Editorial Board

Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

The point at which the Roman Republic moved from republic to empire is generally placed at the point when the Senate granted Octavian almost unlimited power and he adopted the title Augustus. Some historians argue it was when Caesar crossed the Rubicon or when Octavian defeated Anthony at Actium. The implication is that once the transition was started, there was no turning back. The more useful analysis is to think of it as a process, with roots in the Republic, that evolved to the point where dictatorship was inevitable.

The die was most likely cast when the Republic began to compromise its own rules for limiting and distributing power. The system they had created was a reflection of the tribal realities of the early republic. In order to keep any one family from gaining too much power, they systematically limited the time anyone served in office. The system also forced an apprenticeship on those who went into public life. This had the benefit of making public men buy into the system. Therefore they were willing to defend it.

 

That meant the system had a policing mechanism to sort out enemies before they could cause trouble. An ambitious young man could not skip any steps on his way up the ladder, so once he got up the ladder, he was not agreeing to any changes in the process. Defending the system was a way to defend one’s prerogatives, but also a way to defend the system from lunatics. Verpus Maximus may be smart and talented, but he was not only going to wait his turn, he was going to do all the jobs necessary to prove his worth.

This system started to break down with the rivalry of Sulla and Marius. Sulla was the first man to hold the office of consul twice. He also got away with marching an army on Rome itself, in order to defeat his rival, Marius. Both of these acts were supposed to be disqualifying, but exceptions were made for expediency. Sulla sided with the Senate so the Senate bent the rules to serve themselves. A good case can be made that this is the point when it was all over for the Republic.

It was just a matter of time before someone used Sulla as a precedent.

 

 

It is a good lesson to keep in mind as the politicians in the Imperial Capital wrangle over what could be a very dangerous scandal for them.

House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes declared Wednesday that members of Donald Trump’s transition team, possibly including Trump himself, were under inadvertent surveillance following November’s presidential election.

The White House and Trump’s allies immediately seized on the statement as vindication of the president’s much-maligned claim that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower phones — even though Nunes himself said that’s not what his new information shows.

Democrats, meanwhile, cried foul.

Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the intelligence panel, cast doubt on Nunes’ claims in a fiery statement and blasted the chairman for not first sharing the information with him or other committee members.

Schiff also slammed Nunes for briefing the White House on Wednesday afternoon given that the Intelligence Committee is in the middle of an investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election, including possible collusion with the Trump team.

The political class chased Nixon out of town for talking about the use of the FBI and CIA as weapons against political opponents. The rule in politics has been that the use of the IRS or the intelligence agencies was expressly prohibited. There could be no exceptions for obvious reasons, as it would give these bureaucracies dangerous power. That was the lesson of Hoover. If the CIA or IRS are allowed to use their powers to gather dirt on elected officials, then they can control elected officials. That’s the end of democracy.

Of course, there’s another reason to take certain weapons off the table in politics. That’s self-preservation. In prior ages, where the winners had the losers killed, the challengers would always have as their goal, the death of the current ruler. That prompted the ruler to get ahead of the curve and have any potential challengers killed before they could be any trouble. This was Stalin’s game and he just about gutted the intellectual and political elite of Russia in the process. They still have not recovered from it.

That’s what makes this so dangerous. It’s now clear what happened. The Obama people started spying on Trump once he had the nomination or perhaps even earlier. They may have started earlier with an eye on helping the Republicans knock him off in the primary, but that’s not clear. They figured that Clinton was a lock so they were not careful about covering their tracks. The Clinton people are as dirty as it gets so they were not going to be ratting on anyone over it. If anything, they would expand on it.

This is where the Russian hacking story comes into the picture. Once disaster struck and Team Obama realized they had a problem, they needed cover, so they started with the Russian hacking nonsense. They would then claim that it was all an accident and they were just trying to prevent Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale from attacking our democracy! It’s also why Obama signed a retroactive Executive Order giving cover to the intel agencies for their domestic spying activities. They were creating a cover story.

The complication is that it appears that at least one person has perjured himself over this and that one person is FBI Director Comey. There’s no way to square his testimony with these new revelations. The best he can do is split hairs and claim he was not part of the spying effort. Of course, there’s no way to touch him as he runs the FBI. In fact, there’s no way to investigate any of the intelligence organizations. This is the point where many of the robot historians of the future will say the American political class murdered itself.

Unless there is some will to address it, and that’s highly unlikely, we now have a new normal where highly politicized intelligence agencies are used by both sides to discredit one another and discredit any attempts to reform the system. It’s no longer a game of rules. It is a zero-sum game of power and that cycle only ends one way: with someone marching their army on the capital and taking control. As with Rome, whoever emerges as the dictator will not have murdered the system. The system will have murdered itself.

 

Reprinted from The Z-Man Blog.

 

Thursday, 23 March 2017 08:36

Anti-Russian Witch Hunts

 

In order for an ancient tribe to successfully eat or purge a scapegoat, the community first had to scandalize their target with a lying accusation—that the victim was guilty of high crimes against the very social order of the land. This is what is behind the envious mobs and the media priests’ daily work to tie Trump and any of his allies to rumors of “Russian hacking of the election.” The election ritual is the life of the state and its order.

The established media and political hegemony are trying to stab as many pin pricks into Trump as possible with the goal of fashioning him into an agent of an enemy Other who is disturbing the essential sacred ritual of elections. This is all about setting him up for a great devouring to provide orgasmic catharsis on the part of those who covet his power and the state of being they perceive it providing.

One does not have to share Trump’s ideology to see this sorry human anthropological fact and pity all parties involved.

My question is: when will we all stop playing this game of hate and blame and realize how absolutely stupid the state makes us? I mean, not the state itself as some alien entity foisted upon us. But the sacred love of power we all tend to have and manifest into a monopoly on violence we call the state.

The mindlessness of the rumors are embarrassing. The millions of leftists now constantly hallucinating about Russian specters in the reflections of their socially aware soy lattes do not actually care about Russia all of a sudden. They only know what the TV’s like what, six multinational corporations and their Internet extensions tell them: Russia hates gays. Russia loves Trump. Trump stands in the way of my vicarious identity avatar being in the highest symbolic seat of power in the world. Therefore, denial, anger, paranoia, hate.

Similarly, the right’s newfound infatuation with Putin is not based on any real knowledge of the man, only that their chosen avatar indicates a friendly air towards him and that Putin foiled many of their past scapegoat Obama’s machinations.

Do you realize we could pick any country on the map and with enough time of media cookie cutter scandals and marketing words like “butcher,” “threat to democracy,” “thug,” etc. we could get any of these tribes to support violently sanctioning said country, and with another few rumors and allegations, get popular support for violent meddling, a coup, or some other intervention?

