Pam Bondi opened her testimony by asserting the Democrats mentioned Burisma and Hunter Biden 400 times during their opening arguments last week.
Ms. Bondi clearly and concisely showed how Hunter Biden was sitting on the board of a very corrupt Ukrainian natural gas company whilst his father then-Vice President Joe Biden was tasked with handling Ukrainian relations.
The Senators got to see for the first time all of the bank statements proving Hunter Biden was paid over $3 million in a 17-month time span for sitting on the board of Burisma, despite having zero experience in oil and gas.
Bondi not only exposed the Bidens’ corruption in Ukraine, she also brought up Hunter Biden’s sweetheart deal from the Bank of China after flying with his daddy on Air Force Two to China.
But the three largest networks, ABC, CBS and NBC blacked out Bondi’s damning presentation exposing the Biden crime family.
Fake news networks, all regulated by the FCC, are covering for the Democrats and protecting 2020 Democrat front runner Joe Biden!
In contrast, the same three networks carried impeachment manager Schiff’s live presentations.
BREAKING: All Big 3 networks ABC, CBS, NBC blacked out Trump defense lawyer Pam Bondi’s presentation this afternoon of Ukraine corruption related to Joe Biden, son Hunter Biden & Burisma. In contrast, Big 3 carried Schiff’s p.m. presentations live, preempting regular programming
The networks on Monday also gave less air time to Trump’s lawyers in comparison to wall-to-wall live coverage of the Democrats last week.
BLACKOUT: CBS, ABC & NBC–all regulated by the FCC–are NOT giving equal time to covering lawyers arguing in defense of Trump in front of Senate now, as they did last week when they covered Schiff & Dem prosecutors arguing for Trump’s removal in wall-to-wall preemptive coverage
March 17, 2014 – Russia invades Crimean peninsula – annexes portion of Ukraine and regains access to deep water port in Black Sea with access to Mediterranean.
Joe Biden appointed to oversee Ukraine after Russia seizes Crimea [The Hill]
Early April 2014 – UK seizes $23 million in Bursima assets on money laundering charge when Burisma attempts to move the money to Cyprus.
Early April 2014 – Devon Archer (Yale roomate and business partner to Hunter Biden) meets with Joe Biden in White House one week before Archer joins board of Burisma. [The Hill]
April 18, 2014 – Hunter Biden appointed to board of directors of Burisma. Hunter and Archer receive payments Spring 2014-Fall 2015, totaling $3.1 million over 14 months, split between the two, with Hunter receiving $83K/month. [For background on Hunter’s other business dealings, including his lucrative China dealings while his father was in office and overseeing Chinese affairs, see Jim Geraghty’s comprehensive National Review timeline.]
April 22, 2014 – Biden travels to Ukraine and offers $50 million aid to Yatsenuk’s new government
Spring 2014 – Ukraine prosecutor Shokin opens investigation into Zlochevsky/Bursima at the request of UK; WSJ reports Zlochevsky was under investigation in a Ukrainian unlawful-enrichment probe and a separate Ukrainian into alleged abuse of power, forgery and embezzlement
January 2015 – UK closes Burisma investigation when Ukraine failed to produce requested documents by deadline; Ukraine’s Burisma investigation continues.
July 13, 2015 – Crowdstrike announces major investment by Google Capital (Google was the largest corporate donor to the Clinton campaign. Google Capital is owned by Alphabet, whose CEO Eric Schmitds strongly supported the Clinton campaign.) Other investors include Warburg Pincus, whose president, Timothy Geithner, worked for the Clinton and Obama administrations. [Washington Times]
August 2015 – Joe Biden polling high for 2016 presidential election
Fall 2015 – Hunter Biden stops receiving Burisma payments
October 2015 – Biden drops out of 2016 race [allegations are that the NY Times had begun investigating the Biden-Ukraine scandal by this time]
December 7, 2015 – Wall Street Journal publishes Biden exposé, “Ukrainians See Conflict in Biden’s Anticorruption Message”
December 9, 2015 – NY Times publishes Biden exposé, “Joe Biden, His Son and the Case Against a Ukrainian Oligarch”
February 2015 – Shokin returns to Ukraine prosecutor’s position
March 2016 – Just days before the Shokin firing, BlueStar Strategies rep. Sally Painter met with Ukraine embassy official in D.C. to seek a meeting with the prosecutor’s office around the time of Joe’s upcoming visit, and was told to wait until the following week. Burisma’s accounting records show payments to BlueStar. [The Hill]
March 29, 2016 – The day Shokin’s firing is announced, Burisma’s legal defense rep. John Buretta (former U.S. Assistant Attorney General under Holder) calls to ask to speak to interim prosecutor Sevruk, but was denied according to Ukraine prosecutor’s memo.
April 6, 2016 – 2 BlueStar reps. Sally Painter and Karen Tramontano (formerly with the Clinton administration) and Burisma legal defense Buretta obtain meeting with interim Ukraine prosecutor Sevruk. They apologize “for the dissemination of false information by U.S. representatives and public figures on the activities of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine in regards to the investigation of criminal activities of Zlochevsky” and offer to set up DC meeting for new Ukraine prosecutor. [Ukraine prosecutor Sevruk’s memo]
New Ukraine prosecutor Lutsenko scales back Burisma investigation to tax evasion.
Summer 2016 – DNC hires Crowdstrike to investigate server breech; Crowdstrike identifies Russia as perpetrator. The DNC paid Crowdstrike more than $400,000 during 2016. [Washington Times]
November 2016 – Trump wins presidential election
January 2017 – Joe Biden visits Ukraine 10 days before Trump takes office.
January 2017 – Burisma investigation resolved in Ukraine days before Trump’s inauguration, and just after Burisma pays UAH 180 million (a few million U.S.$) back taxes [critics suggest this was a payoff to close the case]
January 2017 – Burisma signs cooperative agreement with Atlantic Council to sponsor their Eurasia Center [Kyiv Post] Crowdstrike cofounder Dmitri Alperovich is a senior fellow with Atlantic Council. The Atlantic Council is hawkish on Russia. In addition to funding from Burisma, it receives funding from the George Soros Open Society Foundation and Ukrainian billionaire who also donated millions to the Clinton Foundation, Viktor Pinchuk. [Daily Caller]
January 20, 2017 – Donald Trump inauguration
Feb. 1, 2017 – Kyiv Post publishes interview with Buretta in which he details timeline of Burisma investigation, saying Ukraine investigation began Aug. 2014 and was open for two years, and contradicting Joe Biden’s claim that the Burisma investigation was over when he demanded Ukraine prosecutor’s firing.
December 2017 – Crowdstrike issues report claiming Russia hacked Ukraine artillery app, and uses the findings to buttress its findings that Russia hacked the DNC servers. The International Institute for Strategic Studies disputes Crowdstrike’s Ukraine hack claim, however, and Crowdstrike subsequently revises and retracts part of its report according to the Voice of America.
January 2018 – Biden describes, at a Council on Foreign Relations event, his threat to withhold $1 billion in aid to Ukraine unless prosecutor Shokin is fired
May 24, 2018 – Intelligence Community Inspector General alters Disclosure of Urgent Complaint “whistleblower” policy (but not the form) to allow second-hand information. ICIG Press Release [The form stated “The [Intelligence Community Inspector General] cannot transmit information via the ICPWA based on an employee’s second-hand knowledge of wrongdoing,” under the bolded heading “FIRST-HAND INFORMATION REQUIRED.” The Federalist]
Summer 2018 – Ukraine begins trying to alert DOJ to possible ethics violations and pro-Clinton election meddling by Democrats in Ukraine. [The Hill]
Deep state players in the Obama administration wove an elaborate tapestry of collusion, subterfuge, and electoral chicanery. While better suited for a Robert Ludlum novel, it played out in real time over the past four years.
