Tuesday, September 19, 2017

The Wiretapper's Ball UPDATED: "Why Obama Really Spied on Trump"

Cockroach Coup-UPDATE: Mueller and his team of swell Hillary donors almost have to indict someone now, just to cover-up Obama's criminal wiretapping on behalf of the Clinton campaign. The FBI had investigations of both campaigns; one to bury Hillary's crimes and one to invent Trump's.

BTW, I'm no fan of Manafort's work for Putin stooges in the Ukraine. But whatever he did pales into nothingness compared to what the Podestas, the Clintons and Obama did for Putin: business partners in Joule Energy, lobbying for SberBank sanctions relief, transferring hi-tech dual-use technology at Skolkovo, selling 20% of America's uranium supply, letting Russia establish military bases in the Middle East for the first time in a half-century while barrel-bombing civilians. Not to mention letting Putin take over the White House's computers with impunity. That's because Obama needed Russia's help with the Iran Surrender.

Hey, I know; let's investigate what happened in June, 2016! :

On an unknown date in June, the FISA court turns down a request for the first time in many years, a request to wiretap the Trumps. Despite the judge's unprecedented ruling, Lynch wiretapped the Trumps anyway.

On June 3, Rob Goldstone emails Trump, Jr., using words that seem designed to justify a FISA warrant. A meeting is set up with the lawyer Veselnitskaya, who had been personally granted a special visa parole by Lynch. It would have been rude not to talk to her after all the trouble Lynch took to send her over to Trump Tower.

On June 9, the meeting takes place, but there is no opposition research presented as promised, only Magnitsky Act issues.

On June 14, Veselnitskaya appears at the Congressional Hearing with Obama's Russian ambassador.

On June 20, the Hillary/Comey/Steele Dossier alleges whatever Hillary twisted hallucinations dreamed-up

And on June 27, Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch hold their Tarmac Summit, even though his alleged wife is "allegedly" under the alleged Lynch/Comey pretend-investigation. But, hey, sometimes you just don't want to discuss wiretapping the opposing political campaign on the phone.

Somebody might be listening.

Whaddaya know? Trump was right. Again.

Don Surber: "The media's wiretap dancing": "A Democratic president spied on a Republican presidential candidate’s campaign using a law a Democratic Congress passed and a Democratic president signed 38 years earlier in the name of preventing Watergate-style abuses.
The Obama administration monitored the political opposition’s private conversations, and then passed along transcripts of those conversations to administration-friendly journalists. This not only was an abuse of presidential power, but also an abuse of the power of the press.
Call it wiretapping or intercepting, the press knew perfectly well the Obama administration spied on political opponents, because the Obama administration shared these goodies with the press. Witness the Inauguration Day story in the Times, which used the word “wiretapped” in its front-page headline.
Far from being a member of a free press, the Times acted as a propaganda tool for a past regime waging a campaign to discredit its successor. Other news organizations followed the lead of the Times.
The press had no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia, but promoted a steady stream of Fake News about Russia. The Fake News media was determined to bring down a duly elected president.
Meanwhile, evidence of electoral eavesdropping by Democrats abounded. Yet the press ignored this actual political scandal, because even after Obama left the White House a Fake News media was reluctant to cast him in a bad light.

The next few weeks should be interesting."

