Friday, February 21, 2020

Joseph Maguire was betrayed, but not by Donald Trump he was betrayed by his own staff.



Subject: Joseph Maguire was betrayed, but not by Donald Trump he was betrayed by his own staff.




Joe Maguire is an outstanding human being. He deserves every word of endorsement as to his dedication to the United States of America.

However, Joseph Maguire was betrayed, but not by Donald Trump he was betrayed by his own staff.

The Soviets and now the Russians want to  create confusion and discontent in the United States. So does George Soros. Adam Schiff is a willing tool of the Russians. Adam Schiff’s every word and every action implements the Russian campaign to undermine the United States and to create domestic discord.

Many elements within  the intelligence community understand [and have reported on ] the continued efforts of the Russians. They certainly would like to kill fracking and destroy the US capability for energy independence. They certainly would like to tank the US  economy by spreading doubt and uncertainty.

I read the Washington Post and I am dismayed  at the constant harassment  of the Trump administration. Further, I read the comments and am dismayed by the extent  of Trump derangement syndrome.

Again, members of McGuire staff should have alerted him that his words would be cherry picked and leaked by the intelligence committee Democratic Party staff to the detriment of Donald Trump.  Members of McGuire staff should have worked within the established chain of command and should  have first given the briefing to the White House.

The following is an unclassified version of a US intelligence report from October 29, 2016 in which US intelligence  reported that Putin favored the election Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. This report was sidelined by John Brennan [who appointed an ad hoc committee whose work' was never vetted]  which  claimed to have" highly sensitive" sources within Putin’s intimate inner circle.     http://ltgjcmilopsg3.blogspot.com/2016/10/appears-that-favors-hillary-clinton-in.html

Thursday, February 20, 2020

SANITIZING SOROS THROUGH "GUILT BY ASSOCIATION”…

SANITIZING SOROS THROUGH "GUILT BY ASSOCIATION”…

There   evidence to believe that Soros has used his vast wealth to promote policies that undermine and weaken democracy, the West and the State of Israel.

Melanie Phillips  JNS  2-2–20





The law professor Alan Dershowitz has thrown a legal hand-grenade into America’s political civil war by claiming to have evidence that former President Barack Obama “personally asked” the FBI to investigate someone “on behalf” of Obama’s “close ally,” billionaire financier George Soros.

He made his cryptic remark in an interview defending U.S. President Donald Trump against claims he interfered in the prosecution of his former adviser, Roger Stone.

Dershowitz, a confirmed liberal, drew the ire of the left by joining Trump’s impeachment defense team—not because he’s a Trump fan, but because he cares about upholding the rule of law and the U.S. constitution, which he believes (with good evidence) are being trashed in the anti-Trump witch-hunt.

Now, though, Dershowitz has crossed yet another line. For to criticize Soros, the principal funder of treasured activist causes, means automatically turning into a bogeyman of the left.

Predictably, therefore, Dershowitz has been painted as a wild conspiracy theorist. Other critics of Soros, a Jewish Holocaust survivor, find themselves labelled anti-Semites.

Last December, Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani suggested that Soros was involved in the Ukraine-Trump imbroglio, controlled various ambassadors and had employed FBI agents who the Trump camp believe were involved in a criminal conspiracy to bring down the president.

“Don’t tell me I’m anti-Semitic if I oppose him,” he told New York magazine. “Soros is hardly a Jew. I’m more of a Jew than Soros is. … He doesn’t belong to a synagogue, he doesn’t support Israel, he’s an enemy of Israel.”

Cue outrage among American Jewish groups. Anti-Defamation League national director and CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said: “For decades, George Soros’s philanthropy has been used as fodder for outsized anti-Semitic conspiracy theories insisting there exists Jewish control and manipulation of countries and global events.”

It’s undeniable that Soros has been targeted by anti-Semites who depict him as a caricature Jew trying to manipulate the world.
Focusing on his Jewishnesss is gratuitous and irrelevant. But just because he’s a magnet for anti-Semites does not mean there aren’t well-founded grounds for complaint against his behavior.
In the last few years, Soros has been trying to control local U.S. law-enforcement agencies by pumping massive amounts of money into backing radical candidates in key district attorney races.

