Robert Trump, the younger brother of the US president, has died aged 72, the White House has confirmed.
"He was not just my brother, he was my best friend," Donald Trump said in a statement on Saturday.
The president had visited his brother in hospital in New York on Friday afternoon, telling reporters: "He's having a hard time."
US media reports had said Robert Trump was seriously ill, but it is unclear what he was suffering from.
"It
is with [a] heavy heart I share that my wonderful brother, Robert,
peacefully passed away tonight," the president said. "His memory will
live on in my heart forever."
Robert Trump was the youngest of the five Trump siblings, born two years after Donald.
He
spent much of his career with the family real-estate firm, becoming a
top executive. Unlike his brother, however, he was said not to court
publicity and lived semi-retired in New York state
According to the New York Post, Robert spent more than a week in the
intensive-care unit of Manhattan's Mount Sinai Hospital in June.
In June 2017, the New York production of Shakespeare in the Park modified its costuming for its production of “Julius Caesar” so that the title character resembled the new U.S. president. After the actor playing a Trump-resembling Caesar pretended to succumb to the many wounds inflicted by the conspiracy of assassins, the character Brutus implored his co-conspirators to, “Stoop, Romans, stoop, and let us bathe our hands in Caesar’s blood up to the elbows and besmear our swords.” In doing so, Brutus forced the other conspirators to become indivisibly responsible for the coup. Nobody could turn on the other plotters if everyone had Caesar’s blood on their sword.
In an irony almost lost to history, the play-acting coup against the image of Trump had an analogue in reality. At that same moment in June 2017, Kevin Clinesmith forwarded two emails to his fellow conspirators who lied to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in order to spy on Trump campaign figure Carter Page.
One email reflected that Carter Page worked as a source for the CIA to gather information on the Russians. That email exposed the entire Carter Page FISA spying as completely unnecessary and therefore totally illegal.
Page had previously used the Washington Post to offer an interview with FBI agents about his contacts with Russia. Page addressed a letter directly to FBI Director James Comey shortly before the FBI certified that intrusive spying was the only way to explore those contacts. The forwarded email documented that Page had a long history of providing reliable information to the CIA on the very subject about which the FBI sought to invade his privacy.
To hide this fact, Clinesmith created a second email by doctoring the first to read “not a source.” Clinesmith’s lawyer, Justin Shur, contends his client “did not try to hide the C.I.A. email from other law enforcement officials as they sought the final renewal of the Page wiretap. Mr. Clinesmith had provided the unchanged C.I.A. email to Crossfire Hurricane agentsand the Justice Department lawyer drafting the original wiretap application.”
Thus, if you believe Clinesmith’s attorney, each conspirator was forced, figuratively, to bathe his hands in blood. By sending both the doctored and undoctored version of the same email, Clinesmith made sure each of them knew that the conspiracy would involve filing a fraudulent document with the FISA court. This may explain why, more than three years later, the conspirators never turned on each other. Like a 2017 version of Brutus, Clinesmith made sure that if he went down, he would be able to take down the other conspirators as well.
But Clinesmith now appears positioned to cash in on that insurance policy. In a stunning development on Friday, the New York Timesreported that Clinesmith intends to plead guilty to a criminal charge of falsifying a court document and that Clinesmith has made a deal with prosecutors.
It was previously reported that “in June of 2017, the CIA sent an email to the FBI restating that Mr. Page had been an asset.” While that’s true, the charging document against Clinesmith dropped this bombshell:
On August 17, 2016, prior to the approval of FISA #1, the [CIA] provided certain members of the Crossfire Hurricane team a memorandum (“August 17 Memorandum”) indicating that [Carter Page] had been approved as an ‘operational contact for the [CIA] from 2008 to 2013 and detailing information that [Page] had provided to the [CIA] concerning [Page’s] prior contacts with certain Russian intelligence officers. The first three FISA applications did not include [Page’s] history or status with the [CIA].
While Clinesmith claims to have shared the two versions (the doctored email and the original) with some of the conspirators, he is also charged with lying to the supervisory special agent who was the affiant on the fourth FISA application. Nevertheless, the charging document makes clear that the CIA notified the FBI that Page was a source in 2016 before the first FISA warrant was even issued. Thus, the charging document strongly suggests that Durham is zeroing in on several other conspirators who participated in deceiving the FISA court.
Normally, former FBI Director James Comey fearlessly weighs in on developments in the Russia collusion hoax. He personally certified the necessity of the FISA warrant to spy on Page, even though Page wrote him an open letter offering to sit for an FBI interview about his Russian contacts.
