Category → Government Of the People…
New York Times Invents Time Machine
The New York Times was once the flagship news source in the whole world. It was the standard by which all other news sources and newspapers were judged.
What happens when a trusted news source becomes an active partisan in politics is inevitable: The credibility banked over decades is spent in a fury of attacks, which then blow away like dust after the contest is ended.
Partisans of all sorts inevitably find themselves clawing for survival, as it is the nature of choosing artificial sides in a world of holism. Sliding over the cliff, partisans act like a drowning victim on the way down. They’ll do anything to keep from going under, no matter how futile or self-defeating. It’s like using the wood from your home’s walls to run the fireplace.
So back in January of this year, the NYT ran headlines about how Trump was wiretapped. Why not? The NYT was one of the partisan proponents alleging an official investigation into Trump, and wiretaps are part of those kinds of investigations. The NYT was doing its best to damage Trump’s credibility, his standing, his ability to act as president. The NYT was trying to delegitimize Trump, and reporting that he had been wiretapped had all the trappings of a bad guy being surveilled by official law enforcement good guys.
Fast forward a couple months, and now “wiretap” has a whole new meaning: Today it means that the Obama administration illegally wiretapped and conducted illegal domestic spying against political candidate Trump. We now know there was no investigation of Trump, ever. But we also know there was eavesdropping aka wiretapping of Trump. The leaked transcripts of his calls prove it.
In this context, “wiretap” sounds awful, even damning when an Obama ally like the NYT reports it, and if you are in the business of bashing Trump and protecting Obama, which the NYT is, then you certainly don’t want to support evidence of the greatest political scandal since Watergate.
So the clever NYT invented a time machine. They went back in time to their January 2017 headlines that screamed “WIRETAP” and digitally altered them, on their website. No kidding. I do not lie. Check it out.
They “fixed” the NYT headlines, which might have a double meaning that applies here quite well. The NYT “fixed” its own headlines from months ago, so that going forward it would appear that the NYT had never said that Trump was wiretapped by Obama. Because now that sounds like an admission that Obama was conducting his illegal domestic spying on a US citizen and politician. The NYT retroactively changed its own history to support the narrative it currently promotes.
Being partisan, and not a news organization, the NYT will do whatever it can to support its allies (Obama) and damage its enemies (Trump, America, traditional values, Christianity, etc.), so the record has been forged to preserve a current version of events that are most favorable to Obama.
Now the forged January 2017 NYT headlines say that Trump’s name came up in “data intercepts” conducted by the NSA while spying on Russian officials stationed here in America.
Data intercepts. Doesn’t that sound a lot more acceptable, more palatable? A lot less invasive? A lot more normal than the actual spying via wiretaps we witnessed going on against Trump by the US government under Obama’s stewardship?
Like a drowning man, the NYT is going down the tubes. Its credibility is shot, gone, spent wildly like a drunken sailor during the recent political contest which saw Trump elected over the NYT’s favored Clinton. Trying to alter what it wrote months ago is simply fakery, forgery, really, and the NYT has been caught red-handed doing what it would never allow anyone else to do: Go back in time and re-invent reality to fit today’s immediate purposes.
If this isn’t fake news and alternative facts, then what is? But this is surely news.
Ryan’s NobamaCare Plan
RINO Paul Ryan, Speaker of the US House, is unveiling a complicated “reform” of ObamaCare as I write these words.
To say his plan is complicated is a gross understatement. The fact that it requires so many charts and graphs tells us everything we need to know: No.
The main problem with Ryan’s NobamaCare plan is that it becomes part and parcel of an already clunky and complicated federal tax code.
We don’t need no more stinkin’ federal tax code stuff, unless it is a total overhaul. Like elimination and replacement.
Ryan’s plan just makes it all worse, both the health care part and the federal tax part.
Only elimination will suffice.
One of the issues with political careerists like Ryan is that they are unwilling to think or act outside the box. They accept certain premises handed down by previous elected officials, instead of questioning why and how they did what they did.
I mean, look at federal and state pension problems alone. What on earth motivated previous elected officials to create these monstrosities? It sure wasn’t a careful and judicious use of limited taxpayer funds! Why, you could be led to believe that those former politicians had used taxpayer money to create largess and thus buy votes, so they could stay in office….
Career politicians like Ryan are terrified of making a mistake, because they are terrified of losing their cozy job and benefits. He refuses to make a principled stand when it can count. So he\they stick to what is politically safe, ie palatable to the special interests that control him\them and then those interests that control the opposition party.
The concerns of us citizens factor in way last, if at all in their calculations.
So, ObamaCare must go, as it is the Unaffordable Care Act, and no, you could not keep your health plan, and no, you could not keep your doctor. It was a disaster. You cannot fix a disaster. You get rid of a disaster.
And while we are at it, can we get rid of RINO Ryan, too? America needs a principles-focused person, man or woman, in that congressional seat. Ryan ain’t gettin it done. In fact, as we see this morning, Ryan is making it a lot worse than it already is.
If I couldn’t keep my doctor, then why do I have to keep Ryan?
Say bye to both problems.
Obama the Domestic Spy Part 3
You know what all this “Russia hacked the election for Trump” noise was all about?
It was a distraction to draw attention away from the fact that Obama had an aggressive and totally illegal domestic spying program against his political opponents.
Including and especially Donald Trump, who threatened everything Obama had done to America over eight years.
The illegally gathered and illegally “leaked” Flynn transcript, the leaked transcripts of Trump talking with the leaders of Mexico and Australia. These are wiretapping results from people controlling the levers of government power. They are the remnants of Obama’s administration, dug down deep in the DC bureaucratic morass, dishing out their best efforts to undermine and damage Trump by whatever means they can.
Before the leaks they were simply wiretapping Trump, when he was a candidate and after he was elected, in his home, his business, his car.
Oh sure, the Obama folks have tried to cover their tracks by saying this was all a legitimate “investigation” of Trump.
But there never was an investigation of Trump. Unlike with Hillary Clinton’s dealings with Russia, there is zero evidence of any wrongdoing by Trump.
Trump didn’t do anything wrong or illegal. His only “crime” is that he opposed the Obama machine, which illegally weaponized the federal government against its political opponents, using the IRS , the NSA, EPA, Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, etc.
Obama took this risk because the information was highly valuable for the campaign, and he bet that Clinton would win. Obama expected this whole thing would be swept under the rug and no one would ever really know after Clinton was elected.
But now that Trump is president, and the facts are coming out, Obama’s malicious persona is becoming public knowledge. He is not a nice man. He is not an honest man. Obama makes president Richard Nixon look like a puppy, a kitten, a baby monkey, whatever image of a cute, cuddly, non-threatening adorable little pet you can imagine.
That is the contrast. That is the truth. And the truth is becoming more widely known. Russia didn’t hack anything, and they didn’t make Clinton run a terrible campaign nor did Russia force people to vote a certain way. Russia is a false flag by a group of people who we now see deserve to be treated like the deposed tyrants of Europe, at the hands of a mob.
What ever will we now do with this illegal squatter in our midst, this criminal alien with his anti-democracy machinations against the American People?
Is there no one who will rid us of this meddlesome priest?
Where are all the rogue judges when they are really needed to administer true justice?
Obama Wire-Tapped Trump Part 2
If past president Barack Hussein Obama did not wiretap Donald Trump (Obama did not deny doing it but rather clumsily dodged the question), then what have the “Russia investigation” and secret-but- disclosed transcripts of President Trump phone calls been about? Where did they come from?
The fake Russia connection claim and fake investigation demand are a result of Obama illegally wiretapping Candidate Trump, and getting caught by President Trump.
No evidence of Trump benefiting from Russia, but tons of official big bucks relationship between Putin and Clinton, like the sale of huge quantities of Uranium to Russia and the insane Iran-Russia-empowerment deal. Those never merited investigation before, apparently. And the same political party still wants no one looking into those Clinton influence peddling deals on the taxpayer dime.
Trump wasn’t wiretapped, you say?
Well we know he was “investigated.” What do investigations involve? Wiretapping? You bet!
And what are these supposedly secure and secret phone call transcripts between Trump and other international leaders being released to the press from government sources?
Where did these transcripts come from? Probably from people left over from the Obama administration using their official positions for partisan gain. The same as they did while illegally wiretapping Candidate Trump and calling it an “investigation.”
