Lies, Treachery, and Colllusion from Christine Blasey Ford, Progressive Democrats, and the Deep State

THE QUESTION TODAY FOR ALL CONSERVATIVE AMERICANS IS 'WHERE ELSE SHALL WE GO?' We have witnessed a Supreme Court process hijacked by a gang of Progressive-Socialist insurrectionists. We saw a Republican Senate Judiciary Committee cave in to their demands not once but three times -- in delaying the hearing itself, in allowing the Democrat members to put a stranglehold on Judge Kavanaugh by insisting that the FBI investigate outrageous unsupported and unsupportable allegations, and finally by voting to release his name to the full Senate and then putting a caveat as big as the ProgDem Swamp on it. WHERE do American conservatives and Republicans who respect the Constitution and the Republic' rule of law go now??? • • • LIES, LIES, AND MORE LIES. They are piling up like dead fish on a contaminated beach. • The Judiciary Committee was informed that the American Bar Association had asked for a delay in the vote -- a LIE. As chairman Grassley pointed out, the President of the ABA took it upon himself to make the ABA decision about Kavanaugh using ABA Letterhead. The ABA Board of Directors have reaffirmed their full support for Kavanaugh and reinstated his standing in the ABA. That LIE was used bt #NeverTrump Seantor Flake to finnagle a week delay even after the Committee had voted to release. Grassley has ample dealings with Flake to realize that he is a Swamp Snake hiding out as a Republican whose agenda is to destroy Trump. WHY did Grassley not simply send the 10-10 vote to the Senate with a note of 'no decision'??? • The President’s stamp of approval on the controversial supplemental investigation came with limitations outlined in a statement : “I’ve ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s file. As the Senate has requested, this update must be limited in scope and completed in less than one week.” Were the Democrats and Flake LYING when they agreed to a one-week limit on the investigation? Most likely since their goal must surely be to trot out more LIES about Judge Kavanaugh as the week rolls by -- with the further goal of delaying the vote in the Senate until after the mid-term elections in which the ProgDems have the hallucinatory dream of taking back the House and Senate. • LIES from the Democrat Committee members started with Delaware's Senator Chris Coons who told the Committee on Friday about Senator Flake's position : "We share a deep concern." Coons was reported in the mainstream media to be fighting back tears defending Jeff Flake. They withdrew to an anteroom, delaying the Senate Judiciary Committee’s scheduled vote on whether to send Kavanaugh’s nomination. They won. Coons believes, as he has stated on the record that Judge Kavanaugh "bears the burden of disproving these allegations." Who cares about the US Constitutino's presumption of innocence? Notthe ProgDem from Delaware. • Democrat Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii doesn't care about the constitutional presumption of innocene either. Senator Hirono stated on the record that Judge Kavanaugh doesn’t get a presumption of innocence because of His "Ideological Agenda." BUT, her ProgDem ideological agenda allowed her to send a fundraising email during the opening remarks of Judge Kavanaugh at Thrusday's hearing. The Hirono LIE is the overriding lies of the elites who believe they are above the law while the est of us must be subject to the law as they choose ot define it. Even Jake Tapper of CNN says that there is no corroborating evidence for any of the charges against Kavanaugh. • Christine Blasey Ford submitted four names to the Judiciary Committee and the media who she said could verify her story. Not one has done that. And, as the FBI begins its new investigation of Judge Kavanaugh -- its 7th -- a statement from the attorney representing one of those named, a friend of Christine Blasey Ford, Leland Keyser, has indicated once again that Keyser has NO recollection of the event that Ford testified to in the Senate on Thursday. Thus far, the only evidence that Ford has brought in the case is her own testimony. All of the individuals who she claimed attended the party with her and Kavanaugh deny any knowledge of the event taking place. Attorney Howard Walsh III wrote to Judiciary Committee chairman Grassley, saying on Saturday : “Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford. In his letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he said : “Ms. Keyser asked that I communicate to the committee her willingness to cooperate fully with the FBI’s supplemental investigation of Dr. Christine Ford’s allegation against Judge Brett Kavanaugh.” Walsh went on to stipulate that “as my client as already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” Keyser’s statement came in response to the decision by the Senate, backed by President Donald Trump, to ask the FBI to further investigate the allegations against Kavanaugh. A LIE by Christine Blasey Ford? Highly likely. • • • AND MEDIA LEAKS ON TOP OF LIES. Legal Insurrection reported on Sunday that Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island referred the latest Kavanaugh false accuser to a reporter at same time that he notified FBI and Judiciary Committee of the allegations. Senator Whitehouse said : “At the constituent’s request, I provided the constituent with the contact information of a reporter who might investigate the allegation.” A Rhode Islander made an accusation that gained media attention, alleging that Kavanaugh participated in a sexual attack on a boat in Rhode Island. The accusation was made to Whitehouse’s office in the morning of September 24, 2018, ands showed up quickly in the media feeding the political frenzy. The accuser, after the story became public and completely implausible, then recanted that night. A LIE compounded by a Senator's sleazy use of the LIE by referring the liar to a reporter. • The Senate Judiciary Committee has referred the matter to the Department of Justice and FBI for investigation and possible prosecution, because the accuser allegedly provided false information to the Committee during its investigation. The cover letter from Chuck Grassley and supporting materials are available at the Committee website. In those materials is the letter Whitehouse sent to the Committee the same day the accuser contacted Whithouse’s office. In that letter, Whitehouse states : “This morning, a constituent contacted my office to report another allegation of sexual misconduct by Judge Brett Kavanaugh, nominee to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. At the constituent’s request, I provided the constituent with the contact information of a reporter who might investigate the allegation. I have also alerted the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” • Whitehouse was one of the most aggressive interrogators of Brett Kavanaugh, interrogating Kavanaugh about high school yearbook entries, and making Whitehouse national mockery. Whitehouse also announced a theory about a July 1, 1982 party, based on Kavanaugh’s contemporaneous calendar, which has been soundly debunked. John McCormack at The Weekly Standard explained : "The potential significance of this event is that it is the only party or gathering listed on Kavanaugh’s calendar at which both Mark Judge and P.J. Smyth were listed as present, and Judge and Smyth are two people alleged by Ford to have been in attendance at the gathering where she was allegedly assaulted. But the house where this gathering took place (according to Kavanaugh’s calendar) does not appear to match the description offered by Ford in her recollection of events, and there are other reasons to be skeptical of the theory put forward by Senator Whitehouse and several left-leaning journalists....Ford recalled that the home where the alleged attack occurred was, according to the Washington Post, “not far from the country club” in Chevy Chase, Maryland, where she had likely spent the day swimming prior to the alleged attack. Tom Kane, one of the Kavanaugh friends who was listed in attendance, told CNN’s New Day on Friday that Tim Gaudette’s house was in Rockville, Maryland, 11 miles away from the country club. 'I saw it published today that someone’s floating the notion that there was something on July 1 at Tim Gaudette’s house,' Kane told CNN. 'Tim Gaudette lived in Rockville. It’s 11 miles away from Columbia Country Club. And it wasn’t a single-family home. It was a townhouse.' " • • • WHO IS CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD? Blabber Buzz reported an article by InfoWars and Zero Hedge on Friday, September 28 2018, that sent shockwaves through me. The article was written by Infowars with the title "CIA Honeytrap Set -- Kavanaugh Accuser Has CIA Ties?" BUT, the Infowars qrticle was entirely based on a September 23 article that was a Zero Hedge Exclusive. Zero Hedge wrote : "All of the other witnesses have come forward and stated they have no recollection of the event, and have taken a step further to say that Brett Kavanaugh is an honest, ethical, and respectable individual : Everyone at the party has said they have no idea what Christine Blasey Ford is talking about, even her longtime friend Leland Ingham Keyser! Also potentially damaging to Blasey Ford’s claim is a theory presented Thursday by Ed Whelan, a former clerk to USSC Justice Antonin Scalia and currently president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC), a conservative think tank. Using entirely circumstantial evidence which could certainly ruin the life of the man at the center of the new theory, Whelan suggested that Kavanaugh’s high school doppelgänger, Chris Garrett, may have in fact been responsible for Blasey Ford’s recollection of the alleged incident. Before we dig deeper let’s understand Deep State forces a bit better. The CIA, et. al utilize a number of techniques to achieve their goals, ‘whatever works.’...we created a simple hypothesis based on history, based on their traditional Modus Operandi (MO). What if this ‘incident’ was a total fabrication, part of a CIA “Honeytrap” ? To test our hypothesis, we did a simple Google search to see if there were any keyword relations including ‘clintons’ and ‘cia’ and sure enough, all 10 of the top 10 results, including the most interesting story which has already been reported. This person’s father works for the CIA but not only that – he was an executive of the bank that handles the CIA’s black budget! You can’t make this stuff up!" InfoWars states : "Of course, this theory is perfectly, logically, and legally impossible to prove, as the CIA operates under the explicit cover of national security, which is the end all and be all of the Shadow Government. What this means is just simply this is another cut in the death by a thousand cuts approach taken by Deep-State Democrats and Crooked Clinton supporters which will do anything to justify their own means, to avoid restoration of ‘rule of law’ and defend and/or cover up their own illegal acts in any way possible. Stay tuned, this is getting interesting." • Reddit showed a site called "Drain the Swamp" that rpeoted that "Gina Haspel, CIA Director, just contacted Mitch McConnell and President Donald Trump yesterday in regards to Christine Blasey Ford and let them know Christine and her father are CIA and this is a smear op." Reddit says :"HAVE NO PROOF TO BACK UP THIS, USE DECERNMENT." • Anorther Reddit link notes that "Dr. Christine Blasey heads Stanford University’s CIA Undergraduate Internship Program." You can find this internship program on the official Stanford site. • Bloomberg's short online bio says this about Ford's father : "Mr. Ralph G. Blasey, Jr. serves as a Vice President of Business Development of Red Coats, Inc., a private company specializing in commercial office cleaning, uniformed guard services and access control systems. From October 1982 to July 1989, Mr. Blasey owned and operated several privately-held companies. He has over 40 years of executive management experience in financial and manufacturing corporations and responsibilities include identifying selling opportunities for the Red Coats Family of Companies, working in conjunction with the Vice President of Sales & Marketing and the Executive Vice President. He served as the President of Weston International Corporation, a Maryland corporation, from February 1974 to October 1982. From June 1962 to January 1974, Mr. Blasey served as a Vice President of National Savings and Trust of Washington, D.C. Mr. Blasey served as the Chairman of the Beverage Industry Council of the Food Processing & Beverage Manufacturing Association from 1996 to 1998. He has been a Director of US Liquids Inc. since December 2002. He served as a Director of Weston International Corporation, a Maryland corporation, from February 1974 to October 1982. He graduated from Rutgers University with a degree in Commercial Banking." Not much there. • BUT, Christine Blasey Ford's lawyer is another matter. Senator Graham said at Thursday's Judiciary Committee hearing : "Here is what I want your audience to know. If Miss Ford really did not want to come forward, never intended to come forward, never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in August and why did she hire a lawyer in August if she never intended to do what she’s doing?...And who’s paid for it?" Debra Katz, the attorney for Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, is vice chair of the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) which has been directly funded by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation. She’s eportedly donated about $24K to liberal causes including Moveon.org and had this to say about Trump advisors on Facebook : “These people are all miscreants. The term ‘basket of deplorables’ is far too generous a description for these people who are now Senior Trump advisors.” Debra Katz is a known lawyer who specializes in the representation of whistleblowers. How was it that she was hired months ago to represent Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser? Remember that Senator Feinstein claimed that the anonymous person wanted to stay anonymous. If that’s the case, why did this woman secure a lawyer specializing in whistleblower cases months ago? What else will we eventually learn about George Soros organizations involvedin trying to stop the Kavanaugh confirmation. These people will stop at nothing to get what they want. • The website heavy.com give a review of Ford's family : "Russell Ford and Christine Blasey Ford have two teenage sons, according to the San Jose Mercury News, which reports that the family members are all avid surfers. A friend described the couple as 'modest,' and said they eat organic food and 'drive hybrids that they plug into a charging station in their driveway.' Russell Ford’s LinkedIn page hasn’t been updated since 2016. However, at that time, it described a lengthy career in medical research. The most recent entry says that, from 2004 to 2006, Russ Ford worked for a company called Zosano Pharma. He gave his title as 'Sr Director, System Design and Development.' Ford described his duties as : 'Individual contributor and manager of engineering group responsible for all mechanical product design and development activities including technical scale-up for components and applicator device; i.e. non-drug, non-excipient product design -- dynamic mechanical applicator, microneedle array, adhesive patch, and packaging. Budgeting for functional group and for individual projects. Presenter and interface for device design during 6+ technical audits by prospective pharma business partners. Attendee at FDA EOP2 meeting.' Before that, he worked as director of Advanced Engineering for Abbott Medical Optics in Milpitas, California, a position he held from 2011 to 2014. 