Had Comey disclosed Page’s offer to the court, it would have denied the warrant until the FBI tried the less-invasive method. The FBI ignored an offer of a voluntary interview because they were more interested in spying on Page than finding out what he knew. Why? Because Page wasn’t the real target. The FBI had a political agenda against Donald Trump and Page’s affiliation with the political campaign provided the bureau a potential source of dirt that it could use as ammunition.
All of this would have been very easy for Robert Mueller to know as he investigated the Russia collusion hoax. Why didn’t Mueller expose this criminal behavior? One reason might be that Clinesmith was part of the Mueller team.
Clinesmith personally interrogated another Trump associate, George Papadopolous, helping Mueller notch the trophy conviction. As the Washington Examiner reported, Clinesmith is also the FBI lawyer who, on November 9, 2016, wrote, “My god damned name is all over the legal documents investigating his staff,” Clinesmith said, adding, “So, who knows if that breaks to him what he is going to do?” Clinesmith (or “FBI Attorney 2”) is referenced 56 times in the 2018 inspector general report criticizing the politicization of the Clinton email investigation.
All of this leads back to current FBI Director Christopher Wray, who has been fighting a concerted rear-guard effort to protect dirty FBI agents and lawyers from the consequences of their meddling in the 2016 election. Although he did not take the leadership position of the FBI until shortly after Clinesmith’s FISA deception, Wray is known to have consistently slowed or obstructed both the FISA court and congressional efforts to get to the bottom of what happened.
Most recently, the president criticized Wray for obstructing Congress. This raises the question of a constitutional crisis as the FBI appears also to be defying the chief executive’s wishes to cooperate with Congress. Legally, Wray, much like Wray’s boss, the attorney general, borrows all of his authority from the president himself.
In another example, Wray allowed Clinesmith to quietly resign in late 2019 shortly before the inspector general’s report disclosed Clinesmith’s deception to the FISA court. John Durham and Attorney General William Barr deserve credit for finally penetrating the deep state wall of silence to hold somebody accountable for the criminal actions of the men and women charged with upholding the law. The fact that Wray still has a job is a troubling sign that the FBI has become more powerful than the constitutional forces that are supposed to control it.
“Loving the people you lead, caring deeply about them, is the basic
prerequisite of leadership. The leaders of today’s Democratic Party do
not. They despise this country. They have said so. They continue to.
That is shocking, but it is also disqualifying. We cannot let them run
this nation because they hate it. Imagine what they would do to it.”
—Fox News host Tucker Carlson, July 6, 2020
Carlson is right. Democrat Party politicos have made it clear they
believe our nation is a systemically racist, xenophobic construct so
irreparably flawed that only “fundamental transformation” can save it.
That the endgame of such transformation would be the acquisition of
unassailable power by Democrats is sold as “coincidental” by those same
leftists and their corporate mouthpiece, the mainstream media.
Thus, Americans are supposed to believe the Democrats’ desire to
eliminate the Electoral College, grant amnesty to 11-22 million illegal
aliens, pack the Supreme Court with additional justices, and force-feed hate-America propagandist “history” to public school students is nothing more than the same political business as usual that attends every election season.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Ever since the Left’s
stunning defeat in 2016, courtesy of a political novice with many flaws —
but an undeniable love for America — Democrats have done everything
they can think of to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency. Even before he
was inaugurated, a movement was initiated to flip Electoral College electors. On Inauguration Day itself, The Washington Post ran a story
with the headline, “The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun,”
meaning the effort to remove him from office was preconceived.
And then came the plots. They ranged from puerile, as in the New York Times story
about former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein wearing a wire as a
means of amassing evidence to prove Trump was unfit for office and thus
removable under the 25th Amendment, to the worst scandal in American
history, as in the attempted coup that went by the name of Crossfire Hurricane, engendered by the most corrupt administration this nation has ever endured.
In between, there were three years of a wholly unjustified
investigation into “Russian collusion!” followed by an attempted
impeachment led by party hack Adam Schiff, who hid exculpatory evidence
and blatantly lied about speaking with the Ukraine “whistleblower” prior to the hearings. Whistleblower is in quotes because, despite media denials, the Intelligence Community Inspector General ultimately released
a statement admitting the office changed its forms for whistleblowers
so that firsthand knowledge of the wrongdoing they were reporting was no
longer required.