Stars of the drama include familiar names such as James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, and Andrew McCabe. Supporting actors played an unwitting role, namely Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. The victim was then candidate Donald Trump. Heroes of the saga include Attorney General William Barr, U.S. Attorney John Durham, and a mysterious group simply called Q.
The plot was simple. The Obama administration, in 2016 and before, wanted to preordain the 2016 electoral outcome. What better way to do this than to spy on the rival presidential campaign? Since spying is illegal, a pretense was needed.
That’s where the Steele Dossier came in. The DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and top Obama administration officials colluded with multiple foreign governments to fabricate opposition research on the Trump campaign alleging treasonous activities. This allowed the FBI to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign advisor Carter Page, and likely others as well.
The Obama administration colluded with foreign governments to influence an election. How ironic that this is exactly what President Trump was impeached for, and why he is a “dictator” and an “existential threat to democracy”. Can you say projection?
The FISA court granted a Title 1 FISA warrant against Page, reserved for those accused of being “an agent of a foreign power,” one who is “knowingly engaging in clandestine intelligence activities.” Yet Page was never arrested or indicted for his activities. The reality is that he was a CIA asset “engaged in clandestine intelligence activities” not for Russia, but for America, and this minor bit of information was deliberately omitted from his FISA warrant application and three renewals.
The Barr DOJ has been pulling hard enough on this thread that after four years of FBI deceit and abuse of power, the Trump Russia collusion tapestry is unraveling before our very eyes. Like a game of Jenga, where blocks are slowly pulled out without collapsing the entire structure, the latest DOJ revelation is the “keystone” which held the entire charade together.
As the Daily Wire reported last week, “DOJ Rules Comey’s FBI Had ‘Insufficient Predication To Establish Probable Cause’ In FISA Scandal.”
The Department of Justice says that the FBI under disgraced former Director James Comey should have discontinued its secret surveillance on a member of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election because it had “insufficient predication to establish probable cause.”
This is a big deal. The Justice Department is conceding that two of the four FISA applications it used to conduct surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were not lawful, and it’s not defending the legality of its other two applications.
What if the other two of four applications were equally bogus? As the FISA warrant applications were based on the fabricated Steele Dossier, and as the Inspector General discovered 17 specific “inaccuracies and omissions” in the warrant applications, it’s highly probable that the entire effort to spy on Carter Page, and through the “two-hop rule”, everyone in President Trump’s orbit, was a gross and deliberate abuse of power.
Aside from the illegality of deceiving the FISA court, and the seditious efforts to remove a duly elected American president, it blows up all downstream Democrat, media, and deep state efforts to overturn the 2016 election.
There is a legal doctrine called the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” To summarize:
A doctrine that extends the exclusionary rule to make evidence inadmissible in court if it was derived from evidence that was illegally obtained. As the metaphor suggests, if the evidential “tree” is tainted, so is its “fruit.”
What fruit did this poisonous tree bear? Read through dossier and see some familiar names and convictions. As World Net Daily reported:
The convictions include former Trump 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, Richard Pineda, Dutch attorney Alex van der Zwaan, former Trump campaign deputy chairman Rick Gates, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.
They all face legal jeopardy or prison due to the Weissman and Mueller cabal, all fruit of the poisonous tree.
No dossier, no special counsel, no Muller, no witchhunt, and no years of fallout and indictments. Time and money wasted. The accused losing their savings, reputations, and freedom over poisonous accusations. A presidency carrying an albatross of suspected treason.
The entire tree from which Democrats, the media, and NeverTrumpers having been harvesting fruit turns out to be a poisonous tree. The fruit is poisonous and those who ate the fruit are now ill. Is it any wonder President Trump, in interviews and at rallies, repeats the phrase, “These people are sick”? Are they sick as in deranged or sick from eating from the poisonous tree?
Lastly is the issue of intent. As the tapestry unravels, expect to see the guilty plead ignorance, that they were duped, and point their fingers at their coconspirators. What is more likely is that they had full knowledge of what they were doing.
This includes Congressional Democrats and the media, all knowingly perpetuating a falsehood, conspiring to undermine and overthrow a duly elected president.
A few months ago, the enigmatic Q brought up the term “knowingly”. Did those involved “know” their tree was poisonous, yielding poisonous fruit? As the tapestry unravels, this may be the next big reveal.
What does “18 U.S. Code § 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government” say about “knowingly”?
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises… of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States.
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government.
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence.
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
This is gross and deliberate abuse of power, a coup to undermine and remove a duly elected president. All done with intent, knowingly. The fallout is far and wide and all as bogus as the predication of this entire hoax.
Yet the media and their Democrat allies are upset over Trump doing his job investigating corruption, and exercising his prerogative to remove ambassadors, just as Obama did before he even assumed office.
This is what Barr and Durham are investigating, pulling on the thread, unraveling the elaborately constructed tapestry, revealing a group of hateful partisans engaged in a seditious conspiracy to overturn a legitimate government. Hopefully their reckoning awaits. Along with well-deserved pain.
Brian C. Joondeph, MD, is a Denver-based physician and freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in American Thinker, Daily Caller, and other publications. Follow him on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and QuodVerum
Deep state players in the Obama administration wove an elaborate tapestry of collusion, subterfuge, and electoral chicanery. While better suited for a Robert Ludlum novel, it played out in real time over the past four years.
Stars of the drama include familiar names such as James Comey, James Clapper, John Brennan, and Andrew McCabe. Supporting actors played an unwitting role, namely Carter Page and George Papadopoulos. The victim was then candidate Donald Trump. Heroes of the saga include Attorney General William Barr, U.S. Attorney John Durham, and a mysterious group simply called Q.
The plot was simple. The Obama administration, in 2016 and before, wanted to preordain the 2016 electoral outcome. What better way to do this than to spy on the rival presidential campaign? Since spying is illegal, a pretense was needed.
That’s where the Steele Dossier came in. The DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and top Obama administration officials colluded with multiple foreign governments to fabricate opposition research on the Trump campaign alleging treasonous activities. This allowed the FBI to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on Trump campaign advisor Carter Page, and likely others as well.
The Obama administration colluded with foreign governments to influence an election. How ironic that this is exactly what President Trump was impeached for, and why he is a “dictator” and an “existential threat to democracy”. Can you say projection?
The FISA court granted a Title 1 FISA warrant against Page, reserved for those accused of being “an agent of a foreign power,” one who is “knowingly engaging in clandestine intelligence activities.” Yet Page was never arrested or indicted for his activities. The reality is that he was a CIA asset “engaged in clandestine intelligence activities” not for Russia, but for America, and this minor bit of information was deliberately omitted from his FISA warrant application and three renewals.
The Barr DOJ has been pulling hard enough on this thread that after four years of FBI deceit and abuse of power, the Trump Russia collusion tapestry is unraveling before our very eyes. Like a game of Jenga, where blocks are slowly pulled out without collapsing the entire structure, the latest DOJ revelation is the “keystone” which held the entire charade together.
As the Daily Wire reported last week, “DOJ Rules Comey’s FBI Had ‘Insufficient Predication To Establish Probable Cause’ In FISA Scandal.”
The Department of Justice says that the FBI under disgraced former Director James Comey should have discontinued its secret surveillance on a member of the Trump campaign during the 2016 election because it had “insufficient predication to establish probable cause.”
This is a big deal. The Justice Department is conceding that two of the four FISA applications it used to conduct surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page were not lawful, and it’s not defending the legality of its other two applications.
What if the other two of four applications were equally bogus? As the FISA warrant applications were based on the fabricated Steele Dossier, and as the Inspector General discovered 17 specific “inaccuracies and omissions” in the warrant applications, it’s highly probable that the entire effort to spy on Carter Page, and through the “two-hop rule”, everyone in President Trump’s orbit, was a gross and deliberate abuse of power.
