ANOTHER CLOWN JOINS THE CIRCUSThe 2020 presidential election started on the night Donald Trump was elected President of the United States. Since that night, Democrats and their allies in the media have been working tirelessly to undermine his agenda and harm his standing with the American people.

The Mueller investigation was a bogus two-year effort to sabotage President Trump and drive him from office. Fortunately, the scheme did not work, and most congressional Democrats realize that impeachment is unlikely and politically unpopular.

via CanadaFreePress.Com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Deep State FBI and DOJ Brass Had Exculpatory Evidence to Absolve Trump Campaign and Withheld It from FISA Court

Rep. Matt Gaetz joined Sean Hannity on Monday night to discuss the ongoing developments in the the Obama spygate scandal.

Gaetz told Sean the “most compelling” evidence in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation will be revealed within days or weeks.

The Florida representative also revealed that the unreleased Papadopoulos transcripts will show the Trump campaign adviser denied there was any illegal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia.
This evidence was withheld from the FISA Court so they could spy on Trump.

FOX News legal expert Gregg Jarrett jumped in and accused the Obama officials of committing fraud on the FISA Court.

FOX News reported:

Florida congressman Matt Gaetz revealed Monday night that “most compelling” evidence in the Trump-Russia collusion investigation is days, if not weeks away.

According to Gaetz, R-Fla., secret unreleased transcripts involving former Trump aide George Papadopoulos reveal that he denied there was an illegal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia and that intelligence officials did not present that information to the FISA court.

“I believe we are days if not weeks aways for the most in compelling evidence in the biggest political scandal in American history,” Gaetz said on “Hannity” Monday.

“There was western intelligence sent to spy on Papadopoulos and there’s a recording and transcript of the conversation. And there, Papadopoulos denies any illegal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia. So, they had evidence presumably that was against Papadopoulos and for him. What they will wont be able to defend is that they never presented that evidence to the FISA court.”

The post Deep State FBI and DOJ Brass Had Exculpatory Evidence to Absolve Trump Campaign and Withheld It from FISA Court appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Loretta Lynch Throws Comey Under The Bus: ‘I Did Not’ Tell Comey To Call Clinton Email Probe A ‘Matter’

Somebody’s lying. Via Daily Caller: Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the House Oversight and Judiciary Committees that she never instructed former FBI Director James Comey to call the probe into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server a “matter” instead of an “investigation.” Georgia Republican Rep. Doug Collins released a transcript of […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

CAIR Demands L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti Apologize for Backing Jerusalem Embassy

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is demanding that Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti apologize for agreeing with the Trump administration’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem on a recent trip to Israel.

Garcetti, the first Jewish mayor in the history of L.A., said last week, according to the Los Angeles Times: “I support the embassy being here. Israel shouldn’t be the only country in the world that can’t determine where its capital will be.” He added that he disagreed with the way that President Donald Trump had moved the embassy in 2017-2018, saying “there is usually a process to these things rather than what seems like an overnight, one-sided, partisan move.”

In response, CAIR sent a letter to Garcetti on Sunday demanding that he retract his statement and that he apologize.

CAIR also said in a statement in the name of its Los Angeles director, Hussam Ayloush:

It is ironic and embarrassing that Mayor Garcetti is scheduled to host a Ramadan iftar on Monday evening with members of the Muslim community. The mayor spent the last week in Israel cozying up to a right-wing apartheid government and whitewashing its brutal and illegal occupation and gross human rights violations against Palestinians to explore business opportunities and then wants to entertain members of the Muslim community, as if nothing happened.

As mayor of Los Angeles, Mayor Garcetti must represent all Angelenos, not just those who support Israel’s illegal occupation. We call on him to retract his statement of support and to stand against Trump’s reckless decision and hold a meeting with the interfaith community to discuss his statements.

As Breitbart news has noted:

In 2007-8, CAIR was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the terror financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development. That case, in turn, led the FBI to discontinue its work with the organization. In 2009, a federal judge ruled that the government “produced ample evidence to establish” the ties of CAIR with Hamas, the Palestinian terror organization. The United Arab Emirates labeled CAIR a terrorist organization in 2014 (a decision that the Obama administration opposed).

