Ilhan Omar: fear her voters and the Democrats who placed her on this critical committee

Earl of Taint

Don’t Accept Omar’s Phony Alibis for Hate  "Her attack on AIPAC* is linked to BDS, not to her learning curve about the history of anti-Semitism"
. . . "As she did when called out for a tweet in which she said Israel was “hypnotizing the world,” Omar issued a contrite-sounding apology for her assertion that members of Congress are bribed by AIPAC into supporting Israel. As in the previous instance, she said she had no idea that her words were classic anti-Semitic tropes that have been used to demonize Jews.
"In an era in which President Donald Trump has turned a brazen unwillingness to apologize for falsehoods, slurs, or inappropriate remarks into a political art form, Omar was able to come across as sensitive and genuine. That allowed even some of her sternest critics within a Democratic party that had reluctantly been forced to condemn her latest jibe at supporters of Israel an easy way out of the controversy.
"Omar’s apology came only after House speaker Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leadership had demanded that she give one. But her contrite retreat enabled Democrats to turn the issue around and accuse Republicans of hypocrisy, since Trump (they alleged) has also said insensitive things about Jews without apology. They also claimed that one of Omar’s antagonists — House minority leader Kevin McCarthy — had been guilty of issuing an anti-Semitic tweet of his own without being held accountable." . . .

*Cooperation between the two countries is advantageous for both nations. As America's bipartisan pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC urges all members of Congress to support Israel through foreign aid, government partnerships, joint anti-terrorism efforts and the promotion of a negotiated two-state solution—a Jewish state of Israel and a demilitarized Palestinian state.

The Honor of Elliott Abrams

National Review Editors   "Three weeks ago, Elliott Abrams returned to government. This was very good news for U.S. foreign policy. He is the State Department’s special representative for Venezuela. And his presence on the public stage has reignited passions about the Reagan administration’s record in Latin America.

"Abrams was the assistant secretary of state for Latin America in Reagan’s second term. During the first, he had been assistant secretary for international organizations, and then for human rights. (Abrams joined the administration when he was in his early 30s.)

"Like many others he was caught up in the Iran-Contra affair, and he pleaded guilty to withholding information from Congress. (Two misdemeanor counts.) He was pardoned by the first President Bush. There is a story to be told about all this, which we will not get into here.  . . .

. . . Abrams told it in a book, Undue Process: A Story of How Political Differences Are Turned into Crimes.
"The second President Bush made Abrams part of his national-security team, first in the area of democracy and human rights. Then he gave Abrams a Middle East portfolio. Later, Abrams wrote a memoir, Tested by Zion: The Bush Administration and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. In recent years, he has been a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

"In short, Elliott Abrams is one of the wisest, most experienced foreign-policy heads in this country. He is also a steadfast advocate of freedom, democracy, and human rights, or American values, if you like." . . .

McCabe's Law

NBC certainly is, and so may you:  You may be disappointed by the Mueller report
Still, the media hangs on to its hope:

Memos explaining decisions not to prosecute can be long or short, and there is nothing in the rules to prevent Mueller from writing a 500-page narrative laying out the behavior of the Trump team with regard to Russia in excruciating detail.

NY Times:McCabe Says Justice Dept. Officials Had Discussions About Pushing Trump Out   . . . “ 'I was very concerned that I was able to put the Russia case on absolutely solid ground, in an indelible fashion,” Mr. McCabe said. “That were I removed quickly, or reassigned or fired, that the case could not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace.' ” 
. . . [Lindsey] "Graham said he was willing to try to subpoena Mr. McCabe if necessary to compel him to appear, though it is unlikely he could get the necessary Democratic signoff."

Andrew McCabe: "Every Day Is a New Low in Trump's White House " . . . As the meeting began, my secretary relayed a message that the White House was calling. The president himself was on the line. I had spoken with him the night before, in the Oval Office, when he told me he had fired James Comey. 
"A call like this was highly unusual. Presidents do not, typically, call FBI directors. There should be no direct contact between the president and the director, except for national-security purposes. The reason is simple. Investigations and prosecutions need to be pursued without a hint of suspicion that someone who wields power has put a thumb on the scale." . . .

