The Return of the Puppetmaster: Soros “Investing” in Local Elections

August 30, 2016

thLOJC62I2Good Morning, boys and girls.

The story that I am about to relate to you is so frightening in its scope, that it were a movie, seen on “Fantastic Features”, a program hosted by your “Monster of Ceremonies”, “Sivad”, which those of us who grew up in Memphis used to watch late on Saturday Nights, when our parents let us stay up, it would be called “The Return of the Puppetmaster”.

Politico.com reports that

While America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system.

The billionaire financier has channeled more than $3 million into seven local district attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors.

His money has supported African-American and Hispanic candidates for these powerful local roles, all of whom ran on platforms sharing major goals of Soros’, like reducing racial disparities in sentencing and directing some drug offenders to diversion programs instead of to trial. It is by far the most tangible action in a progressive push to find, prepare and finance criminal justice reform-oriented candidates for jobs that have been held by long-time incumbents and serve as pipelines to the federal courts — and it has inspired fury among opponents angry about the outside influence in local elections.

“The prosecutor exercises the greatest discretion and power in the system. It is so important,” said Andrea Dew Steele, the president of Emerge America, a candidate-training organization for Democratic women. “There’s been a confluence of events in the past couple years and all of the sudden, the progressive community is waking up to this.”

Soros has spent on district attorney campaigns in Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico and Texas through a network of state-level super PACs and a national “527” unlimited-money group, each named a variation on “Safety and Justice.” (Soros has also funded a federal super PAC with the same name.) Each organization received most of its money directly from Soros, according to public state and federal financial records, though some groups also got donations from nonprofits like the Civic Participation Action Fund, which gave to the Safety and Justice group in Illinois.

The Florida Safety and Justice group just poured nearly $1.4 million — all of which came from Soros and his 527 group — into a previously low-budget Democratic primary for state attorney in Central Florida before Tuesday’s vote. The group is backing Aramis Ayala, a former public defender and prosecutor, in her campaign against incumbent Jeff Ashton, whose jurisdiction covers over 1.6 million people across two counties in metro Orlando.

One TV ad from Florida Safety and Justice boosts Ayala, touting her “plan to remove bias so defendants charged with the same crime receive the same treatment, no matter their background or race.” The Soros-funded group is also attacking Ashton with ads saying he “got rid of protections that helped ensure equal treatment regardless of background or race. … Take two similar traffic incidents that happened on the same night. A white man got off with a slap on the wrist, while the black man faces prison.”

Opponents of Soros’ favored candidates have laced into the billionaire, saying that his influence has wildly tipped the scales of local elections and even charging that he made residents less safe.

“As a candidate and citizen of Caddo Parish, if an outsider was that interested in the race, I wanted to know exactly what he had in mind for the criminal justice system if he were to win,” said Dhu Thompson, a Louisiana attorney who lost a district attorney race to a Soros-backed candidate, James Stewart, in 2015. Soros gave over $930,000 — more than 22 times the local median household income — to the group boosting Stewart.

“I know some of his troubling opinions on social issues, especially the criminal justice system,” Thompson said. “I’ve never known him as an individual who was very strong on some of our crime and punishment issues. I felt it was very detrimental to the safety of Caddo Parish, and that’s why I took such a strong stand against him.”

A Soros representative declined to comment on his involvement in the D.A. races.

As anybody who has paid any attention to American Politics in the last couple of decades knows, George Soros has played the role of the “Evil Puppetmaster” behind the scenes for quite a while now.

For example…

MoveOn.org was formed in 1998 as a supposedly “bipartisan e-mail group” in order to send a petition to Congress to “move on” past the planned  impeachment of President Clinton. It rose to national prominence for its strong disapproval of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

A Liberal Political Group based in the United States, MoveOn.org has played the role of a National Community Organizer and Democratic Propaganda Machine, whose “foot soldiers”, paid and unpaid, are estimated to number over 2,000,000. The group’s publicly stated mission was to promote “grassroots advocacy” through various political activities including running a PAC, voter registration drives, and political advertising (especially in swing states).

It’s covert mission is more nefarious.

MoveOn.org supported the Democratic nominees for the 2004 U.S. presidential election, and played a part in the failed attempt to stop George W. Bush’s re-election effort, raising millions of dollars for Democratic candidates. It is one of several 527 committees who supported John Kerry, the Democratic nominee in the 2004 U.S. presidential election; others include America Coming Together and the Media Fund.

Like numerous other Far Left Political Organizations, a major funder of MoveOn is Former Nazi Collaborator and Hedge Fund Billionaire, George Soros.

George Soros and a partner ponied up $5 million to MoveOn.org, bringing to $15.5 million the total of his personal contributions in the failed attempt to oust President George W. Bush.

Now, in 2016, after funding the election of the worst United States President in History, Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm), the “Evil Puppetmaster” is financing the racist movement known as Black Lives Matter, which has joined with MoveOn.org, in an effort to violate the First Amendment Rights of Donald J. Trump and to prevent him from becoming President of the United States of America.

It should be noted that, according to various sources, during the Nazi Occupation of Hungary in the 1940s, Soros reported his own countrymen to the Nazis (National Socialist Party of Germany), facilitating their removal via “the long train ride from which very few ever returned”.

Soros began his modern “philanthropic activity” in 1979, establishing the Open Society Foundations in 1984. These “foundations” (i.e., political organizations), fund a range of global initiatives “to advance justice, education, public health, business development and independent media.”

It is through this “philanthropic activity” that Soros is funding the current “civil unrest”, the seeds of which were planted in Ferguson, Missouri.

An article published by the Washington Times, on January 14, 2015, titled “George Soros funds Ferguson protests, hopes to spur civil action”, reporter Kelly Riddell went into detail about Soros’ “Community Organizing”…

… Mr. Soros gave at least $33 million in one year to support already-established groups that emboldened the grass-roots, on-the-ground activists in Ferguson, according to the most recent tax filings of his nonprofit Open Society Foundations.

The financial tether from Mr. Soros to the activist groups gave rise to a combustible protest movement that transformed a one-day criminal event in Missouri into a 24-hour-a-day national cause celebre.

“Our DNA includes a belief that having people participate in government is indispensable to living in a more just, inclusive, democratic society,” said Kenneth Zimmerman, director of Mr. Soros‘ Open Society Foundations’ U.S. programs, in an interview with The Washington Times. “Helping groups combine policy, research [and] data collection with community organizing feels very much the way our society becomes more accountable.”

…Colorlines is an online news site that focuses on race issues and is published by Race Forward, a group that received $200,000 from Mr. Soros’s foundation in 2011. Colorlines has published tirelessly on the activities in Ferguson and heavily promoted the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag and activities.

…Mr. Soros gave $5.4 million to Ferguson and Staten Island grass-roots efforts last year to help “further police reform, accountability and public transparency,” the Open Society Foundations said in a blog post in December. About half of those funds were earmarked to Ferguson, with the money primarily going to OBS and MORE, the foundation said.

So, why is the “Evil Puppetmaster” not only pouring so much money into the Black Lives Matter and “Shout Trump Down” Movements, but into local elections across America, as well?

Soros is merely protecting his investment.

Per the Chicago Tribune,

Over the past few years, Soros’ charities have given between $1.5 million and $6 million to the Clinton Foundation. Soros’s biggest contribution this year is a total of $7 million to Priorities USA, the main super-PAC supporting Clinton. Another $1 million went to American Bridge, an opposition-research group. And last week, he announced he was putting $5 million into a new super-PAC known as Immigrant Voters Win. The group is part of a coordinated $15 million voter-turnout effort, first reported in the New York Times, that is targeting Latinos and immigrants in Colorado, Nevada and Florida.

As I have previously written, I firmly believe that America is now fighting a new war against fascism.

It’s not a war that is being fought fought with guns and bullets, But instead with state referendums, Congressional votes, Executive Orders, judicial activism, and FAR Left-sponsored and organized Political Activists.

And, it’s not our Brightest and Best who are dying on this field of battle, but rather, it is our Constitutional Freedoms which are dying an ignoble death, pierced by the arrows of socialism and political correctness.

Soros is attempting to “radically change” our nation into pale shadow resembling the fascism that was the Third Reich.

Just as they did, by controlling what happens in towns and municipalities, Soros’ operatives keep local officials goose-stepping right in line with Soros’ “National Investments” and their  Marxist/Alinsky-ite Political Goals.

Dissension will not be tolerated.

For example,…

Whether you like him or not, Donald J. Trump has the same Constitutional right to speak his mind, as any citizen of the United States of America.

For these Soros-funded, fascist “New Bolsheviks”, to attempt to forcibly invade and shut down all of Trump’s Political Rallies, time and tie again, is an exercise in intimidation that has not been seen since the days of the Russian Revolution and Germany’s National Sociality Party.

And, for Soros to be attempting to “buy” local elections as well, is an exercise in Machiavellian Political Control that has not been seen since the Beer Hall Putsch.

Of course, do not attempt to tell a Modern American Liberal that.

After all, it’s not Fascism when they do it.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

Putting America First: Donald J. Trump, Illegal Immigration, and the Perpetual Handwringing of the Main Stream Media

August 29, 2016

Trump-Tool-600-CIThe handwringing Liberal Main Stream Media continues its quest to find something, ANYTHING, with which to stop Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump from defeating Democratic Candidate Hillary Clinton in this November’s Presidential Election.

Read this article and pay close attention to the tone in which it is written.

CBS News reported this morning that

Donald Trump announced Sunday evening that he plans to deliver a “major speech on illegal immigration” in Arizona on Wednesday.

The GOP presidential nominee shared the scheduled event on his Twitter account.

[I will be making a major speech on ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION on Wednesday in the GREAT State of Arizona. Big crowds, looking for a larger venue.]

This comes after Trump has waffled on his immigration policy position for more than a week, specifically on his plan for dealing with undocumented immigrants already living in the U.S.

Early on in his campaign, Trump advocated deporting the roughly 11 to 12 million immigrants in the United States, and said that they could only re-enter the country through the legal process. Last September, Trump even said that it would take his administration up to two years to deport them all.

On Tuesday however, Trump suggested during a taped town hall hosted by Fox News’ Sean Hannity that he might be open to letting some of the undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. stay. He also told Hannity that there would be “no amnesty” for undocumented immigrants if he’s elected president, but suggested he would be willing to “work with” that community.

On Wednesday, Trump hinted that he plans to announce something new or different regarding his immigration policies over the next two weeks.

Trump told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Thursday that there is “not a path to legalization” for undocumented immigrants under his plan and he described his stance as one that was “hardening” instead of one that was “softening” as he described only two days earlier.

“No, there’s not a path to legalization unless people leave the country, if they come back in and then they have to start paying taxes,” he said, adding that he would first plan to deport “bad dudes” who he estimated would amount to “probably millions…certainly hundreds of thousands.”