Daniel Greenfield: Why Obama Really Spied on Trump

"Either the investigation gets results. Or its perpetrators are left hanging in the wind. If McMaster is fired, which on purely statistical grounds he probably will be, and a Trump loyalist who wasn’t targeted by the surveillance operation becomes the next National Security Adviser and brings in Trump loyalists, as Flynn tried to do, then it’s over.
And the Dems finally get their Watergate. Except the star won’t be Trump, it will be Obama. Rice, Power, Lynch and the rest of the gang will be the new Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Mitchell.
Once Obama and his allies launched their domestic surveillance operation, they crossed the Rubicon. And there was no way back. They had to destroy President Trump or risk going to jail.
The more crimes they committed by spying on the opposition, the more urgently they needed to bring down Trump. The consequences of each crime that they had committed spurred them on to commit worse crimes to save themselves from going to jail. It’s the same old story when it comes to criminals.
Each act of illegal surveillance became more blatant. And when illegal surveillance couldn’t stop Trump’s victory, they had to double down on the illegal surveillance for a coup.
The more Obama spied on Trump, the more he had to keep doing it. This time it was bound to pay off.
Obama and his allies had violated the norms so often for their policy goals that they couldn’t afford to be replaced by anyone but one of their own. The more Obama relied on the imperial presidency of executive orders, the less he could afford to be replaced by anyone who would undo them.  The more his staffers lied and broke the law on everything from the government shutdown to the Iran nuke sellout, the more desperately they needed to pull out all the stops to keep Trump out of office. And the more they did it, the more they couldn’t afford not to do it. Abuse of power locks you into the loop familiar to all dictators. You can’t stop riding the tiger. Once you start, you can’t afford to stop.
If you want to understand why Samantha Power was unmasking names, that’s why. The hysterical obsession with destroying Trump comes from the top down. It’s not just ideology. It’s wealthy and powerful men and women who ran the country and are terrified that their crimes will be exposed.
It’s why the media increasingly sounds like the propaganda organs of a Communist country. Why there are street riots and why the internet is being censored by Google and Facebook’s “fact checking” allies.
It’s not just ideology. It’s raw fear.

The left is sitting on the biggest crime committed by a sitting president. The only way to cover it up is to destroy his Republican successor. 
A turning point in history is here. 
If Obama goes down, the left will go down with him. If his coup succeeds, then America ends."

Magnificent: President Trump Leads For Freedom, For Peace and For America at the UN

American Leadership Again, At Long Last

UPDATE: It was great to hear America defended at the UN after the Apology Years. The Iranians were put on notice. The Treaty that Obama--not America--signed with them to protect the Ayatollah's national security is dead. But that's what happens when you get your Treaties ratified in the Iranian Senate and not the American Senate. The UN also got to "ratify" the deal and they run the inspections, not America, even though they have a conflict-of-interest with their financial dealings with the Mullahs. The Democrats aren't even worth quoting; they sounded like America's enemies--except the Commies were more honest: "We didn’t know if we were listening to President Reagan in 1982 or to President Trump in 2017.” Why, thank you, Communist Toady!

They tried Peace Through Weakness for eight long years. Everywhere, America was weakened and her enemies were strengthened. Your Boyfriend left the world in flames, losers. Enough!

Let's listen to a friend instead. Bibi: “I can say this, none were bolder, none were more courageous and forthright than the one delivered by President Trump today."  Amen, brother. 

C-Span Video  Full Text

The President:

"We want harmony and friendship, not conflict and strife. We are guided by outcomes, not ideology. We have a policy of principled realism, rooted in shared goals, interests and values. That realism forces us to confront a question facing every leader and nation in this room: It is a question we cannot escape or avoid. We will slide down the path of complacency, numb to the challenges, threats and even wars that we face. Or, do we have enough strength and pride to confront those dangers today so that our citizens can enjoy peace and prosperity tomorrow?
If we desire to lift up our citizens, if we aspire to the approval of history, then we must fulfil our sovereign duties to the people we faithfully represent. We must protect our nations, their interests, and their futures. We must reject threats to sovereignty from the Ukraine to the South China Sea. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.
And just as the founders of this body intended, we must work together and confront together those who threaten us with chaos, turmoil and terror.
The scourge of our planet today is a small group of rogue regimes that violate every principal on which the United Nations is based. They respect neither their own citizens nor the sovereign rights of their countries. If the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. When decent people and nations become bystanders to history, the forces of destruction only gather power and strength. No one has shown more contempt for other nations and for the well-being of their own people than the depraved regime in North Korea. It is responsible for the starvation deaths of millions of North Koreans, and for the imprisonment, torture, killing and oppression of countless more.
We were all witness to the regime's deadly abuse when an innocent American college student, (Otto) Warmbier only to die a few days later. We saw it in the assassination of the dictator's brother, using banned nerve agents in an international airport. We know they kidnapped a sweet 13-year-old Japanese girl from a beach in her own country to enslave her as a language tutor for North Korea's spies.
If this is not twisted enough, now North Korea's reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles threatens the entire world with unthinkable loss of human life. It is an outrage that some nations would not only trade with such a regime, but would arm, supply and financially support a country that imperils the world with nuclear conflict.
No nation on earth has an interest in seeing this band of criminals arm itself with nuclear weapons and missiles. The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.
Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime. The United States is ready, willing and able, but hopefully this will not be necessary. That's what the United Nations is all about. That's what the United Nations is for. Let's see how they do.
It is time for North Korea to realize that the denuclearization is its only acceptable future. The United Nations Security Council recently held two unanimous, 15 to nothing votes adopting hard-hitting resolutions against North Korea, and I want to thank China and Russia for joining the vote to impose sanctions, along with all of the other members of the Security Council. Thank you to all involved, but we must do much more.
It is time for all nations to work together to isolate the Kim regime until it ceases its hostile behavior. We face this decision not only in North Korea. It is far past time for the nations of the world to confront another reckless regime. One that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing death to America, destruction to Israel and ruin for many leaders and nations in this room. The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy. It has turned a wealthy country with a rich history and culture into an economically depleted rogue state whose chief exports are violence, bloodshed and chaos. The longest-suffering victims of Iran's leaders are in fact its own people.
Rather than use its resources to improve Iranian lives, its oil profits go to fund Hezbollah and other terrorists that kill innocent Muslims and attack their peaceful Arab and Israeli neighbors. This wealth, which rightly belongs to Iran's people, also goes to shore up Bashar al-Assad's dictatorship, fuel Yemen's civil war and undermine peace throughout the entire Middle East.
We cannot let a murderous regime continue these destabilizing activities while building dangerous missiles, and we cannot abide by an agreement if it provides cover for the eventual construction of a nuclear program.
The Iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into. Frankly, that deal is an embarrassment to the United States, and I don't think you've heard the last of it, believe me.
It is time for the entire world to join us in demanding that Iran's government end its pursuit of death of destruction. It is time for the regime to free all Americans and citizens of other nations that they have unjustly detained, and above all, Iran's government must stop supporting terrorists, begin serving its own people and respect the sovereign rights of its own neighbors.
The entire world understands that the good people of Iran want change, and other than the vast military power of the United States, that Iran's people are what their leaders fear the most.
This is what causes the regime to restrict internet access, tear down satellite dishes, shoot unarmed student protesters and imprison political reformers. Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever, and the day will come when the people will face a choice. Will they continue down the path of poverty, bloodshed and terror, or will the Iranian people return to the nation's proud roots as a center of civilization, culture and wealth where their people can be happy and prosperous once again?
The Iranian regime's support for terror is in stark contrast to the recent commitments of many of its neighbors to fight terrorism and halt its financing. In Saudi Arabia early last year, I was greatly honored to address the leaders of more than 50 Arab and Muslim nations. We agreed that all responsible nations must work together to confront terrorists and the Islamic extremism that inspires them. We will stop radical Islamic terrorism because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation and indeed to tear up the entire world.
We must deny the terrorists safe haven, transit, funding and any form of support for their vile and sinister ideology. We must drive them out of our nations. It is time to expose and hold responsible those countries whose support and finance carry groups like Al Qaida, Hezbollah and the Taliban and others that slaughter innocent people.
The United States and our allies are working together throughout the Middle East to crush the loser terrorists and stop the re-emergence of safe havens they use to launch attacks on all of our people. Last month, I announced a new strategy for victory in the fight against this evil in Afghanistan. From now on, our security interests will dictate the length and scope of military operations, not arbitrary benchmarks and timetables set up by politicians.