Don’t believe me. Ask Assad, he was just dining with Kerry and his wife until his luck ran out in the face of our imperial cult’s financial interests. The same goes for Gaddafi, Hussein, Mossadegh.

Most Americans knew very little why they should support the murder of these individuals and the violent destruction of these foreign rivals. They fell under a trance of groupthink. An ecstasy of oneness that occurs when they are transported by their frustrated mundane lives to a higher plain of justice and blood vengeance for national greatness.

Still, support for acts of war like airstrikes, no-fly zones, and sanctions that starve millions of innocent families are always most fervent and forbearing with the party that shares the same brand with the occupant of the presidency. They imitate their avatar’s resolute righteousness often til the bitter end even as the war high’s diminishing trip reveals itself with photos of carnage coming in steadily with no accompanying tangible benefits from the mission.

Trump, for all his many foreign policy faults, has so far refused to play the standard bipartisan script on targeting a new scapegoat in Putin. So it’s given the media and Washington order, who didn’t get the memo that the script had changed, an occasion to scandalize him. Just think, what would happen if a Rubio or Clinton was in office? Would any of the media question or work hard to daily scrutinize challenge, and “fact check” the standard script of Russian intervention both perform? Of course not. And would much of the Republican base stand in opposition to increased sanctions against Russia and no-fly zones in Syria? Hardly.

Do we see the insanity of this whole ruse? People’s passionate opinions are not really their opinions. They are just copying their ideological tribal peers so they can share the pleasure of hating and venting their frustrations onto someone else. That is not a defect in our modern democratic process. That is its masterful design working perfectly.

Humans have always found unity and satisfaction in finding a common villain to scandalize. This ganging up and shaming and pouring every ounce of wrath in oneself onto a common enemy is an ancient practice that dates back to the very origin of human culture. Evidence of ritual human sacrifice is as ubiquitous to archaic sites as tools and fire-making.

Far from being an odd quirk, sacrifice was the fundamental glue that held these communities together. Tensions always build. Humans are always bound by jealousy and paranoia from comparing themselves to their neighbors. But that tendency to mirror our neighbor is also something that can spill out into a righteous blaming of a common enemy for all of the strife, tension, and fear that consumes our daily lives.

By declaring “It is finished” on human sacrifice and imitating Jesus’s love of enemy, Christianity has slowly eroded the effectiveness and raw brutality of human sacrifice. Western culture experienced the longest sustained infection of Christianity’s anti-sacrificial leavening of strong sacred structures and thus remains the only culture in the world today totally obsessed with self-flagellation of its own ethnocentrism and unfair treatment of minority interests in its history. The only one.

The problem is our culture’s guilt obsession with past mistakes betrays the ultimate conceit: that our public decrying of others’ bad behavior makes us immune. This is a means of gaining power and advantage over others by using victims as a “human shield” of criticism. Jesus dealt with such Victimism as such: “And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!” – Matthew Chapter 23 NIV

Victimism is the dominant state religion of the west. It always wails against its forefathers’ abuses as a means of gaming for more power. So Trump can be torn apart by progressives, who marched by the millions in 2004-2006 against Iraq War lies, for daring to seek peace with Russia because he refuses to imitate the cool speech, self-criticism, and solemnity of the office the history book approved politicians of the system always provide.

 

 

In other words, he’s been cast in their favorite show—one that provides the best opium for the masses money can buy. And he’s not playing it right. He’s a bad actor for their sacred theater. He’s not speaking in eloquent, sweet words. So his open self-obsession and Twitter rants sully the sacredness of the state and thus “turns the lights on” to the barbarity and ridiculousness of the whole enterprise.

People get enraged when you take their opium away.

By the way, why do I use “sacred” so much to describe the state, elections, and politics? Because sacred is that which is unquestioned. It is that which is not supposed to be seen or spoken. The sacredness of statecraft is that it is the madness of crowds lusting after power. It is not needed to order society. But do not bother telling its fervent participants that: they need their obsessed rivalry with their enemy tribe, for, in them, they see themselves.

It’s said we are not to discuss politics at dinner.

It’s said we are not to discuss religion at dinner.

But I repeat myself.

The only way to understand politics and its never-ending scandals and hatred is to understand its religious structure.

In the meantime, that’s me in the corner. Losing my religion.

 

Thursday, 23 March 2017 08:30

Trigger-Warning Tyrants

 

People like thinking the best of themselves, which is why we have “trigger warnings,” “microaggressions” and claims of “taking offense” -- so complainers don’t have to see they’re spoiled, self-absorbed, tyrannical brats.

Here’s how it works: when accusing you of “microaggressing,” the truth is that, generally, these snowflakes just don’t happen to like what you’re saying. But shouting “Shut up! I hate that type of expression!” makes you seem intolerant. So to preserve your image and self-image, you use the ploy of shifting the onus onto the one whose speech you want to suppress.

Note that actual ideas are often targeted. Examples are “I believe the most qualified person should get the job” and “Everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard enough,” which academia has identified as “racial microaggressions.” The principle is: if you can’t refute it, boot it. 

Since coining psychobabble terms is in today, I’ll label this onus-switching “Oppression Transference.” The snowflake oppressor stifles the speech of his victim by making the latter seem the oppressor -- a microaggressor, an agent of triggered feelings or offender in chief.

Another major factor is that, lacking the power of the state, the snowflake has to use social pressure to impose his will. He might just put you in a gulag were he a Stalin, but he’s not, so he shackles you with political correctness.

 
 

Since snowflakes pride themselves on tolerance, it should be emphasized that they don’t even understand the concept. “Tolerance” always implies the abiding of a perceived negative. You’d likely never have to tolerate a fine car or delectable meal, but you would have to tolerate a stubborn cold or bad weather (unless you’re a masochist).

In other words, if, let’s say, you like homosexual behavior or just don’t care about it, that’s not called tolerance; it’s called affinity or indifference. A prerequisite for tolerating it is considering it a negative.

Thus, the true measure of tolerance is how well you handle things you don’t like. And pro tip: if you’re so triggered by “Where are you from?” and “You speak English really well” -- which are also labeled microaggressions -- that you participate in a Stalinesque effort to purge such things from discourse, you’re not just not tolerant; you’re not even tolerable.

Snowflakes are also pathetically self-centered and self-absorbed. If your feelings are hurt by the terms “black hole” or “man up,” well, you need to man up. If you think The Great Gatsby, Mrs. Dalloway, or The Merchant of Venice needs a trigger warning, you’re not just a sniveling little wimp. You also haven’t learned an important life lesson once imparted during toddlerhood: Your feelings just aren’t that important.