In December, radicals who ran on a platform of not prosecuting certain crimes and reducing other state felonies to misdemeanors were elected as top prosecutors for three suburbs of Washington, D.C.

In Virginia’s Fairfax County a defeated prosecutor, Jonathan Fahey, said: “We have a world right now where the president picks the U.S. attorneys and George Soros picks the top state prosecutors. And that’s a scary world to live in.”

Jews are falsely and maliciously accused of manipulating countries and global events. But as Soros has himself acknowledged, that’s precisely what he has set out to do.

Quoting Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s remark that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but bends towards justice,” he told the U.K.’s Guardian: “I don’t believe that’s true. I think you need to bend the arc.”

In his book Soros on Soros, the financier wrote: “I do not accept the rules imposed by others. … I recognize that there are regimes that need to be opposed rather than accepted. And in periods of regime change, the normal rules don’t apply.”

What that means is that he has tried to re-order the world according to how he thinks it should be run. And that means opposing the U.S. and its values.

He has called America “the main obstacle to a stable and just world order,” and said E.U.-style socialism “is exactly what we need.”

Through his Open Society Foundations, which started out genuinely aiding freedom behind the Iron Curtain during the Cold War, his billions have been used to institutionalize policies such as the legalization of drugs, the promotion of illegal immigration or backing for anti-white groups such as Antifa—initiatives which attack Western values, undermine the nation-state, and damage cultural resilience and cohesion.

He has funded a plethora of anti-Israel and anti-Zionist groups. According to leaked documents, the OSF has financed NGOs in the United States, Europe and the Middle East to pressurize and delegitimize Israel. He has given millions to groups which support BDS and accuse Israel falsely of war crimes and ethnic cleansing.
He has also lent credence to the anti-Semitic claim that the “Israel lobby” has exercised undue influence over American foreign policy and in silencing criticism of Israel.

Now he appears to be stepping up yet further his attempts to delegitimize America and destroy the nation-state. At the World Economic Forum in Davos last month, he declared that the United States, China and Russia all remained “in the hands of would-be or actual dictators.”

In that speech, he announced a new $1 billion Open Society University Network to fund education programs around the world—described by the Financial Times as a plan to “educate against nationalism.”

Soros is entitled to hate Trump, despise the nation-state and support the idea of a transnational utopia. But when one single individual spends billions of dollars buying up and thus transforming public debate and global politics outside the normal democratic process, people are entitled to express significant concern.

Yet those doing so run a gauntlet of abuse. The left routinely employs smear by association against anyone who shares a platform with someone deemed to be (however falsely) a racist, fascist or some other kind of thought-criminal.

This happened recently over a conference in Rome discussing “national conservatism,” organized by the Israeli scholar (and Orthodox Jew) Yoram Hazony, whose book The Virtue of Nationalism seeks to restore support for the nation to conservative thought.

Although this conference featured solid conservative thinkers such as Chris DeMuth and Ofir Haivry of the Edmund Burke Foundation and John O’Sullivan of National Review, it also included figures such as Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Giorgia Meloni, whose Brothers of Italy party is supported by members of Mussolini’s family, and Jean-Marie Le Pen’s niece Marion Marechal.

All these are demonized as “far-right” by the liberal establishment, which in turn demonizes anyone who shares their platform.
Appallingly, British Jewish leaders rushed to stoke the flames of this auto-da-fe of political heretics.

The Board of Deputies attacked the Conservative MP Daniel Kawczynski for attending the conference, claiming the Conservative party ran the “serious risk of the public assuming that they share his views” unless it disciplined him. Which it duly did, issuing Kawczynski with a formal warning and forcing him to apologize for his attendance.

Thus the Board of Deputies has also implicitly and absurdly smeared Hazony, one of the most impressive Jewish thinkers of current times.

In a mirror image of this tactic, anyone who criticizes George Soros is accused of being an anti-Semite—because anti-Semites have attacked him.

The point about anti-Semitism is that it is based on paranoid and deranged lies. There is, however, good evidence to believe that Soros has used his vast wealth to promote policies that undermine and weaken democracy, the West and the State of Israel.

By defending him in such a Pavlovian fashion and using character assassination to silence his critics, Jews and others engaged in such witch-hunts do no favors to the Jewish people or the causes of fighting anti-Semitism and defending freedom, which they thus trivialize and undermine.