I have also totally changed the rules of engagement in our fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups.
In Syria and Iraq, we have made big gains toward lasting defeat of ISIS. In fact, our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined. We seek the de-escalation of the Syrian conflict and a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people. The actions of the criminal regime of Bashar al-Assad, including the use of chemical weapons against its own citizens, even innocent children, shock the conscience of every decent person.
No society can be safe if banned chemical weapons are allowed to spread. That is why the United States carried out a missile strike on the air base that launched the attack. We appreciate the efforts of the United Nations agencies that are providing vital humanitarian assistance in areas liberated from ISIS, and we especially thank Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon for their role in hosting refugees from the Syrian conflict.
The United States is a compassionate nation and has spent billions and billions of dollars in helping to support this effort. We seek an approach to refugee resettlement that is designed to help these horribly treated people and which enables their eventual return to their home countries, to be part of the rebuilding process.
For the cost of resettling one refugee in the United States, we can assist more than 10 in their home region. Out of the goodness of our hearts, we offer financial assistance to hosting countries in the region, and we support recent agreements of the G20 nations that will seek to host refugees as close to their home countries as possible.
This is the safe, responsible and humanitarian approach. For decades, the United States has dealt with migration challenges, here in the western hemisphere. We have learned that over the long term, uncontrolled migration is deeply unfair to both the sending and receiving countries. For the sending countries, it reduces domestic pressure to pursue needed political and economic reform and drains them of the human capital necessary to motivate and implement those reforms. For the receiving countries, the substantial costs of uncontrolled migration are borne overwhelmingly by low-income citizens whose concerns are often ignored by both media and government.
... Too often, the focus of this organization has not been on results, but on bureaucracy and process. In some cases, states that seek to subvert this institution's noble aims have hijacked the very systems that are supposed to advance them.
For example, it is a massive source of embarrassment to the United Nations that some governments with egregious human rights records sit on the UN Human Rights Council. The United States is one out of 193 countries in the United Nations, and yet we pay 22 percent of the entire budget and more. In fact, we pay far more than anybody realizes. The United States bears an unfair cost burden, but, to be fair, if it could actually accomplish all of its stated goals, especially the goal of peace, this investment would easily be well worth it.
...the United States has stood against the corrupt, destabilizing regime in Cuba and embraced the enduring dream of the Cuban people to live in freedom.
My administration recently announced that we will not lift sanctions on the Cuban government until it makes fundamental reforms. We have also imposed tough, calibrated sanctions on the socialist Maduro regime in Venezuela, which has brought a once thriving nation to the brink of total collapse.
The socialist dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro has inflicted terrible pain and suffering on the good people of that country. This corrupt regime destroyed a prosperous nation by imposing a failed ideology that has produced poverty and misery everywhere it has been tried. To make matters worse, Maduro has defied his own people, stealing power from their elected representatives to preserve his disastrous rule.
The Venezuelan people are starving, and their country is collapsing. Their democratic institutions are being destroyed. This situation is completely unacceptable, and we cannot stand by and watch. As a responsible neighbor and friend, we and all others have a goal. That goal is to help them regain their freedom, recover their country and restore their democracy.
I would like to thank leaders in this room for condemning the regime and providing vital support to the Venezuelan people. The United States has taken important steps to hold the regime accountable. We are prepared to take further action if the government of Venezuela persists on its path to impose authoritarian rule on the Venezuelan people. We are fortunate enough to have incredibly strong and healthy trade relationships with many of the Latin American countries gathered here today. Our economic bond forms a critical foundation for advancing peace and prosperity for all of our people and all of our neighbors.
I ask every country represented here today to be prepared to do more to address this very real crisis. We call for the full restoration of democracy and political freedoms in Venezuela.
The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented, but that socialism has been faithfully implemented.
(Scattered applause)
From the Soviet Union to Cuba to Venezuela, wherever true socialism or communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish and devastation and failure. Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems. America stands with every person living under a brutal regime. Our respect for sovereignty is also a call for action. All people deserve a government that cares for their safety, their interests and their wellbeing, including their prosperity.
In America, we seek stronger ties of business and trade with all nations of goodwill, but this trade must be fair, and it must be reciprocal. For too long, the American people were told that mammoth, multinational trade deals, unaccountable international tribunals and powerful global bureaucracies were the best way to promote their success. But as those promises flowed, millions of jobs vanished, and thousands of factories disappeared. Others gamed the system and broke the rules. And our great middle class, once the bedrock of American prosperity, was forgotten and left behind. But they are forgotten no more, and they will never be forgotten again.
... We need to defeat the enemies of humanity and unlock the potential of life itself. Our hope is a word and world of proud, independent nations that embrace their duties, seek friendship, respect others and make common cause in the greatest shared interest of all. A future of dignity and peace for the people of this wonderful Earth. This is the true vision of the United Nations. The ancient wish of every people, and the deepest yearning that lives inside every sacred soul. So let this be our mission, and let this be our message to the world: We will fight together, sacrifice together and stand together for peace, for freedom, for justice, for family, for humanity and for the Almighty God who made us all. Thank you, God bless you. God bless the nations of the world, and God bless the United States of America. Thank you very much."........

