NBC News posted a story about the rather unique hazards Olympic golfers will face on the golf course in Rio.
This is a picture of one of the hazards:
Also found on the golf course are owls, two-toed sloths, monkeys and a small crocodile. I think I would take up a different sport.
One of the names that has surfaced in the leak of Hillary Clinton’s emails (many of which were deleted from her computer because she said they were not work related, but have come to light through Judicial Watch) is Gilbert Chagoury. Breitbart posted a story about this man today. The mainstream media has been somewhat quiet about him. Yesterday, Fox News posted a story about some of the links between emails regarding the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.
Fox News reports:
In one email exchange released by Judicial Watch, Doug Band, an executive at the Clinton Foundation, tried to put billionaire donor Gilbert Chagoury — a convicted money launderer — in touch with the U.S. ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.
…Chagoury is a close friend of former President Bill Clinton and has appeared on the Clinton Foundation donor list as a $1 million to $5 million contributor. He’s also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative. Chagoury was convicted in 2000 in Switzerland for money laundering. He cut a deal and agreed to repay $66 million to the Nigerian government.
Breitbart has a list of some of the questionable activities of Mr. Chagoury. The list includes:
In 1996, Gilbert Chagoury donated $460,000 to a controversial Miami-based Democratic voter-registration group called Vote Now 96. As a foreign citizen, Chagoury is barred from donating directly to elected officials or political parties. But his three contributions of $200,000, $10,000, and $250,000, made in September and October 1996, were completely legal because Vote Now 96 was a nonprofit organization.
Just two months after making his six-figure donations, Chagoury was among the 250 guests who attended the Clintons’ White House Christmas party.
…In 2000, Switzerland convicted Chagoury of money-laundering and “aiding a criminal organization in connection with the billions of dollars stolen from Nigeria during the [Sani] Abacha years” of military dictatorship, according to a PBS Frontline report.
And finally, the icing on the cake. Breitbart reports:
It is also worth noting that Chagoury’s company, the Chagoury Group, pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative in 2009, the same year the Clinton Global Initiative awarded the Chagoury Group its annual prize for “sustainable development.” The money pledged was at the heart of Sen. David Vitter’s (R) probe into whether Chagoury’s cozy relationship with the Clintons played a roll in Clinton’s State Department’s delay of a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation on Nigerian Islamist group Boko Haram; an FTO classification would have severely hampered Chagoury’s business endeavors in Nigeria.
We really do not need Hillary Clinton to bring this sort of corruption into the White House.
Bloomberg.com posted a story yesterday about more private Clinton emails that we won’t get to see until after the election. However, some of the emails of Mrs. Clinton’s staff have made their way into the public eye, and they are very revealing.
Bloomberg reports:
Newly released e-mails from a top aide to Hillary Clinton show evidence of contacts between Clinton’s State Department and donors to her family foundation and political campaigns.
The e-mails released Tuesday by the conservative group Judicial Watch included a 2009 exchange in which Doug Band, a senior staff member at the Clinton Foundation, told a top Clinton aide at the State Department that it was “important to take care of” an individual, whose name was redacted.
Huma Abedin, the State Department aide, replied that “personnel has been sending him options.”
…In another 2009 exchange released Tuesday, Band asked Abedin and Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, to put Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire Gilbert Chagoury in touch with a State Department “substance person” on Lebanon. The Chagoury Group co-founder has given between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation, according to a list of donors posted online.
…Judicial Watch said it has now found 171 messages that weren’t included in the 30,000 e-mails Clinton turned over to the State Department. FBI Director James Comey has said that his agency found “several thousand” work-related e-mails that weren’t turned over by Clinton’s lawyers. Clinton has told the State Department she believes she submitted all work-related e-mails she had in her possession, the department’s Trudeau said in a statement.
Under President Obama (and under President Clinton, if she is elected) there is one set of rules for the politically connected and another set of rules for the rest of us. This story should disturb all of us, regardless of our political inclinations. It is no wonder that the rest of Mrs. Clinton’s emails will not be released until after the election. At that point, “What difference does it make?”
Posted by a Facebook friend:
The Second Amendment protects law-abiding Americans. To undermine the Second Amendment is to allow criminals with guns to terrorize law-abiding citizens without guns. Hillary will appoint judges who will not support the Second Amendment. Donald Trump will appoint judges that will uphold the Second Amendment. The choice is yours.
Gateway Pundit reported yesterday that Julian Assange of Wikileaks suggested that Seth Rich, who was murdered in Washington, D.C., on July 10, was responsible for the leak of the DNC emails to wikileaks. Those emails resulted in the firing of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. I honestly do not know what to think of this claim.
The article reports:
Seth Rich’s father Joel told reporters, “If it was a robbery — it failed because he still has his watch, he still has his money — he still has his credit cards, still had his phone so it was a wasted effort except we lost a life.”
…On Tuesday Wikileaks offered a $20,000 reward for information on the murder of DNC staffer Seth rich.
Now this…
Julian Assange suggested on Tuesday that Seth Rich was a Wikileaks informant.
