“It all started Wednesday when CNN reporters hid in the bushes of a Florida golf course to film President Trump golfing.
Later, their attempts to obtain footage from a sidewalk were foiled by a large white truck which appeared to be strategically parked.
And it was all downhill from there.
Because getting footage of Trump slicing a drive is essential news, CNN was determined to get to the bottom of the TruckParkingGate, convinced the truck was parked purposely to prevent them from filming the president.
Even devoting air time to TruckParkingGate:”
———————————–
“CNN’s quest to uncover an explanation for why a truck blocked its view of President Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Fla., on Wednesday stretched into a third day and the network appears to have made a critical discovery.
Noah Gray, a producer for CNN who tweeted a picture of a white box truck in front of hedges adjacent to the golf course on Wednesday, tracked down what looked to be an identical, if not the same, truck parked Thursday in a parking lot at the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Department.”
“While CNN’s John Berman, who sat in for Anderson Cooper on his “360” evening program on Thursday, said that the truck, which was in a lot behind a fence, was parked in such a way that they could not compare license plates, on Friday, three days into the story, Gray said CNN confirmed a report by WPEC CBS 12 reporter Mike Magnoli that the license plate he saw on the truck parked at the sheriff’s department was the same one CNN spotted on the truck blocking their view on Wednesday.”
——————————-
That’s some hard hitting investigative journalism right there.
The leftists Democrats think they have a new tactic to stop deportations of criminal illegals. It won’t work though, because they’re still here illegally and deportation is the still preferred remedy. Crooked Cuomo and Moonbeam should know better, but hey, grandstanding’s always been their thing.
“New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) on Wednesday pardoned 61 people, including some who faced immigration enforcement actions because of prior criminal charges.
Cuomo pardoned 18 immigrants who had committed low-level offenses, saying his pardon was based on their rehabilitation efforts. Cuomo blasted President Trump’s hard-line immigration efforts in the process.”
—————————
“File this story under “Elections Have Consequences.”
California Governor Jerry Brown Brown used a Christmas holiday tradition and granted pardons to two immigrants who were on the verge of being deported for committing crimes while in this country.
Brown, pairing his state’s combative approach to federal immigration authorities with his belief in the power of redemption, characterized the pardons as acts of mercy.
The Democratic governor moved as federal officials in recent months have detained and deported immigrants with felony convictions that resulted in the loss of their legal residency status, including many with nonviolent offenses that occurred years ago.
With the pardons, the reason for applicants’ deportations may be eliminated, said attorney Kevin Lo of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, which represented some of the men in a recent class-action lawsuit.
The news reports indicate the acts were in response to President Donald Trump’s focus on stemming illegal immigration.
The pardons of Rottanak Kong of Davis and Mony Neth of Modesto could be seen as another poke at the Trump administration’s hard-line policies on immigration.
Both men came to the United States as children when their families fled the Khmer Rouge government that killed millions of its own people. They were recently detained as part of a federal immigration roundup, although a California-based federal judge has temporarily halted the deportation of hundreds of Cambodian refugees.
Kong was sentenced to a year in Stanislaus County jail in 2003 for joyriding. He served seven months. Neth was convicted in 1995, also in Stanislaus County, on weapons and receiving stolen property charges. He also served his sentence.
Brown’s pardons said both men had become law-abiding citizens and paid their debts to society.
In news that seems related, the Department of Justice cut funding to one of California’s most prominent “sanctuary cities“.
———————
“A study in Finland explored how religious and non-religious people responded to the idea of God.
The researchers used electrodes to measure how much sweat people produced while reading statements like “I dare God to make my parents drown” or “I dare God to make me die of cancer”. Unexpectedly, when nonbelievers read the statements, they produced as much sweat as believers — suggesting they were equally anxious about the consequences of their dares.
And that’s not simply because nonbelievers didn’t want to wish harm on others. A companion study showed that similar dares that did not involve God (such as, “I wish my parents would drown”) did not produce comparable increases in sweat levels. Together, then, these findings suggest that despite denying that God exists, nonbelievers behaved as though God did exist.
Does this mean that nonbelievers are lying when they say they reject God? Not exactly. Rather, these contradictory behaviours probably arise in part due to living in a theistic culture that hammers home the idea that God exists. Perhaps this leads nonbelievers to form “implicit” attitudes that are at odds with their “explicit” ones.
Explicit attitudes are those people can call to mind consciously and can report when asked: for example “carrots are good for me” or “God does not exist”.
By contrast, people have little or no awareness of their implicit attitudes — the learned associations between ideas in their minds, such as how easily the concept “carrot” brings to mind another concept like “bland,” or how easily the word “God” brings to mind “existence”.
As these examples illustrate, implicit and explicit attitudes can clash. It’s possible for a person to say they “love carrots” while unconsciously bringing negative associations to mind about them. Or, to say “God does not exist” while unconsciously bringing to mind ideas of God’s existence.
In this way, it makes sense for nonbelievers to get nervous at the thought of daring God to do harm.”
A test like that has no significance because a person who truly believes there is no God is unaffected by such thoughts.
I once worked with a guy who, when he sneezed and a co-worker said “God Bless You”. said, “Please don’t say that. it’s like multiplying through by zero.” Not at all affected.
As for the truck. We know the j Russians put it there to shield Trump and the Russian’s in their plot to take over the world.
Why else would a truck be on a golf course? Definitely something nefarious. Racism, sexual harassment and a multitude of other things.
I have to agree with what HRW said last night. I don’t see him as one of the “Trump haters”, but rather that he gives us a perspective from someone not invested in these arguments, albeit also colored by his own political views. Although I am not a Trump supporter, & often am quite displeased with his behavior, I don’t consider myself a “Trump hater”, either. Not everyone who disagrees with him, or is disgusted with some of his words or behaviors, is a hater.
“Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz says he’s feeling the heat from family and friends over his defense of President Trump amid special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
“It’s caused me to lose seven pounds,” Dershowitz told Politico. “My liberal friends don’t invite me to dinner anymore.”
————————
“My really, really close friends say, ‘You’re 100 percent right in your analysis, but can’t you just shut the @#$% up and not talk at all,’” he said. “They tell me, ‘This is a time for selective silence.’ My nephew thinks I’m helping keep in office one of the greatest dangers in American history. I tell him I’m just standing up for principle. He tells me that I don’t have to stand up so loud.”
Dershowitz added that his family is no longer proud to be associated with him.
“I was a source of pride to my kids, my grandkids,” he said. “Now it’s ‘Oy, he’s related to Alan Dershowitz.’ That hurts me a little bit.””
I read something recently that made me think of this question:
Suppose there is another election like the ones with Trump vs. Clinton or Moore vs. Jones, where it seems imperative to conservatives that the Republican candidate win. What if the Republican candidate was known for hating Jews? Or had other white supremacist leanings? Would you still vote for him? Why or why not?
(Btw, this is not completely merely hypothetical.)
Since I am/was unable to understand how anyone could vote for an unindicted criminal, Hillary Rodham Clinton, I am unable to answer any questions about voting for a bad candidate.
Kim H found that Roy Moore was so bad that she voted for a “baby killer” Democrat. I wouldn’t but then I am not married to a Democrat.
My wife usually has ABC on in the morning as she works with her canaries. She had no idea what “Fast and Furious” was; she had never heard of it. Whoopi and Joy didn’t bring it up. There is a whole lot that the MSM doesn’t talk about… They do bring up Trump and how horrible he is though. Mary Anne doesn’t hear the bad stuff about Democrats because it is not mentioned.
Well you won’t rein in the molesting hordes, so this is your only option I guess. How sad, especially for the women.
I guess this is also their back door way of acknowledging that there was in fact a problem last year, despite Merkel and company’s insistence that there wasn’t.
“In both 2016 and 2017, there were mass sexual assaults on women in German cities during New Year’s Eve celebrations.
The police initially tried to conceal that most of the perpetrators were either migrants or Middle Eastern immigrants. But the truth eventually came out and it was a major scandal.”
————————
“This year, German authorities, apparently believing they are unable to control the situation, have taken to creating “safe zones” for women, as the BBC reports, New Year’s Eve party in Berlin to have ‘safe zone’ for women:
The new security measures planned for the Brandenburg Gate party come amid concerns about sexual assaults.
A large number of assaults and robberies targeting women at Cologne’s New Year’s Eve celebrations two years ago horrified Germany.
Hundreds of women reported being attacked by gangs of men with migrant backgrounds.
The events in Cologne heightened tensions in the country over the large influx of refugees and migrants – 1.1m people arrived in Germany in 2015, some, but by no means all, fleeing violence in Syria and Iraq.
Hundreds of thousands of people are expected to attend the New Year’s Eve party in Berlin on Sunday and security will be strict. Large bags, such as rucksacks, and alcoholic drinks will be banned at the Brandenburg Gate.
Women who have been assaulted or feel harassed will be able to get support at a special “safety zone”, staffed by the German Red Cross, on Ebertstrasse.
The Guardian adds:
Berlin police confirmed that this year women would be able to seek help in an area staffed by the German Red Cross.
“The organisers have set up a safety zone for women who have been victims of a sexual offence or are feeling harassed,” a police statement said.
Anja Marx, a spokeswoman for the event, said there would be a tented area with psychologists on hand.