'Division of Abbott Laboratories, #1 in laser vision correction products....Ford has also held similar positions at Boston Scientific and, as noted in his wedding announcement, at Cygnus, where he describes himself as the 'developer of first FDA-approved non-invasive continuous glucose monitor for people with Diabetes.' • Christine Blasey Ford has a second brother named Tom, who is also a lawyer in the Washington D.C. area. QProofs on Twitter stated at https://twitter.com/statuses/1045876006077136896 : "Jill Strzok is Peter Strzoks' sister-in-law. Jill Strzok works with Thomas Blasey. Thomas Blasey is Christine Ford's brother. 3 degrees of separation between Christine Ford and Peter Strzok. There are NO coincidences. They're ALL connected." • According to records, Ford is not licensed in the state of California. Infowars reports : "Testifying under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Christine Blasey Ford identified herself as a ‘psychologist,’ but records indict this is a false statement under California law. Someone at Stanford University also appears to have caught the blunder and edited Ford’s faculty page. Just one sentence into her sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford may have told a lie. After thanking members of the committee on Thursday, and while under oath, Ford opened her testimony saying, 'My name is Christine Blasey Ford, I am a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine.' The issue lies with the word “psychologist,” and Ford potentially misrepresenting herself and her credentials, an infraction that is taken very seriously in the psychology field as well as under California law. Under California law, in order for a person to identify publicly as a psychologist they must be licensed by the California Board of Psychology, a process that includes 3,000 hours of post-doctoral professional experience and passing two rigorous exams. To call oneself a psychologist without being licensed by a state board is the equivalent of a law school graduate calling herself a lawyer without ever taking the bar exam. According to records, Ford is not licensed in the state of California. A recent search through the Department of Consumer Affairs License Bureau, which provides a state-run database of all licensed psychologists in California, produced no results for any variation of spelling on Ford’s name. If Ford at one time had a license but it is now inactive, she would legally still be allowed to call herself a 'psychologist' but forbidden from practicing psychology on patients until it was renewed. However, the database would have shown any past licenses granted to Ford, even if they were inactive. Ford also does not appear to have been licensed in any other states outside California. Since graduating with a PhD in educational psychology from the University of Southern California in 1996 it does not appear Ford has spent any significant amount of time outside the state. She married her husband in California in 2002, and completed a master’s degree in California in 2009. She reportedly completed an internship in Hawaii, but a search of Hawaii’s Board of Psychology licensing databased also did not turn up any results for Ford....Aside from potentially misleading the committee, Ford also appears to have violated California law. California’s Business and Professional Code Sections 2900-2919govern the state’s laws for practicing psychology. Section 2903 reads, 'No person may engage in the practice of psychology, or represent himself or herself to be a psychologist, without a license granted under this chapter, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.' Section 2902(c) states: (c) 'A person represents himself or herself to be a psychologist when the person holds himself or herself out to the public by any title or description of services incorporating the words 'psychology,' 'psychological, 'psychologist,' 'psychology consultation,' 'psychology consultant,' 'psychometry,' 'psychometrics' or 'psychometrist,' 'psychotherapy,' 'psychotherapist,' 'psychoanalysis,' or 'psychoanalyst,' or when the person holds himself or herself out to be trained, experienced, or an expert in the field of psychology.' This appears to include titles like 'research psychologist.' There is one specific exemption to the law regarding the title 'school psychologist,' which refers to school counselors who do not need to be licensed. School psychologists are legally forbidden from referring to themselves as simply 'psychologists.' ” Another LIE. • • • WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION, LET'S USE IT. On Friday, September 28, Patrick J. Buchanan wrote na article calling the Kavanaugh attack a "Dress Rehearsal for Impeachment." Pat Buchanan wrote : "Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court was approved on an 11-10 party-line vote Friday in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Yet his confirmation is not assured. Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, has demanded and gotten as the price of his vote on the floor, a weeklong delay. And the GOP Senate has agreed to Democrat demands for a new FBI investigation of all credible charges of sexual abuse against the judge....if Brett Kavanaugh is elevated to the Supreme Court, it will be because, in his final appearance, he tore up the script assigned to him. He set aside his judicial demeanor to fight for his good name with the passion and righteous rage of the innocent and good man he believes himself to be. He turned an inquisition into his character and conduct as a teenager into a blazing indictment of the Democratic minority for what they were doing to his reputation and his family. Rather than play the role of penitent, Kavanaugh did what Clarence Thomas did 30 years before. He attacked the character, conduct and motives of his Democratic accusers. And did the judge not speak the truth? With few exceptions, all four dozen Senate Democrats are determined to defeat him, even if that requires them to destroy him. They rejected Brett Kavanaugh the day he was nominated. Why? Because the judge is a conservative and a Catholic, hence an unreliable vote to sustain Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that discovered hidden in the Constitution a woman's right to abort her unborn child....Contrast how Kavanaugh, who has served his country with distinction for decades, was treated Thursday, and how Dr. Christine Blasey Ford was treated. Ford was greeted with courtly courtesy by Chairman Sen. Chuck Grassley. No Republican senator asked her a question. Rachel Mitchell, a prosecutor of sex crimes brought in from Arizona, quizzed her as though she were a 15-year-old girl who had just been attacked, not a 51-year-old woman whose uncorroborated accusations were designed not only to defeat a Supreme Court nomination but to destroy the career, family and future of a federal judge. After each five-minutes of polite questioning by Mitchell, Democratic Senators took turns lauding Ford's courage, bravery and heroism in agreeing to appear....'This is the most unethical sham since I've been in politics,' said Senator Lindsey Graham, 'I hope that the American people will see through this charade.' They had best do so. For what is being done to Kavanaugh is, if Democrats take control of Congress in November, a harbinger of what is to come. The assault on Kavanaugh, converting a man known for his integrity into a youthful Jack the Ripper in 10 days, is the playbook for what is planned for Trump. The Kavanaugh lynching is a dress rehearsal for the impeachment of Donald Trump. And the best way to fight impeachment is the way the judge fought Thursday. In defending yourself, go after your malevolent accusers as well." • We will all agree with the Washington Free Beacon's Matthew Continetti, who wrote on Thursday an article titled "Call the Roll on Kavanaugh -- It's time to see where each Senator stands." Continetti was speaking of the roll call to come in the Senate Judiciary Committee. BUT, his point is correct and should be applied by Majortiy Leader Mitch McConnell to the final Senate vote to confirm : "What is clear is that the Senate must vote, up or down, on Kavanaugh's nomination. One way or another, the roll must be called. Yeas and Nays must be recorded. For two reasons. The first is political. If Republicans walk away from Kavanaugh now, especially after Lindsey Graham's philippic, the conservative grassroots will revolt and the midterm election will be an unmitigated disaster. According to polls, the GOP has already lost the middle. It cannot afford to lose the right. The base is the difference between no wave and a blue wave, between a blue wave and a tsunami. Let each Senator say what he or she believes, and record that judgment by vote. Even if the nomination fails because no Democrat votes yes and two Republicans vote no, that is a better outcome for the GOP than no vote at all. Conservatives expect to be disappointed by individual Republicans. No vote? Conservatives walk away. The other reason to call the roll is more abstract. This story is about more than an allegation of sexual assault. It has become a matter of political precedent. The public deserves to know the Senate's position on the following question: Are uncorroborated allegations, sometimes made anonymously, from high school and college enough to disqualify men and women from appointed office? Are we prepared to establish a standard by which appointees are judged by comments in a high school yearbook, statements from classmates 30 or 35 years ago, and attendance at student parties where alcohol was consumed? If we are to go down this road, then we should know where each of the 100 men and women elected to the United States Senate, including Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Jeff Flake, stand at the outset. How else will we be able to apportion blame when the three Furies arrive? Because they are on their way." • • • DEAR READERS, I began this blog with the question "Where else shall we go?" That question has been circulating in private and public conversations among conservatives and Republicans for some time as we watch the Deep State and its ProgDem contingent try to destroy President Trump and the GOP. • The question actually comes from The Catholic Thing's Sunday article by Randall Smith, who asks "Where Else Shall We Go?" if Catholics leave the Catholic Church. He is, of course, talking about the current scandals concerning priests who are/were sex abusers and those who covered up for them. Randall Smith's point is that Catholics do not have faith in priests or bishops. They have faith in God. Read what Smith wrote and insert Republican Party for Catholic Church : "If you ask, 'How can I continue to have faith in the Catholic Church considering all these horrible acts?' you might put yourself in the place of the Jewish community after the Holocaust. They had to ask themselves : 'How can I continue to have faith in God considering all these horrible acts?' How can we continue to dedicate ourselves to a community so unfaithful to God? Moses asked the same question when he saw the infidelity of his fellow Jews in the desert. The prophets asked the same question when they saw the injustices of the people in the Promised Land. The early apostles must have asked themselves the same question when they saw that it was one of their own company who handed Jesus over to His enemies. And Peter himself, the 'rock' on which the Church was to be built, denied he even knew the Lord in His most desperate hour of need. What could anyone do to compete with that? How hard would it have been to stay in the Church when one’s friends, neighbors, and family members were being martyred, torn to shred by animals or burned alive, for refusing to deny their faith? How hard would it have been to stay in the Church when so many of one’s other friends, neighbors, and family members had given in and denied Christ in the face of the threats of the Roman authorities. Life in the Church has rarely been simple. What would you have done when the Arian crisis split the Church in two....How about when three men all claimed to be pope in the fourteenth century? Or when the Protestant Revolt split Christendom....Imagine being a Catholic in the midst of these scandals. What would you have done? Would you have been one of those who stayed and fought the good fight in faith? Or would you have been one of the many who said, 'That’s it. I’m out'? But then where would you have gone? That’s the question Peter asks Christ. 'Lord, where else shall we go?'....C.S. Lewis once complained about a culture that produces 'men without chests' and then expects of them virtue. 'We laugh at honor,' wrote Lewis, 'and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.' " • What do conservatives and Republicans do now?? Demand the truth from Progressive Democrats in the Senate by making them stand up and vote against Judge Kavanaugh publicly so that their constituents can hear and consider their vote against Kavanaugh, the Constitution and the rule of law. Randall Smith wrote that Czech dissident in the Soviet era, and later president of Czechoslovakia, Vaclav Havel insisted that you demand truth by living in the truth, and St. Augustine said about the Gospel : “If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.” • If we conservatives and Repblicans believe what we like about the political process put into motion by the Constitution but reject the entire lot -- process and Constitution included -- when times get tough, what kind of conservatives or Republicans -- or Americans -- are we? There are times when we must stand up and act like we understand what the Founders meant when they wrote "We the People." They had been through hell to get to that unique historical moment of "We the People?" It is now time for us to step up and support them. Demand that the Senate call the roll on Kavanaugh. We Americans have the right guaranteed by the Constitution to see where each Senator stands. And, we have the duty and obligation to evaluate the votes and get rid of the "traitors in our midst" who place power and elite privilege above honor and country.