Aside from the illegality of deceiving the FISA court, and the seditious efforts to remove a duly elected American president, it blows up all downstream Democrat, media, and deep state efforts to overturn the 2016 election.
There is a legal doctrine called the “fruit of the poisonous tree.” To summarize:
A doctrine that extends the exclusionary rule to make evidence inadmissible in court if it was derived from evidence that was illegally obtained. As the metaphor suggests, if the evidential “tree” is tainted, so is its “fruit.”
What fruit did this poisonous tree bear? Read through dossier and see some familiar names and convictions. As World Net Daily reported:
The convictions include former Trump 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos, Richard Pineda, Dutch attorney Alex van der Zwaan, former Trump campaign deputy chairman Rick Gates, former national security adviser Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.
They all face legal jeopardy or prison due to the Weissman and Mueller cabal, all fruit of the poisonous tree.
No dossier, no special counsel, no Muller, no witchhunt, and no years of fallout and indictments. Time and money wasted. The accused losing their savings, reputations, and freedom over poisonous accusations. A presidency carrying an albatross of suspected treason.
The entire tree from which Democrats, the media, and NeverTrumpers having been harvesting fruit turns out to be a poisonous tree. The fruit is poisonous and those who ate the fruit are now ill. Is it any wonder President Trump, in interviews and at rallies, repeats the phrase, “These people are sick”? Are they sick as in deranged or sick from eating from the poisonous tree?
Lastly is the issue of intent. As the tapestry unravels, expect to see the guilty plead ignorance, that they were duped, and point their fingers at their coconspirators. What is more likely is that they had full knowledge of what they were doing.
This includes Congressional Democrats and the media, all knowingly perpetuating a falsehood, conspiring to undermine and overthrow a duly elected president.
A few months ago, the enigmatic Q brought up the term “knowingly”. Did those involved “know” their tree was poisonous, yielding poisonous fruit? As the tapestry unravels, this may be the next big reveal.
What does “18 U.S. Code § 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government” say about “knowingly”?
Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises… of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States.
Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government.
Whoever organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence.
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction.
If two or more persons conspire to commit any offense named in this section, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
This is gross and deliberate abuse of power, a coup to undermine and remove a duly elected president. All done with intent, knowingly. The fallout is far and wide and all as bogus as the predication of this entire hoax.
Yet the media and their Democrat allies are upset over Trump doing his job investigating corruption, and exercising his prerogative to remove ambassadors, just as Obama did before he even assumed office.
This is what Barr and Durham are investigating, pulling on the thread, unraveling the elaborately constructed tapestry, revealing a group of hateful partisans engaged in a seditious conspiracy to overturn a legitimate government. Hopefully their reckoning awaits. Along with well-deserved pain.
Brian C. Joondeph, MD, is a Denver-based physician and freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in American Thinker, Daily Caller, and other publications. Follow him on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and QuodVerum
Quoth the great William F. Buckley: “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
I’ll say this much about the staff at The Denver Post: At least they were able to countenance John Caldara’s views until he started talking about gender.
Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, was a libertarian voice at a newspaper that doesn’t usually lean that way.
He’s no longer there — a decision that was made, according to him, because he thinks there are only two sexes.
In a column posted to Facebook on Saturday, Caldara, who’s been writing for The Post since 2016, said editorial editor Megan Schrader “found my writing too insensitive.”
“And yes, it is,” Caldara said. “My column is not a soft voiced, sticky sweet NPR-styled piece which employs the language now mandated by the victim-centric, identity politics driven media.”
Caldara has been a champion of LGBT rights, he said, but he objects to using gender pronouns different from a person’s biological sex.
“What seemed to be the last straw for my column was my insistence that there are only two sexes and my frustration that to be inclusive of the transgendered (even that word isn’t allowed) we must lose our right to free speech,” he wrote.
Do you think there are only two genders?
0% (0 Votes)
0% (0 Votes)
“To be clear I am strongly pro-gay marriage, which has frustrated many of my socially conservative friends. I have friends, family and employees from the LGBT community. I don’t care who uses whose bathroom, what you wear, or how you identify. People from this community have rights which we must protect.
“But to force us to use inaccurate pronouns, to force us to teach our kids that there are more than two sexes, to call what is plainly a man in a dress, well, not a man in a dress violates our right of speech.”
Caldara had written two recent stories in which he criticized what he deemed free speech restrictions on transgender individuals.
On Jan. 3, he said that The Associated Press’ style guide, which is used by a multitude of publications, has become a “propaganda guide” on the issue because of a recent dictate regarding language that can be used to refer to transgender individuals.
“The AP has updated its style to say that gender is no longer binary and thus declared a winner in this divisive debate. They ruled that, ‘Not all people fall under one of two categories for sex and gender,’” Caldara wrote.
“There are only two sexes, identified by an XX or XY chromosome. That is the very definition of binary. The AP ruling it isn’t so doesn’t change science. It’s a premeditative attempt to change culture and policy. It’s activism.”
Two weeks later, Caldara used his column to discuss a 2019 Colorado law requiring elementary school students to be instructed in “comprehensive human sexuality,” instruction that also touches on transgender issues.
“Some parents weren’t thrilled a couple of years back when during school their little ones in Boulder Valley School District were treated to videos staring a transgender teddy bear teaching the kids how to misuse pronouns or when Colorado’s ‘Trans Community Choir’ sang to kids about a transgender raven,” Caldara wrote.
“What are the protections for a parent who feels transgender singing groups and teddy bears with gender dysphoria might be ‘stigmatizing’ for their kid? How can a parent decide if she wants her kid in that class if the material isn’t transparent and easily accessible?”
The latter column was linked by Caldara in his Facebook post and identified as “the column that got me fired from the Denver Post.”
Caldara’s editor, the aforementioned Schrader, didn’t shine any light on whether it was Caldara’s language on transgender individuals that got him fired, only that he was, in fact, terminated.
“I am writing a job description as we speak to fill his position,” she said in an email to The Washington Free Beacon.
“I hope that conservative Colorado writers will apply knowing that we value conservative voices on our pages and don’t have a litmus test for their opinions,” Schrader said.
Except she declined to say whether she fired him over a litmus test on his opinion on transgender individuals and the language used to refer to them.
There could be a different explanation for Caldara’s firing. If there is, it seems unusual she wouldn’t at least say there was more to this than the fact that Caldara believes (rightly) that gender and the English language are both less fluid than The Denver Post or the AP think.
I wonder what exactly the editors of The Post are looking for in a conservative columnist. No doubt, they want one of the Good Ones™, the kind of Republican who admits of all the tenets of modern liberaldom but protests slightly against some of them.
They may be against a carbon tax but think cap-and-trade is a good idea. They believe in strict constitutionalist judges — along the lines of John Roberts, say. Antonin Scalia was a bit far for them. And more than anything, they talk about bringing civility back to politics — which almost always means giving the pained Bill Kristol smile whenever they’re savaged and then politely trying to explain in the nicest possible terms why they don’t quite see it that way. That civility means they might grumble a bit about the AP’s new rules or Colorado’s “comprehensive human sexuality” education for elementary school students, but they’ll mostly go along with it and hope the issue goes away.
That’s the kind of conservative the media tolerates.
Conservatives, on the other hand, are less likely to countenance them.
In one of his final columns for The Post, Caldara spelled out why.
“It is fascinating how the built-up frustration to the main-stream media carried Trump to victory,” he wrote. “It’s more fascinating that the media has shown absolutely no introspection into their role in the phenomenon. They really think most Americans see them as they see themselves — brave warriors of truth, not torchbearers for progressive ideology.
“One only has to listen to NPR reporters and their pee-your-pants excitement at covering Trump’s impeachment to conclude they still have no idea so much of America considers them the enemy.”
The Denver Post can’t erase biological reality and look askance at anyone who points to it as a regressive relic.
If it’s true that Caldara was fired for saying there are only two sexes, it’s yet another proof of William F. Buckley’s timeless axiom.