Then came the pandemic for which Trump was first branded a racist and
xenophobe for noting it originated in China and for quickly initiating a
travel ban. He subsequently
became a man with “blood on his hands” for acting too slowly, even as
the sclerotic bureaucracies that existed long before Trump came on the
scene failed to meet even the most basic challenges of pandemic management.
As the virus gained hold, Democrats showed their true colors,
precipitating draconian and wholly capricious lockdowns (churches
closed, abortion clinics and liquor stores open), even as those who
protested these unconstitutional maneuvers in states like Michigan were
deemed dangerous,
while those who obliterated history and looted and burned cities to the
ground were deemed righteous and peaceful — until those demonstrations
“intensified,” as our feckless media characterized their descent into blatant anarchy.
In response, Democrats aligned themselves with antifa, a
conglomeration of upper-middle-class fascist thugs whose “revolutions”
consist of burning down police stations and businesses (many
minority-owned), assaulting police, blocking major highways, and
indiscriminately destroying historical artifacts. Democrats are also
aligned with Black Lives Matter, an entity run by self-admitted Marxists, whose true agenda was laid bare in Chicago this week when they held a rally for the looters who perpetrated at least $60 million in property damage and injured 13 police officers. “That is reparations,” a BLM organizer stated. “Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance.”
Has there ever been an American political party so contemptuous of
its own nation that it is willing to allow its own jurisdictions to
descend into complete chaos, even as it champions efforts to defund
police departments? Has there ever been one willing to hold the
American public hostage in the midst of an economy-crushing pandemic for
nothing more than a fiscal shakedown aimed at bailing out Democrat-run cities and states, many of them illegal sanctuaries, for decades of wholesale mismanagement, wholly unrelated to the pandemic?
More important, has there ever been a party with more contempt for
ordinary Americans? Last week, former Clinton adviser and CNN political
commentator Paul Begala declared
that President Donald Trump was “sucking up” to his “white nationalist
base.” In other words, a major player in the Democrat Party automatically
assumes that “white nationalist base” is a pejorative term — in a
nation with a Caucasian majority that believes in American
exceptionalism.
All of the above is quite revealing. Democrats are so contemptuous of
our nation’s institutions and laws that they believe any election or
agenda where they fail to prevail is illegitimate and should be resisted
— by any means necessary.
“The American Left is different from a lot of the global illiberal
lefts in that they’re the only ones that don’t like their country,” asserted
Chris Bedford, senior editor of The Federalist, in an appearance on
Carlson’s show. “The Cubans, the Soviets, the Chinese, they’re all
fiercely patriotic. We don’t have that.”
What we have instead is a globalist agenda wholly supported by Democrats. One where the nation-state itself is an anachronism, and international labor, even slave labor,
will be abided, irrespective of the devastation wreaked on American
workers. One where a cadre of multinational corporate elites completely
disdain patriotism and national security in favor of market share, silence dissenting opinions, and/or completely cancel their promulgators. One where surveillance and data mining
are sold as beneficial, even as they ultimately evolve into
totalitarian-based “social credit systems” akin to those in Communist
China — the same Communist China with whom elitists in business,
academia, and Hollywood
still curry favor, even as millions of their fellow Americans have been
devastated by China’s contemptible duplicity regarding the pandemic.
Not even elections are sacrosanct. Despite the utter fiasco
revealed by mail-in voting in New York — where thousands of ballots
were invalidated and results of local races remain undecided six weeks
after the polls closed — the same Democrat Party that eschews voter ID
as “racist” still contends voting by mail is a viable way to run a national election.
That a similar delay — or much worse — in determining who is
president could undermine all faith in the integrity of the election
process? Only a party that hates America would be willing to so
thoroughly bastardize one of our most cherished privileges.
“Once upon a time, trying to torch a federal courthouse would earn years in prison,” states
Victor Davis Hanson. “And simply taking over a large chunk of a
downtown to re-create Lord of the Flies was unthinkable. Not now.”
In their quest for control, a Democrat Party that hates America is openly abetting
the unthinkable. Come November, it is up to the American electorate to
disabuse them of their execrable ambitions — in no uncertain terms.
Article by Patricia McCarthy in The American Thinker
The most revealing poll of all: gun sales
For
decades, the Democratic party has wanted to abrogate the Second
Amendment, to ban the sale of guns of any and all calibers, sizes,
shapes and potential uses. They have long sought to limit the amount of
ammo per gun and were just foiled again on that score.