Safe zones are not the answer. Getting control of your streets is the answer. But Germany appears unwilling or unable to do that.”
rw: You really don’t believe that there has been corruption in the FBI? Dir. Comey writing an exoneration statement before interviewing the prime subject of the investigation; not giving rights of advisement to the prime subject of the investigation; changing words in the exoneration statement that removes the clear felony language; making comments that a political candidate must be stopped, and implementing an insurance plan should he win the election. The worst hasn’t been made public – the use of an unverified dossier to secure a FISA warrant.
Why do you think FBI Deputy Director McCabe, after 15 hours of congressional testimony, has announced his retirement when he isn’t even eligible yet? Seems pretty obvious to most people…
Hi Kizzie. I don’t characterize hwesseli as a Trump hater; just a hater. He was exercised about the notion that conservatives hold to an ideology that breeds white nationalism, etc., and wished such politicians would disclaim their politics. That’s why he takes the slothful approach and insists Trump was calling nazis “good folks.” I am on facebook, though, so I see people on the right do the same kind of thing!
My position on the FBI and law enforcement has been consistent. Poor Comey and his agents were required to conduct investigations of both major 2016 presidential candidates who were each profoundly dishonest and shockingly stupid. Hillary was likely lacking criminal intent as she made top secret information available to half the world even as Trump probably was incapable of understanding the concept of obstruction of justice even as he committed the offense regularly in the first few months of his administration.
Democrats and Trumpkins have been equally outraged by the way law enforcement has treated their dishonest but clueless nominees.
I suspect many senior FBI agents are retiring early. They likely don’t want to work for a dishonest buffoon. I also suspect many would have also retired early had Hillary been elected as they would not have wanted to work for a dishonest sociopath.
Any reasonably intelligent person could have begun to write the report on Hillary about halfway through the email investigation. She was incredibly careless and negligent. The same could be said about the Trump investigation. Though his campaign was too disorganized to effectively conspire with Russia, there were many inappropriate contacts which Trump and his aides tried to conceal from investigators in a childishly clumsy manner.
Kevin D. Williamson is as balanced as I am. Last night he was giving scathing reviews to Trump. Tonight he reminds people what he thinks of the Clintons:
“The Clintons are the penicillin-resistant syphilis of American politics” ~@KevinNR#TruerWords have never been spoken about the biggest grifters of all time. https://t.co/YuU7G3r3l9
That’s a good question about voting, Kizzie, and it’s certainly not hypothetical. In so many situations, Christians are willing to entrust results of this or that to God. I’m not sure why we think we have to take the reins in the voting booth, though, when there isn’t a worthy candidate. Don’t we know voting is optional?
HRW is anything but a “hater”. He is probably the most rational and well-informed person on this site. He is left of center, so many of his conclusions are shocking to our sensibilities. However, he is extremely knowledgeable and well-informed and his conclusions flow from his philosophy and worldview and objective facts.
As an example, HRW’s view of Trump in many ways mirrors the views of the 20+ conservative intellectuals who wrote articles against Trump in the winter of 2015-2016. Their criticisms were not based primarily on political ideology, but were fact-based critiques of the man’s character, intelligence, stability, etc.
Now, from a purely political point of view, it makes sense for what’s left of the Religious Right to align itself with the Nationalist Right. Given its priorities, the Nationalist Right is the faction most likely to advance our interests, or at least protect us. If you think Institutionalist and Fusionist Republicans are going to stand by religious conservatives against Big Business, you should have left your naivety behind in Indiana two years ago. But from the point of view of theological integrity and credible witness, aligning closely with the Nationalist Right is likely to be a disaster.
The problem with this conclusion is the assumption that Christians must firmly align with ANY economic or political ideology at all and the failure to realize that if we do, we will inevitably have a problem with ‘theological integrity and credible witness’—regardless of which ideology we align with. Modern ideologies are secular constructions and are not constrained by Christian values or moral authority. And this is natural since our ideologies are essentially non-Christian systems of thinking.
I think the powerful in DC do whatever they please for the most part. They indulge their perversions, blackmail their agendas through government bureaucracies and agencies and Congress. The left hand pays the right hand, but claims innocence or ignorance if an accidental spotlight momentarily exposes their activity. That is the environment commonly referred to as ‘the swamp’.
I suspect many are retiring early because the sustained public scrutiny this President has brought with him means they probably won’t be able to operate the way they have in the past. Apparently, that is how the swamp is drained.
“Hater” is a modern word. I’ve been called a “hater” a couple of times and it didn’t bother me because I’ve always associated the use of the word with young liberals. Maybe some young liberal can tell me what the term actually means.
Debra, What specifically do you mean when you say “drain the swamp”?
FBI agents generally do not “indulge perversions” or “blackmail agendas”. They generally pursue terrorists, organized crime bosses and other criminals and work to keep us safe. Recently, they have been forced to investigate a really despicable Democratic nominee and a comical but dishonest Republican nominee. I am sure most of the agents look forward to a time when Americans may be able to again nominate presidential candidates who are not the subjects of federal investigations.
Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Trump have all had investigations on their watch. This one is different in that the President is despised by many in his own party, and hated by the media and by big business movers and shakers. It is the never ending negative media coverage (which Trump himself acerbates) that wearies most Americans.
” Hillary was likely lacking criminal intent as she made top secret information available to half the world ”
See, here’s the thing. Intent is irrelevant. And as a law guy, you should know this. Men and women are punished for far less breaches than hers, and they get prosecuted, regardless of intent. But Comey didn’t do that. He’d already exonerated before even interviewing her. He deserved to be fired.
Just to refresh your memory, here’s the applicable law. I would argue that sending classified info to Anthony Weiner’s laptop so he could print it, which we found out today happened due to Judicial Watch finally getting some answers for their FOA request, would clearly violate the law. Willfully communicated and transmitted, and an unauthorized pervert receiving it, on the same laptop he used to prey on young women.
But your boy Comey doesn’t see a problem, or intent? Maybe he needs to open his eyes.
“(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
Every day prosecutors make decisions on whether to prosecute factoring in the intent of the individual being investigated.
Hillary was stupid. Likewise, Trump was stupid. When Nixon and Bill Clinton obstructed justice, they both understood that what they were doing was wrong and the crime that they were committing. When Trump was begging Comey to let Flynn go and when he fired Comey, Trump didn’t understand his own duties, the limits on his powers or the definition of obstruction of justice. Can a five year old be guilty of obstruction of justice? Can an eleven year old? McMaster supposedly told people Trump had the mind of a kindergartener. Bannon said he was an eleven year old.
And Reagan also knowingly assisted Oliver North in illegally furnishing arms to rebels in Nicaragua. So one can apparently be all grown up and still get away with it. But you can’t get away with it if your party doesn’t like you—-then you don’t get away with it even if you are actually not guilty. That’s part of the corrupt environment in DC.
I know some of what Hillary did that was illegal. I don’t know what Trump did that was against the law, do you?
I still do not understand how honest Democrats could have nominated Hillary. So, i assume that the Democrats who nominated Hillary were not honest Democrats.
Yeah I’m not using ‘hater’ in the modern sense. I’m using it in the sense of it being a motivator for interpreting a part of the world, often the political side of the world. I’m hardly saying anything much different than what’s been said of many here; such statements as “the right needs to take responsibility for an ideology that leads to violence” and the like.
When Huma and Hillary sent classified info to Weiner, who was NOT authorized, and didn’t have the security clearance to receive it, so he could print it for them, they do so willfully, deliberately, and illegally.
This isn’t that hard.
As for your dictionary.
Willfully
1.
with the intention of causing harm; deliberately.
“she denies four charges of willfully neglecting a patient”
2.
with a stubborn and determined intention to do as one wants, regardless of the consequences.
“he had willfully ignored the evidence”
They knew it was illegal and he wasn’t authorized to receive it. But she knew that as always, guys like Comey would spare her the consequences for her illegal acts. Again.
That’s willful and deliberate. It’s also really stupid, and grossly negligent. But you already know all this.
AJ, Go slower, Buddy. Hillary and Abedin are two different people even as Trump and Michael Flynn are two different people.
Of course I know Hillary was stupid. I said so @ 10:29. Of course I know Hillary was negligent. I said so @4:48. I even said that Hillary was profoundly dishonest and shockingly stupid @ 4:31.
What you and most Trumpkins don’t want to face is the fact that your man is just as stupid and dishonest as Hillary. With both, it is not a matter of one or two incidents. Hillary and Trump have been dishonest for their entire lives! Trump paid $25,000,000 to settle a lawsuit because he conned people for years using a fake university. Trump had an imaginary friend (John Barron) whose job it was to lie to the press about Trump’s sex life. That’s about the best combination of stupidity and dishonesty I have ever read about.
What HRW and I find amusing is that Trump and Trump Republicans now are attacking the FBI, the Deputy Attorney General, Bob Mueller and other federal law enforcement personnel who, as part of their jobs, have been forced to investigate the stupid and dishonest acts of Trump even as law enforcement had to investigate the stupid and negligent acts of Hillary.
We just think Orange Lives Matters is ironic and comical.
Debra, I’m waiting. What specifically do you mean when you say: “drain the swamp”?
I know Trump said it all the time, but he is a con man. He said it because he knew his gullible followers like to hear the phrase. I doubt he had any fixed idea of what the phrase meant.
My question is: What do you mean when you say “drain the swamp”?