Hussam Ayloush has a history of radical statements himself. Earlier this month, he compared Israel to Nazi Germany. In 2015, he said U.S. foreign policy was partially to blame for an Islamic terror attack in San Bernardino. CAIR provided assistance to the family of the terrorists after that attack.

CAIR was joined in its condemnation by other left-wing “faith” groups, including Jewish Voice for Peace, which is a radical left-wing group that recently gave a platform at s conference to convicted Palestinian terrorist Rasmea Odeh.

Congress approved the Jerusalem Embassy Act in 1995 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote in both houses. Presidents and presidential candidates from both major political parties have committed to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. Trump finally did so last May, though no elected Democrats attended the opening or a celebratory party thrown by the Israeli embassy in Washington, DC.

Garcetti is not backing down — at least not yet — but the Los Angeles Times reported Monday that he reiterated his support for a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem, as well as an “independent, fully sovereign Palestinian state.”

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. He is also the co-author of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, which is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Dems Demand Trump Stop Solving Nation’s Problems So They Can Impeach Him [Satire]

The following is satirical.

Democrats continue to toy with the idea of impeaching Donald Trump. On the one hand, it seems easier than trying to defeat him in an election. But on the other hand, there could be a lot of paper work involved plus they’d have to find a place to park near the Capitol building.

Congressman Jerry Nadler was interviewed while hiding under a bridge in hopes of devouring one of the three billy goats Gruff and he said, “We have fallen into a terrible imaginary crisis while voters just stand around apathetically admiring their new jobs or their new cars or the fact that they can now feed their families. We need to make these people understand how hysterical I am or else we can’t even begin to tear this country apart over nothing.”

Congressman Adam Schiff stood on the Capitol steps waving a sealed envelope and telling reporters, “I have in this envelope absolute proof that Donald Trump colluded with the Russians, and if he didn’t collude with the Russians he obstructed justice and if he didn’t obstruct justice he said racists were fine people and if he didn’t say racists were fine people then why I am standing here waving this envelope?”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi remains uncertain on the matter of impeachment, and in a statement made to the statue of Sacagawea in the Capital rotunda, said, “The questions we have to answer as a nation are ‘Where am I?’ and ‘Why is there a lipstick stain on my forehead?’ Because before we can move forward with a matter as important as impeaching George W. Bush, I need to know why I locked myself in the broom closet last week, and if not then, when?”

President Trump meanwhile has introduced a proposal to revamp the current immigration system, but Democrats say that’s just a cynical ploy to try to distract voters from the matter of impeachment by solving the nation’s problems.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

House unanimously passes bill to help people seeking international adoptions

The House of Representatives unanimously passed a bipartisan bill Monday afternoon aimed at helping streamline the international adoption process for prospective parents.

The “Intercountry Adoption Information Act of 2019” aims to help American families keep abreast of other countries’ adoption laws and any changes that could delay or halt the process.

“The world today is full of orphaned children, but it’s also full of loving families who are ready and eager to adopt them,” Rep. Ron Wright, R-Texas, said on the House floor. “All too often American families encounter policy obstacles that delay or prevent those adoptions.”

press release from Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Doug Collins, R-Ga., who is the bill’s original Republican sponsor, explained that the often-confusing international adoption process and the ever-changing nature of other countries’ laws and policies can make things incredibly difficult for prospective parents, even leading them to dead ends.

Democratic cosponsor Jim Langevin, R.I., said in a statement after the bill’s passage: “Whether adopting at home or abroad, every family should have the information they need to navigate the process successfully.”

One family that could have benefited from the transparency the bill seeks to provide was the Romano family of Georgia. In 2012, Mark and Pam Romano began the adoption process for two boys from Russia before the country banned all adoptions to the United States, indefinitely halting the adoption process. They have since asked the U.S. State Department to work to get the ban lifted but have had no such luck.