The Post-Kavanaugh Democrat Party Is Unfit to Lead and, Yes, Unfit Even to Follow America's Elected Leaders

DEAR READERS, I watched the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing for Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh. I watched the entire Friday mroning Judiciary Committee meeting before the vote on forwarding Judge Kavanaugh's name to the full Senate for confirmation. I have read every article about the Ford-Kavanaugh hearing that the last 23 hours would allow. I have organized my thoughts. I have prayed. But, I cannot and I will not write a rational blog about an irrational martyrdom. • What we witnessed on Thursday, September 27, 2018, was just that, a martyrdom. On Thursday, Senator Lindsey Graham's righteous rebuke of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, of the Senate, of the Democrat Party and of the US political situation in Washington had the force of terrible truth -- "If you are looking for a fair process, you have come to the wrong town at the wrong time." It was followed by the "before God" demand of Senator Kennedy to Judge Kavanaugh to tell the truth, which the Judge did fully in three separate oaths before God of his innnocence. • Watching Dr. Ford, I knew I was seeing a psychological train wreck. Either she is in the clutch of a mental disorder or she is a liar. I will not delve into he-said-she-said here, but I wonder why nobody has raised the matter of Dr. Ford's medical records, which she and her lawyers have reportedly refused to provide to the Committee. I raise this because she has said that she suffers from claustrophobia, and it strikes me that what actually happened back on that evening in 1982 was that she was pushed -- or more likely -- accidentally entered the room after coming up what she always describes as a narrow set of stairs. It was dark. She panicked and her claustrophobia became a panic attack. She has testified to the symptoms she experienced that evening that fit a panic attack -- what she described as a locked door, inability to breathe, feeling trapped, thinking she would be killed, voices laughing at her, flailing to get away, and finally breaking out of the room. Was that what heppened? Did she then begin to see it 30 years later as a sexual assault? Was the name of Judge Kavanaugh placed in her susceptible mind by her activism for Progressive causes or by those intending to use her -- she did not mention Kavanaugh's name in her therapy sessions. Why has the Judiciary Committee not been permitted to study Dr. Ford's mental health history? It might answer many of the questions now unanswered about her motives. I feel sorry for Dr. Ford and I leave her to her personal demons. • But, Ford's patrons, Senator Feinstein and her staff and her conspirators-in-evil fellow Democrats are agents of destruction. Destruction of two human beings. Destruction of their Democrat Party. Destruction of the Constitution and its Republic's rule of law. I would, if I had the power, censure every Democrat member of the Judiciary Committee and strip them of every committee seat and official role in the US Senate. I would, if I had the power, remove them from the Senate if the chamber's rules provide for it. • For Judge Kavanaugh, there is no remedy. He will bear the wounds of the Democrat assault forever. He is, in a symbolic sense, pure innocence being held before our eyes by God, Who is showing us through Brett Kavanaugh's agony what we have become as a body politic. Is God making one last effort to show us our fallen ways so that we may correct them? It is now for us to answer that question through our actions. The Senate Judiciary Committee just voted 11-10 on strict Party lines to release Judge Kavanaugh's name to the full Senate. He will be confirmed. • But, the United States and her citizens cannot rest easy when that act has been accomplished. Public repentance and reform are our only hope of saving ourselves from the grip of evil and the clutches of national disintegration. That repentance and reform must be led by the Republican Party, if, as it seems, it has at last found its true voice. The Democrats have proven themselves unfit to lead, and unfit even to follow America's elected leaders. Of their deeply cynical strategy to destroy Judge Kavanaugh, his nominee, President Trump has declared, "It's a very dangerous game for our country." American Thinker wrote early this week : "What consequences do we impose on the Democrat Party for stooping to this level? Let’s understand that this isn’t just about Brett Kavanaugh -- though if it’s restricted to him the events of the past week are destructive and outrageous enough. Who will consent to running for office now? Who will stand for a federal appointment confirmable by the Senate? Who will be willing to crawl through the mile of rancid sewer-pipe that is the American political process just to achieve a government job? The answer is the one the Democrats want it to be. Namely, that no conservative will tolerate what Kavanaugh is fighting through. In the future, as National Review’s Andrew McCarthy said, our options will be restricted to polite progressives or the Democrats’ pet RINO’s, if not the hard-core socialists and cultural Marxists the Left would like to impose on us. There is a stark choice -- either to go gently into this good night of American dissolution, or fight. Hard. Now." Americans have always agreed with John Adams about the new nation being created : "They define a republic to be a government of laws, and not of men." __John Adams (1775). Now is the time to step up and prove it. • On January 20, 1981, when Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as President of the United States for the first time, he used his mother's Bible for the oath of office. The Bible was open to Nelle Reagan's favorite passage, 2 Chronicles 7:14 : "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." Beside that passage, Nelle Reagan had handwritten many years before 1981 or 2018, "This is a good verse for the healing of nations, too."

Trump Champions Democracy While Europe Tries to Stifle Opposition

Tomorrow we will review the Judge Kavanaugh hearing and general situation. TODAY -- WHILE PRESIDENTTRUMP IS TRYING TO MAKE IRAN A LESSER THREAT TO THE WORLD, Europe is doing its best to support the terrorist ayatollah regime. • • • EU TRIES TO BYPASS US IRAN SANCTIONS. Money and Markets' JT Crowe reported on Tuesday that : "As a way to rescue the Iran nuclear deal scrapped by US President Donald Trump, Germany’s foreign minister proposed a new payments system, a European Monetary Fund, to bypass meddling from Washington DC that would seek to sink the deal. The EU announced Tuesday it is moving forward with the plan, sending a clear message to the Trump administration that Europe will try to save the 2015 deal." • The Wall Street Journal wrote : "Under the agreement announced Monday by EU foreign-policy chief Federica Mogherini, the bloc agreed with other parties to the 2015 nuclear deal that it would set up a legal entity 'to facilitate legitimate financial transactions with Iran and this will allow European companies to continue trade with Iran.' The special purpose vehicle would be open to all other countries to participate, including Russia and China, who helped negotiate the agreement." • The EU mechanism is in direct opposition to President Trump’s efforts to isolate Iran via diplomacy. Hoxever, experts said Tuesday that the EU mechanism would do little to blunt US economic pressure on Teheran, and wouldn’t prevent European companies from abandoning Iranian oil imports. EU officials, who have been looking for a way to soften the impact of US sanctions, haven't announced a launch date yet for the new system or any details about how it would work. The US gave countries six months to curtail their dependence on Iranian oil, and Trump again called for a united front against Iran at the UN meetings and in his General Assembly speech on Tuesday. • Many large companies in Europe have left Iran’s market rather than risk losing access to the $20 trillion US economy, while Iran’s economy has faltered against the US dollar. The establishment of a Euro-denominated payments system is aimed at allowing companies to send and receive money from Iran by eliminating links to the US financial system so that the payment system would be protected from the main US sanctions threat of barring a firm doing business wiht Iran from US markets. • European officials have also looked at a barter system that would allow Iran to sell oil, for example to China, and use the proceeds from that sale to purchase goods or technology from Europe. • But, experts say any new EU mechanism wouldn’t remove the risk of further US sanctions, which could ensnare individuals and companies taking part. Money and Markets quotes Mark Dubowitz, chief executive of Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank supporting tougher sanctions on Iran : “US sanctions apply to every company and person involved in the SPV, including the banks and companies involved in the transaction. The US government will identify and sanction anyone holding dollar-based assets, doing business with US firms, or traveling to the US.” • Money and Markets also quoted Jarrett Blanc, a former Deputy Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan in the Obama administration, who also served as the Senior Policy Analyst for Multilateral Affairs at the Soros-founded and funded Open Society Institute. Blanc has worked for the UN and on the Iran deal. Blanc said the new EU mechanism was “an important political statement,” underlining what he called “a dangerous division between the US and Europe that will weaken US financial pre-eminence and sanctions effectiveness over time.” However, he added, “there are a lot of reasons for European firms to abide by US sanctions and to stay out or pull out of Iran. Opening one payment channel will not address all those problems.” • • • THERESA MAY FINALLY STANDS UP TO BULLYING EU. Last Saturday, after a brusiing and rude reception from the EU elites at a Brexit meeting in Saleburg, Theresa May took to TV to express her determination to represent the Brexit referendum voice of the British people. The UK Express called it her "Finest Hour." The furious Prime Minister declared war with EU for "making a mockery" of the UK during Brexit negotiations after Brussels bosses rejected her Chequers plan and refused to budge on their demands for the Irish border. In her Saturday TV speech, PM May told the EU that they are making a "fundamental mistake" if they believe she will let the UK be broken up over the Northern Ireland border issue. She said she was committed to attempting to secure a withdrawal agreement but hit out at Brussels for its refusal to compromise. And she warned Britain would leave without a deal rather than agree to the EU's current demands. • The Prime Minister spoke from 10 Downing Street, saying : “I have always said that these negotiations would be tough, and they were always bound to be toughest in the final straight. While both sides want a deal, we have to face up to the fact that despite the progress we have made there are two big issues where we remain a long way apart." The Prime Minister said the EU has put forward just two options it is prepared to accept to break the impasse -- see the UK remain in the European Economic Area and the EU's customs union. PM May said : "In plain English, this would mean we'd still have to abide by all the EU rules, uncontrolled immigration from the EU would continue, and we couldn't do the trade deals we want with other countries. That would make a mockery of the referendum we had two years ago." The UK Express said the second option would involve a basic free trade agreement introducing the need for customs checks at the UK/EU border. But this would effectively cut Northern Ireland off from the rest of the UK by forcing it to remain inside the customs union and parts of the single market. Mrs May added : "Parliament has already -- unanimously -- rejected this idea." She went on to warn EU leaders not to underestimate her resolve to preserve the integrity of the United Kingdom : "Creating any form of customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK would not respect that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the United Kingdom, in line with the principle of consent, as set out clearly in the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement. It is something I will never agree to -- indeed, in my judgment it is something no British Prime Minister would ever agree to. If the EU believe I will, they are making a fundamental mistake." • Her defiance in the face of unacceptable EU bullying and refusal to deal in good faith was clear as she in turn attacked European Council President Donald Tusk, saying his attitude had created an "impasse" in talks : "Yesterday Donald Tusk said our proposals would undermine the single market. He didn't explain how in any detail or make any counter-proposal. So we are at an impasse. The second issue is connected to the first. We both agree that the Withdrawal Agreement needs to include a backstop to ensure that if there's a delay in implementing our new relationship, there still won't be a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland. But the EU is proposing to achieve this by effectively keeping Northern Ireland in the Customs Union. As I have already said, that is unacceptable. We will never agree to it. It would mean breaking up our country." PM May then stated : "We will set out our alternative that preserves the integrity of the UK. And it will be in line with the commitments we made back in December -- including the commitment that no new regulatory barriers should be created between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK unless the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree. As I told EU leaders, neither side should demand the unacceptable of the other." Mrs May warned the EU bosses : "No deal is better than a bad deal. Anything which fails to respect the referendum or which effectively divides our country in two would be a bad deal and I have always said no deal is better than a bad deal." May added that her Government "must and will continue the work of preparing ourselves for no deal." • PM May described the EU referendum as "the largest democratic exercise this country has ever undergone. To deny its legitimacy or frustrate its result threatens public trust in our democracy. That is why for over two years I have worked day and night to deliver a deal that sees the UK leave the EU. I have worked to bring people with me even when that has not always seemed possible. No one wants a good deal more than me." BUT, her final words were clear : “I will not overturn the result of the referendum and nor will I break up my country." • The EU has been silent following Prime Minister May's Saturday speech. Key EU leaders, including Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, said before the Salzburg meeting that significant progress is needed by the European Council summit on October 18 if an agreement on the UK's withdrawal deal is to be reached. French President Emmanuel