The partisan yelling and screaming about Trump and Russia is just a noisy diversion from the increasing recognition that Obamagate is worse by far than Watergate, that Mister Wonderful Obama was in fact an illegal Spy.
The continuing demands for an endless investigation into Trump and Russia is just a smokescreen, an obfuscation designed to make Trump look bad and draw away attention from the truly bad fact that our former president Obama was in fact, much worse than Nixon. Obama makes Nixon look like an incompetent rookie.
May be the first time that an ex president goes to jail. But hey, Obama knew the risks and he decided to illegally spy on his party’s nemesis anyhow. Now the time has come to pay the price.
Poison Candy: Spymaster Obama now officially worse than Nixon
Obama craved power and control, no one disputes that.
In fact his supporters admired him for it, even the American media when he spied on them. They cheered when he had the US National Park Service police actually block Americans from visiting open-air national parks like the Lincoln Memorial in downtown DC.
Obama weaponized the entire government apparatus against his political foes. From the Obama IRS subverting conservative non-profit groups, to the National Security Agency surveilling reporters, American civilians, and political conservatives, as documented by Edward Snowden (who fled from Obama to Russia).
Now it turns out the Obama Department of Justice was spying on the Republican candidate for president, Donald Trump, before the election and afterwards. In his home. In his business.
The reasoning is murky, but the purposes are like all the other crimes Obama committed against Americans: Control. Obama wanted to know what candidate Trump was doing, what he was planning, what he was going to say.
Knowing this information would help the Democrat candidate, who was endorsed by Obama, and who would preserve Obama’s legacy and cover his many criminal tracks.
Because the Democrat candidate was expected to win, the Obama administration probably believed this was a low-risk crime, because their Democrat successor would not hold them accountable.
But irony of ironies, the Democrat did not win, and the Republican victim of illegal government spying did win. So history looks different now than was expected just a few months ago.
What little we know at this point is that Obama is already far worse than Richard Nixon ever could have been, could have even dreamed of. Obama is a much bigger criminal than Nixon ever dreamed of being.
And how will our nation hold Obama accountable? He has left the White House, but he has stayed inside the country. He walks freely among the good citizens of this nation. He is as arrogant and stupid as he was before. At some point he will be held accountable in a court of law, as will his criminal associates Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Huma Abedin, and Loretta Lynch, among others.
Revenge will be sweet, “sweeter than honey,” says our Bible.
Tyranny by Ten
This Tuesday, two and a half days ago, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals created a new law about guns and gun ownership in America out of thin air and completely contradicting recent US Supreme Court decisions the lower courts are bound to follow
If you want to see why citizens’ faith in the judiciary branch has declined, this bizarre decision is the best latest example.
It is gross over-reach far exceeding the court’s authority, and nullifying all of the judicial precedent litigated and decided before by the highest court.
Recall that judges cannot make up law.
They are fully bound by precedent.
They cannot make up policies.
They cannot come to a conclusion that is outside the subject of what has been litigated in front of them.
They cannot second-guess Congress.
They cannot ask what personal motives were behind a president’s executive order.
It does not matter what a judge personally thinks. None of this is supposed to enter into a judge’s ruling. When it does, the ruling is meaningless garbage.
Judges can only interpret the laws that are passed by Congress and signed by the President, or the state equivalent. That is it. That is their sole scope and ability.
At their most precise and honest moment, judges simply determine if a law is Constitutional, or not, or if it needs to go back to the state or federal legislative branch for re-work.
Brazen activism like this week’s decision serves only to undermine the judiciary, not strengthen it, because people will either utterly ignore these wayward judges, or they will seek to have them removed from their office, for good cause. Or both.
I myself do not feel bound by this illegal decision, and I will not comply with it no matter who says I must. These ten judges-gone-wild do not outweigh the collective decisions of the populace. If this court wants my guns, the authors of this decision can come to my home and try to take them away.
Come and (try to) take them!
In this particular instance of judicial malfeasance, ten of the court’s fourteen judges decided on their own that a new legal test was needed, a test that had never been used before by Congress, by the framers, the Constitution, or prior courts.