There are seven billion people on this planet with seven billion sets of feelings. When snowflakes demand their feelings be the arbiters of policy, they’re saying that their emotions should be preeminent, with others who feel contrary being subordinate. Worse still, they’re saying that their feelings, which are subjective, should trump what should be the yardstick for policy: the objective, principles such as the imperative of encouraging the expression of Truth.

This is the crux of the matter. Saying that something originating within you(feelings) should take precedence over Truth, which exists outside of you, is a universal and is meant to be feelings’ arbiter, is the epitome of self-centeredness.

There is the occasional academic who stands against the snowflake phenomenon, such as Oklahoma Wesleyan University’s great president, Dr. Everett Piper, who penned an open letter to his students titled “This is Not a Daycare. It’s a University!” But modern universities, which now resemble dens of iniquity where all the hookers have Ph.Ds, are generally the problem.

For instance, the term “microaggressions” was popularized by a Columbia University professor, Derald Wing Sue, who got the idea from a more originalIvy League lunkhead. Brown University was content to let students establish “a ‘safe space’ that offered calming music, cookies, Play-Doh, and a video of frolicking puppies to help students cope…,” reported the Telegraph. And institutions of lower learning have created charts of microaggressions so all us bigots can know what not to say. An example is the following from the University of Wisconsin:

As for trigger warnings, there’s an interesting thing about them. The people complaining about the “graphic violence” in The Great Gatsby weren’t raised in a cloistered Amish cocoon; they grew up imbibing the most violent, perverse Hollywood fare imaginable. So I suspect that what really bothers them is something else -- such as the more traditional paradigm for society older works portray.

Tragically, the “educators” facilitating snowflakism are ignorant of the harm they do. The University of North Carolina warns that saying to a woman “I love your shoes!” or “[i]nterrupting a female-identified colleague…” can be a microaggression. So can saying to “a person of African descent: “Can I touch your hair?’” because it sends the message “Your appearance is exotic and foreign to me.”

Okay, but what if my appearance really is exotic and foreign to the person? When I was 19, I visited a rural Taiwanese town, a place where homes still had straw roofs. I was brought to the elementary school, and it just so happened that the children had recess. Circling around me curiously, it was plain they’d never personally seen a blondish white person before. The friend I was with told me they wanted to shake my hand, and, after extending it, it wasn’t long before I had a dozen Chinese lads on each arm screaming and pulling me like it was a tug-of-war. It was a fun experience I’ll never forget.

The point is that this curiosity is normal. And here’s another life lesson: If you can’t understand that or are offended by it, you’re abnormal. Thankfully, this abnormality can be cured.

But here’s where the harm lies. Is a couple, or two friends, closer when there’s nothing they can’t discuss? Or when many subjects are off limits and they must walk on eggs?

By creating the latter situation, the snowflake enablers are actually building walls between people. When you can’t acknowledge obvious differences among people -- whether they relate to race, ethnicity, sex, religion or something else -- you’re playing pretend. Another word for this is pretense, which has as a synonym“charade.” Also note one of its antonyms: honesty. 

How do you combat trigger-warning tyranny? Stop being defensive. The people effecting it are trying to shut you up as they purge Truth from your tongue. They’re using social warfare against you, so strike back; fight fire with fire and put the onus on them. Call them what they are: intolerant, spoiled, self-centered, evil tyrants. Take no prisoners.

Only when these oppressors masquerading as victims are stilling their tongues, fearing the scorn, ostracism and possible career destruction threatening sane people today, will we know we’ve made America great again. Remember, people who cannot be reasoned with, can only be fought.  

 

By Selwyn Duke

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

 

 

Was there anyone more pious, anyone more inclined to stroke his chin and intone for guarding national security in the wake of the WikiLeaks revelations than Hillary Clinton campaign manager John Podesta?  Turns out the wily Democrat operative was neck-deep with the Russians he intoned against all along, through a Russian-financed company called Joule, according to a new report from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The problem here is that the Russian oligarchs he's been consorting with are so dirty that even Putin is after them.  That blows apart Podesta's dishonest narrative about "Russians hacked the election" and rival Donald Trump supposedly colluding with them, but also the issue of Putin's supposed animosity toward Hillary Clinton, as cited by FBI director James Comey Monday.  What may be really going on is Podesta getting caught up in an internal power struggle among the boyars of the Kremlin that's of his own making. 

To hear Podesta tell it, the "narrative" is all about "the Russians" hacking the election.  Here are some choice quotes from Podesta last December:

"We now know that the CIA has determined Russia's interference in our elections was for the purpose of electing Donald Trump," he said in a statement to Politico. "This should distress every American."

Podesta issued his statement in response to letter from Nancy Pelosi's daughter Christine, a voting member of the electoral college, to request a security briefing before she casts a ballot.

 

"We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States," Pelosi's letter read.

Podesta's statement floats the suggestion that electors could theoretically select a different candidate for president than Donald Trump.

"The bipartisan electors' letter raises very grave issues involving our national security," Podesta said in a statement. "Electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed."

It's horse hockey.

Podesta made these remarks even as he had benefited from U.S. tech transfers to Russia's military during the time he sat on the board of a renewable energy company called Joule and had ties to Rusnano, a financing arm known in Moscow as "Putin's baby."  (GOP Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas is calling for an investigation of that, according to the Daily Caller News Foundation report.) Podesta concealed his stock holdings to this company as he joined the Obama administration and still hasn't been held accountable for it.  Yet at the same time, he was around when a lot of quid pro quo involving U.S. tech transfers to Russia was going on, raising significant questions as to whether the U.S. was sold down the river during the Obama administration.

 

 

Here's where it gets interesting.  Chubais is one of the most reviled men in Russia.  He sold billions in state assets to oligarchs and crony capitalists for pennies on the dollar while ordinary Russians got nothing but nightmarish currency devaluation, which destroyed their savings, in Russia's miserable privatization effort from communism back in the 1990s.  He's the man who teamed up with Clinton-linked advisers at Harvard and operated so incompetently that they effectively made Russians hate capitalism.  As a result, the Russians elected Putin in 1999.  Podesta's ties to the Clinton machine's Harvard minions such as Larry Summers amount to ties to Chubais.  Note also that Podesta apparently gives well compensated lectures on energy matters to the school.  Podesta's links to George Soros also lead to Chubais.

Around the time the WikiLeaks emails were hacked, it's worth noting that Chubais and Putin had been in the throes of a falling out, dating from at least 2013.  Putin accused Chubais of being a CIA agent at that time, and in 2015, another Chubais ally, a Rusnano official, was placed under house arrest for embezzlement.  In November 2016, Russia's economy minister, still another Chubais ally, was arrested in November.  Chubais wrote on his Facebook page that it came as "a shock."

