RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/antifa-members-beat-leftist-protester-holding-american-flag/

A progressive Democrat earned his fellow left-wing protesters’ wrath earlier this month for the act of carrying an American flag.

Paul Welch, who describes himself as a “slightly progressive leftist,” was protesting the right-wing group Patriot Prayer’s August 4 rally in Portland, Ore. As he carried his American flag alongside other counterprotesters, several black-clad Antifa members carrying various weapons demanded he hand over the flag, calling it a “fascist symbol.” A viral video captured Welch clinging to his flag as several masked men in makeshift armor try to wrest it from his hands. One of them can be seen hitting him repeatedly and then clubbing him on the back of his head, which causes him to collapse instantly and lie curled up on the ground in his own blood.

“I remember thinking there was a very good chance that I could be beaten to death,” Welch told the Oregonian. A three-inch slash on his head required four staples, and he missed two days of work to heal from the concussion he suffered.

“The Right and certainly a lot of smaller groups like Patriot Prayer might rush to things like the flag and try to take it up as, ‘This is our symbol exclusively,’” the 38-year-old line cook said. “Part of my thinking was to take it back.”

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stupid-bullsht-austin-texas-residents-and-tourists-oppose-renaming-city/

AUSTIN, Texas – Residents and tourists in Austin told PJM that they oppose the idea of renaming the state capital due to Stephen F. Austin’s support for slavery.

Austin, known as the “Father of Texas,” owned “a few slaves” in his lifetime and opposed efforts in Mexico to end slavery, according to author and historian Gregg Cantrell. In 1824, Austin defended the economic benefits of slavery, specifically for cotton. The city of Austin’s Equity Office published a report recommending street names to change since they honor figures who had ties to slavery, in addition to renaming the city itself.

The city’s report noted that Austin is “not directly tied to the Confederacy and/or the Civil War” but argued that the existing name is “within the spirit of the resolution representing slavery, segregation, and/or racism.”

Austin residents and tourists disagreed with changing the name.

“F**king no, stay Austin, I think the name is good. Just keep it this way; this is part of history, let’s keep it that way. You do not want to erase history right now. What’s the point?” said Leon, who was visiting Austin from Oklahoma.

“This is the stupidest bullsh*t I’ve ever heard. Why do they want to erase history? Can they change that by changing the name? No. Leave it alone, that’s my take. Some might think I’m crazy but, hey, I’m just like, don’t change it – don’t fix it, there’s nothing wrong, OK?” he added.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/08/20/from-one-psychodrama

Michael Wolff and his media-hyped blockbuster—that supposedly game-changing landmark of a book Fire and Fury—are now ancient history.

Fading similarly is Karen McDougal, Playboy‘s 1998 Playmate of the Year, and her National Enquirer grifter lawsuit that was also supposed to destroy the Trump presidency.

We are by now mostly tired with Stormy Daniels and her unhinged lawyer Michael Avenatti, who at least proved more entertaining than his porn-star client.

Consiglieri Michael Cohen, the Trump attorney who secretly taped his own client and apparently has been flipped to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s side in his veritable war against Trump, is also sliding into the netherworld of no-news coverage and a legal morass.

Cohen now competes with the narcissist Omarosa Manigault, entering from stage left with her trunkful of tapes and gossip to demand her own proverbial 15 minutes of fame. She promises to release never before told, shocking, unprecedented, flabbergasting dirt on Donald Trump that will ensure his impeachment, indictment, and jail time—or reify the dreams of celebrities who have variously voiced desires to hang, dismember, smash, blow up, stab, shoot, and ignite the president.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271089/social-media-corporations-step-attacks-matthew-vadum

The politically-driven censorship of conservatives by the gigantic, unregulated social media corporations controlled by the Left is moving into high gear as the crucial midterm congressional elections of Nov. 6 approach.

It’s no secret that social media platforms have been suppressing and marginalizing ideas they don’t like — and the ideas they don’t like are overwhelmingly of the conservative and patriotic variety.

But the social media corporations are ramping up censorship of right-leaning groups and individuals to give Democrats an advantage in the upcoming elections.

The stakes are high. If Democrats recapture either chamber of Congress from Republicans, President Trump’s conservative reform agenda will grind to a halt and investigating Trump for all manner of imagined misdeeds will be all Americans hear about 24/7/365. It will be political payback – pure and simple.

The immediate goal is to silence and intimidate conservatives, as well as anyone who supports Preside

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12896/is-the-truth-the-truth-when-it-comes-to

All the Special Counsel needs, in order to charge a subject of an investigation with lying to a prosecutor, is a single witnesses willing to contradict the subject.

The witness may not only be “singing,” he may also be “composing” – that is making up or embellishing a story because he knows that the better his story, the better the deal.

Under federal law, the testimony of such a flipped witness need not be corroborated in order to secure a conviction.

Even one question that results in an answer that is contradicted by one witness would be enough to spring the perjury trap.

When Rudy Giuliani stated, perhaps inartfully, that “truth isn’t truth,” he was getting at a higher – or should I say lower – truth. This is a truth that virtually every experienced defense attorney and prosecutor understands: namely that prosecutors get to pick which witness — and which “truth” — to believe.

