An answer to the previous post?

  • Grassley champions the Constitution and the people’s right to know

Daniel John Sobieski writing at American Thinker;

Why is Jeff Sessions hiding the Uranium One informant? 

Maybe this is the answer to the questions in my previous post (and they are not encouraging).   This is serious stuff!!!

Excerpts:

Perhaps as startling as the revelation that the FBI was investigating the Hillary Clinton/Russia/Uranium One collusion and that key figures like Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Special Counsel Robert Mueller and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe knew about it and said nothing, is the refusal by Attorney General Jeff Sessions to remove the non-disclosure agreement gag order on the FBI informant who arguably could put Bill and Hillary Clinton and a few others in federal prison.     . . .

It was said the Jeff Sessions recused himself from all things Russian because of election campaign conflicts but is it really because he thought it would insulate him from having to divulge what he knew about Uranium One and the people who at the very least knew about the deal, some who approved the deal, including past and present members of the FBI, the DOJ, and Special Counsel Robert Miller’s team? Is Jeff Sessions part of the Uranium One cover-up? If not, then he needs to explain why he is thus far refusing Sen. Chuck Grassley’s request to lift the gag order imposed by the Obama administration as part of the Uranium One cover-up:

“The Executive Branch does not have the authority to use non-disclosure agreements to avoid Congressional scrutiny,” Grassley wrote. “If the FBI is allowed to contract itself out of Congressional oversight, it would seriously undermine our Constitutional system of checks and balances. The Justice Department needs to work with the Committee to ensure that witnesses are free to speak without fear, intimidation or retaliation from law enforcement.”

Read the entire article for more insight.     DLH

Additional thoughts:

Chuck Grassley has some  forgivable “cronyisms” of sorts, revolving around what he sees as protecting farmers. As important as they are to home-state economy, it is understandable. Such bias and protectionism are obvious and he makes no attempt to cover anything up. More importantly, more endearingly, however,  Grassley champions the Constitution and the people’s right to know.

I believe DLH would agree at least in part that a possible explanation of the gamesmanship being played by the entrenched state is not just to maintain power and control, but to blunt any prospects that they might go to jail. Trump is seen as someone “undependable”, indeed capable of making an example of them or exiting revenge.  They are definitely intent on maintaining their sinecures. Trump is a wild card and wild cards are not part of their game.

Accordingly they are trying desperately to establish that “everyone does it” (profiting from connections to Russia) and to thus avoid being isolated and significantly punished. Mueller is more than a consigliere to the dons (not of the Trump surname) he is one of them.     R Mall

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

The coming crickets: Will anyone hear them chirp?

Considering this extensive report by Tyler O’Neil writing at PJ Media:

FBI Arrested Russian Spies Getting Close to Hillary Clinton in Lead-Up to Uranium One Deal

The biggest and most chilling story about how corrupt, dangerous, and anti-US the Obama administration and the Clinton campaign were (and are) is that it will never amount to anything!

Just some very obvious questions:

– WHY IS ROBERT MUELLER STILL SPECIAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATION OUR PRESIDENT? WHY IS HE NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR HIS ROLE IN CLINTON/OBAMA/RUSSIAN COLLUSION TO GIVE RUSSIA CONTROL OVER 20% OF US URANIUM SUPPLY?

– WHY HAS A SPECIAL COUNSEL NOT BEEN APPOINTED TO INVESTIGATE THE MOST OMINOUS NUCLEAR TREASON CASE SINCE JULIUS AND ETHEL ROSENBERG?

– WHAT IS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, AND ESPECIALLY ATTY. GEN. JEFF SESSIONS DOING IN THE FACE OF OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF THE ‘URANIUM ONE’ TREACHERY?

– WHAT IS THE LIKLIHOOD THIS SCANDAL, TOO, WILL GO THE SAME WAY AS ‘FAST AND FURIIOUS’, IRS TARGETING OF CONSERVATIVES, BENGHAZI, THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES’ CORRUPTION UNDER OBAMA, THE IRAN DEAL, ETC, ETC?

Answer: Coverup collusion by establishment and media will insure that the coverup is made airtight.

DLH

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Our Fair Lady vents

Peggy, Joe, Mika, and Frederica…

Our “fair Lady”, Peggy Noonan penned a column for the Wall Street Journal this week which should have delighted the DC Establishment, leftists everywhere, and, most certainly, lovebirds Joe and Mika.

It required the obligatory shot at Sarah Palin, her “antic statements, intellectual thinness, and general strangeness”.

