ELECTIONS Comments turned off

Did the Dems Have a Plan for the 2020 Election – Back in 2016? A reflection on what the Democrats did for Hillary in the 2016 primaries. Joseph Hippolito

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/02/did-dems-plan-rig-2020-election-2016-joseph-hippolito/

Buried underneath the reams of data, statistical analysis and affidavits that put the Democrats’ win in the recent presidential election in serious question, lies one salient fact:

The Democrats planned to rig that election regardless of whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton won in 2016, because the Democrats were rigging the 2016 primaries for Clinton.

Project Veritas revealed the Democrats’ scam that year in a two-part video series, “Rigging the Election.” The series not only shows how paid agitators attempted to disrupt Trump’s campaign, as FrontPage Magazine reported in “Capturing the False Flag.” It uncovers schemes to register ineligible voters and transport non-residents into neighboring states to vote.

All this took place with the full knowledge and consent of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton herself.

Though Project Veritas conducted its undercover investigation five years ago, the information is more than relevant today — especially given Joe Biden’s fraudulent status as President.

Scott Foval, a regional coordinator for People For the American Way and the owner of his own consulting firm at the time, admitted the DNC’s complicity in the 2016 rigging.

FOREIGN POLICY, ISRAEL Comments turned off

Biden’s New Asst Sec of State Worked for Islamic Terror State That Funds Hamas “I was inspired by the Palestinian intifada.” Daniel Greenfield

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/02/bidens-new-asst-sec-state-worked-islamic-terror-daniel-greenfield/

“I was inspired by the Palestinian intifada,” Hady Amr wrote a year after September 11, discussing his work as the national coordinator of the anti-Israel Middle East Justice Network.

Biden has now chosen Amr as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Israel-Palestine.

“I have news for every Israeli,” Amr ranted in one column written after Sheikh Salah Shahada, the head of Hamas’ Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, was taken out by an Israeli air strike.

Amr warned that Arabs “now have televisions, and they will never, never forget what the Israeli people, the Israeli military and Israeli democracy have done to Palestinian children. And there will be thousands who will seek to avenge these brutal murders of innocents.”

He also threatened Americans that “we too shouldn’t be shocked when our military assistance to Israel and our security council vetoes that keep on protecting Israel come back to haunt us”

The future State Department official was making these threats less than a year after 9/11.

Hady Amr had accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing” and coordinated an organization that had accused Israel of “apartheid” making his appointment, like that of Maher Bitar, an anti-Israel activist appointed as the Senior Director for Intelligence on the NSC, a statement about the Biden administration’s hostile relationship to the Jewish State.

EDUCATION Comments turned off

‘Systemic Racism’ and the Biden Administration By Peter Kirsanow

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/systemic-racism-and-the-biden-administration/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=right-rail&utm_content=corner&utm_term=second

The first two weeks of the Biden administration have been dominated by promotion of “racial equity” and eradication of “systemic racism.”

Setting aside the fact that structural/institutional/systemic racism is largely a canard, and the administration’s invocation thereof is primarily a tool to expand progressives’ power, there’s one inarguable case of systemic racism that the administration could address, but likely won’t: the blatant and staggering discrimination against Asian Americans in college and grad-school admissions.

The Trump Justice Department filed a brief supporting the appeal to the Supreme Court by Asian-American students who maintain that Harvard discriminates against Asian Americans in admissions. Evidence adduced in the case shows, e.g., that the combined SAT scores of Asian Americans admitted to Harvard between 2010 and 2015 were 218 points higher than those of similarly situated black admittees. Similar disparities, including those involving GPAs, occur in colleges throughout the country.

It’s widely expected that the Biden administration will switch the government’s position on the case, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. If it does, that will tell you all you need to know about the administration’s concerns about systemic racism.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Is Biden Blowing His COVID Vaccine Rollout?