The timeframe of these moves roughly coincides with Podesta's time in the White House and the deterioration of Russian-U.S. relations in the failed "reset."  The Democratic players, including Podesta, coincide with Harvard's involvement with Chubais.  It's also worth noting that a four low-level officials were arrested in Moscow for the supposed Russian hacking – something that also could have been a strike against Chubais, because if Putin were hacking, why would he arrest his own hacker?

Keep an eye on this Gohmert investigation.  What emerges from it may put to pasture the ridiculous narrative Podesta is pushing about Russian hacking.  In truth, it may be that he got mixed up with some very gamy characters so bad they've got Putin after them in Moscow.

 

By Monica Showalter

 

 

 

The phenomena of Islamic radicalism all over the world is directly linked to Wahhabi-Salafi madrassahs (religious seminaries) that are generously funded by Saudi and Persian Gulf’s petro-dollars. These madrassahs attract children from the most impoverished backgrounds in the Third World Islamic countries, because they offer the kind of incentives and facilities which even the government sponsored public schools cannot provide: such as, free boarding and lodging, no tuition fee at all and free of cost books and stationery; some generously funded madrassahs even pay monthly stipends to students.

Apart from madrassahs, another factor that promotes Wahhabi-Salafi ideology in the Islamic World is the ritual of Hajj and Umrah (the pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina). Every year, millions of Muslim men and women travel from all over the Islamic World to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca in order to wash their sins.

When they return home to their native countries after spending a month or two in Saudi Arabia, along with clean hearts and souls, dates and zamzam (purified water), they also bring along the tales of Saudi hospitality and their supposedly “true” and puritanical version of Islam, which some Muslims, especially the backward rural and tribal folk, find attractive and worth-emulating.

Authority plays an important role in any belief system; the educated people accept the authority of specialists in their respective field of expertise; similarly, the lay folk accept the authority of theologians and clerics in the interpretation of religion and scriptures. Apart from authority, certain other factors also play a part in the psychology of believers: like, purity or the concept of sacred, and originality and authenticity, as in the conviction of being closely corresponding to an ideal or authentic model.

Yet another factor which contributes to the rise of Wahhabi-Salafi ideology throughout the Islamic world is the immigrants’ factor. Millions of Muslim men, women and families from all over the Third World Islamic countries live and work in the energy-rich Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait and Oman. Some of them permanently reside there but mostly they work on temporary work permits.

Just like the pilgrims, when the immigrants return home to their native villages and towns, they also bring along the tales of Saudi hospitality and their version of supposedly “authentic Islam.” Spending time in Gulf Arab States entitles one to pass authoritative judgments on religious matters, and having a cursory understanding of Arabic, the language of Quran, makes one equivalent of a Qazi (a learned jurist) among the illiterate, rural folks; and they simply reproduce the customs and traditions of Arabs as the authentic version of Islam to their rural communities.

The Shi’a Muslims have their Imams and Marjahs (religious authorities) but it is generally assumed about Sunni Islam that it discourages the authority of clergy. In this sense, Sunni Islam is closer to Protestantism, at least theoretically, because it prefers an individual and personalized interpretation of scriptures and religion. Although this perception might be true for the educated Sunni Muslims, but on the popular level of the masses of the Third World Islamic countries, the House of Saud plays the same role in Sunni Islam that the Pope plays in Catholicism.

By virtue of their physical possession of the holy places of Islam – Mecca and Medina – the Saudi kings are the ex officio caliphs of Islam. The title of the Saudi king: “Khadim-ul-Haramain-al-Shareefain” (the Servant of the House of God) makes him the vice-regent of God on earth; and the title of the caliph of Islam is not limited to a single nation state, the Saudi king wields enormous influence throughout the commonwealth of Islam: that is, “the Muslim Ummah.”

Thus, when we hear slogans like “no democracy, just Islam” on the streets of the Third World Islamic countries, one wonders that what kind of a simpleton would forgo one’s right to choose their government through a democratic and electoral process?

 

 

This confusion about democracy is partly due to the fact that the masses often conflate democracy with liberalism without realizing that democracy is only a political process of choosing one’s representatives through an electoral process, while liberalism is a cultural mindset which may or may not be suitable for the backward Third World societies depending on their existing level of cultural advancement.

One feels dumbfounded, however, when even supposedly “educated” Muslims argue that democracy is somehow un-Islamic and that an ideal Islamic system of governance is caliphate. Such an ideal caliphate could be some Umayyad or Abbasid model that they conjure up in their minds, but in practice the only beneficiaries of such an undemocratic approach are the illegitimate tyrants of the Arab World who claim to be the caliphs of Islam, albeit indirectly and in a nuanced manner: that is, the Servants of the House of God and the Keepers of the Holy places of Islam.

The illegitimate, and hence insecure, tyrants adopt different strategies to maintain and prolong their hold on power. They readily adopt the pragmatic advice of Machiavelli to his patrons: “Invent enemies and then slay them in order to control your subjects.”

The virulently anti-Shi’a rhetoric of the Gulf-based Wahhabi-Salafi preachers, who are on the payroll of the Gulf’s petro-monarchies, appears to be a cunning divide-and-rule strategy on the lines of Machiavelli’s advice. The illegitimate autocrats of the Gulf States cannot construct a positive narrative that can recount their own achievements, that’s why they espouse a negative narrative in order to vilify their political adversaries for regional dominance in the Middle East.

The Sunni-Shi’a conflict is essentially a political conflict between Saudi Arabia and Iran which is presented to the lay Muslims in the veneer of religiosity. Saudi Arabia has the world’s largest proven petroleum reserves, 265 billion barrels, and its daily crude oil production is more than 10 million barrels (equivalent to 15% of the global crude oil production). However, 90 % of the Saudi petroleum reserves and infrastructure are located along the Persian Gulf’s coast, but this region comprises the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia which has a significant and politically active Shi’a minority.

Any separatist tendency in this Achilles’ heel of Saudi Arabia is met with sternest possible reaction. Remember that Saudi Arabia sent thousands of its own troops to help the Bahraini regime quell the Shi’a rebellion in 2011 in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings in the Shi’a-majority Bahrain, which is also geographically very close to the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qaeda inspired terrorism is a threat to the Western countries but the Islamic countries are encountering a much bigger threat of sectarian conflict. For centuries, the Sunni and Shi’a Muslims have coexisted in relative peace throughout the Islamic World but now certain shady forces are deliberately stoking the fire of inter-sectarian strife to distract attention away from the home front: that is, the popular movements for democracy and enfranchisement in the Arab World.

