RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://thefederalist.com/2018/11/14/ilhan-omars-election-suggests-democrats-arent-interested-in-confronting-anti-semitism/

Ilhan Omar, one of the first of two Muslim women to be elected to Congress, is a new kind of politician. She’s telegenic. Ideologically progressive. Widely celebrated by a media that’s obsessed with identity politics. She’s the kind of politician who can openly side with Hamas against Israel or spread “Protocols of Zion”-style conspiracies on Twitter, claiming that Jews possess the supernatural ability to hypnotize the world as they unfurl their “evil.”

It’s not surprising, then, that Omar also supports the “boycott, divestment and sanctions” movement (BDS). In a statement to the website Muslim Girl (later confirmed elsewhere), someone on Omar’s staff explains that, yes, “Ilhan believes in and supports the BDS movement, and has fought to make sure people’s right to support it isn’t criminalized. She does however, have reservations on the effectiveness of the movement in accomplishing a lasting solution.”

So, although Omar contends that BDS will be ineffective in getting the sides to “a lasting solution,” she stills “believes in and supports” a movement that smears the Jewish state as a racist endeavor and aims to destroy it economically. It’s a mystery, is it not, why some Jews might find that positioning offensive?

Omar has supported BDS for a while, even though she will now occasionally slip in some platitudes about the peace process. As Scott Johnson of Power Line (who’s been following this story from the beginning) points out, Omar misled Jewish voters in her district, obfuscating about her position and, as she still does, conflating her support for BDS with a bill that would have stopped continued taxpayer funding of the movement. No one is attempting to “criminalize” anti-Israel speech, although it’s heartening to see Omar is a free-speech absolutist. We’ll see if her position on the “criminalization” of speech will remain consistent moving forward, and not reserved for supporters of Hamas.

As far as I know, not even former congressman Keith Ellison, who once accused the shifty Jews of running American foreign policy, openly supported the BDS movement. Not even J-Street, the progressive front for hard-left activists posing as Israel supporters, openly backed BDS. Nor does George Soros, although he has intermittently funded BDS groups in the past and has been active against the Jewish state for years.

Of course, BDS proponents will tell you they are anti-Zionist, not anti-Semitic. But when you’re fixated on the only liberal state in the Middle East, and avoid criticism of any Islamic regimes that deny their own citizens the most basic of human rights, you, at the very least, betray a morally bankrupt position. Even as Hamas rains hundreds of rockets down on civilians—a nihilistic project that always takes precedent over investing in their own people in their own autonomous Palestinian territory—there is criticism from those who only see evil behind Jewish acts of self-defense.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/11/15/the-2020-

With the midterms behind us, it’s full steam ahead now to the upcoming Democratic primaries for the 2020 presidential nomination. Of course, the campaigning for that august honor started on November 9, 2016 (one can never be too early) but now that the “Christmas in July” feel of it is shed, there’s no more need for being coy.

Our previous installment focused on those most likely to be the establishment picks for the 2020 election. But if the 2016 battle taught us anything, it is to expect the unexpected. And the Democratic Party is ripe for an outside the party structure challenge, backed by a far-left base ready to avenge the loss of Bernie Sanders in those rigged primaries.

Who are the likely candidates for such a challenge?

Bern-out
Speaking of Sanders, there is little doubt that the socialist senator from Vermont is a frontrunner. He is the one other candidate who rivals former Vice President Joe Biden’s poll numbers, especially in the crucial early state of New Hampshire. And he still maintains a loyal following after his rigged defeat in 2016.

Alternative history and speculation about whether Sanders would have won in 2016 is fascinating. As even supporters of President Trump would admit, Bernie might narrowly have defeated Trump. His message also targeted voters fed up with the traditional politics of Left and Right who were looking for something different in an outsider with populist appeal. What’s more, Bernie had the passionate support of young voters. With his labor union bona fides, he might have understood the need to campaign hard in the Rust Belt (while Hillary Clinton simply took those votes for granted). On issues such as trade, for example, Sanders and Trump practically sound the same (though their reasoning differs).

Just as trade might have been the issue that could have won 2016 for Sanders, it may end up being the issue that secures President Trump’s reelection in 2020. Beginning with Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, his successful renegotiation of NAFTA, and his hard bargaining with China and the European Union for greater trade concessions, Trump has neutralized the issue.