Monday, September 18, 2017

CNN's "The Reagan Show": They Just Can't Stop Themselves From Lying Anymore and Don't Even Remember Why They Shoudn't

"[T]hey, at the same time, have openly and publicly declared that the only morality they recognize is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve unto themselves the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat, in order to attain that, and that is moral, not immoral, and we operate on a different set of standards, I think when you do business with them...you keep that in mind."--Pres. Reagan, on Communists, although he could easily be speaking of the #ProfessionalLiars at CNN today.

At least CNN didn't fund Presidential Assassination Fantasies back then. That's how far down these low-life hacks have gone. Now, their mindless Trump Dementia has caused them to attack Reagan by proxy. I guess they needed some time off from inciting cop-killers.

Historian Craig Shirley and Scott Mauer:

"The Reagan Show" depicts the Great Communicator as a showman, a con. He's a doofus, a jokester who never takes his job seriously. There are lots of selective bloopers and intentional delays in his answers. While Reagan was well-known for his quick wit, we must question why CNN's "The Reagan Show" wanted to make this the sole focus. Surely it wasn't to show that he could have fun, was it? That he could put a smile on his face? And on others'?

No, it was to mock him. What was billed as a lighthearted look at the behind-the-scenes taping of the president instead tries to make him a laughingstock. We don't have to even ask for the network's motives. Those like CNN are literally incapable of praising the president now, much less President Reagan then. Not one mention of the turnaround from the Carter recession. Not one mention of the crushing defeat of the Soviet Union and winning the Cold War (if anything, glorifying the defeated Gorbachev and ignoring the alliance with Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II). Not one mention of his other successes, nor of his huge popularity.
All clips are selectively (corruptly?) edited to give the appearance of an awkward old man. To give one example of this: During the annual pardoning of a turkey one Thanksgiving, Reagan joked about shooting more of them. Because the audio was solely on Reagan's microphone, we, the audience, could only hear his laughter, no one else's. So it's only Reagan laughing and … we get the impression, no one else. Complete silence. Fake news? Contemptible? You bet.

Stretch that scene out to some 90 minutes, and that's what you have here. You get a difficult, elderly man who makes jokes, mispronounces words and names, repeats himself (there was a good 20-second montage of his just saying the Russian "Doveryai, no Proveryai" [Trust, but Verify] at various venues), and ignores the media.

There's a large section of the documentary that is focused solely on the name "Star Wars," which critics gave to Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative. Forget the fact that a large percentage of Americans supported the program, or that it was, in fact, a good idea, and had been successfully deployed. Let's cut to Democratic congressmen and NATO members mocking the President and mocking his "evil empire" remark and miscasting SDI as a Death Star.

Even the title of the documentary emphasizes the supposed charade and supposed fakeness of his presidency. The first clip shows a quip, "There have been times in this office when I wondered how you could do the job if you hadn't been an actor." After a smattering of praises and condemnations (calling him "out of touch," criticizing Reaganomics), the montage of clips ends with Reagan saying that he wanted to "make America great again." Subtlety was never the Left's strong point, especially when we get clips of threats of nuclear annihilation.
Only Democrats and liberals and teleprompter readers are interviewed for this waste of a film. They all trash Reagan. ...CNN charges that the whole Reagan presidency was a show. That is quite a damning accusation. ...

Struggling in its attempts to undo the latest presidential election, we see here CNN trying to undo elections where, respectively, 44 and 49 states voted for one man. He who controls the past ….".......


 And CNN will be there to lie about it.