There are a few things here that are interesting. Why did Wikileaks offer a reward? If it was a robbery, the thief was definitely inept. If Seth Rich leaked the emails, what was all the fuss about the Russians and their relationship with Donald Trump? Is it possible that Seth Rich leaked the emails because he was an honest man trying to reveal the truth?
The article also includes this statement:
Shortly after the killing, Redditors and social media users were pursuing a “lead” saying that Rich was en route to the FBI the morning of his murder, apparently intending to speak to special agents about an “ongoing court case” possibly involving the Clinton family.
This is very strange, and I don’t know if we will ever know the actual truth or find the culprit. It does seem odd that a number of people associated with the Clintons seem to meet untimely deaths.
Remember how ObamaCare was going to keep health insurance premiums from increasing more than a small percentage every year? The following was posted by a friend on Facebook:
It is not only time to repeal and replace ObamaCare, it is time to repeal and replace every Washington politician who has not repealed and replaced ObamaCare already!
Genealogy has become popular in America. Most people are curious as to who their ancestors were and where they came from. A lot of personal history has not been passed through the generations and has been lost. Every now and then a discovery is made that truly adds to the mystery of where we all began.
A post on a website called nativeamericanhere really brings us an interesting puzzle.
The article reports:
There are currently no DNA tests that can accurate label someone a descendant of a particular Indian tribe in eastern North America. The people, calling themselves full-blooded Native Americans, from the eastern United States, are not the same people, genetically, who greeted early European explorers. A few reputable laboratories are now attempting to create reliable DNA markers for individual tribes, but the obstacles are monumental.
Perceiving a vast potential market from the millions of Americans, who proudly claim that their great-grandmother was a Cherokee Princess, DNA Consultants, Inc. initiated comprehensive DNA testing of the Cherokees living on the Qualla Reservation in western North Carolina. The North Carolina Cherokees were chosen because after 180 years in the west, Oklahoma Cherokees are so thoroughly mixed with other ethnic groups, that any DNA test marker obtained would be meaningless.
The laboratory immediately stumbled into a scientific hornet’s nest. That Cherokee princess in someone’s genealogy was most likely a Jewish or North African princess. Its scientists have labeled the Cherokees not as Native Americans, but as a Middle Eastern-North African population. Cherokees have high levels of test markers associated with the Berbers, native Egyptians, Turks, Lebanese, Hebrews and Mesopotamians. Genetically, they are more Jewish than the typical American Jew of European ancestry. So-called “full-blooded” Cherokees have high levels of European DNA and a trace of Asiatic (Native American) DNA. Their skin color and facial features are primarily Semitic in origin, not Native American.
Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It is fascinating. There are so many aspects to this. Who actually settled America? Was anyone here before they got here? Which native American tribes have these European markers? Did we really all come from the same place? I am fascinated by this information.
I realize that I am not an impartial observer, but it seems to me that there are very different rules for democrats and republicans. Media bias right now is over the top, and the democratic party seems very willing to oppose voter identification laws that would play a role in preventing election fraud. One of the eye-opening events in recent years was the Internal Revenue Scandal (IRS) that specifically targeted conservative groups applying for tax exempt status. It was discovered that the IRS was targeting conservative groups, and the head of the IRS stepped down. However, there was some real question as to whether or not that targeting stopped. Evidently, it didn’t.
On Friday, The Wall Street Journal posted an article about a recent court decision regarding the IRS targeting of conservative groups.
The article reports:
A federal appeals court Friday revived a pair of lawsuits against the Internal Revenue Service stemming from the tea party targeting scandal.
The mixed ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit threw out claims for damages against the U.S. government and senior IRS officials sought by the conservative nonprofit plaintiffs.
But the appellate panel reversed a lower court that had dismissed the litigation entirely. The ruling expressed skepticism with IRS assurances that it was no longer subjecting conservative organizations to discriminatory treatment.
The decision Friday threw a lifeline to two lawsuits brought by dozens of conservative nonprofit groups, including Texas-based True the Vote, an advocate for stricter voter registration enforcement and voter identification requirements.
True the Vote discovered rampant voter fraud in Houston. The details are here. The fact that they were attacked does not say good things about the administration that targeted them.
The article further explains:
In 2013, the IRS apologized for improperly targeting conservative groups and said it had halted political screening of applications. But D.C. Circuit Judge David B. Sentelle, who wrote Friday’s opinion, said it was telling that the IRS had suspended the screening “until further notice.” Stated Judge Sentelle:
A violation of right that is “suspended until further notice” has not become the subject of voluntary cessation, with no reasonable expectation of resumption, so as to moot litigation against the violation of rights. Rather, it has at most advised the victim of the violation – “you’re alright for now, but there may be another shoe falling.”
The court said beyond the potential for more abuse, the IRS hadn’t ceased discriminatory conduct, noting that at least two tax-exempt applications submitted by plaintiffs were still pending.
That meant, in the judges’s view, that the case had not become “moot” as U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton had concluded in 2014 when he dismissed the lawsuits.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs said the ruling gives their cases a lifeline with an opportunity to dig for more evidence.