Miss Peggy, overlooking the “antic statements, intellectual thinness, general strangeness”, and pure nastiness (characteristics of virtually all ‘anti-Trumpists’) of the self-proclaimed ‘rock star’ Frederica Wilson, spent several paragraphs telling readers how inept, clumsy, and “jerky sideshow-ish” President Trump is.

We could go on about Noonan’s nasty little attack on Trump, but suffice to say, it was a not so artfully crafted piece, obviously it seems to us, inspired by her heady performance on MSNBC.

We have noted previously that Peggy seems to us as a person wallowing in thinly disguised bitterness toward conservatives and many of her alleged fans over the failure of us to recognize her genius in shaping the greatness of Ronald Reagan, for whom she toiled in virtual obscurity during his presidency. We think she never forgave G W Bush for not selecting her for a great big role in his administration.

It must pain her especially that the two of them are on the same page in their extreme dislike for Trump and their mutual love of the Washington establishment…and yet, George ignored her own greatness.            DLH

Quoting Ms Peggy about Trump:

“inexperienced, crude, an outsider” but that he is “weak and sniveling” and “undermines himself almost daily by ignoring” traditional norms …

Sure princess —  but real people know where the swamp’s “traditional norms” got us

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

No need to be curious about George

GOSH, GEORGE!

WE CAN’T REMEMBER YOU HAVING ANY CRITICISMS AT ALL ABOUT YOUR SUCCESSOR (OBAMA), THE MAN YOU SUCCEEDED (BILLY CLINTON…YOUR “BROTHER BY ANOTHER MOTHER”), OR THE ‘LADY’ (HILLARY) YOU THOUGHT WOULD CHALLENGE YOUR BROTHER (JEB) FOR HIS RIGHTFUL ‘INHERITANCE’ OF THE BUSH-DYNASTY OVAL OFFICE!

HAS TRUMP HURT YOUR FEELINGS?

From The Daily Mail:

George W. Bush comes out of retirement to throw shade at Trump as he denounces ‘bullying and prejudice’ in politics and praises the value of immigration

  • Former U.S. president George W. Bush left little doubt about how he feels about Donald Trump on Thursday
  • Rare speech in New York City was full of veiled barbs in the current president’s direction
  • ‘Bullying and prejudice in our public life sets a national tone,’ he said, and ‘provides permission for cruelty and bigotry’
  • Bush also slammed Trump’s trade isolationism and complained that ‘we’ve seen nationalism distorted into nativism’ and forgotten immigration’s ‘dynamism

What we are to conclude:

Bush is validating his and his families legacy among conservatives. The “isolationism” and “nativism” epithets reflect more subtle but often felt disdain emanating from the Bush family toward conservatives.  The “bullying ” comment reflects his comfort zone of appealing to liberals. His failures to fight for those who fought his political battles for him, his allies more so than any overseas, has been exposed as ignoble. To that can be added to his endorsement of grotesque criticisms of Trump and his “deplorable” supporters, most of whose support he enjoyed.

His utterances validate Trump  — and Bush is too isolated to realize it. Bush has been faithless toward “having the back” of his common-man supporters. Incredibly for an alleged  conservative, in a comfortable position to remark, he saw nothing  in Obama’s policies demanding his expressed concern or opposition. All the things Obama did to undo things Bush garnered support to do on the presumption of his, Bush’s, presumed sincerity were considered by Bush to be unremarkable.

One can only conclude as well that Bush’s feckless enforcement and silence regarding what amounts to an invasion, accompanied by loud assaults on the validity of nation-states, was if not intentional, so weak as constituting a dereliction of duty, certainly not protective of American independence, its culture, and the ability to assimilate others into it.  Criticisms that his foreign policy was more nation building than anything else are more plausible.   His meekness and silence regarding Obama, thought pathetic, is now exposed as being largely that of a formally silent but fellow traveler.

DLH with R Mall

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

The “dudly” Alexander-Murray insurance proposal

Reports are that there are 60 votes to pass the latest health care proposal from the Senate. The tally is comprised of mostly Democrat support with a dozen or so Republicans. The proposal’s lead sponsors are Lamar Alexander and Patty Murray. Their proposal provides no exception to the rule that anything emanating from either, but especially Murray, should  be suspect and the default position be “we’ll get back to you.”

Reading the Heritage Foundation report set forth below we note that Trump is said to be now leaning in support of the proposal having previously intoned likely non-support for anything furthering subsidies to insurance companies, the substance of the Murry-Alexander proposal.