At a rally Saturday, Trump appeared to hint more at his position, but didn’t provide details.

On day one, I’m going to begin swiftly removing criminal illegal immigrants from this country,” he said in Des Moines, Iowa.

In an interview with Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway on CBS’s “Face the Nation” on Sunday, host John Dickerson pointed out that Trump has advocated deporting 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. and he asked why Trump is shifting on that stance.

“Actually, he’s not, John,” Conway said. “He’s pretty consistent. Immigration is a very complex issue.”

Dickerson then asked Conway if the law is enforced, if that would mean Trump would call for undocumented immigrants to self-deport or if he would create a deportation force.

“That’s really the question here, John,” Conway replied. “He has to deal with those agencies and those individuals are are already responsible for this who aren’t doing the jobs.”

Conway added that Trump would “work with law enforcement [and] immigration agencies” to take care of the issue in a “fair, humane and effective” way.

As a Former Collegiate Radio News Director, it is interesting and borderline funny to watch the Main Stream Media’s desperate attempts to catch Trump changing his stance on issues such as Illegal Immigration.

Their fear of an impending Hillary Clinton loss in November is palpable.

What those among us who see to shape the news and not report it fail to realize is that the overwhelming majority of Americans are fed up with out-of-touch Professional Politicians and their empty promises, given in order to maintain the Washingtonian Status Quo.

The unshakable fact is that the overwhelming majority of Americans side with Donald J. Trump on the issue of Illegal Immigration.

Being an individual among that “overwhelming majority”, and, speaking on their behalf, my opinion concerning these “undocumented individuals” can be summed up in the following allegorical story, which went viral, a few years ago.  You may have seen this already, but it explains illegal immigration as succinctly as anything I’ve come across:

Let’s pretend I broke into your house.  When you discover me there, you insist I leave.  But I say, “I’ve made all the beds, washed the dishes, did the laundry, and cleaned the floors; I’ve done all the work you don’t like to do. I’m hardworking and honest (except for breaking into your house). Not only must you let me stay, you must also add me to your insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide these benefits to my husband, too (he will do your yard work, he’s honest and hardworking too–except for that breaking in part). If you try to force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house and proclaim my right to be there! It’s only fair, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m trying to better myself. I’m hardworking and honest…except for, well, you know. I will live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness and prejudice.

Oh yeah, I want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me.

Good plan..don’t you think?

Why are our representatives so intent on rewarding those who have broken our laws with impunity?

Is this a behavior we should be rewarding?

What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, they are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens.

And, yet, even as I write this, they are in our hospitals, taking advantage of our charity and the finest health care system in the world, and driving our streets, with either forged drivers licenses or those obtained from states who have acquiesced and given them to these “undocumented workers”.

This is in no way a human rights issue.

Freedom is God-given, and with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way.

My concerns about rewarding these lawbreakers with a “Path to Citizenship” or Blanket Amnesty can be divided into three bullet points. (Hey, I used to be a VP of Marketing. What do you expect?)

1. Patriotism – Will these new “citizens” be willing to fly our flag above theirs? Will they be willing, if called upon, to serve in our Armed Forces, at home or abroad? Will they love this country, more than the one they left?

2. Loyalty – When these “new Americans” achieve the right to vote, are they all going to vote Democrat, so that they can receive more FREE STUFF? Is the Republican Party shooting themselves in both feet by pushing an outcome which will simply add new Democratic Voters? As I asked in the first point, will they honestly embrace our sovereign nation as their new home? Or, will they remain loyal to Mexico?

3.  Immigration – Are we rewarding illegal behavior, while at the same time, insulting all of the brave souls who have come here legally, seeking a better life for themselves and their families?

So, what is the solution to this “Humanitarian Issue”, as Obama and all of his hand-wringing hypocritical Liberal sycophants are calling this invasion?

Believe or not, a legendary Democrat Leader agreed with Trump on what should be done with those who have broken our laws by entering our Sovereign Nation illegally.

The last bipartisan U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform happened during President ill “Bubba” Clinton’s tenure. Bubba appointed former congresswoman and Democratic icon Barbara Jordan as its chair. Jordan came from humble beginnings to become a lawyer and the first Southern black woman elected to the House of Representatives. A DEMOCRAT, she was a leader in the civil rights movement, a professor of ethics, a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and a world-class orator (two of her speeches are considered among the greatest of the 20th century). Her appointment gave the commission instant credibility. According to Jordan, she believed her responsibility as the head of the commission was to restore credibility to the U.S. immigration system. On the issue of illegal immigration, Jordan was very clear and succinct:

Unlawful immigration is unacceptable. Those who should not be here will be required to leave.

Liberals, on both sides of the Political Aisle, have continuously masked their true intentions for the political usefulness, in granting amnesty to illegal aliens, by swathing it in the noble rhetoric of “Civil Rights” and “Social Justice”.

Please indulge me by allowing me the opportunity to wrap up today’s blog with the answer I gave on May 19. 2010,  to “Benito”, who submitted a rather lengthy comment filled with this same camouflage of noble intentions:

Benito, I approved your comment to ask you a few questions. First, you write very well. Next, a few questions. What part of the word “illegal” do you not understand? What makes the current influx of illegal immigrants exempt from the rules and regulations that every other generation of immigrants to this country had to abide by in order to become legal citizens of the greatest nation in the world? By being here illegally, you are not entitled to the same rights as natural-born or naturalized American citizens. You are no better than someone who breaks into someone’s home, does their dishes, cuts their yard, cleans their house, and then helps themselves to their food and drives their car without asking. This is in no way a human rights issue. Freedom is God-given. And with freedom comes responsibility. With citizenship comes responsibility, like paying taxes and making your own way. Illegal immigration reminds me of the amorous boyfriend who wants everything a young woman will give him, but will leave her at the first mention of marriage. I wish you no ill, amigo, but understand this: This is not a civil rights issue. Illegals do not have the same rights as American Citizens. With our rights, come the responsibilities of being an American citizen. The Mexican flag, by protocol, will always be flown in a subordinate position to the American Flag in this country. And, the American Dialect of the English language is the language spoken in this country.

I understand that people want a better life for themselves and their children.  We are all immigrants in this land, except for American Indians, and they got here by crossing the Bering Straight.  But there is a huge difference between immigrating here legally and sneaking in illegally, between assimilating into an existing culture, and insisting on replacing a country’s existing culture with that of the country you left.

I’m all for assisting anyone in becoming a legal citizen of the United States, if that is their wish.  But, it must be done the right way, and they must accept responsibility for their illegal entry, show a willingness to learn our language, and embrace our American way of life, including respecting the American Flag.

So, let’s take this one step at a time.

  1. Elect Donald J. Trump as the next President of the United States of America.
  2. Build the Wall.
  3. Secure our borders.
  4. Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws.

America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

Too many brave Americans have died to keep our flag flying over our Sovereign Nation for that flag to be flown below any other country’s.

America First.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Divided America: Colin Kaepernick and His “Constitutional Right” to Act Like an Ungrateful Idiot

August 28, 2016

fd4cf6b3826e1b75af9c179bfe12718aIt is the night of September 13, 1814.  The British fleet are bombarding Fort McHenry in the harbor at Baltimore, Maryland. Francis Scott Key, a 34-year old lawyer-poet, is watching the attack from the deck of a British prisoner-exchange ship. Key had gone seeking the release of a friend. They were told that they had to remain aboard the vessel until the end of the attack. When the battle was over, the following morning, Key had his telescope on the fort and saw the American flag was still waving. The sight of the tattered Stars and Stripes was so moving that he pulled a letter from his pocket and began to write the poem. This poem eventually became the national anthem of the United States – “The Star Spangled Banner”.

Oh, say, can you see, by the dawn’s early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro’ the perilous fight’
O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming.
And the rockets red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there.
Oh, say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

It does, sir. Regardless of a the actions of an ungrateful millionaire.

NFL.com has the story:

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has willingly immersed himself into controversy by refusing to stand for the playing of the national anthem in protest of what he deems are wrongdoings against African Americans and minorities in the United States.His latest refusal to stand for the anthem — he has done this in at least one other preseason game — came before the 49ers’ preseason loss to Green Bay at Levi’s Stadium on Friday night.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.” 

The 49ers issued a statement about Kaepernick’s decision: “The national anthem is and always will be a special part of the pre-game ceremony. It is an opportunity to honor our country and reflect on the great liberties we are afforded as its citizens. In respecting such American principles as freedom of religion and freedom of expression, we recognize the right of an individual to choose and participate, or not, in our celebration of the national anthem.”

Niners coach Chip Kelly told reporters Saturday that Kaepernick’s decision not to stand during the national anthem is “his right as a citizen” and said “it’s not my right to tell him not to do something.”

The NFL also released a statement, obtained by NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport: “Players are encouraged but not required to stand during the playing of the national anthem.”

By taking a stand for civil rights, Kaepernick, 28, joins other athletes, like the NBA’s Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony and several WNBA players in using their platform and status to raise awareness to issues affecting minorities in the U.S.

However, refusal to support the American flag as a means to take a stand has brought incredible backlash before and likely will in this instance. The NBA’s Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf of the Denver Nuggets, formerly Chris Jackson before converting to Islam, refused to acknowledge the flag in protest, citing similar reasons as Kaepernick and saying that it conflicted with some of his Islamic beliefs.

Abdul-Rauf drew the ire of fans and was briefly suspended by the NBA before a compromise was worked out between the league and player, who eventually stood with his teammates and coaches at the playing of the national anthem.

Kaepernick said that he is aware of what he is doing and that he knows it will not sit well with a lot of people, including the 49ers. He said that he did not inform the club or anyone affiliated with the team of his intentions to protest the national anthem.

“This is not something that I am going to run by anybody,” he said. “I am not looking for approval. I have to stand up for people that are oppressed. … If they take football away, my endorsements from me, I know that I stood up for what is right.”

Kaepernick said that he has thought about going public with his feelings for a while but that “I felt that I needed to understand the situation better.”

He said that he has discussed his feelings with his family and, after months of witnessing some of the civil unrest in the U.S., decided to be more active and involved in rights for black people. Kaepernick, who is biracial, was adopted and raised by white parents and siblings.

Kaepernick’s Twitter feed is filled with civil rights messages. 

The former Super Bowl starting quarterback’s decision to go public comes while he is fighting for his football life with the 49ers, who drafted him in the second round in 2011. He lost his starting job last season after being one of the most promising players in the NFL during his run under former coach Jim Harbaugh.

Over the past few months, his relationship with management has turned sour. He requested a trade last spring, which never came. He also has spent most of the offseason rehabilitating from operations to his left (non-throwing) shoulder, his hand and knee. His recovery left him unable to fully compete with Blaine Gabbert for months and has him seemingly in a bind to regain his starting job.