So here is what it appears the word “hater” means in the modern sense. I don’t follow modern culture except for sports. Modern athletes like to call anyone who criticizes them a “hater”. If I say say Carmelo Anthony is slow on his defensive rotations, Carmelo and his fans can call me a “hater”. If I say the Carolina Panthers quarterback (whose name escapes me) gave a lackluster effort to recover his own fumble in the Super Bowl, I can be labeled a “hater”.
If I say it was stupid and dishonest for Trump to have an imaginary friend who lied to the press about his sex life, I may be labeled “a hater”. Call me a “hater” all you want.
This article by Bret Stephens is making the rounds:
I repost it for Bob Buckles. I believe Stephens and Bill Kristol both wound up voting for Hillary. Quite a few Yankee NeverTrumpers, including Big Bush, did that. West Texas Never Trumpers like Kevin D. Williamson and myself never really considered voting for Hillary. Like Bob Buckles, we just don’t vote for Democrats. We agree with Stephens that character in a president is really important, but we also concluded that though Hillary was not as ridiculous or embarrassing, she was just as dishonest and foolish as Trump.
yeah like i said, I’m not using hater in the modern sense. I didn’t even initially use the term “hater.” I only used it because someone else used the term “Trump hater,” which wasn’t how I meant it at all. We need to take responsibility for an ideology that leads to violence. hwesseli said so.
“We should really offer a tip of the hat to Judicial Watch for the dogged battle they’ve waged to gain public access to the pile of Hillary Clinton emails found on the laptop of Anthony “Carlos Danger” Weiner. While the fight in the courts with the State Department has dragged on far longer than it should have, the documents have finally been released. We should also offer our condolences to whichever investigators had to sift through all the rest of the, er… “material” which was probably lurking on that hard drive in order to find the emails. And as had long been suspected, there was some red hot material there.
No, we’re not talking about whatever photos Weiner may have been storing to send to his underage, female paramours, but rather the documents which his wife, Huma Abedin had obviously been shuffling around. As it turns out, at least four of the documents were classified. (Fox News)
The State Department on Friday released a batch of work-related emails from the account of top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin that were discovered by the FBI on a laptop belonging to Abedin’s estranged husband, Anthony Weiner, near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign.
At least four of the documents released Friday are marked “classified.”
One November 2010 document that was released shows Abedin forwarding an email to an address titled “Anthony Campaign.”
Former FBI Director James Comey said during a congressional hearing earlier this year that he believed Abedin regularly forwarded emails to Weiner for him to print out so she could give them to Clinton.
Comey famously said in July 2016 that Clinton was “extremely careless” in her handling of classified emails on a private server.
One of the emails was a “call sheet” which had been prepared for Hillary Clinton, briefing her on an upcoming phone call with the Saudi Foreign Minister. You’ll recall that this was from 2010 and Clinton was still serving as Secretary of State at the time. That one and at least three others didn’t just contain information which was later determined to be classified. They were labeled classified. Anyone remember the dancing on the head of a pin which took place during the campaign when the Clinton team insisted that anything not marked classified wasn’t really classified? And they weren’t just on the secret bathroom server… they showed up on the private Carlos Danger laptop, completely outside of the reach of the government.
Doesn’t that sound, at a minimum, grossly negligent to you? Oh, wait… I’m sorry. I forgot that we’re not supposed to say it was grossly negligent. It was “extremely careless.” (Or so we have been assured by the FBI.)”
————————–
“Today the New York Times ran a piece that could best be described as either “alternative history” or “propaganda” that appears sourced from inside the FBI. The gist of the story is that George Papadopoulos, a guy no one had heard of before his indictment by Robert Mueller on some chickensh** charges of lying to federal investigators (essentially this means you gave them answers they didn’t like) started the whole investigation.
You can believe this story if you wish but there is no more reason to believe it than anything more substantial than the email Brian Ross talked about a couple of weeks ago.
During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.
About three weeks earlier, Mr. Papadopoulos had been told that Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Mrs. Clinton, apparently stolen in an effort to try to damage her campaign.
Exactly how much Mr. Papadopoulos said that night at the Kensington Wine Rooms with the Australian, Alexander Downer, is unclear. But two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.
The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired.
Let’s clear one bit of underbrush away. If Papadopoulos is a “cooperating witness” he is probably not going to be cooperating against anyone else. You don’t indict someone you want to use as a witness for lying to the FBI. A known and indicted liar on the witness stand is not going to help you get a conviction.
The key problem with the story is that Papadopoulos told the Australian source (here we have to question why someone in the intelligence community would burn a source when there is actually no need to do so) something that was common gossip by May 2016.”
——————-
“The second huge problem with the story is that it runs 180-degrees out from every other story we’ve heard about the genesis of the investigation. And by every other source I mean 100% of all sources. Devin Nunes hasn’t mentioned this. Charles Grassley hasn’t mentioned it. Adam Schiff hasn’t mentioned it. James Clapper hasn’t mentioned it. James Comey hasn’t mentioned it. Donald effing Trump hasn’t tweeted about it. Do you really think all of these people, people with very disparate motives, would have kept their mouths shut? I don’t. Do you really think the FBI and Justice would have not disclosed this to the House and Senate were it true? I don’t. Do you really think the members of the various committees and their staffs are capable of not talking about this? Me neither.”
——————–
NYT reports George Papadopoulos was a 'driving factor' that led FBI to start Trump-Russia probe in July 2016. Dossier played no role. 1/4 https://t.co/ryMPMDEU8r
So: 1) If Papadopoulos actions drove FBI probe, why wait til nearly Feb 2017 to interview him? If done to keep probe quiet before election, why wait more than two months after vote? 2/4
3) Did officials seek a surveillance warrant on Papadopoulos? They reportedly got one on Carter Page in summer 2016. Did they try to get one on Papadopoulos? If not, why not? 4/4
I love it when one post can cause The Trump Cult to go into a wild frenzy including reposting the post. It reminds me of when Trump threatened to stop Mueller if he started looking at Trump’s finances. Paul Begala (who I always called Paul BeGoebbles) acknowledged that he and other Bill Clinton toadies had done the same thing to Kenneth Starr that The Trump Cult was trying to do to Mueller. However, he protested that Trump and his Cult were much dumber. He said Trump’s attempt to keep his finances secret was like Bill Clinton announcing to Starr: “Whatever you do, don’t look at my relationship with a young White House intern who wears a beret!”
I don’t understand the appeal of posting here to be provocative and somewhat insulting merely for the sake of being provocative and somewhat insulting. Forget asking, “Are we Christians?” I’m just curious, “Are we twelve?”
Tychicus, I posted (and AJ reposted) an article on Papadopoulos written by three reporters from the New York Times. Who wrote the article that AJ posted in response at 11:42?
So how many people here think that over the past year FoxNews has been more accurate or balanced than ABC, CBS, NBC or CNN?
We are now in this strange (and to many comical) situation where the 35% or so of the people who belong to The Trump Cult have their own set of facts. That is going to make the 2018 and 2020 elections very problematic.
HRW and I disagree on policies, on solutions, and on economics. We each have our favorite facts and occasionally we disagree on historical facts. However, we can discuss politics, economics, sociology and history because we generally can agree on facts. Both liberals and traditional conservatives struggle to converse with Trumpkins because Trumpkins have their own set of facts that generally come straight from the horse’s mouth. I first became aware of this when Trumpkins rushed to defend “the tapp Tweets” when no one on the White House staff would support Trump’s accusations. The situation has only deteriorated since then.
You’re welcome, SolarP. If HRW ever comments on Carmelo Anthony’s defense within earshot of Anthony, I am certain that Carmelo will join you in calling HRW a “hater”.
So here’s the deal: The 60-65% of the people who are not yet in The Trump Cult are going to tend to believe a front page story by three reporters in the New York Times rather than the opinion of an anonymous blogger at RedState. I have been critical of The New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media since before many of you were born. Nevertheless, I find the mainstream media to be much more reliable than Trump or his Cult or his media toadies.
Golf — I agree hiding in the bushes to take a picture of Trump golfing almost reduces CNN to the level of a British tabloid except ….. Trump made playing golf a leadership issue by criticising Obama for playing golf and promising he would be too busy to golf. He also tweeted after Christmas that it was time to get back to work and then went out played golf. Now most people try to avoid work between Christmas and New Year so golfing shouldn’t be an issue except for his promises and tweet. And thus we have so called serious journalists acting like a tabloid reporter.
An other more serious reason issue is the amount of money spent so Trump can play golf and how much of it benefits his corporations. This is small town style corruption which I think the Democrats should really press. People understand nickel and dime corruption. For example how much does the secret service spend at mar a lago bc they’re required to stay there?
The Dems should let Mueller quietly go about his work and press for info on the monetary advantages Trumps business have gained through the presidency. This will take the heat off Mueller and expose some easy to understand corruption.
“Hater” isn’t my term; you missed the three or four other times I made that clear, and it wasn’t in the first post I made on the subject. I’m not sure why you keep trying to mine that issue. Maybe you’re addressing someone else?
I won’t try to make you feel any less heroic for calling out Donald Trump. I, myself, urged Christians I talked to not to vote for him. You can agree with hwesseli however much you want. That’s great.
But I’m at a loss why anyone want to be an ass about it.
The Finnish study postef by AJ simply points out the difficulty of suppressing childhood conditioning. I would probably sweat a little more if asked to say ” I dare God…..” whereas my daughter would not. It doesn’t indicate anything more.