The
left has yet to realize the obvious, that criminals do not obey laws of
any kind, least of all gun laws. So deluded are the gun-banning
Democrats, they do not believe that Americans have the right to defend
themselves against said criminals. These Democrats who want to run our
lives all have armed security themselves, but we peons are, in their
warped view, are to be forever denied the rights they bestow upon
themselves.
Like
the imbecilic Beto O’Rourke before her, Kamala Harris advocates gun
confiscation; she wants the tyrannical government she and Joe are
promoting to go into our homes and seize our legally-obtained weapons of
self-defense.
Like
Hitler, Stalin and Mao, seizing the firearms of the citizenry is the
first step toward despotism. But the left misjudges the spirit of
Americans who have escaped being indoctrinated by the anti-American,
anti-constitutionalism that the left in academia and the media have been
pushing for decades. Most of us take the Constitution and its
accompanying Bill of Rights very seriously. Both have served this
nation well for two-hundred and forty-four years. No self-righteous,
virtue-signaling political lefty elitist is going to convince Americans
who support the Constitution that the government has the right to
confiscate their guns.
Can you blame them? The wanton violence that has plagued Democrat-run cities like Minneapolis, Portland, Chicago (homicides
up 139%), New York (13% increase in shooting incidents, 23% increase
in homicides), Seattle, D.C., Los Angeles, Atlanta, etc. over the past
several months with the blessings of the Democrat governors and mayors
that run them has taught law-abiding blacks that the police are being
driven from these cities, betrayed by the elected leaders charged with
enforcing the law. Violent crime has spiked in all those places. And
to this day, no Democrat has spoken out against Antifa or Black Lives
Matter, or the catastrophic damage they have wrought upon those
communities, apparently in the mistaken belief that a majority of
Americans are sympathetic to the specious causes of the vandals. The
massive increase in gun sales would seem to belie that tenet.
While
it has long been mostly republicans who support gun rights and the NRA,
the enormous expansion of gun ownership most certainly includes former
Democrats who will not likely vote for Biden/Harris, both of whom favor
confiscation like the rest of the left. For that reason and for her
other past prosecutorial policies, not all blacks support Harris. So
it is safe to conclude that the colossal increase in gun sales is
perhaps the most telling poll of all. Guns and ammo are expensive and
these numbers represent legal sales and do not account for the illegal
acquisitions of guns. Bottom line? People no longer feel safe in
their own communities and they are seeing the police they respect and
rely upon be demeaned, defunded and directed to stand down while rioters
and looters destroy their small businesses and downtowns. And through
all this monstrous violence, the democrats insist on calling the
vandals “peaceful protesters.” They are anything but peaceful. They are
well-funded fascist groups who mean to destroy the United States as
founded. The death of George Floyd was the spark that lit the fires, covid19 the gift that has kept on giving to those working hard to sabotage our great nation.
The
alleged lead by Biden in the polls most likely does not account for the
huge number of Americans who may have voted Democrat in the past but
are not going to vote Democrat again if it means being stripped of the
guns they’ve only recently purchased and now feel they need for
self-defense. And all the while, the left has promoted and blessed the
violence. They have actually encouraged it, they’ve emboldened the
rioters by refusing to call what they do by its name: brutal
insurrection.
From
day one of the violence in Seattle and Portland, President Trump
offered federal help but those cities’ mayors and each of the others
whose cities were being ravaged declined his offer. As a result, half
of all black-owned businesses in the affected cities have been destroyed
by the rioting or lost to the lockdown. It is hard to take seriously
the mantra that “black lives matter” when in fact they have become a
mere political tool of the left. Most of the media failed to report on
the cold-blooded murder of a five-year-old boy by his adult
neighbor. Why? The child was white, the murderer black which does not
fit the left’s narrative of the day. Mayors Bill de Blasio of New York
and Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C. are all hat, no cattle, when it
comes to actually caring about the lives being devastated by the
disorder they have willingly allowed. As President Trump said last
week, “this election will determine the future of private gun ownership in the United States.”
Biden
is clearly lost in a fog of confusion due to his mental decline and
will say anything his handlers put on the teleprompter but Kamala Harris
is as far left a candidate who has ever run for high office; she is
Bernie Sanders in a dress. She and her fellow “progressives” mean what
they say; they mean to effect a defenseless society.