He made his preseason debut against the Packers and played in the second quarter, completing two of six passes for 14 yards. He looked as rusty as you’d expect from someone who has not played since last November.

Following the game, and without any knowledge of Kaepernick’s non-football behavior, coach Chip Kelly said that there has never been any discussion about cutting Kaepernick. Rapoport added Saturday that Kelly will make “football decisions” on Kaepernick, despite the quarterback’s comments.

So where does this disrespect for Old Glory come from?

It starts at the top.

Let’s go back to 9/13/11, 2 days after America solemnly remembered the 10th anniversary of the worst attack ever on American soil by Islamic Terrorists.  James Robbins wrote the following story for The Washington Times, in which he illuminated a whispered conversation between the President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, and First Lady, Michelle Obama:

The internet was buzzing this week with video of First Lady Michelle Obama apparently showing extreme disrespect to the American flag at a ceremony in honor of the victims of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. As police and firefighters fold the flag to the sound of marching bagpipers, a skeptical looking Mrs. Obama leans to her husband and appears to say, “all this just for a flag.” She then purses her lips and shakes her head slightly as Mr. Obama nods.

And, it filters to the home.

Back in the 60s, President Lyndon Johnson (whose big hand I once shook, at his ranch, as a little boy, after his presidential term) and the Democrats, brought forth a plan, called “the Great Society”. It was decided, in order to ensure that everyone would have an equal opportunity in America, that Uncle Sugar would step in to fill in the gaps.

Two seminal pieces of legislation were passed.

First, the Civil Rights Bill that JFK promised to sign, before his assassination, was passed into law. This Act banned discrimination based on race and gender in employment and ending segregation in all public facilities.

It also helped to cement in stone, minorities’ loyalty to the Democratic Party, which continues to this day.

The second bill that LBJ signed into law was the sweeping ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1964. It created the Office of Economic Opportunity whose stated purpose was to attack the roots of American poverty. A Job Corps was then established to provide vocational training.

A preschool program designed to help disadvantaged students arrive at kindergarten ready to learn, named HEADSTART, was then established. Then came VOLUNTEERS IN SERVICE TO AMERICA (VISTA), which was set up as a domestic Peace Corps. Schools in impoverished American regions would now receive volunteer teaching attention. Federal funds were sent to struggling communities to attack unemployment and illiteracy.

What Johnson told Americans, as he campaigned in 1964, was that the establishment of this “Great Society” was going to eliminate the problems of America’s poor.

It had the opposite effect

The Great Society created a dependent class, which, instead of diminishing as it’s members joined the workforce, increased from generation to generation, relying on the federal government to provide their every need.

Uncle Sugar became Mother, Father, Preacher, and Doctor to generations of Americans. This “plantation mentality” continues to this day.

A few years ago, I worked at our county’s State Employment Center Office.

While at the Employment Office, I was able to observe Americans, both Black and White, down on their luck, struggling to find work and survive in this economy. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of “unemployed ” who came to this particular office were Black.

I saw Black American Families whose existence living on the Government Dole, had become generational.

It is these people whom Obama and the Democrats have hypnotized into believing that Uncle Sugar loves them, and is their only solution to surviving a stifling existence.

They are so, so wrong.

The strength and vitality of America does not come from the benevolence of a Nanny-state Federal Government.

As the greatest American President of my lifetime, Ronald Reagan said:

The nine words you never want to hear are: I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.

Being enslaved to the Government Dole steals one’s ambition. It takes away any impetus or desire to create a better life for yourself and your family, to challenge yourself to pick yourself up by your bootstraps and pursue the American Dream. It makes you reliant on a politically motivated spider’s web full of government bureaucrats who view you and your family as job security.

I watched American citizens trapped in this web of government bureaucracy, so numbed of any initiative that they once had, that they seemed offended that they actually had to prove that they inquired about three jobs that week in order to keep their “benefits”. Others seemed puzzled that they had to search through the state data base and pick out a job that they wanted to talk to an interviewer about receiving a referral to, and weren’t just simply handed a job when they walked through the door.

Instead of moving forward, by exercising the self-reliance that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. preached so well, these people I saw, were content on being “taken care of” by Uncle Sugar, as if being held down by their own poor, miserable circumstance, was a good thing.

I am sure that it would have offended you, Dr. King, to hear the tenants of Marxism, i.e., “sharing the wealth” and Class Envy, being “preached” to the same Black Americans whom you tried so mightily to raise up and inspire.

For the past several years, the results of LBJ’s “Great Society” have been the lead story in every television newscast, on every newspaper front page, and on every internet news/political website.

Dr King, I am sorry to tell you that racism and injustice is still going on in America. Unfortunately, it will not end any time soon, There are too many race-baiters profiting off of it.

Including, the President of the United States.

President Barack Hussein Obama is as responsible for what has happened in Ferguson, New York, Baltimore, and is happening in cities across America,  as any thug wannabe in those cities.

However, he is not alone in his responsibility.

Also responsible are the black political leaders, who make their living and get their 15 minutes of fame by exacerbating racially-divided situations. Their silence speaks volumes.

For example, by the Mayor of Baltimore, purposely giving carte blanche to the rioters to destroy her city by ordering the police to stand down, she, like the Roman Emperor Nero, lit the match that has set her kingdom ablaze.

If Black Lives truly do matter, it is the black community who are going to have to save themselves.

With a nationwide illegitimate birth rate of 74%, black Americans, with help from Uncle Sugar, have succeeded in tearing apart the very thing that kept them safe and strong for decades: the Black Family Unit.

Until that Sacred Foundation, which taught individual responsibility to generations of black Americans, is restored, the violence and disrespect for others will continue.

I remember, as a 9 year old in Memphis, Tennessee, watching my parents’ black and white television as the National Guard was called into action on the night that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.

I remember after that Civil Defense Announcement that President Lyndon Johnson come on national television to make the announcement of Dr. King’s death. I remember a feeling of helplessness and of fear, as a nine-year-old, that I had not felt before.

It wasn’t just the fact that we were living in Midtown Memphis, that made me afraid.

It wasn’t just the fact of the out-of-control violence itself, that caused my consternation.

It was watching my beloved Hometown on the verge of going up in flames.

And now, 48  years later, Memphis is the #2 Most Dangerous City in America, as ranked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and has borne witness to 145 homicides so far this year, the overwhelming majority of which were black Memphians killing one another.

Words can hurt or words can heal.

A President who was supposed to bridge the Racial Divide in this nation…has, instead, widened it.

And, with every divisive word he and the political activists whom he champions speak, the chasm of Racial Divisiveness, which has created a gaping hole in the fabric of American Society, grows wider.

Words mean things.

The part of Dr. King’s magnificent speech about “the content of their character” has been purposefully ignored by the professional race-baiters, assorted politicians (but, I repeat myself), and those, like this millionaire professional quarterback, who seek to blame those who put their lives on the line every day to protect Americans and uphold the law, for the deaths of those whose lives were lost because of their own choice to break the law.

Dr. King, your call for self-reliance has apparently fallen on deaf ears of some of those who have the financial means to help their blighted neighborhoods and the young people roaming their streets.

So, how can we expect these young people to respect OUR FLAG, when they have no respect for THEMSELVES?

To those of you read this today, who somehow believe that dishonoring OUR FLAG, makes you more enlightened than the rest of us, and is your “right”, okay.

However, it is my right, as the son of an American Soldier, who stepped off a perfectly good boat, in a hail of gunfire, onto Normandy Beach to protect our American Freedom, to call you out because of your disrespect of Old Glory and the sacrifices made by those who cherished our nation’s flag.

Yes, children, including Colin Kaepernick and First Lady Michelle Obama.  All this for a flag.  And, for those who gave the ultimate sacrifice in its service.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Victory Through “Social Media”: The Tanking of Target and the Clinton Campaign (A KJ Saturday Morning Analysis)

August 27, 2016

2014-05-06-socialmediaTHESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but “to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER,” and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God. – Thomas Paine, “The Crisis”, December 23, 1776

Fortune.com recently reported that

Target (tgt) is spending millions to add private single-stall locking bathrooms at many of its stores as it looks to reverse a drop in shopper traffic, some of which may have been caused by the retailer’s transgender-friendly bathroom policy.

In April, the discounter said on a blog that transgender workers and customers could use the restroom aligned with the gender they identify with, wading into a national controversy and raising the ire of part of its clientele. The move led to a purported boycott of Target by at least one million customers, many of whom argued that Target’s policy would increase sexual assaults.
 
While many retailers have the same policy, including Macy’s m and Barnes & Noble bks , Target planted its flag on the issue in a blog post in which it explained the policy by saying “inclusivity is a core belief at Target.”
 
Though company executives downplayed the impact of the backlash in May when discussing first-quarter results, and again on Wednesday to go over its second-quarter numbers, which included its first drop in shopper traffic since early 2014, Target is making concessions to customers displeased with the bathroom policy. So Target is spending $20 million to add private bathrooms that can be locked.
 
“It’s clear that some of our guests like and some dislike our inclusive bathroom policy,” Target chief financial officer Cathy Smith told reporters on a media briefing. The vast majority of Target stores already have the single-stall bathrooms but the retailer will add them to more locations by November, and then again after the holiday season, which it doesn’t want to disrupt with repairs, and be done by March.

Though Smith did not say whether the backlash had cost it some business, the announcement of the bathroom policy came at a time pressure on Target was already building from a number of directions. For one thing, Target lost quite a bit of shopper traffic in the second quarter because of the disruption from the transition of the pharmacy business it sold last year to CVS Health cvs . (CVS has undertaken an aggressive marketing campaign to lure customers to its pharmacies within Target stores.) Target also got dinged by a 20% drop in Apple aapl products and customers not taking to its fresh grocery offering.
 
So the last thing Target needed was to alienate any of customer base, given that it is a $75 billion-a-year retailer that caters to a wide swathe of America, including socially conservative shoppers.
 
“We are not satisfied with our second quarter traffic and sales performance,” Smith said. Stepping back a bit on a controversial move is one way Target is trying to fix that. 

What has happened to Target is the same thing that always happens to businesses who decide to acquiesce to the demands of the vocal political minority in this country known as Modern American Liberals.

The “Tanking of Target” is a direct result of an overestimation of the economic impact of American Liberals and an underestimation of the economic impact of average Americans.

As Rev. Franklin Graham recently said,

When over a million people sign a pledge to boycott, that’s a loud and clear message Target shouldn’t have a problem understanding — biological men do not need access into women’s bathrooms or dressing rooms.

By the way, the thunderclap that you just heard was the sound of the  butt cheeks of the radical segment of that 24% of America’s population that I just referred to, slamming together in unison.