Kizzie’s question; The strong support for both Trump and Moore indicate to me that conservatives and many evangelicals have already crossed that bridge. Its quite apparent many are willing to ignore the basest of attitudes and beliefs for political advantage.
I’ve known you for quite some time HRW. For all that time you’ve been trying to convince me and others that our religion should play no role in a secular political system. You’ve advocated for us to strictly follow the secular world’s preferred and twisted version of separation of church and state. Yet now that you think some of us have taken your advice, we’re monsters for doing so.
Be careful, HRW. I am growing concerned that you “hate” golf.
Trump’s businesses are a very interesting story. Articles I have read indicate that his net worth is much, much less than he claims. Much of his net worth is tied up in golf resorts and golf is not a particularly healthy sport. A significant portion of his net income comes from the sale or use of his name. Has the last year made his name more valuable? Hard to say. His debt issue is serious enough that he sued Deutsch Bank rather than pay his debt or refinance back in 2008.
If Russia really does have leverage over Trump, I suspect it will be because of his debts. There are strong and suspicious ties between the Russian leadership and Deutsch Bank.
German safe zones: the German police are merely making sure they are easily accessible in case of trouble. Both the right and left have this situation. The right would like to exploit this to paint certain immigrant groups with a broad brush whereas the cultural left would like to put heir heads in the sand to avoid seeming enthocentric or worse.
The simpje truth is men from patriarchal or honor based cultures simply can’t understand sexual norms in northern Germanic, Nordic and some Anglo cultures. Since almost all other cultures are patriarchal or honor based, its not one particular religion or ethinicity. Whether a rural Muslim Afghan, a Salvadoran Catholic, Serbian Orthodox, Punjabi Sikh etc these men really have no clue and for some they completely misread the situation. This doesn’t excuse their behaviour but its a more reasonable explanation than the cultural right or left are willing to accept.
Accepting refugees and migrants is the humane thing to do but we also must be realistic and give these migrants a crash course on western sexual norms. In a short time I will celebrate the New Year with my Eastern European friends — they are Catholic, Orthodox and atheist but they need frequent reminders from me that their rural Slavic attitudes towards women need to be adjusted for urban Canada.
Sorry Ricky, I agree with Mark Twain on golf. But don’t worry i find “hate” a strong emotion requiring serious effort something I just can’t seem to generate for the game of golf.
Trump’s financial situation is probably quite precarious. Hence his refusal to release his tax returns and his refusal to sell his assests (probably over mortgaged). And yes he probably has debts to Russian banks as American banks will no longer touch him.
And finally (i think) I find this continued focus on Clinton both tellinf and strange. Telling in that it indicates Trump supportes would rather avoid defending Trump and hence find Clinton a conveneient squirrel. And strange in that people think this actually will excuse Trump’s misdoings. Its as if the police won’t write a speeding ticket if you prove somebody else is speeding.
Those culture clashes can also work in the opposite direction as well.
Several years ago I entered a rural New Mexico convenience store to find an urban New York male customer loudly berating two Hispanic female clerks who were stoically enduring the abuse. I pulled him aside and told him the ladies probably had husbands in the trailers behind the store and if the husbands heard what was going on, they would probably come into the store and kill the New Yorker. He turned back to the ladies whose broad smiles confirmed the accuracy of my warning. He quickly and quietly managed to complete his business.
Why are there so many prominent liberals and left-leaning press supporting Iranian govt, and why the strange depiction by the NYT, WaPo and others that demonstrations were pro-govt? I lost track of those narratives.
Facebook “note” from the Libertarian Party of Colorado:
~~~LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF COLORADO DENOUNCES NEW YEAR’S EVE AMBUSH SHOOTING IN DOUGLAS COUNTY
DOUGLAS COUNTY, CO: It is with great sadness that the Libertarian Party of Colorado and the Libertarian Party of Douglas County learned of the fatal shooting of Douglas County Deputy Zackari Parrish as well as the wounding of others and offers their condolences to those families starting out a new year on such a tragic note. The alleged shooter, Matthew Riehl, claimed to be a “libertarian” candidate for the position of Douglas County Sheriff in a YouTube video released earlier this month. Mr. Riehl is not a member of the Libertarian Party and has no recorded involvement with the Party. He was not nominated or endorsed for any office, neither had the Libertarian Party of Colorado nor the Libertarian Party of Douglas ever heard of him prior to this incident. All Libertarian candidates must be members of the Party and sign a statement of belief in the Party’s principles of non-aggression, limited government (if any), and respect for the rights of others. Libertarian Party of Colorado State Chair and Libertarian Party of Douglas County Chair Wayne Harlos stated:
The core of Libertarian philosophy is a belief in a peaceful means to political change and a repudiation of the initiation of physical force for political or social reasons. Ambushing any person and committing physical violence is as blatant a denial of the Party’s beliefs as any action can be. Ultimately this is not about politics but about an evil action that leaves several families in grief over death and injuries.~~~
My friend David adds, “In fact, to join the National Libertarian party, one must swear opposition to violence for social or political goals.”
DJ, We have coyotes on our course, but I think that they and the rabbits they dine on were staying under cover today. As my wife said, “Only old white men were running around outdoors in this weather.”
Kizzie, If the Libertarians can improve the quality of their candidates, they have a chance to pick up the support of a number of disillusioned Republicans.
Thanks, Rick W. Those articles were posted after the initial takes I referred to. I’ll track those down. In the meantime, that lede from the Times is not right, or at best, extremely misleading:
TEHRAN — Iranian security forces clamped down on Tehran on Monday after demonstrators across the country ignored calls for calm by President Hassan Rouhani in the most significant venting of pent-up economic and political frustrations in years.
Toward the end of the Saturday WP article there was a reference to pro-government rallies which indicated that the Iranian media was focusing on those pro-government rallies.
It seems the Editorial Board of the Washington Post must have been following our discussion. They just published this editorial (right before the Georgia fumble):
Kizzie, I still believe in the three pillars of Reaganite conservatism. These include:
1. A belief in a free market economy, free trade, limited govt. regulation of business and a shrunken welfare state.
2. A strong military that is rarely deployed in anger combined with maintenance of our historic post-war alliances.
3. An originalist view of the Constitution which would then allow the states to limit, if not eliminate, abortion and other criminal activity and curtail the spread and influence of perversion.
Almost all libertarians are with me on #1. Many libertarians would prefer more of an isolationist foreign policy rather than #2. Libertarians take a variety of positions on #3.
Wandering Views 
THIS is CNN.
A joke. We’re not laughing with them, but at them. This is supposed to be news?
https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/12/can-someone-check-on-cnn-theyve-been-fixated-on-a-white-truck-for-2-days-now/
“It all started Wednesday when CNN reporters hid in the bushes of a Florida golf course to film President Trump golfing.
Later, their attempts to obtain footage from a sidewalk were foiled by a large white truck which appeared to be strategically parked.
And it was all downhill from there.
Because getting footage of Trump slicing a drive is essential news, CNN was determined to get to the bottom of the TruckParkingGate, convinced the truck was parked purposely to prevent them from filming the president.
Even devoting air time to TruckParkingGate:”
———————————–
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cnns-quest-for-truth-behind-truck-blocking-view-of-trump-golf-course-stretches-into-second-day/article/2644546
“CNN’s quest to uncover an explanation for why a truck blocked its view of President Trump’s golf course in West Palm Beach, Fla., on Wednesday stretched into a third day and the network appears to have made a critical discovery.
Noah Gray, a producer for CNN who tweeted a picture of a white box truck in front of hedges adjacent to the golf course on Wednesday, tracked down what looked to be an identical, if not the same, truck parked Thursday in a parking lot at the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Department.”
“While CNN’s John Berman, who sat in for Anderson Cooper on his “360” evening program on Thursday, said that the truck, which was in a lot behind a fence, was parked in such a way that they could not compare license plates, on Friday, three days into the story, Gray said CNN confirmed a report by WPEC CBS 12 reporter Mike Magnoli that the license plate he saw on the truck parked at the sheriff’s department was the same one CNN spotted on the truck blocking their view on Wednesday.”
——————————-
That’s some hard hitting investigative journalism right there.
LikeLike
The leftists Democrats think they have a new tactic to stop deportations of criminal illegals. It won’t work though, because they’re still here illegally and deportation is the still preferred remedy. Crooked Cuomo and Moonbeam should know better, but hey, grandstanding’s always been their thing.
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/366639-cuomo-pardons-61-people-ahead-of-the-new-year-including-18-immigrants
“New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) on Wednesday pardoned 61 people, including some who faced immigration enforcement actions because of prior criminal charges.
Cuomo pardoned 18 immigrants who had committed low-level offenses, saying his pardon was based on their rehabilitation efforts. Cuomo blasted President Trump’s hard-line immigration efforts in the process.”
—————————
https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/12/ca-gov-jerry-brown-pardons-immigrants-slated-for-deportation-due-to-criminal-convictions/
“File this story under “Elections Have Consequences.”
California Governor Jerry Brown Brown used a Christmas holiday tradition and granted pardons to two immigrants who were on the verge of being deported for committing crimes while in this country.
Brown, pairing his state’s combative approach to federal immigration authorities with his belief in the power of redemption, characterized the pardons as acts of mercy.