Smart Move – Andrew McCabe Launches Proactive, Planned, Lawfare Media Blitz…

"Team McCabe always knew the biggest legal threat to their corrupt position would be if they lost control of the mechanisms within the DOJ and FBI.  The launch of a media blitz, surrounding a book and constructed defense narrative, positions them to claim that any legal action against them now comes from a retaliatory Trump administration and DOJ institution (Barr) carrying out the objectives of the President.
"The best way to position themselves legally was/is to go on the attack and then use their attack as a shield from any accountability. This is what we are seeing today." . . .

"For almost two years the corrupt career elements within the DOJ and FBI have been hiding the trail of evidence that would expose the McCabe plan to usurp the 2016 election.
"They have redacted evidence including the Lisa Page and Peter Strzok text messages; withheld information from congress; stalled and defied requests for documents they used in the construction of their plans; and generally positioned themselves to run out the clock." . . .
Graham Demands McCabe Testify to Explain DOJ’s ‘Bias against Trump’  . . . “ 'After Mr. McCabe’s 60 Minutes interview, it is imperative that he, and others, come before the Senate Judiciary Committee to fully explain how and why a FISA warrant was issued against Carter Page and answer questions about what appears to be, now more than ever, bias against President Trump,” Graham said in a statement issued Thursday." . . .

Did Andrew McCabe Just Admit To Plotting A ‘Coup’ Against Trump On ’60 Minutes’?

"Via Twitchy:

"Well, there goes Thursday . . .

Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who has a new book coming out, sat down with what CBS is calling a “BOMBSHELL” interview with “60 Minutes” where he dropped this bombshell confirming that “There were meetings at the Justice Department at which it was discussed whether the vice president and a majority of the cabinet could be brought together to remove the president of the United States under the 25th Amendment”:

Keep reading…

Poll: Media’s All-Out Assault on Trump Only Hurts Trust in Journalists

Breitbart

"Polling proves that public trust in the establishment media has collapsed in every imaginable way during Trump’s presidency.

"There is no doubt anymore that corporate media’s ongoing assault against President Trump has backfired in a way that journalists will never recover from.

"An IBD/TIPP poll asked about “the public’s perception of the mainstream news media” and found that “fully half the country says its trust in the media decreased over the past two years,” while only eight percent say they have more trust in the media.

"Inside that overall number, the poll finds a plurality of Independents (49 percent) have lost trust in the media over the last two years, along with 81 percent of Republicans, who already had a pretty low opinion of this wretched institution.

"In worse news (for the media), more than two-thirds of the public, a whopping 69 percent, believe the establishment media are “more concerned with advancing its points of view rather than reporting all the facts.”

"Only 29 percent disagree.

"What’s more, nearly half (43 percent) of Democrats agree with that statement, along with an incredible 72 percent of Independents and 95 percent of Republicans.

"When asked if media coverage is designed to “delegitimize the views held by President Trump and his supporters,” nearly six in ten (59 percent) agreed, including 60 percent of Independents and 93 percent of Republicans.

"The media’s non-stop lying and fake news stories about the Russia Collusion Hoax has also backfired. A majority of 53 percent now believe the media “prematurely declared President Trump guilty of collusion with Russia without sufficient evidence” — this includes 55 percent of Independents and even 22 percent of Democrats, which is more than one in five." . . .

Is Diversity an Enemy of Excellence?

Intellectual Takeout   . . . "Diversity is irrelevant to academe’s main purpose"

"The fundamental objection to diversity initiatives is that they have nothing whatever to do with the core mission of a university: which is intellectual excellence in the pursuit of truth via teaching and research. D&I efforts might still be acceptable if they did not interfere with the university’s core mission. Ancillaries like health care, dining facilities, and (perhaps) sports do not compromise education or research. But, is “diversity and inclusion” like that? No. Increasingly D&I conflicts with intellectual excellence.