You often hear of these activists, who are a part of the 24% of , who identify themselves as “Liberals”, referred to as the “Hive-mind”, because most of the time, they present themselves in public and on the internet, including Facebook Political Pages, as being in lockstep with one another, regurgitating “the Party Line”, about each and every Hot Button Political Issue, resembling the brainwashed Proletariat of the old Soviet Union.

As  has been affirmed to me lately, during my surfing of the web, including Facebook Political Pages and websites, Modern American Liberals constantly live in a state of denial.

They respond as if you have told them that you shot Ol’ Yeller, when you inform them that Liberalism is still the minority political belief in America, even (and especially) after the 7 1/2 year reign of King Barack The First.

This salient fact explains why CNN and MSNBC constantly trail Fox News in the television ratings polls.

It also explains their ongoing massive propping up through the use of blatant propaganda of the Presidential Campaign of Hillary Clinton.

Just like the cockamamie idea to allow biological men in women’s public restrooms, the idea of allowing a morally and ethically challenged congenital liar with obvious serious health issues, who is as far removed philosophically from the overwhelming majority of Americans, that she might as well be the President of China, XI Jinping’s Handmaiden, makes average Americas out here in America’s Heartland want to hurl.

Which, by the way, is quite evident when you compare actual images of the size of Donald J. Trump’s overflowing Campaign , numbering in the thousands, compared to the under-attended ones of Hillary Clinton, which are lucky to draw one hundred.

When our Founding Fathers sat down to provide form and substance to the laws and procedures for governing this new country, which they had fought and won a bloody war over, by pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, they were very aware of the price of tyranny.

They determined that this new nation would be a Constitutional Republic, having had their fill of monarchies.

In order to ensure that no leader of this new nation would go mad with power, and become a tyrannical despot, our Founders set up a System of Checks and Balances, overseen by Three Branches of Government: the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial, with each branch having a distinct and LIMITED  role.

The situation, which we as a nation, find ourselves in today, is one which our Founding Fathers sought valiantly to avoid.

Thanks to an Imperious Presidency, we are suffering under a “Tyranny of the Minority”.

This minority is not based on color, rather, it is one based on political ideology and self-interest.

As the past several years have showed, this minority, buoyed by money from this “sponsors”, including the Halls of Power in Washington, DC, will shut down anyone who threatens “what they’ve got” by ANY MEANS NECESSARY, including political devices and beliefs, which we, as a country, have gone to war against in the past.

My late father was one of thousands of brave young American men, who landed on the beaches of Normandy , France on June 6, 1944, in the military operation which broke the backs of the Nazis, leading to the end of World War II,  now known as D-Day.

World War II was a war against Fascism.

What is Fascism? Per merriam-webster.com, it is a

political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

Ladies and gentlemen, I firmly believe that America is now fighting a new war against fascism.

It’s not a war that is being fought with guns and bullets, But instead with state referendums, Congressional votes, Executive Orders, judicial activism, and FAR Left-sponsored and organized Political Activists.

And, it’s not our Brightest and Best who are dying on this field of battle, but rather, it is our Constitutional Freedoms which are dying an ignoble death, pierced by the arrows of socialism and political correctness.

By now, there’s some out there in the audience saying, “Oh Lord, the crazy old cracker’s overreacting again.”

No, Skippy, I’m not.

If you try to talk to a Liberal about this New Fascism, they will deny that there is any fascism going on at all. In fact, they will tell you that this is “the will of the people” and they will site Democratically-stacked push polls in order to back their opinion up.

Modern American Liberals are hoping to continue this “New Fascism” through a “Coronation” on Inauguration Day 2017 of Hillary Clinton.

Unfortunately for them, as the last few weeks have shown, and as I have documented, Americans have become our own “reporters” thanks to the “New Media”.

Americans are now living in a  time when the Main Stream Media’s blatant propaganda is no longer believed at face value, as the evidence which refutes it is appearing in the live videos and photographs being shared on Facebook and other Social Media.

Average Americans are winning the war against the “New Fascism” of the Tyranny of the Minority by the sharing of information through Social Media.

As the Executives at Target found out the hard way,

Information is the oxygen of the modern age. It seeps through the walls topped by barbed wire, it wafts across the electrified borders. – Ronald Reagan
 

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

Hillary Tries to Salvage Rapidly-Tanking Campaign By Calling Trump and Supporters “Raaaciiist”…and Fails Miserably

August 26, 2016

Cover-story-600-CI-2Ahh, but the strawberries that’s… that’s where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with… geometric logic… that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I’d have produced that key if they hadn’t of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers – Lt. Cmdr. Philip Francis Queeg (Humphrey Bogart, “The Caine Mutiny”, 1954

Yesterday, the Presidential Candidate of the political party who gave birth to the Ku Klux Klan , Hillary Clinton, in a lengthy, rambling, and barely-coherent campaign speech attempted to link her opponent, Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump, to every tin foil hat-wearing racist, Conspiracy Nut, and Internet Troll in the United States of America.

She failed miserably.

Foxnews.com reports that

Hillary Clinton returned to the campaign trail Thursday to try pinning a racist tag on Donald Trump, accusing him of “taking hate groups mainstream” — while Trump accused his opponent of “lies” and “smears,” and labeling “decent Americans as racists.”

The Democratic nominee, who has spent the last week fundraising at private donor events, used a Reno, Nev., speech to pointedly accuse Trump of building a campaign on “prejudice and paranoia.” 

“He’s taking hate groups mainstream and helping a radical fringe take over one of America’s two major political parties,” she said, in perhaps her toughest speech yet about her Republican opponent. 

Clinton accused her rival of having a history of racial discrimination and a connection to conspiracy theories, including the “racist” claim that President Obama was not born in the United States. She also claimed that Trump’s businesses discriminated against African-Americans and Hispanics.

“A man with a long history of racial discrimination, who traffics in dark conspiracy theories drawn from the pages of supermarket tabloids and the dark, far reaches of the Internet, should never run our government or command our military,” she said. 

Trump, though, tried to preempt the attacks during an address just minutes earlier in Manchester, N.H. 

When Democratic policies fail, they are left with only this one tired argument – you’re a racist, racist, race, it’s a tired, disgusting argument and so totally predictable. It’s the last refuge of the discredited politician,” Trump said. He accused Clinton of painting everyday Americans as racist, saying: “She lies, she smears, she paints decent Americans – you — as racists.”

He went on to criticize Democrats in general for their leadership of the inner cities, which he said has hurt African-American communities. “For fifty years, people living in our inner cities have suffered under a failed policy regime. But the Democratic politicians – who only want to please media executives and Wall Street donors – do nothing but expand the hurt and the suffering that our inner cities and our country is going through right now.”

The comments were part of Trump’s stepped-up outreach to minority voters — which Clinton cast in her address as disingenuous. 

She also slammed Trump’s decision to make Breitbart News’ Steve Bannon his campaign CEO, pointing to headlines the site has published, including: “Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy” and “Would You Rather Your Child Had Feminism or Cancer?”

She said that Bannon’s hire represented a victory for a fringe conservative movement called the “alt-right” – a movement Clinton described as a racist ideology.

“The de facto merger between Breitbart and the Trump Campaign represents a landmark achievement for the alt-right.’ A fringe element has effectively taken over the Republican Party.”   

A web video released earlier in the day also pointed to a number of white supremacists who have backed Trump’s campaign, including former Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard David Duke. A Trump supporter called the ad “revolting.” 

Clinton’s return to the campaign trail comes after a week of fundraising, amid growing questions surrounding the connection between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department when Clinton served as the country’s top diplomat.

An Associated Press investigation showed that more than half of the people outside government who met with Clinton while she was serving as secretary of state gave money to the Clinton Foundation. The campaign has said that the numbers were cherry-picked to make Clinton look bad.

Before tackling Clinton’s racism charges, Trump used his remarks in Manchester to amplify his attacks on the foundation.

“This week the curtain was lifted. The corruption was revealed for all to see. The veil was pulled back on a vast criminal enterprise run out of the State Department by Hillary Clinton,” he said.

“It is hard to tell where the Clinton Foundation ended, and where the State Department began,” he said. “It’s called pay-for-play.”

Just as the late great Humphrey Bogart’s character in the classic movie, “The Caine Mutiny”,  Lt. Cmdr. Philip Francis Queeg, due to mental instability, loses the command of his ship and the respect of his officers and crew, Hillary Clinton’s obvious health issues and moral and ethical “challenges” are causing her to lose the respect of  once-loyal Democrats.

Breitbart.com reports that

Trumpocrats executive director Christian Rickers told Breitbart News that Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president, is “simply unhinged” as evidenced by her speech in Reno, Nevada, on Thursday.

Hillary is simply unhinged and appealing to the lowest common denominator,” Rickers, a lifelong Democrat who backed Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries but is now leading a movement crossing over to the Republican Party to back GOP nominee Donald Trump, told Breitbart News in response to Clinton’s “alt-right” speech. “Her performance today was more evidence of how desperate she has become.

Rickers’ organization, the “Trumpocrats,” represents the tens of thousands of Democrats who are leaving the Democratic Party because they believe Hillary Clinton does not represent their values—and are instead voting for Trump in the general election. Rickers is planning a bus tour through key battleground states coming up, and is hardly alone: Several other Democrats, as Breitbart News has already reported, are standing up with him—more in those key states than the handful of Republican D.C. insiders who have switched teams to back Hillary Clinton.

Despite the Main Stream Media’s best efforts to cover for “The Queen of Mean”, as I have written before, thanks to this marvelous era in which we are living, which is filled with a new technology which allows average Americans to be our own news reporters, the pro-Hillary propaganda which is continuously spewed forth, ad infinitum, by the Liberal Sycophants in the Main Stream Media, has become less and less affective.

The blinding light which you are witnessing are the light bulbs turning on above the heads of average Americans of all races and political viewpoints as they realize that, if we are to guarantee a prosperous future for our children and grandchildren, Americans must throw off the shackles of the benevolent Nanny-State Socialist Government, which the Far Left Run Democratic Party has desperately tried to put in place for decades, and embrace Donald J. Trump’s hopeful message of “making America GREAT again”.

As evidenced by the Economic Malaise that we once again find ourselves in under the “benevolent rule” of King Barack The First, the Democratic Party has nothing to offer average Americans, except higher taxes, a disenfranchised American Workforce, and a racially-divided nation.

This must end NOW for America to survive.

It is time for Americans to get onboard the “Trump Train”.

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 

The Clinton Pay-For-Play Scandal: Hil “Not Influenced By Any Outside Sources”…and the Check’s in the Mail

August 25, 2016

Access-Hill-NRD-600

Fighting corruption is not just good governance. It’s self-defense. It’s patriotism. – Joe Biden

CNSNews.com reports that

“Hillary Clinton ran the State Department like a failed leader in a third-world country,” Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump told a campaign rally in Tampa, Florida on Wednesday. “She sold favors and access in exchange for cash.”