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/02/03/is-biden-blowing-his-covid-vaccine-rollout/

When not attacking the Trump administration for the pace of COVID-19 vaccine distribution, President Joe Biden said he’d dramatically accelerated the rate at which Americans got treated. What’s more, he was supposed to be ready on day one. At least, that’s what he and his team kept telling the public.

So why is the growth rate of daily vaccinations decelerating? And why is Biden now busy making excuses?

Before taking office,  Biden stated that he’d directed his team to prepare a “much more aggressive effort, with more federal involvement and leadership, to get things back on track.”

T.J. Ducklo, a spokesman for Biden’s transition, told CNN in early January that “the president-elect believes we must accelerate distribution of the vaccine while continuing to ensure the Americans who need it most get it as soon as possible.”

The Boston Globe reported on Jan. 8 that “President-elect Joe Biden plans to order the distribution of almost all available doses of the COVID-19 vaccines, in a striking departure from the Trump administration’s strategy of holding back roughly half of the stock to ensure those who have been vaccinated would receive their second dose.”

So, what’s happened since Biden took office?

POLITICS Comments turned off

Ex-Bush Officials Flee the Party of Reagan and Trump They’re following the cult of the GOP establishment instead. Jeffrey Lord

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://spectator.org/bush-officials-republican-trump/

NOTHING NEW HERE…..EXCERPTS

And the GOP Establishment’s reaction to the idea of Reagan as a GOP presidential nominee? Not to mention the liberal media’s reaction? I described it here in The American Spectator in 2015, saying this:

New York Times: “Reagan’s candidacy is ‘patently ridiculous.’ ”
New York Times: “The astonishing thing is that this amusing but frivolous Reagan fantasy is taken so seriously by the news media and particularly by the President [Gerald Ford]. It makes a lot of news, but it doesn’t make much sense.”
New Republic: “Ronald Reagan to me is still the posturing, essentially mindless and totally unconvincing candy man that he’s been in my opinion ever since I watched his first try for the Republican nomination evaporate in Miami in 1968.”
New Republic: “Reagan is Goldwater revisited…. He is a divisive factor in the party.”
Harper’s magazine: “That he should be regarded as a serious candidate for President is a shame and an embarrassment for the country at large to swallow.”
Chicago Daily News: “The trouble with Reagan, of course, is that his positions on the major issues are cunningly phrased nonsense — irrationality conceived and hair-raising in their potential mischief…. Here comes Barry Goldwater again, only more so, and at this stage another such debacle could sink the GOP so deep it might never recover.”
Time: “Republicans now must decide whether he represents a conservative wave of the future or is just another Barry Goldwater calling on the party to mount a hopeless crusade against the twentieth century.”
Newsweek: Ronald Reagan is “a man whose mind and nerve and mediagenic style have never been tested in Presidential politics and may not be adequate to the trial.”
National Review (a conservative magazine): “Reagan’s image remains inchoate.… At the outset of his campaign, his image is largely that of the role-playing actor — pleasant on stage, but ill-equipped for the real world beyond the footlights. Reagan does not yet project the presidential image. He is not seen as a serious man.”
Manchester Union-Leader (a conservative New Hampshire paper): Reagan “lacks the charisma and conviction needed to win.”
Pravda, the official newspaper of the Soviet Union: Reagan is a “dinosaur from the ‘cold war.’… It is strange that there are still fish in the sea that are tempered by this putrid bait.”

That was just the Establishment media. Next up were the icons of the Establishment Republican Party of the day.

