Displaying posts categorized under

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION

50 STATES AND DC, CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT

Oprah and the triumph of the therapeutic May 25, 2011 by Jamie Manson

Later today, Oprah Winfrey will present the final episode of the epic 25-year run of her talk show. Whether you belong to the Oprah or the “Just Say Noprah” camp, it is difficult to deny that, for millions, Winfrey’s program has been much more than a talk show. The devotion that she has inspired goes beyond her massive car and gift giveaways and her ability to attract the most powerful celebrities to her stage.

In the late 1990s, Oprah made a concerted effort to change the nature of her show from an entertainment similar to rival programs hosted by Phil Donohue and Sally Jesse Raphael, to what she branded “change your life television.”

Though Oprah now admits it was presumptuous to insist that her show could transform any life, hearing some of the testimonials of loyal viewers certainly lends credence to her initial claim:

A woman who, five years ago, suddenly lost her 13 month-old baby, reflects on a show about a mother who has suddenly lost her twin boys. “Nothing could console me,” she says, “This show was the only anchor I could hold onto in my sea of pain.”

Another young woman describes her being in a car accident with a drunk driver. She survived, but her mother and her best friend were killed. “I was so lonely. When I got home, I would turn on the TV and just listen to Oprah. She taught me the power of forgiveness. It freed me.”

A teenage girl who grew up watching Oprah thanks her for “lifting the shame of being abused. You taught me it wasn’t my fault.”

Robert Kaplan The Shrink-Rapped Presidency

Robert M Kaplan is a forensic psychiatrist. His book The King who strangled his psychiatrist and other dark tales is in press.

They have been told to shut up by the American Psychiatric Association, which has rejected the “diagnosis” of Hillary-supporting mental health “professionals” who swear that Donald Trump is a loony and must be removed from office. Something like that happened in Bavaria and didn’t end well

Following the publication of Michael Wolff’s book “Fire & Fury” — reviewed for Quadrant Online by Geoffrey Luck — there has been a cacophony of comment on the president’s mental state and whether Amendment 25 in the US Constitution can be applied to remove him from office. The amendment was instituted during the Eisenhower administration, the intention being to provide a mechanism for being rid of a president rendered incapable of governing. The example in mind was the severe incapacity of Woodrow Wilson from a stroke during his last years, his wife and doctor colluding to hide this from the government.

There are many examples of presidential mental states that led to concerns about psychiatric disorder; Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan’s Alzheimer’s-afflicted final years in office being just two. In those cases, nothing was done and the fact remains that there has never been an attempt to remove a president on these grounds.

For those contemplating such action with the current incumbent, a look back in history at a baroque example will serve as a warning. The case concerns the monarchical defenestration of King Ludwig 11 of Bavaria and the Palatinate, known to this day as “Mad King Ludwig” (above). This is a startling tale of royal eccentricity and grandeur, venal relatives, penny-pinching bureaucrats and miscarriage of justice, to say nothing of broken medical ethics. Those studying the current White House will recall Marx’s dictum that history repeats itself first with tragedy, then with farce.

Ludwig was the splendid king of Bavaria. Influenced by Richard Wagner, he built a number of fairy-tale castles – Neuschwanstein, Herrenchiemsee, Linderhof, Nymphenburg and Hohenschwangau – for no purpose other than to meet his fantasies. His castle-mania drained the state coffers, causing much concern to the treasury and unpaid creditors escalated. His family, a Macbeth-like bunch, seethed with jealousy, resentment, intrigue and envy. To add to the problem, Ludwig queered the pitch with his rampant sexual exploits, rogering the stable men and guards in the royal barracks. His nocturnal sleigh-rides and opulent orgies with soldiers in artificial grottoes did not go down well in staunchly Catholic 19th century Bavaria.

Bullying Booker and the War on Women of the Right By Julie Kelly and Julie Gunlock

At a January 16, Senate Judiciary committee hearing, Senator Cory Booker informally announced he’s running for president in 2020 by bullying Kirstjen Nielsen, President Trump’s DHS Secretary. With eyes and neck veins popping, Booker pounded his fists, pointed his finger, yelled accusations of racism, and further accused the Secretary of lying. She, in turn, could do nothing but sit in dignified silence as this went on. His posture was threatening, even scary.