Will
a majority of Americans choose to be disarmed like the Germans under
Hitler, the Russians under Stalin and the Chinese under Mao or will they
vote to preserve their constitutional right to bear arms? The
astronomical surge in gun ownership these past months tells us that no,
they will not vote to lose their Second Amendment right. Self-defense
is a human right.
“The
right of self-defense never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and
alike necessary to nations and to individuals.“ --James Monroe
The
left, thoroughly deranged by Trump’s 2016 victory, will gladly see our
once civil society destroyed if its destruction will see Trump
defeated. Their plan is doomed to failure. If gun sales translate
to votes, it will ensure his re-election.
With the Clinesmith criminal information at the forefront, a reminder about the Special Counsel motives. Again, it is important to remember the special counsel had the agenda and responsibility to carry on the resistance operation…. that was their sole function.
As a result, this is just a short article on a singular footnote within the Weissmann/Mueller Report that looks completely different in hindsight.
Kevin Clinesmith was the lead FBI lawyer during the counterintelligence operation called Crossfire Hurricane; origination date July 31st 2016. When Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel (May ’17) he took over the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, adding additional DOJ lawyers to staff but retaining the FBI team which included Peter Strzok and Kevin Clinesmith.
When Kevin Clinesmith manipulated the CIA email to gain the third renewal for the Carter Page FISA (June 29, 2017) he was working on behalf of the Mueller investigation.
Clinesmith was removed from the special counsel team in February 2018 after his biased texts were identified by the inspector general. Clinesmith resigned in/around September 2019 “after the inspector general’s team interviewed him.” (link) Not coincidentally that Sept ’19 exit timeline aligns with the first notification to FISC Judge Collyer. (link)
Obviously, special counsel Robert Mueller would know the issues regarding Clinesmith prior to removing him in February 2018; and well in advance of his report published in March 2019.
“¹FBI personnel assigned to the Special Counsel’s Office were required to adhere to all applicable federal law and all Department and FBI regulations, guidelines, and policies.”
“An FBI attorney worked on FBI-related matters for the Office, such as FBI compliance with all FBI policies and procedures, including the FBI’s Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (DOIG). That FBI attorney worked under FBI legal supervision, not the Special Counsel’s supervision.”
Tell me that isn’t a big flashing CYA footnote from the Special Counsel – going out of their way to proactively state that FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith worked under FBI legal supervision, not the Special Counsel’s supervision?
It seems clear in hindsight that Weissmann and Mueller knew the FBI misconduct that was likely to surface, as it has; so they made sure to position blame on FBI Director Chris Wray and FBI Legal Counsel Dana Boente back in March 2019.
I part company with some of my colleagues in that I don’t find Kamala Harris personally irritating. She’s attractive, youthful (she looks 10 years younger than her actual age, which is 55), and presentable. Her voice is neither a hectoring Midwestern drone (like Hillary Clinton’s) nor does it have the prissy professorial condescension of Elizabeth Warren’s. Her voice is fine, albeit a bit nasal.
It’s Harris’s policies that repel me. While I tend to view “Flight 93” thinking as hyperbolic, she does present a major threat to the constitutional order, to the economy, and to established norms. Moreover, she stands an excellent chance of succeeding Biden to the presidency should their ticket be elected in November. Kamala Harris poses a far greater danger to the Republic than Hillary Clinton. Anyone who calls himself a conservative should recognize this.
Harris’s platform is so far to the left of the mainstream that she makes Mrs. Clinton, a hero to the Left for several decades, look moderate. Clinton, for instance, said that illegal immigrants should be allowed to purchase health insurance on the Obamacare exchanges but without subsidies, which is Joe Biden’s position (according to his platform, though Biden himself often seems confused about this when publicly discussing the issue). Kamala Harris backs a single-payer federal health-care plan and did not equivocate when asked whether illegal immigrants would be covered: “Let me just be very clear about this. I am opposed to any policy that would deny in our country any human being from access to public safety, public education or public health, period.” This would mark an end to the distinction between people who are here legally and illegally and would signal to the world’s poor that it’s time to make their break for the United States. Harris also compared Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to the Ku Klux Klan and said we should decriminalize unauthorized border crossings. (“I would not make it a crime punishable by jail. It should be a civil enforcement issue but not a criminal enforcement issue.”)