“Willing, loving families in the United States and elsewhere long to have the chance to make the sacrifices necessary to extend their tender care to a child, or children, they themselves did not give birth to,” Pam Romano said earlier this year. “I think I speak for every family in the process of adopting, or even considering adoption: Change is long overdue. Transparency and accountability are vital to any program that seeks to benefit the welfare of children.”

The legislation is a proposed update on the Interagency Adoption Act of 2000, which requires the State Department to provide Congress with annual statistics on international adoptions that involve immigration to the United States. The bill will also require State to include public reporting requirements about countries that have changed their laws or policies on adoption to the U.S., thereby creating an informational resource for prospective adoptive parents.

“Loving families in Northeast Georgia and across the United States are eager to provide children with the care and support they deserve, yet they remain separated from their adoptive children due to shifting international policies and information gaps,” Collins said in a statement after passage. “The Intercountry Adoption Information Act will help bring families together by ensuring parents pursuing overseas adoption, like Mark and Pam Romano, have access to the information needed to navigate the international adoption landscape.”

The bill also has bipartisan support in the Senate, where it is sponsored by Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., and cosponsored by the Senate co-chairs of the Congressional Adoption Caucus, Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., and Roy Blunt, R-Mo.

The post House unanimously passes bill to help people seeking international adoptions appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

Fed Judge Who Ruled Trump Has To Turn Over His Financial Records Dems Was Obama/Biden Donor

Who would have guessed? Oh look, the Federal Judge who just ruled that President Trump must turn over his financial records to Congressional Dems, also just so happens to be an Obama-Biden donor. I’m sure one has nothing to do with the other though. Nothing to see here folks! — Andrew Surabian (@Surabees) May […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

The War on History Comes for George Washington

They finally came for George Washington.

The perpetual war on history now has the father of our country in its sights as the San Francisco Board of Education considers removing a mural of Washington from a local school.

If the board succeeds in politicizing Washington, whose legacy was once so secured and uniting that his home at Mount Vernon was considered neutral ground during the Civil War, then we have clearly crossed the Rubicon of social division.

Critics of the mural point out that, in addition to Washington, it also depicts slaves and Native Americans—and one of the Native Americans appears to be dead.

They have called the artwork offensive, and the school board says it “traumatizes students” and “glorifies slavery, genocide, colonization, manifest destiny, white supremacy, oppression, etc.,” according to The Wall Street Journal.

But the original intent of the mural was actually the exact opposite.

It was painted in 1936 by artist Victor Arnautoff, a man of the left in his own time who, according to historian Fergus M. Bordewich, wanted to depict Washington in a less glamorized way by including images of disturbing realities. Bordewich explained:

[Arnautoff] included those images not to glorify Washington, but rather to provoke a nuanced evaluation of his legacy. The scene with the dead Native American, for instance, calls attention to the price of ‘manifest destiny.’ Arnautoff’s murals also portray the slaves with humanity and the several live Indians as vigorous and manly.

Those who condemn the murals have misunderstood it, seeing only what they sought to find. They’ve also got their history seriously wrong. Washington did own slaves—124 men, women and children—and oversaw many more who belonged to his wife’s family. But by his later years he had evolved into a proto-abolitionist, a remarkable ethical journey for a man of his time, place, and class.

No matter to the modern iconoclasts. It’s too much to expect one to think about what one is rushing to destroy. Obliterate now and ask questions, well, never.

This is just the latest example of attempts to purge American history of its historical figures. Not only is this trend wildly misguided—how destroying statues and paintings bring an end to racism and prejudice is never fully explained—but it also cheapens the debate over America’s past by ignoring nuance.

From the beginning, it was clear that this movement had far less to do with genuinely criticizing past historical figures, but instead reflected the need of modern radicals to feel good about themselves and think they are “doing something” to stop oppression, be it real or imaginary.

Reflection and thoughtfulness are uncomfortable impediments to those who never dare question whether they are on the “right side of history.”

It makes sense that the same people who seek to de-platform individuals for wrongthink on social media and shut down controversial speakers at universities are the same people who want to erase artwork and monuments. The common thread is for their views to be constantly reinforced and never challenged from without.

The unthinking maxims of intersectionality and identity politics must be recited over and over again from all sectors of society. No alternate views can be tolerated. Such teachings soothe the minds of radicals who can easily ignore the moral complications of life from the safe comforts of their college campuses and public buildings. (Those, of course, are made possible by the wicked people they seek to extinguish.)

Doubt, skepticism, and the use of reason are uncomfortable and problematic.

It didn’t take long for the iconoclasts to move from Jefferson Davis to Thomas Jefferson, and then from Jefferson to the most revered of our Founding Fathers, George Washington.

What’s truly revealing about the empty, surface-level nature of these efforts is how little cost is involved for those doing the erasing.

Criticizing slavery and racism in 2019 can get one tenure, public office, and a six-figure salary as a corporate consultant. So brave.

It’s easy to cover up or take down a painting, not so easy to sacrifice the immense benefits of living in the prosperous constitutional republic that problematic men like Washington created.

As David Marcus wrote for The Federalist, it was easy to get rid of Kate Smith’s “God Bless America” recording at Yankee games due to her singing what are now considered offensive songs in the 1930s—but are Yankee fans willing to abolish the Yankees themselves because of their team’s historical role in segregation?

For that matter, are Harvard University administrators and professors willing to give up their jobs at an institution founded in part by a man who owned slaves because its origin was problematic?

Not likely.

It’s far more satisfying to take the less costly step of tearing down a painting or a statue. And it’s much easier to avoid the complicated fact that so many of these supposedly ignorant and prejudiced people built the very institutions they enjoy today.

In their simplistic thinking, surely those who founded a free republic based on consent, and truly “broke the wheel” of tyranny that had been the norm for virtually all of human history, couldn’t be great if slavery was still a part of their heritage.

They failed to live up to their own ideals, so they best be erased.

But to follow this logic forward, we can’t stop with the Founders.

The over half-million Americans who lost their lives and countless others who risked them to end slavery, the “original sin” of this country, also weren’t so great, you see.

Their skin was generally too fair, their motivations insufficiently pure, and most were undoubtedly homophobes who couldn’t have conceived of modern concepts like gay marriage or a man literally becoming a woman.

How can men like President William McKinley, who could simply be attacked for other reasons, be celebrated?

They can’t. They too must be obliterated.

Greatness, according to the history erasers, truly belongs to the wokescolds who wage hashtag campaigns to raise awareness about offensive art and ensure society conforms to their ever-evolving whims.

But the truth is, those who wage war on America’s history are tacitly acknowledging the benefits of living in America, a free country that allows them to pursue their radical activism, even though it is antithetical to the founding ideals that enable free speech.

These movements are forcing politics to infect every corner of our existence, and that weakens this country. It makes us more hateful toward one another and trains us in the un-American notion that to win arguments, we must quash, liquidate, and erase from all memory those we disagree with.

The Washington mural may come down in San Francisco, but the real damage is not being done to the art. It’s being done to the legacy of Washington, to ourselves.

The past is an easy target for iconoclast bullies, but if Americans don’t want them to keep winning, they will have to begin standing up and speaking out against them.

If not, the destruction of our statues and artwork will merely be symbolic of the destruction done to our country at large.

The post The War on History Comes for George Washington appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website:

The Similarities Between Declining Rome and the Modern US

Sometime around A.D. 60, in the age of Emperor Nero, a Roman
court insider named Gaius Petronius wrote a satirical Latin novel, “The
Satyricon,” about moral corruption in Imperial Rome. The novel’s general
landscape was Rome’s transition from an agrarian republic to a globalized
multicultural superpower.

The novel survives only in a series of extended fragments.
But there are enough chapters for critics to agree that the high-living
Petronius, nicknamed the “Judge of Elegance,” was a brilliant cynic.
He often mocked the cultural consequences of the sudden and disruptive influx
of money and strangers from elsewhere in the Mediterranean region into a
once-traditional Roman society.

