[Breitbart] Thursday on Fox News Channel’s "The Kelly File," former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey reacted to a report that current U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch had met with former President Bill Clinton while his wife, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, was under investigation for her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
Mukasey called the meeting a mistake and dismissed the claim it was a chance encounter.
"I think it was a mistake," Mukasey said. "People make mistakes all the time. It was a mistake because you don’t take a meeting with the spouse of somebody who was the subject of an investigation by your department. It’s not that that’s a written rule any more than it’s a written rule that a surgeon washes his hands before he operates.
I strongly suspect that each hospital has not only a written rule that everyone going into a room where surgery will take place not only has a written rule that they scrub, but that the rules explicitly decree minimum scrub time, permissable cleansers, and physical area to be scrubbed; a printout of this is probably posted over each sink, as protection against being sued. After all, every American hospital room I've been in over the past several decades has a small sink with soap or at least a container of alcohol gel just inside the door, with a sign reminding all who enter to sanitize hands before approaching the patient.
There are some things that are so elementary that you don’t have to have a written rule to have them in effect."
"Megyn, the attorney general is protected by a security detail of FBI agents," Mukasey said. "I assume she was traveling with staff since she was on government business. The president is protected by a detail of Secret Service agents. They don’t work for the same department. They don’t encounter each other casually. That happens by design and I think it was actually not her fault. It was the president’s design. From what I read in the accounts, he was the one that pushed it forward."
He went on to add it was cause for Lynch to recuse herself completely from the Clinton email investigation.
A long plea for humanitarian assistance for the area and countries around Lake Chad. The suffering is described in detail. The cause of the suffering isn't mentioned whatsoever.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/01/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
h/t Instapundit
[FinancialPost] As the world marks the first week anniversary of last Thursday’s Brexit vote, it’s time for a review of the carnage -- the record-setting demolition of trillions in market value, the Lehman Brothers-like tipping point to financial meltdown, the currency devaluations, the portents of recession and global economic crises -- all the stuff that didn’t happen.
#1
Sort of like the several times the US government shut down, except lately, the gov't would manufacture a crisis - close National Parks, for example.
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/01/2016 7:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What? You think the high rollers are gonna take a loss like that?
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
07/01/2016 11:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
For the smart high rollers it's a buying opportunity. The consensus I'm seeing is that this is a dip rather than a crash, because until Brexit agreements are reached nothing will change. Henry Kissinger wrote the other day that PM Cameron called the Brxit referendum to shut up the Leave segment of his coalition, with most of those on both sides expecting it to be soundly trounced; so it aeems to me quite possible action toward leaving will be slow and reluctant.
What that will do to politicsl careers on the right is no doubt being pondered at the moment. Labour, in the meantime, is becoming even more blatantly antisemitic.
#4
What their concerned about is that the rubes are catching on that classical democracy is dead and that they're expected to be content with being ruled by those who despise and hate them.
[Daily Caller] Rush Limbaugh says that when Donald Trump defeats Hillary Clinton, the Left will be so angry "we’re gonna see levels of violence that we have not seen" as a result.
During Thursday’s "The Rush Limbaugh Show," Limbaugh argued when Trump wins the election, "I want you to think, using your intelligence guided by experience, what’s gonna happen that night? What’s gonna happen the next day? What’s going to happen every day thereafter? What’s gonna happen the day Trump gets inaugurated? What is the left gonna do?"
According to Limbaugh, the Left is "not gonna just sit idly by and accept this... They’re gonna do everything they can to undermine it. And I think we’re gonna see levels of violence that we have not seen."
"I think people are gonna be shocked at the degree to which the left intends to intimidate people into reversing that result. I think they’re gonna do everything they can to see it that Trump never does get inaugurated," Limbaugh said. "Whatever, it’s gonna be unlike anything."
#2
They are moving as many muslims on as quickly as possible to facilitate extreme violence against the party of Trump.
Posted by: Unelet Protector of the Sith2424 ||
07/01/2016 2:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
on = in
Posted by: Unelet Protector of the Sith2424 ||
07/01/2016 2:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And incoming muslims are now exempt from from swearing to protect the Constitution. Sharia is thier law.
Posted by: Unelet Protector of the Sith2424 ||
07/01/2016 2:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The publicly funded have reached the point where there is literally no crime, no violence they will forego to protect their magic checks. All the facts on the ground prove that the publicly funded will sacrifice all of their own liberties and all of their neighbors' to keep the gravy train coming. People like that will also sacrifice the lives of their neighbors for the same reason. They may not have the courage or knowledge or ability to do so themselves, but they will stand by and quietly cheer if government jackboots do the job for them.