Since the Senate Republicans are not up to fulfilling promises of ending Obamacare and the national takeover of healthcare ,we prefer Trump’s “last week”  approach, endorsed by Rand Paul, to by executive order reverse an Obama administrative decision subsidizing insurance companies as the subsidies are unconstitutional as initiated and to end bars and inhibitions to interstate insurance sales.  Trumps executive actions would allow individual groups and plans to be formed to purchase insurance and bring down the cost and end many mandates as to what is covered.

Why the New Obamacare ‘Fix’ Is a Dud, and Why the Narrative Justifying It Is Wrong 

While President Donald Trump’s response to the bipartisan health care proposal on Capitol Hill has slid from optimistic to negative, and then back to optimistic, he would be right to move away from this deal.

Despite its advocates’ claims, this proposal isn’t needed to help low-income Americans or stabilize the insurance markets—and is a major distraction from the steps really needed to help with both.

While Trump had made statements indicating he would potentially support a bipartisan bill to tackle health care reform, he quickly expressed concern over the proposal introduced by Sens. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., and Patty Murray, D-Wash., which would allegedly stabilize health care markets.

Trump Tweeted out on Wednesday:

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can’t be done alone.

The legislation has been billed as a way to address Trump’s recent executive order ending cost-sharing reduction payments to health insurance companies.

The common narrative is that Trump’s decision will collapse the health insurance market if there isn’t some way to “bail out” insurance companies that were promised Obamacare subsidies for offering higher-level plans at a cost below their value.

As The Daily Signal explained in May:

The cost-sharing reductions are subsidies designed to reduce out-of-pocket costs for low-income patients who purchase silver-level plans through Obamacare’s exchanges. The subsidies are only available to marketplace customers with an income between 100 percent and 250 percent of the federal poverty line ($12,000 to $30,000 for an individual).

In 2017, 7 million people—58 percent of marketplace enrollees—qualified for cost-sharing reductions, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

These subsidies were challenged on constitutional grounds, as the funding was never appropriated by Congress.

The Trump administration has now effectively mooted that legal challenge by announcing that it will no longer pay the subsidies. However, some see the move as a dangerous step that will cause damage to the health insurance industry and dramatically increase premiums.

The subsidies, in general, are a poorly conceived idea. Obamacare effectively told insurers to give low-income enrollees platinum-level coverage for the price of silver-level coverage, and promised to pay the addition cost (about 30 percent more) in the form of these back-door subsidies.

The Alexander-Murray bill would essentially continue the cost-sharing payments for an additional two years to “stabilize” the market and keep premiums “low.”

Alexander said that he worked on this proposal to “help lower premiums and make insurance available to the 18 million Americans in the individual market in 2018 and 2019.”

This bailout is premised on the idea that without it, the health care markets will collapse and most Americans will see their premiums increase dramatically.

Some, like Vanity Fair’s Abigail Tracy, have insinuated that stopping the subsidies is simply a cunning plot by the Trump administration to wreck Obamacare.

“There doesn’t appear to be any policy upside to Trump’s move to sabotage the current health care system, except to use its failure as leverage to pass a new law,” she wrote.

But this is a false narrative.

States have already prepared for the withdrawal of these cost-sharing payments, and continuing to pay these subsidies will do little to either stabilize or destabilize health insurance markets for most Americans.

For instance, in July, California’s state Obamacare exchange announced that it “took steps to protect most consumers from any rate increases caused by the uncertainty surrounding cost-sharing reduction payments.”

The only customers who would be impacted would be silver-level plan purchasers who would experience an increase in their premiums but “also see an increase in the amount of financial assistance they receive, leaving their net payment virtually the same.”

Pennsylvania also made similar adjustments. The Pennsylvania Insurance Commission recently announced:

Because cost-sharing reductions are only available on silver plans, rate increases necessitated by the nonpayment of these cost reductions will be limited to silver plans. On-exchange bronze, gold, and platinum plans and off-exchange silver plans will not be impacted by these disproportionate increases.

In other words, insurance regulators in California, Pennsylvania, and other states are effectively converting this program into how it could have been better designed from the beginning—more generous coverage for low-income people that carries a higher up-front premium, but with higher up-front subsidies to match the costs.

According to The Hill, Ed Haislmaier, a senior research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, said continuing the federally subsidized payments keeps the Obamacare market afloat, but does nothing for the vast and unsubsidized individual health insurance market.

Here Are 7 Implications of Ending Obamacare’s Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments

“What is instead needed to stabilize the unsubsidized market is the removal of Obamacare’s cost-increasing insurance mandates and misguided regulations,” he said. “To fix that Obamacare-caused damage and lower the cost of insurance, Congress will need to make other policy reforms.”

