Wednesday, January 10, 2018

What about Iran now?

America can and should help the cause of freedom in Iran

Utilizing our economic, political, and technological might, rather than armed intervention, the United States should rectify past inaction and amplify the voices of Iranians. (AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi)
Utilizing our economic, political, and technological might, rather than armed intervention, the United States should rectify past inaction and amplify the voices of Iranians. 
From The Skeptics: America Should Keep Iran's Protesters at Arm's Length
" . . . the expressions of solidarity that some U.S. officials and foreign-policy activists have voiced are ill advised. Washington’s close embrace easily could do more harm than good. There are two crucial reasons for greater reticence and caution. First, the political and ideological composition of the demonstrators is murky. Second, many Iranians, even those who have no love for Khamenei and his ilk, are suspicious of any indications that the United States is meddling, once again, in Iran’s internal political affairs." . . . 

Iran and Daesh Lite in North America  "Recent mass demonstrations in Iran, and the government's violent crackdown has been met with a deafening silence by Muslim "civil rights" organizations in the U.S. and Canada.  Why have they refrained from supporting the Iranian people's uprising to overthrow the oppressive mullahs?  After all, the same organizations have vocally and financially supported the mass demonstrations in the Middle East and North Africa that erupted in December 2010 and led to the rise of Egypt's short-lived Muslim Brotherhood government and caused turmoil and destabilized these regions." . . .
. . . Taha Ghayyur explained the rationale behind the harsh punishments in Islam (execution, stoning, cutting off thieves' hands, etc.) and argued that the Islamic law (sharia) can be implemented in North America. 

The biggest Hillary Clinton scandal no one's talking about

Washington Examiner

The Committee to Defend the President has filed an FEC complaint accusing the Democratic establishment of using state chapters as straw men to circumvent campaign donation limits and launder money to Hillary Clinton's campaign. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon)

"You've heard of Benghazi and Uranium One. But more than a year after Hillary Clinton’s resounding loss to President Trump, she must now grapple with a new scandal: An ongoing Federal Election Commission investigation into an alleged $84 million money laundering scheme orchestrated by the Hillary Victory Fund — the $500 million joint fundraising committee between the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and Democratic state parties.
"Based on former DNC Chairwoman Donna Brazile’s public comments, a memo by former Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook, and months of reviewing FEC reports, the Committee to Defend the President has filed an FEC complaint accusing the Democratic establishment of using state chapters as straw men to circumvent campaign donation limits and launder money to Clinton’s campaign. The Hillary Victory Fund solicited six-figure donations from major donors, including Calvin Klein and “Family Guy” creator Seth MacFarlane, “papered” them through state parties en route to DNC and then the Clinton campaign.
"In reality, the fund either never transferred $84 million to state parties, sending the funds straight to the DNC, or it made the transfers without state parties having actual control of the money. In either case, the fund violated campaign finance laws in precisely the way the Supreme Court deemed illegal in its 2014 McCutcheon v. FEC ruling. And that’s only the tip of allegations in this particular iceberg." . . .
Rich Terrell
Full Replay: Trump Meets With Congress on DACA in Rare Public Negotiation    54 minute video of the meeting

Victor Davis Hanson: From Resistance to Nullification to What Next?
. . . "Yet, so far, the Resistance, despite helping to drive down presidential approval ratings to the low 40 percent range, has not stopped the Trump agenda. The Mueller investigation will likely settle for face-saving charges against a few Trump officials for crimes not envisioned under its original directives. Its own biases and the FBI’s involvement with the discredited Steele dossier may result in a number of successful appeals of those who confessed or acquittals of those charged." . . .Full article.

CNN's Dana Bash: "I'll Get Hit For This," But Meeting Was What People Thought Trump Was Capable Of   "CNN's Dana Bash delivered praise for the nearly hour-long recorded meeting President Trump held with Congressional leaders on immigration reform Tuesday afternoon. However, the CNN correspondent was nervous what the reaction would be when she delivered commentary on the transparent meeting." . . .