So: a parking ticket for coming in illegally? How is that to be seen as anything other than an engraved invitation to would-be migrants? In a Senate hearing, Harris suggested ICE should be more of a welcome wagon than an enforcement agency: “Are you aware,” she said to Ronald Vitiello, acting director of ICE, “that there is a perception that ICE is administering its power in a way that is causing fear and intimidation, particularly among immigrants? And specifically among immigrants coming from Mexico and Central America?” Neither the culture nor the federal fisc is prepared for the massive disruption likely to be unleashed if an American president so encourages illegal migration. Way back in 1994, when the Democratic Party was still concerned with what the center of the country thought and felt, Mrs. Clinton said in a House hearing that her Hillarycare plan would not be available to illegal entrants: “We do not want to do anything to encourage more illegal immigration into this country,” she said, adding that “we know now that too many people come in for medical care, as it is.”
Kamala Harris laughed uproariously at Joe Biden’s suggestion that a president is constrained by the Constitution from ruling by executive fiat. This clip ought to nauseate any constitutionalist: Even Hillary Clinton would not have gone so far as to treat the Constitution as a joke. Harris, moreover, has the most extreme position on abortion imaginable. And when an undercover journalist, David Daleiden, made the abortion lobby look bad by accurately exposing the inner doings of Planned Parenthood executives, she brought the full force of the state down on his head, raiding his home and launching a vendetta that would result in nine felony charges against him. Former Obama speechwriter and leftist pundit Jon Favreau calls it “hilarious” that anyone thinks Harris is a moderate because “she has one of the most liberal records in the U.S. Senate.”
And as a senator, she fully backed the Green New Deal, which is so important to her that she would destroy the filibuster tradition to enact it. This is a breathtakingly extreme piece of legislation that aims to rewire the U.S. economy along social-justice lines. Harris would end fracking and quickly zero out carbon-based fuels, leading to catastrophic energy-price hikes and dizzying costs. One aspect of the proposal, to convert the 83 percent of the U.S. energy supply that is carbon-based to renewables, would cost $2.9 trillion all by itself — nearly a full year’s federal tax revenue. The cost of the whole package is estimated at anywhere from $18 trillion to $93 trillion — enormous sums that would require comparably enormous tax hikes. That a President Harris would ram this disastrous bill through with only 50 Senate votes (plus, presumably, a tie-breaking vote from her own vice president) is more alarming than anything Hillary Clinton ever proposed.
The Democrats’ guiding strategic precept is: Never let a crisis go to waste. In their minds, the personality and behavior of Donald Trump constitute a crisis, and they may find broad agreement on that point from the electorate. But Biden’s selection of Harris indicates that the party is prepared to overstep any mandate it receives yet again, as it did in 2009–2010, the period of unasked-for Democratic hyperactivity that led to the election of a Republican to replace Ted Kennedy in the Senate and the famous “shellacking” in the midterms. Making someone as extreme as Kamala Harris a president-in-waiting is a bone-chilling prospect. No conservative or moderate should fail to recognize the danger.
Prince Charles has led tributes to Second World War veterans on the
75th anniversary of VJ Day, saying they should be "respected, thanked
and cherished".
Although VE Day (Victory in Europe Day) arrived
just over three months earlier, it was not until 15 August 1945 that the
Second World War finally came to an end with the surrender of Japan.
Charles, who laid wreaths with the Duchess of Cornwall at the National
Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire, said those who fought in the Far
East had been labelled "the forgotten army".
About 40 veterans attended the anniversary VJ Day service.
Richard
Day, 93, who was involved in the decisive Battle of Kohima in northeast
India, said the worst part was "crossing rivers at night", then going
through the small hours in wet clothes with wet equipment.
He said the Japanese were "very determined for their emperor" and "didn't appear to have any fear at all".
More than 71,000 British and Commonwealth troops died in the Far East
campaign, including 13,000 who lost their lives in Japanese prisoner of
war camps, where conditions were brutal.
In a speech, the Prince
of Wales said many of the "soldiers, nurses and other personnel felt
anger and disappointment at how they were treated when they finally
returned home from a war which, from the public's point of view, had
ended on the 8th May 1945 (VE Day)".
He added: "Let us affirm, they and serving veterans are not forgotten,
rather you are respected, thanked and cherished with all our hearts and
for all time."
Boris Johnson read the Exhortation before a two-minute silence, which
was followed by a Battle of Britain Memorial Flight flypast, involving
three Spitfires, a Hurricane and a Lancaster bomber.
In a letter
to veterans, the prime minister said: "You fought for freedom, brought
the Second World War to its end, and restored peace and prosperity to
the world. On this anniversary, and every day hereafter, you will be
remembered."