Rush is spot on about what would happen if Trump were to win.
Will Trump win? It looks grim based upon the amount of money that Hillary Clinton has in her war chest from the five biggest industries in the U.S. plus back-channel foreign money.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
07/01/2016 5:04 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Interesting. Trump wins. The left riots. Obama calls for a state of emergency. He further fuels the fire with accusations of cheating. This country collapses. His plan is complete.
Posted by: 49 pan ||
07/01/2016 9:53 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I read somewhere that Democrat turnout takes a nosedive when there is a lot of violence around the election. I think the case studies were based on the 60s so they may not be relevant but I think the hippie wing of the party doesn't like seeing the violent heart of their alliance and stays home.
Add to that we are seeing terrible Democrat turnout (down 30% despite all the Hillary/Bernie coverage) and historically high Republican turnout (up 50% according to one report).
I think they will go violent, but they'll turn a victory into a wave for the Republicans by doing so.
#11
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
Those who count the votes decide everything"
Joseph Stalin.
On top of all said a above, add this. Electronic voting is an open door to massive, virtually undetectable fraud.
#12
The violence we've already seen is perhaps a portent of what will come. Particularly interesting to me was the contrast between Trump's visits to San Diego and San Jose. In San Diego the police were ready with a plan to keep Trump supporters and protesters apart from each other. There were no rocks or bottles thrown. There were a few arrests but the police were prepared and professional so it was easily controlled. But in San Jose you could just about say the plan was the opposite and there was violence. So it might depend on who has control of the police in each location. San Diego leans to the right while San Jose is in the heart of traditionally leftist Silicon Valley. So the blue cities and states may see riots, burning and looting. That's tough luck for them.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
07/01/2016 12:16 Comments ||
Top||
#13
As surely as the US-N-Only-The-US caused WW2, or WW2 in the Pacific, by bombing their own base at Pearl Harbor!
D *** NG IT, BELUSHI WAS WRONG, IT WASN'T THE GERMANS AFTER ALL!
[Wash Times] The Navy commander in charge of a pair of patrol boats captured by Iranian forces in January opted to surrender rather than fight back, citing later fears that a confrontation could endanger the Obama administration’s efforts to lock in a deal with Tehran on its nuclear program.
In an interview with investigators looking into the January incident, the commander said he surrendered the vessels after calculating that his sailors would not be in danger because Iran "wants this nuke deal to go through."
The interview was one of several stunning revelations in the often scathing 170-page report compiled by Navy investigators, chronicling the chain of events that led to the apprehension and detention of the 10 American sailors by the Iranian military after a pair of U.S. patrol boats drifted into the country’s sovereign waters in the Persian Gulf.
The incident, which played out as President Obama was preparing his State of the Union address, proved deeply embarrassing to the U.S. military and roiled diplomatic relations between Tehran and Washington as they were trying to implement key measures in the deal to curb Iran’s suspect nuclear programs.
Adm. John Richardson, chief of naval operations, said Thursday that the mishandling of the incident resulted from "the accumulation of a number of small problems" created by the U.S. sailors who strayed into Iranian waters all the way up to the senior commanders who led the Navy squadron and task force under which the unit served.
#1
Adm. John Richardson, chief of naval operations, said Thursday that the mishandling of the incident resulted from "the accumulation of a number of small problems" created by the U.S. sailors
Fixing blame on the enlisted men is generally the first indication of a much, much greater problem.
Members of traditional religions became moral outlaws in the United States once equal rights for sexual preference and gender choice were enshrined in regulation and law. To believe that homosexual relations are sinful, as does biblical religion, defines the believer as a bigot in the view of liberal opinion, which is backed by the federal regulatory apparatus and the regulators of most American states, as well as by most of the judicial system.
As Mary Eberstadt reports, expressions of religious belief that society considered innocuous and normal until quite recently are now grounds for dismissal from jobs, denial of employment, and boycotts by the media. Devout Christians believe they must choose between their faith and job security, and they commonly conceal their faith in the workplace to avert discrimination. (Muslims are exempt because liberals consider them a threatened minority and make allowances for their misogyny and gay-bashing.) Plus the fact that Muslims are violent and leftards are, first and foremost, cowards
Actions or speech (quoting a Bible verse or leaving a religious symbol in plain view) elicit persecution. In some cases, evidence of past incorrect opinion is sufficient: The CEO of the software firm Mozilla, Brendan Eich, was hounded from his post in 2014 for a $1,000 contribution to a 2008 California referendum campaign against gay marriage, evidence of a position he shared at the time with Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
...Eberstadt calls the persecution of traditional religion a "witch-hunt"--a critical error. A witch-hunt is a search for malefactors who pretend to be good people but really are intent on doing evil. There is a witch-hunt going on today, namely the search for secret racists at American universities. The witch-hunters pillory teachers and administrators who claim to hold politically correct views but allegedly betray their secret racism through wicked actions, for instance by correcting bad grammar in minority students’ term papers. Loyal liberals who commit no aggressions are said to be guilty of micro-aggressions.