"In addition to the political litmus tests feared by Dean Flier, diversity and inclusion of identity groups sometimes means exclusion and uniformity of ideas — and diversity advocates sometimes admit it. Identity diversity is very far from idea diversity. The drive for diversity can also limit rigor and dumb down difficult courses. The Canning and Reddick article provides a couple of examples.

"These two authors claim that the academy is not “a space of objective assessment” especially for “those on the margins.” Rather than defend this claim with any kind of empirical argument, they recite the tale of Carmen Mitchell, a Ph.D. student in the Department of Health Management at the university of Louisville.

"D&I evidently helped Ms. Mitchell, who affirms that “Nearly all of the most supportive and helpful faculty members who helped steer me toward a Ph.D. were women (of many races).” In other words, her personal leg-up justifies the D&I program. Reacting to a comment by a prominent critic of “diversity statements,” she writes,

"Back in September, Heather MacDonald, criticizing the new requirement, asked readers to consider whether Albert Einstein would have been hired into a faculty position if he had to provide an EDI statement, implying that it may have been a distraction from his work as a scientist." . . .

Amy Klobuchar Launches 2020 Presidential Bid: Minnesota Mean, or Minnesota Nice?

Legal Insurrection

Comes across as more likable than many other Dem candidates, in contrast to reports she’s a “Mean,” “Bad Boss”

"Over the past several days, there has been a flurry of news “reports” about Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) being a “mean boss” and a “bad boss.”  In sharp contrast to these accusations, Klobuchar’s 2020 presidential campaign announcement shows her to be immensely likable.  She has that genuine “it” quality that stands in sharp contrast to Elizabeth’s Warren’s Saturday launch. 

Mike Harris

"Having just seen the Warren launch, I had to smile as Klobuchar begins her speech by thanking, rather pointedly I thought, Minnesota Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan and noting that Flanagan is “the highest ranking Native American state official in our nation.”  A few minutes later, she mentions that the Mississippi river, the central theme of her speech, is Native American for “the father of waters,” a reference totally irrelevant to her speech.

In all honesty, this is the first time I have listened to Klobuchar give a speech, and I wasn’t expecting to find her so personable, so yes, I’ll say it again, likable.  It was a pleasant surprise, and I think the contrast between her and the triumvirate of angry Democrats (i.e. Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker) stands her in good stead.

"Watch: Video

. . . 

"Having been reading for days about what a horrible human being she is, I was genuinely surprised to find Klobuchar so likable.  It’s not hard to imagine that the oppo research dump came from one (or more) of her 2020 Democrat competitors trying to get a head start on undermining her genuine charm and appeal.

"Here are just a few of the stories that have been running across leftstream media:" . . .

On American education of our voting citizens

South Dakota Drops Study of Early U.S. History as a High School Requirement

"Students in South Dakota will now graduate from high school without studying early American history, under new teaching guidelines adopted by the state.

"After a year of deliberations, the state Board of Education adopted new curriculum standards that no longer require instructors to teach the first 100 years of U.S. history. Such milestone events and developments as the Revolutionary War and the drafting of the U.S. Constitution could be completely ignored.

"Cutting out early U.S. history in 11th grade hurts the ability of students to “think historically” when they reach higher education, according to a letter sent to the state Board of Education by Ben Jones, dean of arts and sciences for Dakota State University and educators from the University of South Dakota, South Dakota State University, Northern State University, Augustana College, Presentation College, the University of Sioux Falls, Black Hills State University and other institutions.

“ 'By that, we mean they are unfamiliar with the use of sources, the identification of bias, analysis of information, understanding context and the development and practice of research that aid them both inside and outside the discipline of history,” according to the letter.

"That, of course, might be exactly what the Republican-dominated state government has in mind. “It’s disabling their citizenship,” Jones told the Argus Leader." . . .

The board members:

The Wound in American Education  "The failure of American colleges to promote free speech and intellectual diversity is like an open wound. It stains the imagination, obscuring paths of investigation with a sick pus. It drains the vitality of thought, leaving the mind weakened. And it strains intellectual discourse—the Socratic ideal of conversation—by making us fearful, anxious, and self-censoring." . . .