Consider this behavior in a normal professional setting. If a colleague at your work acted like Booker, someone would likely step in and ask him to calm down. (He might even get fired.) If a police officer witnessed a man yelling at a woman in public, pounding his fists, using menacing body language, the officer would walk over to ask if there was a problem. And if a Republican senator had accused a female Obama official of lying without any proof, shamed her as a racist, cut her off when she tried to defend herself, another senator would have interrupted him immediately.

There is no professional environment—indeed, no public space—where Booker’s conduct would be tolerated. So how is it that he not only got away with it, but is now lauded as a hero for this highly unprofessional and embarrassing display? Because attacks against women on the Right—particularly those who support or serve in the Trump administration—are considered completely acceptable on the Left, especially in the Trump era. And on the Right there remains an unwillingness to fight on equal terms.

Booker’s 10-minute unhinged obloquy is a fitting crescendo to the yearlong mugging of Right-leaning women. Angered by President Trump’s alleged comment describing some African countries as “shitholes,” tough guy Booker decided not to take it up with Trump himself, but instead direct his rage at Nielsen. Quoting Martin Luther King Jr, Booker accused Nielsen of “sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” When he misrepresented what she said, and Nielsen tried to defend herself, he cut her off, yelling, “let me finish!” His voice rising, spit flying, Booker pounded on the dais, pointed at Nielsen, and essentially accused her of being a liar and a racist: “Your silence and your amnesia is [sic] complicity.” He ended his tirade by mocking her recollection of the meeting: “You don’t remember. You can’t remember the words of your commander-in-chief. I find that unacceptable.”

This Memo May Expose Obama’s Watergate Daniel Greenfield

The big explosive scandal is the one that hardly anyone talks about.

It’s not Russia collusion. It’s not even Uranium One. It’s the eavesdropping on Trump staffers by Obama staffers. This eavesdropping was partially legitimized by the Steele dossier. It was accidentally uncovered and since then it’s cost multiple people their jobs, not the people responsible, but those who learned about it.

Now the reckoning may finally be here. Sara Carter reports.

A review of a classified document outlining what is described as extensive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse was made available to all House members Thursday and the revelations could lead to the removal of senior officials in the FBI and Department of Justice, several sources with knowledge of the document stated. These sources say the report is “explosive,” stating they would not be surprised if it leads to the end of Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation into President Trump and his associates.

The House Intelligence Committee passed the motion along party lines Thursday to make the classified report alleging extensive ‘FISA Abuse’ related to the controversial dossier available to all House members. The report contains information regarding the dossier that alleges President Trump and members of his team colluded with the Russians in the 2016 presidential election. Some members of the House viewed the document in a secure room Thursday.

That’s why #ReleaseTheMemo has begun trending on Twitter.

The document also apparently outlines “several problematic” issues with how FISA warrants were “packaged, and used” state several sources with knowledge of the report.

That’s why the media’s Fusion GPS echo chamber has begun claiming that the Steele dossier’s exposure is getting people killed. It’s a desperate measure to end the investigation of the coup conducted by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton against the 2016 election.

For Real ‘Collusion,’ Look At Obama’s Dirty Dealings With Iran Obama’s scheming with the Mullahs reveals a troubling pattern. Ari Lieberman

By now it should be readily apparent to all, even those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome, that the Trump-Russia collusion narrative is a spent force or as leftist political commentator Van Jones put it, “a big nothingburger.” Nearly a year has passed since the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller and not a scintilla of evidence demonstrating collusion has been forthcoming. Moreover, the investigation itself has been plagued by scandal and partisanship placing a cloud of taint over the entire inquiry. Nevertheless, Mueller’s Russia probe will continue to putter along and after wasting millions of taxpayer dollars (as of December 2017, the cost has reportedly reached a staggering $7 million) the former G-Man will get a trickle of indictments and plea bargains on peripheral figures for matters wholly unrelated to the original investigation. Democrats will then pat themselves on the back and Mueller will go back to obscurity.