Notwithstanding, Islam is regarded as the fastest growing religion of the 20th and 21st centuries. There are two factors that are primarily responsible for this atavistic phenomena of Islamic resurgence: firstly, unlike Christianity, which is more idealistic, Islam is a practical religion, it does not demands from its followers to give up worldly pleasures but only aims to regulate them; and secondly, Islam as a religion and political ideology has the world’s richest financiers.

After the 1973 collective Arab oil embargo against the West, in the wake of the Arab-Israeli war, the price of oil quadrupled; and the contribution of Gulf’s petro-sheikhs towards “the spiritual well-being” of the Muslims all over the world magnified proportionally. This is the reason why we are witnessing an exponential growth of Islamic charities and madrassas all over the world and especially in the Islamic World.

Finally, it’s a misconception that the Arab sheikhs of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and some emirates of UAE generally sponsor the Wahhabi-Salafi sect of Islam, because the difference between numerous sects of Sunni Islam is more nominal than substantive. Islamic charities and madrassas belonging to all the Sunni denominations get generous funding from the Gulf Arab states as well as private donors.

 

SOURCE: NAUMAN SADIQ, BLACKLISTED NEWS

Nauman Sadiq is an Islamabad-based attorney, columnist and geopolitical analyst focused on the politics of Af-Pak and MENA regions, neocolonialism and petroimperialism.

 

 

On 21 October 2016, I headlined “An Email From Lynn Forester de Rothschild to Hillary Clinton, Against Elizabeth Warren” and reported extensive back-door funding of Hillary Clinton by the Rothschild family. 

On 15 December 2016, I headlined “U.S. Gov’t. Is Secretly Allied with America’s Enemies“ and noted that:

Prior to Hillary’s becoming the U.S. Secretary of State, the Clinton Foundation had collected a total of $10 million to $25 million from the Saud family and their vassals (the Sauds’ subordinate aristocrats, such as the bin Ladens — but all from official government accounts). As the U.S. Secretary of State, she and her State Department celebrated in 2011 the Saud family’s purchase of $29.4 billion worth of U.S. Boeing F15-SA bombers (which now were destroying Saudi Arabia’s neighboring country of Yemen, with American bombs); and, as Lee Fang of The Intercept noted about that, “As weapons transfers were being approved, both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Boeing made donations to the Clinton Foundation. The Washington Post revealed that a Boeing lobbyist helped with fundraising in the early stages of Hillary Clinton’s current presidential campaign.”

Then, on March 10th, Jack Burns of The Free Thought Project (a left-libertarian organization, which receives no funding from the Kochs or other billionaires) bannered “EXPOSED: Senator John McCain And His Ties To Saudis, Rothschilds” and he documented similar backdoor funding of John McCain.

 

 

John McCain’s father, Admiral John McCain II, headed the official “court of inquiry” into Israel’s 8 June 1967 military assault against the U.S.S. Liberty and he ruled that Israel had merely erred in having slaughtered its 34 U.S. sailors. (It was an entirely unprovoked attack.) However, that ‘finding’ was a cover-up. Ample evidence (such as presented here and here and here) proves that it was intentional and authorized at the top of Israel’s government and why they did it. So, after reviewing that and other evidence, I headlined on 30 September 2016, “Why Does U.S. Gov’t. Donate $38B to an Enemy Nation?” (referring to Obama’s commitment for U.S. taxpayers to donate $38 billion to Israel over the next ten years).

As I explained on 25 December 2015, under the headline “The Saudi Wahhabi Origins of Jihadism”, the Sauds are allied not only with the other fundamentalist-Sunni royal Arab families who own respectively Qatar (Thani), Kuwait (Sabah), and UAE (six royal families in that country), but also with Jewish billionaires, many of whom are American and are major funders of both political parties, just as Christian billionaires are. Israeli politics is largely dominated by Jewish American billionaires, and so the Western Alliance is an alliance of billionaires, who are Roman Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and Sunnis, but they are all united together in supporting neoconservatism — the ultimate goal of conquering Russia — and this means wars to overthrow Russia-friendly leaders, such as Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi, Viktor Yanukovych, and Bashar al-Assad. But the billionaires also control the armaments-firms, which need lots of wars — it’s just good business for them to invade and otherwise (such as in coups) overthrow governments that refuse to particpate.

This also is the reason why, as I headlined on 28 January 2017, “Al Qaeda Funded by Royal Sauds, U.S. Gov’t. Documents”, and explained why the U.S. government often protects and even arms Al Qaeda, such as in Syria.

Geostrategy is an international game that is played by billionaires who collectively join together to conquer whatever territory they’ve not yet conquered. The non-billionaire publics are merely the customers and agents for those aristocratic families, or else their cannon-fodder — their taxpayer-funded gangsters hired to kill or else be killed. And, of course, the armaments-firms are controlled by the billionaires, and the profits of those firms also are being paid by the nation’s taxpayers; so, the aristocracies extract from the publics everywhere. There is nothing personal in this: it’s just a bloody game.

And that’s also why, as I headlined on 27 March 2017, “Trump Boosts Most Wasteful Department, Reduces All Others”, and reported that the only U.S. Cabinet Department that’s so corrupt it’s unauditable, the ‘Defense’ Department, is boosted an additional 9% in the new President’s budget, and all of the auditable Departments get their budgets cut. Siphoning from the public can be very profitable business. Unfortunately, it has lots of “collateral damages” (such as bloody corpses, and failed states). But, that’s just business, and even hauling off such wastes can be profitable.

—————

BY: Eric Zuesse

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

 

 

Self-described gang member, pimp and Hillary Clinton supporter Snoop Dogg released a mock assassination video of President Donald Trump. The left’s response? A collective yawn. 

I issued a statement calling for the arrest of Snoop Dogg for the “Lavender” video, which features Snoop spouting murderous threats and shooting a clown-faced Trump look-alike with a replica gun.

Any decent person would repudiate Snoop Dogg for his vile video. But when men are weak, evil flourishes. This is what has allowed predators like Snoop Dogg and others in the rap industry to get rich pushing sexually explicit and violent music to our kids.

President Trump had a great response on Twitter: “Can you imagine what the outcry would be if @SnoopDogg, failing career and all, had aimed and fired the gun at President Obama? Jail time!”

The president is right! If a musician – especially a white one – made a mock assassination video of Obama, so-called black “leaders” and the Democratic Party leadership would be calling for the culprit to be locked up!

In fact, liberals were furious when a rodeo clown (ironically) dared to simply wear an Obama mask at the Missouri State Fair! Note the NPR headline: Rodeo clown in Obama mask sparks outrage, apologies.

The rap world is not only defending Snoop Dogg’s sick video, it’s doubling down.