Sunday, September 17, 2017

Night of the Living Nino

"Justice Antonin Scalia--A champion of our liberties and a stalwart defender of the Constitution, he will go down as one of the few Justices who single-handedly changed the course of legal history."--Sen. Ted Cruz

Justice Scalia would often tell the story of the activist judge who wakes up in the morning and tell his wife: "Honey, it's amazing; the Constitution agrees with me!" That is, everything the Left wants is already magically in the Constitution!  That's not law, but anti-law,  a 3-year-old's "Gimme!"-temper tantrum; a diaper-load disguised as jurisprudence. If it is law at all, it is merely The Law of the Jungle, the judge's gavel as the Caveman's Club. Our Constitution is Hanging by a Thread.
"Our manner of interpreting the Constitution is to begin with the text, and to give that text the meaning that it bore when it was adopted by the people ... This is such a minority position in modern academia and in modern legal circles that on occasion I'm asked when I've given a talk like this a question from the back of the room--'Justice Scalia, when did you first become an originalist?'--as though it is some kind of weird affliction that seizes some people-- 'When did you first start eating human flesh?'"

“Never compromise your principles, unless of course your principles are Adolf Hitler’s, in which case you would be well advised to compromise them as much as you can.”

Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas: "Insofar as a claimed legal right to release into this country is concerned, an alien under final order of removal stands on an equal footing with an inadmissible alien at the threshold of entry: He has no such right. We are offered no justification why an alien under a valid and final order of removal-- which has totally extinguished whatever right to presence in this country he possessed --has any greater due process right to be released into the country than an alien at the border seeking entry.".......

"In sum, we hold that the District's ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment, as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. Assuming that Heller is not disqualified from the exercise of Second Amendment rights, the District must permit him to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home. We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country. and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns. But tthe enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.".......

“From watching too many episodes of ‘The Sopranos,’ your staff seems to have acquired the belief that any Sicilian gesture is obscene.”

“If securing its territory in this fashion is not within the power of Arizona, we should cease referring to it as a sovereign State.”

“Under all the usual rules of interpretation, in short, the Government should lose this case. But normal rules of interpretation seem always to yield to the overriding principle of the present Court: The Affordable Care Act must be saved. ...We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.”

“I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.

It is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court.

The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create ‘liberties’ that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.

This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government. Except as limited by a constitutional prohibition agreed to by the People, the States are free to adopt whatever laws they like, even those that offend the esteemed Justices’ ‘reasoned judgment.’ A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.

The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic.

The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003. They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a ‘fundamental right’ overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds—minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis, William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly—could not.

They are certain that the People ratified the Fourteenth Amendment to bestow on them the power to remove questions from the democratic process when that is called for by their ‘reasoned judgment.’ These Justices know that limiting marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago, cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry. And they are willing to say that any citizen who does not agree with that, who adheres to what was, until 15 years ago, the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, stands against the Constitution.

The stuff contained in today’s opinion has to diminish this Court’s reputation for clear thinking and sober analysis. The opinion’s showy profundities are often profoundly incoherent. ‘The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality.’ (Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie. Expression, sure enough, is a freedom, but anyone in a long-lasting marriage will attest that that happy state constricts, rather than expands, what one can prudently say.)

What possible ‘essence’ does substantive due process ‘capture’ in an ‘accurate and comprehensive way’? It stands for nothing whatever, except those freedoms and entitlements that this Court really likes. And the Equal Protection Clause, as employed today, identifies nothing except a difference in treatment that this Court really dislikes. Hardly a distillation of essence. If the opinion is correct that the two clauses ‘converge in the identification and definition of a right,’ that is only because the majority’s likes and dislikes are predictably compatible.

When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. … Since there is no doubt whatever that the People never decided to prohibit the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the public debate over same-sex marriage must be allowed to continue.

But the Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law.

Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion is a candid and startling assertion: No matter what it was the People ratified, the Fourteenth Amendment protects those rights that the Judiciary, in its ‘reasoned judgment,’ thinks the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect. [T]o allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.

What really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch.”