Sanders’ luster generally has faded over the past two years. Another run in 2020 would be more of an attempted remake of his 2016 crusade rather than an actual “revolution.” And everyone knows the sequel is rarely better than the original. Perhaps that explains why the Democrats’ new rising socialist star, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has refused to endorse a possible Bernie 2020 campaign. While Bernie may still be useful as a campaigning tool, the chances of him actually being the candidate grow smaller and smaller by the day.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mitch-mcconnell-re-elected-majority-leader-by-senate-republicans-1542211942?cx_testId=16&cx_testVariant=cx&cx_artPos=0&cx_tag=collabctx&cx_navSource=newsReel#cxrecs_s

WASHINGTON—Congressional lawmakers elected familiar faces Wednesday to leadership next year as they brace for Democrats to take control of the House in January.

In the most closely watched election, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) defeated Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) in a 159-43 vote to lead House Republicans when they enter the minority next year.

Mr. McCarthy’s victory ended the uncertainty that House Republicans had faced since House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) announced in April he would retire at year’s end.

Three years after he unexpectedly withdrew a bid to become House speaker, Mr. McCarthy completed his rebound at a low point for House Republicans. After last week’s midterm elections, Democrats have so far won a net of 34 House seats and have a chance at picking up as many as 38.

“We took a beating in the suburban areas,” Mr. McCarthy said after the leadership elections. He said Republicans were willing to work with House Democrats, but that the GOP would block moves from Democrats who exceed their oversight authority regarding the Trump administration. “If their agenda is simply investigations and impeachment, and not focusing on the hardworking American public, we’ll be there to defend the American public,” he said.

Democratic leaders have said they plan to focus on transparency in politics and oversight of the Trump administration next year. They have cautioned Democratic lawmakers to tread carefully around impeachment, which could spark political backlash.

Mr. McCarthy’s defeat of Mr. Jordan isn’t likely to end the power struggle between House GOP leadership and its more conservative wing, particularly the House Freedom Caucus, a group of roughly three dozen of the House’s most conservative Republicans. Mr. Jordan helped found the group in January 2015.

“We speak for millions of Americans that feel like this place has forgotten them—that hasn’t changed,” said Rep. Mark Meadows (R., N.C.), chairman of the Freedom Caucus and a close ally of Mr. Jordan.

Mr. Meadows said it was important that Mr. McCarthy’s election hadn’t gone unchallenged. “To have any dissenting votes is certainly saying that at least we didn’t just automatically go out and crown somebody as the new leader,” he said.

It isn’t yet clear whom Mr. McCarthy will be squaring off against next year in the House.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/florida-democrat-organizer-called-voters-to-fix-rejected-mail-in-ballots-after-election-day/

A Democratic volunteer in Palm Beach, Fla. was reportedly recorded while calling a voter to correct their rejected mail-in absentee ballot as recounts were being conducted, in violation of the law.

The report comes after the Department of State revealed that it discovered election officials in four counties, included the embattled Democratic stronghold of Broward, illegally changed the date on mail-in-ballot-correction forms, granting voters more time to fix their rejected absentee ballots than is allowed by law.

The so-called “cure affidavits” were supposed to be due no later than 5 p.m. on November 5, the day before the election, but the forms were changed to indicate they were due back by 5 p.m. on Thursday, two days after the election. Department of State officials have referred the incident to the Department of Justice for investigation.

“Altering a form in a manner that provides the incorrect date for a voter to cure a defect . . . imposes a burden on the voter significant enough to frustrate the voter’s ability to vote,” Florida Department of State interim general counsel Bradley McVay wrote in a letter sent to federal prosecutors on November 9 and released publicly on Tuesday.

In an email chain released with the November 9 letter, Citrus County Supervisor of Elections Susan Gill said that a voter who received an illegally modified “cure affidavit” also received a call from the office of the Florida Democratic party, indicating party volunteers were calling voters to correct rejected mail-in ballots.

Recounts in the Florida gubernatorial and Senate races began Saturday and must conclude by 3 p.m. on Thursday or else initial vote counts will be used to determine the contests.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sherrod-brown-if-stacey-abrams-doesnt-win-gop-stole-it/

Senator Sherrod Brown said Wednesday that if Democrat Stacey Abrams loses her bid for governor of Georgia, Republicans “stole” the election.

“If Stacey Abrams doesn’t win in Georgia, they stole it,” the Ohio Democrat said. “It’s clear. It’s clear. I say that publicly and it’s clear.”

Brown went on to say that there are “way more” Democrats than Republicans, so the GOP has to cheat to win elections.

“They win elections by redistricting and reapportionment and voter suppression and all the ways they try to scare people, particularly people of color,” he said at the National Action Network conference in Washington.