The IRS needs to be either done away with or cleaned up. Neither is likely under an Obama or Clinton administration. The attack on conservative groups was designed to silence their voices during the 2012 election. Although the attack has morphed into other areas, the attack has not ceased. Any American who depends on the mainstream media for their news is routinely told things that are not true or not told things that are true. The picture that the mainstream media is painting of both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are caricatures–they are not realistic images. Americans are responsible for the leaders they elect. However, there are forces at work that are attempting to prevent Americans from making informed choices in electing those leaders.
The Washington Times posted a story in June 2016 outlining some of the speech guidelines at the University of North Carolina. The inmates have definitely taken over the asylum.
The article reports:
Guidelines issued on the university’s Employee Forum aim to help staff avoid microaggressions in their interactions by cautioning against offensive phrases such as “Christmas vacation,” “husband/boyfriend” and “golf outing.”
The guidebook, first reported by Campus Reform, categorizes examples of potential microaggressions by “social identity group,” including race, gender and sexual orientation.
Under the “Religion” tab, the guidebook says organizing vacations around Christian holidays further “centers the Christian faith and minimizes non-Christian spiritual rituals and observances.”
With regard to “gender” microaggressions, the guidelines discourage comments such as “I love your shoes!” to female colleagues or otherwise complimenting the appearance of women.
It gets worse:
Microaggressions against “sexual orientation” include using the terms “husband” or “boyfriend” when addressing a female colleague, or “wife” or “girlfriend” when addressing a male colleague, instead of the asexual “partner” or “spouse.”
This, the taxpayer-funded university warns, sets “the expectation that people do not identify as LGBTQ until they say otherwise or disclose their sexual orientation.”
At faculty award ceremonies, be sure not to ask honorees to “stand and be recognized” for their achievements, which assumes “that everyone is able in this way and ignores the diversity of ability in the space.”
To further complicate matters:
An editor’s note later amended to the University of North Carolina guidebook makes clear that it “does not represent University policy.”
“The piece was compiled from research and published scholarly works in response to Forum members’ interest in the topic of microaggressions,” the note says.
If the guidebook does not reflect University policy, why does it even exist? Where in the world did we come up with the concept of microaggressions? People are different–that is because we all have different backgrounds, different talents, different abilities, different taste, etc. When did noticing these things become microaggression? It is time for the rebirth of common sense. I guess I shouldn’t expect that rebirth to occur on college campuses. Meanwhile, how much are parents paying to have their children exposed to this junk?
Unfortunately voter fraud is a problem in America. There have been instances of voting machines incorrectly registering votes, and there are examples of people voting multiple times under various names. Voter ID laws are an attempt to solve at least part of the problem.
A few days ago I posted the following chart. I am reposting it just as a reminder of where we are:
Several states have passed voter identification laws, and lawsuits have followed. Texas, at least, is sticking to its guns.
On Wednesday Breitbart.com reported:
Under the deal, voters with valid forms of photo ID or ones “expired by no more than four years” will be allowed to vote a regular ballot, according to court documents obtained by Breitbart Texas. In trade, individuals presenting a valid “voter registration certificate, certified birth certificate, a current utility bill, a bank statement, a government check, a paycheck, or any other government document that displays the voter’s name and an address and complete and sign a reasonable impediment declaration shall be permitted” to vote a regular ballot as well.
As I reported in September 2010, an organization called True the Vote investigated voter fraud in Houston, Texas. This is what they found:
“Vacant lots had several voters registered on them. An eight-bed halfway house had more than 40 voters registered at its address,” Engelbrecht said. “We then decided to look at who was registering the voters.”
“Their work paid off. Two weeks ago the Harris County voter registrar took their work and the findings of his own investigation and handed them over to both the Texas secretary of state’s office and the Harris County district attorney.
“Most of the findings focused on a group called Houston Votes, a voter registration group headed by Sean Caddle, who formerly worked for the Service Employees International Union. Among the findings were that only 1,793 of the 25,000 registrations the group submitted appeared to be valid. The other registrations included one of a woman who registered six times in the same day; registrations of non-citizens; so many applications from one Houston Voters collector in one day that it was deemed to be beyond human capability; and 1,597 registrations that named the same person multiple times, often with different signatures.”
North Carolina is currently involved in a lawsuit against its voter identification laws–despite the fact that voter turnout was up when the laws went into effect in March. Hopefully, North Carolina can find a way to follow the example of Texas.
A number of people familiar with the world of international intrigue have stated that it is a pretty safe bet that Hillary Clinton’s private email server was hacked by any foreign spy network worth its salt. Because the Director of the FBI has acknowledged that there were classified emails on the private server, that hacking presents a threat to American national security. There is also a very strong possibility that it cost at least one man his life.
The Washington Examiner posted a story today about Shahram Amiri, who gave information to the U.S. about Iran’s nuclear program.
The article reports:
Iran confirmed on Sunday that Amiri had been hanged for treason. He was convicted of spying charges in a death sentence case that was upheld on appeal, according to the Associated Press.
“This person who had access to the country’s secret and classified information had been linked to our hostile and No. 1 enemy, America, the Great Satan” a spokesman for the Iranian judiciary said. “He provided the enemy with vital and secret information of the country.”
His body was returned to his mother with rope marks around the neck.
