LAUSD STRIKE: UNSAFE IN ANY CLASS...

lausd-hammer-dollar When I went to school in the dark (non-internet) ages, boys were boys, girls were girls, and everybody knew which bathroom to use. For boys, there were no “accommodations” when it was time to shower after gym. There was a tolerance for a certain level of joking and jiving when class started, but nothing major. Classroom disruptions were far and few between with the offender quickly corralled and marched off to the vice principal’s office. Now we find that the malignant hand of progressive socialist democrats in the classroom as they push their phony “disparate impact” theory which posits that the human behavior of an identifiable class of people must approximate their representation in the general population or something is wrong. A boneheaded policy that is arguably wrong as demonstrated by the number of high-achieving Asians relative to their population numbers. It is my understanding that the responsible factors are parental expectations, parental guidance, and peer pressure. All lacking in many other cultures, some of which have few expectations of their children, little parental guidance, and negative peer pressure directed towards high achievers. This has manifested its malignant self in higher education where some prestigious progressive educational institutions, notably Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and elsewhere as adopted the motto “Do as I say, not as I do.” [Note: The Ivy League was notorious for its anti-Semitic, anti-Catholic, and anti-Black atmosphere – and whose graduates were likely to gravitate to policy-making government institutions like the Department of State, Department of Justice, and the various intelligence agencies.] In fact, there is a joke about one of the most recognizable universities outside of the United States, UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) where the pejorative “Unknown Caucasian Lost Among Asians” has been bandied about. All are “progressive schools” dominated and led by progressive socialist democrats who have attempted to shield their admissions policies from claims of bias and racism. In general, institutions of higher learning tacitly allow a higher level of disruption as long as that disruption is linked to social causes or advances the progressive agenda. Attempts at free speech are shouted down and speakers attacked because they have been labeled as “haters” and their utterances “hate speech.” One need only look at UCI (University of California, Irvine) to see what havoc disruptive students have been allowed to create. But the progressive socialist democrat nonsense does not end there… It is one thing to break a child’s heart with a rejection letter from a desirable university. It is quite another to see that student physically bullied in an atmosphere of progressivism that touts “zero tolerance” for disruptive behavior but gives a pass to disrupters, some more violent than others. The pass is in the form of a “stay out of jail” card given to African-Americans by progressive idiots who have not learned that poor behavior that is ignored or rewarded is likely to be accepted as “the norm” rather than being identified as abnormal and punished. The pass even has a high-sounding name: “restorative justice.” The goal of the so-called restorative justice movement was to disrupt the school-to-prison pipeline by ignoring petty issues that often served as sentencing factors leading to charges that were punished more severely. The presence of “priors” sometimes changing a misdemeanor into a more serious felony calling for incarceration. Like any euphemism, “an expression substituted for one considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing,” restorative justice is a form of racial preferences that is designed to impose little or no punishment on offenders as a redress to historical intolerance and to “adjust: the number of African-Americans disproportionately incarcerated in jails and prisons throughout the land. So why is this important today? As nearly 35,000 teachers and others strike and walk the picket lines to protest the Los Angeles Unified School District’s position relative to union negotiations, we are hearing more and more about the necessity for more funds to make the classroom safer for both teachers and students. Stunning hypocrisy from progressive socialist democrats who are actually fueling the flames of disobedience in their quest for political power. When the Trump Administration sought to rescind the Obama-imposed “restorative justice” policy that the Department of Education was promoting to schools who wanted to receive federal funds, the outcry could be heard from coast to coast. As with educational excellence, money is not the answer; neither is a relaxed tolerance for misbehavior. Bottom line… It is time that the American public realize that the progressive socialist democrats are openly dividing Americans into classes, telling those classes that they are victims of the system, and then promising to redress their grievances in return for political power. Of course, to anyone with half-a-brain and open eyes, we can see that the political power bestowed on the progressive socialist democrats did little or nothing the the majority minority inner cities. Where billions were stolen, waster, or simply used to buy votes. It is time to stop being hyphenated-Americans and become Americans. Americans who reward excellent achievement and punish misbehavior. If the teachers in Los Angeles were as “woke” as they claim, these useful idiots would be marching against both the school district and their union – two sides of a coin where anyone not politically connected is screwed over by hypocrisy and upside down policies. It is like 1984 met Alice in Wonderland and everything is mirrored in an alternate, and malignant, universe. We are so screwed. -- steve

