“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."
Friday, July 21, 2017
Anyone Else Tired of Chris Wallace and Charles Krauthammer?
"Jeff Sessions is a patriot and he believes in enforcing our laws...He was the best senator opposing ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. Thats why the Dems want him out. Sessions is working quietly to get the gangs out and affiliated family members. He is loyal to Trump and Trump knows it. Trump needs to fire Mueller and the whole fiasco now that they have found NOTHING after 6 months and are now fishing by expanding into unrelated matters like Trumps finances in 2008. Give me a break. Fire the investigating team...mostly Hillary people...and let the left rage....nothing new.....carry on with the Trump agenda and MAGA.. Charles Krauthammer has been wrong about Trump since he ran....I don't know why his opinion is sought."
Posted by Deuce ☂ at 7/21/2017 07:49:00 AM
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Can anyone countenance the possibility that this would have happened to Obama on his first six months? Going after Obama's family and putting on a special prosecutor to scrutinize Obama's history?ReplyDelete
Do the Republicans know how to win or are they only good at shooting off their mouth?
Grow a set boys.
Yes, I've been thinking about this very thing all day. Amazing how there was absolutely no scrutinizing of Obama...in 8 years!Delete
Who paid for him to go to Harvard? How is that he is a constitutional "scholar"? What was his real black in America experience? And these are just the little things.
The Republicans know how to win of late, and shoot their mouths off, but not too much is getting done.ReplyDelete
I read that this Kamala Harris, California Senator, got her start as Assemblyman Willie Brown's mistress. heh
She has worked her way up.
Sean Spicer has just resigned, his role take by Carramucci (sp?).
The Donald is quite capable of firing people.
My money is that Mueller is out somehow or other soon after Labor Day.
Tony 'The Scare' Scaramuucci, nice mafia ring to it, a good trooper.Delete
Trump Trains His Sights on Mueller's InvestigationDelete
The president’s lawyers are looking at multiple ways to undermine or curtail the Russia inquiry, including his issuing pardons.
Joshua Roberts / Reuters
MATT FORD JUL 20, 2017 POLITICS
President Trump is exploring steps to curtail Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal investigation into the president’s campaign and business dealings, inching the country closer to uncharted constitutional waters.
The New York Times reported Thursday that Trump’s private legal team is scouring the backgrounds of Mueller and his prosecutors for potential conflicts of interest and damaging information to be used against them. According to the Times, that research is part of a broader effort by Trump to curtail and discredit the former FBI director’s probe into whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election.
The Times’s account depicted a president who is increasingly angered by the sprawling Russia investigation that has become a central feature of his young presidency. Trump displayed flashes of that anger during a lengthy interview Wednesday with the Times, in which he flitted between channeling his ire towards Mueller, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, as well as James Comey, the former director of the FBI ousted by Trump in May.
Trump’s lawyers defended their investigations of Mueller’s team as part of an effort to ensure he stays within the lines prescribed to him by the Justice Department. “The fact is that the president is concerned about conflicts that exist within the special counsel’s office and any changes in the scope of the investigation,” Jay Sekulow, the second-in-command of Trump’s private legal team, told the Washington Post. “The scope is going to have to stay within his mandate. If there’s drifting, we’re going to object.”
The Post and Times reports drew a swift reaction from members of the legal community, especially among former Obama administration officials. “If Mueller is fired, will any high-level DOJ officials resign in protest?” asked Preet Bharara, the former Manhattan federal prosecutor who was ousted by Trump in March. “Trump cannot define or constrain Mueller investigation,” Eric Holder, the former attorney general, wrote on Twitter. “If he tries to do so this creates issues of constitutional and criminal dimension.”
Trump’s aggressive efforts follow weeks of his allies taking aim at Mueller and his staff for perceived conflicts of interest. A recurring talking point is past political donations for Democratic office-holders by some members of the special counsel’s team. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who initially supported Mueller’s appointment, tweeted last month that Republicans “are delusional if they think the special counsel is going to be fair,” citing FEC reports. (Trump and his family have also donated to Democrats in past election cycles.)....
Clinton Scandal Only Deepens — So Why Is Trump, Not Hillary, Targeted For Investigation?Delete
Corruption: Amid the trivial fault-finding by the media of President Trump's every move, it's important to note that the very same pundits who now rip Trump have completely ignored the growing scandal of Hillary Clinton's pay-for-play tenure as secretary of state. It's reasonable to wonder why no charges have yet been filed, yet the media, blinded by their Trump hatred, seem strangely incurious.
The legal investigative think tank Judicial Watch recently released 448 pages of documents that it dug up from the U.S. State Department, the fruit of months of Freedom of Information Act requests and document-digging. The documents are damning, showing even more instances of Hillary Clinton performing official favors for those who donated to the Clinton Foundation and certain political campaigns.