Macron almost rejoiced at the collapse, saying those who “predicted easy solutions” were now shown to be “liars.” • One thing we can be sure of -- the EU socialist elites, like the US socialist ProgDem elites, will not tolerate anyone who disagrees with them. • • • MERKEL IN POLITICAL TROUBLE. While Theresa May is getting applause for her tough Brexit stand against the refusals of the EU to negotiate in good faith, support for Angela Merkel’s German coalition has plummeted to its lowest ever level, a new poll has suggested, with the beleaguered Chancellor beset by problems on all sides as she desperately tries to hold her Government together. The September 17-18 ARD DeutschlandTrend survey put support for Mrs Merkel's conservative alliance – between her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian allies, the --Christian Social Union (CSU) – at 28%, down one point from September 6, its lowest ever figure. Merkel, who has led Germany since 2005, only narrowly averted the collapse of her coalition government in June after a row between the CDU and the CSU over immigration policy. The UK Express says : "The conservative sister parties and their Social Democrat Party (SPD) junior coalition partners this week agreed to oust the head of the BfV domestic agency over accusations that he harboured sympathies to the far-right -- but only by effectively giving him a promotion. The decision to give Hans-Georg Maassen a deputy minister position at the interior ministry was derided as a bad compromise which allowed the ruling parties to paper over deep differences which could make their coalition unworkable. Mr Maassen had come under fire after questioning the veracity of a video appearing to show foreigners being attacked on the streets of Chemnitz by neo-Nazi extremists -- in direct contradiction to Mrs Merkel. He was defended by interior minister -- and CSU leader -- Horst Seehofer, who is now his direct boss. However, the CSU has since hinted the decision to give him a new job could now be reversed in response to the criticism. • The ARD poll also shows that the populist party Alternative for Germany (AfD) could expect to be the second-largest party in the German Parliament, were an election held tomorrow....The AfD stand on 18%, with the SPD on 17%, and the Greens on 15%. Overall, the so-called grand coalition would receive 45%, meaning a similar alliance next time round would not be possible." The survey also suggests that CSU leader Seehofer’s popularity has also taken a hit, possibly as a result of recent clashes over immigration, with just 28% approving of the job he was doing, compared with 59% disapproving. • Chancellor Merkel ignored British Prime Minister Theresa May at the EU Salzburg meeting, reportedly refusing to speak to her or shake hands. • • • THE CHEMNITZ MURDER AND PROTESTS. Earlier, on September 13, American Thinker's Rick Moran wrote an article about Chancellor Merkel and the Chemnitz murder that continues to be a very hot topic in Germany. Moran asked : "What's the best way to blunt the effectiveness of the political opposition? In the case of German chancellor Angela Merkel, it's smearing ordinary people for protesting the murder of an innocent German by two Afghan refugees. It happened in the city of Chemnitz as two Afghan refugees murdered a German citizen in a knife attack two weeks ago. The resulting demonstration against the Chancellor's immigration policies brought thousands into the street -- including some far-right Nazi sympathizers. Merkel saw an opportunity to smear the entire Alliance for Germany [AfD] political party when she condemned the entire demonstration." Reuters reported that Chancellor Merkel told the Bundestag : "There is no excuse or reason for hunting people down, using violence and Nazi slogans, showing hostility to people who look different, who have a Jewish restaurant, for attacks on police officers. We will not allow whole groups in our society to be quietly excluded." Merkel added that Jews, Moslems, Christians and atheists all belong in German society, and stressing that human dignity was paramount." Reuters also reported that Before Merkel took the podium, the head of the AfD group in the Bundestag said Germany's "domestic peace" was at risk : "As disgusting as Hitler salutes are, I would like to remind you that the really serious event in Chemnitz was the bloody deed (committed) by two asylum seekers," said Alexander Gauland. • Merkel, wrote Rick Moran, seemed to have forgotten the murder "when she was calling ordinary people demonstrating against her flawed policies 'Nazis.' The AfD, some of whose members joined right-wing militants in the Chemnitz marches, is the third biggest party in Germany. Its lawmakers' presence in parliament, which they entered after the 2017 election, has generated a more confrontational climate....There is no doubt that some far-right 'militants,' as Reuters calls them, took part in that demonstration in Chemnitz. But the portrayal of mobs of neo-Nazis attacking foreigners was questioned by Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of Germany's domestic intelligence agency (BfV). He made the comment that a video that appears to show a few right-wing idiots accosting a single man of Middle Eastern descent might have been faked. Deutsche Welle looked into that charge : 'What does the video show? In the video, a group of protesters can be seen ganging up on a man with black hair, shouting xenophobic remarks, such as 'You're not welcome here!' and 'What's the matter, you Kanaks?' (A German derogatory term for people with a supposedly southern or Middle Eastern appearance). Just before the video ends, one of the mob members attempts to swing a kick before the victim runs away. Another person in the mob then turns toward the camera, revealing his t-shirt with the right-wing slogan 'Tradition, not Invasion,' emblazoned on it. That's a "Nazi slogan"? Sheesh." • Deutsche Welle concluded that the attacks were real, not faked. But a description of the protest suggests that both sides were engaged in violence : "The first protest was an Alternative for Germany demonstration in the afternoon, a small rally of about 100 people, to encourage the government to be stricter on immigration, which finished without any violence. In the evening, another protest began, this one organised by football hooligans belonging to the right-wing 'Kaotic Chemnitz' over social media. This protest became violent, and the group also incited individuals to attack and harass foreign people and people who looked non-German. The rioters attacked police officers who were deployed to calm the protests. There were also more demonstrations announced by both leftist and right-wing groups. The riots and protests continued into the next day, with the right-wing populist group 'Pro Chemnitz' organising a large protest. This was initially 800 people gathered at the city's iconic Karl Marx monument, Deutsche Welle reports that this group quickly became thousands, and grew less peaceful, police counted up to 6,000 protesters. As this group grew, the counter-protest began on the other side of the square, with about 1,500 people. Initially, the two main protesting groups were a short distance from each other facing off, with a riot police line of 600 officers between them. The protests became violent at around 9pm local time on Monday 27 August, when the far-right protesters began to actively demonstrate and move. Masked protesters from both sides began to throw solid objects and fireworks, with some right-wing protesters also performing the Nazi salute. At least twenty people were injured. An extensive police force equipped with water cannons was deployed and a second set of demonstrators belonging to the far left were kept at a distance by police. The rioters had reportedly simmered down by Tuesday morning, but far-right groups encouraged people to continue protesting." • Rick Moran's conclusion reminds us of what occurred in Charlottesville : "So the initial protest by AfD members was peaceful and orderly. It wasn't until 'soccer hooligans' and neo-Nazis [read that Antifa in Charlottesville] began to demonstrate that there was a violent confrontation with counter-protesters..." Moran says it -- "probably Antifa or its allies. Merkel smeared thousands of ordinary Germans and an entire political party to defend her indefensible immigration policies and attack the opposition as Nazis. This is what passes for politics in Germany under Merkel." • • • THE RISE OF ANTI-IMMIGRATION SENTIMENT IN GERMANY. The rise of the AfD -- fueled by widespread anger over Merkel's decision to allow into the country more than a million mostly Moslem migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East, and the subsequent increase in violent crime -- reflects an ongoing realignment in German politics, in which voters increasingly are rejecting the multicultural orthodoxy of the mainstream parties. • Gatestone Institute's Soeren Kern recently wrote : "When federal elections were held on September 24, 2017, the CDU/CSU won 32.9% of the vote, its worst electoral result in nearly 70 years. The SPD won 20.5%, its worst-ever showing. The AfD won 12.6%, to become the country's third-largest party in the German Parliament. The election results showed that more than a million traditional CDU/CSU voters defected to the AfD. In a sign that concerns over mass migration are not limited to conservative voters, the center-left SPD lost 500,000 voters to the AfD while the far-left Left Party lost 400,000 voters. In addition, nearly 1.5 million first-time voters cast their ballots for the AfD. This trend has continued, as consistently corroborated by opinion polls since the 2017 election. The mainstream parties are fighting back with what some observers say are underhanded measures, aimed at delegitimizing -- and possibly criminalizing -- the AfD, including by calling for the party to be placed under state surveillance. The AfD's opponents, who often brand the party as 'far right' or 'extremist,' claim that the party's alleged ties to neo-Nazi groups pose an existential threat to Germany's constitutional order. The AfD's supporters counter that Germany's politically correct establishment, afraid of losing its power and influence, is attempting to outlaw a legitimate party that has pledged to put the interests of German citizens first. Calls for the AfD to be monitored by German intelligence have intensified in recent days, after members of the AfD participated in mass protests in Chemnitz against spiraling migrant criminality -- protests in which approximately 50 hooligans and neo-Nazis were also present. The protests erupted after a 35-year-old German-Cuban man named Daniel Hillig was stabbed to death on August 26 by two migrants during the city's annual festival." • Soenen Kern notes that the local German police : "Initially refused to reveal the identities of the perpetrators, but on August 27 a police report was leaked on social media -- the document has since been scrubbed from German websites but it remains on a Russian site -- which showed that the killers were illegal migrants from Iraq and Syria. Both had extensive criminal histories but were allowed by German authorities to roam free on German streets. Police later confirmed that the leaked document was authentic and said that they had opened an investigation into suspected 'violation of official secrets.' " • Kern also said that : "Few if any of Germany's mainstream politicians condemned the murder of Hillig, but they were quick to denounce attacks on migrants....Chancellor Merkel echoed : 'We have video footage about the fact that there were hunts, that there were riots, that there was hatred on the street, and that is unacceptable in our constitutional state.' It later emerged that all of the government's allegations were based on a single 19-second video -- titled "Hunting for Humans in Chemnitz" -- which was posted on YouTube and later broadcast by the public television channel ARD. The video shows one individual chasing another in what appears to be an isolated incident." • In addition, the center-left SPD partner in Merkel's coalition, pushed the anti-AfD drumbeat even further. Kern wrote : "The chairman of the German Parliament's Internal Affairs Committee, Burkhard Lischka (SPD), warned of the danger of a civil war : 'There is a small right-wing mob in our country that will take its violent fantasies of civil war to our streets. That in the Bundestag [German parliament] a party applauds these excesses against foreign fellow citizens as legitimate self-justice, shows that the majority of our country must become even louder when it comes to rule of law, democracy and cohesion in our society.' Bundestag Vice President Thomas Oppermann demanded that the AfD be monitored by Germany's domestic intelligence service, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution : 'The refugee question divides society and the AfD rides ever more radically on this wave.' " • It was when German Interior Minister Horst Seehofer (of the Bavarian conservative Merkel partner, CSU) countered that he sees no basis for monitoring the AfD that the political tensions exploded into public view. Soenen Kern reports : "On the sidelines of a closed-door meeting of the CSU in Brandenburg, Seehofer defended the Chemnitz protesters : 'Just because people protest, that does not make them a Nazi. Migration is the mother of all problems.' Saxon Prime Minister Michael Kretschmer (CDU) later contradicted the government's claims : 'There was no mob, there was no hunting down of people, there was no pogrom in this city.' Saxon Attorney General Spokesman Wolfgang Klein added : 'After examining all of the material available to us, there was no hunt in Chemnitz....Writing for Tichys Einblick, a prominent German blog, commentator Oswald Metzger summed it up : 'There was no mob, there was no hunting down of people, there was no pogrom in this city.' Saxon Prime Minister Michael Kretschmer (CDU) clearly corrected the almost hysterical and false reporting of countless leading media outlets on the events in Chemnitz after the deadly stabbing. Even the chancellor and her government spokesman had, as we all know, conveyed these false reports to the public, and thereby giving them publicity. For long enough, many citizens from all walks of life have noticed that the problems of integrating even third- and fourth-generation immigrants have grown bigger, not smaller -- especially among Turks. The mass immigration of the past three years, under the banner of 'the right to asylum,' has significantly increased the fear of parallel societies, of crime, and of cultural alienation. When I consider the often undifferentiated, blanket accusations against 'brown Chemnitz' [brown is the color of Nazism], then the established parties will not have to wonder why, almost without exception, they continue to lose to the colorful AfD. When concerned citizens increasingly are stigmatized as being Nazis -- accusations which, incidentally, in their excessive use amount to a shameless trivialization of Nazi crimes -- they often respond with the indifferent remark: 'Well, then I'm just a Nazi!' Extremism cannot be combated with