Throughout the campaign, Republican nominee Brian Kemp was accused of using his position as Georgia’s secretary of state to suppress votes, in particular by putting tens of thousands of African-American voter registrations on hold. Kemp in turn accused the Democratic party just before Election Day of attempting to hack Georgia’s voter registration system, saying he had opened an investigation into it but refusing to provide any evidence for his claims.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/cory-booker-absolutely-considering-a-presidential-run-in-2020-deciding-in-coming-months/

Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said he’s “absolutely” considering a run for president in 2020 and will take some time “over the coming months” to decide.

“I’ll consider that. I’m focused right now on my re-election but is that something I’ll consider? Absolutely,” Booker said at Yahoo! Finance’s All Markets Summit today.

“Now is not the time to do that. We’ve got re-elections in the field. I’ve got a lot of work to do. I’ve just come off an election. I will do my best over the coming months,” he added.

When asked when he would make his decision, Booker replied, “My decision’s made right now. I’m running for re-election [in 2020], but will I take some time over the coming months to consider it? I absolutely will but let’s, like, this is bothersome to me that we’re two years out… it is too early to say.”

Booker continued, “Honestly, right now, this is those wonderful moments in Washington where we should be able to come together and get good work done before we start vulcanizing ourselves for presidential ambitions. I am so excited.”

Booker, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, called for a federal investigation of the Georgia gubernatorial race between Stacey Abrams and Brian Kemp.

“I mean, I don’t understand how you can have a guy who’s running for an office, who’s currently holding office, supposed to be policing and protecting elections, using that office to disenfranchise people, to remove people from the polls. I mean, there should be a federal investigation,” he said, referring to Kemp, who resigned as Georgia’s secretary of state after Election Day.

“The Justice Department should be investigating that election to make sure it was fair and the decisions that were made were not to politically advantage someone, but to protect voters and the voting process,” he added.

Booker argued that the governorship is being “stolen” from Abrams and said the situation goes beyond impropriety. A federal judge ordered a review of thousands of provisional ballots this week as Abrams has not conceded.

“I’m saying this from a perspective where I have not been in the weeds, but I think that Stacey Abrams’ election is being stolen from her, using what I think are insidious measures to disenfranchise certain groups of people,” the senator said.

“And that’s something I think that all of us should be calling for is the Trump Justice Department should conduct an investigation into what happened, because on the on the appearance of it that’s not just appearance of impropriety. To me, it’s the appearance of voter fraud, voter disenfranchisement, voter suppression,” he added.

Booker recently proposed a bill that would create federally funded savings accounts for children born in the U.S. as a way to address the “racial wealth gap” in the country. He estimated that the legislation, called the “American Opportunity Accounts Act,” would cost $50-$70 billion depending on how the program is managed. CONTINUE AT SITE

https://edwardcline.blogspot.com/2018/11/vengeance-is-ours-sayeth-democrats.html

One way to understand the depthless malice exhibited by the Democrats, Social Justice Warriors, the MSM, Hollywood, and other anti-Trump trolls and activists over the last two years is to grasp that the urge to flood the country – and Europe – with “illegal’ immigrants and to swamp Western culture under the demands of arrogant, predatory non-citizens who promised to smother it is to wreck vengeance on those who either voted for Trump or opposed borderless nations, and to have a taste of rape and theft. Americans will learn the hard way to conform to Democratic priorities, or suffer if they don’t.

One variation of the vengeance quotation is from Deuteronomy 32:35

‘Vengeance is Mine, and retribution, In due time their foot will slip; For the day of their calamity is near, And the impending things are hastening upon them.’

Here in America, our vengeance is also to steal elections from the legitimate election of conservatives and other fascists by finding new Dem ballots behind soda vending machines, in secret storage facilities, and in Brenda Snipes’s purse.

Here in America, our first priority is to drown America and hold its head in the water until it dies. We can do that and not be called treasonous, even though that term means nothing to us, unless you suddenly advocate capitalism, individual rights, and the Constitution.

It is also to steal your guns and leave you helpless before our onslaught.

We’re going to encourage Antifa and other violent activists to harass Americans wherever they go to shop or eat, or at gas stations, or at home, and to make their lives miserable and unlivable. Pro-Trumpers will be mobbed and beaten in Wall-Marts, Targets, supermarkets, and churches. We’re going to sanction using bike locks and fists and acid to put them down and to experience the pain of being pro-Trump voters. They will be charged with opposing the “freedom of speech” of activists if they fight back and injure an ally of the Democrats. The feet of our enemies will slip, and we will “kick ‘em”when they’re down. We will implement Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals to the maximum. Calling us Leftists or any other name will not hurt us. We’re taking our power back.

https://amgreatness.com/2018/11/14/nevertrumps

“At what point do others stand up and not just deny Kristol his “conservative” cred, but acknowledge that he is now on the other side? When you join the battlefield alongside partisan hacks like Adam Schiff and take payoffs from leftist billionaires to do their political dirty work, there is nothing Republican or conservative, or frankly, decent, about you.”