Democrats and their allies in the establishment media have cleverly succeeded in temporarily deflecting America’s attention away from the real collusion story, one with real substance and far greater ramifications. A persuasive case can be made that former president Barack Obama colluded with a sworn enemy of the United States, the Islamic Republic of Iran. With each passing day, another disquieting facet of the Obama administration’s dealings with the Islamic Republic is revealed and when taken in totality, paints a disturbing picture of the administration’s underhanded efforts to placate and appease the mullahs and their proxies, including Hezbollah.

The Obama administration’s current dealings with Iran began with an outright fabrication to the American people. On August 5, 2015 Obama asserted that negotiations with the Iranians commenced in 2013. Obama argued that the ascent of the “moderate” Hassan Rouhani offered the United States an opportunity to engage with the Iranians. This was in fact, a bald-faced lie. Circumventing the State Department and using Sen. John Kerry (whose Iran connections are a matter of public record) as its point man, the administration began engaging with Iran in 2011 when the toxic Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was president. For the record, Ahmadinejad is a rabid Holocaust denier. Four years later, Obama sealed his infamous Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, alternatively known as the Iran deal, which gave the Iranians $150 billion worth sanctions relief while simultaneously providing them with a legal pathway toward acquiring nuclear weapons.

The flow of lies and deceit continued from there. The JCPOA was, to put it mildly, a flawed agreement, one in which the benefits flowed one way. Charles Krauthammer aptly described it as the worst agreement in U.S. diplomatic history. But there were alarming elements of the agreement, chiefly secretive side arrangements between Iran and the IAEA, which were so patently egregious and absurd that even Obama understood that it would render the agreement a hard sell. Under these side arrangements, Iran’s highly opaque Parchin military facility was off limits to international inspectors undermining Obama’s claim that the agreement provided for anytime, anywhere intrusive inspections. Consequently, Obama tried and failed to keep this information from Congress.

Every Intelligence Committee Democrat votes against letting full House see facts about Trump campaign by Dan Calabrese

WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID OF????????RSK

Remember how hard the Justice Department and the FBI fought to not have to turn over documents concerning their pursuit of a warrant to wiretap Trump campaign official Carter Page in 2016? Remember how the House Intelligence Committee subpoenaed the documents in August, but had to deal with constant foot-dragging and excuses until Paul Ryan had to threaten them with a contempt of Congress charge to finally get access to the documents?

If you’re any sort of critical thinker, it made you wonder what they were hiding – especially since it appears they may have used the fake Steele dossier to convince the FISA court to issue a warrant to wiretap Page. That would mean a Democrat administration got permission under false pretenses to spy on a Republican presidential campaign. That’s bigger than Watergate.

FISA warrant application

Well. The House Intelligence Committee finally got to see the documents it wanted, including the FISA warrant application. So if the Steele dossier was in fact the primary basis for that wiretap warrant, the committee members are now aware of it. But they didn’t get to keep copies. They were only allowed to view them and take notes. As a result, some committee members drafted a memo summarizing the facts they learned from viewing these documents. And on Thursday, the committee voted to make these memos available to all House members.

That measure passed, but guess who voted against it. Yep. Every Democrat on the committee:

Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes also moved Thursday to release to the public his committee’s interview with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Every Democrat joined Republicans in voting for that public disclosure. Yet every Democrat voted against letting the rest of the House see a memo that will list the facts about the FBI’s use of FISA warrants to surveil members of the Trump campaign in 2016. Strange. What are Democrats afraid of?

Ranking Democrat Adam Schiff has been a loud voice for accountability regarding the Trump-Russia probe, but his outrage evaporates regarding the role that Fusion GPS and its Democratic financiers may have played in persuading the FBI to seek a warrant to eavesdrop on American civilians. What were the FBI’s reasons and the evidence it used to seek such an extraordinary writ?

All of this is relevant to the House’s recent vote to extend Section 702 that allows law enforcement to monitor foreigners. Mr. Nunes provided two closed briefings to Republicans last week as they prepared to renew Section 702, and he assured Members that he’d seen no evidence that government had abused 702 powers. But he also said he had seen evidence that law enforcement misused powers involving the surveillance of U.S. citizens as part of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign.

Does a Red Thread Run Through the Anti-Trump “Coup”? by: Diana West

Let’s take a closer look at Fusion’s “academic expert on Russia,” Nellie H. Ohr, the mystery woman, intriguing for her marriage to DOJ official Bruce Ohr, her fluency in Russian, her ham radio operator’s license, and, finally, the possibility that she had a hand in the anti-Trump “dossier.”

The “H” stands for Hauke, Ohr’s maiden name. On reading through a Washington Post obituary of Kathleen A. Hauke, Nellie’s mother, and a guide to the papers of her parents, Kathleen A. and Richard L. Hauke, both Ph.D.s, which are archived at the University of Rhode Island, a sketch of the Hauke family’s life of the mind takes shape.

Clearly, Nellie grew up in a family on the intellectual Left — i.e., the mainstream of American academia. Her mother, an English professor, was active, if not activist, in black-white racial issues of the late 1960s and 1970s, including interracial adoption and “promoting racial equality in education,” a kindly-sounding idea, which, via coercive means of “promoting,” has atomized our society into a sum of non-working parts — yes, the opposite of “a more perfect union.” Whoever conceived of the project, there was something devilishly clever about turning college admissions offices into key enforcement centers of racial and other quotas of a state-mandated order. As we might finally admit, from Berekely to Yale to Mizzou, it is here where generations of cadres have received Marxian indoctrination under cover of cap and gown, the indispensable legions of ideological victory in a “Cold War” Americans still insist they won.

In this same pioneering spirit of “promoting,” perhaps, Kathleen A. Hauke devoted herself to studying black/African American authors and writers on the same Left, even communist, wavelength, from Langston Hughes to South African writer Richard Rive. One notable biographical detail was Kathleen’s first visit to South Africa in 1954, via freighter, when she was just 19 years old.

Her main academic interest, however, was a black American journalist named Ted Poston. She wrote or edited three books on Poston, including a 2000 collection of his journalism, which is described as having “infused” his newspaper, the New York Post, “with a black viewpoint on topics as varied as the paranoia engendered by McCarthyism and the light-stepping magic of Bill Bojangles Robinson” (emphasis added). A highlight of Poston’s pre-“McCarthyism”-youth came when he, along with Langston Hughes and others, journeyed to the USSR in 1932, the height of the Stalin’s mass-starvation of “collectivized” Ukrainians, to be wined and dined by the Soviets as they worked on a Comintern movie about the plight of the “American Negro.” It was never completed.

Nellie’s father, Richard L. Hauke, was a botany professor. His listed works are mainly scientific, but his biographical notes highlight his interests in creationism, bioethics and, circa 1983-1985, “nuclear winter.”

In these days of “global warming” (it was 7 degrees when I woke up), it’s easy to forget the mass hysteria over “nuclear winter” that gripped the 1980s, the final decade, they say, of the Cold War. This was the heyday of the Reagan administration, and Soviet strategists were thus concentrated on thwarting Reagan’s program to modernize US and NATO arsenals (plus ca change …). Talk about “Russian influence,” that cartoonishly misunderstood mantra of today: It was the “active measures” of Brezhnev-Andropov-Chernenko-Gorbachev’s Kremlin that drove the Western disarmament movement known as the “peace movement,” or “nuclear freeze movement,” across Europe and the US, sparking outrage via “disinformation” against neutron bombs and “Star Wars” and “war-monger” Reagan along the way.

Transparency for Fusion and the FBI Democrats vote to keep documents secret but Congress will see them.

The chance that Americans will learn what really happened between the FBI and Fusion GPS is growing with Thursday’s vote by the House Intelligence Committee to give every House Member access to key information. Soon the House should move to declassify all documents in the case that don’t jeopardize intelligence sources and methods so the public can get the complete story.

Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes also moved Thursday to release to the public his committee’s interview with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson. Every Democrat joined Republicans in voting for that public disclosure. Yet every Democrat voted against letting the rest of the House see a memo that will list the facts about the FBI’s use of FISA warrants to surveil members of the Trump campaign in 2016. Strange. What are Democrats afraid of?

Ranking Democrat Adam Schiff has been a loud voice for accountability regarding the Trump-Russia probe, but his outrage evaporates regarding the role that Fusion GPS and its Democratic financiers may have played in persuading the FBI to seek a warrant to eavesdrop on American civilians. What were the FBI’s reasons and the evidence it used to seek such an extraordinary writ?

All of this is relevant to the House’s recent vote to extend Section 702 that allows law enforcement to monitor foreigners. Mr. Nunes provided two closed briefings to Republicans last week as they prepared to renew Section 702, and he assured Members that he’d seen no evidence that government had abused 702 powers. But he also said he had seen evidence that law enforcement misused powers involving the surveillance of U.S. citizens as part of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign.

THE “TRUMP IS A DESPOT CREW IS THE REAL THREAT TO DEMOCRACY RICH LOWRY

It hasn’t been easy recently to make an attack against President Trump that is over-the-top enough to stand out from the run-of-the-mill hysteria, but outgoing Republican Sen. Jeff Flake managed it.

In a speech hitting Trump for his broadsides against the press, Flake excoriated the president for using the phrase “enemy of the people.” Per the Arizona senator: “It is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own president uses words infamously spoken by Josef Stalin to describe his enemies.”

The association of Trump, whose offense is being crude and thoughtless while occupying an office he won in a raucously free election, with one of the greatest monsters of the 20th century is so wildly irresponsible it is its own corruption of our discourse.

Trump isn’t a despot. Far from being an autocrat, he’s a weak president susceptible to the views of the last person he’s talked to and so deferential to Congress that he spent all of last year pining for a signing ceremony for literally anything lawmakers could send him on health care or taxes.

At its worst, the Trump White House isn’t sinister; it’s farcical. It’s not Recep Tayyip Erdogan carefully and deliberately creating a one-party state; it’s Trump getting miscued by a TV show into a tweet undermining his administration’s own position on the reauthorization of a surveillance program.

The Trump alarmists thought that a brittle democratic culture and set of institutions were about to encounter a man representing a dire, determined threat to their integrity; instead, a robust democratic culture and set of institutions encountered the guy sitting down at the end of the bar yelling at the TV.

David Frum of The Atlantic warned at the beginning of the year of Trump cowing the media. Instead, Trump faces the most hostile press at least since Richard Nixon. So comprehensively do Trump outrages dominate the news cycle that it’s difficult for a sex scandal involving a porn star to break through. If you’re a late-night host who doesn’t spend an inordinate amount of time on Trump, your ratings lag. Michael Wolff has sold more than a million copies of a loosely sourced book whose power is the salaciousness of its gossip and its confirmation of everything people who hate Trump already believe.

Rather than stretching his powers, Trump has reined in the executive overreach of the Obama years, which was brazen and unconstitutional, although undertaken with much greater politeness. Obama proudly thought he could rewrite immigration law on his own and make recess appointments when Congress wasn’t in recess.

There’s no doubt Trump violates norms that we should want to preserve. The president shouldn’t slam reporters and news organizations by name, call for people in the private sector to be fired, criticize companies or urge his adversaries to be jailed, among other routine provocations.

The Out-of-Touch Party By Adriana Cohen

Democrats are out of touch.

They made that abundantly clear when every liberal lawmaker rejected the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and did everything possible to obstruct its historic passage. Instead of working in a bipartisan manner to help grow the U.S. economy and restore the American dream for all, liberal politicians — including Democratic Party leadership — told voters the GOP tax bill would be bad for them, bad for the economy and a gift to the rich.

Then millions of Americans got a raise — faster than liberals could knit another pussy hat.

Just ask the multitude of blue- and white-collar workers across industries and demographics who are enjoying higher wages, lucrative bonuses, extended family-leave benefits and an abundance of other perks thanks to the tax reform bill, which not a single Democrat voted for. Yet despite the fact that AT&T is giving out $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 U.S. employees as a result of the new law and scores of other American businesses are doing the same, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi told reporters, “In terms of the bonus that corporate America received versus the crumbs that they are giving to workers to kind of put the schmooze on, it’s so pathetic. … I think it’s insignificant.”

Only an out-of-touch 1 percenter like Pelosi — a well-known multimillionaire — could dismiss thousands of dollars in working families’ pockets as mere “crumbs.” To the contrary, for 99 percent of the population, it’s significant.

Notwithstanding, Apple announced this week that it’s going to invest $350 billion in America. This investment includes expanding existing campuses and building new facilities, as well as creating 20,000 jobs. The maker of the iPhone also said it’s giving the majority of its employees $2,500 in stock options.