…Amiri disappeared while on a religious pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia in 2009, but he then resurfaced a year later in the U.S., where he visited the Iranian interest section of the Pakistani embassy and demanded to be sent home to Iran. While Amiri told reporters that he was held against his will by both the Saudis and the Americans, U.S. officials said he was receiving millions of dollars for information he provided about Iran’s nuclear program.
The scientist shows up in Clinton’s emails back in 2010, just nine days before he returned to Iran.
This is not a minor infraction. It is likely that the carelessness with which Mrs. Clinton handled her emails resulted in Shahram Amiri’s death. This is totally unacceptable behavior.
We have all listened to the media report on the $400 million dollars paid to Iran. Iran claims it was a ransom payment; President Obama claims it was not. One of the hostages has stated that they were detained at the Iranian airport until the plane with the payment landed. That sounds like ransom, but ransom is not the real issue.
Andrew McCarthy posted an article in National Review today explaining another aspect of the payment.
The article explains:
At a press conference Thursday, Obama remarkably explained, “The reason that we had to give them cash is precisely because we are so strict in maintaining sanctions and we do not have a banking relationship with Iran.” Really Mr. President? The whole point of sanctions is to prohibit and punish certain behavior. If you — especially you, Mr. President — do the precise thing that the sanctions prohibit, that is a strange way of being “so strict in maintaining” them.
…As noted above, the sanctions prohibit transactions with Iran that touch the U.S. financial system, whether they are carried out in dollars or foreign currencies. The claim by administration officials, widely repeated in the press, that Iran had to be paid in euros and francs because dollar-transactions are forbidden is nonsense; Americans are also forbidden to engage in foreign currency transactions with Iran.
This was posted on Facebook by a friend:
These are the reasons we need voter identification laws. Just for the record, in the recent primary elections in North Carolina, the state implemented picture identification requirements to vote. There was a record turnout–voter identification in no way suppressed the vote.
Haaretz posted a story today about the Olympics in Rio. This will be the first time the Olympics honors the memory of the Israeli Olympic athletes killed in a Palestinian terror attack in 1972.
The article reports:
Called the Place of Mourning, the Olympic Village memorial site honors the memory of the Israelis as well as four other people who were killed during Olympic Games. The others are the German policeman who was killed in a failed rescue attempt in Munich; two victims of a bombing at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta and a Georgian athlete who died in an accident at the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver.
Ankie Spitzer and Ilana Romano, widows of two of the murdered Israeli athletes, had been campaigning for years to have the Israelis officially commemorated. They were unsuccessful until Thomas Bach, of Germany, became IOC president in September 2013.
…A “moment of reflection” for the Munich 11 will be held during the Games’ closing ceremony on Aug. 21.
In addition to the IOC commemorations, an August 14 ceremony for the Israeli 11 at Rio City Hall will feature the widows of weightlifter Yossef Romano — who was kidnapped, castrated and murdered by the terrorists — and Andre Spitzer, a fencing coach, lighting 11 candles, according to the Folha de S. Paulo newspaper. Officials from the Israeli Olympic Committee and the Israeli Consulate will lead the commemoration.
I had the privilege of hearing Dan Alon, a member of the 1972 Israeli Olympic Fencing Team who survived the attack, speak many years ago. He has an amazing story. It is fitting that the Olympic Committee has finally honored the victims of that attack.
This is the origin of the Gadsden Flag according to the Gadsden Flag History website:
By 1775, the snake symbol wasn’t just being printed in newspapers. It was appearing all over the colonies: on uniform buttons, on paper money, and of course, on banners and flags.
The snake symbol morphed quite a bit during its rapid, widespread adoption. It wasn’t cut up into pieces anymore. And it was usually shown as an American timber rattlesnake, not a generic serpent.
We don’t know for certain where, when, or by whom the familiar coiled rattlesnake was first used with the warning “Don’t Tread on Me.”
We do know when it first entered the history books.
In the fall of 1775, the British were occupying Boston and the young Continental Army was holed up in Cambridge, woefully short on arms and ammunition. At the Battle of Bunker Hill, Washington’s troops had been so low on gunpowder that they were ordered “not to fire until you see the whites of their eyes.”
In October, a merchant ship called The Black Prince returned to Philadelphia from a voyage to England. On board were private letters to the Second Continental Congress that informed them that the British government was sending two ships to America loaded with arms and gunpowder for the British troops.
Congress decided that General Washington needed those arms more than the British. A plan was hatched to capture the cargo ships. They authorized the creation of a Continental Navy, starting with four ships. The frigate that carried the information from England, the Black Prince, was one of the four. It was purchased, converted to a man-of-war, and renamed the Alfred.
To accompany the Navy on their first mission, Congress also authorized the mustering of five companies of Marines. The Alfred and its sailors and marines went on to achieve some of the most notable victories of the American Revolution. But that’s not the story we’re interested in here.
What’s particularly interesting for us is that some of the Marines that enlisted that month in Philadelphia were carrying drums painted yellow, emblazoned with a fierce rattlesnake, coiled and ready to strike, with thirteen rattles, and sporting the motto “Don’t Tread on Me.”
It is a symbol of the fight for freedom in the American Revolution.
Yesterday The Daily Wire posted the following story:
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has now taken the position that displaying the Gadsden flag (AKA the “Don’t Tread on Me” flag) constitutes racial harassment.