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Howie Carr suggests Democrats compile a Greatest Hits of their fantasies for getting rid of President Trump, among which we might find:
Jill Stein’s recount (before Hillary was accused of being a Russian asset), faithless electors, emoluments clause, the 25th Amendment, Hillary’s fake dossier, the Russian hoax, firing crooked James Comey, senile Bob Mueller and his 19 angry Democrats, Michael Cohen, Michael Avenatti (pre-indictments), Stormy Daniels, Brett Kavanaugh frame-up, tax returns, loans guaranteed by Russian oligarchs[.] …
And now, the Ukraine hoax.
What are [Trump’s] high crimes and misdemeanors? Record high numbers of Americans working, the stock market at record highs. Favorable trade deals, ISIS destroyed, millions off welfare and food stamps.
They used to love Donald Trump, back when they could attribute his success to Daddy plus corruption. They’re accustomed to guys getting to be high rollers for those reasons. But on his way to the presidency they realized, to their horror, that Trump’s basically a smart, honest man who figured out how to navigate a corrupt system. Liberal politicians are suspicious of anyone who isn’t vulnerable to being bought off, blackmailed, or intimidated, and Trump was invulnerable to all three.
A number of factors came together in Trump to build his fortune: ability, intelligence, work ethic, guts, confidence, education. As a younger man, he was also quite handsome, which, whether we like it or not, does help. His dad’s name helped him get started, and field experience with his dad from early ages familiarized him with the nuts and bolts of his future career.
Beyond these were what he did with them. There were three keys: first was to do good work. He made billions because he delivered excellent, beautiful buildings on budget and on time. Nobody else could match him. He subcontracted based on excellence rather than politics. Second, he avoided public ownership of his organization so that he never had to deal with boards of directors but could make all decisions himself. That gave him the huge advantage of speedy decision-making that publicly owned outfits couldn’t match. Third, he supervised all work personally and often. Workers knew him by first name, and he knew their first names. Camaraderie developed. His work sites were enjoyable places to visit because of the high morale that resulted.
This just isn’t the way liberals do things, partly because they’re too lazy to work so hard but also, one suspects, because their confidence fails at key junctures. Seeking safety in numbers, they play the politics and network themselves into positions where they can command abler people. This is straight out of Atlas Shrugged, but where Ayn Rand attributed it to moral failure, I think it’s more often due to lack of confidence or courage — psychology as much as morality.
This also underlies the visceral hatred the Left has for the president. Leftists envy his confidence, which spills over into everything else they hate about him: a gorgeous wife; successful, good-looking kids; no self-doubt; no fear of confrontation; the guts to change course on a dime when something isn’t working as it should. Donald Trump deals in bottom lines. If you aren’t adult enough to handle cutting to the point and calling things by their right names, you won’t last long under him, and you certainly won’t like being around him.
And there’s the real rub: liberals in high places know that Donald Trump is superior to them by any measure that matters in the real world. So they veer off into the surreal, where they can literally make things up to slow or stop him. Slightly dimming his star might make their pathetic LED light look a little brighter — not make it brighter, but make it look brighter. With their narcissism, they see everything in black-and-white, zero-sum, win-lose terms, such that if he’s better, they are necessarily lesser.
AT observers have noted before that Washington has become like high school with its gossip and backstabbing. It’s always been that way, but with noticeably more heat and venom since the advent of Donald Trump. His very excellence excites hatred among the second-rate. And nothing describes the Democrat impeachment squad better than “second-rate.”
Howie Carr suggests Democrats compile a Greatest Hits of their fantasies for getting rid of President Trump, among which we might find:
Jill Stein’s recount (before Hillary was accused of being a Russian asset), faithless electors, emoluments clause, the 25th Amendment, Hillary’s fake dossier, the Russian hoax, firing crooked James Comey, senile Bob Mueller and his 19 angry Democrats, Michael Cohen, Michael Avenatti (pre-indictments), Stormy Daniels, Brett Kavanaugh frame-up, tax returns, loans guaranteed by Russian oligarchs[.] …
And now, the Ukraine hoax.
What are [Trump’s] high crimes and misdemeanors? Record high numbers of Americans working, the stock market at record highs. Favorable trade deals, ISIS destroyed, millions off welfare and food stamps.
They used to love Donald Trump, back when they could attribute his success to Daddy plus corruption. They’re accustomed to guys getting to be high rollers for those reasons. But on his way to the presidency they realized, to their horror, that Trump’s basically a smart, honest man who figured out how to navigate a corrupt system. Liberal politicians are suspicious of anyone who isn’t vulnerable to being bought off, blackmailed, or intimidated, and Trump was invulnerable to all three.
A number of factors came together in Trump to build his fortune: ability, intelligence, work ethic, guts, confidence, education. As a younger man, he was also quite handsome, which, whether we like it or not, does help. His dad’s name helped him get started, and field experience with his dad from early ages familiarized him with the nuts and bolts of his future career.
Beyond these were what he did with them. There were three keys: first was to do good work. He made billions because he delivered excellent, beautiful buildings on budget and on time. Nobody else could match him. He subcontracted based on excellence rather than politics. Second, he avoided public ownership of his organization so that he never had to deal with boards of directors but could make all decisions himself. That gave him the huge advantage of speedy decision-making that publicly owned outfits couldn’t match. Third, he supervised all work personally and often. Workers knew him by first name, and he knew their first names. Camaraderie developed. His work sites were enjoyable places to visit because of the high morale that resulted.
This just isn’t the way liberals do things, partly because they’re too lazy to work so hard but also, one suspects, because their confidence fails at key junctures. Seeking safety in numbers, they play the politics and network themselves into positions where they can command abler people. This is straight out of Atlas Shrugged, but where Ayn Rand attributed it to moral failure, I think it’s more often due to lack of confidence or courage — psychology as much as morality.
This also underlies the visceral hatred the Left has for the president. Leftists envy his confidence, which spills over into everything else they hate about him: a gorgeous wife; successful, good-looking kids; no self-doubt; no fear of confrontation; the guts to change course on a dime when something isn’t working as it should. Donald Trump deals in bottom lines. If you aren’t adult enough to handle cutting to the point and calling things by their right names, you won’t last long under him, and you certainly won’t like being around him.
And there’s the real rub: liberals in high places know that Donald Trump is superior to them by any measure that matters in the real world. So they veer off into the surreal, where they can literally make things up to slow or stop him. Slightly dimming his star might make their pathetic LED light look a little brighter — not make it brighter, but make it look brighter. With their narcissism, they see everything in black-and-white, zero-sum, win-lose terms, such that if he’s better, they are necessarily lesser.
AT observers have noted before that Washington has become like high school with its gossip and backstabbing. It’s always been that way, but with noticeably more heat and venom since the advent of Donald Trump. His very excellence excites hatred among the second-rate. And nothing describes the Democrat impeachment squad better than “second-rate.”
Maxine Waters (D) vowed last Sunday that Democrats “will not stop” their attempt to impeach Trump even if they fail this time. Her latest vexation is characteristic of the Dem’s unceasing insanity. For anyone having any remaining doubt that the once respected Democratic Party of JFK is dead, I recommend David Limbaugh’s latest book, Guilty by Reason of Insanity. In it he explains “why the Democrats must not win” with 380 pages of meticulously researched evidence backed up by 80 pages of end notes. (Included is at least one credit to American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson and another for Brian C. Joondeph, a regular AT contributor.)
It took a while to finish the book because it is too mentally fatiguing to ingest so much disturbing information except when taken in small bites spread far apart. Below are three excerpts that provide some of his insights into what the party has become.
The Democratic Party is a vehicle of leftist extremism that poses an existential threat to America as founded — because it is at war with our first principles and traditions. It is anti-capitalist and rejects equality of opportunity in favor of a hierarchy of privileges of identity groups ranked according to their alleged level of historical oppression. It’s a brazenly anti-life party that promotes gender anarchy, militant feminism, and hostility toward traditional male roles and masculinity itself. It prosecutes a vicious culture war punctuated by an ongoing assault on Christians’ religious liberty (p. 2).