Federal Court Orders Discovery on Clinton Email, Benghazi Scandal: Top Obama-Clinton Officials, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes to Respond to Judicial Watch Questions Under Oath

open INSIDE JW FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: 202-646-5188 January 15, 2018 Federal Court Orders Discovery on Clinton Email, Benghazi Scandal: Top Obama-Clinton Officials, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes to Respond to Judicial Watch Questions Under Oath Seven Other Top State Department/Clinton Aides Must also Respond to Judicial Watch Queries (Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced today that United States District Judge Royce C. Lamberth ruled that discovery can begin in Hillary Clinton’s email scandal. Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers and Clinton aides will now be deposed under oath. Senior officials, including Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Jacob Sullivan, and FBI official E.W. Priestap, will now have to answer Judicial Watch’s written questions under oath. The court rejected the DOJ and State Department’s objections to Judicial Watch’s court-ordered discovery plan. (The court, in ordering a discovery plan last month, ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”) Judicial Watch’s discovery will seek answers to: Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system; whether the State Department’s efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request. Discovery is scheduled to be completed within 120 days. The court will hold a post-discovery hearing to determine if Judicial Watch may also depose additional witnesses, including Clinton and her former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills. Judge Lamberth ordered written responses under oath to Judicial Watch’s questions from Obama administration senior officials Rice, Rhodes and Sullivan, and former FBI official Priestap. Rice and Rhodes will answer interrogatories under oath on the Benghazi scandal. Rejecting the State and Justice Department objections to discovery on the infamous Benghazi talking points, Judge Lamberth reiterated: Yet Rice’s talking points and State’s understanding of the attack play an unavoidably central role in this case: information about the points’ development and content, as well as their discussion and dissemination before and after Rice’s appearances could reveal unsearched, relevant records; State’s role in the points’ content and development could shed light on Clinton’s motives for shielding her emails from FOIA requesters or on State’s reluctance to search her emails. Judicial Watch also may serve interrogatories on Monica Hanley, a former staff member in the State Department’s Office of the Secretary, and on Lauren Jiloty, Clinton’s former special assistant. According to Lamberth’s order, regarding whether Clinton’s private email use while Secretary of State was an intentional attempt to evade FOIA, Judicial Watch may depose: Eric Boswell, the former Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security.… Boswell’s March 2009 memo to Mills … discusses security risks Clinton’s Blackberry use posed more generally. And Boswell personally discussed the memo with Clinton. So, he plainly has relevant information about that conversation and about his general knowledge of Clinton’s email use. Judicial Watch may depose Boswell. Justin Cooper. the Clinton Foundation employee who created the clintonemail.com server. In its proposal, Judicial Watch noted Cooper’s prior congressional testimony “appears to contradict portions of the testimony provided by Huma Abedin in the case before Judge Sullivan.” … Cooper repeatedly told Congress that Abedin helped set-up the Clintons’ private server, e.g., Examining Preservation of State Department Federal Records: [before a Congressional hearing] Abedin testified under oath she did not know about the server until six years later.