Our Bronze Stars: Lt. Col. Richard Sakakida and Chief Warrant Officer Arthur Komori

So You Could Be Free

Via Anna PumaUS Senate - January 30, 1996

SEN. AKAKA. "Mr. President, I want to take the floor of the U.S. Senate to tell my colleagues and the people of Hawaii and the country about a Hawaii-born unsung hero of World War II. His extraordinary story has never been fully told. Colonel Sakakida, one of America's genuine war heroes, faced death with the same stoicism and dignity as he displayed in facing the dangers of war and the constant pain of his war injuries. Colonel Sakakida will be mourned by the many who knew him personally or by reputation, including the thousands of Japanese-Americans who followed his footsteps to serve in their country during the Second World War. He is survived by his beloved wife of many years, Cherry, to whom I offer my deepest condolences. Colonel Sakakida was a true hero, one whose contributions, tragically, have never fully been recognized by his own Government. His was one of the most amazing stories to come out of World War II. As a United States Army undercover agent and prisoner of war of the Japanese in the Philippines 50 years ago, he endured isolation, privation, disease, shrapnel wounds, the constant threat of discovery, and unspeakable physical torture in carrying out daring intelligence missions for his country. His sacrifices not only resulted in the advancement of the Allied cause during the Second World War, they reflected a great sense of duty and personal courage rarely seen even in that great conflict." ...

America's Secret Army: The Untold Story of the Counter Intelligence Corps


"Of all the unsung heroes of World War Two, Richard Sakakida must rank as one of the most remarkable. For courage, fortitude and loyalty to his adopted homeland there were few to rival him. Yet outside a small circle of veteran CIC agents Sakakida's name is almost unknown, and his extraordinary story has never been fully told. Richard Sakakida was a native of Hawaii, the son of Japanese parents who had emigrated there from Hiroshima at the beginning of the century. Most Americans would have described him as a Japanese-American, but the Japanese had a special word for such expatriates--Nisei, meaning the firstborn away from the homeland. Educated at a American high school in Honolulu and brought up as an American citizen in a Japanese family, Sakakida was a man of two cultures and two languages. The outbreak of war between America and Japan might easily have led to a hopeless confusion of loyalties in a person of his dual background, but it did not. Like the great majority of Nisei, many of whom were later to distinguish themselves in action against the Germans in Europe, Sakakida firmly considered himself to be an American first and last. In March 1941, nine months before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, this resolute, soft-voiced, earnest-mannered young man was invited to put his unusual linguistic and cultural qualifications to practical use by joining the specialist branch of the U.S. Army best able to take advantage of them--the CIC. Along with another young Nisei, Arthur Komori, he was sworn in as a CIC agent in Hawaii with the rank of sergeant. These were the first Japanese-Americans ever to be recruited into the CIC, and they were to be among the handful of their detachment to survive the war against Japan. After an intensive training course in the use of codes and ciphers and the recognition of prime targets, Sakakida and Komori were told to prepare to embark on a secret mission, the nature of which would be revealed to them later. They were told that their destination was Manila, the capital city of the Philippines, an American possession on the point of independence, where the United States still maintained a substantial military presence. They were warned that their assignment would certainly be a source of inconvenience and probably of danger. They were to say nothing except to their immediate family--in Sakakida's case his widowed mother. Less than a month later the two agents set sail for Manila on board a U.S. Army transport, traveling as deck hands in order to conceal their identity as members of the armed forces. In Manila, a city of tropical languor and almost colonial ease, they were met by the Commanding Officer of the CIC Detachment in the Philippines and briefed for the first time about the nature of their mission. The magnitude of their task took their breath away. It involved nothing less than the counter intelligence investigation of the entire Japanese community in Manila, into which they were required to infiltrate themselves as undercover miles in order to target those individuals who had connections with the Japanese military and posed a threat to the security of the United States Army. As a cover story they were to claim that they were crew members of a freighter and had jumped ship after tiring of life at sea--a story Komori enhanced by adding that he was also a draft dodger, a state of affairs which he reported later `was favourably received by the pro-Emperor sons of Japan.' Sakakida was instructed to register at a small hotel called the Nishikawa, while Komori checked in at the Toyo Hotel. From these two bases the tyro agents were to start looking around for roles in keeping with their assumed identities. Their case officers, Major Raymond and Agent Grenfell D. Drisko, were the only members of the CIC Detachment who knew that they were Nisei agents. In order to stay in contact they were given keys to a mailbox at the Central Post Office in Manila under the name of Sixto Borja and told to check the box twice daily for instructions about rendezvous places. Major Raymond or Agent Drisko would then pick them up at a prearranged spot and drive them by a roundabout route to the Military Intelligence section in Forth Santiago, where they could submit their report in safety and receive new briefings. For Major Raymond, a long-time Agent, Sakakida and Komori developed tremendous admiration and affection. `He gradually instilled in us the techniques of subtle investigations and subterfuges in the best traditions of the CIC,' Komori recalled later. To him they owed everything they knew about working as undercover agents amongst the impendingly hostile Japanese. And so, in the months preceding the outbreak of war, the two young and apprehensive Nisei began the delicate task of burrowing into the warren of the main Japanese community in the Philippines, numbering more than 2,000 in all. Sakakida posed as a sales representative of Sears, Roebuck, whose sales brochures he had learnt by heart, and spent most of his evenings in the Japanese Club, where he assiduously ingratiated himself with the Japanese businessmen who frequented this hotbed of Nippon orthodoxy. Meanwhile Komori obtained a post as a teacher of English at the Japanese Cultural Hall in Manila and made use of this respectable position to win the confidence and even the friendship of some of the leading Japanese residents of the city--the Japanese Consul General, the Chief of the Japanese News Agency, the Chief of the Japanese Tourist Bureau, the Chief of the Japanese Cultural Hall and many others. With few exceptions he found the Japanese `arrogant and expansionist-minded,' openly sympathetic to the militaristic ambitions of the Japanese Army generals and increasingly dismissive of the more peaceable and compromising civil government in Tokyo. War fever had developed to such an extent, Komori reported, that one of his students in his English class, a journalist who wrote for a newspaper in Osaka, even reported the likely route of advance of the Japanese forces once they had launched their attack against the British in Singapore. Komori had to go along with all this, of course, in order to keep up his cover. He even had to seem to join in the jinjoistic euphoria when Japanese planes bombed the American fleet at Pearl Harbor on 7 December and drink toasts to the Emperor when America declared war on Japan the following day. The outbreak of war now put him in grave danger, for it meant that henceforth he would be spying on an enemy people, and would have to face the consequences if he put a foot wrong. The war was only a few hours old when the complexities of Komori's new situation were brutally brought home to him. He was in the Japanese News Agency in Manila, downing yet another sake in yet another toast to the Emperor, when the door burst open and he found himself ringed by a group of Filipino Constabulary with bayonets fixed. To the Filipinos he was just another Japanese. Along with officials of the News Agency, Komori was herded down the stairs and into a waiting bus. He was then driven to the stinking old Bilibid Prison--`the hell hole' as he recalled, `of Manila'--and here he languished, an American agent amidst a gaggle of enemy subjects, completely confident that Major Raymond would eventually learn his whereabouts and rescue him. Meanwhile, in the wake of the rising tide of anti-Japanese feeling in the Philippines that followed the outbreak of hostilities, Sakakida too had been thrown into the Bilibid Prison, though via a much more circuitous chain of events..."