Rapper T.I. – who’s spent months attacking President Trump – posted on his Instagram account, calling Snoop Dogg a “f—in legend” and said Trump should keep Snoop’s name out of his “f—in old ass puppy p–s smelling ass mouth …”

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

In 2007, T.I. was arrested by federal authorities and charged with two felonies –possession of three unregistered machine guns and two silencers, and possession of firearms by a convicted felon. He pleaded guilty to U.S. federal weapons charges. He was sentenced to an undefined prison sentence, a year of house arrest and 1,500 hours of community service. Because of his light sentence, it’s widely believed that he cooperated with the feds. To try and regain his street cred, T.I. has been a vocal supporter of Black Lives Matter and now a critic of Donald Trump.

Bow Wow (Shad Gregory Moss), a 30-year-old rapper (who reportedly still lives with his mama), threatened Melania Trump with this tweet:

“Ayo @realDonaldTrump shut your punk a-s up talking s–t about my uncle @SnoopDogg before we pimp your wife and make her work for us.”

If you’re waiting for Gloria Allred, Madonna, Ashley Judd or Rosie O’Donnell to condemn this idiot and demand an apology on behalf of the first lady, don’t hold your breath. The left doesn’t care about women or blacks; they only feign outrage over perceived injustices that help Democrats and damage Republicans.

Since the black community is in such disorder due to the absence of fathers, lowlifes like Snoop Dogg have been elevated to celebrity status. Here’s his background:

  • Snoop’s father was absent from his life. After high school, he was arrested for possession of cocaine and was in and out of prison.
  • In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Snoop said he was a professional pimp.
  • In 1996, he and his bodyguard were acquitted of first- and second-degree murder charges in the shooting death of a gang member; the jury deadlocked on a manslaughter charge.
  • From 1993 to 2015, he’s been repeatedly caught with firearms and drugs, including marijuana and cocaine. In 2007, he pleaded no contest to two felony charges of drug and gun possession by a convicted felon.
  • He’s also been in trouble with the law overseas in London, Australia and Sweden.
  • And this week, Snoop Dogg released “Super Crip,” a song and video glamorizing gang life using animation. He is affiliated with the Rollin’ 20 Crips gang.

Recently, I had Milwaukee Sheriff David Clarke on my radio show to talk about his book, “Cop under Fire,” and the need for a cultural shift in black America. We discussed the left’s war on the black family, the emasculation of black males and the “cultural rot” that is destroying any trace of decency within the black community and elevating the likes of Snoop Dogg.

Sheriff Clarke noted that the black community is the only culture that doesn’t self-criticize. As a result, he said we have the emergence of the black underclass. Black “leaders” – instead of providing moral guidance – are going along with the left’s agenda for power and wealth.

Blacks used to have moral character. But that changed in the ’60s after President Lyndon B. Johnson and other Democrats began to seduce the black family with government handouts, eventually displacing black fathers.

It’s so important to rebuild men and families – and for men and women to get married before having kids. When you turn the children away from their fathers, you’re turning them away from their own identities; it leaves a void in their souls that can’t be filled by anything else.

The absence of good men is what has led to the emergence of Snoop Dogg and his ilk. He is a cancerous symptom of our sick culture. It’s time for law enforcement to arrest this thug.

 

BY: Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson 

 

 

The US stock market today has never been more dangerous and overvalued, according to respected Wall Street market analyst John Hussman.

Indeed, Hussman goes as far as to say that “this is the most dangerous and overvalued stock market on record — worse than 2007, worse than 2000, even worse than 1929” as reported by Marketwatch.

For some months now, Hussman of Hussman Funds’ has been warning in his research that investors are ignoring extremely high stock market valuations and are being lulled into a false sense of security by central bank liquidity, massive quantitative easing and zero percent and negative interest rates.

Hussman begins his latest research note by quoting the late, great Sir John Templeton:

“Bull markets are born on pessimism, grow on skepticism, mature on optimism, and die on euphoria.”

 

 

He then warns

“A week ago, bullish sentiment among investment advisers soared to the highest level in 30 years (Investor’s Intelligence), joined last week by a 16-year high in consumer confidence. When one recognizes that the prior peak in bullish sentiment corresponds to the 1987 market extreme, and the prior peak in consumer confidence corresponds to the 2000 bubble, Sir Templeton’s words take on both relevance and urgency.”

 

 

Hussman advises investors become more defensive because the market could be about to enter a brutal bear market as seen throughout history.

Huge crowds gather in shock at the New York Stock Exchange after 1929 stock-market crash. Getty Images/Keystone/Staff

Hussman Funds provide in-depth analytical research on the US stock market. They use long-term valuation models, reversion to the mean and mathematics to support their views.

Dr. Hussman says what we’re currently seeing is worse than 2007 when the global financial crisis brought the world economy to its knees, worse than 2000 when the tech bubble popped and caused a market catastrophe, and even worse than the biblical Wall Street 1929 crash.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average recently breached the hugely important psychological level of 20,000 and has recently surged over 20,100 to 21,115.

Throughout history, the first breach of these important psychological resistance levels is usually the end of — rather than the beginning of — a stock market boom. After the initial breach of the barrier, it takes years for the market to make a permanent breach through these ‘barriers’ (see below).

Is this time different?

We do not know and no one has a crystal ball, however, it is important to realize that the U.S. stock markets and bond markets are priced for perfection, despite a very uncertain outlook for the U.S. and the world.

Brexit, the risk of Frexit and EU contagion, the uncertainty created by the Trump Presidency and considerable geopolitical risk from a myriad of unresolved conflicts – from North Korea to Russia to Iran and the geopolitical mess that is the Middle East.

These overvalued stock markets are also vulnerable given the scale of overvaluation that is evident in bond markets and the real risk of a very significant sell-off in global bond markets.

Bond markets have come under pressure in recent days with yields rising in many key markets. Italian debt looks particularly vulnerable with Italian 10-year yields rising and concerns that a break above 2.50% in the third largest bond market in the world (debt valued at €2.2 Trillion) has the potential to jettison Italy out of the European monetary union.

Bond guru Bill Gross is also warning that investors need to keep a watchful eye on the U.S. 10 year bond yield as a breach of 2.6% will mean that “a secular bear bond market has begun.”

A massively indebted EU and U.S., which reaches the debt ceiling today, with indebted households and fragile economic recoveries will struggle when interest rates revert back to more normal levels.

Markets are priced for perfection and yet the political, financial, economic and monetary outlook is less than perfect. Euphoria and “irrational exuberance” will inevitably revert to “fear and loathing”.

The question is when and by what one catalyst or a combination of catalysts?

Given the scale of the risks facing investors and pension owners today, it is prudent to reduce allocations to stocks and bonds and increase allocations to physical gold.

