Confirmed: The Fix Was In

Hillary Clinton was presumed innocent until, and after, proven guilty

The Washington Post is reporting this morning that James Comey knew the Justice Department was protecting Hillary Clinton, drafted a letter exonerating her in early May, then gave immunity to her aides who subsequentially confessed to lying and destroying evidence.

A month later, after Comey wrote the exoneration letter, Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton privately where they “talked about wedding plans”. They didn’t. The fix was in. All they needed for the show was to have Hillary be interviewed by the FBI. Bill needed assurances that the Justice Department still had her back and that Comey had already chosen to exonerate her.

Five days later, Comey interviews Hillary Clinton, with her aides who had been granted immunity allowed in the room to serve as her lawyers.  Two days later, Comey goes public with his exoneration letter as though he had just come to that decision.

September 28, Comey tells Congress that he did not make his decision until after interviewing Hillary Clinton.  He states emphatically that he did not make the decision until after interviewing Hillary Clinton.

Here is the Washington Post timeline:

Early March – Comey receives information from Russian sources that the Justice Department is working to ensure Hillary Clinton won’t be prosecuted.  Loretta Lynch had also spoken to Comey and asked him to call the “investigation” a “matter” instead so as not to make it sound so bad.

(Sidebar: why would Russia know anything about the Justice Department’s relationship to Hillary Clinton?  Perhaps because of how the Uranium One deal was covered up?)

May 2 – Comey drafts the exoneration letter

May 3 – Paul Combetta, Clinton computer specialist, admits to lying to the the FBI about knowing the emails should have been preserved and deleting them anyway.  Combetta is given immunity because Comey, apparently, wanted to move up the line to get someone more important.  AFTER he had already written the exoneration letter.

May 5 – The media reports that there is little evidence Clinton committed a crime

May 16 – Comey sends the draft of his exoneration around to other members in the FBI.  This is before Cheryl Mills is interviewed.  Part of the deal to interview Cheryl Mills becomes immunity and the destruction of her laptop, which likely contained evidence.

June 27 – Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton meet privately on his jet.

July 2 – Hillary Clinton is interviewed by the FBI for 3 1/2 hours with her aides in the room serving as her lawyers.  The aides have immunity already.  They can confer and make sure they get their stories straight.

July 5 – Comey exonerates Hillary Clinton.

Anyone with any sense and understanding can clearly see the fix was in.  There was no way the Obama Justice Department was going to prosecute Hillary Clinton.  And Comey worked with the administration to make sure it never happened.  The investigation should be reopened, and prosecution of Comey, Lynch, the Clintons, Mills, Combetta, Abedeen, and Obama should be on the table for obstruction of justice and perjury.

Advertisements

Finland Needs Babies

Socialism works until you run out of other people’s money, or simply out of other people….

Socialism is all fun and games until you run out of other people’s resources. In Venezuela things were going great so long as the state could fund itself by selling oil. Great of course being a relative term. If you’re a relative of someone in the government, then things are great.

In Finland, they are running short of a different commodity: babies. Finland’s social system is similar to US social security in that it is dependent on having a high taxed worker to non-working consumer ratio. In the US, the conundrum we have run into is that Social Security was stable when there were at least three workers for every retiree. By 2030 we expect to see two workers per retiree and Social Security will run out of money.

Finland is facing the same dilemma.  They are running out of workers to fund the free-loaders.  They are not making enough new workers to keep the socialist ponzi scheme going. This is driving them to adopt new policies such as increased maternity leave. They are even rethinking their progressive stances on family values. Of course, when the purpose of having more babies is to support the welfare state, this strategy can backfire. Additional maternity leave means more labor is needed to fill those gaps.

While some have suggested that nationalism is the barrier to admitting more immigrants, I have a feeling the true barrier is the fear of adding more dependents to a broken system. After all, in a state built on social safety nets and transfer of wealth who wants to volunteer to go there and work to pay for it all?

Margaret Thatcher said that the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.  In Finland, they have simply run out of other people.

 

A Different Way To Look At “Illegal”

How to read the news

Here is a different way to look at illegal immigration. I saw a post from Dan Rather the other day about how Spanish speaking people rescuing others from Houston shouldn’t be thought of as anything other than American. Sure, why not? I mean, assuming they actually are Americans.  If the President of Mexico offers aid to Houstonians, we don’t automatically grant him citizenship.

The problem is that the Left has defined the debate. On their terms “citizen” means “white dude”. Immigrant means “Hispanic (regardless of citizenship)”. Illegal immigrant means you are simply a racist, privileged white dude for using that term. Nobody is “illegal”. They are “human”.  Right?

Instead of using the often confused terms of immigrant and illegal immigrant, let’s replace those terms with “Taxpayer” and “Tax Cheat”. After all, that’s what an illegal immigrant has done. They have cheated on their paperwork, or not filed at all. See how the stories change in that context.

Take today, there is a story about how immigrants are battling detection and deportation after Harvey. Really? We are deporting citizens because they emigrated to the USA? No, they mean illegal immigrants, but nobody is illegal so that is a racist term. Let’s try this instead, “Tax cheats battle detection and IRS penalties after Harvey”. Still feel so much sympathy?