In a telephone interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Wednesday night, Democrat Hillary Clinton was asked to respond.

“Well, first, What Trump has said is ridiculous. My work as secretary of state was not influenced by any outside forces,” Clinton said. “I made policy decisions based on what I thought was right, to keep Americans safe and to protect U.S. interests abroad.

“No wild political attack by Donald Trump is going to change that. And, in fact, the State Department has said itself that there is no evidence of any kind of impropriety at all.”

Clinton noted that the Clinton Foundation does “life-saving work” and is “well-respected” in the U.S. and around the world.

“And in 2009, they (the Clinton Foundation) took steps that went above and beyond all legal requirements, and indeed, all standard requirements followed by every other charitable organization — voluntarily disclosing donors, significantly reducing sources of funding, even to the point of, you know, of (that) funding being involved in providing medication to treat HIV/AIDS.”

Clinton became secretary of state in 2009 after signing an ethics agreement that said she would “seek to ensure that the activities of the Foundation, however beneficial, do not create conflicts or the appearance of conflicts.”

But an Associated Press report published on Tuesday found that more than half of the non-government officials who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money, in some cases, substantial sums of money, to the Clinton Foundation.

Bill Clinton last week announced that to avoid conflicts of interest, the Foundation will stop accepting foreign and corporate donations and he will step down from the board if Hillary is elected president.

Hillary Clinton told Anderson Cooper that those changes will allow the Clinton Foundation “to continue as much of its important work as possible, but to do it in a way that provides great disclosure, and although none of this is legally required, these steps go further than the policies that were in place when I was secretary state.”

“Why was it OK for the Clinton Foundation to accept foreign donations when you were Secretary of State, but it wouldn’t be okay when you were president?” Cooper asked Clinton.

“Well, what we did when I was secretary of state, as I said, went above anything that was required, anything that any charitable organization has to do,” Clinton said.

“Now, obviously, if I am president, there will be some unique circumstances, and that’s why the foundation has laid out additional unprecedented steps we will take if I am elected.”

“Didn’t those unique circumstances exist when you were secretary of state?” Cooper asked.

“No, no, you know, look, Anderson. I know there’s a lot of smoke and there’s no fire. This AP report — put it in context. It excludes nearly 2,000 meetings I had with world leaders, plus countless other meetings with U.S. government officials when I was secretary of state.”

According to the Associated Press, at least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs.

“The meetings between the Democratic presidential nominee and foundation donors do not appear to violate legal agreements Clinton and former president Bill Clinton signed before she joined the State Department in 2009,” the AP said. “But the frequency of the overlaps shows the intermingling of access and donations, and fuels perceptions that giving the foundation money was a price of admission for face time with Clinton.”

The AP said the 154 people did not include U.S. federal employees or foreign government representatives “because such meetings would presumably have been part of her diplomatic duties.”

Clinton told Cooper the Associated Press report examined “a small portion” of her tenure as secretary of state: “And it drew the conclusion and made the suggestion that my meetings with people like the late, great Elie Wiesel or Melinda Gates or the Nobel Prize winner Muhammad Yunus (a Bangladeshi economist) were somehow due to connections with the Foundation instead of their status as highly respected global leaders. That is absurd,” Clinton said.

“These are people I was proud to meet with, who any secretary of state would have been proud to meet with, to hear about their work and their insights.”

And, the check’s in the mail.

As I have previously written, Clinton’s trail of corruption leads all the way back to when she was fired from the Watergate Investigative Committee for dishonesty.

However, to practice “Pay-For-Play” on a Global Scale, while holding the Office of Secretary of State of the United States of America,  issues downright treasonous.

Why did she do it?

Michael Goodwin, in his column for the New York Post, offers the following spot-on analysis:

The easy answers about why she did what she did are too obvious: She wanted to get rich and she didn’t want anyone to know her business.

Throw in her chronic paranoia and sense of entitlement, and she and Hubby Dearest had a rationale for thinking they were above the law. They’d escaped his impeachment trial, so they believed they had lifetime immunity.

All true, but too simple, and it’s impossible to believe that’s all there is. There has to be more, probably something so big and awful, it would destroy her if it’s discovered.

Remember, the Clintons were absolutely determined to get back to the White House, which would be the ultimate vindication of their public lives. Victory would make them unique in American history, so it doesn’t make sense that they would risk throwing it all away for the obvious — and ordinary — benefits already revealed.

The added riches they collected through what I believe are corrupt actions weren’t necessary. They were getting legitimately rich on his and her book contracts alone.

And what difference would another donation make to the foundation, which was already swimming in more money than it could spend?

Because none of this adds up to a coherent explanation, I believe we are still in the dark about a hidden bombshell. There must be a secret Unholy Grail that explains her self-destructive behavior of stonewalling and lying.

I won’t speculate on what the Clintons are hiding because my gifts of imagination are no match for theirs. They always had a knack for pioneering new ways of selling access. No president had ever thought of renting out the Lincoln Bedroom until they did it.

The sleazy act that so outraged the nation then seems positively quaint now, thanks to the creative ways they’ve monetized power since leaving the White House. Now they could afford to buy the furniture they tried to steal on their way out the door then!

Of course, I could be wrong. I could be giving them far too much credit.

Maybe the Clintons really are just ordinary grifters, con artists who enjoy the thrill of pulling off the scam. Maybe it’s not even about the money.

Then again, it’s always about the money, one way or another.

And so, as with Watergate, with Bernie Madoff and now with the Clintons, the advice to all gumshoes is the same: Follow the money. Whatever deep, dark secret they are hiding, the money will lead us to it.

The price of “paying tribute” in order to gain an audience with someone in power goes all the way back to Biblical Times, continuing to the American and French Revolutions.

Our government was never meant to be a Monarchy. America remains a Constitutional Republic.

American Politicians were never meant to be Lords, who would remain in power in perpetuity, amassing unlimited wealth by accepting “tribute” from those seeking “favors”.

Our Founding Fathers envisioned Citizen Statesman, who after serving their country and their communities for a short period of time, would return to their homes, to their families, and to their trades.

What Hillary Clinton is attempting to get away with is a prime example of why our Founders set up the System of Checks and Balances that they did when they were constructing our system of government.

Obama, the Department of Justice, and the clintons circumvented that system with a series of maneuvers carried out between the White House, the campaign Trail, and a private jet idling on a Tarmac at an airport.

Come November, as Americans, we will have an opportunity to voice how we feel about this travesty of Justice in November of this year.

Unlike the French Revolution, we won’t have to entrust our future to Madame Guillotine.

Our country’s future will be entrusted to The Ballot Box.

This November, remember July 5th, 2016 as the day that Hillary Clinton was proven to be above the law.

And, vote accordingly.

Until He Comes, 

KJ 

Liberals Upset Over Trump Hiring Election Observers. Meanwhile, the UN is Sending 500.

August 24, 2016

High-Ground-600-LA

The Trump campaign website posted a message on Friday, August 12th, that read,

Volunteer to be a Trump Election Observer. Help Me Stop Crooked Hillary From Rigging This Election! Please fill out this form to receive more information about becoming a volunteer Trump Election Observer.

The “Smartest People in the Room” immediately threw a hissy fit, which continues to this day.

Jon Grinspan, a curator of political history at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, has written an op-ed for The New York Times, which posted this morning. In it he writes…

…Measures like the Voting Rights Act ushered in a more equitable, peaceful era in American elections. In the 21st century, though, we seem willing to cast off the restraints that society designed to clean up politics over the last century — a trend into which private, partisan election observers fit perfectly.

To be fair, it doesn’t automatically follow that such observers will return Election Day to its violent, chaotic past — they could even enliven our polling places, which since have become colorless affairs, far from the public gatherings of the mid-19th century. Maybe we should all be observing our elections.

America has reached a critical moment of re-evaluation of our democracy — new ideas are welcome. But we are working within a very old and well-documented political system, and have plenty of experience with democratic innovations. So we might occasionally pause to look back at what worked, and what didn’t. We tried election observers. There’s a reason we left them in the past.

There is nothing more embarrassing that someone who considers themselves to be one of “The Smartest People in the Room” who is woefully uniformed.

CNSNews.com reports that

When Americans went to the polls four years ago, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) deployed 44 observers, a quarter of whom came from countries deemed by a leading democracy watchdog to be “not free” or “partly free.”

This year, the OSCE plans to send more than ten times that number – and some civil rights groups in the U.S. say even that won’t be enough.

Following a “needs assessment” visit earlier this year, the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) decided to send 100 long-term and 400 short-term observers to monitor the November 8 election. The former will follow the electoral process across the nation while the latter will monitor Election Day itself.

The nationalities of those who will be deployed have yet to be announced. Queries sent to ODIHR headquarters in Warsaw, Poland, brought no response by press time.

In 2012, the much smaller team included members from OSCE members Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, all at the time ranked “not free” by Freedom House.

Others came from six countries graded “not free” – Albania, Armenia, Bosnia, Georgia, Macedonia and Ukraine.

(Washington-based Freedom House each year evaluates political rights and civil liberties in the nations of the world, and then ranks them as “free,” “not free” or “partly free.” Since 2012 it has upgraded Kyrgyzstan from “not free” to “partly free.”)

The significantly larger observer group to be sent this time reflects the fact that the OSCE believes this year’s election requires a “full-scale” election observation mission, while in 2012 it felt that a “limited” election observation mission was sufficient.

OSCE explains that a full-scale mission is sent in cases where “there is limited confidence among election stakeholders in the election administration, the long-term process and election-day proceedings and … the presence of observers could enhance public trust in the process.”

By contrast, a limited mission is sent when it’s determined “that serious and widespread problems on election day at the polling-station level are unlikely, but that observation of the entire long-term process throughout the country might still produce useful recommendations.”

For a coalition of U.S. civil rights groups, the difference between 2012 and 2016 has to do with the Trump campaign; and with the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision to strike down a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA). The ruling paved the way for states with a history of racial discrimination to change their election laws without “preclearance” from the Justice Department.

While supporters of voting laws passed in some states since the Supreme Court decision argue that they are needed to counter electoral fraud, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights describes the developments as “a tidal wave of voter discrimination efforts.”

On Tuesday the Leadership Conference released a letter sent to OSCE/ODIHR director Michael Georg Link, urging him to “greatly expand” the monitoring of the U.S. election and to “target resources to states where voter discrimination and intimidation is most likely.”

Those states, it said, include Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin.

The coalition pointed to the VRA changes, and to Republican nominee Donald Trump’s campaign for the White House.

“A confluence of factors has made the right to vote more vulnerable to racial discrimination than at any time in recent history,” it told Link, a German politician who has headed the ODIHR since 2014. “The need for additional election observers is paramount.”