Reprinted with permission from GoldCore.

 

Thursday, 16 March 2017 07:07

Lynch Mobs of the Left

 

"Comrades! The kulak uprising in your five districts must be crushed without pity. The interests of the whole revolution demand such actions ... You must make an example of these people. 

(1) Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see it) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. 

(2) Publish their names. 

(3) Seize all their grain. 

(4) Single out the hostages per my instructions in yesterday's telegram. 

Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks and that we will continue to do so. 

Reply saying you have received and carried out these instructions. 

Yours, Lenin." 

Thus did V.I. Lenin command leftist mobs in 1918 to be whipped up by his Bolshevik organizers. Mob agitation and propaganda (agit-prop) became a major attack strategy of the radical Left in Russia, picking innocent targets to hang and destroy by propaganda. This is also what George Soros witnessed in in Budapest, when Nazi-incited mobs killed Jews and put them on cattle cars for the death camps. Soros sold the furniture of deported Jews to begin building his fortune. He has said "it was the happiest time of my life."

In Leninist jargon, Obama is an "agitator," not an "organizer." The words "community organizer" are just an inversion of "communist agitator." And this is the model for all of the mob activities so persistently found to be the tool of the left.

What the United States is witnessing today is a leftist lynch mob seeking innocent victims. The other day, Rick Santorum was targeted by a Twitter mob. Today it may be you. They will use anything: The oligopoly media, Pravda on the Hudson (The New York Times), the Washington Post, and "professors" who live off taxpayers, to agitate the innocent and the ignorant. You can watch it happen. When you see it, please keep track of who, when, how, why. If you don't see the string-pullers behind the scenes now, you will soon, because the playbook is always the same. 

The aim of agitation-propaganda (or agit-prop) is to overthrow legitimate governments. It is a major part of Obama's hero Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, which should be called "rules for mob agitators." This moment has been prepared by Obama and Hillary (who wrote a fawning bachelor's thesis justifying agit-prop), both acolytes of lynch mob agitator Alinsky. 

Alinsky learned agit-prop from the Russian progroms around 1900, which persecuted his (Jewish) parents, who then fled to Chicago. The city then became a center of Leninist agitation. 

In Alinsky's rules, agitators must:  "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it."  In Russia, it was the Jews. In Obama's Jakarta, where the Indonesian civil war broke out in 1965, (The Year of Living Dangerously,) it was mostly the overseas Chinese who were scapegoated. The dynamic began in France whenrabid mobs attacked shopkeepers over government-triggered price hikes at the dawn of the French Revolution.

For Lenin it was the kulaks -- the pathetic "rich peasants" in what was becoming Soviet Russia. In a lesser, but no less valid manifestation, for The New York Times it was Justice Clarence Thomas when he was nominated to the Supreme Court, and any number of conservatives and Republicans, who learned to kowtow, to mouth the party line from the NYT and WaPo, so that even today House Republicans are afraid to speak up against lynch-mob agitation by the left. 

Today the lynch mobs are organized by Obama and Michelle, who have been joined by Valerie Jarrett, living in their home to be at the very center of things. Today's lynch mobs have been picked and trained by George Soros front groups. The mobs are mostly ignorant adolescents, led by today's agitators. 

This is all standard operating procedure on the totalitarian left. 

 

 

The Democrats have a long, long history of mob agitation. In the Civil War, they defended black slavery, as conservatives know very well, and not a single liberal will confess today. The KKK was a Democratic Party front group to keep blacks cowering in fear after Republican President Abe Lincoln signed the Emancipation Declaration of 1863 and the Reconstruction began at the Civil War's end.

Segregationist Democrats called themselves Dixiecrats, another word for KKK enablers. They accomplished by lynching and terrorism what federal and state laws could not: Keeping black people shaking in fear. 

"Fear" is what agitators aim to create. 

To quote Lenin's master, Karl Marx, 

"In his article, The Victory of the Counter-Revolution in ViennaNeue Rheinische Zeitung, No. 136, 7 November 1848:

“… there is only one means to shorten, simplify and concentrate the murderous death throes of the old society and the bloody birth pangs of the new, only one means – revolutionary terrorism[5] ..."

Marx was not a "great philosopher," as the Bolshie BBC wants you to believe. As an economist, he never produced a single original thought. He was a scapegoating rabble rouser, and agit-prop artist, and one of the most destructive human beings in history. In the 150 years after Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto of 1848, an estimated 100 million people were murdered by the international left -- not by accident, not as an unintended side effect from trying to make the world better, but as a matter of deliberate policy. 

Lynch mobs are a traditional feature of Muslim jihad, too. The "Reverend" Jeremiah Wright, Obama's mentor, specializes in whipping up racist rage and anger against whites, with the exception of leftists who support his "cause." Father Michael Pfleger, another vicious mob agitator in Chicago, sounds like Hitler on one of his radio rants (see YouTube). 

In the Muslim world, "spiritual leaders" (imams and mullahs) practice television and radio propaganda, often paid for by Saudi oil billionaires, to whip up mobs. The West refuses to admit that ISIS murder and rape battalions follow jihadist commands to the letter. All their bloodthirsty cruelty against children and women, homosexuals, Coptic Christians in Egypt, Jews, women who don't cover their faces and bodies, all that cruelty is carried out by male mobs whipped up by their "spiritual leaders," especially on Fridays. 

If you want a definition of evil in the world, this is it. If you don't recognize it already as a kind of routine massacre of the innocents, do your homework. 

You will never understand today's rage on the left, or its real effort to overthrow American constitutional government, if you do not understand lynch mobs -- KKK, Leninist, Soros-sponsored, and Obama-controlled. 

Do your homework and you may save your country. Ignore it and try to find a better place to live. 

 

By James Lewis

 

Thursday, 16 March 2017 06:57

Rogue IRS Felons Vindicate Trump

 

Thanks to Rachel Maddow and MSNBC, we now know Hillary was making things up in the debates when she accused President Trump of nefarious reasons for not releasing his tax returns. And thanks to a reporter nobody heard of, so-called independent journalist David Cay Johnson, we know Trump was right when he said the "mainstream" media is indeed the enemy of the American people.

The self-righteous media willingly traffics in stolen goods -- Trump’s illegally leaked 2005 tax returns -- and all they wind up proving is that Trump paid a higher rate of taxes than his peers, and a higher rate than Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders. The story here is not Trump’s taxes, but that someone at the IRS, the rogue agency that targeted the Tea Party, committed a felony. Where is the media drumbeat that the leaker be found and prosecuted?  