Leftist activism today, from identity politics to abortion, is me-centered. The left’s myriad victims are trained to think only of themselves and never about the greater good. It is the politics of graceless, narcissistic self-directedness. For all its boasts about compassion, the left has long since abandoned any pretense of it and replaced it with envy, bitterness, and hate (p. 60).
The left has become a closed-minded mega-cult that arbitrarily declares issues beyond debate and opponents unworthy of respect or civil treatment. Those who don’t agree are not just wrong, but evil (p. 233).
Mr. Limbaugh provides copious evidence the Dems operate like a cult, yet he does not include a definition of a cult’s most common characteristics. Stella Morabito, a senior writer for The Federalist, separately makes up for that minor oversight in “4 Reasons The Left’s Methods Are Far More Cult-Like Than Trump’s.” Using her list while reading Limbaugh’s book makes it easier for us less intellectual readers to connect the dots.
1. Cults Are Defined By Their Methods, Not Their Beliefs. Cults use coercive and deceptive methods. They psychologically manipulate people and isolate people from other points of view. Consider also the left’s large-scale imposition of political correctness throughout all of society’s institutions, particularly in the media, which they control. It is a cult-like practice because it is designed specifically to isolate people from other points of view through social pressures of ostracism and worse.
2. A Cult Leader Does Not Allow Any Criticism. Leftist leaders are also far more intolerant of criticism, and far more punitive to their critics. If you speak your mind about any of their sacred cows, you are liable to be socially punished by mobs and even lose your job.
3. A Cult Leader Aims the Control the Lives of His Followers and Keep Them Utterly Dependent. … [T]he agenda of dependency [has been] promoted for generations by leftist elites who run the media. We see the results of those policies in broken families, widespread welfare dependency, and the cultivation of ignorance in both K12 and higher education.
4. Cults Are Interested In One Thing Only: Amassing Power and Recruits. They [Dems] hope to secure a “permanent majority” (their words) by gaining recruits (voters) through dependency programs, open borders, and the continuing cultivation of ignorance in education. These practices reflect an unquenchable appetite for power that exactly parallels the operations of cults.
Obviously, there is much more in Limbaugh’s book than could possibly be summarized here, but reading it should open many eyes to truths that have been so successfully silenced in our postmodern era.
Maxine Waters (D) vowed last Sunday that Democrats “will not stop” their attempt to impeach Trump even if they fail this time. Her latest vexation is characteristic of the Dem’s unceasing insanity. For anyone having any remaining doubt that the once respected Democratic Party of JFK is dead, I recommend David Limbaugh’s latest book, Guilty by Reason of Insanity. In it he explains “why the Democrats must not win” with 380 pages of meticulously researched evidence backed up by 80 pages of end notes. (Included is at least one credit to American Thinker’s Thomas Lifson and another for Brian C. Joondeph, a regular AT contributor.)
It took a while to finish the book because it is too mentally fatiguing to ingest so much disturbing information except when taken in small bites spread far apart. Below are three excerpts that provide some of his insights into what the party has become.
The Democratic Party is a vehicle of leftist extremism that poses an existential threat to America as founded — because it is at war with our first principles and traditions. It is anti-capitalist and rejects equality of opportunity in favor of a hierarchy of privileges of identity groups ranked according to their alleged level of historical oppression. It’s a brazenly anti-life party that promotes gender anarchy, militant feminism, and hostility toward traditional male roles and masculinity itself. It prosecutes a vicious culture war punctuated by an ongoing assault on Christians’ religious liberty (p. 2).
Leftist activism today, from identity politics to abortion, is me-centered. The left’s myriad victims are trained to think only of themselves and never about the greater good. It is the politics of graceless, narcissistic self-directedness. For all its boasts about compassion, the left has long since abandoned any pretense of it and replaced it with envy, bitterness, and hate (p. 60).
The left has become a closed-minded mega-cult that arbitrarily declares issues beyond debate and opponents unworthy of respect or civil treatment. Those who don’t agree are not just wrong, but evil (p. 233).
Mr. Limbaugh provides copious evidence the Dems operate like a cult, yet he does not include a definition of a cult’s most common characteristics. Stella Morabito, a senior writer for The Federalist, separately makes up for that minor oversight in “4 Reasons The Left’s Methods Are Far More Cult-Like Than Trump’s.” Using her list while reading Limbaugh’s book makes it easier for us less intellectual readers to connect the dots.
1. Cults Are Defined By Their Methods, Not Their Beliefs. Cults use coercive and deceptive methods. They psychologically manipulate people and isolate people from other points of view. Consider also the left’s large-scale imposition of political correctness throughout all of society’s institutions, particularly in the media, which they control. It is a cult-like practice because it is designed specifically to isolate people from other points of view through social pressures of ostracism and worse.
2. A Cult Leader Does Not Allow Any Criticism. Leftist leaders are also far more intolerant of criticism, and far more punitive to their critics. If you speak your mind about any of their sacred cows, you are liable to be socially punished by mobs and even lose your job.
3. A Cult Leader Aims the Control the Lives of His Followers and Keep Them Utterly Dependent. … [T]he agenda of dependency [has been] promoted for generations by leftist elites who run the media. We see the results of those policies in broken families, widespread welfare dependency, and the cultivation of ignorance in both K12 and higher education.
4. Cults Are Interested In One Thing Only: Amassing Power and Recruits. They [Dems] hope to secure a “permanent majority” (their words) by gaining recruits (voters) through dependency programs, open borders, and the continuing cultivation of ignorance in education. These practices reflect an unquenchable appetite for power that exactly parallels the operations of cults.
Obviously, there is much more in Limbaugh’s book than could possibly be summarized here, but reading it should open many eyes to truths that have been so successfully silenced in our postmodern era.
One of the constants in 2020 is that we’re deluged by videos. Actual news videos, worrisome deep fake videos, political ads, product ads, and artistic videos. All of them, in one way or another, shape how we view our world and, often, how we view ourselves.
Because videos have such a profound effect on the way in which we perceive things, it’s noteworthy that two videos dropped today, both of which are getting positive buzz and both which make statements about what America is or what it could be.
On the serious side, the GOP released a video entitled “For Democrats, It’s All About Power.” The video is a compilation of all those moments when Democrats said something that made conservatives think, “Oh, my! The commercials practically write themselves.” The ad intercuts power-hungry Democrat statements with Trump’s warning to voters about the freedoms the American left wants to take from the American people.
Audio of news reports talking about ANTIFA violence.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez saying the world will end in 12 years.
Beto O’Rourke saying that Democrats are going to confiscate American’s guns.
Elizabeth Warren saying she wants to eliminate cars and electricity.
Bernie Sanders saying that “you cannot go too far” on pushing radical climate agendas.
Joe Biden saying he wants to shut down coal-burning plants
Bernie Sanders saying it’s a good thing when people line up in bread lines
Beto O’Rourke saying he will have law enforcement go to people’s homes to confiscate guns.
Joe Biden agreeing that “a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns.”
Ted Lieu saying “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech, but the First Amendment prevents me from doing so.”
Beto O’Rourke agreeing with the statement, “religious institutions should lose tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage.”
The ad also takes on the Kavanaugh hearing, the push to destroy the Electoral College (without a constitutional amendment, of course), third-trimester abortion, the Democrats’ driving need to strip Americans of their hard-earned money through higher taxes, and Rep. Al Green’s famous warning that, if the Democrats failed to impeach Trump, he would win in 2020.
At periodic intervals, we hear Trump saying, “They would strip Americans of their constitutional rights . . . use the power of the law to punish their opponents . . . they would shut down your free speech . . . the governor of Virginia, he stated he would execute a baby after birth . . . our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage. They want to destroy you. They only care about their own political power.”