The Democratic governor moved as federal officials in recent months have detained and deported immigrants with felony convictions that resulted in the loss of their legal residency status, including many with nonviolent offenses that occurred years ago.
With the pardons, the reason for applicants’ deportations may be eliminated, said attorney Kevin Lo of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, which represented some of the men in a recent class-action lawsuit.
The news reports indicate the acts were in response to President Donald Trump’s focus on stemming illegal immigration.
The pardons of Rottanak Kong of Davis and Mony Neth of Modesto could be seen as another poke at the Trump administration’s hard-line policies on immigration.
Both men came to the United States as children when their families fled the Khmer Rouge government that killed millions of its own people. They were recently detained as part of a federal immigration roundup, although a California-based federal judge has temporarily halted the deportation of hundreds of Cambodian refugees.
Kong was sentenced to a year in Stanislaus County jail in 2003 for joyriding. He served seven months. Neth was convicted in 1995, also in Stanislaus County, on weapons and receiving stolen property charges. He also served his sentence.
Brown’s pardons said both men had become law-abiding citizens and paid their debts to society.
In news that seems related, the Department of Justice cut funding to one of California’s most prominent “sanctuary cities“.
———————
Time for some more consequences.
LikeLike
This one was interesting. Personally I think everyone knows deep down in their hearts and minds that God exists, even though their mouth may deny it.
Thoughts?
https://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2017/12/29/religions_psychological_effects_on_non-believers.html
“A study in Finland explored how religious and non-religious people responded to the idea of God.
The researchers used electrodes to measure how much sweat people produced while reading statements like “I dare God to make my parents drown” or “I dare God to make me die of cancer”. Unexpectedly, when nonbelievers read the statements, they produced as much sweat as believers — suggesting they were equally anxious about the consequences of their dares.
And that’s not simply because nonbelievers didn’t want to wish harm on others. A companion study showed that similar dares that did not involve God (such as, “I wish my parents would drown”) did not produce comparable increases in sweat levels. Together, then, these findings suggest that despite denying that God exists, nonbelievers behaved as though God did exist.
Does this mean that nonbelievers are lying when they say they reject God? Not exactly. Rather, these contradictory behaviours probably arise in part due to living in a theistic culture that hammers home the idea that God exists. Perhaps this leads nonbelievers to form “implicit” attitudes that are at odds with their “explicit” ones.
Explicit attitudes are those people can call to mind consciously and can report when asked: for example “carrots are good for me” or “God does not exist”.
By contrast, people have little or no awareness of their implicit attitudes — the learned associations between ideas in their minds, such as how easily the concept “carrot” brings to mind another concept like “bland,” or how easily the word “God” brings to mind “existence”.
As these examples illustrate, implicit and explicit attitudes can clash. It’s possible for a person to say they “love carrots” while unconsciously bringing negative associations to mind about them. Or, to say “God does not exist” while unconsciously bringing to mind ideas of God’s existence.
In this way, it makes sense for nonbelievers to get nervous at the thought of daring God to do harm.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
A test like that has no significance because a person who truly believes there is no God is unaffected by such thoughts.
I once worked with a guy who, when he sneezed and a co-worker said “God Bless You”. said, “Please don’t say that. it’s like multiplying through by zero.” Not at all affected.
As for the truck. We know the j Russians put it there to shield Trump and the Russian’s in their plot to take over the world.
Why else would a truck be on a golf course? Definitely something nefarious. Racism, sexual harassment and a multitude of other things.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Chas,
But he obviously was affected, or he wouldn’t have responded at all. Good or bad, the effects were there in his response, and they are telling.
LikeLike
I have to agree with what HRW said last night. I don’t see him as one of the “Trump haters”, but rather that he gives us a perspective from someone not invested in these arguments, albeit also colored by his own political views. Although I am not a Trump supporter, & often am quite displeased with his behavior, I don’t consider myself a “Trump hater”, either. Not everyone who disagrees with him, or is disgusted with some of his words or behaviors, is a hater.
LikeLiked by 3 people
They just can’t handle the truth and if you won’t join them, you must be shunned. Talk about shallow people. 🙂
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alan-dershowitz-on-defending-trump-my-liberal-friends-dont-invite-me-to-dinner-anymore/article/2644432
“Harvard Law School professor Alan Dershowitz says he’s feeling the heat from family and friends over his defense of President Trump amid special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
“It’s caused me to lose seven pounds,” Dershowitz told Politico. “My liberal friends don’t invite me to dinner anymore.”
————————
“My really, really close friends say, ‘You’re 100 percent right in your analysis, but can’t you just shut the @#$% up and not talk at all,’” he said. “They tell me, ‘This is a time for selective silence.’ My nephew thinks I’m helping keep in office one of the greatest dangers in American history. I tell him I’m just standing up for principle. He tells me that I don’t have to stand up so loud.”
Dershowitz added that his family is no longer proud to be associated with him.
“I was a source of pride to my kids, my grandkids,” he said. “Now it’s ‘Oy, he’s related to Alan Dershowitz.’ That hurts me a little bit.””
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read something recently that made me think of this question:
Suppose there is another election like the ones with Trump vs. Clinton or Moore vs. Jones, where it seems imperative to conservatives that the Republican candidate win. What if the Republican candidate was known for hating Jews? Or had other white supremacist leanings? Would you still vote for him? Why or why not?
(Btw, this is not completely merely hypothetical.)
LikeLike
Since I am/was unable to understand how anyone could vote for an unindicted criminal, Hillary Rodham Clinton, I am unable to answer any questions about voting for a bad candidate.
Kim H found that Roy Moore was so bad that she voted for a “baby killer” Democrat. I wouldn’t but then I am not married to a Democrat.
My wife usually has ABC on in the morning as she works with her canaries. She had no idea what “Fast and Furious” was; she had never heard of it. Whoopi and Joy didn’t bring it up. There is a whole lot that the MSM doesn’t talk about… They do bring up Trump and how horrible he is though. Mary Anne doesn’t hear the bad stuff about Democrats because it is not mentioned.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’d do the same thing I did this time. Pray that God would give us the “winner” we need, not the one we deserve and not vote.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Well you won’t rein in the molesting hordes, so this is your only option I guess. How sad, especially for the women.
I guess this is also their back door way of acknowledging that there was in fact a problem last year, despite Merkel and company’s insistence that there wasn’t.
https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/12/this-is-germany-safe-zones-for-women-during-new-years-eve-celebrations-after-past-mass-sexual-attacks/#more-237848
“In both 2016 and 2017, there were mass sexual assaults on women in German cities during New Year’s Eve celebrations.
The police initially tried to conceal that most of the perpetrators were either migrants or Middle Eastern immigrants. But the truth eventually came out and it was a major scandal.”
————————
“This year, German authorities, apparently believing they are unable to control the situation, have taken to creating “safe zones” for women, as the BBC reports, New Year’s Eve party in Berlin to have ‘safe zone’ for women:
The new security measures planned for the Brandenburg Gate party come amid concerns about sexual assaults.
A large number of assaults and robberies targeting women at Cologne’s New Year’s Eve celebrations two years ago horrified Germany.
Hundreds of women reported being attacked by gangs of men with migrant backgrounds.
The events in Cologne heightened tensions in the country over the large influx of refugees and migrants – 1.1m people arrived in Germany in 2015, some, but by no means all, fleeing violence in Syria and Iraq.
Hundreds of thousands of people are expected to attend the New Year’s Eve party in Berlin on Sunday and security will be strict. Large bags, such as rucksacks, and alcoholic drinks will be banned at the Brandenburg Gate.
Women who have been assaulted or feel harassed will be able to get support at a special “safety zone”, staffed by the German Red Cross, on Ebertstrasse.
The Guardian adds:
Berlin police confirmed that this year women would be able to seek help in an area staffed by the German Red Cross.
“The organisers have set up a safety zone for women who have been victims of a sexual offence or are feeling harassed,” a police statement said.
Anja Marx, a spokeswoman for the event, said there would be a tented area with psychologists on hand.
Safe zones are not the answer. Getting control of your streets is the answer. But Germany appears unwilling or unable to do that.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
HRW, Not all Republicans have joined Orange Lives Matter in attacks on the FBI.
LikeLike
rw: You really don’t believe that there has been corruption in the FBI? Dir. Comey writing an exoneration statement before interviewing the prime subject of the investigation; not giving rights of advisement to the prime subject of the investigation; changing words in the exoneration statement that removes the clear felony language; making comments that a political candidate must be stopped, and implementing an insurance plan should he win the election. The worst hasn’t been made public – the use of an unverified dossier to secure a FISA warrant.
Why do you think FBI Deputy Director McCabe, after 15 hours of congressional testimony, has announced his retirement when he isn’t even eligible yet? Seems pretty obvious to most people…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi Kizzie. I don’t characterize hwesseli as a Trump hater; just a hater. He was exercised about the notion that conservatives hold to an ideology that breeds white nationalism, etc., and wished such politicians would disclaim their politics. That’s why he takes the slothful approach and insists Trump was calling nazis “good folks.” I am on facebook, though, so I see people on the right do the same kind of thing!
LikeLike
And of course there’s the Antifa hatred that seems to infest its supporters with rabies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
My position on the FBI and law enforcement has been consistent. Poor Comey and his agents were required to conduct investigations of both major 2016 presidential candidates who were each profoundly dishonest and shockingly stupid. Hillary was likely lacking criminal intent as she made top secret information available to half the world even as Trump probably was incapable of understanding the concept of obstruction of justice even as he committed the offense regularly in the first few months of his administration.
Democrats and Trumpkins have been equally outraged by the way law enforcement has treated their dishonest but clueless nominees.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect many senior FBI agents are retiring early. They likely don’t want to work for a dishonest buffoon. I also suspect many would have also retired early had Hillary been elected as they would not have wanted to work for a dishonest sociopath.
Any reasonably intelligent person could have begun to write the report on Hillary about halfway through the email investigation. She was incredibly careless and negligent. The same could be said about the Trump investigation. Though his campaign was too disorganized to effectively conspire with Russia, there were many inappropriate contacts which Trump and his aides tried to conceal from investigators in a childishly clumsy manner.
LikeLike
Kevin D. Williamson is as balanced as I am. Last night he was giving scathing reviews to Trump. Tonight he reminds people what he thinks of the Clintons:
LikeLike
Debra, I agree with you that political analysis is not the strength of Dreher. However, I think he does a pretty good job here:
LikeLike
That’s a good question about voting, Kizzie, and it’s certainly not hypothetical. In so many situations, Christians are willing to entrust results of this or that to God. I’m not sure why we think we have to take the reins in the voting booth, though, when there isn’t a worthy candidate. Don’t we know voting is optional?
LikeLiked by 2 people
HRW is anything but a “hater”. He is probably the most rational and well-informed person on this site. He is left of center, so many of his conclusions are shocking to our sensibilities. However, he is extremely knowledgeable and well-informed and his conclusions flow from his philosophy and worldview and objective facts.
As an example, HRW’s view of Trump in many ways mirrors the views of the 20+ conservative intellectuals who wrote articles against Trump in the winter of 2015-2016. Their criticisms were not based primarily on political ideology, but were fact-based critiques of the man’s character, intelligence, stability, etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why are we assuming “hater” and rational, well-informed are mutually exclusive?
Anyone who has backed Antifa has supported hatred.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky @5:09 Dreher’s last paragraph:
The problem with this conclusion is the assumption that Christians must firmly align with ANY economic or political ideology at all and the failure to realize that if we do, we will inevitably have a problem with ‘theological integrity and credible witness’—regardless of which ideology we align with. Modern ideologies are secular constructions and are not constrained by Christian values or moral authority. And this is natural since our ideologies are essentially non-Christian systems of thinking.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think the powerful in DC do whatever they please for the most part. They indulge their perversions, blackmail their agendas through government bureaucracies and agencies and Congress. The left hand pays the right hand, but claims innocence or ignorance if an accidental spotlight momentarily exposes their activity. That is the environment commonly referred to as ‘the swamp’.
I suspect many are retiring early because the sustained public scrutiny this President has brought with him means they probably won’t be able to operate the way they have in the past. Apparently, that is how the swamp is drained.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Hater” is a modern word. I’ve been called a “hater” a couple of times and it didn’t bother me because I’ve always associated the use of the word with young liberals. Maybe some young liberal can tell me what the term actually means.
LikeLike
Debra, What specifically do you mean when you say “drain the swamp”?
FBI agents generally do not “indulge perversions” or “blackmail agendas”. They generally pursue terrorists, organized crime bosses and other criminals and work to keep us safe. Recently, they have been forced to investigate a really despicable Democratic nominee and a comical but dishonest Republican nominee. I am sure most of the agents look forward to a time when Americans may be able to again nominate presidential candidates who are not the subjects of federal investigations.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Trump have all had investigations on their watch. This one is different in that the President is despised by many in his own party, and hated by the media and by big business movers and shakers. It is the never ending negative media coverage (which Trump himself acerbates) that wearies most Americans.
LikeLiked by 2 people
” Hillary was likely lacking criminal intent as she made top secret information available to half the world ”
See, here’s the thing. Intent is irrelevant. And as a law guy, you should know this. Men and women are punished for far less breaches than hers, and they get prosecuted, regardless of intent. But Comey didn’t do that. He’d already exonerated before even interviewing her. He deserved to be fired.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just to refresh your memory, here’s the applicable law. I would argue that sending classified info to Anthony Weiner’s laptop so he could print it, which we found out today happened due to Judicial Watch finally getting some answers for their FOA request, would clearly violate the law. Willfully communicated and transmitted, and an unauthorized pervert receiving it, on the same laptop he used to prey on young women.
But your boy Comey doesn’t see a problem, or intent? Maybe he needs to open his eyes.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/798
“(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both
LikeLike
AJ, Read the law you printed. Read the fourth word of sub paragraph (a).
Read this:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/willfully
As a “law guy”, I was taught to read.
LikeLike
Every day prosecutors make decisions on whether to prosecute factoring in the intent of the individual being investigated.
Hillary was stupid. Likewise, Trump was stupid. When Nixon and Bill Clinton obstructed justice, they both understood that what they were doing was wrong and the crime that they were committing. When Trump was begging Comey to let Flynn go and when he fired Comey, Trump didn’t understand his own duties, the limits on his powers or the definition of obstruction of justice. Can a five year old be guilty of obstruction of justice? Can an eleven year old? McMaster supposedly told people Trump had the mind of a kindergartener. Bannon said he was an eleven year old.
LikeLike
And Reagan also knowingly assisted Oliver North in illegally furnishing arms to rebels in Nicaragua. So one can apparently be all grown up and still get away with it. But you can’t get away with it if your party doesn’t like you—-then you don’t get away with it even if you are actually not guilty. That’s part of the corrupt environment in DC.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I know some of what Hillary did that was illegal. I don’t know what Trump did that was against the law, do you?
I still do not understand how honest Democrats could have nominated Hillary. So, i assume that the Democrats who nominated Hillary were not honest Democrats.
If Hillary was the best Democrats could do…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah I’m not using ‘hater’ in the modern sense. I’m using it in the sense of it being a motivator for interpreting a part of the world, often the political side of the world. I’m hardly saying anything much different than what’s been said of many here; such statements as “the right needs to take responsibility for an ideology that leads to violence” and the like.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ricky,
I’ll go slow.
When Huma and Hillary sent classified info to Weiner, who was NOT authorized, and didn’t have the security clearance to receive it, so he could print it for them, they do so willfully, deliberately, and illegally.
This isn’t that hard.
As for your dictionary.
Willfully
1.
with the intention of causing harm; deliberately.
“she denies four charges of willfully neglecting a patient”
2.
with a stubborn and determined intention to do as one wants, regardless of the consequences.
“he had willfully ignored the evidence”
They knew it was illegal and he wasn’t authorized to receive it. But she knew that as always, guys like Comey would spare her the consequences for her illegal acts. Again.
That’s willful and deliberate. It’s also really stupid, and grossly negligent. But you already know all this.
LikeLike
AJ, Go slower, Buddy. Hillary and Abedin are two different people even as Trump and Michael Flynn are two different people.
Of course I know Hillary was stupid. I said so @ 10:29. Of course I know Hillary was negligent. I said so @4:48. I even said that Hillary was profoundly dishonest and shockingly stupid @ 4:31.
What you and most Trumpkins don’t want to face is the fact that your man is just as stupid and dishonest as Hillary. With both, it is not a matter of one or two incidents. Hillary and Trump have been dishonest for their entire lives! Trump paid $25,000,000 to settle a lawsuit because he conned people for years using a fake university. Trump had an imaginary friend (John Barron) whose job it was to lie to the press about Trump’s sex life. That’s about the best combination of stupidity and dishonesty I have ever read about.
What HRW and I find amusing is that Trump and Trump Republicans now are attacking the FBI, the Deputy Attorney General, Bob Mueller and other federal law enforcement personnel who, as part of their jobs, have been forced to investigate the stupid and dishonest acts of Trump even as law enforcement had to investigate the stupid and negligent acts of Hillary.
We just think Orange Lives Matters is ironic and comical.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, I’m waiting. What specifically do you mean when you say: “drain the swamp”?
I know Trump said it all the time, but he is a con man. He said it because he knew his gullible followers like to hear the phrase. I doubt he had any fixed idea of what the phrase meant.
My question is: What do you mean when you say “drain the swamp”?
LikeLike
So here is what it appears the word “hater” means in the modern sense. I don’t follow modern culture except for sports. Modern athletes like to call anyone who criticizes them a “hater”. If I say say Carmelo Anthony is slow on his defensive rotations, Carmelo and his fans can call me a “hater”. If I say the Carolina Panthers quarterback (whose name escapes me) gave a lackluster effort to recover his own fumble in the Super Bowl, I can be labeled a “hater”.
If I say it was stupid and dishonest for Trump to have an imaginary friend who lied to the press about his sex life, I may be labeled “a hater”. Call me a “hater” all you want.
LikeLike
This article by Bret Stephens is making the rounds:
I repost it for Bob Buckles. I believe Stephens and Bill Kristol both wound up voting for Hillary. Quite a few Yankee NeverTrumpers, including Big Bush, did that. West Texas Never Trumpers like Kevin D. Williamson and myself never really considered voting for Hillary. Like Bob Buckles, we just don’t vote for Democrats. We agree with Stephens that character in a president is really important, but we also concluded that though Hillary was not as ridiculous or embarrassing, she was just as dishonest and foolish as Trump.