As UCLA Professor Eugene Volokh points out in The Washington Post, the EEOC decided the case of Shelton D. [pseudonym] v. Brennan two months ago: The complainant, “Sheldon D,” argued that as a black man he had been racially discriminated against because a coworker wore a hat with the Gadsen flag emblazoned on it to work.
There is nothing racial about the Gadsden Flag. If I feel discriminated against because a coworker who wears pink socks, can I file a complaint? This is ridiculous. We are losing our freedom. You can no longer purchase Confederate flags on Amazon, but you can still purchase an ISIS flag on Amazon. This is how upside down America has become. Hopefully this ruling can be appealed and the idiots who made the ruling removed from their positions. It’s time for some common sense.
Some wisdom from Rush Limbaugh:
Is it the sudden realization that Trump imploding, if they think that’s what’s happening — by the way, don’t bank on that yet, folks. Don’t infer anything yet. But they perceive it. The media perceives it. The media is trying to create the impression, is it that they’re associating a Trump implosion with a party implosion? Is it that they thought maybe they could arrange it so that Trump would bomb out but that wouldn’t have any effect on the party?
How it can be that when these people, the people I’m talking about have made it clear that they’re abandoning the party as long as Trump’s there. The party’s not worth standing with and saving. No. Because Trump’s the head of it as the nominee, because Trump’s saying he’s a Republican. It’s not worth saving the Republican Party. No, I’m going to join the Democrats or I’m going to join some third party or I’m going to go independent or raise money for Hillary or whatever.
Now, the need for an intervention, that story’s coming from Trump supporters. And, by the way, who is it, somebody’s claiming that Newt started that story, that it’s not a genuine story.
Donald Trump is a serious threat to the status quo. Those who have held the reins and brought us to where we are will no longer be in charge if he is elected. Those who have been increasing their own wealth at the cost of the American taxpayer will no longer be able to do that. The lobbyists will have to reevaluate which parties to attend and who to suck up to. I don’t know if Trump is imploding or not, but I know that the Washington elites would prefer Hillary and would not at all be in a panic if Trump imploded. Therefore, I hope the story is a lie.
This article is based on an article posted in the Malaysia Chronicle on Tuesday. The article deals with the 1MDB Scandal.
The article reports:
Donation is the buzzword for this year, both in the United States as well as Malaysia, but serving different purpose. In US, as temperature rises in the wake of Clinton-vs-Trump for the presidential general election this coming November, hundreds of millions of dollars are being pumped into campaigns to influence American voters.
In the case of Malaysia, Saudi Arabia’s claim that it had donated US$681 million to Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, is now busted. The press conference held by the U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and US Department of Justice last week has not only exposed that money was stolen from 1MDB, but also proved that the Saudi had lied about its donation.
The article speculates that the money will be given to the Clinton Foundation or the Clinton Campaign so that when the Department of Justice investigates, Razak will get a favorable result. Whether or not that happens, the chart below tells us a lot about the money flowing into the Clinton campaign and the Clinton Foundation.
These numbers are somewhat alarming when you consider that only 9 or 10 percent of the money donated to the Clinton Foundation actually goes to help those the foundation is claiming to help. Charity Navigator placed the Clinton Foundation on a watch list.
Breitbart reported in April of last year:
“Charity Navigator, who we have on the show all the time, placed the Clinton Foundation on a watch list,” she ( Fox Business Network’s “The Willis Report,” host Gerri Willis) continued. “They think there are problems with this non-profit.” She added, “Any Democrat—they say what a wonderful charitable organization it is doing to help people in need, people who are hungry, people who have AIDS. Listen, 6 percent of the money it collected in 2013, 6 percent — $9 million, of the $140 million in total it collected, went to help people.”
There are a whole lot of things going on with the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton campaign that are downright scary.
It’s time for a reality check on who is buying our elections. According to opensecrets.org, some of Hillary Clinton’s top contributors to her campaign include Emily’s List (a pro-abortion group), a few major Wall Street investment firms, the US Government and US State Department (how is that legal?), and Time Warner, a major player in cable television and media. Donation amounts from major donors ranged from over $600,000 to about $250,000. The Donald Trump campaign donations paint a very different picture. According to opensecrets.org, Donald Trump’s top donations came from a couple of financial institutions and various companies I have never heard of. The top donation given was $150,000 and the smallest donation listed in the major donation list was about $10,000. Big money and big investments are supporting Hillary. Why? She will continue the status quo where big money people continue to make big money and non-elites continue to make less. And of course, these numbers do not include any money taken from the Clinton Foundation used for travel expenses and other things. The money that does not have to be spent on travel expenses (because the Clinton Foundation can legally fund travel expenses of the Clintons) can be used for attack ads targeting Donald Trump. The 2016 election will determine whether or not elections can be bought in America.
The media is going after Donald Trump with guns blazing. Why? Because he is a serious threat to the status quo. The first victim of this attack is truth. It has long since left the building. The latest example is pointed out in a PJ Media story posted yesterday. The story deals with the media reporting of a Trump rally in Loudoun County, Virginia, earlier in the week. The rally was held with only 24 hours notice, and approximately 2000 people were turned away because the crowd was so large. One attendee posted his observations on Facebook. Please read those observations and compare them to what you have heard on the media.