The tag line is Lindsay Graham, speaking at the Kavanaugh hearings: “Boy, y’all want power. God, I hope you never get it.” It is a powerful ad and one that deserves to be shared.
On the lighter side, there’s a great new ad from Budweiser, which used to be an American company (started in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1876). Although it’s now just a subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch InBev, which is headquartered in Belgium, it clearly found itself a wonderful pro-American ad agency. We see that in Budweiser’s newest Super Bowl ad, which it released Friday on Twitter. It’s clearly aimed at an audience disgusted by ads demeaning men or smugly denigrating Americans. It’s always refreshing to see an ad capture who Americans really are. (Hint: They’re not the evil, hate-filled people that Democrats paint them as being.) Watch and enjoy:
America, look beyond the labels. You might be surprised by what you find.
One of the constants in 2020 is that we’re deluged by videos. Actual news videos, worrisome deep fake videos, political ads, product ads, and artistic videos. All of them, in one way or another, shape how we view our world and, often, how we view ourselves.
Because videos have such a profound effect on the way in which we perceive things, it’s noteworthy that two videos dropped today, both of which are getting positive buzz and both which make statements about what America is or what it could be.
On the serious side, the GOP released a video entitled “For Democrats, It’s All About Power.” The video is a compilation of all those moments when Democrats said something that made conservatives think, “Oh, my! The commercials practically write themselves.” The ad intercuts power-hungry Democrat statements with Trump’s warning to voters about the freedoms the American left wants to take from the American people.
Audio of news reports talking about ANTIFA violence.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez saying the world will end in 12 years.
Beto O’Rourke saying that Democrats are going to confiscate American’s guns.
Elizabeth Warren saying she wants to eliminate cars and electricity.
Bernie Sanders saying that “you cannot go too far” on pushing radical climate agendas.
Joe Biden saying he wants to shut down coal-burning plants
Bernie Sanders saying it’s a good thing when people line up in bread lines
Beto O’Rourke saying he will have law enforcement go to people’s homes to confiscate guns.
Joe Biden agreeing that “a Biden administration means they’re going to come for my guns.”
Ted Lieu saying “I would love to be able to regulate the content of speech, but the First Amendment prevents me from doing so.”
Beto O’Rourke agreeing with the statement, “religious institutions should lose tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage.”
The ad also takes on the Kavanaugh hearing, the push to destroy the Electoral College (without a constitutional amendment, of course), third-trimester abortion, the Democrats’ driving need to strip Americans of their hard-earned money through higher taxes, and Rep. Al Green’s famous warning that, if the Democrats failed to impeach Trump, he would win in 2020.
At periodic intervals, we hear Trump saying, “They would strip Americans of their constitutional rights . . . use the power of the law to punish their opponents . . . they would shut down your free speech . . . the governor of Virginia, he stated he would execute a baby after birth . . . our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage. They want to destroy you. They only care about their own political power.”
The tag line is Lindsay Graham, speaking at the Kavanaugh hearings: “Boy, y’all want power. God, I hope you never get it.” It is a powerful ad and one that deserves to be shared.
On the lighter side, there’s a great new ad from Budweiser, which used to be an American company (started in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1876). Although it’s now just a subsidiary of Anheuser-Busch InBev, which is headquartered in Belgium, it clearly found itself a wonderful pro-American ad agency. We see that in Budweiser’s newest Super Bowl ad, which it released Friday on Twitter. It’s clearly aimed at an audience disgusted by ads demeaning men or smugly denigrating Americans. It’s always refreshing to see an ad capture who Americans really are. (Hint: They’re not the evil, hate-filled people that Democrats paint them as being.) Watch and enjoy:
America, look beyond the labels. You might be surprised by what you find.
Although the National Park Service has not issued its official crowd size estimate for this year’s March for Life in Washington, D.C., which took place Friday morning, the crowd easily numbered in the tens of thousands and may even have topped 100,000 people. After all, last year’s March for Life drew between 100,000 and 300,000 people, depending on who was estimating, and it didn’t have the big speaker this year’s March offered: President Donald J. Trump.
Speaking before the enthusiastic crowd, Trump hit all the right notes for those in the nation who are tired of the wholesale slaughter of babies. While the Clintons in the 1990s chanted the mantra “Safe, rare, and legal,” we’ve learned over the years that none of that is true.
We know that abortion is unsafe for women, whether they’re at Kermit Gosnell’s house of horrors or suffering, and even dying, from RU-486. For the babies, of course, abortion is always unsafe, to the point of death.
We know that abortion is anything but rare. Since the Supreme Court found an imaginary federal right to abortion in the Constitution, almost 61,700,000 babies have been aborted – and a disproportionate number of them (almost 18,506,000) have been black babies. Margaret Sanger, a eugenicist, would have been proud.
And we know that, while abortion is legal, it’s become completely untethered from morality. Currently, Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Vermont, and Washington, D.C. all allow third trimester abortion. Thanks to modern science, we can easily keep alive babies born early in the second trimester. Governor Ralph “Grab the Gun” Northam, a Virginia pediatrician, explicitly approved of post-birth abortions (although he currently limits it to “severe deformities” or a “non-viable” fetus):
[T]he infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.
The discussion, obviously, would be whether to un-resuscitate that infant. I attended school with a kid who had been born with “severe deformities.” That kid is a successful psychiatrist.
The lie of “safe, rare, and legal” is what is turning Americans against the abortion industry. While the pollsters like to say the majority of Americans are “pro-choice,” the reality is more nuanced – and the nuance goes against the Democrat party’s demand for unbounded abortion:
The latest annual, nationwide Marist/Knights of Columbus pollshows most Americans, 70 percent, desire significant restrictions on abortion, such as limiting it to the first trimester, permitting it only in cases of rape or incest or to save the mother’s life, or prohibiting abortion altogether. In fact, even 47 percent of people who identify as “pro-choice” want some form of these restrictions.
While Trump talked about his administration’s efforts to limit abortion in America — such as strict constructionist judges, a promise to veto pro-abortion policies, and a greater focus on religious liberty — it was the occasional moments of soaring rhetoric, as well as the strong attacks against the pro-choice Democrats, that caught the crowd:
When we see the image of a baby in the womb, we glimpse the majesty of God’s creation. When we hold a newborn in our arms, we know the endless love that each child brings to a family. When we watch a child grow, we see the splendor that radiates from each human soul. One life changes the world. From my family — and I can tell you, I send love and I send great, great love.
[snip]
Unborn children have never had a stronger defender in the White House. And as the Bible tells us, each person is “wonderfully made.”
[snip]
Together, we are the voice for the voiceless. When it comes to abortion, Democrats is a — and you know this, you’ve seen what’s happened — Democrats have embraced the most radical and extreme positions taken and seen in this country for years, and decades — and you can even say “for centuries.”
Nearly every top Democrat in Congress now supports taxpayer-funded abortion, all the way up until the moment of birth.
Last year, lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb right up until delivery.
No matter Trump’s views before, when he was a Democrat, his language and his policies show that this is a man who truly supports every American’s Right to Life, whether born or unborn.
Although the National Park Service has not issued its official crowd size estimate for this year’s March for Life in Washington, D.C., which took place Friday morning, the crowd easily numbered in the tens of thousands and may even have topped 100,000 people. After all, last year’s March for Life drew between 100,000 and 300,000 people, depending on who was estimating, and it didn’t have the big speaker this year’s March offered: President Donald J. Trump.
Speaking before the enthusiastic crowd, Trump hit all the right notes for those in the nation who are tired of the wholesale slaughter of babies. While the Clintons in the 1990s chanted the mantra “Safe, rare, and legal,” we’ve learned over the years that none of that is true.