LikeLike
I guess someone needs to put up the big political story of the weekend. This is how the Russian investigation started:
LikeLike
This article helps explain Comey’s extremely difficult position when both major presidential nominees were complete slimes:
LikeLike
yeah like i said, I’m not using hater in the modern sense. I didn’t even initially use the term “hater.” I only used it because someone else used the term “Trump hater,” which wasn’t how I meant it at all. We need to take responsibility for an ideology that leads to violence. hwesseli said so.
LikeLike
Sure Ricky, Huma did it all on her own. Yet she wasn’t charged by Comey either. Go figure.
https://hotair.com/archives/2017/12/30/lot-just-porn-carlos-dangers-laptop/
“We should really offer a tip of the hat to Judicial Watch for the dogged battle they’ve waged to gain public access to the pile of Hillary Clinton emails found on the laptop of Anthony “Carlos Danger” Weiner. While the fight in the courts with the State Department has dragged on far longer than it should have, the documents have finally been released. We should also offer our condolences to whichever investigators had to sift through all the rest of the, er… “material” which was probably lurking on that hard drive in order to find the emails. And as had long been suspected, there was some red hot material there.
No, we’re not talking about whatever photos Weiner may have been storing to send to his underage, female paramours, but rather the documents which his wife, Huma Abedin had obviously been shuffling around. As it turns out, at least four of the documents were classified. (Fox News)
The State Department on Friday released a batch of work-related emails from the account of top Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin that were discovered by the FBI on a laptop belonging to Abedin’s estranged husband, Anthony Weiner, near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign.
At least four of the documents released Friday are marked “classified.”
One November 2010 document that was released shows Abedin forwarding an email to an address titled “Anthony Campaign.”
Former FBI Director James Comey said during a congressional hearing earlier this year that he believed Abedin regularly forwarded emails to Weiner for him to print out so she could give them to Clinton.
Comey famously said in July 2016 that Clinton was “extremely careless” in her handling of classified emails on a private server.
One of the emails was a “call sheet” which had been prepared for Hillary Clinton, briefing her on an upcoming phone call with the Saudi Foreign Minister. You’ll recall that this was from 2010 and Clinton was still serving as Secretary of State at the time. That one and at least three others didn’t just contain information which was later determined to be classified. They were labeled classified. Anyone remember the dancing on the head of a pin which took place during the campaign when the Clinton team insisted that anything not marked classified wasn’t really classified? And they weren’t just on the secret bathroom server… they showed up on the private Carlos Danger laptop, completely outside of the reach of the government.
Doesn’t that sound, at a minimum, grossly negligent to you? Oh, wait… I’m sorry. I forgot that we’re not supposed to say it was grossly negligent. It was “extremely careless.” (Or so we have been assured by the FBI.)”
————————–
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now as for the Times piece, which allegedly came from a known and indicted liar……
Easily proven false
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/2017/12/30/drunken-conversation-really-probable-cause-fbi-needed-investigate-presidential-campaign/
“Today the New York Times ran a piece that could best be described as either “alternative history” or “propaganda” that appears sourced from inside the FBI. The gist of the story is that George Papadopoulos, a guy no one had heard of before his indictment by Robert Mueller on some chickensh** charges of lying to federal investigators (essentially this means you gave them answers they didn’t like) started the whole investigation.
You can believe this story if you wish but there is no more reason to believe it than anything more substantial than the email Brian Ross talked about a couple of weeks ago.
During a night of heavy drinking at an upscale London bar in May 2016, George Papadopoulos, a young foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, made a startling revelation to Australia’s top diplomat in Britain: Russia had political dirt on Hillary Clinton.
About three weeks earlier, Mr. Papadopoulos had been told that Moscow had thousands of emails that would embarrass Mrs. Clinton, apparently stolen in an effort to try to damage her campaign.
Exactly how much Mr. Papadopoulos said that night at the Kensington Wine Rooms with the Australian, Alexander Downer, is unclear. But two months later, when leaked Democratic emails began appearing online, Australian officials passed the information about Mr. Papadopoulos to their American counterparts, according to four current and former American and foreign officials with direct knowledge of the Australians’ role.
The hacking and the revelation that a member of the Trump campaign may have had inside information about it were driving factors that led the F.B.I. to open an investigation in July 2016 into Russia’s attempts to disrupt the election and whether any of President Trump’s associates conspired.
Let’s clear one bit of underbrush away. If Papadopoulos is a “cooperating witness” he is probably not going to be cooperating against anyone else. You don’t indict someone you want to use as a witness for lying to the FBI. A known and indicted liar on the witness stand is not going to help you get a conviction.
The key problem with the story is that Papadopoulos told the Australian source (here we have to question why someone in the intelligence community would burn a source when there is actually no need to do so) something that was common gossip by May 2016.”
——————-
“The second huge problem with the story is that it runs 180-degrees out from every other story we’ve heard about the genesis of the investigation. And by every other source I mean 100% of all sources. Devin Nunes hasn’t mentioned this. Charles Grassley hasn’t mentioned it. Adam Schiff hasn’t mentioned it. James Clapper hasn’t mentioned it. James Comey hasn’t mentioned it. Donald effing Trump hasn’t tweeted about it. Do you really think all of these people, people with very disparate motives, would have kept their mouths shut? I don’t. Do you really think the FBI and Justice would have not disclosed this to the House and Senate were it true? I don’t. Do you really think the members of the various committees and their staffs are capable of not talking about this? Me neither.”
——————–
But Ricky does. 🙄
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLiked by 1 person
I love it when one post can cause The Trump Cult to go into a wild frenzy including reposting the post. It reminds me of when Trump threatened to stop Mueller if he started looking at Trump’s finances. Paul Begala (who I always called Paul BeGoebbles) acknowledged that he and other Bill Clinton toadies had done the same thing to Kenneth Starr that The Trump Cult was trying to do to Mueller. However, he protested that Trump and his Cult were much dumber. He said Trump’s attempt to keep his finances secret was like Bill Clinton announcing to Starr: “Whatever you do, don’t look at my relationship with a young White House intern who wears a beret!”
LikeLike
I don’t understand the appeal of posting here to be provocative and somewhat insulting merely for the sake of being provocative and somewhat insulting. Forget asking, “Are we Christians?” I’m just curious, “Are we twelve?”
LikeLike
I see that Ricky has put out yet another disinformation diversion from the NYT…
LikeLike
Tychicus, I posted (and AJ reposted) an article on Papadopoulos written by three reporters from the New York Times. Who wrote the article that AJ posted in response at 11:42?
LikeLike
Ricky: AJ posted Byron York’s tweets which referenced the article – I imagine that’s why it ended up in his post.
LikeLike
So how many people here think that over the past year FoxNews has been more accurate or balanced than ABC, CBS, NBC or CNN?
We are now in this strange (and to many comical) situation where the 35% or so of the people who belong to The Trump Cult have their own set of facts. That is going to make the 2018 and 2020 elections very problematic.
HRW and I disagree on policies, on solutions, and on economics. We each have our favorite facts and occasionally we disagree on historical facts. However, we can discuss politics, economics, sociology and history because we generally can agree on facts. Both liberals and traditional conservatives struggle to converse with Trumpkins because Trumpkins have their own set of facts that generally come straight from the horse’s mouth. I first became aware of this when Trumpkins rushed to defend “the tapp Tweets” when no one on the White House staff would support Trump’s accusations. The situation has only deteriorated since then.
LikeLike
Tychicus, I read Byron York’s Tweets. My question was: Who wrote the article that AJ posted @ 11:42 in response to the NYT article on Papadopoulos?
LikeLike
Heh, ok. Thank you, Rick Weaver. Thank you for the honor of your presence here.
LikeLike
You’re welcome, SolarP. If HRW ever comments on Carmelo Anthony’s defense within earshot of Anthony, I am certain that Carmelo will join you in calling HRW a “hater”.
So here’s the deal: The 60-65% of the people who are not yet in The Trump Cult are going to tend to believe a front page story by three reporters in the New York Times rather than the opinion of an anonymous blogger at RedState. I have been critical of The New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media since before many of you were born. Nevertheless, I find the mainstream media to be much more reliable than Trump or his Cult or his media toadies.
LikeLike
Its new year’s eve so lets relax and enjoy.
Golf — I agree hiding in the bushes to take a picture of Trump golfing almost reduces CNN to the level of a British tabloid except ….. Trump made playing golf a leadership issue by criticising Obama for playing golf and promising he would be too busy to golf. He also tweeted after Christmas that it was time to get back to work and then went out played golf. Now most people try to avoid work between Christmas and New Year so golfing shouldn’t be an issue except for his promises and tweet. And thus we have so called serious journalists acting like a tabloid reporter.
An other more serious reason issue is the amount of money spent so Trump can play golf and how much of it benefits his corporations. This is small town style corruption which I think the Democrats should really press. People understand nickel and dime corruption. For example how much does the secret service spend at mar a lago bc they’re required to stay there?
The Dems should let Mueller quietly go about his work and press for info on the monetary advantages Trumps business have gained through the presidency. This will take the heat off Mueller and expose some easy to understand corruption.
LikeLike
“Hater” isn’t my term; you missed the three or four other times I made that clear, and it wasn’t in the first post I made on the subject. I’m not sure why you keep trying to mine that issue. Maybe you’re addressing someone else?