Trump considers ending the Dream Act (which wasn’t actually an act, just a regulation) for children of immigrants. What? We are deporting citizen children because their parents came here legally from other countries??  No, of course not.  But again, illegal immigrant is a racist term used by citizens (privileged white dudes). So let’s try it differently. Trump considers crackdown on tax cheats filing illegitimate child tax credit claims. Ah, suddenly it doesn’t sound so bad.

So that’s the assignment. If you see an article that says “immigrant” but means “illegal immigrant”, just substitute “tax cheat”. If you see an article that says “immigrant” and means “legal citizen who emigrated”, read it “taxpayer”.

By the way, if you think this is a ridiculous idea just remember that anyone who is here illegally is either dodging taxes, committing identity theft, or filing the wrong return. Most are paid under the table or with a false tax ID. The reason businesses use their labor is because they are illegally paid less than minimum wage and don’t operate under the same overtime and labor laws that citizens…sorry, taxpayers do. So if you read every story in that lens, taxpayer and tax cheat, you won’t be that far off.

Matt Walsh: How It Ought To Be

In a cookie cutter world…

Oh Matt. Matt Walsh is sticking by a tweeted photo and commentary of a man carrying a woman and baby out of a flood. Ok, let’s start with what he got right. The baby is probably in no circumstances going to be carrying the man or the woman out of the flood waters. Woman or man protecting the child, we’re good.

21105976_1669671863065917_8245532479166072481_n

Gender studies professors. Gosh, if your biggest beef with them right now is gender roles? You’re probably not paying attention. Maybe you should go back to science and chromosomes and start with them there.

Now, to the rest of his analogy. Matt, your world view demonstrated by this picture is a tiny box. In that box, you view a woman who is probably 120 lbs and her husband who wears camo, hunts and gathers. He probably drives a big truck. So when it floods, he carries her out. That’s nice. Probably happens a lot. That’s not how it “ought to be”.

How it ought to be is that the parents care for the child and whoever can walk or carry does the walking or carrying.  I’ve known far too many physically strong women, and honestly a fair share of physically weak men, to try to fit the world into that one size fits all box. By the way, if your child is bigger than you, it’s ok if they carry you to safety too.

We can of course debate all day on averages and so on.  Of course there are biological differences.  But people aren’t defined by laws of averages.  They are defined by their individuality.  If average height for a woman is 5’5 and average height for a man is 5’10, that does not mean it ought to be that a 6′ tall woman should let her 5’4 man carry her out of danger.

The same goes for emotional strength, common sense, intelligence, education.  America isn’t about cookie cutter. It’s not about people being limited to their stereotypical boundaries. It’s about people realizing their full potential and being better and more than the standard picture someone else has in their head. That’s how it ought to be.

UBI and the Matrix

How Universal Basic Income is more dangerous than automation…

I’ve been asked in the past about my views on UBI, or universal basic income. This article does a pretty good job of summing up how UBI creates two classes of humanity. I would go further to say UBI takes a large portion of humanity out of the evolutionary process.

When you lose your job to a machine, you are forced to reinvent yourself and find a new way of providing for yourself in a world of limited resources. That’s why businesses are started in garages, why new things are invented, and why people go back and educate themselves in fields that matter to the progress of humanity.

I see it as the Matrix. For younger readers, the Matrix was a movie about a future age where robots have taken over the world and hooked every human into a computer that feeds off of their biomass energy while keeping them satiated with a false virtual reality.

In the Matrix you live in a fake reality, have everything you need, and meanwhile your body slowly is eaten up and decays. Outside of the Matrix life is difficult. You are fighting the very automation that has enslaved the rest of humanity. For a time the food isn’t as good. The living conditions aren’t as good. But you are free, innovative by necessity, and progressing humanity.

We’ve had UBI before. Instead of having a job, we had large populations who lived in provided homes, ate provided food, and performed tasks required by the free class of society. That was slavery. In my mind, UBI equates to slavery because it’s only a matter of time before the working class requires the UBI class to contribute for their government provided paycheck. That will usually come right about the time the Socialists get the difficult reminder that resources are not unlimited.

When the resources to provide UBI run out, the question usually comes down to whether people should be forced into labor camps or systematically starved. Just ask anyone anywhere socialism has actually been tried. When robots figure out how to solve the question of limited resources, then let’s give UBI a shot.

Fascist Beasts

And where to find them…

Ask any American about Charlottesville and they can tell you exactly what happened there.  Ok, not exactly.  It depends on what side they are on. Neo-Nazis ran someone over. Conservatives ran someone over. A crazy, schizophrenic ran over a Communist aggressor. I guess it really depends on someone’s viewpoint. I like how Ted Cruz characterized it: someone committed a terrorist act in the United States.  But it wasn’t the only act of terror in the world this past week.