We know that abortion is unsafe for women, whether they’re at Kermit Gosnell’s house of horrors or suffering, and even dying, from RU-486. For the babies, of course, abortion is always unsafe, to the point of death.
We know that abortion is anything but rare. Since the Supreme Court found an imaginary federal right to abortion in the Constitution, almost 61,700,000 babies have been aborted – and a disproportionate number of them (almost 18,506,000) have been black babies. Margaret Sanger, a eugenicist, would have been proud.
And we know that, while abortion is legal, it’s become completely untethered from morality. Currently, Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Vermont, and Washington, D.C. all allow third trimester abortion. Thanks to modern science, we can easily keep alive babies born early in the second trimester. Governor Ralph “Grab the Gun” Northam, a Virginia pediatrician, explicitly approved of post-birth abortions (although he currently limits it to “severe deformities” or a “non-viable” fetus):
[T]he infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if this is what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physician and the mother.
The discussion, obviously, would be whether to un-resuscitate that infant. I attended school with a kid who had been born with “severe deformities.” That kid is a successful psychiatrist.
The lie of “safe, rare, and legal” is what is turning Americans against the abortion industry. While the pollsters like to say the majority of Americans are “pro-choice,” the reality is more nuanced – and the nuance goes against the Democrat party’s demand for unbounded abortion:
The latest annual, nationwide Marist/Knights of Columbus pollshows most Americans, 70 percent, desire significant restrictions on abortion, such as limiting it to the first trimester, permitting it only in cases of rape or incest or to save the mother’s life, or prohibiting abortion altogether. In fact, even 47 percent of people who identify as “pro-choice” want some form of these restrictions.
While Trump talked about his administration’s efforts to limit abortion in America — such as strict constructionist judges, a promise to veto pro-abortion policies, and a greater focus on religious liberty — it was the occasional moments of soaring rhetoric, as well as the strong attacks against the pro-choice Democrats, that caught the crowd:
When we see the image of a baby in the womb, we glimpse the majesty of God’s creation. When we hold a newborn in our arms, we know the endless love that each child brings to a family. When we watch a child grow, we see the splendor that radiates from each human soul. One life changes the world. From my family — and I can tell you, I send love and I send great, great love.
[snip]
Unborn children have never had a stronger defender in the White House. And as the Bible tells us, each person is “wonderfully made.”
[snip]
Together, we are the voice for the voiceless. When it comes to abortion, Democrats is a — and you know this, you’ve seen what’s happened — Democrats have embraced the most radical and extreme positions taken and seen in this country for years, and decades — and you can even say “for centuries.”
Nearly every top Democrat in Congress now supports taxpayer-funded abortion, all the way up until the moment of birth.
Last year, lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb right up until delivery.
No matter Trump’s views before, when he was a Democrat, his language and his policies show that this is a man who truly supports every American’s Right to Life, whether born or unborn.
Picture a neighborhood composed of low and middle income families, each with two parents, no homeless people, no street drugs, safe to walk the streets at night. Is this the figment of an overactive imagination? Well, it is in fact a peek at a neighborhood in New York City where the son of immigrant parents read The New York Times every morning in high school, before orchestra rehearsal. Me. The principal, strongly authoritarian and well loved, opened a weekly assembly of highly diverse youngsters by reading a psalm from the Bible. Tough-as-nails, yet tenderhearted teachers passed on a tradition of excellence in thought, expression, and civility while preparing us for a wide range of careers in a free and independent America.
This typical school of 1940s New York City had higher standards and grade profile than any counterpart today and operated on a budget far smaller in equivalent dollars than any current public school budget. In these “backward” times, the schools were free of substance abuse problems, sexual promiscuity, and identity problems. There was an abiding respect for the authority of teachers and parentsand for the dignity of every person regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity. There were clubs in my school for religion, for foreign languages (including Latin). A Reporters’ Club recorded significant events for the school paper. There were toy drives for a local hospital . . . The list of extracurricular engagements was long.
I think it’s revealing that dictionaries in these “retrograde” times did not prefix definitions of words referring to high moral standards, such as virtue, with the phrase “regarded as.” It did not have to be stated that opinion or “point of view” is not a valid basis for morality.
Where were we coming from? Where was I coming from? Well it was not from vengeance against America’s “sins,” real and imagined – the basis for any ideology that dismisses the human flaws in every person, including saints and heroes. The journey I took – we took – was down-to-earth and mindful of the power that gave us life, known worldwide as God by people of every degree of intelligence.
A childhood flashback and reflection will perhaps help bring some focus to a past that still speaks to the present. This was before World War II . . .
At a street in Brooklyn that was closed to traffic for several blocks, archways with curlicue designs were raised on wooden posts . Bunting and lights trimmed a parade route for a feast. At twilight the ornate arches burst into sparkling color, as the lights entwining them went on. The smell of roasted nuts, sweets, and sundry aromas of Italian cuisine floated through the air in eddies, as curb-side vendors turned the street and sidewalks into a mile-long buffet of deli-grade food. People thronged and milled along the chain of carts and tables, ate, drank, and gabbed in block-party style.
Before long there was a boom of drums, a splash of cymbals, a blare of brass and woodwinds from the direction of the church and la processione began. Musicians in white shirts played robust marches, while men in shirtsleeves carried la Madonna di Pompei along the route. When the preciously sculpted symbol of the Holy Mother returned to the front steps of the church, fireworks filled the sky with brilliant streaks of light and volleys of artificial thunder that thrilled little Tony (me) to his core.
Festa – a unity of faith, family, friends, food, and fun – was to these 1940s Mediterraneans in Brooklyn as natural as breathing. And equally natural to these “backward” folk making their home in America was a freedom of thought and action within limits trespassed only by the mad. As a child, when you took a turn that way, you were brought back with appropriate corrective action. Any moppet philosopher thus checked, who asked why, was perhaps secretly admired but it was made clear that what is right and what is wrong was not for him or her to decide. You questioned established wisdom like you questioned the need to eat.
It was the job of parents to transmit time-honored wisdom and the job of children to learn it. Later, after completing the needed study on matters of vital importance, the child thinker could discover for himself the ironic truth, missed by many an intellectual, that in order to move freely in life’s journey, one must heed restraints imposed by fundamental constants of life – regardless of who we are and where we come from. This is the break-off point, from which so many stray, to be gathered by activists for movements that lack genuine concern for those they pull into their fold.
Mid-20th century saw a rapid loss of understanding regarding timeless constants relating to the fundamentals of life. “We are living at a time when the status of man is undergoing profound upheavals,” observed Igor Stravinsky in 1947. “Modern man is progressively losing his understanding of values and his sense of proportions. This failure to understand essential realities is extremely serious. It leads us infallibly to the violation of the fundamental laws of human equilibrium.” [1]
What this composer touched on, and what has occupied the minds of philosophers and theologians throughout human history, is the vital importance of achieving a harmony between what is changeable and what is not changeable, which is well expressed in the plea: “God, grant me the grace to accept with serenity the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can,and the wisdom to know the difference.” [2]
Although the childhood experiences mentioned above prove nothing regarding the cultural health of America in the first half of the twentieth century, they point to a co-relation between family-with-faith-in-God – linked to eternal constants of life – and the attendant wellbeing. As I grew into an adult, during the war-ravished 20th century, I became more than ever aware of the need for a harmony between what belongs to the state and what belongs to the people or, as scripture codes it, “what is Caesar’s” and “what is God’s” [3].
In 1950, as I entered a classroom before the start of a college class session, I saw on a blackboard the words “Damn the Absolute!” Was the student insane, I thought? Was he not cursing himself? Can you do away with what makes you tick? In my mind this was an implicit death wish, for if you break away from what got you here in the first place and made it possible even for you to breathe, you are in essence committing suicide, spiritual if not physical.
It would not be long before radical distortions of reality, dressed in endearing language, would be fed the public in the news, on campus, even in church, in order “to demolish beyond hope of repair the engine of Western metaphysics” – to use the words of J. Hillis Miller, an outspoken academician of the political Left.