The Ripon Society: “The nomination of Ronald Reagan would McGovernize the Republican Party.”
Vice President Nelson Rockefeller: Reagan is “a minority of a minority” who “has been taking some extreme positions.”
New York’s Republican Sen. Jacob Javits: Reagan’s positions are “so extreme that they would alter our country’s very economic and social structure and our place in the world to such a degree as to make our country’s place at home and abroad, as we know it, a thing of the past.”
Illinois Republican Sen. Charles Percy said Reagan’s candidacy was “foolhardy” and would lead to a “crushing defeat” for the Republican Party. “It could signal the beginning of the end of our party as an effective force in American political life.”
Former President Gerald Ford: “I hear more and more often that we don’t want, can’t afford to have a replay of 1964.” If the Republican Party nominates Ronald Reagan “it would be an impossible situation” because Reagan “is perceived as a most conservative Republican. A very conservative Republican can’t win in a national election.” Asked if that meant Ford thought Reagan can’t win, Ford replied to the New York Times: “That’s right.” The Times story went on to observe that Ford thought “Mr. Reagan would be a sure-loser in November” and that Reagan held “extreme and too-simple views.”

Sound familiar? Of course it does.

EDUCATION, P.C.-CULTURE Comments turned off

The war on Jordan Peterson Professor is canary in toxic coal mine of political correctness and petty thought police By Charles Hurt

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/feb/1/the-war-on-jordan-peterson/

Leftist hatred for the Canadian psychology professor Jordan Peterson is really something to behold. He stands as an example of what happens to someone who strays from the crazy line of thinking by modern campus bigots.

Mr. Peterson is the canary in the toxic coal mine of political correctness and petty thought police.

Let’s start with the professor’s crime.

Simply put, Mr. Peterson does not share the monolithic, prevailing liberal orthodoxy on university campuses dictating that Western White males are the world’s evil oppressors and anyone who does not belong to that evil race is a victim trapped in circumstances beyond his or her control.

Consider for a moment the leftist premise to which the radical Mr. Peterson objects.

On its face, it is blatantly racist. Divvying up, defining and punishing groups of people based on their race (or gender) was racist 200 years ago during slavery times. It was racist 75 years ago. It is still racist today.

Yet, astonishingly, this reborn racism is widely embraced by the racists who dominate college campuses today. 

The second obvious flaw in this racist orthodoxy is the message it sends to non-White, non-males.

Any challenges, failures or misery you face in life are not your fault. And, even worse, there is nothing you can do to change your circumstances. So, just stew in your bitterness and hatred for White males along with the rest of us, goes the leftist campus orthodoxy of the day.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Alexei Navalny’s Cause: Can the Biden Administration marshal a unified Western response to the Russian opposition leader’s prison sentence?

Posted By on February 3rd, 2021

https://www.wsj.com/articles/alexei-navalnys-cause-11612309007?mod=opinion_lead_pos3

We would have liked to have been in the room when Vladimir Putin confronted whoever came up with the idea to poison Alexei Navalny last year. The opposition politician nearly died, but the assassination attempt by Russian spooks has made him an even more prominent threat to the Russian dictator’s rule.

The Kremlin had Mr. Navalny arrested upon his return to Russia in January after several months of treatment in Germany, and on Tuesday a Russian court sentenced him to three-and-a-half years in prison (reduced by one year for time served). The charges of violating his parole from a previous conviction are a farce. This is a political arrest and sentence.

One lesson is that Mr. Putin and his gang must feel threatened. Protests in support of Mr. Navalny have been growing in major Russian cities. Mr. Putin has survived protests before, notably in 2012, but his popularity has sagged amid an economy weakened by lower oil prices and Western sanctions.

“[Putin’s] only method is killing people,” Mr. Navalny said in court. “For as much as he pretends to be a great geopolitician, he’ll go down in history as a poisoner.”

EDUCATION Comments turned off

Georgetown Professor: Islamic Slavery is Freedom? By Andrew Harrod

Posted By on February 2nd, 2021

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/01/georgetown-professor-islamic-slavery-is-freedom

“Slavery cannot be intrinsically evil in Islamic law,” Georgetown University professor Jonathan Brown stated during a July 20, 2020 webinar. This disturbing assessment came during a 2019-2020 series of presentations on his 2019 book, Slavery & Islam, whose theses have hardly improved upon this Muslim convert’s past scandalous comments on slavery.