James Fields, aside from being crazy, committed an act of terror. He acted violently and killed someone because of their beliefs and how they conflicted with his. His beliefs, as a neo-Nazi, are that not only is his race better than your race, but the government should just acknowledge that and stop all the other races from oppressing his race. He is a Fascist.

Sidebar, I’ve often wondered how White Supremacists have not logically worked through their belief and seen where it falls apart. Nazis killed Jews because they saw the Jews as always doing better and oppressing them financially. They kill blacks because they see blacks as stronger and therefore dangerous. Eventually White Supremacists are going to put two and two together and stop thinking of themselves as the master race.

But putting that aside, let’s talk about Fascists for a minute. The difference between a Fascist and a Socialist is that Fascists wear their ill intentions on their sleeve. A Socialist will tell you they kill for the betterment of society, and actually sound good saying it. Look at Iceland where they are celebrating the elimination of down syndrome. They killed them all, but that’s not what they’ll tell you.

Fascists believe their (fill in the blank) is better. Therefore, they must eliminate any competition for power. The best example of modern day Fascism is not Charlottesville where a bunch of inbred white dudes carried tiki torches and chanted “We are the best” until the craziest one ran someone over.  The best examples were seen this past week in Barcelona and Turku.

In Barcelona, an Islamic Fascist terrorist ran people over with his car. Not because of voices in his head, not because he found the crowd threatening, but because in his view Islam is best and all others must be killed or intimidated into signing up. CNN stupidly pondered whether Barcelona was a Charlottesville copycat. Probably not, considering Islamic Fascist terrorists have used car terrorist attacks 11 times in Europe over the last two years. In Turku, Finland, an Islamic Fascist terrorist pulled out a knife and started indiscriminately stabbing civilians. That scares me more than a crowd of tiki torch wielding, racist frat boys.

Yet, the words Islamic, Fascist, jihad, and even terror remain verboten in much of the news coverage of these kind of terror attacks. The same people in the US who are sure that Trump is about to start the Fourth Reich with his approximately 20,000 neo-Nazi and KKK followers will pray for the victims of Barcelona without admitting Islam had anything to do with it. As slow as Trump was to call out the KKK and neo-Nazis, the Obama administration was far slower to even admit Benghazi was a terrorist attack.

Islamic Fascism is responsible for murder, rape, and slavery throughout the countries they control.  Christians, Jews, and Muslims are among the primary victims. While ISIS was the extreme version, it is still illegal in most Muslim countries to convert to another religion, or in some cases to even convert to a different denomination of Islam.  When Iran says they have no gays, it’s not because they all left or prayed the gay away and turned straight. It’s because the penalty for homosexuality in Islam is to be thrown off a roof.

There is nothing good, right, or sane about the tiny but loud pocket of Fascism rearing it’s ugly head in the US.  But until the Alt-Left gets the courage to call Fascism Fascism wherever it exists and regardless of how popular, they lack the credibility to confront neo-Nazi thugs.

I guess that leaves it up to the rest of us freedom loving Americans.

 

To Those Who Suddenly Care, Welcome

It’s not like violent protests are new…

I feel like I should welcome all the people who are suddenly now concerned about violent protesters. When St Louis was burning and cops were being assassinated in their cars, people got upset if you said you support the police or that this went beyond free speech.

When Antifa, angry that Trump won, were smashing Starbucks windows and burning property in the streets, we were told this is all free speech and #resistance.

When protesters set Berkeley ablaze, Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders said he understood their anger, condemned their violence, and admonished the violent ones not to say they were Bernie Sanders supporters.

People cheered when an Antifa member punched Richard Spencer in the face. I’ll admit, I cheered.
People paused for a moment when an alt-leftist from Bernie Sanders campaign staff walked onto a softball field and started gunning down GOP congressmen. In fact for almost a whole 24 hour news cycle there was unity in the thought that a line had been crossed. At the same time, Antifa on social media cheered the attack on right-wingers who opposed the Socialist agenda.
As Antifa emailed threats of violence to Fascist rally organizers and got nationalist events canceled through threats of violence, many sat in silent approval because our violence is apparently better than their violence.
Now that the racist Fascists have drawn blood, people are starting to care. In fact, they care so much that if you even mention “both sides”, you are shouted down and lumped with the racists. Condemning all violence and promoting all free speech has become anathema to the crowds. It is as evil as suggesting all lives matter when a cop is shot dead in his patrol car.
The Socialists of the Antifa movement and the Fascists of the Nazi/KKK movement have one goal in mind. They seek power. One seeks it through populist appeals and promises to those they seek to control, the other through an overt demand that all others should bow to them. Both sides oppose liberty. Both sides only approve of their own free speech and believe the other should be limited.
The only way to truly diffuse this war that the vast majority of Americans want no part of is to embrace liberty. The demands of both the Nazis and the Socialist Antifa are incompatible with the constitution. Unfortunately, embracing liberty means giving up aspirations of controlling others through big government. Even non-radical Republicans and Democrats struggle with that concept.
If you are finally ready to denounce all violence and all attempts by partisan groups to gain power over our lives through big government, then welcome. If you are simply mad that their side killed someone on your side, then this article isn’t for you.