“The unprecedented weakening of the Voting Rights Act has led to a tidal wave of voter discrimination efforts nationwide and has required the United States to drastically scale back its own election monitoring program,” the letter continued, referring to federal observers used in past elections.

“In addition, a leading presidential candidate who has made the demonization of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities a hallmark of his campaign has recently urged supporters to challenge voters at polling sites nationwide.”

Leadership Conference president and CEO Wade Henderson said in a statement the right to vote in the U.S. “is more vulnerable now than at any time in the past 50 years.”

“Additional monitors can never replace what we lost when the VRA was gutted but we have to use every possible means to ensure the integrity of this election isn’t compromised by racial discrimination and intimidation,” he said.

“We now have to fight in the courts and at ballot box for every voter and even our nation’s best and most well-organized efforts will not meet the demand we’re confronted with.”

“Congress needs to restore the VRA immediately,” Henderson added.

When the OSCE/ODIHR carried out its “needs assessment” visit earlier this year it held meetings with representatives of federal and state institutions, political parties, media, and civil society groups.

It said these interlocutors had mostly expressed confidence in the election administration.

OSCE/ODIHR did, however, cite issues including the “implementation of new state laws regarding voter registration and identification, changes to alternative voting methods, the reliability of NVT [new voting technologies], the effectiveness of campaign finance rules, and the conduct of the electoral campaign, particularly in the media.”

The OSCE has observed U.S. elections since 2002.

However, Petulant President Pantywaist ramped the United Nations’ Involvement up a bit during the 2012 Presidential Election.

And, now, once again, Obama is bowing before the United Nations, as if they have some authority over our Sovereign Nation, without whom, they would no exist nor have a place to meet.

There are several times, during my musings, that I have described our blessed country as a Sovereign Nation. What does that mean?

On June 5, 2009, Professor Jeremy Rabin of George Mason University, author of “The Case for Sovereignty”, delivered a lecture sponsored by Hillsdale College in Washington, DC. What he said certainly applies to this situation…

The Constitution provides for treaties, and even specifies that treaties will be “the supreme Law of the Land”; that is, that they will be binding on the states. But from 1787 on, it has been recognized that for a treaty to be valid, it must be consistent with the Constitution—that the Constitution is a higher authority than treaties. And what is it that allows us to judge whether a treaty is consistent with the Constitution? Alexander Hamilton explained this in a pamphlet early on: “A treaty cannot change the frame of the government.” And he gave a very logical reason: It is the Constitution that authorizes us to make treaties. If a treaty violates the Constitution, it would be like an agent betraying his principal or authority. And as I said, there has been a consensus on this in the past that few ever questioned.

…At the end of The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton writes: “A nation, without a national government, is, in my view, an awful spectacle.” His point was that if you do not have a national government, you can’t expect to remain a nation. If we are really open to the idea of allowing more and more of our policy to be made for us at international gatherings, the U.S. government not only has less capacity, it has less moral authority. And if it has less moral authority, it has more difficulty saying to immigrants and the children of immigrants that we’re all Americans. What is left, really, to being an American if we are all simply part of some abstract humanity? People who expect to retain the benefits of sovereignty—benefits like defense and protection of rights—without constitutional discipline, or without retaining responsibility for their own legal system, are really putting all their faith in words or in the idea that as long as we say nice things about humanity, everyone will feel better and we’ll all be safe. You could even say they are hanging a lot on incantations or on some kind of witchcraft. And as I mentioned earlier, the first theorist to write about sovereignty understood witchcraft as a fundamental threat to lawful authority and so finally to liberty and property and all the other rights of individuals.

Let me inform any idiotic individuals who might support Obama’s pattern, as seen during his ongoing crusade to take away our guns and his recent Iran Deal, where he continuously goes to the United Nations as the Supreme Authority over our Sovereign Nation, first, instead of our own Congress, the way I feel about “answering” to the United Nations.

The United States of America is a Sovereign Nation, created by the blood, sweat, and tears of men and women, who rise above those of you, including President Obama, who do not believe in American Exceptionalism and our Sovereignty as a Free Nation, in stature, honor, integrity, and courage to the point where you are not even fit enough to tie their boots.

We are an “independent state”, completely independent and self-governing. We bow to no other country on God’s green Earth. We are beholden to no other nation. America stands on its own, with our own set of laws, the most important of which is The Constitution of the United States, which guarantees us, as a Free People, the right to cast our vote from whomever we please…including Donald J. Trump.

And, much to the esteemed professor’s chagrin, as American Citizens, we have the right to monitor our own elections.

America is still the Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth, despite all of President Barack Hussein’s efforts to make us “just another country”.

Because, usually, those who claim to be the smartest person in any room that they walk into, greatly overestimate themselves.

Until He Comes,

KJ

The Clinton Foundation Scandal: Laundering Money as Secretary of State for Favors, Fun, and Profit

August 23, 2016

Trump-Spot-600-LA

“Hillary Clinton is the defender of the corrupt and rigged status quo. The Clintons have spent decades as insiders lining their own pockets and taking care of donors instead of the American people. It is now clear that the Clinton Foundation is the most corrupt enterprise in political history. What they were doing during Crooked Hillary’s time as Secretary of State was wrong then, and it is wrong now. It must be shut down immediately.” – Donald J. Trump

While the attention of Main Stream Media is focused on the Democratic Candidate for President, Hillary Clinton, demonstrating how “healthy” she is by opening a probably pre-opened jar of pickles on Jimmy Kimmel’s Late Night Talk Show, they are purposefully ignoring a “YUGE” “Pay-For–Play” Money Laundering Scheme, involving the Former United States Secretary of State.

Fox News’ James Rosen has the exclusive story…

A senior executive at the Clinton Foundation left almost 150 telephone messages for Hillary Clinton’s top aide at the State Department within a two-year time frame, according to previously unpublished documents obtained by Fox News.A review of State Department call logs for Cheryl Mills, the longtime Clinton confidant who served as chief of staff for the entirety of Clinton’s four-year tenure as America’s top diplomat, reflects at least 148 messages from Laura Graham – then the Clinton Foundation’s chief operating officer – between 2010 and 2012. No other individual or non-profit appears in the logs with anything like that frequency or volume, the review found.

One of the messages Graham left for Mills, in August 2011, referenced “our boss” – without further identifying that individual. Another, from January 2012, appeared to reference former President Clinton, using his initials: “Please call. WJC is looking for her [Graham] and she wants to talk to you before she talks to him.” 

The telephone records were released by the State Department to the conservative advocacy group Citizens United as part of a long-running lawsuit over the Freedom of information Act.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said he could not provide “a read-out of every one of those messages or every one of those calls,” nor estimate how many of them were returned. But he acknowledged that Mills and Graham never shared the same boss and insisted the department “always” acted under Clinton to advance U.S. foreign policy interests, “with no other intent in mind beyond that.”

“Secretary Clinton’s ethics agreement at the time [she assumed office] did not preclude other State Department officials from engaging with, or having contact with, the Clinton Foundation,” Toner said. 

Absent additional detail, there is no evidence of any misconduct in the calls or contacts between Graham and Mills. But the records surfaced amid mounting questions about the relationship between the Clinton State Department and the Clinton foundation, and particularly about the role played by Mills.

“It’s an amazing thing that the State Department spokesperson would actually make an argument,” said Citizens United President David Bossie, “that Hillary Clinton would be obligated under an ethics agreement that the White House made her sign with the foundation but her top employees would not be under that same agreement. I find it’s just very Clintonesque.”

Last week, the State Department acknowledged that in June 2012, Mills spent two days traveling to New York to interview job applicants at the foundation. The State Department said Mills “volunteered” to do so, but neither the department nor a spokesman for the Clinton presidential campaign, nor Mills’s attorney, would say whether Mills used annual leave or unpaid days to perform that work – or whether it was done on the taxpayers’ time. 

The call logs reflect a wide cross-section of individuals angling for the secretary’s ear, from celebrities like Sean Penn to elder statesmen of the Democratic Party like Vernon Jordan. The messages include a number averring to irksome home-renovation issues Mills was facing, and even one left by the chief of staff’s mother, who told her daughter, through the intermediary of a State Department secretary, in September 2011: “Please call. Hadn’t heard from you in so long and was wondering if you are out of town.” 

Just how corrupt was the pipeline between the Clinton Foundation and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton?

Per discoverthenetworks.org,

By the time Clinton left office in February 2013, the charity had received millions of dollars in new or increased payments from at least seven foreign governments. Five of the governments came on board during her tenure as secretary of state while two doubled or tripled their support in that time, according to data provided by CHAI spokeswoman Daley…CHAI should have told the State Department before accepting donations totaling $340,000 from Switzerland’s Agency for Development and Cooperation in 2011 and 2012. However, it did not believe U.S. authorities needed to review the other six governments, including Britain and Australia, she said, citing various reasons.” [Reuters, 3/19/15]

However, it was not just governments who sent money to the Clintons through their Foundation. Again, according to discoverthenetworks.org…

* “The Clinton Foundation swore off donations from foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. That didn’t stop the foundation from raising millions of dollars from foreigners with connections to their home governments, a review of foundation disclosures shows. Some donors have direct ties to foreign governments. One is a member of the Saudi royal family. Another is a Ukrainian oligarch and former parliamentarian. Others are individuals with close connections to foreign governments that stem from their business activities. Their professed policy interests range from human rights to U.S.-Cuba relations.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

* During Secretary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department, “More than a dozen foreign individuals and their foundations and companies were large donors to the Clinton Foundation… collectively giving between $34 million and $68 million…. Some donors also provided funding directly to charitable projects sponsored by the foundation, valued by the organization at $60 million.” [Wall Street Journal, 3/19/15]

Whether the revelation of “the gift” of massive quantities of Uranium to the Russians or the formation of an Iranian Connection, as a result of money given to the Clinton Foundation,  as was previously  reported in 2015, or this new revelation involving “dual-staffer” Cheryl Mills, this is not just a scandal involving money and unscrupulous political ladder-climbing through the peddling of “favors”, the actions of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State crossed the line into the abhorrent abyss of a Conflict of Interest involving possible Treason.

Time and time again, from Watergate to Travelgate to Benghazigate, and now to E-mailgate and the Clinton Foundation, Hillary Clinton has proven to be a ruthless, untrustworthy, Machiavellian professional politician, who only cares about herself and her ascension to the Presidency of the United States of America.

Every successful person is ambitious. Donald J Trump is an ambitious man. However, judging from his track record and the charitable things that he has done for Americans behind the scenes,  for which he neither sought nor received any publicity for, and his public accomplishments, along with his stated love for this country and his wish for us to prosper economically and once again resume our place as Leader of the Free World, as an average American, I will be voting for him in November of 2016 to become our next President.

