Displaying posts published in

December 2019

Where’s the Liberal Outrage? Would Joe Biden or any other Democratic president let the FBI’s discredited behavior become the norm?By Daniel Henninger

https://www.wsj.com/articles/wheres-the-liberal-outrage-11576714083?mod=opinion_lead_pos9

Some readers objected—went ballistic—when it was suggested in this space recently (“The Democrats’ Fractured Fairy Tales”) that absent the now-discredited Russia-collusion narrative, “we would have had a ‘normal’ presidential term.”

To be precise: Yes, the Trump personality still would have maddened millions daily, but the mad, mad world of Donald Trump would have been about immigration, climate change or other issues inside the orbit of real, workaday politics, national court injunctions and all.

Instead, Wednesday saw official Washington light the equivalent of a rubber-tire bonfire—House Democrats voting to impeach President Trump. The vote climaxed the Beltway’s three-year delirium over Donald J. Trump. To judge by the coverage, there’s been nothing like it since the feds nailed John Dillinger.

Well, it’s not too soon to survey the ruins. Driven by the collusion narrative, the past three years have done significant damage to America’s institutions—especially the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

On Tuesday, in one of the most astounding public documents in years, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in Washington announced that its relationship with the FBI is broken.  CONTINUE AT SITE

This Impeachment Folly The Resistance wins in the House, but will it now lose in 2020?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-impeachment-folly-11576715094?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

House Democrats voted Wednesday evening to impeach Donald Trump but, media high-fives aside, what have they accomplished? They have failed to persuade the country; they have set a new, low standard for impeaching a President; Mr. Trump will be acquitted in the Senate; and Democrats may have helped Mr. Trump win re-election. Congratulations to The Resistance.

Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Jerrold Nadler have said in the past that impeachment must be bipartisan to be credible, and they have achieved their goal—against impeachment. In the actual vote, two Democrats voted against both articles and a third voted with them against one. New Jersey Rep. Jeff Van Drew voted no and may switch to the GOP. All Republicans voted against impeachment.

The impeachment press will deride the GOP as either afraid of Donald Trump or moral sellouts. But note that even the 20 GOP Members who are retiring from the House and not running for another office voted against impeachment. GOP Members like Peter King (N.Y.), Jim Sensenbrenner (Wis.) and Will Hurd (Texas) have been unafraid to break with party leaders or Presidents in the past.

***

The problem isn’t GOP consciences, it’s the weak and dishonest Democratic case for impeachment.

Facing a 2020 drubbing, the left begins lining up its excuses By Monica Showalter

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/facing_a_2020_drubbing_the_left_begins_lining_up_its_excuses.html

The left and its Democrats in power are in bad shape.

They face a blowout election from voters in 2020, probably comparable to what Britain got, based on their crazed effort to impeach and remove President Trump over some totally non–national security issue like arms to Ukraine.

They’re sinking in the polls.  Their favorite networks are seeing collapsing ratings.  They have a string of bad candidates, each more socialist than the next.  Voters hate socialism, along with guys who are too old to run.  The Horowitz report exposed the dishonesty and absence of integrity of their Deep State allies.

The object of their ire, by contrast, is rising in the polls, with sharp drops in his high-negative numbers and strong gains in traditional Democratic bulwarks such as black and Latino votes and more.  A recent poll showed that Trump would smash any Democrat in a head-to-head lineup.  There’s no arguing with a stellar economy and promises kept.

They know it’s coming, so now they’re pre-emptively lining up their excuses.  Here’s one from Mother Jones:

Republicans are intensifying efforts to aggressively purge the voter rolls in Wisconsin and Georgia before the 2020 elections, potentially giving their party a crucial advantage by shrinking the electorate in two key swing states.

On Friday, a state judge in Wisconsin ruled that the state could begin canceling the registrations of 234,000 voters — 7 percent of the electorate — who did not respond to a mailing from election officials. The Wisconsin Elections Commission, a bipartisan group overseeing state elections, had planned to wait until 2021 to remove voters it believes have moved to a new address. But in response to a lawsuit from a conservative group, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, Judge Paul Malloy, a Republican appointee, said those voters could be purged 30 days after failing to respond to a mailing seeking to confirm their address.

Former Intelligence Chiefs Fit Perfectly Into Media Advocacy Culture By Victor Davis Hanson

https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/former-intelligence-chiefs-fit-perfectly-into-media-advocacy-culture/

Former FBI Director James Comey and deputy director Andrew McCabe, former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper have lots of things in common.

One, they ran the nation’s key intelligence and investigatory agencies under former President Barack Obama. They were deeply involved in the “Russian collusion” hoax. And they participated in the surveillance of the Trump campaign and transition.

Comey and McCabe both signed applications for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrants requesting surveillance on Trump campaign aide Carter Page. A report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz criticized Comey and McCabe’s FBI for falsehoods and misrepresentations during its investigation of the Donald Trump campaign.

Clapper, Brennan and the FBI helped to disseminate the fallacious Steele dossier to the press and among government agencies.

Two, Comey, McCabe, Brennan and Clapper have all lied either under oath or in the public sphere.

Horowitz has said that he referred Comey for criminal prosecution for leaking classified memos he wrote about his confidential conversations with the president, but the Justice Department did not pursue charges. He signed FISA warrant applications that the inspector general has determined were misleading at best and at worst simply flat-out wrong.

Trump approval up 6 points since launch of impeachment inquiry: Gallup By Owen Daugherty –

President Trump’s job approval rating has ticked up 6 percentage points since the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry began, according to a new survey.

The Gallup poll released early Wednesday found Trump’s approval rating at 45 percent, up from 39 percent when the inquiry was launched in the fall. The new findings mark the third-consecutive increase in Trump’s approval rating, Gallup noted.

Several Democrats defect on impeachment, as GOP holds together in support of Trump Andrew O’Reilly

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/several-democrats-defect-impeachment-gop-holds-together

While the votes to impeach President Trump on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress fell mostly along party lines, three Democrats bucked their party on Wednesday evening to vote against impeaching the president on at least one of the articles.

Reps. Jeff Van Drew, D-N.J., and Collin Peterson, D-Minn., voted against both articles of impeachment. Rep. Jared Golden, D-Maine, voted in favor of impeaching Trump on abuse of power, but not on obstruction of Congress.

Another Democrat, presidential candidate and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, voted “present” on both impeachment resolutions.

The result helped GOP lawmakers make the case that the only bipartisan vote on the floor Wednesday evening was the vote against impeachment — as all Republicans held together in opposition.

“Not a single Republican broke ranks,” GOP Rep. Greg Steube of Florida told Fox News’ Tucker Carlson minutes after the vote.

Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich., who left the Republican Party earlier this year, voted “yea” on both articles.

All three Democrats who voted against impeaching Trump come from districts that Trump won in the 2016 election and are expected to face difficult reelection campaigns in the swing districts.

“A Middle Way – Is It Possible?” Sydney Williams

http://swtotd.blogspot.com/
In a recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal (“I’m Partial to Impartiality,” December 12, 2019) Joseph Epstein wrote, “I happen to be someone who, in politics, yearns for impartiality.” I suspect that that desire for impartiality is common to most Americans – in the current environment, it “is a consummation devoutly to be wished,” as Hamlet would say. Most recognize we live in a pluralistic society, comprised of people from every nation on earth, representing all religions and races. In our homes, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates, we speak 350 languages. Nevertheless, we have in common a love of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We favor a middle road, which accommodates all travelers. But, in recent times, with our biases, real and imagined, we struggle for a common purpose and a common morality. Where I disagree with Mr. Epstein, whose mind and writing style I admire and envy, is that he puts principal blame on Donald Trump for the discord that has disrupted our lives. I would certainly agree that Mr. Trump has accentuated the divide, but real blame is more widely distributed.

Politicians have compartmentalized the electorate – youth versus age, urban versus rural, rich versus poor, people of color versus Caucasians, immigrants versus nativists, gays versus straight, globalists versus nationalists. As well, there are those in the industrialized (and former industrialized) parts of the Country who have seen coastal elites become wealthy, while their incomes have fallen or grown stagnant. There are a few immigrants who have chosen not to adapt to the culture of their adopted country, and there are people who have been here for generations who fear a breakdown in the social unity they have enjoyed. A culture of victimization, identity politics and moral relativism accentuates these divides. There are secularized elites on the coasts who cannot understand why folk in rural areas cling to religion and guns. There are those who have hated Mr. Trump from when he first ran for the Presidency, people who will do anything to remove him from office. (Last week, Nancy Pelosi, in a slip-of-the-tongue, said she had been working on impeachment for two-and-a-half years. Yet, hypocritically, she claims it is with great sadness she has advanced articles of impeachment.) And, of course, social media allows factions to gather in greater numbers, with more intense focus. And there are those like me who fear that the decades-long tilt in Washington toward statism, with the acquiescence of mainstream media, risks the fundamentals of personal liberty and economic liberty on which this nation was founded. In good conscience, I cannot remain silent.

NYC maniac causes mayhem, randomly slugs woman in the face By Joe Tacopino

DPS Note: I don’t understand why the newspapers have to refer to people filmed committing violent crimes as “suspects” when they could say “perpetrators.” The guy in the film referred to in this article really can’t be “suspected” of punching the 21 year old lady in the face when you can actually see him do it. 
Weird, huh? But not as weird as the fact that not a single person in the article is identified by race. I wonder if police reports are written this way. Also, keep in mind that under the new NYS law to go into effect on January 1st, 2020, this “suspect” will be required to be released without putting up any bail to assure that he’ll return for his next required appearance but might well be given Mets tickets to encourage him to do so because the system is being nice to him. Brave new world. The market for bodyguards is getting tight.

****************************************December 18, 2019 | 12:10am | 

https://nypost.com/metro/

Cops are looking for a maniac who launched a string of violent outbursts Monday on the Upper East Side — including a random slugging of a woman looking at her cellphone.

The suspect can be seen on surveillance video gingerly walking on East 85th Street near Park Avenue around 11 a.m. when he suddenly strikes the 21-year-old woman in the face without notice, according to police.

The victim suffered bruising and swelling to the face but refused medical attention. The suspect simply walked away.

Minutes earlier, the suspect approached a man sitting in his car in front of 960 Park Ave., cops said.

“I know you are talking about me!” the suspect said before brandishing a knife and chasing the man around his car.

 

The suspect in the Upper East Side attacks

After the assault captured on video, the suspect approached his next victims at East 87th Street and Third Avenue around 11:13 a.m., when he deliberately walked into a man and woman, cops said.

He then brandished a knife and threatened the couple.

Cops were looking for the individual, who was described as about 25 years old and around 5 feet 6 inches tall.

The U.N. General Assembly Is A Joke. But Let’s Take It Seriously. Shoshana Bryen •

https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/insight

The United Nations General Assembly (GA) doesn’t take itself seriously. Unlike U.N. Security Council resolutions, GA pronouncements have no enforcement mechanism and often serve only to permit countries to vent — mostly at Israel. But this travesty helps determine the allocation of general U.N. funds — American tax dollars among them, albeit fewer under the Trump administration. So, it is worth parsing the activity of the GA last week.

Thirty-five resolutions were proposed in the GA by the U.N. Special Political and Decolonization Committee. The Committee, which includes Syria, Iraq, Iran, Russia, Bolivia, and Venezuela, has no North American, Western European, or Scandinavian members. Twenty-seven resolutions used general language and named no specific country; eight targeted Israel.

If you thought this would be a good time for the U.N. to recognize the desperate efforts of the people of Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran to throw off repressive and kleptocratic governments — and specifically, to rid themselves of the destructive machinations of the mullahs of Iran — the GA didn’t agree with you.

If you were waiting for the U.N. to condemn horrific violations against the people of Syria by its own government and aided by Russia and Iran, or to stand up for the Rohingya who have been forced out of Myanmar, or to consider the plight of the Muslim Uighurs of China herded into camps, you’re still waiting.

Slave labor in Qatar; Venezuelans reduced to eating garbage; North Koreans with no discernible human rights; Palestinian-Arab children taught that the highest form of life is death — their own and that of as many Jews as possible; civil war in Libya; increasing repression of the press and of dissent in Russia — all ignored. Turkey, Pakistan, Zimbabwe, and Saudi Arabia — ignored.

Tensions in NATO and the Looming End of Pax Americana written by Brian Stewart

https://quillette.com/2019/12/05/tensions-in-nato-and-the-looming-end-of-pax-americana/

As NATO leaders gathered in London this week to mark the 70th anniversary of history’s most venerable military alliance, it has been widely forgotten that not so long ago the specter of armed conflict haunted the European continent. When the Washington treaty establishing NATO was signed in April 1949, the Soviet Union occupied the captive nations of Eastern Europe and an invasion of Western Europe by the Red Army was not a remote possibility. On current trends, the Atlantic alliance may well suffer a premature demise as the world moves into another great power rivalry that is also an ideological contest between democracy and autocracy.

A terse review of the historical record is in order here. In the aftermath of World War Two, the United States committed itself to a revolutionary foreign policy. The extraordinary task of maintaining some semblance of international order after two global conflagrations was premised on a controversial but compelling notion of enlightened self-interest. The guiding principle of U.S. statecraft was that the peace of the world was in grave and permanent jeopardy, and thus that it needed to be imposed and kept by force, or at least the credible threat of it. This momentous undertaking required that American power remain second to none, and for it to be deployed in outposts far from the American mainland. It was only through this forward engagement, providing moral and material succor to vulnerable allies and international norms, that would prevent a breakdown in order that would draw the world into yet another violent maelstrom.

America’s reluctant but immense decision to take the lead in upholding a decent international order did not enjoy a long honeymoon. It rapidly came under ferocious challenge by Soviet power pressing to extend its imperium from Berlin to Baghdad, from Helsinki to Havana, and from Seoul to Saigon. The containment doctrine that flowed from the novel understanding of America’s self-interest aimed to thwart Soviet expansion. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, set up in 1949 as a key pillar of containment, upheld the principle of anticipatory self-defense. However, the “self” that was being defended, as was pointed out by isolationists of the day, was not exactly the American homeland, but the sovereignty of American allies and the security (as well as the prevalence) of the American way of life.