Just hours after Jeff Sessions resigned as attorney general last Wednesday at the president’s behest, #TheResistance found its newest target for destruction: Sessions’ interim replacement, Matthew Whitaker.

Negative coverage about the acting attorney general has dominated national publications and cable news outlets. Reporters have portrayed Whitaker as a Trump lackey, a crackpot, and an “attack dog”; Democratic leaders are demanding that he recuse himself from overseeing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation; on Tuesday, incoming House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) warned that if Whitaker fails to step aside from the probe, “his actions will be exposed.” (Of course, this is pure propaganda. As Andrew McCarthy explains, Whitaker is well-qualified and meets the legal requirements for an interim presidential cabinet appointment.)

NeverTrump “conservatives” are aiding Schiff and the media in their campaign to paralyze if not remove Whitaker. Commercials attacking the acting attorney general were aired on several Sunday morning political shows. The ads were sponsored by “Republicans for the Rule of Law,” a group founded earlier this year by Bill Kristol, the editor-at-large of The Weekly Standard. The group’s primary role so far appears to be pimping for the Mueller probe, a political witch-hunt that Kristol and his fellow NeverTrumpers pray will lead to the impeachment and removal of the president. The Left and their NeverTrump footsoldiers fear Whitaker will thwart the special counsel’s investigation instead of rubber stamping Mueller’s ever-expanding investigation as Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has done over the past 18 months.

Buying primo air time on network television doesn’t come cheap. So who is funding “Republicans for the Rule of Law” and their attacks on the Republican president and his acting attorney general? Is it big Republican donors?

We haven’t found any, but we have learned learned that one of Kristol’s benefactors is progressive billionaire Pierre Omidyar, the co-founder of eBay.

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/chuck-schumer-urges-florida-to-ignore-ballot-deadlines/

Senator Chuck Schumer on Tuesday encouraged Florida to blow off fast-approaching deadlines to submit vote totals for the Senate race where Republican Rick Scott leads incumbent Democratic senator Bill Nelson by a tiny margin.

“The more time that passes since election day, the better things keep looking for Democrats,” Schumer said at a joint press conference with Nelson in Washington, D.C.

“Supervisors of the elections should have all the time they need to count every Floridan’s ballot,” the Senate minority leader said. “Even if the vote count has to go beyond Sunday.”

Schumer said the deadlines should be ignored since the Senate race does not have an electoral vote in Congress scheduled for December as the 2000 presidential race did when it underwent a recount in Florida.

“We will not have a rerun of 2000, when bullying and intimidation ruled and created a rush to judgement that, to this day, many Americans believe that election was unfairly decided,” Schumer said. “That cannot happen again.”

The Florida governor has a mere 12,562 more votes than Nelson according to the current count.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/georgia-election-critics-question-legitimacy-stacey-abrams-lost/

Stacey Abrams’ refusal to concede is not bolstered by any real indication of election malfeasance.

In the overtime of the 2018 elections, the Left can’t decide whether it opposes casting doubt on election results or insists on it.

In the case of the Georgia gubernatorial election, narrowly lost by African-American activist Stacey Abrams, it’s unquestionably the latter. A cottage industry has grown up around declaring the outcome a stain on our nation.

Carol Anderson of Emory University deemed the state’s election system “neo-Jim Crow.” Dan Rather found the gubernatorial vote in Georgia “a deeply troubling challenge to American democracy,” and said if it were “a foreign country there would be a call for international inspectors.” Georgia has become a byword for “voter suppression,” which is presumed to be why Secretary of State Brian Kemp, a Republican, will soon occupy the governor’s mansion.

The critics advance myriad reasons why the result in Georgia isn’t legitimate:

They complain that Kemp ran for governor while he was still secretary of state. Yes, but Georgia’s constitution allows for that, and it’s been done before. In the 2000s, Democrat Cathy Cox ran for her party’s gubernatorial nomination while serving as secretary of state. Kemp ran for re-election twice while simultaneously occupying the office, with no one seriously alleging malfeasance. In any case, localities count the votes, not the secretary of state’s office.