Of course, this change is not in the Alexander-Murray bill, nor are there any meaningful proposals to fix Obamacare. It’s simply a costly proposal to fix a non-crisis as the real problems with our health care system go unaddressed

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Bill and Hillary, Julius and Ethel, Obama and Holder

THIS IS HUGE!

The accounts are growing more definitive and sinister every day . . .  even more important and dangerous than the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg episode!!

(And you know how that was ultimately resolved!)     DLH

This from John Hinderaker at Powerline:

Bombshell Revelations about Russia and Obama’s Department of Justice     (excerpt)

Ironies abound: who supervised the Russia investigation? Rod Rosenstein. Who was the FBI director when the Russia probe began in 2009? Robert Mueller. Who was running the FBI when the case ended with a whimper and an apparent cover-up? James Comey. How any of these people can participate with a straight face in an investigation into President Trump’s purportedly nefarious (but, as far as we know, nonexistent) relationship with the Russian regime is beyond me.

This story belongs on the front page of every newspaper in the United States tomorrow

We posted an explanation earlier this morning as to why this will not be front page news

Russian style propaganda technique — repetitive overpowering diversion *

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Question for NFL and NBA players and all the “take a knee” jerks in sports

 . . . along with the media horses asses they ride in on:

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

The “King’s Speech”…LeBron has spoken

I have this platform, and I’m somebody that has a voice of command, and the only way for us to be able to get better as a society and us to get better as people is love. And that’s the only way we’re going to be able to conquer something at the end of the day. It’s not about the guy that’s the so-called president of the United States, or whatever the case.  (LeBron James)

The NBA’s “Man of Letters”, (reportedly a high school graduate ) LeBron James speaks out…is against ‘inequality’

 –  his quest to convey his wisdom to make the world better should include speaking out against the high average number of “baby mommas” his ‘homies’ in the NBA have

– Is the NBA’s meritocracy a bad thing, LeBron? White players are certainly underrepresented…is that inequality?

– When will those citadels of higher learning bestow an honorary doctorate on “LeBron the Wise”? I’m betting Columbia will be first, Georgetown next

————–

LeBron James has been more vocal about topics beyond basketball this offseason—most notably his criticisms of President Donald Trump—and it seems that’s by design.

GQ magazine dropped a story about James on Tuesday, the opening day of the NBA’s regular season, that follows the Cleveland Cavalier superstar throughout a series of offseason meetings and events. The article sketches the 32-year-old as he looks toward his post-NBA life and relinquishes the identity of perhaps the best athlete in the world. 

James’ willingness to take on Trump, whom the star famously called a “bum” on Twitter, hints he’s after something bigger than just basketball. The writer of the article, GQ’s style editor Mark Anthony Green, asked James directly if he could see himself in the mold of Muhammad Ali, who helped fight against the Vietnam War and for the rights of black people in America. James told Green “time will tell.” He told GQ:

Trending: Did Trump Obstruct Justice? You decide. Here’s The Key Timeline

 “I think Ali represented something bigger than Ali. He wanted to make a change for a future without him included. That’s what Ali brought to the table. I don’t know what it’s like to live in every state in this country, but I know freedom. I know the opportunity that our country has given people, and to see the guy in charge now not understanding that is baffling to not only myself but to my friends and to the people that’ve helped grow this country. But Muhammad Ali’s correlation to the war… I don’t think me and Donald Trump could ever get to that point.”

It matters when a star like James is willing to take this sort of stand. He’s the most famous athlete in the country at a time when media is incredibly fractured—and sports remain one of the few things that’s consumed relentlessly. He holds incredible influence and has begun to use this platform in the wake of Trump’s presidency.   . . .

Sports commentators can relate to LeBron and have similar inflated opinions of their profundity and the desire of their audiences to hear it.

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

Russian style propaganda technique — repetitive overpowering diversion *

  • FBI  Obama Justice Department coverup facilitated by media
  • Democrat operatives/dominate liberal media first accuse Trump of dark foreboding Russia connection, then, when newsworthy facts about Democrat collusion appear, (which they tried to coverup) they ignore or emphasize emotional stories as a diversion
  • Pot lying about the kettle being black
  • What are typical totalitarian (Russian, Chinese, Marxists in general) propaganda techniques?

Obsessive deliverers of fake news regarding the “Russia connection to Trump” the dominant liberal media largely and purposefully ignores the Russia connection to the Clintons. The facts and implications of the Russia/Hillary payola is perhaps the most scandalous corruption and coverup in American history as it involves the FBI and the Justice Department and the media.  What have we seen on NBC/CBS/ABC on the latest developments. Anything like the breathless reporting of unsubstantiated rumor and innuendo cast by Democrat operatives about Trump?