Here is the story as told by someone who was there:
Today I went to the Donald Trump rally in Ashburn, VA. Since I know good people can disagree over whether or not to support Trump, I am just going to post some candid thoughts below. I report, you decide!
Since I am the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee, I was working with the campaign in advance of the rally. On Monday evening, a senior Trump staffer emailed me and asked me if I would be willing to give the invocation at the rally. I said I’d be happy to, but I also told him that as a born again Christian, I end my prayers with “I pray all of this in the name of Jesus.” Since I know that in this day and age mentionoing the name of Jesus can offend some people, I said I’d understand if they preferred that someone else give the invocation. His response to me was: “We know that’s how you pray, that’s why we asked you.”
After the welcome (by John Whitbeck), invocation (by yours truly), pledge (by Sheriff Michael Chapman), and National Anthem (by Briar Woods High School Teacher Nina Peyton), we waited back stage to get a photo with Donald Trump. And then – he was there, with a crowd of staff, Loudoun County Sheriff’s deputies, and Secret Service. I was immediately struck by his presence – he radiates confidence, but also I was struck by his soft spoken demeanor. He spoke softly and thoughtfully the entire time we were backstage.
The first person to get a photo with him was an older man. We had been chatting before-hand while all of us were waiting for Trump to arrive, and he introduced himself as Lieutenant Colonel Louis Dorfman and he had served in the 82nd Airborne. He shook hands with Donald Trump, and handed him his Purple Heart saying he wanted Trump to have it as thanks for standing up for wounded vets. Trump was surprised and said something like “I can’t take this!” We were all surprised and not expecting this. It was pretty cool to see the respect this veteran had for Trump.
Then it was my turn to shake hands with Trump and get my photo taken. I told Mr. Trump that I was the chairman of the Loudoun County Republican Committee and he immediately stopped and looked at me: “Will, how do I win Loudoun?” he asked me. We started talking and he called over one of his staffers. “George, these people here in Virginia know what we need to do to win Virginia.” And then – in a really cool turn of events – John Whitbeck, the GOP chairs of Prince William County and Arlington County, Trump’s campaign staffer, and me are all huddled in a corner, photos forgotten, strategizing on how Trump will win Virginia. Trump didn’t do a lot of talking. He listened to all of us, he made sure his staff had our emails, and he said that we would have everything we needed.
As we finished up the photos, Trump looked at all the Sheriff’s Deputies. “Let’s get them in the photo,” he said. And then he was taking group photos with all of the cops. They loved it. In fact, my favorite photo I took was all of the deputies with Trump (I’ll post it tomorrow). I was struck by how Trump didn’t forget the “little people.” Even though it was just a few of us and no media, he was relaxed and took the time to get photos with everyone.
The rally itself was super cool. Lots of energy, packed room (something like 2000 people had to be turned away because the auditorium was packed – and just on 24 hours notice!), everyone stood the entire time even though they all had seats. One thing I want to mention is the baby crying, because that has been national news. Contrary to news stories, it was a very funny thing, Trump was very supportive of the mom calling her and her baby “beautiful” and “wonderful”, and then when the baby kept crying he turned it into a joke. Everyone was laughing and it was actually very endearing and funny. Not at all anti mom or anti baby like the media has portrayed it to be.
Which brings me to the final point: I was there and saw and heard the entire event with the mom and baby. There was nothing to it. But then after I’m reading all the news coverage saying “Trump hates moms and babies!!!” I started to doubt myself. Did I really miss a huge story right in front of me? I started asking others who were there, including a husband and wife with young kids. And everyone in the room said the same thing: there was no story here. Trump was being funny and personable and going out of his way to make sure the mom wasn’t embarrased by making it a funny situation.
My conclusion is that the media is selling us a narrative. Be very skeptical of what the media is telling you, because I saw it with my own eyes and it was something very different.
The media has lost touch with integrity as they attempt to control the election. It’s time to ignore them.
On June 30th, The Providence Journal posted an article about the United Nations concerns for the heath of the world if people continue to eat meat.
The article reports:
It may be delicious, but the evidence is accumulating that meat, particularly red meat, is just a disaster for the environment – and not so great for human beings, too.
By 2050, scientists forecast that emissions from agriculture alone will account for how much carbon dioxide the world can use to avoid catastrophic global warming. It already accounts for one-third of emissions today – and half of that comes from livestock.
That’s a driving reason why members of a United Nations panel last month urged its environmental assembly to consider recommending a tax on meat producers and sellers. By raising the cost of buying meat, it would ultimately aim to reduce production and demand for it.
Maarten Hajer, professor at the Netherlands’ Utrecht University, led the environment and food report that recommended the meat tax.
“All of the harmful effects on the environment and on health needs to be priced into food products,” said Hajer, who is a member of U.N.’s International Resource Panel, which comprises 34 top scientists and 30 governments. “I think it is extremely urgent.”
First of all, I would like to point out that human beings have canine teeth–they are designed for eating meat. Second of all, I would like to point out that man-caused global warming is a myth. For honest information on global warming see wattsupwiththat.