America has endured enough duplicity and political chicanery in the last 7 years to last us for centuries. The deleterious effect of the Presidency of Barack Hussein Obama has left a stain of incompetent leadership and out-of-control political correctness which will take years to wash away.

America and the rest of the Free World cannot afford the devastating effects of a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

Just like the Broadcast Networks have ended just about all of their soap operas which aired on their channels on a daily basis, Americans need to pull the plug on the failed leadership and the legacy which Barack Hussein Obama is leaving behind.

The raw, unmitigated corruption involving Hillary Clinton and her Foundation, revealed over the past year, along with these new revelations, involving the DOJ refusing to investigate the FBI’s repeated requests to investigate the Foundation and Cheryl Mill’s involvementin  in  Hillary Clinton’s influence peddling as Secretary of State under President Barack Hussein Obama, via means of the Clinton Foundation, is breath-taking in its size and scope, as more and more unscrupulous details are being revealed.

Hillary Clinton does not belong in the White House.

She belongs UNDER the Jail House.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Hil and Huma…A Radical Islamic “Love” Story: Why Americans Cannot Allow These “Besties” Back in the Oval Office

August 22, 2016

huma_abedin_3556883b-1.jpg

“If Hillary Clinton, after this attack, still cannot say the two words ‘Radical Islam’ she should get out of this race for the Presidency,” – Now-Republican Presidential Candidate Donald J. Trump, 6/12/16, referring to the Orlando Muslim Terrorist Attack, which left 49 Americans dead and 50 wounded.

The Now-Democratic Presidential Candidate refused to identify that American-killing Barbarian as a follower of Radical Islam for a very simple reason.

Clinton’s closest confidante is one.

The New York Post reports that

Hillary Clinton’s top campaign aide, and the woman who might be the future White House chief of staff to the first female US president, for a decade edited a radical Muslim publication that opposed women’s rights and blamed the US for 9/11.

One of Clinton’s biggest accomplishments listed on her campaign Web site is her support for the UN women’s conference in Bejing in 1995, when she famously declared, “Women’s rights are human rights.” Her speech has emerged as a focal point of her campaign, featured prominently in last month’s Morgan Freeman-narrated convention video introducing her as the Democratic nominee.

However, soon after that “historic and transformational” 1995 event, as Clinton recently described it, her top aide Huma Abedin published articles in a Saudi journal taking Clinton’s feminist platform apart, piece by piece. At the time, Abedin was assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs working under her mother, who remains editor-in-chief. She was also working in the White House as an intern for then-First Lady Clinton.

Headlined “Women’s Rights are Islamic Rights,” a 1996 article argues that single moms, working moms and gay couples with children should not be recognized as families. It also states that more revealing dress ushered in by women’s liberation “directly translates into unwanted results of sexual promiscuity and irresponsibility and indirectly promote violence against women.” In other words, sexually liberated women are just asking to be raped.

“A conjugal family established through a marriage contract between a man and a woman, and extended through procreation is the only definition of family a Muslim can accept,” the author, a Saudi official with the Muslim World League, asserted, while warning of “the dangers of alternative lifestyles.” (Abedin’s journal was founded and funded by the former head of the Muslim World League.)

“Pushing [mothers] out into the open labor market is a clear demonstration of a lack of respect of womanhood and motherhood,” it added.

In a separate January 1996 article, Abedin’s mother — who was the Muslim World League’s delegate to the UN conference — wrote that Clinton and other speakers were advancing a “very aggressive and radically feminist” agenda that was un-Islamic and wrong because it focused on empowering women.

“‘Empowerment’ of women does more harm than benefit the cause of women or their relations with men,” Saleha Mahmood Abedin maintained, while forcefully arguing in favor of Islamic laws that have been roundly criticized for oppressing women.

“By placing women in the ‘care and protection’ of men and by making women responsible for those under her charge,” she argued, “Islamic values generate a sense of compassion in human and family relations.”

“Among all systems of belief, Islam goes the farthest in restoring equality across gender,” she claimed. “Acknowledging the very central role women play in procreation, child-raising and homemaking, Islam places the economic responsibility of supporting the family primarily on the male members.”

She seemed to rationalize domestic abuse as a result of “the stress and frustrations that men encounter in their daily lives.” While denouncing such violence, she didn’t think it did much good to punish men for it.

She added in her 31-page treatise: “More men are victims of domestic violence than women . . . If we see the world through ‘men’s eyes’ we will find them suffering from many hardships and injustices.”

She opposed the UN conference widening the scope of the definition of the family to include “gay and lesbian ‘families.’ ”

Huma Abedin does not apologize for her mother’s views. “My mother was traveling around the world to these international women’s conferences talking about women’s empowerment, and it was normal,” she said in a recent profile in Vogue.

Huma continued to work for her mother’s journal through 2008. She is listed as “assistant editor” on the masthead of the 2002 issue in which her mother suggested the US was doomed to be attacked on 9/11 because of “sanctions” it leveled against Iraq and other “injustices” allegedly heaped on the Muslim world. Here is an excerpt:

“The spiral of violence having continued unabated worldwide, and widely seen to be allowed to continue, was building up intense anger and hostility within the pressure cooker that was kept on a vigorous flame while the lid was weighted down with various kinds of injustices and sanctions . . . It was a time bomb that had to explode and explode it did on September 11, changing in its wake the life and times of the very community and the people it aimed to serve.”

Huma Abedin is Clinton’s longest-serving and, by all accounts, most loyal aide. The devout, Saudi-raised Muslim started working for her in the White House, then followed her to the Senate and later the State Department. She’s now helping run Clinton’s presidential campaign as vice chair and may end up back in the White House.

The contradictions are hard to reconcile. The campaign is not talking, despite repeated requests for interviews.

Until now, these articles which Abedin helped edit and publish have remained under wraps. Perhaps Clinton was unaware she and her mother took such opposing views.

But that’s hard to believe. Her closest adviser served as an editor for that same Saudi propaganda organ for a dozen years. The same one that in 1999 published a book, edited by her mother, that justifies the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation under Islamic law, while claiming “man-made laws have in fact enslaved women.”

And in 2010, Huma Abedin arranged for then-Secretary of State Clinton to speak alongside Abedin’s hijab-wearing mother at an all-girls college in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. According to a transcript of the speech, Clinton said Americans have to do a better job of getting past “the stereotypes and the mischaracterizations” of the oppressed Saudi woman. She also assured the audience of burqa-clad girls that not all American girls go “around in a bikini bathing suit.”

At no point in her long visit there, which included a question-and-answer session, did this so-called champion of women’s rights protest the human-rights violations Saudi women suffer under the Shariah laws that Abedin’s mother actively promotes. Nothing about the laws barring women from driving or traveling anywhere without male “guardians.”

If fighting for women’s rights is one of Clinton’s greatest achievements, why has she retained as her closest adviser a woman who gave voice to harsh Islamist critiques of her Beijing platform?

For those of you who are not aware of the rest of Ms. Abedin’s troubling past and familial connections, here are some bullet points, courtesy of discoverthenetworks.org…

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

…From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda.

[As detailed in the previous article] From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA).

****At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.****

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the$135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients included the U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arrangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedin resigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton.

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Speaking straight from the heart. as I always do, as an American Citizen, I find it beyond the pale that, during the time of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, someone with direct ties to our sworn enemies, the Muslim Brotherhood, had access to the highest level of Top Secret Information contained in our State Department, being sent to her over Secretary Clinton’s own unsecured e-mail Server.

And, the thing is, she not only had access through her job as Assistant to Secretary of State Clinton, she also had access to government information through pillow talk with her husband, then-Congressman and “Professional Sexter” Anthony Weiner.

Being the “proud Muslim” that she has proclaimed herself to be, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that this information found its way to her “troubling Familial Affiliations”?

Which brings up a troubling question:

Considering her familial ties, how deeply was Ms. Abedin involved in “BenghaziGate”?

Mrs. Clinton, as shown by her complete disdain for the American People and the laws which govern us, is unfit to hold public office.

The old axiom is true. We ARE judged by the company that we keep.

The fact that the Former Secretary of State continues to hold close to her, as her confidante, a young woman with a history of supporting Radical Islam and who possesses familial ties to Godfather of all Muslim Terrorist Organizations, the Muslim Brotherhood, shows how dangerous and untrustworthy that she truly is.

Hillary Clinton, and her closest friend and confidante, Human Abedin, must not be allowed access to the Oval Office ever again.

Until He Comes,

KJ

A KJ Sunday Morning Reflection: Social Justice and Democrat Promises…Paving the Road to You-Know-Where

August 21, 2016

untitled (87)Sundays, for many of us, are a time of reflection, as we think about the world around us, and the blessings which God has given us, including our family, friends, our jobs, and the privilege of living in the greatest country on the face of the God’s Green Earth.

As we go through the current Presidential Campaign Season, we, as Americans, need to pay close attention to what the candidates are saying, for the sake of our Children’s and grandchildren’s futures.

This past week, Susan Stamper brown wrote the following article, found on Christianpost.com…

Apparently, the Democratic Party’s latest strategy to win the White House in 2016 is “Let’s pretend to be religious.”

Now it’s all about Hillary’s faith, according to Democratic Party Vice Presidential hopeful Tim Kaine, who told a group in New Orleans that Hillary Clinton’s faith is at the “root of everything she does.” That’s quite a statement, considering all the years she’s been in the public’s eye.

Most likely, though, Kaine was referring to Hillary’s attachment to the “Social Gospel.” The Social Gospel is a cheap counterfeit for the real thing that liberals conjured up to promote socialism and at the same time relieve people from any guilt associated with living life according to their own standards, not God’s.

The Social Gospel crowd concentrates on scriptures that instruct us to help the poor and feed the hungry. They ignore the ones where Jesus told those he helped and fed to “go and sin no more.”

But, here’s the rub. If liberals really wanted to do things the right way, they’d do it themselves and not pass personal responsibility off to the government. Jesus never said governments are an acceptable replacement for lazy, no-good followers who refuse to do what he asks.

Obviously, Kaine was trying to paint Hillary in a softer, nicer light while at the same time courting right-leaning anti-Trump evangelicals. It’s a political ploy.

In May, Slate magazine ran a piece by Ruth Graham, “Can the Christian Left Be a Real Political Force?” — suggesting that Donald Trump’s rise in the GOP makes 2016 the perfect opportunity for the Democrat Party to win over anti-Trump evangelicals if they can find a way to lop their horns and replace them with halos to make them look like the “party of God.”

What the author, Tim Kaine and Democrat Party strategists fail to understand is that anti-Trump conservative Christians would never vote for Hillary. Nor will they be tricked by those bearing faux religion in the name of politics.

Graham did her best to make a case for liberal Christianity, writing: “It must first be said that despite the empty pews, there’s reason to believe that liberal Christianity has been dormant, not dead.”