Excerpt from Katie Pavlich writing at Town Hall:

With Bribery, Russian Nuclear Officials Made Bill and Hillary Clinton Richer

In 2009 Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted more control over U.S. nuclear capability and the Clintons helped him get there.

According to a bombshell report published today in TheHill the corruption surrounding the sale of Uranium One when President Obama was in the White House, which overwhelmingly and personally benefited former President Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, was far worse than we first knew and the FBI documented all of it. Bolding is mine: . . .

Under her watch at the State Department, Secretary Hillary Clinton benefited from the Russian government increasing its power inside the U.S. nuclear program and allowed it to happen. She then denied knowing anything about it on the campaign trial and resented allegations she used her position at the State Department for personal gain. Russian nuclear officials were paying her husband millions through shady back channels and by default, they were paying her too.

A New York Post masthead editorial: (excerpt)

Team Obama’s stunning cover-up of Russian crimes

It turns out the Obama administration knew the Russians were engaged in bribery, kickbacks and extortion in order to gain control of US atomic resources — yet still OK’d that 2010 deal to give Moscow control of one-fifth of America’s uranium. This reeks.

Peter Schweizer got onto part of the scandal in his 2015 book, “Clinton Cash”: the gifts of $145 million to the Clinton Foundation, and the $500,000 fee to Bill for a single speech, by individuals involved in a deal that required Hillary Clinton’s approval.

The New York Times confirmed and followed up on Schweizer’s reporting — all of it denounced by Hillary as a partisan hit job.

But now The Hill reports that the FBI in 2009 had collected substantial evidence — eyewitnesses backed by documents — of money-laundering, blackmail and bribery by Russian nuclear officials, all aimed at growing “Vladimir Putin’s atomic-energy business inside the United States” in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The bureau even flagged the routing of millions from Russian nuclear officials to cutouts and on to Clinton, Inc.   . . .

And Democrats accuse Trump of propagandizing like the Russians!

How about this incredibly obtuse analysis from Mother Jones: excerpt quoting a Rand Corporation “study”  (And the devil quotes the Bible)

Pot lying about the kettle being black

A Chilling Theory on Trump’s Nonstop Lies
His duplicity bears a disturbing resemblance to Putin-style propaganda

RAND: “Russian propaganda is produced in incredibly large volumes and is broadcast or otherwise distributed via a large number of channels.”

1. High-volume and multichannel
2. Rapid, continuous, and repetitive
3 Lacks commitment to objective reality
4 lacks commitment to consistency

RAND: “Don’t expect to counter the firehose of falsehood with the squirt gun of truth.”

The Washington Post has called Trump “the most fact-checked politician.” Yet, the RAND research found that pointing out specific falsehoods was an ineffective tool against the propaganda techniques they studied in Russia because “people will have trouble recalling which information they have received is the disinformation and which is the truth.” The researchers acknowledged the challenges that other governments and organizations like NATO have in countering Russian propaganda, and advised against taking on the propaganda messages directly.

Some responses proposed by the researchers may also hold clues for media struggling to contend with Trump’s unprecedented behavior in the Oval Office. The researchers suggest making the first impression on an issue by priming audiences with accurate information, to get in front of a potentially misleading message. And they advise exposing the method: “Highlight the ways propagandists attempt to manipulate audiences,” they say, “rather than fighting the specific manipulations.”

For the American media, it may well be a matter of doing both, and often.

What is unprecedented is a Republican calling the real leftist propagandists out. America’s leftist intellectuals learned Soviet propaganda techniques at their knee and passed it on to their acolytes in the current propaganda ministry  —  the dominant liberal media establishment.

Related reading:

15-point checklist of Putin’s regimes propaganda techniques

See any resemblance to the left?                  R Mall

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment

THE DAY’S HEADLINES (Wednesday)

THE DAY’S HEADLINES (Wednesday)

– ‘Fake’ Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl Pleads guilty to Serving With “Honor and Distinction” (No word if Obama attended the plea)

– Is ‘Miss Peggy’ Noonan seeking a gig on MSNBC; She was on ‘Morning Joe’ Wednesday (Look Out George Will and Kathleen Parker)

– NFL “Knee Jerks” and Trump’s condolence call take the spotlight off what is very likely the most dangerous and shocking scandal of the Obama tenure yet…the sale of 20% of US uranium, following large contributions to Clinton Foundation by, wait for it…RUSSIANS; covered up by FBI?!

DLH

Posted in UNCATEGORIZED | Leave a comment