The United Nations has forgotten its purpose. The United Nations supposedly originally started to avoid world wars by creating a place for negotiation and dialogue and to encourage the expansion of individual freedom in all countries. However, in recent years, the United Nations has become an organization desiring to form a one-world government and take away individual freedom. Agenda 21 is a prime example of this. If you are unfamiliar with Agenda 21, google it or use the search engine on this website. The United Nations wants to control where you live, how big your house is, how much property you own, and now, how you eat.
The article further reports:
But, governments must soon move to limit major carbon producers, Hajer said. Food companies will naturally be part of that.
The idea of a meat tax has developed over the past 25 years as a “completely obvious” measure to economists and environmentalists, Hajer said, as knowledge of the environmental toll of meat emerged.
Agriculture consumes 80 percent of water in the United States. For a kilogram of red meat, you need considerably more water than for plant products.
Governments are starting to take notice. China, which consumes half of the world’s pork and more than a quarter of its overall meat, announced new dietary guidelines last week that advise the average citizen to reduce meat consumption by half. That country’s meat consumption has increased nearly five-fold since 1982, even though their population has only increased by 30 percent during that time.
Denmark went a little further in May. The Danish government is considering a recommendation from its ethics council that all red meats should be taxed. Red meat accounts for 10 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, and the council argued that Danes were “ethically obliged” to reduce their consumption.
I am very concerned about the world we will be leaving our children and grandchildren. Junk science is not a basis for extorting money from people who produce or eat a product that has fallen out of favor with the elites. My question is simple, “What are they serving at diplomatic dinners at the United Nations?”
Last week Catholic priest Father Jacques Hamel was murdered in St. Étienne Church in the village of Saint-Etienne-du Rouvray in northern France. It was the latest in a series of terrorist attacks in France. Let’s look at the way some of the media covered that event.
The Center for Security Policy posted the information:
UK newspapers The Telegraph and The Daily Mail called the assailants “Islamic gunman” and said the killers claimed they were from Daesh. French President Françoise Hollande said Saint-Etienne-du Rouvray was “horribly affected by the cowardly murder of the parish priest by two terrorists who claimed to be from Daesh.”
The first story by the New York Times on this incident referred to the killers only as “attackers” and did not mention ISIS, Daesh or the words “Islamic” or “Islamist.” However, after Hollande said Daesh was behind the attack, a sentence was added to the article was altered to note this. However, the Times did not mention that the killers said they were from Daesh or that they reportedly yelled “Allahu Akbar”
…The New York Times article said France has had three major terrorists attacks in the last 19 months but did not mention that these were attacks were inspired by ISIS and radical Islam. Like the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton, the New York Times is in denial that radical Islam is at war with Europe, America, and modern society. As a result, the Times treats terrorist attacks like Orlando, Nice, Istanbul, Paris, San Bernardino, Brussels, and now Saint-Etienne-du Rouvray as unrelated acts of “violent extremism” and repeatedly ignores clear indications they were motivated by radical Islam.
As long as U.S. leaders refuse to recognize the true nature of Islamist atrocities like the murder of Father Hamel, there will be more attacks like this in the United States.
Wake up. Find your own alternative news sources. The Obama Administration and the mainstream media are not telling you the whole story.
I suspect that if you are reading this, you are as tired of this presidential election as I am. However, the media (and the Clinton campaign) have said so many outlandish things about Donald Trump, I feel obligated to respond to at least some of them. I would like to point out that Donald Trump has been in the public eye for at least thirty years, and although he has never been a poster child for modesty, humility, and Puritanism, he has had a rather reasonable reputation until he decided to run against Hillary Clinton. That alone is cause for reflection.
The latest Democratic talking point is that America will end if Donald Trump is elected–the seas will begin the rise again, we will bomb everyone, and the world will hate us. Pick any major media and you will find a story about one of the above. Well, it’s time to point out the background of one of the accusers.
Yesterday The Conservative Tribune posted an article about one of Donald Trump’s attackers–retired General John Allen. General Allen spoke in Philadelphia and has appeared on a few news shows since then.
The article reports General Allen’s statements about Donald Trump:
Allen apparently wasn’t just referring to Trump’s statement that he would reintroduce waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques, but that he would bomb the Islamic State group. Apparently, that’s an illegal order now, too.
“He’s talked about needing to torture. He’s talked about needing to murder the families of alleged terrorists,” Allen said. “He’s talked about carpet-bombing ISIL. Who do you think is going to be carpet-bombed when all that occurs? It’s going to be innocent families.”
“What we need to do is ensure that we don’t create an environment that puts us on a track conceivably where the United States military finds itself in a civil military crisis with a commander in chief who would have us do illegal things.”
Actually, that sounds better than the current rules of engagement.
Let’s look at General Allen’s record. The article reports:
Allen was, at one point, the White House coordinator for anti-Islamic State group efforts. Along with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Susan Rice, and the whole sick crew, he was responsible for the policy of treating the Islamic State as the “JV team” — a bunch of angry, stupid teens who had somehow found Kalashnikovs and were taking their angst out on the world.
He’s the one who helped construct a policy where a group with ultramodern weaponry and a Bronze Age ideology were considered to be no threat whatsoever.