By contrast, the purge of traditional Christians and Jews is a heretic hunt, an Inquisition, whose objective is to isolate and punish individuals who actually profess opinions contrary to the prevailing orthodoxy. There can be some overlap between an Inquisition and a witch-hunt, to be sure. But today’s liberal Inquisitors are not searching for individuals secretly in communion with God--yet.
...This is a critical distinction. Witch-hunters eventually discover that burning a few old hags does not prevent cows’ milk from souring. Inquisitions, by contrast, usually succeed: The Catholic Church succeeded in stamping out broadly held heresies, as in the Albigensian Crusade of 1220-1229, which destroyed between 200,000 and 1,000,000 inhabitants of Cathar-controlled towns in Southern France. In many cases a town’s entire population was killed, just to make sure. For its part, the Spanish Inquisition eliminated all the Jews, Muslims, and Protestants, although it sometimes drove heretical opinions underground, with baleful consequences for the Catholic faith.
...Because Eberstadt confuses the present persecution with mere witch-hunting, she hopes that the witch-hunters will realize their error and do the decent thing. She compares the persecution of Christians to Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist campaign of the late 1940s and early 1950s.
...The comparison is misguided. McCarthy was not attacking individuals who professed Marxist sympathies, but individuals who concealed their Marxist sympathies while serving as high-ranking military officers and officials of the Eisenhower administration. He was a witch-hunter drunk on his own power (as well as drunk in the usual sense of the term). He had to be humiliated, and he was.
McCarthy claimed to know of secret Communist agents in high Establishment positions. And unlike in the Salem of the witch trials, in Eisenhower’s America there were in fact "witches" to be hunted--that is, hundreds of secret Russian agents or agents-of-influence. American intelligence decoded more than 3,000 covert messages to and from the Soviet embassy in Washington after 1943, in whichhundreds of Americans were mentioned, some of whom later were proven to be spies. The U.S. government couldn’t reveal its covert sources, so it encouraged "witch-hunts" to flush out suspected traitors. McCarthy got out of control. But by the time the U.S. Senate passed a motion of censure against the rogue Wisconsin Senator, in December 1954, the problem largely had been eliminated.
In a similar way, the liberal establishment will eventually conclude that its witch-hunt--its persecution of academic liberals--has gone too far. It will decide that correcting grammar in a doctoral dissertation submitted by a minority student is not a firing offense. Witch-hunts respond to an observed problem (spoiled cows’ milk, a plague, failed crops, and so forth). I have suggested previously that the academic witch-hunters are responding to a catastrophic outcome among minority students: "Little more than a third of black male college students obtain a bachelor’s degree (ideally a four-year program) after six years of university attendance. The college entrance rate is identical for white and black high school graduates at about 70%, but graduate rates diverge. Sixty percent of white male students graduate within six years, almost double the proportion of black males." That is not the fault of liberal academics who correct the grammar in black students’ term papers, and eventually the liberal establishment will call off the witch-hunt.
...The liberals fear that Christian America will rise up and avenge itself against their tyranny. They will keep coming after you.
Your alternative is to counterattack.
Ridicule your enemies. Expose their intellectual and moral bankruptcy. Assert the superiority of your own intellectual tradition. Single out some of the "New Atheists" and attack their intellectual pretensions. Target individuals; liberals are brave in a mob but cowards in a corner.
#1
When people have no real understanding of history (as the Marxist/Socialist) they forget the bloody couple hundred years of religious wars that hammered Western Civilization. Just look at the ME today with Sunni vs Shiite. There was a very very good reason to put religious freedom at number 1 on the Bill of Rights. If this thing breaks, a lot of bloody payback is going to be on the venue.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[Breitbart] Thursday on Fox News Channel’s "The Kelly File," former U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey reacted to a report that current U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch had met with former President Bill Clinton while his wife, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, was under investigation for her use of a private email server while secretary of state.