Melanie Phillips, a British journalist, broadcaster and author, writes a weekly column for JNS. Currently a columnist for “The Times of London,” her personal and political memoir, “Guardian Angel,” has been published by Bombardier, which also published her first novel, “The Legacy,” in 2018. Her work can be found at: www.melaniephillips.com.

Saturday, February 15, 2020

For Black History Month, give '1776' a read by Washington Examiner February 14, 2020

For Black History Month, give '1776' a read

by Washington Examiner  February 14, 2020

In celebration of Frederick Douglass’s birthday, the Washington Examiner has published a number of special essays on the topics of race, slavery, and the achievement of the United States’s highest ideals. This represents our collaboration with the Woodson Center to promote its new educational series, “1776.”
This project has brought together “an assembly of independent voices who uphold our country’s authentic founding virtues and values.” The writers of these essays, most of them black and all of them serious thinkers, come from ideologically diverse backgrounds. They are liberals, conservatives, academics, journalists, and activists. What they share in common is an aversion to the increasing infantilization of black America or the denial of blacks’ agency throughout their history. These writers share with one another a distaste for attempts at pseudo-scholarship that would reduce all of U.S. history to a history of racism and all of black America to the permanent status of helpless victim.
The name they chose, “1776,” consciously echoes that of the New York Times’s 1619 Project, as it is intended to be an alternative. The flawed premise of that other enterprise was that slavery is not just the original sin that the U.S. has worked to overcome but actually makes up the nation’s foundational character and explains all of the social maladies in black America today.
There are many problems with this concept, as the 1776 authors note. For example, slavery cannot become an explanation for social maladies that didn’t even exist as recently as the civil rights era.
The evil of slavery in the early U.S. and its modern legacy must not be ignored. Slavery was an abomination and, for the founders of this nation, a daily reality. It had existed not since 1619 but from time immemorial. Some of the Founding Fathers embraced and defended this vile institution as it slithered its way into modernity as a form of permanent, race-based subjugation; others tolerated it, some very reluctantly, in the interest of forming what they hoped would become a more perfect union.
This nation has since become just that: more perfect. It was not an easy journey from ownership of blacks to the election of a black president, but the progress is real, as strangely loath as some are to admit it. The journey included the most destructive war in U.S. history in terms of both economic and human costs. It included the vicious lie of “separate but equal,” which abrogated the rule of law for a century. It included terrorism, intimidation, lynchings, and violent resistance to civil rights by the very authorities that were supposed to be protecting the rights of all.
But this story also has its heroes and its triumphs. It includes black and white abolitionists who stood and spoke out tirelessly on principles of freedom. It includes black families who were forced to build their own schools and community institutions. Blacks built up entrepreneurial enterprises and fortunes, and, sometimes, they rebuilt them after racist terrorism destroyed them. They built their own colleges and universities of the sort that produced key figures such as Martin Luther King Jr. And, finally, after overcoming so many obstacles, they laid claim to the full set of rights that no one can deny them today, taking up their rightful place as first-class citizens.
The U.S. is now a more perfect union than it was. It is still not perfect, but it is a highly functional, dynamic, and successful nation and the most diverse nation in history.
Immigrants from every part of the world aspire to come to the U.S., not because they want to share in ill-gotten wealth from slavery but because people all over the world tacitly understand and acknowledge that no one outdoes Americans in their welcoming attitude toward foreigners and their commitment to fairness and the rule of law.
We hope you will enjoy these essays, beginning with the introduction to the series by Robert Woodson. He holds up the oft-forgotten achievements of blacks even against the grain of Jim Crow as “a powerful refutation of the claim that the destiny of black Americans is determined by what whites do or what they have done in the past.”
We are also proud to host the "1776" essay by Clarence Page, the famed liberal columnist for the Chicago Tribune, whose work has now appeared in print in seven different decades. Page, distressed by “the long-held stereotypes of black people as helpless bystanders in their own history,” urges readers to “desegregate our poverty discussion.” The causes of black and white poverty, he notes, are often strikingly similar.
We have published 10 other essays, as well, which all appear on our "1776" landing page, and we will be adding more as we continue our celebration of Black History Month. Each of the essays at the above link contains valuable arguments, new perspectives, and nuggets of forgotten black history. They are well worth your attention.