exclusion, but with looking at the facts. Those who want to reach concerned citizens must themselves get out of the ideological trenches." • • • DEAR READERS, the rise of anti-immigration and anti-elite government parties and groups in Germany is simply the leading edge of what is happening all over Europe. The EU's bitter refusal to recognize Britains' absolute right as a sovereign nation to withdraw from the EU is a symptom of an elite, largely supra-national, clique that is running scared of its own citizens. Slapping penalties on Hungary for its determination to remain in charge of its sovereign rights as an EU member is another sympton of the EU elites' fear. And, the EU attempt to side with Iran against its only benefactor, the United States, reflects the EU elite desire to be free of the obviously anti-elite American beacon to national sovereignty that shines all over Europe, despite the attempts of the EU political leaders and their largely managed media to smear President Trump and turn him into a monster beyond any rational recognition. They laughed at his UN speech on Tuesday because there is little else they can do against Trump's direct appeal to the people of Europe and the world to shake off elitist socialism and globalist hegemonies of unelected bureaucrats determined to crush nationhood and culture. • When President Trump uttered his call for free and sovereign nationhood at the UN yestersay, he might just as well have been pointing a howitzer at the elites of the EU and the world : "As for Americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. We know what kind of a nation America must always be. In America, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty -- a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. We celebrate our heroes, we treasure our traditions, and above all, we love our country. Inside everyone in this great chamber today, and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland. The passion that burns in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs, and magnificent works of art. Our task is not to erase it, but to embrace it. To build with it. To draw on its ancient wisdom. And to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better. To unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered. And so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all. When we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. We will find new passion for peacemaking rising within us. We will find new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us, and making this a more beautiful world in which to live. So together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. Let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. And let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of God." • There is no human heart on Earth that does not respond to that call. Ronald Reagan's Shining City on the Hill has become Donald Trump's Shining City to defend and preserve. Make no mistake. Donald Trump is up to the task.

President Trump Confronts Globalist Elites with Ancient Humam Verities about Sovereignty and Nationhood

THE TRUMP UN SPEECH. President Trump gave an excellent speech at the United Nations General Assembly annual meeting on Tuesday. It was cast in more practical terms than last year's philosophical discussion, focusing on what it means to be a world composed of nations who govern themselves in the best interests of their citizens. And, it has received almost no coverage in the US media, undoubtedly because the President chose to emphasize his world agenda -- nationhood rather than globalism, US support for allies rather than squandering its resources on those who reject America, support for Israel and for countries in the Middle East who are not hostile to Israel, US energy independence, a continuing determination to isolate Iran until it gives up terrorism and military nuclear programs, and a program to reform the UN itself with the US paying a fair 25% of the UN's total cost. • Here is the text of President Trump's address delivered at the 73rd Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City on Tuesday, September 25, 2018, at UN Headquarters : "Madam President, Mr. Secretary-General, world leaders, ambassadors, and distinguished delegates : One year ago, I stood before you for the first time in this grand hall. I addressed the threats facing our world, and I presented a vision to achieve a brighter future for all of humanity. Today, I stand before the United Nations General Assembly to share the extraordinary progress we’ve made. In less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. America’s -- so true. (Laughter.) Didn’t expect that reaction, but that’s okay. (Laughter and applause). America’s economy is booming like never before. Since my election, we’ve added $10 trillion in wealth. The stock market is at an all-time high in history, and jobless claims are at a 50-year low. African American, Hispanic American, and Asian American unemployment have all achieved their lowest levels ever recorded. We’ve added more than 4 million new jobs, including half a million manufacturing jobs. We have passed the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history. We’ve started the construction of a major border wall, and we have greatly strengthened border security. We have secured record funding for our military -- $700 billion this year, and $716 billion next year. Our military will soon be more powerful than it has ever been before. In other words, the United States is stronger, safer, and a richer country than it was when I assumed office less than two years ago. We are standing up for America and for the American people. And we are also standing up for the world. This is great news for our citizens and for peace-loving people everywhere. We believe that when nations respect the rights of their neighbors, and defend the interests of their people, they can better work together to secure the blessings of safety, prosperity, and peace. Each of us here today is the emissary of a distinct culture, a rich history, and a people bound together by ties of memory, tradition, and the values that make our homelands like nowhere else on Earth. That is why America will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance, control, and domination. I honor the right of every nation in this room to pursue its own customs, beliefs, and traditions. The United States will not tell you how to live or work or worship. We only ask that you honor our sovereignty in return. From Warsaw to Brussels, to Tokyo to Singapore, it has been my highest honor to represent the United States abroad. I have forged close relationships and friendships and strong partnerships with the leaders of many nations in this room, and our approach has already yielded incredible change. With support from many countries here today, we have engaged with North Korea to replace the specter of conflict with a bold and new push for peace. In June, I traveled to Singapore to meet face to face with North Korea’s leader, Chairman Kim Jong-un. We had highly productive conversations and meetings, and we agreed that it was in both countries’ interest to pursue the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Since that meeting, we have already seen a number of encouraging measures that few could have imagined only a short time ago. The missiles and rockets are no longer flying in every direction. Nuclear testing has stopped. Some military facilities are already being dismantled. Our hostages have been released. And as promised, the remains of our fallen heroes are being returned home to lay at rest in American soil. I would like to thank Chairman Kim for his courage and for the steps he has taken, though much work remains to be done. The sanctions will stay in place until denuclearization occurs. I also want to thank the many member states who helped us reach this moment -- a moment that is actually far greater than people would understand; far greater -- but for also their support and the critical support that we will all need going forward. A special thanks to President Moon of South Korea, Prime Minister Abe of Japan, and President Xi of China. In the Middle East, our new approach is also yielding great strides and very historic change. Following my trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Gulf countries opened a new center to target terrorist financing. They are enforcing new sanctions, working with us to identify and track terrorist networks, and taking more responsibility for fighting terrorism and extremism in their own region. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar have pledged billions of dollars to aid the people of Syria and Yemen. And they are pursuing multiple avenues to ending Yemen’s horrible, horrific civil war. Ultimately, it is up to the nations of the region to decide what kind of future they want for themselves and their children. For that reason, the United States is working with the Gulf Cooperation Council, Jordan, and Egypt to establish a regional strategic alliance so that Middle Eastern nations can advance prosperity, stability, and security across their home region. Thanks to the United States military and our partnership with many of your nations, I am pleased to report that the bloodthirsty killers known as ISIS have been driven out from the territory they once held in Iraq and Syria. We will continue to work with friends and allies to deny radical Islamic terrorists any funding, territory or support, or any means of infiltrating our borders. The ongoing tragedy in Syria is heartbreaking. Our shared goals must be the de-escalation of military conflict, along with a political solution that honors the will of the Syrian people. In this vein, we urge the United Nations-led peace process be reinvigorated. But, rest assured, the United States will respond if chemical weapons are deployed by the Assad regime. I commend the people of Jordan and other neighboring countries for hosting refugees from this very brutal civil war. As we see in Jordan, the most compassionate policy is to place refugees as close to their homes as possible to ease their eventual return to be part of the rebuilding process. This approach also stretches finite resources to help far more people, increasing the impact of every dollar spent. Every solution to the humanitarian crisis in Syria must also include a strategy to address the brutal regime that has fueled and financed it: the corrupt dictatorship in Iran. Iran’s leaders sow chaos, death, and destruction. They do not respect their neighbors or borders, or the sovereign rights of nations. Instead, Iran’s leaders plunder the nation’s resources to enrich themselves and to spread mayhem across the Middle East and far beyond. The Iranian people are rightly outraged that their leaders have embezzled billions of dollars from Iran’s treasury, seized valuable portions of the economy, and looted the people’s religious endowments, all to line their own pockets and send their proxies to wage war. Not good. Iran’s neighbors have paid a heavy toll for the region’s [regime’s] agenda of aggression and expansion. That is why so many countries in the Middle East strongly supported my decision to withdraw the United States from the horrible 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal and re-impose nuclear sanctions. The Iran deal was a windfall for Iran’s leaders. In the years since the deal was reached, Iran’s military budget grew nearly 40 percent. The dictatorship used the funds to build nuclear-capable missiles, increase internal repression, finance terrorism, and fund havoc and slaughter in Syria and Yemen. The United States has launched a campaign of economic pressure to deny the regime the funds it needs to advance its bloody agenda. Last month, we began re-imposing hard-hitting nuclear sanctions that had been lifted under the Iran deal. Additional sanctions will resume November 5th, and more will follow. And we’re working with countries that import Iranian crude oil to cut their purchases substantially. We cannot allow the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism to possess the planet’s most dangerous weapons. We cannot allow a regime that chants “Death to America,” and that threatens Israel with annihilation, to possess the means to deliver a nuclear warhead to any city on Earth. Just can’t do it. We ask all nations to isolate Iran’s regime as long as its aggression continues. And we ask all nations to support Iran’s people as they struggle to reclaim their religious and righteous destiny. This year, we also took another significant step forward in the Middle East. In recognition of every sovereign state to determine its own capital, I moved the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. The United States is committed to a future of peace and stability in the region, including peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. That aim is advanced, not harmed, by acknowledging the obvious facts. America’s policy of principled realism means we will not be held hostage to old dogmas, discredited ideologies, and so-called experts who have been proven wrong over the years, time and time again. This is true not only in matters of peace, but in matters of prosperity. We believe that trade must be fair and reciprocal. The United States will not be taken advantage of any longer. For decades, the United States opened its economy -- the largest, by far, on Earth -- with few conditions. We allowed foreign goods from all over the world to flow freely across our borders. Yet, other countries did not grant us fair and reciprocal access to their markets in return. Even worse, some countries abused their openness to dump their products, subsidize their goods, target our industries, and manipulate their currencies to gain unfair advantage over our country. As a result, our trade deficit ballooned to nearly $800 billion a year. For this reason, we are systematically renegotiating broken and bad trade deals. Last month, we announced a groundbreaking US-Mexico trade agreement. And just yesterday, I stood with President Moon to announce the successful completion of the brand new U.S.