Giuliani was discussing President Trump’s decision whether or not to be interviewed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Giuliani made the point that even if President Trump testified truthfully, he could be accused of lying to a prosecutor – a serious felony – if the prosecutor chose to believe witnesses who have provided a different account.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/andrew-cuomo-administration-regular-contact-corrupt-lobbyist/

Senior New York state officials regularly corresponded with, and acted on behalf of, a lobbyist and former aide to governor Andrew Cuomo in the months and years leading up to his indictment on federal corruption charges.

While the Cuomo administration has downplayed lobbyist Todd Howe’s access to senior officials, emails obtained by the New York Times after a protracted legal battle with the administration demonstrate Howe’s continuing influence.

In one particularly revealing email sent to Jim Malatras, then the director of state operations, Howe urgently requests payment for his clients, two developers contracted by the state for a public-private infrastructure project.

“Both need some payment as a sign of good faith before the close of business tomorrow,” Howe wrote to Malatras and his deputy, Andrew Kennedy, in December 2014 .

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/robert-mueller-donald-trump-inte

With testimony from the president’s top lawyer, the special counsel is in no position to claim he needs to speak with Trump.

For months, these columns have contended that, on the question whether President Trump should agree to a request by Special Counsel Robert Mueller III for an interview, the burden of persuasion has been imposed on the wrong party. That is, the president should not even be asked to submit to questioning at this point; the prosecutor must first establish that the president (1) is implicated in a serious crime and (2) has information or evidence that the prosecutor is unable to obtain from any other source.

That argument is bolstered by this weekend’s New York Times report that, with the president’s consent, Mueller’s team has conducted 30 hours of interviews with White House counsel Donald F. McGahn II. Having secured testimony from the president’s top lawyer, the special counsel is in no position to claim that he needs the president’s own testimony.

The president’s consent to make McGahn available to prosecutors is extraordinary, as it involves waiving both executive privilege and attorney–client privilege. As to the latter, some claim that there is no real waiver involved because McGahn purportedly represents “the presidency” in the abstract, not the actual incumbent. (The Times pushes this line, claiming that McGahn “viewed his role as protector of the presidency, not of Mr. Trump.”) This is nonsense. McGahn’s client is the president in the latter’s official capacity — in contrast to Trump’s private lawyers (Rudy Giuliani and Jay Sekulow).

http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/20/papers-saying-papadopoulos-lied-fbi-fbi-shows-either-also-lying-incompetent/

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office filed a sentencing memorandum Friday in its pending criminal case against George Papadopoulos, the former Donald Trump campaign advisor who pled guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to the FBI. Papadopoulos is scheduled to be sentenced next month.

Mueller’s team provided the court a detailed background of Papadopoulos’ criminal offense in the sentencing memorandum and suggested Papadopoulos’ lies justified a sentence of 0 to 6 months of incarceration. While much of the ten-page memorandum merely rehashes facts previously known, one passage includes a significant new admission that proves the FBI is either incompetent, or incompetent at lying.
Let’s Run Through the Context First

Before we get to why, a quick refresher. In early March 2016, Papadopoulos learned he would serve as a foreign policy advisor to the Trump presidential campaign. Later that month, Papadopoulos met a professor while traveling in Italy, Joseph Mifsud.

Sir Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813), a Scottish jurist and historian, provides an explanation for why great societies do not survive for more than 200 years:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship (bondage).”

Our forefathers founded the United States of America as a republic and not a democracy to avoid this existential threat. So, what happened?

The Bern happened. Snowflakes and millennials discovered leaders in representative government who would provide the largesse from the treasury that they could not vote for directly. Bernie Sanders promised them the cradle-to-grave government support of socialism and its attendant breakdown of representative government – they trusted the Bern and they were all in. After Hillary and the DNC managed to deny Bernie the candidacy Hillary’s campaign moved further left politically to pick up Bernie’s constituents.

Hillary tailored her message toward Bernie’s followers and in the aftermath of her shocking loss to candidate Donald Trump her followers disavowed the American electoral system entirely. They have withdrawn their trust because they don’t like the outcome. This is unprecedented in American history. For 242 years the American public has accepted election outcomes and moved on. As in any competition there is a winner and a loser and everyone moves on to try again next time.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/20/fox-news-first-weinstein-accuser-was-accused-sexual-assault-brennan-mulls-taking-trump-to-court.html

#METOO HYPOCRISY: Actress Asia Argento, one of the first prominent women to accuse disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault, agreed to pay $380,000 to an actor who accused her of sexually assaulting him when he was 17 years old, The New York Times reported Sunday night … The actor claimed that the assault took place in a California hotel room in 2013, according to the report. The age of consent in California is 18. The newspaper obtained documents sent between lawyers for Argento and the accuser that laid out a payment schedule. The notice of intent asked for $3.5 million in damages. The Times reported that the final agreement was reached in April of this year.

Argento, now 42, played a prominent role in the downfall of Weinstein, the former head of Miramax. In October of last year, The New Yorker published allegations by Argento that Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on her in 1997. The allegations against Weinstein by Argento and other actresses — including Ashley Judd, Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and Rose McGowan — gave rise to the global “MeToo” movement and prompted a re-examination of the behavior of prominent men in other industries, most notably media.