In reality, those empty pews are what happens when we do things our way and cherry-pick the Gospel. A a Pew poll rolled out last year backs that statement finding that mainline church denominations embracing the Social Gospel like Hillary Clinton’s Methodist denomination are in decline across the United States. In sharp contrast, the same Pew poll found that conservative Christian churches are vibrantly alive and growing.

The Slate magazine author accidentally answers why “liberal Christianity” is little more than an oxymoron when she wrote: “There’s a cost associated with membership … churches that ask more from their followers tend to be stronger … Many progressive churches, by contrast barely demand a pinky toe … They don’t pressure me when I skip; the sermons rarely suggest it matters whether I believe the creeds … By contrast, when I visit conservative churches … they feel alive: People are there because they think it matters for their everyday lives and for their eternal souls.”

Those churches “feel alive” because they are … alive. It’s impossible to be truly excited about something that isn’t there. And it’ll never be there if it’s about politics rather than a personal, saving faith.

Graham concludes: “If there is to be a resurgent Christian left, it will need to learn a trick or two from the very movement [conservative Christian] that overtook it a generation ago.”

Tricks cannot revive that which never existed in the first place.

As C.S. Lewis wrote: “Once you have made the World an end, and faith a means … it makes very little difference what kind of worldly end he is pursuing.”

It’s a slippery slope, that road to Hell we’re headed, that American politics has deteriorated to this.

I also do not believe that Jesus would be a part of the Social Justice movement, advocated by the Far left Radicals of the Democratic Party, including Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton. His was and is a soul-saving movement. One that still brings hundreds of thousand of people to individual salvation on this terrestrial ball every day. A movement that, in fact, was embraced by the founders of this cherished land.

The Social justice Movement is an offshoot of Marxist Theory, named for the radical who conceived it, Karl Marx. it’s basic tenet states,

From each according to his ability to each according to his need.

The modern translation, provided for us by Sitting President Barack Hussein Obama, during his 2008 Presidential Campaign, is that working Americans need to “share the wealth”.

That, boys and girls, is “Socialism” and, in Marxist Theory, Socialism is the step before Communism.

A simple definition of Socialism describes it as

a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

In a recent opinion piece for ChristianPost.com, Christian Talk Show Host Julie Roys gave the following Five Reasons that Socialism itself is not based on  the teachings of Jesus Christ.

1. Socialism is Based on a Materialistic Worldview

According to socialists like Bernie Sanders, the greatest problem in the world is the unequal distribution of wealth.

His website declares: “The issue of wealth and income inequality is the great moral issue of our time, it is the great economic issue of our time, and it is the great political issue of our time.”

This betrays a fundamentally materialistic worldview, which is the basis of socialism.

To socialists, all that really exists is the material world.

2. Socialism Punishes Virtue

Socialists want to distribute wealth to individuals according to their need, regardless of virtue.

As Karl Marx, famously said, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”

However, whenever any institution provides aid, it runs the risk of removing God-designed rewards and consequences. It can punish those who are industrious by making them pay for those who are not. And, it can reward those who aren’t industrious by giving them the fruits of another man’s labor. This is precisely what socialism does.

Interestingly, Marx mooched off others his whole life, and failed to provide for his wife and children.

As Aristotle once noted, “Men start revolutionary changes for reasons connected with their private lives.”

The Bible teaches that aid should be tied to responsibility. First, anyone who refuses to work should be refused aid.

3. Socialism Endorses Stealing

Barack Obama once defended his socialist policies to a little girl by saying, “We’ve got to make sure that people who have more money help the people who have less money. If you had a whole pizza, and your friend had no pizza, would you give him a slice?”

That sounds pretty Christian, right? What Christian wouldn’t endorse sharing your abundance with someone who has nothing? However, Obama wasn’t endorsing people voluntarily sharing their wealth with others; he was endorsing the government forcibly taking a piece of the pie from one person and giving it to someone else. Put another way, that’s saying that if you have three cars and your neighbor has none, the government has a right to take your car and give it to your neighbor. That’s not Christian; that’s stealing!

But, socialists don’t believe in private property. And, some Christian socialists actually assert that the Bible doesn’t either. That’s preposterous.

Both the Old Testament and New Testament unequivocally affirm private property. We can’t even obey the eighth commandment to not steal, unless we accept the notion of private ownership. Nor, can we steward our money as the Bible commands if the state owns our money, not us.

4. Socialism Encourages Envy and Class Warfare

Socialists demonize the rich, blaming all of society’s problems on them.

Bernie Sanders once posted to his Facebook Page: “Let us wage a moral and political war against the billionaires and corporate leaders on Wall Street and elsewhere, whose policies and greed are destroying the middle class of America.”

Here, Sanders is mimicking Karl Marx, who viewed history as a series of class struggles between the rich and the poor — and advocated overthrowing the ruling class.

Scripture strongly warns the rich and powerful not to oppress the poor.

In fact, Proverbs 14:31 says, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for his maker . . .”

But, Sanders — and other Leftists, including Hillary Clinton — go far beyond decrying specific acts of injustice. They basically condemn an entire class of people simply for possessing wealth. And, they encourage those who are poor to overthrow them. In fact, Clinton once said the U.S. economy required a “toppling” of the wealthiest 1%.

The rich are not causing all the problems in American society. People like Bill Gates are not acquiring wealth by stealing from the masses. They’re creating great products, which produce wealth, and actually provide jobs for many people. But, even if they were exploiting the poor, nowhere does Scripture support the have-nots demanding money from the haves. Instead, it teaches that we should not covet (Exodus 20:17) and should be content in all circumstances (Phil. 4:11-13). 

5. Socialism Seeks to Destroy Marriage & Family

A little known fact about socialism is that, from its beginning, it has sought to destroy marriage and family. Grove City Professor Paul Kengor explains this in detail in his book, Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Marriage and Family. Essentially, what socialism seeks is for the state to replace the family. That way, it can indoctrinate children in its Leftist way of thinking, and remove from them any notions of God and religion.

Friedrich Engels, co-author with Marx of the “The Communist Manifesto,” once wrote that the society he envisioned would be one where “the single family ceases to be the economic unit of society. Private housekeeping is transformed into a social industry. The care and education of the children becomes a public affair.”

Similarly today, Bernie Sanders calls for a “revolution” in childcare and for the government to provide early childhood education beginning with children as young as six-weeks-old. And, he’s a proud supporter of gay marriage — what Kengor calls “communism’s Trojan Horse” to secure the final takedown of traditional marriage.

To socialists, what Bernie describes is a utopia. But, to Christians, it’s a dystopia. That’s because there’s nothing Christian about socialism — and there’s absolutely no way Jesus would ever support it.

America was not founded to be a Socialist Nation.

The following is courtesy of adherents.com:

There were 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence. There were 48 signers of the Articles of Confederation. All 55 delegates who participated in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 are regarded as Founding Fathers, in fact, they are often regarded as the Founding Fathers because it is this group that actually debated, drafted and signed the U.S. Constitution, which is the basis for the country’s political and legal system. Only 39 delegates actually signed the document, however, meaning there were 16 non-signing delegates – individuals who were Constitutional Convention delegates but were not signers of the Constitution.

There were 95 Senators and Representatives in the First Federal Congress. If one combines the total number of signatures on the Declaration, the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution with the non-signing Constitutional Convention delegates, and then adds to that sum the number of congressmen in the First Federal Congress, one obtains a total of 238 “slots” or “positions” in these groups which one can classify as “Founding Fathers” of the United States. Because 40 individuals had multiple roles (they signed multiple documents and/or also served in the First Federal Congress), there are 204 unique individuals in this group of “Founding Fathers.” These are the people who did one or more of the following:

– signed the Declaration of Independence
– signed the Articles of Confederation
– attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787
– signed the Constitution of the United States of America
– served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791)
– served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress

The religious affiliations of these individuals are summarized below. Obviously this is a very restrictive set of names, and does not include everyone who could be considered an “American Founding Father.” But most of the major figures that people generally think of in this context are included using these criteria, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, John Hancock, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and more.

Courtesy adherents.com

Religious Affiliation of U.S. Founding Fathers

# of Founding Fathers/% of Founding Fathers

Episcopalian/Anglican 88 54.7%
Presbyterian 30 18.6%
Congregationalist 27 16.8%
Quaker 7 4.3%
Dutch Reformed/German Reformed 6 3.7%
Lutheran 5 3.1%
Catholic 3 1.9%
Huguenot 3 1.9%
Unitarian 3 1.9%
Methodist 2 1.2%
Calvinist 1 0.6%
TOTAL 204

The Founding Fathers were, I do not doubt, aware of the following passage:

Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. – 2 Corinthians 3:17

The Liberals and Atheists who reply to my blogs on Facebook and other Internet Sites insist that Crosses and other Christian symbols have no place in the Public Square.  They wish for Christians to remain unseen and unheard from, worshiping in private, and for Christian Americans to  “compromise” our Faith (i.e., shut up about Homosexual Marriage and other sins,  being used as political expediencies to further an agenda to “radically change” America into something that it was never meant to be.

Well,  y’all can wish for a unicorn to magically appear in your backyard…but that ain’t gonna happen, either.

As a free nation, all you who are non-believers have every right to exercise your faith.

However, as Orthodox Rabbi Daniel Lapin of the Jewish Policy Center clearly explains:

[I] understand that I live . . . in a Christian nation, albeit one where I can follow my faith as long as it doesn’t conflict with the nation’s principles. The same option is open to all Americans and will be available only as long as this nation’s Christian roots are acknowledged and honored.

…Without a vibrant and vital Christianity, America is doomed, and without America, the west is doomed. Which is why I, an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, devoted to Jewish survival, the Torah, and Israel am so terrified of American Christianity caving in. God help Jews if America ever becomes a post-Christian society! Just think of Europe!

Is the Rabbi prophetic? I pray that he isn’t.

I have, however, noticed in the last few years, a propensity among those who have not been raised in a Christian home, to be intolerant toward those who have….staring with the individual who sits at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC.

Americans’ Christian Faith, of which approximately 3/4ths of us, according to Gallup, still anchor our lives around, has been the Solid Rock upon which our nation was built. To deny that, is to deny reality, to re-write history, and, to, quite frankly, endanger “the Shining City on a Hill”.

As President Ronald Reagan said,

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under. 

Isn’t it interesting that those among us who claim to be the most tolerant are actually the least tolerant of all?

And, those who claim to be champions of “personal freedom” are enemies of the religious freedom secured for us in the United States Constitution?

Watch the next two and one half months leading up to the Presidential Election in November and see who talks about Freedom and Responsibility and who talks about the right of “citizens”, both legal and illegal, to “free stuff”.

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. – Matthew 7:20

Until He Comes,

KJ

 

 

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,748 other followers