You'll want to read it all.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

"The First": Hillary's Victory New Yorker Cover

...And Ours!

"The First"
She was supposed to be The First Woman President--What Happened?

Well, that's too bad--but we've thoughtfully prepared some alternative covers:

"The Fifth!"

"Carlos Did WHAT?"


"I'm Important!"

"One way or the other..."


All the Paranoia, None of the Talent

"I clawed my way to the very middle!"

"What do you mean Blumenthal won't accept the charges?"

"They call me chronic, too, dude."

Old News
"I'm melting!"

"I'm never letting Anthony drive again."

"She might come back? Quick--hide the silverware!"

"Look what I found!"

Dr. Sowell:

"It is amazing how a simple question can cause a complex lie to collapse like a house of cards. The simple question was asked by Bill O'Reilly of the Fox News Channel, and it was addressed to two Democrats. He asked what has Hillary Clinton ever accomplished. For someone who has spent her entire adult life in politics, including being a Senator and then a Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has nothing to show for all those years -- no significant legislation of hers that she got passed in the Senate, and only an unbroken series of international setbacks for the United States during her time as Secretary of State."

Well, she does have some accomplishments, Doc.

She was the only Democrat fired for corruption in Watergate.
Every time she broke the law, she got someone else sent to jail for it.
And she built one of the most highly-regarded, ethical and upstanding worldwide bribery operations ever seen.

"See, hon--I told you she would never get her own cover."