I won’t try to make you feel any less heroic for calling out Donald Trump. I, myself, urged Christians I talked to not to vote for him. You can agree with hwesseli however much you want. That’s great.
But I’m at a loss why anyone want to be an ass about it.
LikeLike
The Finnish study postef by AJ simply points out the difficulty of suppressing childhood conditioning. I would probably sweat a little more if asked to say ” I dare God…..” whereas my daughter would not. It doesn’t indicate anything more.
Kizzie’s question; The strong support for both Trump and Moore indicate to me that conservatives and many evangelicals have already crossed that bridge. Its quite apparent many are willing to ignore the basest of attitudes and beliefs for political advantage.
LikeLike
I love it.
I’ve known you for quite some time HRW. For all that time you’ve been trying to convince me and others that our religion should play no role in a secular political system. You’ve advocated for us to strictly follow the secular world’s preferred and twisted version of separation of church and state. Yet now that you think some of us have taken your advice, we’re monsters for doing so.
🙂
LikeLike
Be careful, HRW. I am growing concerned that you “hate” golf.
Trump’s businesses are a very interesting story. Articles I have read indicate that his net worth is much, much less than he claims. Much of his net worth is tied up in golf resorts and golf is not a particularly healthy sport. A significant portion of his net income comes from the sale or use of his name. Has the last year made his name more valuable? Hard to say. His debt issue is serious enough that he sued Deutsch Bank rather than pay his debt or refinance back in 2008.
If Russia really does have leverage over Trump, I suspect it will be because of his debts. There are strong and suspicious ties between the Russian leadership and Deutsch Bank.
LikeLike
German safe zones: the German police are merely making sure they are easily accessible in case of trouble. Both the right and left have this situation. The right would like to exploit this to paint certain immigrant groups with a broad brush whereas the cultural left would like to put heir heads in the sand to avoid seeming enthocentric or worse.
The simpje truth is men from patriarchal or honor based cultures simply can’t understand sexual norms in northern Germanic, Nordic and some Anglo cultures. Since almost all other cultures are patriarchal or honor based, its not one particular religion or ethinicity. Whether a rural Muslim Afghan, a Salvadoran Catholic, Serbian Orthodox, Punjabi Sikh etc these men really have no clue and for some they completely misread the situation. This doesn’t excuse their behaviour but its a more reasonable explanation than the cultural right or left are willing to accept.
Accepting refugees and migrants is the humane thing to do but we also must be realistic and give these migrants a crash course on western sexual norms. In a short time I will celebrate the New Year with my Eastern European friends — they are Catholic, Orthodox and atheist but they need frequent reminders from me that their rural Slavic attitudes towards women need to be adjusted for urban Canada.
LikeLike
AJ I’m a little confused by your 832 comment.
Sorry Ricky, I agree with Mark Twain on golf. But don’t worry i find “hate” a strong emotion requiring serious effort something I just can’t seem to generate for the game of golf.
Trump’s financial situation is probably quite precarious. Hence his refusal to release his tax returns and his refusal to sell his assests (probably over mortgaged). And yes he probably has debts to Russian banks as American banks will no longer touch him.
And finally (i think) I find this continued focus on Clinton both tellinf and strange. Telling in that it indicates Trump supportes would rather avoid defending Trump and hence find Clinton a conveneient squirrel. And strange in that people think this actually will excuse Trump’s misdoings. Its as if the police won’t write a speeding ticket if you prove somebody else is speeding.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HRW @ 8:46
Those culture clashes can also work in the opposite direction as well.
Several years ago I entered a rural New Mexico convenience store to find an urban New York male customer loudly berating two Hispanic female clerks who were stoically enduring the abuse. I pulled him aside and told him the ladies probably had husbands in the trailers behind the store and if the husbands heard what was going on, they would probably come into the store and kill the New Yorker. He turned back to the ladies whose broad smiles confirmed the accuracy of my warning. He quickly and quietly managed to complete his business.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What would be the problem if someone hated golf? I’m not following the joke or insult there.
LikeLike
Happy New Year, ya’ll. :–)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Happy New Year, Debra!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Happy New Year to all! It is 15 degrees here. We must bundle up for golf.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Coyotes love golf courses
LikeLiked by 4 people
Why are there so many prominent liberals and left-leaning press supporting Iranian govt, and why the strange depiction by the NYT, WaPo and others that demonstrations were pro-govt? I lost track of those narratives.
LikeLike
Facebook “note” from the Libertarian Party of Colorado:
~~~LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF COLORADO DENOUNCES NEW YEAR’S EVE AMBUSH SHOOTING IN DOUGLAS COUNTY
DOUGLAS COUNTY, CO: It is with great sadness that the Libertarian Party of Colorado and the Libertarian Party of Douglas County learned of the fatal shooting of Douglas County Deputy Zackari Parrish as well as the wounding of others and offers their condolences to those families starting out a new year on such a tragic note. The alleged shooter, Matthew Riehl, claimed to be a “libertarian” candidate for the position of Douglas County Sheriff in a YouTube video released earlier this month. Mr. Riehl is not a member of the Libertarian Party and has no recorded involvement with the Party. He was not nominated or endorsed for any office, neither had the Libertarian Party of Colorado nor the Libertarian Party of Douglas ever heard of him prior to this incident. All Libertarian candidates must be members of the Party and sign a statement of belief in the Party’s principles of non-aggression, limited government (if any), and respect for the rights of others. Libertarian Party of Colorado State Chair and Libertarian Party of Douglas County Chair Wayne Harlos stated:
The core of Libertarian philosophy is a belief in a peaceful means to political change and a repudiation of the initiation of physical force for political or social reasons. Ambushing any person and committing physical violence is as blatant a denial of the Party’s beliefs as any action can be. Ultimately this is not about politics but about an evil action that leaves several families in grief over death and injuries.~~~
My friend David adds, “In fact, to join the National Libertarian party, one must swear opposition to violence for social or political goals.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Something my libertarian friends often refer to is the NAP – the Non-Aggression Principle – which is against any kind of violence or coercion.
LikeLike
DJ, We have coyotes on our course, but I think that they and the rabbits they dine on were staying under cover today. As my wife said, “Only old white men were running around outdoors in this weather.”
Kizzie, If the Libertarians can improve the quality of their candidates, they have a chance to pick up the support of a number of disillusioned Republicans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
SolarP, Here is the latest NYT article on Iran:
LikeLike
Here is what the Washington Post said about the Iranian protests:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/iran-says-10-people-have-been-killed-in-nationwide-protests/2018/01/01/384f61be-ee7b-11e7-95e3-eff284e71c8d_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_iranprotests-6pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.99be95224a7e
LikeLike
CNN on the Iranian protests:
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/01/world/iran-protests-deaths-rouhani-intl/index.html
LikeLike
The liberal Slate on Iran:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/01/iran-protests-show-no-signs-of-easing-as-death-toll-rises-to-at-least-12.html
LikeLike
Thanks, Rick W. Those articles were posted after the initial takes I referred to. I’ll track those down. In the meantime, that lede from the Times is not right, or at best, extremely misleading:
TEHRAN — Iranian security forces clamped down on Tehran on Monday after demonstrators across the country ignored calls for calm by President Hassan Rouhani in the most significant venting of pent-up economic and political frustrations in years.
LikeLike
Friday NYT article:
LikeLike
Friday WP:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/iran-arrests-demonstrators-against-price-hikes-in-tehran/2017/12/29/81155900-ec9e-11e7-956e-baea358f9725_story.html?utm_term=.ad539e50ff55
LikeLike
Is this flurry of links directed at anyone in particular?
LikeLike
Saturday NYT:
LikeLike
Saturday WP:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/pro-government-demonstrators-rally-in-iran-following-days-of-unrest/2017/12/30/a737b40e-ecdd-11e7-956e-baea358f9725_story.html?utm_term=.691b9d863272
This may be one you were looking for, SolarP.
LikeLike
Toward the end of the Saturday WP article there was a reference to pro-government rallies which indicated that the Iranian media was focusing on those pro-government rallies.
LikeLike
Here’s the twitter link and headline to the Times article Rick linked above.
“[I]gnored calls for calm” is a downright strange way to put it…
LikeLike
Kizzie, I was somewhat unfamiliar with the Iranian economy. It looks like they could use more libertarians:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iran
LikeLike
Los Angeles has a large group of Iranian immigrants. The LA Times has a couple of Iranian or Iranian-American reporters:
http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-iran-explainer-20171231-story.html
LikeLike
It seems the Editorial Board of the Washington Post must have been following our discussion. They just published this editorial (right before the Georgia fumble):
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/the-west-should-support-the-protesters-in-iran/2018/01/01/02b4f208-ef11-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.dc5209dd5097
LikeLike
Ricky – You have often shared with us the same articles that my libertarian friend David posts on Facebook. Do you have libertarian leanings?
LikeLike
Kizzie, I still believe in the three pillars of Reaganite conservatism. These include:
1. A belief in a free market economy, free trade, limited govt. regulation of business and a shrunken welfare state.
2. A strong military that is rarely deployed in anger combined with maintenance of our historic post-war alliances.
3. An originalist view of the Constitution which would then allow the states to limit, if not eliminate, abortion and other criminal activity and curtail the spread and influence of perversion.
Almost all libertarians are with me on #1. Many libertarians would prefer more of an isolationist foreign policy rather than #2. Libertarians take a variety of positions on #3.
LikeLiked by 3 people