by Jm Moran

2019-01-18T15:42:37.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

Ahmed

Ahmed
by Jm Moran

2019-01-18T15:32:53.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

HYPOCRITES ONE & ALL: DEMOCRATS APPOINT ANTI-SEMITE TO POWERFUL FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE

DEMOCRATS APPOINT ANTI-SEMITE TO POWERFUL FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE cpd In a stunning display of supporting the growing anti-Semitism in the Democrat Party, we see House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appointing Ilhan Omar to the powerful House Foreign Relations Committee … io-ap One must wonder and worry if Omar qualifies for a security clearance which would be, in my opinion, tantamount to giving our sworn enemies access to official state secrets and insight into foreign policymaking. There is little doubt in my mind that Representative Omar (D-MN), a foreign-born (Mogadishu, the capital city of Somalia) Somali-American politician from Minnesota, is a rabid anti-Semite and a vicious opponent of anything having to do with Israel. io-1 Where is the condemnation of the terrorist state that hides offensive weapons amid hospitals, schools, and mosques to ensure any defensive counter-strike creates civilian casualties that can be exploited in the international media for fund-raising since the state produces nothing of value except terror? Where is the condemnation of a terrorist state that launches thousands of un-aimed rockets at a civilian population? Where is the condemnation of a terrorist state that builds elaborate tunnels for the sole purposes of crossing Israeli barriers to murder men, women, and children? Consider the difference in the treatment between an Arab in Israel and a Jew in any radical Muslim area, it will tell you everything you need to know. [BTW: Criticizing the policies of the State of Israel does not make you an anti-Semite -- it is the overtly expressed hatred that makes you an anti-Semite. A promoter of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement against Israel, Omar often refers to the State of Israel as an “apartheid state.” io-as Somehow the reality that Arabs and other Muslims living within the State of Israel have the same duties, rights, and privileges as any other Israeli citizen belies the fact that there is a malignant state policy comparable to the official state policies that separated the blacks and whites in South Africa. Full disclosure… Stand-w-Israel I stand with Israel. As for those who believe that there will be peace in the region, I give you the musings of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, who famously said, “If Arabs lay down there weapons, there will be peace. If Israel lays down its weapons, there will be no more Israel.” Truer words have never been spoken. Israel, a land of liberty, literacy, and accomplishment, stands among nations desiring to be ruled by dictators under laws that were suited for the 12th century. A reminder: just because you can vote for a dictator, does not mean you implement freedom, liberty, or engage in traditional democracy. Sounding like a communist… io-5 Can anyone see the flaws of abolishing the law enforcement agency sworn to protect America from illegal aliens, criminals, and terrorists? Can anyone see that the end-point of socialism/communism is a totalitarian state that must exist to protect the leadership when other people’s money runs out, centrally-planned state goals fail, and people become so apathetic they refuse to work in servitude to a state that gives the results of their hard labor to someone else who does not work as hard, or even works at all? Bottom line… I am deeply troubled by the un-American and anti-Semitic actions of the Democrat Party, a party which is looking more-and-more like the neo-Communist Party in the United States. How is it that the progressive socialist democrats can ignore the realities of the world and the consequences of their actions to promote the perverse dream of a terrorist state which openly attacks an American friend and ally and represents a culture that is incompatible with the freedoms acknowledged in the United States Constitution. The very same Constitution which our representatives took an oath to support and defend. I am deeply troubled about a people who congregate in concentrated areas and refuse to assimilate into American life. People who, by the language, dress, food, and behavior want to re-create the hell-hole they left here in an infinitely safer United States. It is one thing to be proud of your culture and to promote its benefits, but to demand that others recognize and adhere to your cultural or religious practices is an anathema to the Constitution. Something is deeply wrong in the Democrat Party, a party which bears little resemblance to the days of previous Democrats. There is a malignancy in the United States, and it appears to be metastasizing rapidly; whether the body politic can be saved from this disease if yet unknown. We are so screwed. -- steve

by Jm Moran

2019-01-16T01:21:59.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

Suddenly it appears that Nancy, Chuckles & their democratic socialist minions have had their access to the “all-you-can-eat” government gravy train & buffet cutoff! Trump just canceled military transportation for their junket/vacations at taxpayer’s expense...until the shutdown is over. Perhaps they will now be willing to #BUILDOURWALL!

Suddenly it appears that Nancy, Chuckles & their democratic socialist minions have had their access to the “all-you-can-eat” government gravy train & buffet cutoff! Trump just canceled military transportation for their junket/vacations at taxpayer’s expense...until the shutdown is over. Perhaps they will now be willing to #BUILDOURWALL!
by Jm Moran

2019-01-17T21:03:22.000Z
from Facebook
via IFTTTfrom Facebook
via IFTTT

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.