Maddow, MSNBC, and Johnson ought to have egg on their faces, seeing that not only did Trump not escape paying taxes, but also that he paid a higher rate than the likes of Sanders and Obama. The Obamas paid an effective tax rate of only 18.7 percent in 2015. Bernie Sanders paid a federal tax rate of only13.5 percentin 2014. Ironically, Comcast, the parent of MSNBC, paid a tax rate of only 24 percent from 2008 through 2012, less than Trump’s 2005 effective rate ofroughly 25 percent. Trump paid $38 million in taxes on income of $150 million.

Exposed as a lie were Hillary Clinton’s slanderous innuendo during theSeptember 26, 2016 presidential debate when she hinted candidate Trump was hiding something by not releasing his taxes: 

Clinton said, “So you’ve gotta ask yourself, why won’t he release his tax returns? And I think there may be a couple of reasons. First, maybe he’s not as rich as he says he is. Second, maybe he’s not as charitable as he claims to be. Third, we don’t know all of his business dealings, but we have been told, through investigative reporting that, he owes about $650 million to Wall Street and foreign banks. Or maybe he doesn’t want the American people, all of you watching tonight, to know that he’s paid nothing in federal taxes. Because the only years that anybody has ever seen, were a couple of years where he had to turn them over to state authorities when he was trying to get a casino license. And they showed he didn’t pay any federal income tax.”

Hillary knew full well, or should have known, that it is allowed to deduct business losses, something that Trump pointed out that many of the donors to the Clinton Foundation did. If businesses couldn’t do that, investors wouldn’t invest and risk-takers wouldn’t take risks. Many startups and small businesses would fail and economic and job growth would be suffocated.

We have been down this road before, with a leak of portions of Trump’s 1995 tax returns during the 2016 campaign timed to aid the presidential hopes of Hilary Clinton.  This idea will be immediately dismissed in some quarters as just another conspiracy theory concocted by the vast right wing but it is not as far-fetched as it sounds. Several items lend credence to the idea that the IRS has once become an arm of the political left targeting conservatives.

Could it really be just coincidence that Hillary Clinton focused on Trump’s failure to release his tax returns, surmising that the reason might be he hasn’t been paying any taxes, just days before the New York Times printed pages from his 1995 return showing a loss that “may have” allowed him to not pay taxes for the next 18 years? Was this Hillary’s “October surprise” for Trump? It didn’t work then and won’t work now.

Compare Hillary’s debate remarks to the eerily similar statement released by Team Clinton almost immediately after the New York Times published the excerpts from Trump’s 1995 taxes:

There it is. The bombshell report reveals the colossal nature of Donald Trump’s past business failures and just how long he may have avoided paying any federal income taxes whatsoever. In one year, Donald Trump lost nearly a billion dollars. A billion. He stiffed small businesses, laid off workers, and walked away from hardworking communities. And how did it work out for him? He apparently got to avoid paying taxes for nearly two decades – while tens of millions of working families paid theirs. He calls that ‘smart.’ Now that the gig is up, why doesn’t he go ahead and release his returns to show us all how ‘smart’ he really is?

Did Hillary know in advance Trump’s documents would be leaked and that this story would break within days of the debate? At this point, this can only be surmised that someone at the IRS leaked the documents, but when you consider the 2012 targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups by the IRS for the purpose of reelecting President Obama, the thought that this politicized agency might do a similar favor for Obama’s successor is, again, not so far-fetched.

 

 

As Investor’s Business Daily has noted, the adventures of Hillary Clinton and her missing and deleted emails from her private server are similar to the crashed hard drives of Lois Lerner, who masterminded the Tea Party targeting by the IRS in 2012:

Clinton, under this administration, will likely not fear or face any criminal prosecution for violating the Federal Records Act and doing her official business on that personal server now deliberately wiped clean of records she knew were under subpoena and the subject of Freedom of Information Act lawsuits.

But then, Lois Lerner, poster child for hard-drive crashes and missing emails, won't face charges for contempt of Congress either. After pleading her innocence at that 2013 hearing, Lerner went on to invoke her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.

Both Hillary Clinton and Lois Lerner used their political positions for their personal and political agendas. Both “lost” or destroyed the emails that would have proven their crimes. Lerner targeted the Tea Party. Hillary targets Donald Trump. Both benefit from acts that violated the laws. The New York Times says someone sent the documents to a reporter so they have no criminal liability. One finds it odd that if a private citizen receives stolen property, they go to jail. If a reporter receives stolen documents, they receive the Pulitzer Prize.

The IRS Chief and Lois Lerner’s boss, John Koskinen, has been the target of a move to impeach him for his role in covering up Lerner’s crimes, his obstruction of Congress, and outright lying to Congress. He is the poster child for political hacks and it is not beyond the realm of possibility that on his watch employees of a politicized agency that has the power to tax and therefore the proverbial power to destroy leaked Trump’s 1995 return for the political purpose of helping Hillary Clinton. After all, a Trump Department of Justice would not hesitate to prosecute both.

As the Washington Times notes, Koskinen has been knee-deep in the IRS corruption and its cover-up:

Among the specific charges leveled by Mr. Chaffetz and 18 of his fellow Republicans on the committee were that Mr. Koskinen, appointed by President Obama in December 2013 after the targeting scandal broke, misled Congress when he said he had turned over all of former IRS senior executive Lois G. Lerner’s emails and that he oversaw destruction of evidence when his agency got rid of backup tapes that contained the emails.

Lying to Congress and destruction of evidence under subpoena are federal crimes, and that includes the arrogant Mr. Koskinen, who is just one example of being an Obama donor can get you a good job with the administration. As Investor’s Business Daily noted:

Certainly, it might be argued that Koskinen's current position is owed to four decades of being a prodigious Democratic donor.

Koskinen has contributed to every Democratic presidential candidate since 1980, including $2,300 to Obama in 2008, and $5,000 to Obama in 2012. Of course, being an Obama donor with a government job in and of itself is not a crime, but how Koskinen has used that job is positively criminal. Koskinen once confessed before Congress that obeying the law was a difficult task:

Of course, being an Obama donor with a government job in and of itself is not a crime, but how Koskinen has used that job is positively criminal. Koskinen onceconfessed before Congress that “obeying the law was a difficult task:

"Whenever we can, we follow the law," IRS chief John Koskinen recently told the House Ways and Committee in a Freudian slip of the truth that says it all.

This longtime Democratic donor and the IRS has broken the law to help President Obama and his wannabe successor, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and to damage the administration of Donald Trump. Someone at the IRS has repeatedly broken the law and should be located and prosecuted, even if that means Koskinen himself.

 

By Daniel John Sobieski

Daniel John Sobieski is a freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.  

 

Page 1 of 2

Shop thru Us - Save $

Top