The novel plots the wandering odyssey of three lazy, overeducated, and mostly underemployed single young Greeks: Encolpius, Ascyltos, and Giton. They aimlessly mosey around southern Italy. They panhandle and mooch off the nouveau riche. They mock traditional Roman customs. The three and their friends live it up amid the culinary, cultural, and sexual excesses in the age of Nero.

Certain themes in “The Satyricon” are timeless and
still resonate today.

The abrupt transition from a society of rural homesteaders into metropolitan coastal hubs had created two Romes. One world was a sophisticated and cosmopolitan network of traders, schemers, investors, academics, and deep-state imperial cronies. Their seaside corridors were not so much Roman as Mediterranean. And they saw themselves more as “citizens of the world” than as mere Roman citizens.

In the novel, vast, unprecedented wealth had produced
license. On-the-make urbanites suck up and flatter the childless rich in hopes
of being given estates rather than earning their own money.

The rich in turn exploit the young sexually and emotionally
by offering them false hopes of landing an inheritance.

Petronius seems to mock the very world in which he indulged.

His novel’s accepted norms are pornography, gratuitous
violence, sexual promiscuity, transgenderism, delayed marriage, childlessness,
fear of aging, homelessness, social climbing, ostentatious materialism,
prolonged adolescence, and scamming and conning in lieu of working.

The characters are fixated on expensive fashion, exotic foods, and pretentious name-dropping. They are the lucky inheritors of a dynamic Roman infrastructure that had globalized three continents. Rome had incorporated the shores of the Mediterranean under uniform law, science, institutions—all kept in check by Roman bureaucracy and the overwhelming power of the legions, many of them populated by non-Romans.

Never in the history of civilization had a generation become so wealthy and leisured, so eager to gratify every conceivable appetite—and yet so bored and unhappy.

But there was also a second Rome in the shadows. Occasionally the hipster antiheroes of the novel bump into old-fashioned rustics, shopkeepers, and legionaries. They are what we might now call the ridiculed “deplorables” and “clingers.”

Even Petronius suggests that these rougher sorts built and
maintained the vast Roman Empire. They are caricatured as bumpkins and yet
admired as simple, sturdy folk without the pretensions and decadence of the
novel’s urban drones.

Petronius is too skilled a satirist to paint a
black-and-white picture of good old traditional Romans versus their corrupt
urban successors. His point is subtler.

Globalization had enriched and united non-Romans into a world culture. That was an admirable feat. But such homogenization also attenuated the very customs, traditions, and values that had led to such astounding Roman success in the first place.

The multiculturalism, urbanism, and cosmopolitanism of “The Satyricon” reflected an exciting Roman mishmash of diverse languages, habits, and lifestyles drawn from northern and Western Europe, Asia, and Africa.

But the new empire also diluted a noble and unique Roman agrarianism. It eroded nationalism and patriotism. The empire’s wealth, size, and lack of cohesion ultimately diminished Roman unity, as well as traditional marriage, child-bearing, and autonomy.

Education likewise was seen as ambiguous. In the novel, wide
reading ensures erudition and sophistication, and helps science supplant
superstition. But sometimes education is also ambiguous. Students become idle,
pretentious loafers. Professors are no different from loud pedants. Writers are
trite and boring. Elite pundits sound like gasbags.

Petronius seems to imply that whatever the Rome of his time was, it was likely not sustainable—but would at least be quite exciting in its splendid decline.

Petronius also argues that with too much rapid material
progress comes moral regress. His final warning might be especially troubling
for the current generation of Western Europeans and Americans. Even as we brag
of globalizing the world and enriching the West materially and culturally, we
are losing our soul in the process.

Getting married, raising families, staying in one place, still working with our hands, and postponing gratification may be seen as boring and out of date. But nearly 2,000 years later, all of that is what still keeps civilization alive.


The post The Similarities Between Declining Rome and the Modern US appeared first on The Daily Signal.

via The Daily Signal

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: