Saturday, August 19, 2017

ICE Has Arrested More Than 400 In Operation Targeting Parents Who Pay Smugglers!

NPR ^ | Aug 18, 2017 | John Burnett 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement has arrested more than 400 people in an operation targeting undocumented parents and guardians who allegedly paid smugglers to bring their children to the U.S., putting them in grave danger. An ICE spokesman tells NPR the domestic phase of its Human Smuggling Disruption Initiative concluded on Friday. He said the "surge initiative" will now shift its focus to the transnational smuggling organizations that bring the children to the U.S.-Mexico border.
The operation, which uses immigrant children to target their sponsors in the U.S., has been controversial. Immigrant advocates complain it is hampering efforts to reunite families.
Critics also say it was just another ICE roundup, and didn't have the intended effect of breaking up smuggling rings. The vast majority of those arrested have been hit with civil and criminal immigration violations. Only a handful were charged with federal smuggling crimes.
"Instead they're really targeting this low-hanging fruit and using children as a tool for immigration enforcement," said Jennifer Podkul, policy director at Kids In Need of Defense.
Since the surge began in June, ICE has arrested more than 400 people. The agency says that included parents and guardians of immigrant children as well as "collateral arrests" or undocumented immigrants encountered during the operation. ICE officials say adults living in the U.S. who pay human smugglers to bring children here are aiding and abetting criminal smuggling networks...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Illegal Immigrants, by Definition, Are Not Law-Abiding US Citizens!

The Connecticut Law Tribune ^ | 18 Aug 2017 | CHRIS POWELL, The Connecticut Law Tribune 

As another illegal immigrant defied a deportation order and sequestered himself in a church in New Haven the other day, Mayor Toni Harp welcomed him and proclaimed: "New Haven will remain a sanctuary city. We are not going to engage in helping to report our law-abiding citizens."
But, of course, by definition illegal immigrants are not law-abiding, and the latest one seeking sanctuary in New Haven, like the last one, received a deportation order years ago and then some temporary stays before he was denied another. While he seems harmless enough, terrorists and other ne'er-do-wells might be cheered by the mayor's assurance that anyone who breaks into the country illegally and makes his way to New Haven should be exempt from law enforcement because New Haven substitutes its own immigration policy for that of the United States. No foreigners need to be vetted before arriving in New Haven.
Having declined to pursue New Haven's previous sanctuary seeker into the church to enforce her deportation order, the federal immigration enforcement agency invited illegal immigrants everywhere to consider churches to be enforcement-free zones. Now, with the second sanctuary seeker, a spokesman for the agency has proclaimed as much — that the agency won't try to arrest him and enforce his deportation order as long as he stays inside, churches being considered "sensitive" locations.
This doesn't mean that the deportation of these particular illegal immigrants is compelling. Indeed, the government shares with them the responsibility for the heartbreak that deportation would cause, since in repeatedly postponing its deportation orders the government gave the illegal immigrants more time to build family connections here in the hope of winning exemption from the law.
Rather, it means that both sides in the immigration controversy are destroying the law in their own way, even as impartial and conscientious law enforcement is largely what makes this country worth immigrating to and its borders worth defending.

Media just can't stop telling falsehoods about Trump's views on race!

The Hill ^ | August 19, 2017 | John R Lott Jr 

The media just can’t stop lying about President Trump’s views on racism and hatred.
The media has been awash in praise for the joint statement that former presidents George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush put out on Wednesday concerning the violence in Charlottesville. The statement was viewed as a rebuke of Trump’s statements.
The Dallas Morning News headline said, “Former presidents Bush rebuke Trump's neo-Nazi stance.” The New York Times called it “a rare joint rebuke of Mr. Trump.” The New York Times praised George W. Bush for leading the condemnation of former KKK leader David Duke in 1991, and then accuses President Trump of being “equivocal in his public or private statements against white nationalists and other racist organizations.” The Times alleged Trump is “embracing” America’s “racially charged past.”
This all comes despite the Times’ Julie Davis quoting Trump as saying last November, “I disavow and condemn them,” in reference to a neo-Nazi conference in Washington, D.C.
But the strange thing about the Bush statement is that it so closely parallels Trump’s own statements. They wrote: “America must always reject racial bigotry, anti-Semitism, and hatred in all forms.” How is that fundamentally different than Trump saying on Saturday, “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides…. It has no place in America.”
What about Trump’s statement on Monday? “As I said on Saturday, we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America. And as I have said many times before, no matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws.” Or Trump’s statement on Tuesday? “I'm not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

We're Going to Need a Bigger Moat

Kakistocracy ^ | 8/17/2017 | Porter 

As a companion piece to the prior post, I wanted to talk more about fascists. As you will recall a fascist is whoever a leftist attacks. I mean they don’t just rabidly attack anyone, right? The Cossacks surely had their genocide coming. And so if you don’t want to be a fascist, it’s well worth your time to not make leftists angry.
Unfortunately not many people at all are in a sufficiently vegetative state to achieve this end, and thus the ground is stained by copious fascism anywhere leftists gaze.
And that means you better put on a show when they look.
Of course I mean the abysmal republicans, who have been defensively denouncing at such a pace I’m surprised they haven’t held all-night filibusters just to prove their bonafides. This having the electoral effect of annihilating their 2018 congressional prospects. Ask yourself how many liberals are going to say: “I think I may just vote for that fascist now,” compared to how many conservatives are rolling their eyes in contempt at the cucking. Constituent memories are very short, but if they linger it’s going to be a libslide next November.
Elections aside, it is truly a spectacle of self-delusion to watch republican performers deliver thunderous denunciations of “white supremacists” without the vaguest realization of whom the left is directing that ubiquitous imprecation toward. They’re talking about you, idiots.
Though I don’t think these politicians are actually so dumb as to not realize they’re the “fascists” too. It’s simply a matter of field mice leaping to out-sprint their fellows running left once they think the Bolshevik cat may have escaped its bag. The initial question is not can you outrun the cat, but whether you can outrun the other “fascists.” And god help us have the republicans gotten out to a lead.
I’m inclined to say it’s a temporary respite. The left never leaves a buffet voluntarily. And being the last bete noir eaten is hardly a satisfying ambition. But for some reason so many conservatives seem to wear the same glasses that cause rather than correct myopia. Otherwise I think they would see clearly that sacrificing the guy on your right only increases the left’s appetite for devouring you next. Do you think statues of Stonewall Jackson are where they’ll stop?
So conservatives should take note of precisely whom the left claims are nazis. Because in repeatedly expressing their intent to kill all nazis, a prudent man takes his political taxonomy seriously. To aid in that endeavor, I’ve listed below several prominent nazi entities.
John Kelly and Jeff Sessions are both nazis.
Ronald Reagan was a nazi enabler.
George W. Bush is a nazi.
And Prescott Bush was a nazi.
Ted Cruz is a nazi.
John McCain is a nazi.
Steve Scalise is a nazi collaborator.
Paul Ryan is a nazi.
Charles Murray is a white nationalist, which is more than the normal four letters used to spell nazi. And he’s worse things besides.
Donald jr, Eric, Ivanka, and Tiffany Trump are nazis.
Mike Pence is a nazi. Really.
Mitch McConnell is a nazi.
Ron Paul is a nazi.
Mitt Romney is a nazi.
Marco Rubio is a nazi collaborator.
And The Chronicles of Narnia are nazis.
But those are all just individuals, and if you aren’t any of them then what’s the fear of bolsheviks turning your hands into skin gloves–as bolsheviks have historically done? Well, the answer to that is that there are also numerous nazi groups. And if you’re not in one, just keep reading until you are.
We already know that white southerners are nazis; that hardly bears repeating. But that still leaves about 235 million people in America who might not be. So who else?
NRA members AND conservatives are nazis.
Traditional marriage advocates are defeated nazis.
Border control is nazis.
Patriot groups are nazis.
Conservative Christians are nazis.
And–of course–63 million Trump voters are nazis.
Do you get the feeling American communists are hungrily eyeing Mao’s murder record? Maybe not. Maybe the nazis they want to silence, imprison, or bury in shallow graves are only those and not these. Or they and not them. Though honestly I’m fairly motivated to keep from finding out either way.
I’m motivated because, contra the dead Third Reich, communist horrors persistently return. Like the same movie with different accents, the plot always features pronouncements of anathema. Only the names ever change. From “counterrevolutionary” to “white supremacist,” every generation of leftist totalitarian is convinced he has alighted upon the ONE TRUE EVIL. And what does true evil necessitate if not some egg breaking?
Though that’s probably all just paranoia. Nothing like that could ever happen here. Hey I just had the feeling someone else has said that before…weird.

Will Another Democrat Mayor Allow A Riot In His City? Watch Boston Today.

DB Daily Update ^ | 8.19.2017 | David Blackmon 

More than a dozen times this year, in cities with Democrat Mayors, the George Soros-funded and Democrat Party-supported thugs in Antifa and Black Lives Matters have been allowed to turn peaceful protests into outright riots. Property has been destroyed, political enemies have been attacked, and yes, people have died – most recently in Charlottesville – as a direct result of these actions.
These cities have names: Seattle, Washington; Portland, Oregon; Berkeley, California; Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; Baltimore, Maryland; Ferguson, Missouri; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Charlottesville, Virginia. It’s happened multiple times in some of these cities. All of these cities have Democrat mayors. This is not a coincidence.
None of these events are accidents. None of them are organic outpourings of emotion by upset citizens. All are carefully planned, organized and allowed by public officials to take place, regardless of the consequences.
Here’s the playbook: identify a date and time in one of these cities when a peaceful demonstration, or even better, a gathering of right-wingers, has been permitted by a city or university campus to take place. Use social media networks to issue a call to arms for agitators to volunteer to show up and turn the peaceful demonstration into a riot, or the gathering of right-wingers into a street fight.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Saturday smirks and snickers

friendly emails | 8/19/2017 | unknown 


Dorothy and Edna, two "senior" widows, are talking.
Dorothy: "That nice George Johnson asked me out for a date. I know you went out with him last week, and I wanted to talk with you about him before I give him my answer.”

Edna: "Well, I'll tell you. He shows up at my apartment punctually at 7pm, dressed like such a gentleman in a fine suit, and he brings me such beautiful flowers! Then he takes me downstairs. And what's there; a limousine, uniformed chauffeur and all. Then he takes me out for dinner; a marvelous dinner, lobster, champagne, dessert, and after-dinner drinks. Then we go see a show. Let me tell you Dorothy, I enjoyed it so much I could have just died from pleasure!

So then we are coming back to my apartment and he turns into an ANIMAL. Completely crazy, he tears off my expensive new dress and has his way with me - three times!"

Dorothy: "Goodness gracious! So you are telling me I shouldn't go?”

Edna: "No, no, no... I'm just saying, wear an old dress."

Hate on the Left ^ | August 19, 2017 | John C. Goodman 

The video that appeared more often than any other on my TV screen this past week showed protestors toppling a statue of a confederate soldier in Durham, North Carolina. Then kicking it, stomping on it, spitting at it.
The Workers World Party is the group that pulled off this feat and they were also involved in the violent conflict in Charlottesville.
So, who are they? You didn’t learn much about them if you watched CNN or even Fox News. The commentators on the regular cable channels were too focused on racists and white nationalists and why Donald Trump wasn’t condemning them enough. So, I turned to Google instead.
Wikipedia descries the WWP as a communist party. But they are not garden variety communists. Its website makes clear that these folks admire North Korea and its mentally-deranged dictator, Kim Jong Un. They even defend Jong Un’s efforts to develop the nuclear weapons that currently threaten every innocent person who happens to be on Guam.
Although the WWP describes itself as a party that supports “the struggles of all oppressed peoples," you won’t find any country in the whole world where people have been more systematically oppressed than North Korea. A UN report estimates that 18 million North Koreans go to bed hungry every night, including 1.3 million children under the age of five.
While his fellow countrymen were starving, Kim Jong Un managed to slip by international sanctions and import $2.09 billion in luxury goods from China between 2012 and 2014, according to The New York Times. The items included Mercedes-Benz S-Class cars and a luxury yacht worth as much as $6 million. More recently, he imported the materials needed to construct a world class ski resort. As far as anyone can tell, the only skier who uses it is Kim Jong Un himself.
This case is not unusual. Over the past 100 years the most oppressive ideology in the world has been communism. While the people who lived under it were starved, tortured and murdered, its leaders lived in luxury. The suppression of ordinary people by their communist rulers far surpasses anything capitalist employers were ever accused of doing. While condemning exploitation, communist dictators turned out to be masters at it.
Fidel Castro’s former bodyguard Juan Reinaldo Sánchez says that the communist leader “lived like a king” and “ran country like a cross between medieval overlord and Louis XV.” While ordinary Cubans stood in breadlines and suffered the effects of a declining economy, Castro had his own private yacht and his own private island -- a luxurious Caribbean getaway, complete with dolphins and a turtle farm. In Havana, he lived in an immense estate with a rooftop bowling alley, a basketball court and fully-equipped medical center.
According to Hong Kong-based historian, Frank Dikötter, Chinese communist leader Mao Tse-tung was the greatest mass murderer in world history. “At least 45 million people were worked, starved or beaten to death,” he writes. “It was like [the Cambodian communist dictator] Pol Pot's genocide multiplied 20 times over."
In abook written by Mao’sown personal physicianDr. Li Zhisui writes:
Despite his populist pretensions, Mao lived like a traditional emperor with all the material comforts that China could afford. His physical needs were taken care of by attendants recruited from young, uneducated peasants, who bathed and clothed him and combed his hair …. [He] indulged in young women--sometimes more than one at the same time -- and … even had a special bed made for his sexual activity…
The world’s second greatest mass murderer, Josef Stalin, killed 20 million, many by forced starvation. Stalin himself had no fear of starvation, however. Upon his death, he was worth an estimated$75 million.
On his death, Mao Tse-tung was worth an estimated $1 billion. Mao’s granddaughter has been named to China’s rich list, with a fortune of nearly £530 million.
During the reign of avowed Marxist Hugo Chavez, Venezuela drowned in a sea of corruption involving “some of the most senior figures in Mr. Chávez’s “Bolivarian revolution,’” according to The Economist. The country was ranked as the eighth most graft-ridden county in the world. Even places like Haiti and Zimbabwe ranked higher.
Although Chavez is now dead, the country has continued its decline into dictatorship under the rule of Nicolas Maduro. Yet while ordinary people face food shortages, skyrocketing inflation and abject poverty, Chavez’s daughter, María Gabriela Chávez, has bank accounts in the U.S. and Andorra withassets totaling nearly $4.2 billion – making her the richest individual in the country.
R.J. Rummel estimates that almost 170 million people were killed in the 20th century by their own governments. These are not deaths in war. They are the victims of genocide by the governments in the countries where they lived.
Almost all American billionaires are philanthropists. At last count, 141 of them have pledged to give half their wealth away. Warren Buffett is giving 95% away. Bill Gates is giving 99%.
You will find very little charity where leftists are in power.

79% of Mass Shootings in America: a Black Thing!?

Colin Flaherty (YouTube) ^ | 08/14/2017 | Colin Flaherty 

I saw this video on Colin Flaherty's youtube channel where he casually referenced the fact that the New York Times, of all publications, admits that 79% of all mass shootings in America are done by black people. 

Remember, according to leftists, only white Republicans commit mass shootings, like Dylan Roof, the most Republican shooter of them all (actually he suffered from severe mental problems).

For those of you unfamiliar with Colin's youtube channels (he has two channels, one of which periodically gets suspended, so he switches to the other one, and vice versa), he tracks the extreme amounts of black-on-white, black-on-asian, black-on-turtle, black-on-everything violence that is so out of proportion that it makes the leftist claims that cops and judges and juries and prosecutors are all racists members of a racist society that targets blacks for no reason whatsoever.

Anyway, watch the video for yourself here:

The Monumental Problems Facing our Country ^ | August 19, 2017 | Arthur Schaper 

Business is booming. Job productivity is up. Despite the left-wing lies that coal was not coming back, miners are mining like never before. Industry is rebranding and expanding, and educational reforms are underway with Betsy DeVos and her team in the Department of Education. Trump has trumped the media yet again, refusing to cave to calls of racism or demands for an apology because he did not immediately condemn white supremacists at the Charlottesville, Virginia rally. Why should Trump care? The race card has become so played out, and new media reports are debunking this narrative.
Instead of talking about Fat Boy Kim Jong Un backing away from his bellicose rhetoric, or the massively declining illegal immigration problem which used to overwhelmed our borders, the media are hyping up the fading White Supremacy movement and discussing whether to take down Post Civil War era monuments. Our country is fracturing, but it’s more like a necessary corrective, like a new generation of Americans breaking out of their shells. But let’s talk about the explicitly monumental problem for a few minutes.
The leaders of Baltimore, Maryland decided to remove statues in the city which commemorated Confederate soldiers, officers, etc. Honestly, it makes sense to remove these statues. These men acted in open rebellion to the United States. They explicitly defended slavery and wanted to rip the country apart. It’s no secret that Democratic lawmakers after the Civil War wanted to champion their inveterate confederates. Take them down! These statues do not represent our country or the state of Maryland.
I just read today that the Maryland State legislature decided to remove the bust of Supreme Court Justice and Maryland native Roger Taney. This man was the politically slanted Justice who decided that “Negroes are a subordinate class of human beings with no rights which a white man was bound to respect.” A Democrat and a slave owner, Taney’s temper tantrum in the 1857 Dred Scott decision further divided an already distempered country writhing over the slavery issue—one which had to be resolved by bloodshed on fields of battle all over the nation, including the streets of New York City.
Monuments are not exactly the best way to preserve our historical heritage, anyway. Nietzsche pointed out in his seminal text “The Use and Abuse of History” that monuments allow man to commemorate great deeds, but cover up the hard work and pain which major historical figures encountered to accomplish what brought them great fame. Monuments can give a community a false sense of pride. We celebrate what they did, but are we willing to fight for and defend their principles with the same vigor?
I would further submit that monuments have this inevitable tendency to enshrine what is good about someone without recognition for their failures. Why else would anyone build a monument to another, if they would have to remind the present and future community about their failings? Battles deserve to be commemorated, though, because they helped forge the values and identity of the country which they fought for. There is no greater show of devotion than a man laying down his life for his homeland. President Trump rightfully donated his salary to preserve Gettysburg. I hope that the non-stop guardians for the Unknown Solider remain vigilant.
Ultimately, monuments are about ideas, not just about the people depicted. Martin Luther King Jr. received an extended honor at the Washington Mall, even though Maya Angelou felt that one quote on the marble piece was poorly placed. It was welcome news that liberal Seattle mayor permitted the removal of a statue of Vladimir Lenin. That monument should come down! Ronald Reagan demanded that Gorbachev “Tear Down This Wall!” a symbol of Soviet oppression. On the eve of the American Revolution, colonists tore down monuments to King George III. The Iraqis gleefully removed statues to Saddam Hussein. Following exposure of his complicity with covering up child sex abuse, Joe Paterno’s statue was also removed from Penn State. Aren’t we glad that they are gone? As new revelations manifest about the truth and error of our status as citizens, we learn more about our history and the legacies we want to celebrate. It makes sense to tear down or remove certain statues.
But won’t these sudden removals obliterate our society’s historical knowledge? What I have learned is that the harder that nefarious interests try to hide or cover up historical humiliations, the more evident they become. Adolph Hitler once quipped “Who remembers the Armenians?” referring to the 1915 genocide. The answer? The growing cohort of Armenian-Americans along with the entire nation of Armenia, and historians around the world. Holocaust denial may have reached a fevered pitch, but proof of the Holocaust has become more ample than ever.
Ultimately, The Battle of the Monuments is really the desperation of the Democratic Party and their new domestic terrorist wings (including Antifa) to undermine the President and force an ongoing narrative that Republicans, conservatives, patriots are racists, and those “racists” must prove otherwise. This line of attack is never-ending, an arrow in the quiver of Cultural Marxism to further undermine our culture of life and liberty.
If Republicans in Washington had more backbone instead of supine spine, they would applaud the removal of these Confederate monuments, reminding the country that these were all Democratic slavery sympathizers. They would also praise President Trump for standing his ground, blasting the violence on both sides at Charlottesville, particularly from the Alt-Left. Trump even predicted then condemned where this monument-bashing movement would lead to: “Are we going to take down George Washington’s statue next?” My response is an emphatic “No!” Why? Even though he did own slaves, Washington fought to establish a new country, conceived in liberty, dedicated to a political culture which would eventually set slaves free and ensure the longest-lasting constitutional republic in world history.
Republicans, not just elected officials, should follow Trump’s lead. Imagine how quickly the argument over monuments would dissipate from the national forefront.

Florida Lawsuit Reveals What Trump Thinks About Discrimination [First Club Open to Blacks] ^ | 7/5/16 | Jack Davis 

...In 1997, Trump defied societal conventions when he purchased his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, and converted it into a private club.
Prior to Trump’s arrival, other clubs in the Pam Beach area “had long barred Jews and African Americans — which is to say they practiced a quiet but steely racism,” wrote Jeffrey Lord...
“He put the light on Palm Beach,” said Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League....
Trump went further, asking the town council to lift the existing restrictions on the club, and sending them a copy of “Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner,” a film whose characters defy the race-based discrimination of the day.
The town council would not budge, leading Trump to file a $100 million lawsuit alleging the town was “discriminating against Mar-a-Lago, in part because it is open to Jews and African Americans,” The American Spectator reported.
...Eventually, Palm Beach put an end to its discriminatory restrictions.
“In other words, long before he was running for president, there was Donald Trump battling racism and anti-Semitism in Palm Beach society. Using every tool at his disposal,” Lord wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Media Bias Can No Longer Be Reasonably Denied

Daily Caller ^ | August 18, 2017 | John Lott 

The news media wants to tie everything it can to the Charlottesville attack. Wolf Blitzer was worried just a couple of hours after yesterday’s van attack in Barcelona, Spain, which left at least 13 dead and over 100 injured. “There will be questions if what happened in Barcelona was at all, at all a copycat version of what happened in Charlottesville, Virginia, even though they may be different characters and different political ambitions. They used the same killing device, a vehicle going at high speed into a large group of pedestrians.”
The notion that Islamic terrorists, like those in Barcelona or the next day in Cambrils, Spain, got the idea for these attacks from Charlottesville is absurd. Europe’s first Islamic terror attack with a vehicle occurred in March 2002. Two cars were crashed through the main gate of a synagogue in Lyon, France. Fortunately, though, no one died.
ISIS has used vehicle attacks since 2014, even providing its followers with detailed instructions on the best method. These attacks are planned long in advance.
Vehicle attacks have occurred all over the world, with the three worst happening in Nice, France (86 dead); Xinjiang, China (39 dead); and Srinagar, India (38 dead). Others have occurred in London, Stockholm, Melbourne, East Jerusalem, Berlin, the Netherlands, and India. Islamic terrorists have clearly learned from each other, taking notice of highly successful attacks like the one in Nice.
Vehicle attacks are still rare, though they are becoming more frequent. Since 2000, there have been 11 terrorist van attacks with four or more fatalities, but six of those have occurred just this year. Two more occurred last year.
Europeans have been thinking about vehicle attacks for a while before Charlottesville. After an attack this April left five dead and 15 injured in Stockholm, there was even a discussion about establishing large, vehicle-free zones. Banning cars from an area is not the same as banning guns and hoping that terrorists will comply. Putting up barricades in pedestrian-heavy areas seems likely to stop vehicle attacks. . . .

Poll: Plurality believes far-right groups were *not* mostly to blame for violence in Charlottesville!

Hot Air ^ | August 18, 2017 | Allahpundit 

Your daily reminder via Survey Monkey and Axios that virtually all issues are partisan now.
Since our national future of Antifa reds slugging it out with alt-right brownshirts in running street battles looks increasingly assured, we might as well start tracking reaction polls like this:
Watching media coverage, you’d think Trump is nearly alone in believing “both sides” share fault for the Charlottesville violence. Turns out, most Republicans have his back…
Far more blame “the far right groups” for Charlottesville (46%) than “the counter-protesters” (9%), but a remarkable 40% concur with Trump’s assertion that both were equally responsible.
“Beneath the surface, we see the same partisan division: Two-thirds of Democrats (66%) blame the far-right groups rather than the counter-protesters (6%), while Republicans overwhelmingly blame both sides equally (64%). About the same proportion of Republicans blame the far-right groups (18%) as the counter-protestors (17%).”
As Sean Trende put it, “So basically, a plurality agree with Trump’s characterization of the Charlottesville events, or are to his right.” Indeed. Given a binary choice of whether the alt-right or counter-protesters bears most of the blame for the violence, people are far more likely to blame the alt-right. It was their rally, Nazis are known for violence, one of them actually killed someone on the other side. That’s why, I assume, even Republicans are (slightly) more likely to blame the alt-right than the left-wing protesters. Under the circumstances it’s hard to see the white nationalists as relatively blameless for what happened.
Once you include the option of blaming both groups equally, though, you end up with a plurality (49 percent) who say either that blame should be shared or that the counter-protesters were mainly at fault. If you’re wondering why Trump’s job approval has ticked up a point and a half since Sunday despite the brutal media coverage, that may explain some of it. Although more likely it’s the politics of the debate over Confederate monuments that’s helping him, as Democrats have stupidly zeroed in on that despite the fact that most of the public shares Trump’s view that they should be left in place.
As much as partisan interests are driving reaction here, don’t overlook the fact that nearly a quarter of Democrats — 24 percent — agree with Trump that both sides bear equal responsibility for what happened. (It’s even higher among indies at 38 percent, although a majority of 51 percent blames the “far-right groups.”) That’s an impressively large and resilient minority given the torrents of condemnation in stark moral terms that Trump has endured this week. It’s one thing for Republicans to stick with him, as their agenda depends on Trump’s political credibility. Democrats, though, have every partisan reason to hammer him over this, yet a quarter are holding firm on apportioning blame for the violence equally. I wonder if there’s a segment of the left that’s already aware of, and uncomfortable with, Antifa’s tactics and unwilling to absolve them of responsibility for throwing down with neo-Nazis. Probably too much to hope for.

Where is the Russian Collusion News? Eclipsed?

18 Aug 17 | hapnHal 

Where is the Russian collusion news? Has it anything to do with the upcoming eclipse?

A new report detailing attempted communications between the Trump campaign and Russia “is concrete evidence the Russia collusion narrative is fake news,” a spokesman for former campaign chairman Paul Manafort said Monday.

The White House lawyer brought in to deal with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election said he believed the focus of the probe was "narrow" and the aspects related to President Donald Trump should be completed before the end of the year.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio: 'Feels good' To Have Trump Backing Me Up

The Washington Examiner ^ | 08/18/17 | Melissa Quinn 

Former Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio said Thursday he would be honored if President Trump decided to pardon him following his recent conviction for criminal contempt of court.
In an interview with NPR, the outspoken sheriff said he hasn't spoken with Trump, but was pleased to see reports that the president is on his side.
"It makes me feel good that at least someone is backing me up. And how much better can you get than president of the United States?" Arpaio told NPR.
Trump told Fox News this week he was "seriously considering" a pardon for Arpaio, who he praised as an "outstanding sheriff."
"He has done a lot in the fight against illegal immigration," the president told Fox News. "He's a great American patriot, and I hate to see what has happened to him."
"As far as the situation on a pardon, I didn't ask for it but I will accept it if he does do it," Arpaio said. "This president understands what I've been going through. There aren't many politicians around believe me. I learned that real quick over this situation. You don't see anybody next to me and I've endorsed so many people."
Trump will be in Phoenix for a campaign-style rally Tuesday, and Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton urged the president against announcing a pardon for Arpaio at the event, saying such action would make it "clear that his true intent is to enflame emotions and further divide our nation."
Arpaio, though, said he believes Trump will be the greatest president in U.S. history.
"We need him, and I feel sad how they're trying to destroy him," he said. "It makes me sick. I'll tell you one thing, he's got guts and courage, and that's what this country needs."
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The News Media Thinks They Finally Have Trump Cornered. They Are Wrong!

Mediaite ^ | August 18, 2017 | John Ziegler 

It has long been said that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result. Such a strategy never worked out well in Wile E. Coyote’s endless pursuit of the Roadrunner, and it is still very unlikely to do so in the mainstream news media’s quixotic quest to bring down Donald Trump (after having gleefully given him billions in free advertising just over a year ago).
This week, after Trump’s bonkers press conference — which would have been great had he been a television guest on Fox News, but performed really horribly as the president of the United States — the news media seems to think they finally see political blood in the White House water. After all, there are some significant signs that THIS controversy is different and that the dynamics have somehow fundamentally changed.
A southern GOP Senator has lambasted Trump as incompetent. Three White House advisory boards have been disbanded because prominent business people no longer want to be associated with him. Trump properties are losing big business because of the blowback. Betting houses are giving basically even money on wagers that he will be impeached. Even the CEO of the company which owns Trump’s favorite state-run “news” organization, Fox News, is very publicly rebuking him.
For any previous modern president, this might indeed, as many are hoping/speculating, be the beginning of the end of his time in office. But in case you have forgotten, Donald Trump is no ordinary president, and nothing we have seen so far has dramatically shifted the fundamental realities of why he will be exceedingly difficult to drive from office.
I wrote at the beginning of this summer of insanity that the Trump cult (“Cult 45”) was specifically designed to weather nearly any storm. This current hurricane not only poses no mortal threat to Trump’s base of support, its winds may end up blowing, at least in part, at his back.
There are several important reasons why this is so obviously the case:
– Trump’s base is almost all white and very few white people who support him will be remotely offended by what he said.
– The mainstream media has almost no influence (except perhaps in an inverse direction) on Trump’s base, and the more outraged they become the more fired up his fans get.
– Trump was never thought to be strong on Civil Rights issues and therefore there is no shock/disappointment factor among average Americans.
– Most of the state-run “conservative” media outlets, while having chided him, have not remotely abandoned the ship as of yet.
– The GOP establishment is still forced to mostly stick by him as long as their political base does.
– Having the media/political/business establishment be super mad with Trump actually plays into his anti-establishment persona and his laughable “drain the swamp” campaign promise.
– You can’t kill the “Politically Incorrect” presidency by claiming that Trump is too politically incorrect (just like you can’t destroy the candidacy of a thrice-married beauty pageant owner with a tape of him bragging about grabbing pussy).
– The Democrats, as they ALWAYS do, are already WAY overplaying their hand to placate their own rabid base of support.
These last two points deserve more detailed consideration.
The issue of attacking Trump for being too politically incorrect is one that goes back to the beginning of the 2016 campaign. While publicly I was insisting that Trump couldn’t win a general election, behind the scenes I was urgently warning my good friend, Democratic Congressman John Yarmuth, that the Clinton campaign was going about it all the wrong way.
Anyone who was offended by Trump’s political incorrectness was already never going to vote for Trump, I told him. The best way to beat Trump was to eviscerate his strengths by exposing him as a lying conman who isn’t very rich and has no clue how to bring jobs back to the middle class.
The news media, despite the election results, has clearly still not learned this vital lesson. If you like Trump, you love his willingness to say things that the media hates, even if you might disagree with them at times. If the news media really wants to “get” Trump, they need to focus their umbrage on how those who voted for him have been duped by a guy who has delivered on none of his major promises.
Instead, the media has largely played right into Trump’s hands this week. For instance, he cautioned about the dangers of the slippery slope to tearing down Confederate monuments, and sure enough CNN had a guest say that, just as Trump had warned, even George Washington and Thomas Jefferson should not be spared.
Democrats, of course, never having seen a political hand that they can’t overplay, have gone off the deep end. Nancy Pelosi, seemingly having forgotten that she was once Speaker of the House and that Barack Obama was president for eight years, is now suddenly/absurdly making an issue of confederate statues in the Capitol. Meanwhile, other Democrats are drafting articles of Impeachment, saying Trump should be removed via the 25th Amendment, or, just flat-out assassinated.
Heck, if I wasn’t so convinced that Trump is mostly a dunce who is making all of this up as he goes along, I might actually think that he planned all of this brilliantly. You have to remember that Trump’s goals appear to have nothing to do with getting a majority of Americans to “approve” of him. I’m not even sure he intends to run for reelection.
Therefore, all that matters is his maintaining his base (and thus his leverage over the Republican Party.) And, as difficult as it may be for liberals to grasp this, nothing has happened this week which will significantly change that status. In fact, there is a decent chance that among some sub-groups (not just Neo-Nazis, by the way) his approval rating will actually go UP slightly because of this controversy and the liberal hyperbolic overreaction to Trump’s role in it.
Even better than that from Trump’s perspective is that forcing prominent GOP leaders to express disapproval of him actually forwards the most important narrative to him in the long run. You see, at some level, Trump knows he is going to fail as a president. Now he needs a scapegoat. Further showing his supporters that if he just hadn’t been surrounded by such back-stabbing PC wimps, he could have made America great again, serves his purposes just perfectly.

When Obama Declared Many Sides to Blame for Islamist Terrorism Media Castigated Critics!

Ace of Spades HQ ^ | 08/18/2017 | Ace 

Let's go all the way back through the mists of time, to a forgotten era of dinosaurs and wizard-kings, an age of wonder and mystery called "February 2015."
In this mythological age, evoking "many sides" to blame for violence was not considered "racist," but in fact was hailed as the very pinnacle of rationality and cosmopolitanism.
Despite the fact that it is always Islamists responsible for Islamist terrorism (see the name; just what it says on the tin), President Lord God Obama proclaimed that many sides were in fact responsible for the rivers of blood spilled by Islamists, including, most notoriously, the Christians.

His latest challenge came Thursday at the National Prayer Breakfast. At a time of global anxiety over Islamist terrorism, Obama noted pointedly that his fellow Christians, who make up a vast majority of Americans, should perhaps not be the ones who cast the first stone. "Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history," he told the group, speaking of the tension between the compassionate and murderous acts religion can inspire. "And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ."
When Trump spoke of "many sides" offering violence, he was referring to the fact -- the fact -- that antifa thugs attacked the Nazis and, when the cops drove the Nazis from the park, surrounded them and attacked them with apparent police complicity.
When Obama spoke of many sides being to blame, he was going back to... the Crusades between 1100 and 1350 AD. Oh, and, of course, the famous Christian enslavement of Muslims, which did not happen.
The response from the media was not -- get this -- anger and bitter denunciation, but rather a moistened-crotched panting, along with a sneering dismissal of critics of the "many sides" talk as "the usual quarters."

President Obama is drawing some heat -- mostly from the usual quarters -- for invoking the Crusades while talking about Islam and terrorism on Thursday. At the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, Obama noted there was a time when people mass-murdered in the name of Christianity, too:And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. As many were quick to point out, the Catholic church's Crusades began more than 900 years ago, and the Inquisition began in the 13th century.
In the context of Obama's long-standing remarks on Islam and terrorism, though, invoking the Crusades and the Inquisition are wholly unsurprising. What is more surprising is that he hasn't done this sooner.
I'm not surprised the leftwing media has completely ignored its own history of defending "many sides to blame" arguments from the president.
I am surprised, however, that so many members of the #FakeNews "rightwing" media have, however.
More: At the eulogy for five dead Dallas cops assassinated by a Black Lives Matter terrorist, Barack "Many Sides" Obama offered this observation:

"We have all seen this bigotry in our lives at some point," obama told an audience of about 2,500 at a concert hall in Dallas. "None of us is entirely innocent. No institution is entirely immune. And that includes our police departments. We know this."
Telling cops they're racist at a funeral for their own was, by the media's estimation, the height of cosmopolitan nuance and sophistication.
Thanks to Soothsayer for that quote.

POLL: Most Black Americans Don’t Want Confederate Statues Removed!

Daily Caller ^ | 8/18/17 | Amber Randall 

Most black Americans do not think Confederate statues should be removed because they are offensive, a Marist poll released Thursday found. Forty-four percent of African Americans believe the Confederate statues should stay in place, while 11 percent said they’re unsure. The remaining 40 percent of African Americans polled said the statues should be removed. Those surveyed were asked whether statues “honoring leaders of the Confederacy” should “remain as a historical symbol” or “be removed because they are offensive to some people,” or whether the respondent is unsure. NPR and PBS News Hour conducted the Marist poll Monday and Tuesday, following a weekend of violent protests sparked by the subject in Charlottesville, Va. Latin Americans who participated overwhelmingly believe that Confederate monuments should stay in place — 65 percent said they should remain. Twenty-four percent said they should come down, while 11 percent said they weren’t sure.
White Americans also overwhelmingly supported keeping up Confederate monuments– 65 percent said they should stay, while 25 percent said they should be taken down. Eight percent said they weren’t sure if they should stay up or not. Most Republicans, Independents and those who identified as “soft” Democrats said the statues should stay. Fifty-seven percent of those identified as “strong” Democrats said the statues should be removed. Lawmakers and city officials are calling for the removal of Confederate statues, particularly in light of the Charlottesville riots, where white supremacists gathered in part to protest the removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee. Baltimore city workers removed four Confederate statues late Tuesday night. The Congressional Black Caucus has also proposed the removal of the statues from the U.S. Capitol Building. “We will never solve America’s race problem if we continue to honor traitors who fought against the United States in order to keep African Americans in chains. By the way, thank god, they lost,” CBC Chairman Rep. Cedric Richmond, D-Louisiana, said to ABC News in a Monday statement.

Back of the Bus, Megan Kelly: Make Room for the MAGA PolitiDiva, Traci Belmonte!

Madison's Media Short Video: Thoughts on Charlottesville ^ | 8/16/2017 | Traci Belmonte, the PolitiDiva 

I'm hooked on the PolitiDiva!  How do you describe a woman with the smarts of a New York City builder, the moxie of a Jeanine Pirro, and the bellissimo charm of a Sophia Loren?

This is Traci Belmonte, outspoken political commentator, and a frequent co-host on Bill Mitchell's daily YourVoiceAmerica internet TV show and podcast. And also soon to be appearing in a Friday noon "Better View" show where she and two other conservative women banter over politics, culture, lipstick, relationships -- whatever women talk about...

Check out the short 3 minute video as she defends President Trump from the Charlottesville media, the Dems, and Romney/Never-Trumper attacks.

Just love her passionate and honest delivery.  Listening to her speak and watching her expressive gestures, I'm transported back to the old ethnic households and neighborhoods of the America we grew up in.

Political correctness was unknown at the time.  You spoke your mind!  You got stuff that was bugging you off your chest.  You fought for your ideas.  You won some fights and lost others.  But people got educated about the world, and the family remained strong.

Traci Belmonte is real, she loves President Trump, she's exciting and interesting to hear -- she's got the whole package to become a star of the MAGA movement.

A New Job!

CAREER OVER: Kaepernick ANGRY That Nobody Wants Him!