To put it even more bluntly, the emails make a prima facie case for a criminal prosecution of Clinton. As Judicial Watch notes:....
To all of the above.
Rationalizing the actions of a spiteful and corrupt man-child.
Justifying that which can't be justified.
Attacking anyone and everyone who doesn't enable and support every action of this unstable and volatile sociopath.
Yesterday, taking apparent glee with John McCain's current condition and wishing the same on Merkel.
Someone here really looks like he has needs to get laid occasionally.
Needs it real bad.
Another excellent psychoanalytical analysis.ReplyDelete
Marc Kasowitz Out As Trump’s Lead Russiagate AttorneyReplyDelete
Marc Kasowitz is out as Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, CBS News chief White House correspondent Major Garrett reports. And Kasowitz’s spokesman, Mark Corallo, has resigned, Garrett says.
The reasons for the moves were not immediately known.
Kasowitz has represented Mr. Trump since the early 2000s, and led his defense in the Trump University fraud case....
Whatever happened to that fraud case ?
A federal judge on Friday gave final approval to a $25 million agreement to settle fraud claims arising from Donald J. Trump’s for-profit education venture, Trump University, rejecting a last-minute objection to the deal.
The judge, Gonzalo P. Curiel, in San Diego, issued his order after considering a challenge from Sherri Simpson, a former Trump University student from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., whose lawyers say she should have had a chance to opt out of the class-action settlement and individually sue President Trump, perhaps forcing a trial.
The civil settlement was not enough for Ms. Simpson, who wanted to see Mr. Trump tried on criminal racketeering charges. She also wanted an apology.
But Judge Curiel, in his ruling, sided with the class-action plaintiffs’ lawyers, who had urged him to approve the agreement, saying it was the best possible outcome for roughly 3,730 students. They could recoup more than 90 cents on the dollar of what they spent at Trump University.
The Inside Story of the Week That Saved the WorldReplyDelete
Churchill's secret War Cabinet debate with Lord Halifax to avoid surrender to the Nazis.
History K.S. Bruce for RealClearLife
60 mins ago
Two new films, Dunkirk and Darkest Hour, taken together commemorate the week that saved the world: May 24 to May 31, 1940.
As the week began, the French army, presumed to be the strongest in the world, was melting before the German blitz. The British Expeditionary Force was falling with them, trapped at the north coast port of Dunkirk.
Germany appeared invincible. The Soviets were still German allies. America was away from the war. The king of the Belgians had surrendered, and Signor Mussolini was about to throw Italy onto the winning German side.
Human civilization was saved amid the sounds of the bombs on the beach, and even more so, among the muffled sound of five gentlemen quietly debating in the War Cabinet of London. The newly appointed prime minister, Winston Churchill, was engaged in a subtle “duel” with his foreign secretary, Lord Halifax. Neville Chamberlain, who had just been replaced as prime minister but was still residing at 10 Downing Street, was a third key voice.
Winston Churchill leaving a cabinet meeting at 10 Downing Street after his appointment as Prime Minister May 10, 1940. (H. F. Davis/Topical Press Agency/Getty Images)
Churchill succeeded Chamberlain as prime minister on May 10, and allowed Chamberlain to take his time in moving from the P.M.’s residence. (This small act of reflexive courtesy by Churchill may have helped win Chamberlain’s support and changed the course of humanity.)
Lord Halifax – dependable, well-dressed, unflappable, eminently reasonable – had been the leading alternative to Churchill to succeed Chamberlain, and had been the king’s favorite. However, Halifax was in the House of Lords, not the Commons, and may have sensed his own limitations. In any case, Churchill – often considered undependable, ill-dressed, belligerent and eminently unreasonable – had won the job instead. Halifax himself had many doubts.
England might have surrendered at this exact moment, and it might not have looked like surrender at all. Here is the lesson of history. Evil, as it rises, often does not look like evil. And surrender may not feel like surrender.
British War Cabinet
British War Cabinet; from the left, sitting: Foreign Secretary Lord Halifax, Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir John Simon, Prime Minister Chamberlain, Lord Privy Seal Sir Hoare, Minister for Coordination of Defence Lord Chatfield; standing (fr. l): Home Secretary Sir Anderson, Lord Hankey, Secretary of State for War Hore-Belisha, First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill, Sir Wood, Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs Anthony Eden, Sir Bridges (Pullstein bild/ullstein bild via Getty Images)
The War Cabinet met on May 24 with France falling. A top secret report from the British military concluded that Britain might survive with help from the U.S., but there was no reasonable way to defeat Germany.
As the British troops seemed doomed on the beaches of Dunkirk, Lord Halifax asked the Italian ambassador to Britain, Giuseppe Bastianini, to meet him. Mussolini’s Italy was then one of the few European nations able to speak with both Britain and Germany.Delete
According to Halifax’s notes, Bastianini expressed Mussolini’s “sincere desire” to find a settlement “that would not merely be an armistice but would protect European peace for the century.”