On February 7, 2017, Brown had caused furor while presenting a paper on slavery and Islam at the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). Thereby he noted the traditional Islamic doctrine expressed in Quran 33:21 that Islam’s prophet Muhammad is an “excellent pattern” of behavior. Therefore this example sanctified the slavery practiced by him and his companions, including sex slavery, a doctrine that had justified slavery throughout Islamic history.

Once public, such views completely negated Brown’s disclaimer at the presentation’s beginning. “I always make some hyperbolic statement that really makes sense in the context,” he noted, such that he would face accusations of “calling for slavery.” Given such concern over criticism, he expelled this author from the presentation before it started.

Brown’s elaboration of his views during his subsequent book tour has been hardly more reassuring, for slavery is “simply a fact of life in the Quran” and perhaps even “part of the DNA of Islam.” “Every area of Islamic law is permeated by slavery,” something that “sharia, without exception until the 20th-century, validated.” Muslim scholars have even speculated about a “time when the laws of slavery will actually be needed again,” such as in a post-apocalyptic Mad Max-like world, he has noted.

CHARLOTTE'S NEWS WEB, NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Why Trump Should Press His Case On Voter Fraud Donald Trump can win his Senate trial on the merits, not just a technicality, and he should. By David Marcus

Posted By on February 2nd, 2021

https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/02/why-trump-should-press-his-case-on-voter-frau

With a major shakeup in Donald Trump’s legal team this weekend, increasing attention is being paid to what defense the former president will mount in his upcoming Senate impeachment trial.

Conventional wisdom is that Republican senators would prefer Trump simply argue that it is unconstitutional to impeach a former president. Reportedly, they do not want him to argue he was not guilty of inciting a riot, and most certainly do not want him to argue that there was, in fact, widespread election fraud.

One can understand why these senators would rather rule only on the narrow issue of the constitutionality. It is far less contentious than the other two arguments, and why even bother with them if the first argument makes them moot?

But for Trump, who has already lost his largest platform on Twitter, the ability to lay out the case on why he didn’t incite a riot and that there was widespread fraud may seem irresistible. It would be far riskier, but there is still a very good chance he would be acquitted, maybe by a closer margin — possibly with some annoyed votes in his favor, but acquitted nonetheless.

On all three counts, Trump has very reasonable arguments to make. And given that so many in the media have already made up their mind that he is obviously guilty, he would have a very low bar to cast doubt on that guilt. So let’s look at each defense on its own.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

A New Law To Contain Islamic Radicalism Threatens French Protestants

Posted By on February 2nd, 2021

https://markdurie.com/a-new-law-to-contain-islamic-radicalism-threatens-french-protestants/

Six years ago, when I was serving as the pastor of an Anglican church, the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission wrote to the parish requesting that it implement measures to stop our church from funding terrorists.

Warning a quiet suburban Anglican parish against funding terrorism seems more than faintly ridiculous, but for some types of charities it could be entirely reasonable. For example, during the 1990’s the Islamic Council of Victoria was administering a “mujihadeen” account, to raise funds for jihad in Afghanistan, although representatives of the Council later stated that the ICV never funded any jihadis who were ‘extremist’.

The ICV’s mujahideen campaign had a religious basis in Islam. One of the obligatory five pillars of the faith is to make financial contributions, known as zakat. According to the Qur’an, these ‘alms’ can be used for various purposes, not all of which would meet the conventional Christian understanding of ‘charity’. One of the permitted uses is to fund jihadis. The Qur’an calls this ‘alms … in the path of Allah’. This phrase was explained by the renowned Muslim commentator Ibn Kathir as “‘in the path of Allah’ is exclusive for the benefit of fighters in jihad.”

The Islamic sharia presents many unique and specific regulative challenges for secular governments. In addressing these challenges the authorities are understandably loath to discriminate between religions, so when they set out to impose legislative boundaries around Islamic radicalism, there is a risk that the freedoms of other religions will be damaged.  Freedoms and privileges currently enjoyed by Christian charities could be wound back, as collateral damage of a scattergun response to Islamic radicalism.