those responsible for persecuting Carter Page, Gen. Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Donald Trump Jr. and of course the president himself.
What Mucarsel-Powell and other Democrats are worried about is that if the American public finally learns the incontrovertible truth that Barack Obama and his vice president, Joe Biden, participated in an illegal campaign to prevent Trump from winning in 2016, then Biden is toast in 2020.
It’s no coincidence that Comey, disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok, Mueller puppeteer Andrew Weissmann and several other anti-Trump conspirators have books coming out prior to the election. This is a continuation of the full-court press to remove Trump from the White House. The last thing they need is an actual court unsealing indictments against the “higher loyalty” crowd in time for voters to make an informed decision about the real election interference that took place in 2016.
Fortunately, Barr stood firm against the attempt to bully him. He is no Jeff Sessions. As Barr rightly pointed out, the outcome of Durham’s investigation against alleged coup plotters is about crimes, not about politics, and therefore should not be affected by department policy against public announcements that could have an undue political influence on an election.
“Any report will be, in my judgment, not one that is covered by the policy and that would disrupt the election,” the attorney general said.
Turns out that depends on what the meaning of “disrupt” is. For Democrats, anything that leads to the reelection of Donald Trump is a disruption. That’s why, for as long as they can get away with it, Democrats are going with the party line that the targeting of Trump by the Obama administration is (to borrow an apt phrase from Rep. Nadler) “a myth that’s being spread only in Washington, D.C.”
Something’s being spread in Washington, D.C., that’s for sure, but it’s way more pungent than a myth. My guess is that since there are so few bulls in the nation’s capital these days, it must be coming from the tail end of the Democrat donkeys.