That’s not all. He was also responsible for the funding and arming of so-called “moderate” Islamic rebels in Syria. Lo and behold, these were the rebel groups who often decided that their allegiance — as well as their funds and weaponry — belonged to the Islamic State group. Others merely surrendered their weapons.
It gets worse:
He’s one of the people behind the drone killing of terrorist imam Anwar al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen, in Yemen. Now, granted, al-Awlaki was a detestable individual, but the American-born cleric had never been charged in court nor had his citizenship stripped. He was the first American citizen specifically targeted and killed without any due process. And this is a man who thinks enhanced interrogation techniques are going to cause a military revolt?
General Allen retired as the result of a sex scandal (he fits right in with the Clintons). This is the portrait of the latest accuser of Donald Trump.
Yesterday The Wall Street Journal ran a story about the now government-run student loan program. In 2010 Congress passed a law that essentially forced commercial banks out of the student loan business and made student loans a federal program. At the time, critics of the change pointed out that the banks had a better handle on how to screen people to see if they were likely to repay the loans. Congress chose to ignore those warnings. Now the U.S. taxpayers are quite likely to find themselves stuck with a bill for $125 billion in unpaid student loans. This is not good for our economy. It is another example of a government program that has failed miserably.
The article in The Wall Street Journal focused on two students from for-profit colleges.
The article points out:
Borrowers in long-term default represent about 16% of the roughly 43 million Americans with student debt, now totaling $1.3 trillion across the U.S., and their numbers have continued to climb despite the expanding labor market.
One story involves a student from Abdill College:
Mr. Osborne said Abdill provided a low-quality education and exaggerated the likelihood that they would find career success. And he said the government should have never extended them so much debt for jobs that are in low demand. The typical phlebotomist makes just under $32,000 a year, according to the Labor Department.
About 1 in 5 student borrowers who left Abdill in 2012 defaulted on their loans within three years, the latest federal figures show. Its default rate of nearly 21% is far higher than the national average of 12% among all colleges.
Would a commercial bank have given these loans? What is the responsibility of the borrower in doing research on the college and its graduates? I don’t have a problem with for-profit colleges, but there is a need for students to study the employment rates of these colleges before borrowing large amounts of money to attend them.
The story reported on another student:
He is in default on his private loans and in forbearance on his federal loans. Debt collectors call him almost daily but he ignores their calls.
Mr. Lopko, who lives in a Chicago suburb, now earns $32,000 a year as a customer-service agent for an Illinois manufacturer.
“The only way out of this situation honestly is to win the lotto or to find a job that pays me $300,000 a year,” Mr. Lopko said.
He says he tries to be frugal but admits he occasionally splurges. He recently upgraded to a one-bedroom apartment from a studio and took out a loan for a new Subaru WRX that carries a $445 monthly payment.
“Are you supposed to stay in inside all the time, never go out, and pay these loans?” he said.
Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but I think I would have bought a cheaper car for a few years. I am also somewhat amazed that he was able to get a car loan. Part of the problem here is that we have not taught all of our young people financial responsibility and that there are always people willing to lend them money that they may not be able to pay back.
The media is all abuzz right now claiming that Donald Trump disrespected the parents of a Muslim soldier who was killed in Iraq. The parents of the soldier were paraded in front of the public for whatever reason. What Trump said was probably unnecessary, but so was parading the parents in front of the public. (Just for the record, we should probably look at some of the comments Hillary has made about Patricia Smith.) At any rate, let’s look at these wonderful Muslim parents. There are a few things that the mainstream media seems to have overlooked.
Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about Khizr Khan and his background.
The article reports:
But, as Breitbart News showed on Monday midday, that clearly was not the case. Khizr Khan has all sorts of financial, legal, and political connections to the Clintons through his old law firm, the mega-D.C. firm Hogan Lovells LLP. That firm did Hillary Clinton’s taxes for years, starting when Khan still worked there involved in, according to his own website, matters “firm wide”—back in 2004. It also has represented, for years, the government of Saudi Arabia in the United States. Saudi Arabia, of course, is a Clinton Foundation donor which—along with the mega-bundlers of thousands upon thousands in political donations to both of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2016—plays right into the “Clinton Cash” narrative.
All of this information was publicly available, and accessible to anyone—including any of these reporters, and Breitbart News—with a basic Google search. Anyone interested in doing research about the subjects they are reporting on—otherwise known as responsible journalism—would have checked into these matters. But clearly, none in the mainstream media did—probably because, as Fox News’ Chad Pergram noted, Democrats “sense blood in the water over” the whole Khan controversy.
The article also points out that Khan now runs a law firm that financially benefits from opposition to Donald Trump’s policies on migration — specifically that he aims to represent aspiring EB5 visa holders, who pay large sums of money to enter the country, a program that the Senate Judiciary Committee has uncovered as having major flaws.
Somehow in their attacks on Donald Trump, the media overlooked the background of Khizr Khan.
This attack on Donald Trump while leaving out significant facts is only a foretaste of what is to come. The only defense against this sort of misinformation is to do your own research and ignore the major media.
I am truly sorry that the Khans lost their son, but I am also truly sorry that they are being used as political pawns while the truth about who they are and the things they support are being hidden.