Halifax replied to him that “the purpose of His Majesty’s Government was the same, and [the British] would never be unwilling to consider any proposal made with authority that gave the promise of a secure and peaceful Europe.”
Also according to Halifax’ notes, Bastianini “warmly agreed” and said, “he would like to be able to inform Signor Mussolini that His Majesty’s Government did not exclude the possibility of some discussion of the wider problems of Europe in the event of the opportunity arising.”
As France fell and the War Cabinet met, Halifax put this same question of peace and security to the committee in these terms: “We had to face the fact that it was not so much now a question of imposing a complete defeat upon Germany but of safeguarding the independence of our Empire … We should naturally be prepared to consider any proposals which might lead to this, provided our liberty and independence were assured … If [Churchill] was satisfied that matters vital to the independence of this country were unaffected” would he be “prepared to discuss such terms?”
Consider Halifax’s position. What could be more reasonable than seeing if good terms exist before committing millions of people to die and before risking the complete annihilation of your nation? Why not at least ask the question of peace terms while the British fleet and air force remained intact, and Britain had bargaining cards to play?
And here is where Churchill saved the world. He refused.
In a close-run debate over the next five days, Churchill persuaded his colleagues to unify, to refuse this false hope of peace and to fight on alone.
Churchill argued that the olive branch of peace talks was a fantasy. Hitler would never give good terms and the mere act of seeking to find out would so demoralize Britain as to lose the war. It was “a slippery slope,” Churchill argued. “Nations that went down fighting rose again, but those that surrendered were finished.” The German terms would be no worse if Britain fought on and lost, Churchill believed, than if they came to the table early.
Churchill formed his defiant position before the British troops were saved at Dunkirk. And yet he knew the risks of British defeat. Churchill even sought to recruit former Prime Minister David Lloyd George back into the government to serve as an appeasing leader if Hitler turned Britain into a vassal state; Churchill viewed Lloyd George as a better leader in defeat than more fascistic possibilities such as Sir Oswald Mosley.
The War Cabinet consisted of just five men: Churchill, plus Chamberlain and Halifax for the majority Conservatives, and Clement Attlee and Arthur Greenwood from Labour. The Labour representatives were generally silent, but instinctively supportive of Churchill’s view. Chamberlain, who had appeased Hitler once, would not agree to do so again, and stayed with Churchill as the key swing vote. Again, Churchill’s loyalty and magnanimity toward Chamberlain from the moment Churchill had joined Chamberlain’s team may have helped in this critical matter.
The details of these secret debates are reported in detail in historian John Lukacs’ excellent book, Five Days In London, May 1940 from which this column’s quotes were taken. The movies Dunkirk and Darkest Hour promise to brilliantly recreate both the battle and Churchill’s defiance, including Gary Oldman’s spot-on portrayal of Churchill. Together, they may give visual life to the memories of these civilization-saving days.
MUELLER EXPANDS HIS PROBE AGAINReplyDelete
It’s all Russia, Russia and Trump, Trump -- all the time.
July 21, 2017 Matthew Vadum
Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III is yet again expanding the scope of his off-the-rails investigation into the Left’s wacky Russian electoral collusion conspiracy theory by examining financial transactions even vaguely related to Russia involving President Trump’s businesses and those of his associates, Bloomberg News reports.
Honest observers recognize that with the election of Donald Trump, the longtime Russophiles of the morally flexible Left flipped on their traditional friends in Moscow faster than you can say Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact or Operation Barbarossa. Ignoring its own history of rampant seditious collaboration with Russia, the Left has now managed to convince many that any past or present connection a Republican has or had to Russia, however trivial, is somehow now retroactively evidence of treason against the United States.
There is still no evidence that Trump covered up a crime, or even that there was an underlying crime to be concealed but that hasn’t stopped the Left’s witch-hunt from growing and the goalposts from being shifted.
Remember that it was just a month ago as the bizarre collusion allegations got stuck in the mud that Mueller expanded his investigation to include allegations that Trump tried to obstruct justice by firing FBI Director James B. Comey on May 9. The claim is that Trump did this to end Comey’s investigation into National Security Advisor Mike Flynn’s ties to Russia. Of course, as Harvard Law professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz has pointed out repeatedly, the president has authority under the Constitution to fire the FBI director for any reason or no reason at all. Comey himself has freely acknowledged he served at the pleasure of the president.
That said, “FBI investigators and others are looking at Russian purchases of apartments in Trump buildings, Trump’s involvement in a controversial SoHo development in New York with Russian associates, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and Trump’s sale of a Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch in 2008,” Bloomberg reported an anonymous source saying.....
I have an anonymous source that tells me Mueller is getting his ass canned after Labor Day.