In a statement, the Queen mentioned the "joy at the
end of the conflict", but also remembered the "terrible devastation that
it brought"
The Prince of Wales helps 97-year-old veteran Darbara Singh Bhullar lay a wreath
It is nauseating to read the schedule for the Democratic Convention.
It
gives names to the pile of scavenged shards left from the explosion of
the Democrats' political bomb. The fire of the bomb's long fuse has
finally run its course. But why is there a Democratic Convention at
all, or, for that matter, a Democratic Party? Many people believe that
the parties, and hence their conventions, are required by the
Constitution. But this is not true.
Indeed,
the truth is near to the opposite. The Founders did not forget to
include a requirement for political parties — what they called
"factions" at the time — but carefully eschewed them. Washington,
especially, was fearful of factions. Nevertheless, there were nascent
parties even before the ninth state, New Hampshire, had approved the
Constitution and brought the new government to life.
The
Founders may not have wanted parties, but they were overpowered by
political nature. During the raging debates over adoption, there were
two factions, or parties, called the Federalists and the
Anti-Federalists. The Federalists felt that each state, shorn of the
protection of Great Britain and left in isolation all on its own, was
too weak to defend itself. They advocated for the strength of a union
of states as offered by the proposed Constitution. The Anti-Federalists
feared too great an amassing of power, with the concomitant tendency to
dictatorship, and urged the states to reject the
Constitution. Notably, Patrick Henry, of the immortal phrase "Give me
Liberty or give me death," was an Anti-Federalist and did not vote for
adoption.
The
names of the parties underwent sequential changes. Today, the
Democrats are the descendants of the Federalists, and the Republicans
are the descendants of the Anti-Federalists.
So
now we are back at the point of beginning. For better or for worse,
there is a Democratic Party, they will start their convention on 17
August, and the first day will be devoted entirely to mini-conventions
of their plethora of disjointed groups. I have put in a capsule below a
few of these more shocking, otherworldly groups.
In
our history, some parties have self-destructed, and the time may be
nigh for another one to do the same. The Democrat Party is exhibiting
the signs of being in its death throes!
Democratic National Convention Schedule
All times listed in Eastern Time (ET). Check out more events from our partner organizations.
August 17
Daytime Events (9 AM - 7 PM ET)
The Black Caucus,
which is one of the DNC's official constituency caucuses, will meet on
August 17 at 2:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public.
Join us by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The Hispanic Caucus,
which is one of the DNC's official constituency caucuses, will meet on
August 17 at 12:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public.
Join us by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The Women's Caucus,
which is one of the DNC's official constituency caucuses, will meet on
August 17 at 6:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public.
Join us by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The Labor Council, which
is one of the DNC's official constituency councils, will meet on August
17 at 1:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public. Join us
by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The AAPI Caucus,
which is one of the DNC's official constituency caucuses, will meet on
August 17 at 1:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public.
Join us by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The Interfaith Council, which
is one of the DNC's official constituency councils, will meet on August
17 at 2:30 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public. Join us
by RSVP'ing at the link below!
The Ethnic Council,
which is one of the DNC's official constituency councils, will meet on
August 17 at 3:00 PM ET and will be open to delegates and the public.
Join us by RSVP'ing at the link below!
It’s not an indictment, it’s a Criminal Information with no grand jury, which suggests counsel for defendant approached DOJ to structure an agreement. The plea agreement likely also included an agreement for method of public release. [LINK HERE] Last year John Spiropoulos explained the Clinesmith information for OAN TV. WATCH:
WILMINGTON, DE—In a campaign speech today, presidential candidate Joe Biden, with running mate Kamala Harris at this side, debuted his hopeful new slogan. “I want to be absolutely clear,” Biden announced. “I’ll be dead in the cold, cold ground before a black woman becomes president!”
"I mean it: A black woman will become president over my dead body!"
Some thought maybe the statement was just another racist gaffe from Biden, but Dems applauded the statement, much to Biden's confusion.
The new slogan, which outlines how the U.S. would achieve the milestone of having a black woman as president if Biden was elected, received huge cheers, especially from Kamala Harris herself. “That’s right!” Biden continued shouting. “I’ll be in a coffin before we see someone like her become president!” He then pointed to Harris, who gave him a thumbs-up, eliciting more cheers.
“Not while I’m alive! Not while I’m alive!” Biden finished his speech before going into a coughing fit, which earned him a standing ovation. "Over my dead body! Over my dead body..."
