Starting July 1, we will only send the Evening Edition to subscribers of that newsletter. Please add your name here to receive these emails.
Fact-checking the fact-checkers
I know fact-checking is hard, but is it really that hard for people who claim to be professional fact-checkers? And do I even need to add that this defamatory lie about a disabled veteran was retweeted by a liberal celebrity? Of course, it was.
OUR TOP STORY TODAY: Hillary intended to break the law, FBI intended to absolve her
Tuesday was “Juneteenth,” a celebration of the anniversary of the announcement of the abolition of slavery in Texas on June 19, 1865. At the link is a timely must-read article by minister, civil rights activist, niece of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, and (I’m proud to say) my friend, Alveda King. She reminds us that we still have a ways to go in creating a compassionate, egalitarian society, and the left's selective outrage over how some children and parents are treated, but not others, is not advancing that cause.
Impact of successful SPLC challenge
The news that an Islamic reform group had received an apology and a nearly $3.4 million settlement from the Southern Poverty Law Center for falsely branding them as “anti-Islam extremists” has emboldened more defamed groups to stand up to the SPLC. The SPLC used to do good work in fighting real hate groups, but it could be looking at as many as 60 lawsuits from groups they allegedly defamed simply because they hold views to the right of the SPLC’s far-left positions.
Let’s all hope and pray that this is the first strike back in a successful campaign to end, once for the all, the ludicrous slander that just because a person or group holds religious views that cause it not to embrace some particular view or practice, that means they “hate” people who do. One of the foundations of Christianity is the idea, “Hate the sin, love the sinner.” This conflating of religious people who hold traditional moral values with “hate groups” is a damnable lie that’s been told so many times, it’s now accepted as truth. It’s time to fight back and end it.
For instance, I have nothing but love in my heart for the people at the SPLC. I only hate the fact that their group raises money through frightening some people by slandering other people. I don’t pray for any harm to come to them, just that they see the error of their ways, repent, then go forth and sin no more. I hope they will arrive at that self-realization on their own, but if it takes 61 lawsuits, well…the Lord works in mysterious ways.
Being "passionate" doesn't excuse bad behavior
I wrestled with whether to comment on this or not because I didn’t want to call more attention to the sick comments of a drug-addled former celebrity, particularly when they called for violence against my own daughter and grandchildren. But since it’s become a major news story, I feel I have to say something. For the record, this person whom I shall not name has apologized. He should, but that’s not good enough. I am a patient and forgiving man, but I am fed up with leftists launching sick, obscene attacks and calling for violence that could incite their unstable followers to harm innocent people -- and not just adults they disagree with politically, but now, their innocent children -- and then skirting responsibility.
Even though I have my own very firm political views, I try hard not to be partisan when it comes to issues of personal behavior. I have criticized President Trump when I thought his rhetoric went too far or his policies were off-target. I called for Roseanne to lose her TV show after she wrote an offensive tweet about Valerie Jarrett, even though I have no love for Ms Jarrett’s works and Roseanne at least had the excuse that she is self-admittedly mentally ill. But the recent spate of reprehensible personal attacks and calls for violence on the left is inexcusable.
The intern who shouted the F-word at President Trump during his Congressional visit should be fired immediately. As should the DOJ employee who was found to be among the Democratic Socialists group that forced the Homeland Security director to have to leave a restaurant under threat.
Tweets such as those made by the ‘60s burnout actor referenced above should be dealt with as criminal actions, because free speech does not protect people who incite violence and make threats. I don’t care that he’s since apologized and deleted them. No decent human being would ever have even thought of writing them in the first place.
Personally, I’ll not be satisfied until this aged, bitter, hateful, and violent creep gets arrested. And I pray for him that NO ONE EVER encourages violence and criminal actions against his grandchildren. But this kind of vile behavior will continue until smug, self-righteous, drug-addled losers like him are held accountable.
Sadly, he wasn’t alone in his disgusting calls for violence, as the leftist group Occupy Wall Street used Twitter not only to call for deadly attacks on immigration enforcement officers but to give instructions on how to do it (by the way, how does Twitter manage to police and ban every user who expresses a conservative opinion, yet these vermin still have Twitter accounts?)
Being “passionate” about some issue in the news that you don't even understand is not an excuse for inciting violence against innocent men, women and children. That's not being “passionate,” that's being sick, childish, thoughtless and vile.
It’s especially ironic that this should come on the very same day that Rep. Steve Scalise was able to return to the baseball diamond for the first time, exactly one year since he was nearly murdered by a deranged leftist gunman, inspired by overheated political rhetoric to try to slaughter as many Republican Congress members as possible at a charity baseball game practice. It was only due to the swift, heroic response by police that he didn’t accomplish his planned massacre, which has oddly become one of the few shootings that the media never seem to want to talk about.
And yet, even after that, some people still refuse to examine their own actions and words.
There is a character in the movie “Forrest Gump” who said something that’s become a meme on many conservative websites. Wesley, the hippie boyfriend of Forrest’s love, Jenny, after beating her up, tried to weasel out of responsibility by saying, “Things got a little out of hand. It’s just this war and that lying son of a b**** Johnson.” But of course, he didn’t beat his girlfriend because the President or his policies drove him to it. He did it because he was a violent, immature, self-centered, hypocritical jerk.
Anyone who commits or foments violence against others and tries to blame it on the President or political policies they disagree with is no better than that scumball. Shame on them. They don’t belong on movie or TV screens or on social media. They need to spend a long time looking inside themselves and reflecting on what they’ve said and done and what they have become. Preferably during a stay in a federal prison.
