Article by Alex Markovsky in RedState

Revolution of Morons

The election of Barack Obama was a seminal event in American history. History was not made by the color of the President’s skin; it was made by the color of his ideas. An ardent Marxist, Obama converted the Democratic Party into a socialist cartel and put the country on its way to a non-violent transition to socialism.

With the advent of Donald J. Trump the process was interrupted and economic prosperity put socialism in real jeopardy. After all attempts to render Trump ineffective had failed, the Party leaders drew the conclusion consistent with Marxist ideology: that the events had reached a point where peaceful methods of getting the country back on the socialist trail were inadequate.

In the nightmarish scenario of Trump reelection, acting like a gambler who doubles his bet after each loss in hope to recoup losses, the Democrats attempted to wreck the country, turn it into chaos in order to create what Lenin called, “revolutionary environment.”

The Party of slavery, the Confederacy, the Black Codes, Jim Crow, and racial segregation, in a virtuoso ploy declared war on “systemic racism.”

The fuse that set off the riots was the death of a habitual criminal George Floyd in police custody. The Democrats took advantage of the fact that Floyd happened to be a black used Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA to organize and send thousands of disturbed souls akin to Mao’s Red Guards of the Cultural Revolution in a widespread insurrection.

The near objective of the current campaign is to weaken law enforcement, forcing it to choose between security and political posturing. As the law enforcement getting overwhelmed, the radical turmoil gains momentum and expands to more cities merging various resentments — social, economic, racial, and gender — gaining strength to destroy existing patterns of authority and subsequently undermine the President before the elections.

The campaign started with a bang. “Systematic racism,” offered the rioters justification for abandoning every single ethical value. The Democratic governors and mayors got on board with the campaign, abdicated their responsibilities and defected to the mobs. They facilitated the chaos by releasing thousands of criminals from jails, ostensibly for protecting them from the coronavirus, to join the ranks of looters and ordered the local police to stand down.

Not bounded by reasoning or moral restrains, rejecting all existing concepts of order, the mobs have turned our cities into Beirut and Aleppo alike. Just like ISIS and the Taliban, mobs are trying to rewrite history by destroying the historic monuments and cultural icons that embody the so-called “systematic racism,” which they reserved to themselves the monopoly to identify.
“The land of the free” took a grotesque meaning.

The Democrats’ plot was obviously not thought out and appeared rather a pre-election nervous breakdown than a grand strategy to defeat Trump. Neither terms “systematic racism” nor “black lives matter” has been given an operational meaning and remained simply cries for anarchy. Furthermore, the battlefield runs through the Democrats’ controlled states and cities and to what extent the Democrats are prepared to destroy their cities and to what end is unclear.

If the riots were supposed to provoke Trump to use force to restore order, so the Democrats could shed crocodile tears for the victims calling the President a tyrant with the blood of peaceful protesters on his hands, they egregiously miscalculated. Trump did not take the bait and let the drama play itself out on the national TV. Trump was invoking American moral values, which are based on fundamental principles of righteousness and justice – “we the people” would never embrace banditism.

Some Democrats are beginning to realize that they are pursuing two incompatible objectives: winning democratic elections and sponsoring upheaval. The Mayor of Portland, who supported the upheaval and even participated in a demonstration, recently called the demonstrators “rioters” and begged them to stop because it helps Trump.

This situation is as if it was specifically tailored for Trump’s talent in waging psychological warfare. The Democrats were better at starting the crisis than at knowing how to finish it. Order cannot be imposed by appeasement – it can only be imposed by force. Indeed, the Democrats lack moral stamina to use force against “peaceful demonstrators” and demoralized police are not in a position to use adequate force anyway. Acceptance of Trump’s help would be seen as an admission of their impotence. The rejection of help validates Trump’s contention that the Democrats are inherently incapable or unwilling of safeguarding this country. It is a gift to Donald Trump reelection “Law and Order” campaign that keeps on giving.

The roots of this movement are shallow and can easily be pulled up. The Democrats lack determination and genuine leadership necessary for a revolution. As the French political thinker, Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out, “History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.” The Bolshevik revolution’s heirs are miserable copies of Trotsky, Lenin, and Bukharin. They share their precursors’ ambitions but not their nerve, genius, or, for that matter, raw power.

Ironically, the profound consequence of the riots is not the destruction of properties, businesses and human lives, but the extent to which the Democrats are prepared to go to impose the harness of socialism around the necks of the American people.

 

https://www.redstate.com/diary/alex2010/2020/08/21/902768/

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

 Article by Robert Spencer in The American Left

Reclaiming Our Culture from the Left

Everyone knows it: the death of George Floyd was just a pretext. The rioters who continue every night to wreak havoc in Portland, and who are poised to engage in new orgies of destruction all over the country don’t know much and care less about Floyd. They’re quite open about engaging in a “revolution” with the goal of destroying the existing order and replacing it with an authoritarian Marxist regime. But what we are seeing today is not new. Its seeds were planted decades ago. Now the question before us, if we want to preserve the United States as a free society, is what we must do to counter this violent, hate-filled movement.

There will be no easy fix. The Left’s long march through the institutions began in the 1960s and has ended in total victory; only a reverse march through the same institutions will ultimately overcome the catastrophic effects of the Left’s advance. The leftist stranglehold on the educational system is a big part of the problem: the Antifa and BLM barbarians of today learned their hatred at our colleges and universities. Our children have been taught to hate the land of their birth. Who didn’t think this would bear bitter fruit? There was some indignation among conservatives over the 1619 Project, which portrays the entire American enterprise as racist, oppressive, and hateful, winning the Pulitzer Prize, but that was just the culmination of decades of miseducation and propaganda disguised as education. I wrote Rating America’s Presidents: An America-First Look at Who Is Best, Who Is Overrated, and Who Was An Absolute Disaster as an antidote, to remind Americans, or show them for the first time, the heroes who made America great -- and the failures and sellouts who got us into this fix.

But the education most of the rioters have received has made them abjectly incapable of thinking rationally and evaluating claims on the basis of their logical coherence and supporting evidence. No amount of careful reasoning, no amount of evidence is going to convince most of the rioters that their rage is based on false premises, because they have been carefully educated throughout their lives to feel rather than think, and to believe that America is a nation of deep injustice with a shameful history and an equally condemnable present. It doesn’t matter that the claims that the rioters and their defenders are making are false. It doesn’t matter that police brutality affects people of all races. It doesn’t matter that thoroughgoing civil rights legislation has made “systemic racism” a thing of the distant past.

The rioters know America is evil because they have been taught it all their lives by virtually every authority they have encountered, and those authorities have also taught them that those who tell them otherwise are stupid, contemptible, and operating out of ulterior motives. This is true of the establishment media as well as the educational system -- not to mention the corporate culture, the entertainment industry, and more. As long ago as 1962, Richard Nixon famously complained about biased press coverage during his campaign for Governor of California in 1962 when he said, “You won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore.”

The propaganda machine that did him in was in its infancy then. Now it is infinitely more powerful, and most people still take its power for granted. No one bats an eye when Democratic Party operatives such as George Stephanopoulos and Donna Brazile, and a host of others, go into the “news” business. It is taken for granted that every reporter for every major publication, every last one, is a hard-Left ideologue.

This has consequences far beyond simply giving only one side of the story and doing everything possible to make President Trump look as bad as possible. Government and law enforcement officials at all levels today have no problem appearing at functions of groups such as the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which the media consistently portrays as a “civil rights” organization when its agenda is in fact deeply subversive.

But they would never be caught dead at a conference of a group opposed to jihad violence and Sharia oppression of women, and if they did have the temerity to show up at such a gathering, they would have to answer to a hysterical media lynch mob enraged at their appearing at a meeting of a “hate group.”

All that is just a small part of a very large problem. If all this isn’t rolled back, the calls for revolution will get louder and shriller, and eventually prevail.

Can it possibly be done? Not all at once. But one step that could be taken now is the stripping of all federal funding from all universities and colleges that suppress all points of view that dissent from the leftist line. Another is a thoroughgoing reform of primary and secondary school material, such that it once again tells the truth about our nation, which will naturally make students proud to be American.

PBS and NPR, as just two more leftist propaganda mills, should also lose all federal funding. Let them survive on their merits if they can. And as for the rest of them, the legal protections that all the social media giants to maintain a monopoly on the means of communication must also be taken away. The self-appointed guardians of acceptable speech must be swept aside. Let the people determine for themselves who is telling the truth and who isn’t.

And as for the entertainment industry. Turn it off. Or watch movies from the 1940s and 1950s (which are better than the new ones anyway). If John Cusack and Robert de Niro want to lecture their audiences with hate-filled socialist agitprop, turn them off. If enough people did this, they’d feel it – and maybe a clever entrepreneur will arise in Hollywood who will realize that there is a great deal of money to be made from people who don’t want Leftism and anti-Americanism shoved at them in every movie.

Recover a sense of our history, our values, our culture, and teach them to your children. Our young people will not defend what they do not value. Learn in Rating America’s Presidents why America is even worth defending.

These are just a few general notes. There is much, much more that must be done. Yet none of this is even on the table now. If the nation is to survive, however, these things must be done. This fight isn’t over. And if the riots have shown us anything, it is that free Americans face a ruthless and determined foe. We must be no less resolute in the defense of truth, justice, and freedom.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/08/reclaiming_our_culture_from_the_left.html#ixzz6VlWPgT8s

 

 

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

 

 Article by Dex Bahr in The American Thinker

Democrats Have Proven They are Unworthy of Power

If a person or entity has proven to  be abusive or irresponsible with power, then it is the duty of the people, while freedom still prevails, to resist and to ensure that such a person or entity is never entrusted with such power ever again or, at least until they have regained the confidence of the people.  Such is the case with today’s Democrat party.

Americans have given their lives and blood to liberate people from fascism and Marxism/communism. But now it is unassailable that those oppressive political philosophies now have their home in the Democrat Party.  In six months, with the pandemic and nationwide riots, Democrat leaders have revealed that their natural penchant is not for freedom, but tyranny.

The past six months have shown that we are long past the days of mere policy differences between the two political parties.  Now our battle is against Democrats, a party that has been usurped by the radical left, is literally for the preservation of America as founded.  This election is about whether America will remain a light of liberty or descend into the darkness of Soviet-style communism with elements of Nazism. This is not hyperbole.

The nation’s crucible has been steadily escalating. Neighbors are snitching against neighbors.  Those who complain about the masks, lockdowns, etc. have been denigrated as the “Other”, worthy only of scorn, assault and ridicule. And recently we have had the spectacle of shoppers falsely imprisoned and later arrested by police for the crime of not wearing a mask in conservative Orange County, California. The police were just following orders when detaining the shoppers.  Where have we heard that before?  On a national and global level, the censorship of all information countering the Wuhan virus narrative (as with the demonization of hydroxychloroquine) is aided by journalists who long ago removed their guises as objective fact finders. Journalists have instead become willing know-nothings in their efforts to help the Democrats.

In the past 20 years, elected Democrats have paid lip service to loving America, but their actions have shown that they endear nothing about the patriotic tradition and foundational laws of this country.  From their rhetoric and policies, the America they envision is one where police are weakened, racial wounds fester, immigration laws ignored and global emergencies trump fundamental Constitutional rights.

Tell some Americans these facts about Democrats and they may find it hard to comprehend that an American political party has policies that undermine its own country.  Many people would also be shocked that many elected Democrats view the Constitution as an impediment to their plans of ultimate power.  Uncomfortable truths, perhaps, but these are proofs.

 Remember the Democrat reaction to the electoral college after Donald Trump’s stunning victory over the “inevitable” Hillary Clinton?   The party of slavery howled in outrage over Hillary winning the popular vote but losing the electoral college. Recently, Democrats have championed the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, which would force state electors to vote in accordance with the national popular vote and rejecting their own state vote totals. This is just another example of the Democrats forcing legislation down people’s throats as opposed to changing the hearts and minds of voters to their way of thinking. A major foundation of our representative republic, the electoral college was an ingenious creation of the Founders to ensure that smaller populated states have just as much say as their larger counterparts when choosing the president. Of course, Democrats want to scrap this system of real equality because they are nothing but sore losers and because it is too difficult to rig the electoral college in their favor. 

Democrats claim to be the party of equality but only as far as it disrupts America. Yet when it comes to the Constitutional rights of free speech and bearing arms, the two greatest equalizers to powerful elites, the party of segregation is a staunch enemy.  

Only bullies want to shut people up from criticizing them and ensure they have no way to fight back.  This sums up the Democratic Party. Instead of protecting the little guy, they want to lord over the average American who only wants to be prosperous, safe and left alone to pursue happiness. 

But the left hates you exercising rugged individualism because it threatens their tyrannical form of governance. Instead of respecting your rights as an individual, the party of Jim Crow laws wants to force you to conform to the “collective” in your thoughts and speech. To achieve this result, all the impediments to conformity must be eliminated, such as the traditional family, the Christian church and patriotism.

If this sounds like Marxism, it is because today’s Democrat Party has gone full Marxist. They champion policies like the Green New Deal that would destroy prosperity and transfer wealth; they embrace socialism that grows government into an all-encompassing behemoth, such as Obamacare; and are carving out a two-tiered system of justice that favors leftists and punishes their political enemies. Going full Marxist commands Democrats/leftists to disrupt the smooth transition of power whenever they lose a presidential election as unquestionably demonstrated in 2016. This is especially troubling because the peaceful transfer of power has made America unique in the annals of history and the left appears determined to upend that tradition. But when you are your own higher power, who cares about custom?

Godlessness is a major tenet of Marxism and this too has been embraced by the party of abortion.  Remember that this is the party that booed God during the 2012 Democrat Convention when the question was posed of placing God on their platform.  Their rejection of the Creator was punctuated with a rainbow-colored exclamation point recently when they deemed churches as non-essential during the Wuhan virus lockdown. The left hates the Judeo-Christian ethic that, historically, formed the moral foundation of the United States and they really loathe Bible-believing Christian churches.  In their ongoing efforts to never let a serious crisis go to waste, the left seized an opportunity to keep Americans fearful and addled by preventing them from gathering in church. The big lie declared by the party of Margaret Sanger and backed up by the media, was that such blatant rejection of the freedom of religion clause of the First Amendment was needed to keep people safe. The reality of the proscription was for one reason and one reason alone: to sow seeds of chaos and to destabilize the citizenry.

 This lack of deference to God also allows elected Democrats to blatantly ignore their oaths of office. Oaths appear to mean nothing to Democrats (and to certain left leaning Republicans). If affirmations were important to the left, there would be tremendous guilt and consternation by these particular elected officials in both houses of Congress for violating their basic oath of office which they do so with impunity on a daily basis.  In case you are unfamiliar, here is the oath for the House of Representatives which is recited by every member upon taking office:

“I, …, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Now here is the oath for the United States Senate:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Identical oaths, yes, but both pledges indicate that the office holder in either house of congress swears before God that they will defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic.  Yet the facts are abundantly clear, that where elected Democrats are concerned, oaths are an empty gesture to be mindlessly recited before undermining the very country, states and cities they are representing.  Just ask the folks who live in the cities of Portland, Seattle, New York, Minneapolis, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco about the failures of their mayors and governors to protect the rights, lives and property of the law-abiding citizens they were elected to serve. Yes, serve! Not rule over, frighten or intimidate, but serve!

The mayors and governors who became infamous during the virus lockdown and riots did not go rogue with their arbitrary dictates. All of their efforts have the distinct appearance of coordination, all for the sake of keeping the spirit of the nation anxious and to damage the economy heading into the November presidential election. The Democrats have been pulling out all the stops to demoralize this nation in their effort to recapture the presidency, and they have proven that their constituents are nothing but pawns in this effort.

 This is the party that demands to lead the country after November. Democrats want you to cast a vote for a party that has proven that it will not defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and have no qualms about disregarding their oaths under God. Can a party that has these beliefs be trusted to lead a country whose motto is “In God We Trust”?  I would argue that if the Democrats win in November then it will be the American people who will lose. You will lose all of your freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution under Democrat power. This will not happen all at once, but the erosion will begin under a Democrat administration and, the America that you love and cherished will be lost for decades to come, if not for good.

If a person or entity has proven to be abusive or irresponsible with power then it is the duty of the people, while freedom still prevails, to resist and to ensure that such a person or entity is never entrusted with such power ever again or at least until they have regained the confidence of the people. Remember this as we head into the most important presidential election since the founding of our country.

 

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/08/democrats_have_proven_they_are_unworthy_of_power.html#ixzz6VlHsWj2h

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

The Democratic Party is Unwell

The only cure for what ails the Democrats is for voters to turn them out of office so they get the nice long rehab they need.

  

Julie Kelly for American Greatness

A healthy political party—just like a healthy individual—has certain traits and habits that nourish overall wellness. A diversity of interests, a sense of humor, a curious mind, a measured temperament, and an occasional endorphin-release from physical activity are just a few things that contribute to the fitness of a human being. The same kind of characteristics should be found on a collective scale in a thriving, muscular, and stable political party.

None of those qualities, however, can be detected in the present-day Democratic Party. 

For all the squawking about Donald Trump’s alleged unfitness for office and insistence that the Republican Party is populated with zombie-like Trump cultists, in reality it is the Democratic Party that needs an extended stay at a detox facility to cleanse its sickly mind and body.

The party’s ailments have been on full display this week. Look no further than the freakish music video that closed out the first night of the Democratic National Convention. Billy Porter, a gay black Broadway star, and geriatric Steven Stills of Crosby, Stills, and Nash teamed up to remake Stills’ 1966 classic, “For What It’s Worth.”

The video was a performative display of the party’s schizophrenia: A white ’60s counterculture icon and a Dracula-costumed POC LGBTQ activist offering an inharmonious version of a Vietnam-era tune as the official anthem for the candidacy of a feeble establishment codger and his unaccomplished cackling sidekick quickly shredding their faux moderate façade in fealty to the party’s lunatic fringe of America-hating nihilists.

Days of (More) Rage

Somebody call a doctor.

The Democratic Party is not well. Joe Biden is neither mentally nor physically healthy enough to run the country, yet the party remains in denial. Biden’s conduct should raise all sorts of red flags but party stalwarts are hellbent on dragging him across the finish line in November in an almost cruel act of selfishness.

While Democrats willfully ignore Biden’s fragility, the party is fixated on every move, utterance, and tweet from Donald Trump in a way that any mental health professional would diagnose as obsessive.

Their rage often is expressed in alarming public outbursts. From tearing up a State of the Union address to threatening to “impeach the motherfucker” and calling for “unrest in the streets” against Trump supporters, the Democratic Party is controlled by emotionally unstable people who behave more like mad stalkers than rational adults.

They have one hallucination after another. For three years, Democrats rocked back and forth wrapped in a collusion straightjacket mumbling about the Russians(!) and lighting candles for Special Counsel Robert Mueller. One Democratic leader made up phone conversations between Trump and the Ukrainian president; one presidential candidate pretends to be Native American.

Now, metal mailboxes disappear before their very eyes.

Even the party’s aristocracy is ailing. Why exactly are the Obamas so angry? Barack Obama continues to escape any culpability for the rampant corruption that occurred on his watch, not the least of which was using the sweeping powers of the federal government to target his political foes both before and after the 2016 election. Michelle Obama recorded her dark convention message from their 30-acre, $12 million estate in Martha’s Vineyard. The pair signed a joint book deal for $65 million and a $50 million gig with Netflix.

I suppose Trump’s dismantling of Obama’s legacy might sting a bit, but it hardly justifies the doomsday scenarios both Obamas presented to the American people this week. 

Yes, Mrs. Obama, many people believe this election will have serious consequences for America’s future but it has nothing to do with climate change or Trump’s tweets and everything to do with the threat posed by a lawless Democratic Party intent on tearing out the underpinnings of the country.

Normal People Don’t Act This Way

But it’s not just the big party names who need sedation. The rank-and-file are just as disturbed. 

On a lovely summer Sunday last weekend, a large group of “protestors” gathered outside the North Carolina home of the U.S. postmaster to harass Louis DeJoy for his purported scheme to make the postal service unmanageable before the election. (Yes, that’s a joke.) Some agitators held signs that read “Protect Our Boys in Blue!” referring not to police officers but to mailmen.

That’s not how normal people spend a Sunday afternoon. Hounding public officials and their families, however, has become political chic in the Trump era. On a Sunday in July, crackpot Democrats congregated in the Virginia neighborhood where Chad Wolf, acting director of the Department of Homeland Security, lives with his family. The agitators were furious over Wolf’s comment to enforce federal law in unruly cities such as Portland.

The rank-and-file Democrats are as much to blame for the toxic political climate as the news media or party leadership. They are the people banging on the doors of the Supreme Court, forcing their kids to attend Black Lives Matters marches, and posting Adam Schiff’s latest absurd conspiracy theory on their Facebook pages. Trump-hating Democrats are like junkies; they need a daily fix from the Washington Post and Rachel Maddow just to get through the day.

Teachers’ unions are a perfect example. Most schools were preparing plans to reopen this fall—until the Bad Orange Man weighed in. “Trump’s aggressive, often bellicose demands for reopening classrooms helped to harden the views of many educators that it would be unsafe—and give their powerful unions fodder to demand stronger safety measures or to resist efforts to physically reopen,” the New York Times reported August 13. “As the president has pushed for schools to reopen, key constituencies—parents and educators—have largely moved in the other direction.”

Now, think about that. The president correctly concluded that tens of millions of children must return to in-person classrooms after five months of isolation and irreversible educational setbacks but grown adults are so consumed with partisan rage that they instead choose to sacrifice the well-being of our kids to score political points against him.

Not healthy, not compassionate, and not sane.

“These People Are Insane”

Healthy people thrive on good habits and routine; unhealthy people sow chaos for themselves and for others. The Democratic Party is the home of monument-destroyers, Magnificent Mile looters, urban center occupiers, cop abusers, and thugs of all ages.

Democratic leaders are enablers of this mob-like behavior; in fact, they want more. Lawmakers pledge to defund local police, dismantle border patrols, and empty the prisons. If those promises are kept, the country as we know it will be gone for good. Democrat-run big cities are already disintegrating in rapid fashion due to failed leadership and policies; expect to see it in a small city or suburb near you if they get control in November.

The whole of the Democratic Party should be in a rubber room not anywhere near the levers of power. The only cure for what ails the Democratic Party is for voters to turn them out of office so they get the nice long rehab they need. As Trump said Thursday about the opposition party, “There was a certain sense of sanity 4 years ago. These people are insane.”

He is correct.

 Article by Rick Moran in PJMedia

Not Much Enthusiasm for Biden and Democrats as Convention TV Ratings Tank

Much has been made of the “enthusiasm gap” between Trump and Biden supporters. The short story is that fewer than half of Biden supporters are “very enthusiastic” about supporting him compared to 65 percent of Trump supporters, who identify as “very enthusiastic.”

This makes a difference on Election Day — usually. But with mail-in voting, you don’t have to motivate yourself to go out in the cold and stand in line at the polling place to cast your ballot. The most strenuous activity you’ll see in mail-in voting will be licking the stamp to post the ballot.

Nevertheless, there are other ways to measure “enthusiasm.” One of them is interest in party conventions. Alas, for Democrats, it’s something of a bust.

On Monday night, the NBA playoffs (without fans in the stands) trounced convention coverage on all three over-the-air networks combined. On Tuesday, America’s Got Talent swamped the network’s coverage of the Democrats.

But far more significantly, viewership compared to 2016 was way off.

New York Post:

The broadcast networks — CBS, NBC and ABC — took the biggest hit, with a 42-percent decline in viewers from 2016.

The three cable news networks fared better, but still saw a 16-percent drop in viewership from 2016, the report said.

The first night of the virtual 2020 Democratic National Convention was largely a snoozefest and that was reflected in its dismal TV ratings, which tanked compared to the opening festivities of 2016.Among the six, MSNBC drew the most eyes during the 10 p.m. hour, with 5.1 million viewers.

Tuesday’s numbers were almost as bad despite an appearance by Democratic Party superstars Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton.

The Hill:

Overall when including cable news numbers released by Nielsen late Thursday afternoon, the second night of the Democratic convention attracted 18.2 million viewers, down two percent from Monday night’s 18.6 million. When compared to 2016 Democratic convention numbers, Tuesday’s viewership was down 24 percent overall.

MSNBC led the way on the cable news front with 4.6 million viewers from 8:00 pm to 11:00 pm ET. CNN was second in total viewers with 3.6 million, followed by Fox News with 3.5 million.

Democrats are claiming a total audience of 28 million — if you include all those online viewers. I doubt whether too many people were glued to their iPhones watching a bunch of nobodies trash Trump.

Indeed, the 18-28 demographic tuned the convention out entirely. The rating for viewership in that age range for NBC and ABC was a paltry 0.3. It was only 0.2 for CBS.

My theory on voters tuning in to this “America’s Got No Talent” TV show is that it’s just bad reality TV. Americans are a discerning folk and the Democratic convention as “must-watch” TV is like a cross between a bad episode of the Bachelor and a good episode of Marriage Boot Camp. There’s far more action and much less talk on both of those shows.

 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/08/20/not-much-enthusiasm-for-biden-and-democrats-as-convention-tv-ratings-tank-n815104 

Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage

What is 'snapback'? America’s Iran sanctions move explained

The United States will initiate a controversial procedure called "snapback" at the United Nations Security Council on Thursday in a bid to unilaterally reimpose sanctions on Iran.

by AFP via MSN

AFP answers key questions surrounding the unprecedented legal measure, which America's European allies oppose and which threatens the Iranian nuclear deal.

- What's the background to this? -

In 2015, after long negotiations, the permanent members of the Security Council (the US, China, Russia, France and Britain) plus Germany signed a historic nuclear accord with Iran.

The agreement saw the UN lift international sanctions against Iran in exchange for Tehran agreeing not to develop nuclear weapons.

The deal, signed in Vienna and known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was later unanimously ratified by the Security Council under resolution 2231.

Under that resolution, a conventional arms embargo on Iran is due to expire on October 18. Last week, the US failed to extend that embargo indefinitely, leading it to pursue the "snapback" route.

- What's the 'snapback' clause? -

Then-president Barack Obama's administration boasted of having obtained a clause in the agreement that would allow it to reimpose, or "snapback," all sanctions if Iran failed to comply with the agreement.

The clause permitted a "snapback" without members being allowed to veto. American officials worried at the time that China or Russia may veto any attempt to reimpose sanctions.

According to resolution 2231, any state "participating" in the agreement can lodge a complaint with the Security Council if they deem another participant has significantly failed to respect the accord.

That notification starts a 30-day window where the Council must pass a new resolution that would officially lift the sanctions agreed to in resolution 2231.

If the country -- in this case the US -- that issues the initial complaint wishes instead to reinstate the sanctions, then it can veto the new resolution, thus automatically triggering the "snapback."

- Is the US still a 'participant'? -

The US and its European partners disagree over who is legally a participant.

In May 2018, President Donald Trump pulled America out of the JCPOA, denouncing it as insufficient to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.

Britain, France and Germany insist that the US gave up its right as a participant when it withdrew and therefore cannot legally enforce the "snapback."

The US argues that it can trigger a return to sanctions because it participated in the signing of the resolution, which is still technically in force.

- What happens next? -

Now that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has formally informed the UN that America intends to restart international sanctions against Iran, the Security Council enters uncharted territory.

The mechanism has never been used before, so it's difficult to predict what will happen.

It's safe to say, however, that the US has never before been so isolated on the Security Council over Iran before. Last week, only the Dominican Republic backed America's call to extend the conventional arms embargo.

This month's sitting president of the Council, Indonesia, is expected to consult with members about whether they think the US has the right to activate "snapback," according to UN expert Richard Gowan.

The answer will be a clear "no," at which point, Gowan predicts, the president may decide to dismiss the complaint.

That could see the US adopt an even more brazen move -- tabling a draft resolution of its own to lift sanctions that it would then veto to confirm the "snapback." 

"We will then enter a very strange period in which there will be two alternate universes," said Gowan, of the International Crisis Group think-tank.

"There will be a US universe in which sanctions have been fully restored on Iran. And then there will be the universe that most other council members, and I think actually most members of the UN in general, will exist in, in which nothing of the sort has happened," he told a briefing.

Hillary Clinton Hired Ghislaine Maxwell’s Nephew For State Department Position

Jeff Charles reporting for RedState

Earlier this week, the Ghislaine Maxwell story took an interesting turn when a photograph surfaced showing former President Bill Clinton receiving a shoulder massage from Chauntae Davies, one of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims. But now, a new revelation has emerged in this affair, and this time, it involves his wife. 

Ok! Magazine published a report on Thursday stating that Hillary Clinton gave Maxwell’s nephew, Alexander Djerassi, an important job in the State Department when she served as Secretary of State. The author wrote:

“Alexander Djerassi, the son of Ghislaine’s sister Isabel Maxwell, was gifted a very powerful and prestigious position within her State Department and the US Government.

According to his online profile, Mr. Djerassi was chief of staff and special assistant in the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, covering U.S. relations with Arab states, Israel, and Iran from 2009 to 2012.”

A source told the magazine that “Secretary Clinton gave Alex a job in one of the most sensitive areas of Obama’s executive apparatus.” They continued, “The fact Alex Djerassi, fresh out of college, was put in charge of the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, covering the Middle East, was an interesting move.”

The source also explained that Djerassi “worked directly on the Arab Spring.” Clinton enlisted him as the U.S. representative to the rebel groups Friends of Libya and Friends of the Syrian People. 

The magazine points out that only one year before Djerassi’s appointment, Epstein “ pleaded guilty to a state charge (one of two) of procuring for prostitution a girl below age 18 and was sentenced to 18 months in prison.” The author also notes that the alleged Epstein accomplice “attended Chelsea Clinton’s wedding to Marc Mazvinsky in July 2010.” 

Needless to say, this development brings up more questions regarding the relationship between the Clintons and Epstein. The former president has been minimizing his connection to the convicted child sex trafficker, claiming that he had never been to Epstein’s infamous island. But later, multiple people, including Epstein accuser Virginia Guiffre, stated they had seen him there. The photos that emerged showing the massage also cast doubt on Clinton’s claim. 

Is it possible that Clinton’s hiring of Djerassi was completely innocent? Sure, but given what we know about these two casts doubt on the propriety of this appointment. The reality is that there are suspicious links between the Clintons and Epstein. But given the state of the corporate media, it is unlikely that the true nature of the connection will gain national attention.

Sketchy – Clinesmith Agreement Structured to Avoid Scrutiny Upon Special Counsel

credit sundance at the conservative treehouse

1. Remember, the Special Counsel was appointed in May 2017, and from then until April 2019 any matter which had anything to do with Spygate or Trump/Russia, was managed exclusively by the Special Counsel team. [Rosenstein testified to this June 2, 2020]

2. The Carter Page FISA warrant of June 29, 2017, was renewed during the tenure of the Special Counsel. They alone ran the FISA process for the third renewal.

3. Kevin Clinesmith’s boss at the FBI during the period was Tricia Beth Anderson. [LINK]

4. The Clinesmith criminal indictment (actually an “information”) informs that, while the Special Counsel was running the DOJ, and Andy McCabe was running the FBI, McCabe’s deputy at the FBI, Tricia Anderson, made this request to Clinesmith:

We need some clarification on [Carter Page]. There is an indication that he may be a “[digraph] source.”

[LINK]

5. Why is this “digraph” redacted from the Clinesmith information?

6. Anderson continued:

“This [the status of Carter Page] is a fact we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal…”

7. Why is the sentence following that critical question redacted from the Clinesmith indictment with “….”?

8. Anderson continued:

“To that end, can we get two items from you? 1) Source Check/ Is [Carter Page] a source in any capacity? 2 ) If he is, what is a [digraph] source ( or what ever type of source he is) ?”

[LINK]

9. Why again is the critical “digraph” source code redacted out of the Clinesmith indictment?

10. The entire issue is that Clinesmith’s boss, Trisha Anderson, is asking Clinesmith to ask the CIA whether Carter Page is any kind of CIA informant. Why redact out that specific material from the Clinesmith indictment, unless the intent is to conceal that material?

11. Why is the specific 2-digit number “digraph” supposedly secret, and why is the “type of source” omitted form the criminal information? Clinesmith’s boss, Tricia Anderson, seems to be asking, “what is this kind of ‘source’ is Carter Page? He’s claiming to be a source, so check with the CIA to verify ‘if he is any kind of source.’”

12. Again, despite the redaction of what appears to be critical exchange, the Clinesmith indictment still includes his boss (Tricia) asking for official CIA confirmation about Carter Page, “whatever kind of source he is.”

13. We know from the Clinesmith indictment that (at a minimum) he reported back to his boss, Tricia Anderson, that Carter Page “was a subsource” for the CIA.

14. So when the DOJ (now run by the Special Counsel) signed the Carter Page FISA renewal [June 29, 2017], we know without question that the FBI deputy who reported directly to the FBIs’ General Counsel (Jim Baker), who reported directly to FBA Director (Andy McCabe), that deputy (Trisha Anderson) knew that Carte Page was at least a CIA subsource.

15. And we know without question that Tricia Anderson’s deputy – Clinesmith- had been informed by the CIA that the CIA has already informed the DOJ and the FBI about Carter Page’s status, a year earlier, on August 17, 2016.

16. The CIA gave Clinesmith an email with all of that information. [LINK]

17. Without any push-back from the DOJ or FBI, in 2020, in connection with Clinesmith’s guilty plea, he stated that he (Clinesmith) never bothered to read the Carter Page file that the CIA gave to him. [LINK]

18. His boss, Tricia Anderson, had asked him specifically to check with the CIA as to the status of Carter Page. The CIA confirmed that Carter Page was some kind of source, and provided the file explaining it all.

19. Clinesmith first reports to his boss, Tricia Anderson, that the CIA has confirmed that Carter Page is some kind of a source – a “sub-source,” but we don’t know exactly because the “digraph” code describing what kind of source he was had been concealed out of the indictment.

20. What possible reason is there for the DOJ to redact out that code?

21. When Clinesmith reports to his Boss -Trisha Anderson- that Carter Page is definitely some kind of CIA source, without question Trisha by her own email now knows:

“This [the CIA source status of Carter Page] is a fact we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal…”

22. Yet a few days later, Clinesmith sends an email to his boss, Trisha Anderson, evidencing for her file that Carter Page “was never a source.” Yet the DOJ’s indictment redacts the “digraph” code about this.

And…

23. Isn’t it a logical conclusion that the combination of the following highlight a DOJ whitewash: (i) the redactions of the digraph code from the indictment, “(ii) the DOJ allowing Clinesmith, unchallenged, to assert that he “did not recall ever reviewing the documents referenced in the [CIA’s] email” disclosing Carter Page’s informant status with the CIA.

24. And how could veteran FBI attorneys (Anderson and Clinesmith), in the space of a few days, twisted “A” into “B”?

25. Here is “A” the process the FBI started with:

Getting “clarification on [Carter Page]. There is an indication that he may be a “ [digraph] source… we would need to disclose in our next FISA renewal… To that end….[contact the CIA and find out]: (1) Is [Carter Page] a source in any capacity? and (2) If he is, what is a [digraph] source (or what ever type of source he is)?”

26. What was “B”?

After first telling his boss that Carter Page was a sub-source, Clinesmith changed the official story by then stating that Carter Page “was not a source”, as if there is some distinction between being a CIA-approved “source” versus a CIA-approved “sub-source.”

27. Clinesmith’s boss, Tricia Anderson, knew this change of story was a smoking gun of a fix.  How do we know that? Two issues:

28. First, the Clinesmith indictment concedes it, although it is buried.  Trish Anderson asked Clinesmith whether the FBI “had it in writing” from the CIA that Carter Page “was not a source.”  That’s not a question in this scenario, that’s an instruction.

29. Anderson and Clinesmith both knew any written claim that Carter Page was not a source would be untrue, because the CIA had informed them specifically that Carter Page was working with the CIA as a [digraph], and that his role was described in the CIA briefing memo to the Crossfire Hurricane team dated August 17, 2016. [LINK]

30. The Crossfire Hurricane team consisted of many senior members of the DOJ and FBI who eventually overlapped into the Special Counsel [They had to know what was going on with this June 29, 2017 renewal]

31. So when the last Carter Page FISA application was submitted on June 29th, and signed-off by Trisha Beth Anderson, she knew that Carter Page was a CIA-approved asset; and that Carter Page had been working with the CIA in some capacity.

32. Clinesmith also knew Carter Page was a source for the CIA. He deliberately falsified the CIA email to try and create a CYA position for his boss, Trish Anderson. For this event he has now plead guilty to a felony.

33. What happened during the four days: June 15, 2017 to June 19, 2017, that caused FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith to commit a felony by doctoring an email from the CIA?

34. What happened during the four days June 15 to June 19, 2017, that caused senior FBI Deputy Trish Anderson to pivot from asking about Carter Page’s status with the CIA “in any capacity, and whatever type of source he is” – to later telling her subordinate, Clinesmith, to “get in writing” something from the CIA that she knew was untrue?

35. Trisha Beth Anderson signed-off on the Carter Page FISA application, a title-1 surveillance warrant, under penalty of perjury…. even though we know from her own writing the application contained materially false information and omissions.

36. Trisha Beth Anderson claims she signed the FISA affidavit, which she knew to be incorrect, because it was presented to her in a rather unusual manner. [LINK]

37. Why did she do this? She disclosed why in her previously hidden testimony to congress (August 2018). [LINK]

38. Anderson had signed-off on earlier Page FISA applications because they came to her already signed: ex. by James Comey (FBI) and Sally Yates (DOJ).

39. When she signed-off on the last Carter Page FISA renewal (June 29, 2017) the Special Counsel was now running the DOJ.  Andrew McCabe was in position and running the FBI

40. So who caused Trisha Beth Anderson to sign-off on the FISA application she knew was false?

41. Why did Anderson ask her subordinate, Clinesmith, to make sure there was something in writing in the file to back up this false statement? Who instructed her to do this?

42. She signed-off the prior Carter Page FISA’s because they were presented to her pre-approved and pre-signed by the FBI  and and DOJ leadership.

43. Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe was Anderson’s FBI boss when she signed-off on what she knew was a false affidavit. Rod Rosenstein was Deputy Attorney General. Who pre-approved the false filing?

44. Additionally, on June 29, 2017, the special counsel was in control of the DOJ and DOJ-NSD. This third renewal was under their authority.

45. Who told Trish Anderson to change her stor yand paper the file with a false claim that Carter Page was somehow not a CIA asset?

46. AG Bill Barr has known since December 9, 2019, about Kevin Clinesmith’s felony forger when OIG Inspector General Michael Horowitz made a criminal referral for the discovery. Why delay the indictment until August 20, 2020.

This thing reeks of another institutional preservation approach. What I suspect is that Barr does not want to touch any material that contacts the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel… however, what took place under the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel is actually more corrupt than any activity that preceded it.

What I also strongly suspect is that Bill Barr is using his oft stated “I will not allow the DOJ to be political” as a crutch in his preservation approach. If nothing from the world or sphere of politics is allowed to enter the world or sphere of the DOJ then what is supposed to happen with all those years of congressional evidence gathering?

If my suspicions are correct; and keep in mind I have made first hand contact with the Durham investigators to confirm their intense alignment with Barr’s directive; then nothing from any embargoed political silo will ever be prosecuted regardless of how it percolates out.

If you read all the material you will see there is clearly no arrangement for Kevin Clinesmith to have provided any other evidence to the DOJ. This is a one-and-done move just like James Wolfe. The parallels are very similar.