… Judicial Watch may depose Cooper. Clarence Finney, the former deputy director of State’s Executive Secretariat staff…. [T]his case’s questions hinge on what specific State employees knew and when they knew it. As the principal advisor and records management expert responsible for controlling Clinton’s official correspondence and records, Finney’s knowledge is particularly relevant. And especially given the concerns about government misconduct that prompted this discovery, Judicial Watch’s ability to take his direct testimony and ask follow-up questions is critical. *** Judicial Watch seeks to go beyond cursory, second-hand testimony and directly ask Finney what he knew about Clinton’s email use. This includes asking about emails suggesting he knew about her private email use in 2014, and emails he received concerning a December 2012 FOIA request from Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington (CREW) regarding senior officials’ personal email use-topics State’s 30(b)(6) deposition in Judge Sullivan’s case never addressed. Judicial Watch may depose Finney. 4. Heather Samuelson. the former State Department senior advisor who helped facilitate State’s receipt of Hillary Clinton’s emails.… [T]his case turns on what specific government employees knew and when they knew it. Judicial Watch must be able to take their direct testimony and ask them follow-up questions. Judicial Watch may depose Samuelson. 5. Jacob Sullivan. Secretary Clinton’s former senior advisor and deputy Chief of Staff. The government does not oppose Sullivan’s deposition. Regarding whether the State Department’s settlement attempts that began in late 2014 amounted to “bad faith,” Judicial Watch was granted depositions from the State Department under Rule 30(b)(6); Finney; John Hackett, the former deputy director of State’s Office of Information Programs & Services; Gene Smilansky, an attorney-advisor within State’s Office of the Legal Advisor; Samuelson; and others. Judicial Watch was also granted interrogatories on whether the State Department adequately searched for responsive records, as well as several document requests. “In a major victory for accountability, Judge Lamberth today authorized Judicial Watch to take discovery on whether the Clinton email system evaded FOIA and whether the Benghazi scandal was one reason for keeping Mrs. Clinton’s email secret,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Today, Judicial Watch issued document requests and other discovery to the State Department about the Clinton email scandal. Next up, we will begin questioning key witnesses under oath.” The court-ordered discovery is the latest development in Judicial Watch’s July 2014 FOIA lawsuit filed after the U.S. Department of State failed to respond to a May 13, 2014 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch seeks: Copies of any updates and/or talking points given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency concerning, regarding, or related to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Any and all records or communications concerning, regarding, or relating to talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency. The Judicial Watch discovery plan was in response to a December 6, 2018, ruling by Judge Lamberth. Incredibly, Justice Department attorneys admit in a filing opposing Judicial Watch’s limited discovery that “Counsel for State contacted the counsel of some third parties that Plaintiff originally included in its draft discovery proposal to obtain their client’s position on being deposed.” This collusion occurred despite criticism from the Court that the DOJ engaged in “chicanery” to cover up misconduct and that career employees in the State and Justice Departments may have “colluded to scuttle public scrutiny of Clinton, skirt FOIA, and hoodwink this Court.” Judicial Watch countered that “[t]he government’s proposal, which is really nothing more than an opposition to [Judicial Watch’s] plan, demonstrates that it continues to reject any impropriety on its part and that it seeks to block any meaningful inquiry into its ‘outrageous misconduct.’” This Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.

by Jm Moran

2019-01-13T23:51:04.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

by Jm Moran

2019-01-13T23:50:45.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

Next Stop...GITMO & The Clinton Containment Area!

Next Stop...GITMO & The Clinton Containment Area!
by Jm Moran

2019-01-13T23:47:39.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

by Jm Moran

2019-01-11T02:55:29.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

The Enemy Within Seeks to Destroy US...

ADL: THE PROGRESSIVE DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA FROM WITHIN Com-donkey There is little doubt that the Democrat Party has now become closer to becoming the neo-Communist party in the United States that to the traditional moderate mainstream Democrat party of my parents and my era A turn toward the radical progressive socialist democrats under former President Obama, himself a transformational president who early on embraced communism, black liberation theology, and anti-Semitism. This entire Russia collusion charade is merely another attempt by the radicals to cover-up the demonstrable damage they have done to the country and to hide the depth of infiltration and compromise of some of the nation’s premier institutions such as the CIA, DOJ, FBI, IRS, EPA, DOE, and others. They need to discredit President Trump. But even more important, is their need to capture the House of Representatives to shut down the investigations that are highlighting the traitorous, seditious, and rebellious nature of the Obama Administration. How else can you explain the entry of the mostly non-political Anti-Defamation League’s into partisan politics? Under the direction of Jonathan Greenblatt, the sixth national director and CEO, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) has seemingly turned from highlighting and combatting anti-Semitism, anti-Jew, and anti-Israel bias to a partisan political machine that blindly supports the policies of former President Obama, openly disparages Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and now has apparently joined the anti-Trump movement to oppose both President Trump, his policies, and his nominees for office. Greenblatt recently served in Obama’s White House as a “Special Assistant to Barack Obama” and the Director of the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation. In essence, he was part of the Obama machine designed to seduce Jews, ordinarily progressive socialist democrats, into accepting Barack Obama and his cadre of pro-communist, pro-Muslim, and anti-Israel acolytes. The Tweets… adl-aa There is nothing in Judge Kavanaugh’s distinguished history to suggest he is anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, anti-Jew or anything else. So why else that Greenblatt’s bias against Trump and the Trump Administration would provoke such a nonsensical statement. The idea that Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court would somehow compromise civil rights and civil liberties by following the U.S. Constitution is ludicrous. adl-d Greenblatt seems to ignore the concept of national sovereignty and that the nation’s ability to protect its borders is vital to national defense. It is not “inhumane” to keep your country free, safe, and protect its legal residents from harm. adl-c Immigrant community? There is no problem with legal immigrants, even those who refuse to assimilate. The problem is the illegal immigrants who believe they have some “right” to enter our country because their country has become a corrupt hellhole, mostly under dictators, socialists, and communists. The United States is governed by our Constitution, not a poem on the base of the Statue of Liberty. “The New Colossus" is a sonnet that American poet Emma Lazarus wrote in 1883 to raise money for the construction of a pedestal for the Statue of Liberty, not a statement of national purpose, nor one of legal standing. “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” does not supersede national sovereignty nor the “legal” immigration process that governed entry into the United States. adl-b Substitute “Muslim nationalists” for white supremacists, and you have the primary cause for the rise of anti-Semitism in America and elsewhere in the world. The statement by President Trump is absolutely correct, and prominent and disturbing examples can be found all over Europe. adl-a First, Greenblatt ignores that Trump has welcomed “legal” immigrants who obey the immigration laws into the country, it is the hoard of unregistered illegal immigrants who are problematical. I am not aware of any anti-Muslim policies other than those affecting national defense and attempt to keep America safe and secure from terrorists and others who want to recreate their own corrupt and toxic culture here in America. Then again, I wonder how Greenblatt feels about former President Obama giving massive aid and comfort to Iran, especially when his wife was an Iranian-Jewish political refugee who entered America legally. What were they thinking… When Greenblatt was approached about heading the ADL, he is quoted as saying, “I thought, ‘ADL is a civil rights organization. I’m not a civil rights expert. ADL is all lawyers. I’m not a lawyer. ADL is a Jewish organization. I’ve never worked in the Jewish community.’” But Greenblatt’s business influence is clearly on display as the ADL’s Silicon Valley office is now partnering with the uber-progressive University of California, Berkeley to create an algorithm that can discern the difference between hate speech and non-hate speech. What makes Berkeley’s choice as a partner problematic is that the school is well-known for its anti-Israel, anti-Semitic atmosphere, and pro-Palestinian support? I also wonder how Greenblatt feels about a foreign sovereign entity like Saudi Arabia funding most American Mosques and staffing them with radical Wahhabis – some noted terrorists and supporters of terrorists? Bottom line… It is inconsequential that Jonathan Greenblatt appears to hate Trump and the GOP. What matters is that he is destroying the reputation and goodwill of decades by compromising the core mission of the ADL and embracing radical progressive socialist democrat politics. Some suggest Greenblatt’s animus towards Trump stems from the rumor that he was being considered for a high position in a Hillary Clinton administration – which was dashed when Trump took office. It is time to replace Greenblatt with a non-partisan director who will faithfully execute the ADL’s core mission and not merely parrot the radical progressive socialist democrats. The idea that the ADL is a non-partisan organization and not an arm of the progressive socialist democrats is fading fast. We are so screwed. -- steve