These ten judges decided to call it the “weapons of war” test, and they simply state that the Second Amendment never intended for American citizens to possess “weapons of war,” which according to these judges include the basic AR-15 rifles that are commonly used to hunt coyotes every week across the nation. Never mind that this new test would have eliminated from their personal possession the very military grade guns the American Patriots used to defeat the British.
But obviously logic is not of concern to these judges. The language of the majority decision and supporting decision is florid, full of political and emotional hyperbole, uses sophomoric logic and impolitic language (“the American people deserve a break”), and is simply disconnected from Constitutional text or legal precedent.
It is the equivalent of my kids saying “So, there!” in an argument.
But wait, there’s more!
Beyond being merely political, the majority bizarrely state that the decision is consistent with the US Supreme Court’s Heller decision, when it is in fact completely contradictory. Talk about shades of Orwell’s “1884,” where up is down, black is white, etc.
This is not a legal decision, it is a political decision. It is a bold, defiant “I dare ya!” act by ten radical politicians wearing sombre black robes. And it is not just about guns. This decision is about rogue, out-of-control judges destroying the fabric of our Republic, which was not designed to turn over all issues to the judiciary, as if they make our every decision for us. This court throws the whole delicate machine of democracy out of kilter.
These judges are anti-democracy, plain and simple. They want a certain policy outcome, and because they cannot get it legitimately, legally, through the established legislative process, they simply want to wave a magic wand and make it so.
As much as this illegal decision shocks me, I do have to thank these judges, because they have outed themselves. By engaging in such egregious over-reach, illegally reaching deep into the realms of policy and law, they have willingly exposed themselves as frauds deserving of the most serious correction our system of government allows for – removal from the bench.
Now it is up to those American citizens who want to ‘drain the swamp’ and reclaim American government so that it serves We The People, to remove these anti-democracy activists from their sacred judicial roles. We can push to have them impeached or removed administratively.
Either way will do. Tyranny by ten cannot stand. We the People demand our rights.
Judicial independence, or over-reach?
Judges do not technically have an ability to do more than rule “Yes” or “No” on an issue that is both before their court and also justiciable.
However, for decades activist judges use “broad powers” to advance a political agenda and have continuously put average Americans on defense. This means overstepping boundaries around the judicial branch, reaching deeply into the legislative and executive branches. These activist judges ignore the elementary separation of powers at the heart of the American republic, and they establish themselves as rulers by fiat over all the little people.
Because all people (literally everywhere) want to respect judges, and the justice system, as the heart and soul of democracy and quintessential justice, a culture of deference has built up around even the most active judges who legislate from the bench. That culture is at work now as several extreme judges have ruled that President Trump’s executive order on immigration must stop. The truth is that the recent immigration order is both in keeping with existing law and with the Constitutional purview of the executive branch. Judges really have nothing to say about it. Technically speaking.
But, so powerful is the draw of an independent judiciary that Americans have for a long time given up their rights, liberties, even our immediate safety to even the most obvious judicial political over-reach. Plenty of judges create “rights” where none existed before, or take rights that are expressly stated in the US and most state constitutions. The problem with this is it is unsustainable.
Judges are not elected, and when they act as if they are, and as if they are part of the political system from which they are supposed to remain aloof, they undermine the entire system of law that delicately balances upon their shoulders.
What is now happening as more and more judges engage in out-and-out political action, is the American citizenry believes less and less in what those judges do. The citizenry is losing confidence that those judges are capable of upholding the basic tenets of America, first and foremost.
A truly independent and cautious judiciary is one that passes up most legal complaints, focusing instead on the truly important ones that cut to the heart of American representative government. America is far beyond that now, and here is what we ought to be doing about it:
First, the executive branch must ignore the rulings of imperial activist judges. Simply ignore them, because judges have no actual enforcement power. Ignoring activist holdings will strand activist judges and draw attention to their powerlessness, re-focusing attention on the real heavy weight of truly well-considered holdings. Activist judges have only themselves to blame for this.
Second, activist judges must be removed from the bench, either through elections, impeachments, or administratively. For far too long judges acting far beyond their natural limits have gotten away with murdering democracy, and it is time for Americans to reclaim their freedoms. It is time to focus our efforts on reining in judicial over-reach, so that we might have an independent judiciary worthy of our admiration, respect, and deference.