The Absolute that was being condemned (“demolished”) is – let’s face it – the very Absolute raised by liberals themselves who have said, “If there were no God, one would have to be invented.” Well, there is no need to invent God or even to “prove” the existence of God with rationales that manage only to prove what one already believes. What is really needed, especially among those who would govern people or improve their lives, is to wake up.
A sober comparison between life in America before and after mid-20th century shows what has been lost and what has been gained at the hands of Leftist agents of “change,” raising necessary questions not asked or answered by most people of influence in America. How, for example, has the “progress” pushed by Leftist activists improved life for all of us today? Is it possible that loving, not hating, one another (a Christian constant), in an atmosphere of freedom and independence – so despised by the Left – is an important clue to why living in America was better before than after the “progress” thrust on America? Is it possible that swinging a wrecking ball against “the West,” in pursuit of a world populated with virtual zombies instead of real human beings, was not such a good idea, after all?
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
[1] Igor Stravinsky, Poetics of Music in the Form of Six Lessons.
[2] Reinhold Niebuhr, 1892-1971]
[3] Implied in the injunction “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Luke 20:25)
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
Anthony J. DeBlasi is a veteran and lifelong defender of Western culture.
Picture a neighborhood composed of low and middle income families, each with two parents, no homeless people, no street drugs, safe to walk the streets at night. Is this the figment of an overactive imagination? Well, it is in fact a peek at a neighborhood in New York City where the son of immigrant parents read The New York Times every morning in high school, before orchestra rehearsal. Me. The principal, strongly authoritarian and well loved, opened a weekly assembly of highly diverse youngsters by reading a psalm from the Bible. Tough-as-nails, yet tenderhearted teachers passed on a tradition of excellence in thought, expression, and civility while preparing us for a wide range of careers in a free and independent America.
This typical school of 1940s New York City had higher standards and grade profile than any counterpart today and operated on a budget far smaller in equivalent dollars than any current public school budget. In these “backward” times, the schools were free of substance abuse problems, sexual promiscuity, and identity problems. There was an abiding respect for the authority of teachers and parentsand for the dignity of every person regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity. There were clubs in my school for religion, for foreign languages (including Latin). A Reporters’ Club recorded significant events for the school paper. There were toy drives for a local hospital . . . The list of extracurricular engagements was long.
I think it’s revealing that dictionaries in these “retrograde” times did not prefix definitions of words referring to high moral standards, such as virtue, with the phrase “regarded as.” It did not have to be stated that opinion or “point of view” is not a valid basis for morality.
Where were we coming from? Where was I coming from? Well it was not from vengeance against America’s “sins,” real and imagined – the basis for any ideology that dismisses the human flaws in every person, including saints and heroes. The journey I took – we took – was down-to-earth and mindful of the power that gave us life, known worldwide as God by people of every degree of intelligence.
A childhood flashback and reflection will perhaps help bring some focus to a past that still speaks to the present. This was before World War II . . .
At a street in Brooklyn that was closed to traffic for several blocks, archways with curlicue designs were raised on wooden posts . Bunting and lights trimmed a parade route for a feast. At twilight the ornate arches burst into sparkling color, as the lights entwining them went on. The smell of roasted nuts, sweets, and sundry aromas of Italian cuisine floated through the air in eddies, as curb-side vendors turned the street and sidewalks into a mile-long buffet of deli-grade food. People thronged and milled along the chain of carts and tables, ate, drank, and gabbed in block-party style.
Before long there was a boom of drums, a splash of cymbals, a blare of brass and woodwinds from the direction of the church and la processione began. Musicians in white shirts played robust marches, while men in shirtsleeves carried la Madonna di Pompei along the route. When the preciously sculpted symbol of the Holy Mother returned to the front steps of the church, fireworks filled the sky with brilliant streaks of light and volleys of artificial thunder that thrilled little Tony (me) to his core.
Festa – a unity of faith, family, friends, food, and fun – was to these 1940s Mediterraneans in Brooklyn as natural as breathing. And equally natural to these “backward” folk making their home in America was a freedom of thought and action within limits trespassed only by the mad. As a child, when you took a turn that way, you were brought back with appropriate corrective action. Any moppet philosopher thus checked, who asked why, was perhaps secretly admired but it was made clear that what is right and what is wrong was not for him or her to decide. You questioned established wisdom like you questioned the need to eat.
It was the job of parents to transmit time-honored wisdom and the job of children to learn it. Later, after completing the needed study on matters of vital importance, the child thinker could discover for himself the ironic truth, missed by many an intellectual, that in order to move freely in life’s journey, one must heed restraints imposed by fundamental constants of life – regardless of who we are and where we come from. This is the break-off point, from which so many stray, to be gathered by activists for movements that lack genuine concern for those they pull into their fold.
Mid-20th century saw a rapid loss of understanding regarding timeless constants relating to the fundamentals of life. “We are living at a time when the status of man is undergoing profound upheavals,” observed Igor Stravinsky in 1947. “Modern man is progressively losing his understanding of values and his sense of proportions. This failure to understand essential realities is extremely serious. It leads us infallibly to the violation of the fundamental laws of human equilibrium.” [1]
What this composer touched on, and what has occupied the minds of philosophers and theologians throughout human history, is the vital importance of achieving a harmony between what is changeable and what is not changeable, which is well expressed in the plea: “God, grant me the grace to accept with serenity the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can,and the wisdom to know the difference.” [2]
Although the childhood experiences mentioned above prove nothing regarding the cultural health of America in the first half of the twentieth century, they point to a co-relation between family-with-faith-in-God – linked to eternal constants of life – and the attendant wellbeing. As I grew into an adult, during the war-ravished 20th century, I became more than ever aware of the need for a harmony between what belongs to the state and what belongs to the people or, as scripture codes it, “what is Caesar’s” and “what is God’s” [3].
In 1950, as I entered a classroom before the start of a college class session, I saw on a blackboard the words “Damn the Absolute!” Was the student insane, I thought? Was he not cursing himself? Can you do away with what makes you tick? In my mind this was an implicit death wish, for if you break away from what got you here in the first place and made it possible even for you to breathe, you are in essence committing suicide, spiritual if not physical.
It would not be long before radical distortions of reality, dressed in endearing language, would be fed the public in the news, on campus, even in church, in order “to demolish beyond hope of repair the engine of Western metaphysics” – to use the words of J. Hillis Miller, an outspoken academician of the political Left.
The Absolute that was being condemned (“demolished”) is – let’s face it – the very Absolute raised by liberals themselves who have said, “If there were no God, one would have to be invented.” Well, there is no need to invent God or even to “prove” the existence of God with rationales that manage only to prove what one already believes. What is really needed, especially among those who would govern people or improve their lives, is to wake up.
A sober comparison between life in America before and after mid-20th century shows what has been lost and what has been gained at the hands of Leftist agents of “change,” raising necessary questions not asked or answered by most people of influence in America. How, for example, has the “progress” pushed by Leftist activists improved life for all of us today? Is it possible that loving, not hating, one another (a Christian constant), in an atmosphere of freedom and independence – so despised by the Left – is an important clue to why living in America was better before than after the “progress” thrust on America? Is it possible that swinging a wrecking ball against “the West,” in pursuit of a world populated with virtual zombies instead of real human beings, was not such a good idea, after all?
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
[1] Igor Stravinsky, Poetics of Music in the Form of Six Lessons.
[2] Reinhold Niebuhr, 1892-1971]
[3] Implied in the injunction “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Luke 20:25)
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
Anthony J. DeBlasi is a veteran and lifelong defender of Western culture.
It took a while to finish the book because it is too mentally fatiguing to ingest so much disturbing information except when taken in small bites spread far apart. Below are three excerpts that provide some of his insights into what the party has become. 