-Korea trade deal. And this is just the beginning. Many nations in this hall will agree that the world trading system is in dire need of change. For example, countries were admitted to the World Trade Organization that violate every single principle on which the organization is based. While the United States and many other nations play by the rules, these countries use government-run industrial planning and state-owned enterprises to rig the system in their favor. They engage in relentless product dumping, forced technology transfer, and the theft of intellectual property. The United States lost over 3 million manufacturing jobs, nearly a quarter of all steel jobs, and 60,000 factories after China joined the WTO. And we have racked up $13 trillion in trade deficits over the last two decades. But those days are over. We will no longer tolerate such abuse. We will not allow our workers to be victimized, our companies to be cheated, and our wealth to be plundered and transferred. America will never apologize for protecting its citizens. The United States has just announced tariffs on another $200 billion in Chinese-made goods for a total, so far, of $250 billion. I have great respect and affection for my friend, President Xi, but I have made clear our trade imbalance is just not acceptable. China’s market distortions and the way they deal cannot be tolerated. As my administration has demonstrated, America will always act in our national interest. I spoke before this body last year and warned that the U.N. Human Rights Council had become a grave embarrassment to this institution, shielding egregious human rights abusers while bashing America and its many friends. Our Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, laid out a clear agenda for reform, but despite reported and repeated warnings, no action at all was taken. So the United States took the only responsible course: We withdrew from the Human Rights Council, and we will not return until real reform is enacted. For similar reasons, the United States will provide no support in recognition to the International Criminal Court. As far as America is concerned, the ICC has no jurisdiction, no legitimacy, and no authority. The ICC claims near-universal jurisdiction over the citizens of every country, violating all principles of justice, fairness, and due process. We will never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy. America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism, and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism. Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination. In America, we believe strongly in energy security for ourselves and for our allies. We have become the largest energy producer anywhere on the face of the Earth. The United States stands ready to export our abundant, affordable supply of oil, clean coal, and natural gas. OPEC and OPEC nations, are, as usual, ripping off the rest of the world, and I don’t like it. Nobody should like it. We defend many of these nations for nothing, and then they take advantage of us by giving us high oil prices. Not good. We want them to stop raising prices, we want them to start lowering prices, and they must contribute substantially to military protection from now on. We are not going to put up with it -- these horrible prices -- much longer. Reliance on a single foreign supplier can leave a nation vulnerable to extortion and intimidation. That is why we congratulate European states, such as Poland, for leading the construction of a Baltic pipeline so that nations are not dependent on Russia to meet their energy needs. Germany will become totally dependent on Russian energy if it does not immediately change course. Here in the Western Hemisphere, we are committed to maintaining our independence from the encroachment of expansionist foreign powers. It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere and in our own affairs. The United States has recently strengthened our laws to better screen foreign investments in our country for national security threats, and we welcome cooperation with countries in this region and around the world that wish to do the same. You need to do it for your own protection. The United States is also working with partners in Latin America to confront threats to sovereignty from uncontrolled migration. Tolerance for human struggling and human smuggling and trafficking is not humane. It’s a horrible thing that’s going on, at levels that nobody has ever seen before. It’s very, very cruel. Illegal immigration funds criminal networks, ruthless gangs, and the flow of deadly drugs. Illegal immigration exploits vulnerable populations, hurts hardworking citizens, and has produced a vicious cycle of crime, violence, and poverty. Only by upholding national borders, destroying criminal gangs, can we break this cycle and establish a real foundation for prosperity. We recognize the right of every nation in this room to set its own immigration policy in accordance with its national interests, just as we ask other countries to respect our own right to do the same — which we are doing. That is one reason the United States will not participate in the new Global Compact on Migration. Migration should not be governed by an international body unaccountable to our own citizens. Ultimately, the only long-term solution to the migration crisis is to help people build more hopeful futures in their home countries. Make their countries great again. Currently, we are witnessing a human tragedy, as an example, in Venezuela. More than 2 million people have fled the anguish inflicted by the socialist Maduro regime and its Cuban sponsors. Not long ago, Venezuela was one of the richest countries on Earth. Today, socialism has bankrupted the oil-rich nation and driven its people into abject poverty. Virtually everywhere socialism or communism has been tried, it has produced suffering, corruption, and decay. Socialism’s thirst for power leads to expansion, incursion, and oppression. All nations of the world should resist socialism and the misery that it brings to everyone. In that spirit, we ask the nations gathered here to join us in calling for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela. Today, we are announcing additional sanctions against the repressive regime, targeting Maduro’s inner circle and close advisers. We are grateful for all the work the United Nations does around the world to help people build better lives for themselves and their families. The United States is the world’s largest giver in the world, by far, of foreign aid. But few give anything to us. That is why we are taking a hard look at US foreign assistance. That will be headed up by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. We will examine what is working, what is not working, and whether the countries who receive our dollars and our protection also have our interests at heart. Moving forward, we are only going to give foreign aid to those who respect us and, frankly, are our friends. And we expect other countries to pay their fair share for the cost of their defense. The United States is committed to making the United Nations more effective and accountable. I have said many times that the United Nations has unlimited potential. As part of our reform effort, I have told our negotiators that the United States will not pay more than 25 percent of the UN peacekeeping budget. This will encourage other countries to step up, get involved, and also share in this very large burden. And we are working to shift more of our funding from assessed contributions to voluntary so that we can target American resources to the programs with the best record of success. Only when each of us does our part and contributes our share can we realize the UN’s highest aspirations. We must pursue peace without fear, hope without despair, and security without apology. Looking around this hall where so much history has transpired, we think of the many before us who have come here to address the challenges of their nations and of their times. And our thoughts turn to the same question that ran through all their speeches and resolutions, through every word and every hope. It is the question of what kind of world will we leave for our children and what kind of nations they will inherit. The dreams that fill this hall today are as diverse as the people who have stood at this podium, and as varied as the countries represented right here in this body are. It really is something. It really is great, great history. There is India, a free society over a billion people, successfully lifting countless millions out of poverty and into the middle class. There is Saudi Arabia, where King Salman and the Crown Prince are pursuing bold new reforms. There is Israel, proudly celebrating its 70th anniversary as a thriving democracy in the Holy Land. In Poland, a great people are standing up for their independence, their security, and their sovereignty. Many countries are pursuing their own unique visions, building their own hopeful futures, and chasing their own wonderful dreams of destiny, of legacy, and of a home. The whole world is richer, humanity is better, because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world. In each one, we see awesome promise of a people bound together by a shared past and working toward a common future. As for Americans, we know what kind of future we want for ourselves. We know what kind of a nation America must always be. In America, we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty -- a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence. We celebrate our heroes, we treasure our traditions, and above all, we love our country. Inside everyone in this great chamber today, and everyone listening all around the globe, there is the heart of a patriot that feels the same powerful love for your nation, the same intense loyalty to your homeland. The passion that burns in the hearts of patriots and the souls of nations has inspired reform and revolution, sacrifice and selflessness, scientific breakthroughs, and magnificent works of art. Our task is not to erase it, but to embrace it. To build with it. To draw on its ancient wisdom. And to find within it the will to make our nations greater, our regions safer, and the world better. To unleash this incredible potential in our people, we must defend the foundations that make it all possible. Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered. And so we must protect our sovereignty and our cherished independence above all. When we do, we will find new avenues for cooperation unfolding before us. We will find new passion for peacemaking rising within us. We will find new purpose, new resolve, and new spirit flourishing all around us, and making this a more beautiful world in which to live. So together, let us choose a future of patriotism, prosperity, and pride. Let us choose peace and freedom over domination and defeat. And let us come here to this place to stand for our people and their nations, forever strong, forever sovereign, forever just, and forever thankful for the grace and the goodness and the glory of God. Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the nations of the world. Thank you very much. Thank you." • • • ISRAEL AND WORLD MEDIA COVERED THE SPEECH. The Jewish Press noted : "US President Donald Trump opened his speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday in New York with remarks that, at the start, sounded remarkably like those he delivers at one of his election campaign rallies. Predictably, the first few minutes were greeted with some head-shaking, chuckles and in a few cases, even outright laughter. But all that stopped abruptly once the President buckled down to business." • Israel Today wrote : "Trump is not my president. This is an important observation considering the gazillion non-Americans who think they have an obligation to hate him. That Trump is not my president frees me from feelings that do nothing but distort things. From the narrow Israeli viewpoint, we should be thankful for Trump's pro-Israel policy, and many indeed are thankful. More encouraging, Trump's UN speech last night shows that his pro-Israel policy isn't the result of early morning convulsions. His vision for a better world is the vision of his administration, the vision of those who voted him in, and it is this vision, not Trump's personality, that so angers his political rivals. To Israeli ears, The New Yorker's scornful reporting of 'the audible ripple of gasps and giggles' supposedly heard in the UN General Assembly during Trump's speech sounds too vindictive and harsh. The terms 'patriotism,' 'homeland,' 'people,' 'sovereign and independent nations' guided by 'ancient wisdom' do not sound at all offensive to most Israelis who, I suppose, would not mind seeing Israel restored to the kind of Liberal Conservatism that Trump is talking about. America under Trump wants to restore the sovereignty of nations and pride in national culture and heritage. Instead of the uni-cultural world coerced upon us in the name of multiculturalism, America now encourages countries like Israel to freely pursue our own destiny. 'The whole world is richer, humanity is better," said Trump, "because of this beautiful constellation of nations, each very special, each very unique, and each shining brightly in its part of the world.' Israel -- harshly and unfairly criticized by the UN, EU and their innumerable NGO cohorts -- should follow's Trump's lead, for it, too, must not surrender its 'sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable, global bureaucracy.' Freedom and democracy, the American leader correctly observes, should be allowed to be defended 'against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination,' which means, coercion of the masses into accepting ideologies that scorn and loath anything other than a multiculturalism run amok. This vision, it is almost needless to say, suits Israel like a glove because, by definition, Israel must attribute its very existence to its uniqueness. It's no surprise, therefore, that of all nations, Israel is singled out as most problematic, which is why its very existence is continuously challenged, mostly by the same unelected powers exposed so effectively by President Trump. Those who follow Israel closely know that its Jewish character and its sovereignty are being challenged on a daily basis. Internal and external forces do their utmost to frustrate the majority's desire to guard Israel's uniqueness. At times it seems as if our governments capitulate to these unelected, undemocratic forces seeking to turn Israel into just another "normal" country. Now, with America's backing, one could only hope that our leaders will know to seize the historical moment and further entrench both Israel's uniqueness and its sovereignty." • Deutsche Welle's online DW.com gave a very critical European view of the President, writing : "In his first address at the General Assembly last year, a newly elected President Donald Trump threatened to annihilate another United Nations member state, North Korea. In his second appearance at the world body on Tuesday, Trump did not threaten to attack another UN member state. Instead, in a hard-edged speech that was reminiscent of his historically dark inauguration address, he took on the entire international community and its underlying principles of multilateralism and cooperation. As in his inauguration remarks, Trump at the UN portrayed the US, the world's most powerful country, as a victim that has been exploited by nefarious external forces and himself as the savior. One of these pernicious forces threatening the well being and the sovereignty of the US, according to Trump, is global governance. Trump's answer to the false choice between multilateralism and sovereignty, and the imagined impending takeover of the US by UN types, is simple -- and nothing new : The crude nationalism espoused in his campaign slogans 'Make America Great Again' and 'America First' that helped him win the presidential election will beat back the alleged creeping advances of globalists. In Trump's words : 'America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism.' But while the truism that America is governed by Americans and the rejection of what he called globalism may win him points at a campaign rally in Kansas, it doesn't with the global leaders gathered in Manhattan. The same goes for his bragging, and factually inaccurate opening line that his administration had accomplished more than any other in US history. At the UN General Assembly it was rightfully met with a mixture of incredulous and embarrassed laughter. That was also the reaction of the German delegation after Trump called out Berlin by claiming that Germany would become completely dependent on Russian energy if it did not reverse course on a controversial gas pipeline....Because with his remarks at the UN, the President of the world's most powerful country gave the green light for authoritarian-minded leaders and strongmen to pursue whatever they deemed to be in their national interests and not worry about petty interferences from the UN or other reviled agents of globalism. After a year in which the US has exited key international treaties such as the Iran nuclear deal and the Paris climate accords, and left UN bodies including UNESCO and the UN Human Rights Council, Trump presented himself under the guise of sovereignty as a quasi role model for other leaders to follow. Trump's speech also underscored that his administration is serious about Washington's retreat as the leading multilateral actor, instead charting a course driven by purely nationalist sentiments. Nothing highlights the zero-sum-mentality that is the core of everything this President says or does better than Trump's declaration that in the future US foreign aid dollars will only flow to friendly countries. This is not just a politically short-sighted move which will undermine Washington's global standing and its leadership role, it is also an abdication of human decency. If there is anything positive coming out of Trump's speech, and that is a big if, then it may be that other democratic members of the international community should now have realized that, until this President leaves the White House, they need to try to fill the vacuum left by a retreating US. This is a tall order, but it may be possible, because Trump has isolated his country internationally. The President and his policies are deeply unpopular in large parts of the world. That was again on display Tuesday in the way the audience reacted during his speech. But not liking Trump is not enough. If the collective international community does not want a global order in which only the most powerful countries call the shots, it needs to protect international bodies like the UN." • French President Emmanuel Macron used his UN speech to hold a mirror up to the US approach, suggesting it was the United States that posed a threat by trying to hurt Iran’s economy and by suggesting sanctions on European companies that do business with Iran. • • • DEAR READERS, if the German reaction to President Trump's UN speech reminds us of a stump speech by Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer, that is because the instinctive hatred of Donald Trump is as deep in Europe as it is in the ProgDem leadership in the US. And in both cases it is the result of FEAR. They FEAR President Trump's calls for ending the elite globalist stranglehold on the world through their control of unelected international organizations like the UN. They FEAR that the already unruly people-as-sovereign parties in the EU will grow and emulate Trump in their countries -- taking back power from the elites and giving it back to citizens. Above all, they FEAR a United States that for the first time since Ronald Reagan puts America first -- and even more than President Reagan, intends to see that America is not fleeced and weakened. Reagan had a very full plate in ending the Soviet Union. Trump is busy putting America back on its sovereign course to greatness. • And by the way, as the President delved into his subjects the laugher became quiet attention. What the world's assembled leaders were hearing from the most powerful leader on the planet should worry them because Trump knows who America's friends are and he is not afraid to call them by name and support them while casting America's naysayers aside. President Trump's UN speech was tough, but kind. That's really his style -- tell the hard truth but say, America is here for you if you step up and assume your obligations to your citizens and to humanity. Germany, France, and the EU elites should seriously study the President's UN speech instead of snickering at it. While President Trump has proven again and again that he is not vindictive or looking for fights, he has the vision, the resources, the allies, and the guts to call Europe's bluff whenever he chooses.

President Trump and Judge Kavanaugh - Victims of America's Moral Malaise

THERE IS OTHER NEWS. The Judge Kavanaugh story is sucking up a lot of the available oxygen. But, the other Monday news -- created, I think, by the ProgDem media as one more way to irritate President Trump into acting against his own best interests -- was about the supposed imminent firing of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. • • • THE NYT ALLEGATIONS ABOUT ROSENSTEIN. The story began last Friday when the New York Times reported that Rosenstein considered rallying Cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to the Constitution and offered to wear a wire to record his conversations with the President. Rosenstein has denied that he considered such actions, saying the NYT article "is inaccurate and factually incorrect. I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this : Based on my personal dealings with the President, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.” Follow-up reports have indicated that he was being sarcastic when bringing up the secret recording. • On Sunday, Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, told "Fox News Sunday" that there is a “bureaucratic coup” being uncovered following last week's NYT report that Rosenstein discussed trying to oust President Trump. Graham said that Trump should not fire the top Justice Department official unless he believes Rosenstein is lying : "He said he did not do the things alleged, but there is a bureaucratic coup against President Trump being discovered here. Before the election, the people in question tried to taint the election, tip it to [Hillary] Clinton’s favor. After the election, they’re trying to undermine the President.” Senator Graham cited former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, former FBI agent Peter Stzrok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page’s actions as evidence of government officials trying to undermine Trump, saying : “They tried to destroy this President. If Rosenstein is involved, he should be fired. If he is not involved, leave him alone...There's a bureaucratic coup going on at the Department of Justice and the FBI and somebody needs to look at it.” • • • TRUMP AND ROSENSTEIN WILL MEET. TheHill said on Monday that : "Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein faces a high-stakes meeting on Thursday with President Trump that may determine his future as the Department of Justice official charged with overseeing special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation. The White House punctuated hours of speculation about Rosenstein’s future by revealing that Trump and the No. 2 Justice Department official on Monday had an 'extended conversation to discuss the recent news stories' and would meet in person on Thursday." • Conflicting reports at midday on Monday said Rosenstein was either resigning or expecting to be fired as he met at the White House with chief of staff John Kelly. TheHill reported that : "Cable news showed Rosenstein getting into an SUV for the ride, while social media watched with breathless anticipation. The visit ended anticlimactically, with Rosenstein attending another White House meeting that had previously been scheduled -- and with the mystery of his fate punted to Thursday, when Trump will be back in Washington after his trip to New York for annual meetings at the United Nations." • President Trump told reporters on Monday : “We’ll be determining what’s going on. We want to have transparency, we want to have openness, and I look forward to meeting with Rod at that time.” In an interview with Geraldo Rivera that aired early Monday, Trump said he did not have "all the facts" about the reports, but said he would make a "determination" about the deputy attorney general's future. “I don’t want to comment on it until I’ve got all the facts. I haven’t gotten all the facts," Trump said. "We will make a determination." • If Rosenstein resigns or is removed, it would put a new official in charge of the Russia investigation at a key moment, opening Trump up to charges that he is trying to quash the probe. Democrats were quick on Monday to compare events to “The Saturday Night Massacre,” when several DOJ officials resigned after then-President Nixon ordered the firing of a special prosecutor. Representative Jerrold Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, told CNN : “This is the next step in a slowly evolving, slow-motion ‘Saturday Night Massacre’ in which the President is getting rid of all the people who were involved in initiating or carrying out the investigation of obstruction of justice by him.” Some Republicans have also expressed concern. Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Maine Republican, tweeted that she is “very concerned” over the prospect of Rosenstein being fired or forced to resign. But, allies of the President say he should be fired if he really wanted to wear a wire to gather information on Trump. Former Trump campaign aide Sam Nunberg said : “People have been fired for much less. You should at some point face consequences for your actions and this is simply the last straw.” Represnetative Jim Jordan, who has been critical of Rosenstein, is calling on him to testify before Congress about the allegations in the New York Times report. • Rosenstein has overseen Mueller’s investigation for 16 months as it has moved away from the initial mandate to investigate the possibility of Trump campaign 'collusion' with Russia in the 2016 election -- it has become a general search for business and personal items that could be used to impeach the President or jail his senior campaign staff for acts unrelated to the campaign. Rosenstein has served as acting attorney general with respect to the Mueller probe because Jeff Sessions recused himself from all DOJ matters related to Russia soon after being confirmed as Attorney General early in 2017. And, as far as the public knows, Rosenstein has placed no mandate-directed limits on Mueller's search for ways to destroy Trump and his presidency. Should Rosenstein resign or be fired, Solicitor General Noel Francisco would be next in line to oversee the investigation. • On Monday, Jay Sekulow, one of Trump’s personal lawyers, suggested there should be a “timeout” in the Mueller investigation should Rosenstein be removed : “I think it’s really important that there be a step back taken here, and a review, and I think it’s a review that has to be thorough and complete, and a review that has to include an investigation of what has transpired." • If Rosenstein resigned as deputy attorney general, President Trump would be able to install an acting replacement without Senate confirmation because of the Vacancies Act, although that official would not be able to also act as acting attorney general overseeing the Russia investigation. If Trump decides to fire Rosenstein, the Act does not say whether Trump can appoint an acting replacement. In any event, firing Rosenstein would also open up Trump to charges of obstruction, which Mueller is currently investigating as part of his sprawling probe. Stephen Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas, told TheHill : “Folks will argue that, [but] I think the President would have a nonfrivolous argument that Rosenstein was fired for cause.” • • • OBAMA DOJ / FBI WAS LEAKING TO THE MEDIA TO CONNECT TRUMP AND RUSSIA. Liberty Headlines reported on Monday about a statement issued by North Carolina GOP Representative Mark Meadows, House Freedom Caucus founder and member of the House Oversight Committee. Meadows' statement concerned the current state of the Justice Department : "Whether or not the latest reports on Rod Rosenstein are true, one thing is clear: what is happening at the Department of Justice is a travesty. The total lack of transparency and accountability among senior FBI and DOJ officials has devolved into a constant wheel of behind-the-scenes gamesmanship, with anonymous leaks left and right, each seeking to create their own narrative and save face with the public. Under Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, the Department of Justice has had just as much of a transparency problem as it did even under Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch -- the bar for which is extremely low. This is disastrous, and it needs to end now. It does not serve the President well, and far more importantly, does not serve the American people well. Today’s report once again underscores the desperate need for transparency at the DOJ. It is time release the documents. Declassify everything. Stop the games and show Americans the truth about what has gone on at the DOJ and FBI. If they have nothing to hide, it is time for them to act like it." • The Daily Caller wrote last week that : "Newly released emails, memos and text messages show FBI officials at odds with the CIA’s assessment [under Brennan] that Vladimir Putin interfered with the 2016 presidential election. The IC report was released in January of 2017 and claimed all 16 intel agencies (later corrected to only 4 agencies) agreed that Putin meddled in the 2016 presidential election to help elect Donald Trump. Newly obtained FBI memos reveal the bureau was at odds with the Intelligence Community’s assessment on Trump-Russia, says investigative journalist Sara Carter." • Here is Sara Carter's statement : "In newly obtained emails, bureau officials noted there was not enough intelligence to support the January 2017 findings by the CIA which concluded Vladimir Putin meddled in the 2016 election to help Trump, according to a numerous documents and text messages obtained by SaraACarter.com. However, while Strzok, Comey and others were disputing the findings of former CIA Director John Brennan and former DNI Director James Clapper behind closed doors, the public perception was that the FBI agreed with the intelligence community’s assessment, as noted in news reports in late 2016 and early 2017. Strzok, however, was a double-edged sword. Although he believed there wasn’t sufficient evidence to prove Russia wanted Trump in office, text messages suggest he was still intent on proving that members of the Trump campaign colluded with Moscow. And while Comey also disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence assessment, he -- like Strzok -- believed the unverified Dossier, compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele, should have been part of the Intelligence Community Assessment titled 'Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections.' There is no dispute that the Kremlin meddled in the elections, but the suggestion that it did so to aid Trump set off a wave of controversy for the past several years." • This raises the question why the DOJ permitted the FBI -- that didn’t believe there was enough intel to support the notion that Putin meddled in the 2016 election to help Trump -- to launch an investigation with the full power of the FBI based on an unverified Dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton. According to Carter, Strzok sent an email to the FBI press office stating : “We did not have information to differentiate what their ultimate goal was.” He noted that Comey gave the Senate Intelligence Committee the same answer, saying : “In other words, the activity is one-sided and clear but we can’t say the sole and primary purpose was specifically intended to help someone, hurt someone else or undermine the process. The reality is all three." Strzok emails reveal that he even stated that some people in Obama’s intel agencies may have “partisan axes to grind” : “He, like us, is concerned with oversharing. Doesn’t want Clapper giving CR cuts to WH (White House). All political just show our hand and potentially makes enemies.” [It is not certain what Strzok means by ‘CR’ in this text.] Lisa PAge responded to Strzok : “Yeah, but keep in mind we were going to put that in the doc on Friday, with potentially larger distribution than just the dni [Director of National Intelligence Clapper]." Strzok responded : "The question is should we, particularly to the entirety of the lame duck usic [US Intelligence Community] with partisan axes to grind.” • Other text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page show they were plotting a ‘media leak strategy‘ and congratulating each other after left-wing outlets published their leaks. Legal Insurrection's Mary Chastain says : "THIS is collusion. Representative Mark Meadows announced on Monday that his office received new text messages between former FBI agent Peter Strozk and his mistress Lisa Page that show 'an apparent systemic culture of media leaking by high-ranking officials at FBI and DOJ related to ongoing investigations.' ” THEREFORE, says Chastain, the DOJ and FBI "teamed up to release harmful information to the media about President Donald Trump last year right before special counsel Robert Mueller began his Russia-Trump probe. This is what collusion looks like. Someone point Mueller to this story." • Mary Chastain also wrote on September 12 that : "On the day Strzok texted to Page about people 'leaking like mad,' the media published reports 'that US intelligence officials said they were convinced that Russian President Vladimir Putin was personally involved, and approved Russian meddling in the 2016 Presidential election.' A few days before he sent the text, the New York Times published an article that claimed 'senior [Obama] administration officials' believe that Russian hackers aimed to help then-candidate Donald Trump win in November 2016. These latest texts appear to back up the claims made by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) on Monday and Tuesday. His office reviewed texts from Strzok and Page that show 'an apparent systemic culture of media leaking by high-ranking officials at FBI and DOJ related to ongoing investigations.' ” • American Thinker Editor Thomas Lifson wrote on September 14 : "The former US attorney for the District of Columbia, Joe DiGenova, knows what he is talking about when it comes to legal liability, and he has the guts to lay out in straight talk what really happened with the conspiracy to swing a Presidential election, cover up the effort, and take out a duly elected President. Last night, on Sean Hannity's show, he explained the fate awaiting not just the Strzok-Page lovebirds, but a range of officials, including James Comey." The five minute video is available at < https://caching.grabien.com/c/streams/0458/9-rVSEh1StQgCfdFGMXAqQ/1537068158/458057.mp4?key=9-rVSEh1StQgCfdFGMXAqQ >. • Joe Di Genova told Hannity : "Here’s what we do now. We know from the text revealed by Strzok and Page yesterday that we now are at a different place. The walls are closing in, but they are not closing in on the President. They are closing in on the FBI and the Department of Justice under President Obama. Those text messages by Strzok and Page, which reveal an illegal media strategy to illegally and criminally released FISA warrant information and name a US Citizen, whose information they gave to “The New York Times” is a criminal offense. And by mentioning Carter Page, they have now created massive civil liability for everybody involved in revealing Carter Page’s name. Including themselves, James Baker, the former FBI general general counsel...everybody in the chain of command, the reporters for “The New York Times” have no privileges now. They also can be sued by Carter Page. Because although they may have been legally able to accept information, by publishing it, they revealed classified information that smeared Carter Page. Mr. Page will be a very wealthy man." When Hannity asked about FBI Director James Comey, Di Genova answered : "They are all involved, they are going down. And people don’t like to think about this, but James Comey, Strzok, McCabe, they are all going down on the FISA warrant stuff. That is not even in question." • Silvio Canto wrote on American Thinker last week : "What more do we need to learn? We just learned from Sara Carter that FBI agents were talking about 'leaks' to the media : The text messages suggest that Strzok, along with his paramour, former FBI Attorney Lisa Page, had been in contact with reporters from both newspapers. Strzok specifically mentioned two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times writer Michael Schmidt [in] his text message to Page. Strzok wrote, 'Also, apparently Times is angry with us about the WP (Washington Post) scoop and earlier discussion we had about the Schmidt piece that had so many inaccuracies. Too much to detail here, but I told Mike (redacted) and Andy they need to understand we were absolutely dealing in good faith with them,' Strzok texted to Page on April 14, 2017. 'The FISA one, coupled with the Guardian piece from yesterday.'....According to several US officials who spoke to this news outlet, 'Mike' mentioned in Strzok's text message is Mike Kortan, the former FBI assistant director for public affairs who retired in February. 'Andy' was in reference to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. McCabe was fired earlier this year after it was revealed in DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report that said he lied to investigators and leaked information to the media. Talk about something gone wrong!" Silvio Canto's conclusion is direct : "For 22 months, we've witnessed a meltdown on the other side about the election of Donald Trump. At first, I thought that it was political passions or just irrational liberals behaving irrationally. Today, I think we are watching a bunch of people who know that the investigation is getting closer and closer to the Obama White House." • Another set of Strzok-Page emails showed cooperation with CNN -- knowledge of the Comey-Trump briefing was leaked to CNN, CNN printed the story, Strzok wanted to use it as a pretext to interview people in the Trump-Russia investigation, and weeks later George Papadopoulos became ensnared in their investigation. • All of this suggests that there was an ongoing and pervasive collusion between Obama's intelligence agencies and the mainstream media to defeat, and then smear Donald Trump after he had won the election. Representative Mark Meadows pointed out that messages, sent the day before and after two damaging articles about former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page, raise “grave concerns regarding an apparent systematic culture of media leaking by high-ranking officials at the FBI and DOJ related to ongoing investigations.” The texts show “a coordinated effort on the part of the FBI and DOJ to release information in the public domain potentially harmful to President Donald Trump’s administration.“ TeaParty.org wrote on September 14 that Freedom Caucus Chairman Jim Jordan and Freedom Caucus founder Mark Meadows told Sean Hannity : "The latest text messages from the anti-Trump officials show how they were feeding anti-Trump articles to the press. The newly released documents obtained by the House Oversight Committee reveal Deep State operatives Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were discussing a strategy to leak unverified information to the media in an effort to damage President Trump. Jordan told Stuart Varney earlier today that one liberal reporter had 13 different sources from within the FBI feeding him information. On Wednesday night, Mark Meadows told Sean Congress knows the identities of the far left media hacks working with the Deep State to take down President Trump. Representative Mark Meadows : 'There are dozens of other documents that will support the fact that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page had ongoing relationships with multiple reporters and that they were feeding them information to spin a narrative against this President...We know that James Comey leaked, we know that Andrew McCabe leaked, we know that Peter Strzok and Lisa Page leaked. We also know that the reporters who they leaked to know that they leaked. And look we got names. We also have the reporters’ names.' " The Hannity-Meadows-Jordan video is available at : < https://youtu.be/xyGEfKH3saM >. • • • DEAR READERS, President Trump’s decision to meet Rosenstein on Thursday provides a spectacular day at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. Trump will meet with the official who appointed and oversees the Mueller probe. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Senators on the Judiciary Committee will hear testimony from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing him of sexual misconduct. • Is this the beginning of the end for the Progressive Democrat cabal seeking the overthrow of the duly elected US President? Or is it just one more day in the Swamp? Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hit Democrats and their 11th hour “me too” ambush from the Senate floor Monday afternoon in a fiery speech, saying the resistance has become a smear campaign aided and abetted by members of the US Senate. Senator McConnell also said that Kavanaugh will be voted on the Senate Floor -- up or down on the Senate floor. McConnell characterized the latest Kavanaugh allegations as “another orchestrated hit.” The video of McConnell's speech is available at : < https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1044306787871207424 >. • The anti-Trump leaking by ProgDems goes on, even in the halls of the US Senate. The ranking Democrat member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein, sat on the letter Christine Ford delivered to Senate Democrats for several weeks only to have it leaked to the media at the 11th hour to create a firestorm in an effort to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation. • Watching Judge Kavanaugh and his wife talk to Martha McCallum on Fox News Monday evening, it was hard not to feel my heart breaking for this man and his family. Character assassination is never pretty to watch. In Europe, it is a specialty of French politics -- but the opposition waits until a French president has left office to dish dirt and find something that can justify the opening of a legal procedure against him. The excpetion -- and it may be a sign of what is coming in Europe -- is the case of François Fillon, the conservative candidate in the last French presidential election, who was hounded until he withdrew, over allegations that he had misstated his financial accounting and filings. The case drags on today. America is better than that. We do not resort to personal villification, smears, and lies to defeat our opponents. We do it at the ballot box. But, as in France, perhaps this is a vestige of an earlier epoch when politics had a character more on keeping with the polite society it represented. • It must take a terrible moral void to deliberately set out to destroy another person. The conservative outrage over the attempt to destroy Judge Kavanaugh is more than politics. It reflects the anguish we have over the moral and ethical state of American politics today. That a man so removed from the rough-and-tumble of politics, so Christian in his life, so humble about his brilliance as a constitutional jurist can become Swamp bait simply because he was appointed by the President the ProDems have already villified with lies and unconstitutional actions in league with their propagandist media is deeply offensive and troubling to those of us who still have souls that can be 'troubled' by anything that goes on in public life today. The malaise is rotting the sinews of our society. It is contaminating our children. It is making of our body politic a wasteland where ethics and responsibility for one's acts is replaced by winning at any cost -- lies, cheating, double-dealing -- they are the surface symptoms. Underneath it is the smell of putrid flesh whose spiritual and moral latticework have vanished. • We cannot say that we have not been warned. In the 18th century, Founder and President John Adams told us : "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Edward Gibbon warned us in the same century by describing the decay of the Roman Empire : "The five marks of the Roman decaying culture : Concern with displaying affluence instead of building wealth; Obsession with sex and perversions of sex; Art becomes freakish and sensationalistic instead of creative and original; Widening disparity between very rich and very poor; Increased demand to live off the state.” As early as the 15th century Machiavelli noted : "There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt." In our times, General MacArthur told us directly and clearly : "History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster." And, the father of modern conservatism, Russell Kirk, told us : "Moral decay first hampers and then strangles honest government, regular commerce, and even the ability to take genuine pleasure in the goods of this world. Compulsion is applied from above as self-discipline relaxes below, and the last liberties expire under the weight of a unitary state....Since religion has lost its empire over the souls of men, the most prominent boundary that divided good from evil is overthrown; kings and nations are guided by chance and none can say where are the natural limits of despotism and the bound of license." • Is it too late for America to regain its moral signposts? Are Americans too worldly to return to church or synagogue? Do Americans who reject religion have the force of character to find a moral code of conduct that guides their lives? Between 68% and 80% of Americans believe in God, depending on how the question is asked. That is a start. For now, President Trump and Judge Kavanaugh are both the victims of America's moral malaise.