"This really was a negotiation," she said. "We really got to be the fly on the wall in this room listening to the way they talk. I'm really not convinced that it would have been any different had the cameras not been in there. I was just communicating with now two Republicans who were in that meeting who said that they had no idea that the cameras were going to stay in there as long as they did. The president before the cameras came on said we will just do a typical thing. They're going to come in, I'm going to make a remark and you guys can too. And so on and so forth.' "


Well, CNN is the channel California school districts encourage their students to watch. I have seen this for myself on a Ventura homework assignment.TD

Dershowitz: The Left Couldn't Criminalize Trump, Now Trying To "Psychiatrize Political Differences"  . . . "Dershowitz said it is tyrannical governments that use the power of psychiatry and not the merits to debate their political opponents.

" 'They're trying to say, 'Oh maybe we can't get him on crime but we're going to show that he has mental problems, that he's disturbed.' The guy on CNN today was talking about he has Alzheimer's and he should be subjected to a neurological exam," Dershowitz said.

" 'That is so dangerous," he added." . . .


Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Why was Juanita Broaddrick never a guest on Oprah's show?

If she runs for president thinking she can ride recent events in Hollywood and politics as a champion of women, Oprah will have to explain why such a powerful and self-made woman at least sat in stony silence as people like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein preyed on the very women she claims to champion.

Phantom of the Oprah  "There was Oprah Winfrey at the Golden Globes, with her big glasses and 2020 visions of a presidential run, speaking to the greatest collection of sexual predators and their enablers pontificating about the rights of women in an industry where not long ago these same people, led by the pompous and condescending Meryl Streep, gave a standing ovation and an award to director Roman Polanski, child rapist. 
"Oprah didn't mention Polanski, or Harvey Weinstein, or Bill Clinton, or why she didn't use the show that made her rich and famous to condemn predators such as these and the Hollywood culture that demeans women and exploits them for fun and profit.  If Oprah wants to run for president as a champion of women, she has a lot of explaining to do." . . .
. . . "Juanita Broaddrick was never a guest on Oprah's show and noted that Oprah was a willing participant in the "nothing to see here" Clinton cover-up.  She also promoted the presidential candidacy of Bill Clinton's enabler, Hillary Clinton, who ignored his predatory activities and covered up his "bimbo eruptions" as she rode his stained coattails to political prominence:" . . .  By Daniel John Sobieski

President Oprah: Another hypocrite  . . . "If Oprah and her Hollywood pals dressed in expensive black gowns had given this speech in 1997 when Bill Clinton, darling of the Hollywood left, was abusing Monica Lewinsky, groping Kathleen Willey, harassing Paula Jones by dropping his pants, and credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick, then Oprah and Hollywood would have some credibility.  Oprah and her Hollywood pals did not support the victims of Bill Clinton, nor say they should have been believed.  Clinton's victims were vilified and insulted by the Clinton thugs, such as James Carville, as "trailer trash," as if a certain social class of women can be sexually abused by Clinton with no recourse and no support from the Oprah crowd." . . .

Speaking of Hollywood's hate for conservatives, never forget this Law & Order stunt:
"Law & Order": another TV show that sucker-punches half the American population  From 2011:
"Why, you ask? Because this same episode of Law & Order ran on TNT again this week
"We began watching a 2009 episode of "Law and Order" entitled "Fed" last night and I had to shut it off at the start. We saw people like ourselves - TEA par-tiers, portrayed as rifle-toting, hateful bigots. Only Hollywood is capable of inspiring dislike and outrage by the simple means of the skillful acting of those who portray people like you and me as despicable and violent. They give us the same treatment they give to pharmaceutical  and insurance companies.

"May God bless all courageous conservatives in our country trying to stem the socialist tide sweeping America because the left has such massive force to bring against them. And the propaganda is being spoon-fed to the American public. How do we stand a chance?"