Ah HAH !ReplyDelete
I hear it's Anthony 'Tony the Mooch' Scaramucci !!.
"perceived conflicts of interest."ReplyDelete
Yeah, he's gonna be real tough on his boyfriend and all his left wing underlings in the deep state, knowing they'll try there darnedest to be fair and balanced.
If everyone in DC and the Media say Mueller's shit doesn't stink...Delete
It doesn't stink.
Santa Barbara Sheriff Blasts ‘Sanctuary State’ BillReplyDelete
Says Senate Bill 54 Will Harm Public Safety
Last week, Santa Barbara County Sheriff Bill Brown testified in Sacramento to strongly oppose Senate Bill 54, commonly known as the “sanctuary state” bill. The measure proposes to be part of California’s rejection of President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration enforcement. But most California sheriffs and law enforcement associations worry the bill would harm public safety.
“This bill, in its current form, provides sanctuary for criminals,” Brown told the Assembly’s Judiciary Committee, where the bill passed 8-3. (In April, the bill passed the Senate on a 27-12 vote. It is expected to reach the full Assembly later this summer.)
Simply put, SB 54 would limit cooperation between local law enforcement agencies and the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency. It would, among other things, preclude peace officers from inquiring about an inmate’s immigration status, prevent ICE agents from interviewing individuals in custody, and prohibit sheriffs from notifying ICE when they plan to release requested inmates.
IOW, it enshrines lawlessness as the "law" of the land.
The Swamp extends to Arizona -ReplyDelete
Ward To McCain: Step Down So I Can Be Appointed To Replace You
ED MORRISSEYPosted at 4:41 pm on July 21, 2017
Washington DC is a place for grand ambition, a place that no one gets without having something of a killer instinct. Usually it’s disguised a little better than in this WOWO interview with Kelli Ward, the woman who challenged John McCain in the 2016 primary, picked up here by CNN. Ward, a physician by trade, tells the Indiana station that the prospects for McCain’s health are “low,” and that he should get out of the way immediately in order to open up the seat for … Kelli Ward:............
Dr. Kelli would fit right in back in D.C.
Nice Bedside Manner, though.Delete
It certainly does and McCain has about the worst of it, but progress is being made.Delete
The two times I heard Maria the thing that stood out was that she laughed a lot.Delete
Not in that video.
The little I learned yesterday was that McCain's is the worst, and the older you are the more aggressive it is.Delete
...or more probably the weaker our defenses are.Delete
...changed from you to "our" in the interest of accuracy.Delete
It’s still O.J.’s America. Nothing has changed.ReplyDelete
Simpson’s acquittal became the jury’s black-on-white retort to Los Angeles’ law enforcement abuses. Then as now, few Californians believed he was innocent.
He is 70 now, and gray-haired. He had to try twice to hoist his burly frame from the chair after the Nevada Parole Board approved his release.
Still, there was no missing the old O.J. as he charmed and wheedled, going on about the lowlife escapade that put him behind bars, face earnest as a choirboy’s. No missing his supporting cast, either, newly famous now thanks to a mini-series and award-winning documentary.
Here was former prosecutor Christopher Darden on the “Today” show. There was Fuhrman, giving Fox News commentary.
And there we were, glued to our screens and Twitter, a nation as captive as we’ve ever been to racism, sexism, celebrity, cheap thrills and famous dissembling con men.
It’s O.J.’s America. Still.
I was struck by his fluent and fluid delivery.Delete
Then I remembered he was a TV Star as well as a cold-blooded murderer.
Amazing how cheap his house in Florida is compared to the Sanctuary State of California.Delete
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
Pipsqueak banned from China -Delete
Bieber banned from China to 'purify' nation...DRUDGE
Dali dead, mustache lives -ReplyDelete
Salvador Dali Still Has Mustache Despite Dying 28 Years Ago
July 21, 2017 1:19 PM
Filed Under: Salvador Dali
CBS Local– Salvador Dali’s body was exhumed for a paternity test and the legendary artist’s famous mustache is still intact 28 years after his death.
A woman is claiming that her mother had an affair with Dali and requested a paternity test. If she’s Dali’s daughter, she’ll have a right to the Dali estate. A judge sanctioned the exhumation.
Narcis Bardalet was in charge of embalming Dali’s body after the artist passed away in 1989.
“When I took off the silk handkerchief, I was very emotional,” Bardalet said, via BBC. “I was eager to see him and I was absolutely stunned. It was like a miracle… his moustache appeared at 10 past 10 exactly and his hair was intact.”
After a four hour operation DNA samples were extracted from Dali’s teeth, bones and nails. The results of the paternity test likely won’t be known for a few weeks.
Ian Gibson, a biographer of Dali, says it’s “absolutely impossible” for Dali to be the father.
“Dalí always boasted: ‘I’m impotent, you’ve got to be impotent to be a great painter,'” said Gibson.