Congratulations to Congressional Democrats for getting what they wanted: the President doing their job for them yet again. They demanded that immigration enforcement policy be changed while adamantly refusing to change the law, so Trump signed an executive order ending the separation of children from parents trying to sneak them across the border illegally.
It’s still not clear what will happen to these children: will they be put in the same detention facilities with their parents and other adults who might be dangerous? If so, I don’t expect to hear a lot of crying from the left about their welfare. The children have served their purpose to them and can now be safely ignored, just as they were during the Obama Administration when many of the photos the activists circulated of those “concentration camp-like conditions” were actually taken.
At least, this may mean that the left can stop feigning shock and outrage at discovering that the chief law enforcement officer of the US was actually enforcing the laws they passed themselves. That is, until they hear Trump’s next suggestion for cutting off the flow of illegal immigrants at the source. They’re really going to hate this: it would not only reduce illegal immigration, it would also save the taxpayers’ money.
For those still contending that “there’s nothing to see here” in the investigation of the FBI’s handling of the Clinton and Trump investigations, please note that this week, when the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings, three major figures who were asked to testify were AWOL.
Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe invoked his Fifth Amendment right to avoid testifying on grounds he might incriminate himself. Former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch simply failed to appear. And “Mr. Integrity” James Comey sent word that he was out of the country, even though Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa dryly noted that he’d seen Comey in Iowa over the weekend, and “according to his Twitter feed, he seems to be having a wonderful time.”
In Comey’s defense, judging from what we learned in the IG report about what top FBI officials really think about those smelly, WalMart-shopping subhumans who voted for Trump, maybe Comey really does consider Iowa to be a foreign country.
A great summary
George Neumeyr at the American Spectator has an excellent summation for those who haven’t been keeping up with the fallout from the IG report on the Hillary Clinton email investigation. If you’ve just been getting the mainstream media version that it’s a big nothingburger that proves no bias at the top, then read this. It makes it clear in the participants’ own words that not only were they egregiously biased, but even their excuses and denials are proven by their own words to be “blatant lies.” And whatever the Mueller investigation eventually offers up, if it ever results in anything, it will have sprung from this poisoned well.
Very sad news: one of the few celebrities who was still capable of communicating kindly, thoughtfully and intelligently in the Trump era has passed away at 46.
Hillary intended to break law, FBI intended to absolve her
We were right about the news cycle being dominated by the hysteria about crying children at the border for yet another day; hardly anyone other than FOX News covered the Inspector General’s testimony before congressional committees on Tuesday. (CBS gave it a tiny bit of coverage.) The timing of this immigration story –- which is not new information –- has to be a deliberate distraction from the shocking revelations in the IG report, because they shed too bright a light on the roaches infesting the Obama DOJ and FBI.
Obviously, we can’t look to the mainstream media for information about what has turned out to be the worst scandal in memory: the intentional weaponizing of the federal law enforcement bureaucracy to try to fix the outcome of a presidential race and, later, to bring down a duly elected President. It’s been gratifying to see respected legal analysts such as Andrew McCarthy confirming in legal terms what we’ve been saying in layman’s terms for two years.
Consider the “matter” (Loretta Lynch’s term) of Hillary’s email server. My readers know that for a long time, we’ve maintained that her setting up of a personal server to handle all her business as Secretary of State had “intention” written all over it. That seemed even more important than any particular document that might have done through it, because the only conceivable motivation for setting it up that way was to keep her official correspondence out of reach of subpoenas and Freedom Of Information Act requests. It had to have taken some foresight and planning. Hillary got it done on Day 1 of her new cabinet job.
Now, only one of two things is possible. 1) Hillary Clinton intentionally disregarded the training she had received in document classification and security and put all her State Department business on a nonsecure server because hiding what she was up to was more important than following the law, in which case she is far too unethical to be President, or 2) Hillary Clinton is such a clueless ninny that she really thinks you wipe a server “with a cloth” and that the 33,000 subpoenaed emails she deleted really were about yoga and Chelsea’s wedding plans, in which case she is far too stupid to be President.
Now, Hillary Clinton may be a clueless ninny about some things --- why she lost the election certainly comes to mind --- but when it comes to hiding information, she is a master, so I’m going with 1) unethical. She has practiced hiding information since she was in the White House; remember the missing Rose Law Firm time sheets and Vince Foster’s office files that were carted off after his suicide? She’s also quite practiced at hiding the truth by telling lies; remember Benghazi? Remember “the vast right-wing conspiracy” to accuse her husband? Through the years, she has shown herself over and over to be secretive and dishonest. (Hillary, THAT’S why you lost the election.)
When Hillary ascended to the State Department, she had to know that, by definition, much if not most of her work would deal with classified matters. The rules were clear. Everybody who works with classified materials knows them. Hillary HAD to know how vulnerable her information was to foreign agents (in fact, we’ve learned from the IG report that they hacked it), and she HAD to know she was breaking the law, big-time, but she didn’t care. It’s just astonishing.
This is the Elephant In The Room that the Justice Department and FBI had to find a way around if they weren’t going to indict her. (McCarthy explains how they did this.) And why would they contort the law in such a way? Even Horowitz, in his report, doesn’t really focus on this, opting to give them the benefit of the doubt that their conclusions weren’t based on political bias.
But what else could they possibly have been based on?