Kamala wants to be President of the United States, for crying out loud. If getting called “nasty” or “phony” can completely undo her, maybe she should find a less combative, rough-and-tumble profession.
One of the things that has always irritated me about Kamala Harris is her insistence on bragging about what a strong woman she is while simultaneously wilting like a fragile flower at the slightest criticism.
Truth is this is standard operating procedure for all Leftist Feminists.
[A]fter Kirsten Gillibrand slammed Donald Trump for decades-old accusations of sexual misconduct, President Trump hit back on Twitter.
And like every Democrat woman who talks tough, Kirsten scampered away and hid behind the skirts of her fellow Pussy-Hat-wearing fragile flowers.
The collective meltdown coming from the I-am-Woman-Hear-Me-Roar crowd was a sight to behold.
Sure, they strut around like the Cowardly Lion – snarling and snapping – until Trump smacks one of them on the nose, then they’re all breathless sobs and howls of pain.
But next to Hillary, Kirsten Gillibrand and Liz Warren, Kamala’s “I’m a Strong Woman how dare you call me names” routine is the most tiresome.
If Kamala was actually the strong woman she claims to be, maybe it’s time she proves it.
And, more to the point, perhaps the media that can’t shut the hell up about what a strong woman Kamala is while shielding and protecting her like a hot-house orchid and let Kamala demonstrate this alleged strength all on her own.
They won’t. Because she isn’t.
It’s hard to show American voters just what a strong woman you are when you constantly hide behind a sycophantic press – not to mention your pals in Hollywood.
Of course the Democrats, the media and Leftist celebrities are running the exact same playbook for Kamala that they did for Hillary in 2016.
They’re not exactly inventive or original.
Remember at the last debate between Trump and Hillary when, after an especially ugly attack from Hillary, Trump quietly said, “Such a nasty woman?”
Instantly the Democrats and their dutiful handmaids deployed a silly “Protect Hillary from mean names by declaring ourselves nasty too!” campaign (Remember the T-shirts?).
It drew attention to a very significant distinction between Hillary’s relationship with her supporters and Trump’s relationship with his.
When Hillary called Trump voters “Deplorable,” Donald Trump rallied to our side and had our backs. HE defended US.
But when Trump called Hillary “nasty,” Hillary’s supporters rallied to her side and had her back. THEY defended HER.
Don’t underestimate how significant that was because it’s happening all over again.
As I wrote at the time:
In a speech this summer Donald Trump pointed out that Hillary Clinton wants her supporters to declare “I’m with Her.” But he doesn’t want us to be with him. Instead, Donald Trump said that he is with us, the American people.
That’s not just semantics. It is a significant distinction between the two candidates.
Hillary’s entire campaign has been predicated on the notion that we must make history and elect the first woman President. We must rally behind Hillary. Hillary is what matters.
Not the United States of America or the American people.
Hillary.
“I’m with Her” by its design makes this election about Hillary Clinton not the country.
In contrast, Donald Trump has made this election about us. Putting America first. Getting Americans back to work. Keeping Americans safe.
Notice the hashtag Alyssa Milano included in her tweet. #WeHaveHerBack.
If Kamala Harris is this powerful, strong woman, why the hell do voters have to pledge to have her back? Shouldn’t this strong woman be vowing to have our backs?
Is Kamala so fragile and dainty that American voters need to pledge to protect her from mean words?
Kamala Harris wants to be Vice President of the United States, for crying out loud. If getting called “nasty” or “phony” can completely undo her, maybe she should find a less combative, rough-and-tumble profession.
Perhaps party planner or landscape design would be more suited to her delicate disposition.
As usual, Jesse Kelly put it best:
You can’t on the one hand claim that there is nothing a man can do that a woman politician can’t while on the other hand demanding that women politicians not be subjected to the same kind of verbal attacks every man in politics must endure.
Are you equal or not?
Are you just as strong or not?
“Strong women” who constantly cry over the slightest criticism or insult also tend to be the ones who constantly scream, “I will not be silent!” — as if someone is actually trying to silence them.
Kamala isn’t a Strong Woman. She’s a political opportunist that exploits her sex and her skin color – both to advance her career and claim Victim status. Then again, for the Democrat Party, playing the Victim is the quickest way to advance your career.
Do you want to endure four years of this garbage?
I don’t even want to endure it for the next two and a half months.
For crying out loud, she’s only been Biden’s running mate for two days, and already this garbage has worn out its welcome.
I leave you with this great clip from Jesse Kelly’s show:
