GOP Risks Spending Confrontation With Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

GOP leaders seeking a way out of their September logjam are talking about tying a disaster aid bill for Hurricane Harvey to a larger measure funding the government and raising the nation’s borrowing limit.

Including the disaster aid would almost certainly win some Republican votes for the package, which will otherwise be unpopular with GOP lawmakers who oppose a “clean” debt ceiling hike and would like to impose restrictions on government spending.

But the move risks a confrontation with President Trump, who is demanding that the end-of-month bill include $1.6 billion in funding for his southern border wall.

Trump has repeatedly suggested he is willing to shut down the government to win funding for his wall, an outcome GOP leaders want to avoid just more than a year ahead of midterm elections where they will be defending majorities in the House and Senate.

Trump on Monday vowed to win quick disaster relief funding for Harvey’s victims, but he suggested that he saw the aid package and the wall as separate issues. (Read more from “GOP Risks Spending Confrontation With Trump” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Professor Says ‘Trump-Lovin’ Texas Deserved Hurricane

/0 Comments/in , /by

. . .The whole disaster is probably just karma for those Republicans who voted for President Trump in 2016.

At least that’s what a former assistant professor at the University of Tampa claimed in a tweet that stunned the Twittersphere Sunday.

The assistant professor, Kenneth L. Storey, posted a tweet suggesting Texans deserved Hurricane Harvey devastation for voting for Republicans such as President Trump.

And now Storey is out of a job.

Storey, who taught sociology and had worked at the university since 2011, posted the following tweet Sunday before later deleting it: “I don’t believe in instant Karma but this kinda feels like it for Texas. Hopefully this will help them realize the GOP doesn’t care about them.” (Read more from “Professor Says ‘Trump-Lovin’ Texas Deserved Hurricane” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hurricane Survivor Rips CNN for ‘Exploiting’ Flood Victims

/0 Comments/in , /by

The desperation in Houston is heartbreaking and palpable after Hurricane Harvey’s devastation and flooding, and a stunning CNN interview with a flood victim is leaving many viewers in horror at the distressing circumstances there Tuesday.

A Houston mother who fled Hurricane Harvey and rising water in her home managed to reach a shelter Tuesday with her young daughter, a child who appears to be about 9 years old.

When CNN reporter Rosa Flores spotted the mother, Danielle, she asked how the family ended up at the shelter. That’s when Danielle explained that she and her daughter had been waiting for someone to rescue them from their home, but no one showed up. So they braved the floods and managed to get to a nearby gas station, where a rescuer arrived and helped them out.

“We had been there for five days with no food, no lights, and nobody came,” Danielle explained. “We [had to] go through four feet of water to get them food on the first day. Yeah, that’s a lot of s–t.”

Then she unloaded on CNN and Flores, blasting them for exploiting flood victims “during their worst times.” (Read more from “Hurricane Survivor Rips CNN for ‘Exploiting’ Flood Victims” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster: A Legend or a Lie?

/0 Comments/in , /by

[Explicit language]

Fresh on the heels of a successful offensive in Mosul, Iraq, the Iraqi military is now poised to retake Tal Afar, long a hotbed of ISIS and other insurgent activity. Before we pulled out of Iraq, Tal Afar, like Fallujah, had been the focal point of multiple large-scale, costly offensives to eject entrenched insurgents. In 2005, then-Colonel H.R. McMaster led the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment (3rd ACR) in the largest of these offensives, Operation Restoring Rights. His reputation as a brilliant military strategist rests largely on the results of that one battle. Given the widespread support for McMaster in the media and Washington establishment, it is ironic that current reporting largely fails to mention this battle or McMaster’s central role in it.

McMaster’s widely-hyped strategic acumen has been called into question by high-level military sources with personal knowledge of his conduct in the field. These sources spoke with me on condition of anonymity.

McMaster rests his laurels on the counter-insurgency strategy he claims won the Battle of Tal Afar, Iraq. But sources say McMaster ignored counter-insurgency experts and that his reckless leadership killed between 70 and 85* Americans and almost lost the battle. The battle, the sources say, was won only through a valiant rescue mission during which most of those casualties occurred.*

Until today this information has been suppressed.

Today, National Security Advisor McMaster is facing sustained criticism for his seemingly relentless opposition to Trump policies, his purging of many competent, conservative Trump loyalists from the National Security Council staff, and “protecting and coddling” 40 Obama holdovers — almost one-sixth of the NSC staff — who are plainly out to sabotage the Trump agenda.

Yet he continues to enjoy President Trump’s support. Is President Trump reluctant to fire McMaster for fear of criticism? Has he decided that McMaster’s reputed military genius is worth the cost? Or has he been thoroughly misinformed about McMaster’s character and competence? Who is H.R. McMaster really?

Lieutenant General (three-star) Herbert Raymond McMaster is a career Army officer still on active duty. He came to the Trump administration as a quick replacement for Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (Ret.), who resigned over controversies regarding his contacts with Russian officials. Whatever Flynn may have done wrong, his true sin was bucking the D.C. establishment, including many military leaders. And as frequently happens in Washington, when a strong conservative political appointee faces widespread (often manufactured) controversy, the knee-jerk reaction is to find a replacement the establishment likes. McMaster fits the bill.

On the surface, he appears to have the right resume. He has been awarded the Silver Star, Purple Heart, Bronze Star, the Legion of Merit and other medals, although John Kerry and many others have proved there are ways to get these medals without earning them. Most of this acclaim comes out of his service at the Battle of 73 Easting (1991), where in 23 minutes, McMaster’s nine M1A1 Abrams tanks and 12 Bradley Fighting Vehicles destroyed 30 Iraqi tanks and 14 armored vehicles. McMaster has been given credit for quick thinking and aggressive action, but his unit faced off against obsolete Iraqi T-55 and T-72 tanks operated by troops with inferior training. His unit was part of a larger operation that experienced similar success, ultimately destroying 85 tanks, 40 personnel carriers, and over 30 other vehicles. As George Dvorsky observes: “the [Republican Guard] didn’t have a chance.”

As the author of the 1997 book, Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that Led to Vietnam, McMaster enjoys a reputation as something of a maverick, a fact which perhaps found favor in the unorthodox Trump administration. The book has been described as “the seminal work on military’s responsibility during Vietnam to confront their civilian bosses when strategy was not working.”

But, as noted above, McMaster’s reputation rests largely on the counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy applied at Tal Afar. It was later hailed by President George W. Bush, who said it, “gives me confidence in our strategy because in this city we see the outlines of the Iraq that we and the Iraqi people have been fighting for…” For once, the media agreed with Bush, published glowing reports on McMaster’s feats. Mother Jones and the Washington Post called him the “Hero of Tal Afar.” The left-leaning Slate.com calls him “the Army’s smartest officer.”

Now leftists are coming out of the woodwork to defend McMaster against his conservative critics. Newsweek accuses the “alt-right” of attempting to smear McMaster, while genuine slime merchants like Media Matters for America are smearing his critics. He is even being defended by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the propaganda arm of the Palestinian terrorist group HAMAS.

Okay, wait a minute.

When reflexively anti-American, anti-military outlets like Mother Jones, Slate and the Washington Post offer fawning praise for a Republican military commander, the reasons underlying those plaudits deserve further investigation. When anti-American, anti-military, George Soros-funded, extreme leftist smear operations like Media Matters go to war to defend a Trump political appointee, it casts a shadow on everything about the man. When the anti-American, terrorism-supporting, Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated CAIR defends an American general, the alarm bells drown out all other sound. And officers who have witnessed his “leadership” in the unforgiving crucible of combat are now sounding the alarm.

It is not unusual in Army practice that studies and reports often gloss over leadership failures by simply not mentioning the leaders who failed. This seems to be the case in an official military report prepared for the U.S. Army’s Combat Studies Institute concerning the conduct of 3rd ACR in Operation Restoring Rights, according to Brave Rifles at the Battle of Tal Afar.[1] The 3rd ACR, also known as the “Brave Rifles,” is comprised of three ground squadrons, the 1st, 2nd and 4th, and a support squadron. Most of the fighting during this operation was conducted by the 2nd Squadron. Its commander, Lt. Col. Christopher M. Hickey, was the man on the ground leading the engaged combat forces.

Virtually all of the action described centers on decisions made by Hickey. McMaster barely gets a mention. The Washington Post‘s account of the battle puts McMaster in the middle of it, though the embedded reporter, Jon Finer, says he didn’t see McMaster until “the operation was winding down.” Brave Rifles does not describe where McMaster was at all, only that he responded to Hickey’s request for more troops by appealing to Task Force Freedom and Multinational Corps–Iraq (pp. 131-132). He likely oversaw the offensive from 3rd ACR’s operations base, FOB Sykes, 7.5 miles south of town (p. 130). Given that he had overall command of the regiment, that is probably where he should have been, except that he seemed to want people to believe he was in the heat of battle. He wasn’t.

The report is not especially critical of Hickey, but if the operation was an unqualified success, McMaster’s role presumably would have been highlighted. McMaster’s Tal Afar COIN strategy is also credited with inspiring Iraq’s 2007 “surge” operation. Yet Brave Rifles makes no such claim.

The report describes a halt in the advance to evacuate civilians that occurred little more than one day into the fight. In a “Frontline” video interview, [2] McMaster claims the pause was “about three days,” but according to Brave Rifles, it took a full week (p. 142). Officers on the ground during that battle claim that in fact the 2nd Squadron was surrounded and in danger of being annihilated. One Special Forces operative described it as a “goat fuck” (p. 142). A 1,150-strong Special Operations Group joined with other units to launch a rescue mission that would clear a path to McMaster’s beleaguered forces.

The following is an account of that effort provided for this article by the commander of the Special Operations Group. He is a highly decorated retired Special Forces flag officer with decades of service under his belt. His bona fides have been confirmed by other top-level military sources. All have requested anonymity. Given the D.C. establishment’s demonstrated hostility to whistleblowers, you can’t blame them.

Here is his story:

Mine was one of three units sent to rescue McMaster from Tal Afar. McMaster replaced most of the operations people upon assuming command with his admirers — most of whom had limited combat experience at best. The majority never had a troop command, even in peacetime. As an apprentice of David Petraeus, McMaster was recommended to command the 3rd ACR not because of his ability/experience to command a large armored formation but simply so he could get his ticket punched on the way to flag rank.

The strategy called for assault, clear and hold, but McMaster simply ordered the squadron to advance without securing positions taken. This allowed insurgents to come in behind his assault force and it was soon surrounded. It came to be known among the troops as “Little Stalingrad” because of McMaster’s arrogance and disregard of advice from COIN experts. McMaster was thoroughly briefed that Tal Afar was an insurgent stronghold but ignored this intelligence and attempted to take the city by coup de main (surprise attack) using a blitzkrieg strategy like Von Paulus used in the Battle of Stalingrad.

Use of armor in urban warfare is fraught with danger if not carefully coordinated with infantry and combat support. The insurgent force, commanded by former Iraqi officers, allowed McMaster’s column to enter the city, then sprung the trap. As with Von Paulus, McMaster soon found his tanks and tracks hopelessly bogged down in the streets and narrow alleys of Tal Afar.

The insurgents used the city like a giant maze. M1A2s (Abrams main battle tank) have vulnerabilities the insurgents used to their advantage. The Abrams was designed with no escape hatch underneath. The insurgents dropped Molotov cocktails on the tanks from tops of buildings. With the tank on fire, the crew had to exit thru the top of the tank, where they could be fired upon as they climbed out.

The M1A2 is also vulnerable to RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades]. Tal Afar had been ringed with sand berms to make it difficult for insurgents to get away. However, to enter the city, the tanks had to drive over the berms. The M1A2 underbelly is not adequately armored. As the tanks came over the berms, insurgents shot at their undersides with RPGs. The insurgents learned these tactics from the experience of jihadis who fought the Russians in Afghanistan in the 1980s. McMaster apparently didn’t.

McMaster attempted to paint a rosy picture of the assault but it soon became apparent to others his unit was in trouble. McMaster estimated the assault would take one-and-a-half days to complete, but by that time the 2nd Squadron was trapped. The official record claims that they halted the assault to allow civilians to evacuate. The truth is that they had become surrounded and couldn’t move.

My SF unit, just off another operation, was ordered to re-deploy and fight our way in to open a supply route into the city to replenish ammo and supplies and Medevac the wounded. Earlier attempts to drop supplies by helicopter met intense fire and risked supplies falling into enemy hands. It took us three days to battle our way to them. I lost 40 men KIA [killed in action] in one day and a total of 50 lost from my unit alone during the pause, with many more wounded.

The operation which was supposed to last 2 days, turned into an 18-day battle, with the 3rd ACR being decimated. Many soldiers died later in field hospitals overloaded with wounded. Many civilians were not evacuated until after the forces engaged, and they too suffered many dead and wounded.

This fiasco was covered up by McMaster’s good friend, mentor and fellow West Pointer, David Petraeus, who worried that revealing the depth of McMaster’s mistakes would reflect badly on him as well.

McMaster is a political officer who took credit for the hard work and sacrifice of others. He advanced his own career and burnished his myth with the help of David Petraeus and John McCain. A deeper research into Army records including casualties and vehicle losses will paint an accurate picture of the debacle, not mythical accounts.

The truth about Tal Afar is that a major cover up has allowed an unqualified officer to occupy one of the most critical positions in our national security apparatus.

According to the Brave Rifles report, 2nd Squadron lost 8 men and 12 soldiers from other units who joined them in the fight and 38 friendly Iraqi soldiers and 6 Iraqi policemen also perished.** (p. 147). According to the Special Forces officer, however, losses actually included:

Approximately 250 killed in action, including 70 to 85 American troops* and approximately 165 to 180 friendly Iraqi forces

1 HH47 Chinook helicopter

4 Blackhawk helicopters

4 M1A2 Abrams Tanks

30 Bradley Fighting Vehicles

Heavy losses of 5-ton trucks and fuel tankers

McMaster’s reputation for arrogance and incompetence filtered down to the rank and file as well.

Mathew Bocian served in the U.S. Army as a cavalry scout with 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry (Stryker). He deployed to Mosul and Tal Afar in 2004 and to Baghdad for The Surge in 2007. He has written a book about it, The Ghosts of Tal Afar. Bocian’s unit was in Tal Afar when McMaster’s 3rd ACR showed up. He had this to say about McMaster’s leadership:

[T]he regiment’s senior leadership thought they were hot-shit, and would teach us a thing or two. I was in a Squadron-wide officer call when good old H.R himself told the room not to worry – the real cav[alry] was here, and they brought the “big guns”. We deterred Hajj [the insurgents] by going into town every day – yes, even Al Sarai [the insurgent stronghold] because if you didn’t, Hajj took more and more control of the town; they were trying to drive a wedge between U.S. Forces and the Iraqi populous [sic]

3rd ACR’s idea of deterrence was to park a few tanks up at the castle and occasionally shoot main gun rounds over Al Sarai and into the empty desert. Yeah. That worked for all of about an hour until the Hajj (who are pretty fucking smart) got wise to the scheme and weren’t afraid of the sound. All that did was keep the residents in their homes so the only folks who went out were the bad dudes.

Not long after we returned to Mosul to take part of the Brigade’s new offensive to seal off all of Mosul, 3rd ACR launched an offensive of their own. They had opted to “assess” the situation for a week and had neglected certain parts of Tal’Afar – including Al Sarai. They lost a tank, a Bradley and an M-88 recovery vehicle in that initial push – and taking heavy fire and multiple casualties, were repelled by the Hajj, who had entrenched themselves in the area given plenty of time to prepare.

I don’t know how many soldiers 3rd ACR lost, or had wounded in Tal’Afar, but I look back in disgrace and wonder if their leadership had listened and were less cocky, if their losses could have been fewer.

Other sources I interviewed say that McMaster has very few admirers in the general officer corps and was considered to be just another typical “political general.”

He has not been given any battle commands since he was promoted to general. They say he would never have made general rank without the help of David Petraeus. He was passed over twice for promotion to flag rank, and didn’t get his first star until Army Secretary Peter Geren, a former Democratic congressman from Texas, took the unprecedented step of pulling General Petraeus from a combat command and appointing him to chair the Army’s promotion board, which Geren also hand-picked. Petraeus, of whom it has been said, “throughout his military career had worn his ambition like a strong aftershave,” saw to McMaster’s star. Then-Army Chief of Staff General George Casey concluded, “If McMaster weren’t such a smart-ass, he would have been promoted a long time ago.”

General officers require Senate confirmation both for appointment and advancement. McMaster’s Senate champion was and still is Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). McCain advocated replacing Flynn with McMaster. McCain described McMaster as “a man of genuine intellect, character and ability.”

To obtain his fourth star, McMaster must please his Senate overlords and their allies in the military — i.e. the establishment. This virtually guarantees a NSC advisor beholden to the swamp. In a recent interview with Breitbart News, Erik Prince, founder of the military contractor Blackwater, said:

[T]he danger of appointing a serving general, a three-star general that wants to be a four-star general, means that that general will always go with his service. If it’s a long-retired guy that’s not worried about a promotion, I think it’s easier to give objective advice. That’s the danger of having a serving officer as the national security director.

It is worth noting that Trump had consulted Prince extensively regarding Afghanistan strategy and Prince had been invited to join him at Camp David deliberations, but McMaster allegedly took him off the list at the last minute.

It seems the height of irony that Iraqi forces are now entering Tal Afar again, this time with Iran-backed militias — responsible for killing many Americans in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Meanwhile, the “Hero of Tal Afar” counsels President Trump to certify Iran in compliance with a nuclear deal composed in secret that was never signed and never consented to by the Senate. On the home front he resists efforts to declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, emboldening groups like CAIR, that have joined with other subversive groups in their efforts to destabilize our nation.

My source concludes: “With McMaster now as National Security Advisor, maybe some aspiring young Army officer will write a sequel to McMaster’s book and call it, LtGen McMaster: Dereliction of Duty II. We can only hope General Mattis and General Kelly, along with a very distinguished group on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, give our President competent and honest military advice and guidance, not tainted by ‘what’s in it for me’ from a man who is a legend only in his own mind.”

_____________________________________________

James Simpson is an economist, businessman and investigative journalist. His latest book is The Red Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebook.

*The Special Forces flag officer who served as the primary source for this article acknowledged after the article was initially published that he had previously provided incorrect casualty figures from the Battle of Tal Afar. The resulting errors in this article have been corrected and where they have been corrected there now appears an asterisk (*).

**The Iraqi casualties from the Brave Rifles report were not stated in the original article but in light of the flag officer’s now-corrected information, we have included those figures.

Cops: Woman Called 911 Over Meth Quality

/0 Comments/in , /by

A Montana woman called 911 to report that she had purchased some “bad meth,” adding that the drug left a “bad taste in her mouth,” according to police.

A Great Falls Police Department officer was dispatched Friday afternoon to the home of Margery Ann Dayrider, 33, who had dialed cops to report having a bad reaction to meth she had injected . . .

As first reported by the Great Falls Tribune, Dayrider told the cop, “I do meth three times a day everyday and have never had this reaction before.” Dayrider said that she and her boyfriend had purchased the drug the night before and that she injected herself at 9 AM, 11 AM, and 3 PM. (Read more from “Cops: Woman Called 911 Over Meth Quality” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Jury Refuses to Convict in Bundy Ranch Standoff

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Ken Ritter. A federal jury in Las Vegas refused Tuesday to convict four defendants who were retried on accusations that they threatened and assaulted federal agents by wielding assault weapons in a 2014 confrontation to stop a cattle roundup near the Nevada ranch of states’ rights figure Cliven Bundy.

In a stunning setback to federal prosecutors planning to try the Bundy family patriarch and two adult sons later this year, the jury acquitted Ricky Lovelien and Steven Stewart of all 10 charges, and delivered not-guilty findings on most charges against Scott Drexler and Eric Parker.

More than 30 defendants’ supporters in the courtroom broke into applause after Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro ordered Lovelien and Stewart freed immediately and set Wednesday morning hearings to decide if Parker and Drexler should remain jailed pending a government decision whether to seek a third trial. (Read more from “Jury Refuses to Convict in Bundy Ranch Standoff” HERE)

___________________________________________________

“Fed’s Taking it Personally”: Decide to Retry Two Defendants a THIRD Time

By Robert Anglen. Federal prosecutors who didn’t succeed in the Bundy Ranch standoff trial will retry and retry again.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Las Vegas confirmed Wednesday it will go back to court for the third time in an attempt to convict two men accused of taking up arms against federal agents.

Less than 24 hours earlier, a jury had acquitted two standoff defendants and dismissed the most serious charges against two others. Now federal prosecutors say they will retry the men next month on outstanding weapons and assault charges.

The move pushes back the trials for 11 other defendants in the 2014 Bundy Ranch standoff, including Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his sons Ammon and Ryan Bundy, who have spent 18 months in prison while awaiting their court date. (Read more about the Bundy ranch stan off acquittals HERE).

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

WARNING: The Race War Is Being Engineered

/0 Comments/in , , /by

[Editor’s note: Restoring Liberty does NOT agree with everything below. However, the author raises a number of legitimate concerns. We’ve suggested repeatedly that the supposed racial divisions and antifa riots are contrived, hyped by the MSM and likely fomented by powerful factions that hope to profit from the resulting chaos]. The corporate deadstream media continues to stoke the flames of an alleged brewing race war. Is there any truth to this tale or are we witnessing something much more nefarious?

There is a division brewing. At least, that’s what the “mainstream” media would have you believe. If you have been plugged into the deadstream corporate media (TV, Internet, magazines, etc.) over the last year, you would likely have spent at least some of your time being afraid of the following:

– ISIS
– Russia
– ISIS
– North Korea

Now you can add white supremacists and anti-fascists to the list of things that should keep you up at night. This is not to say that any of these topics are completely irrelevant. What I am getting at is the fact that the corporate media (which is owned by a handful of corporations) have the power to influence your thinking and, as a result, keep you afraid or angry. The media (and the people behind it) are working together to create conflict. To stir the pot. To stoke the flames. In reality, for the average American these issues truly represent a small slice of the issues which are of immediate threat to their freedoms and livelihood.

While I believe all people should oppose low-level, primitive thinking such as racism and bigotry, we should be hesitant to let these stories and pundits play on our fears and push us into violent action. Also, we should remain skeptical and be aware there are infiltrators and provocateurs involved with promoting these fears. That is what I would like to focus on today. We must consider the possibility that the threat of both white supremacists and violent left-wing activists is being blown out of proportion to manipulate the public’s emotional state. A second possibility: These incidents of violence are being provoked by a State agency in order to create further conflict and justification of police state measures in response to this faux race war.

As I first wrote in December 2016, the purpose of a Donald Trump’s presidency is to radically divide the American people. He has not only emboldened conservatives who grew tired of mainstream politics and neoconservatism, but his actions and words have lit a fire under the extreme right wing of American politics. This extreme, or “Alt”-Right includes white nationalists, white supremacists, anti-Semites, former anarcho-capitalists and libertarians, and others who do not quite fit in with mainstream (or even independent) politics. Of course, not all Donald Trump supporters are racist bigots and not all those who choose to identify as Alt-Right should be considered racist bigots. Still, there is no denying that Trump’s policies and speeches have given the bigots a glimmer of hope that their ideas might become mainstream.

In reaction to the rise of racist factions of the Alt-Right, we are seeing the growth of the American AntiFascist Action (Antifa) movement. Despite the reports from the corporate media, this tactic has historical roots. Since at least the 1930s, anti-fascists and anti-racists took the streets of Europe to fight actual fascists. In America 2017, the Antifa activities have tended to focus on pro-Donald Trump rallies, freedom of speech rallies, and the growing American Alt-Right.

The purpose of this piece is not to argue that white supremacists do not pose a danger or that Antifa has not used violence. The purpose is to punch holes in the idea that these conflicts over race and identity are 100% organic. To be fair, there have been previous reports warning about the dangers of white supremacists. Specifically, in a joint intelligence bulletin, issued May 10 and obtained by Foreign Policy, the DHS and the FBI said white supremacist groups had carried out more violent attacks than any other domestic extremist group over the past 16 years. The report also said the agencies expected more attacks. There’s also a 2006 bulletin warning law enforcement about infiltration by white supremacists. Unfortunately, organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center often lump these legitimate dangers together with warnings about peaceful “anti-government” activists and organizers.

The white supremacists are not the only group striking fear into the heart of some Americans. An online petition calling on the White House to designate Antifa a terror group has been signed over 300,000 times. “It is time for the pentagon to be consistent in its actions – and just as they rightfully declared ISIS a terror group, they must declare AntiFa a terror group – on the grounds of principle, integrity, morality, and safety,” the petition reads. Unless we are to assume that all 305,000 signatures were done by their white supremacist nemeses, it would seem Antifa’s tactics are opposed by a few hundred thousand Americans.

These two groups — the right-wing racists and the left-wing anti-fascists who fight them – -are quickly becoming the focal point of the latest drama in middle America. The corporate media has done a hell of a job running round-the-clock news coverage of these white supremacists and Antifa. Not only do these groups represent a small minority of Americans, but, as I wrote in my last piece, there is a great danger in the FBI (or other government agency) infiltrating Alt-Right, white supremacist groups and anti-fascist groups for the purpose of causing or encouraging violence.

“There is a real danger of masking up while in the moments of conflict , not only from law enforcement , but also the possibility of hidden white nationalist who infiltrate to cause disruption or to make antifa conflicts worse,” scott crow, former Antifa organizer and author of the upcoming Setting Sights: Histories and Reflections on Community Armed Self Defense, told Activist Post. “We have seen it online with fake antifa sites calling for fake violence.”

The desire to protect one’s identity is understandable, but it also opens the door to infiltrators who only desire to initiate chaos and violence without any purpose or message. Police masquerading as black bloc activists have been exposed at the 2001 G8 Summit in Genoa, Italy, and at protests in 2007 in Quebec, and police posed as activists to infiltrate the Occupy movement.

“There is always a cost benefit analysis that needs to be assessed before any strategy or tactic is used,” crow warned. “These questions have to be answered by those participating in the streets at any given time, and sometimes its absolutely necessary and infiltration does happen.”

We must also consider the infiltration of the right-wing groups, especially the more extreme racist and supremacist groups. While there were Internet rumors of Crowds on Demand organizing paid protesters for the Charlottesville march, those allegations are not factual. There was another story from the website True Pundit which claims that anonymous FBI sources confirmed that federal confidential informants were responsible for the violence at the Charlottesville march. Unfortunately, anonymous government sources are not credible. We do not have to imagine the entire rally to be fake to understand the danger of provocateurs. As the Alt-Right and their supporters begin to don masks and helmets it is likely that police or private actors will infiltrate for their own purposes.

Believe it or not, there is actually a historical precedent for provocateurs playing a role in riots and protests directly related to racism. By studying the Central Intelligence Agency’s role in promoting riots and racial division in Guyana one might gain insight into how the CIA (or other state agency) could operate domestically. (For more from the author of “WARNING: The Race War Is Being Engineered” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan Surrender Unconditionally

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Once again, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan have demonstrated how good they are at surrendering to the unarmed.

Even if Republicans had 80 percent majorities in Congress along with the White House, they would find an excuse for giving Democrats everything they want on the debt ceiling and the upcoming budget bill. The reason is simple: They have no interest in conservative governance. They love giving Democrats what they want, even if they have the power to pass a good bill and even if they’d win a stare-down over a shutdown.

McConnell fights the doctors, not the illness

Earlier this week, McConnell wanted Democrats to understand that he will not let them try to get him to win. Unconditional surrender is the only way forward:

“There is zero chance — no chance — we won’t raise the debt ceiling. No chance. America is not going to default, and we’ll get the job done in conjunction with the secretary of the Treasury.”

There are a couple of important observations about this statement:

1. McConnell is right that there is zero chance of default. As I’ve noted before, our revenue stands at about $3.4 trillion a year, and interest on the debt is $270 billion. We have enough funds to deal with the interest and all the other vital functions of government without issuing any more debt. Unfortunately, this is not what McConnell meant by not defaulting. He is using the other side’s false talking point about default.

2. The only way we will actually default and, in the long run, have trouble paying interest payments, is not if we fail to raise the debt ceiling but if we fail to lower the debt floor. Why is McConnell making the debt ceiling the problem rather than the actual debt?

3. Why would anyone preemptively tell Democrats they will give them anything they want because they are so scared of their obstruction, even when they are in the minority? Putting the repeal of the filibuster aside for a moment, yes, it’s true that Republicans don’t have 60 votes in the Senate. But neither do Democrats! And they don’t have the White House, the House, or a majority vote in the Senate with the leverage to threaten reforms to the filibuster.

The answer to all of these questions is simple: Republicans don’t share our values and goals. Whereas Democrats view brinksmanship as leverage to advance their goals, Republicans view it as the plague to be avoided precisely because they have no interest in our goals. They could have 99 Senate seats, and they would still find an excuse not to do the right thing.

Fear of government shutdown is a phony excuse to perpetuate the status quo

And so it goes with the government funding bill. Republicans have an opportunity to get up in front of the people and declare their priorities in what they plan to fund in the budget and what they plan not to fund. They should fund border security and missile defense while defunding Planned Parenthood, sanctuary cities, refugee resettlement, and other harmful aspects of government. Americans care more about these issues than a 17 percent shutdown of the bureaucracies.

Yet Republicans, in their insular thinking and their broken political barometer, believe that Americans care about what the D.C. media cares about — a government shutdown — and that Democrats would always win a stare-down. It’s kind of like their fear of the monument issue, where every poll shows super-majority opposition to tearing down monuments, yet Republicans are running scared. It’s why they have no interest in fighting sanctuary cities, fighting for free market health care reform, reclaiming power from the courts, or pushing voter ID.

Take a look at what Paul Ryan said about a government shutdown:

“I don’t think a government shutdown is necessary and I don’t think most people want to see a government shutdown, ourselves included,”

Notice the difference in tone between GOP leaders and Chuck Schumer. Democrats will pound the lectern and declare their beliefs and assert their red lines on policy, even when they are extremely unpopular. Yet Republican leaders sound more like cable commentators opining on the state of play with a government shutdown, refusing to fight for their policies.

That is because they don’t have any policies other than pursuing power as an end to itself.

Which brings us to President Trump

Trump was correct to call out McConnell and Ryan for sabotaging the agenda on the debt ceiling and the budget funding over the border wall, which, by the way, is required by current law. Sadly, we are not going to change this leadership until they are defeated or we start a new party. But Trump can fix the way his administration behaves. Guess who was standing next to McConnell while he made his comments on the debt ceiling? Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. Trump’s own Treasury secretary has been running around for months calling for what Trump himself is now repudiating. And he has been pressuring conservatives to capitulate. So rather than his administration uniting behind his supposed agenda, his personnel are actually fueling the very behavior from Ryan and McConnell that Trump has rebuked. This is absurd.

The president needs to double down from yesterday’s tweets and get his administration singing in the same key. He needs to create a list of red lines in the budget, red lines that, if crossed, will trigger his veto pen. He should make some form of free market health care reform the condition for raising the debt ceiling, because health care is the largest driver of the debt. Then he must fully support candidates who are willing to have his back and not support McConnell puppets like Luther Strange.

Overall, the president must remember that Twitter is not a policy outcome, especially when almost all his advisers and cabinet members are rowing in the opposite direction. He should remember who supported his campaign agenda and who opposed it and stop banishing supporters while embracing opponents.

As the party stands now, there is not much Trump can do about congressional leaders. But he can consolidate his own message and behavior by bringing his own administration on board. (For more from the author of “Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan Surrender Unconditionally” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sheriff Joe May Run for Senate – Perhaps to Punish RINOs McCain, Flake, Ryan, Others for Criticizing Trump’s Pardon

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Washington Examiner. After receiving President Trump’s first pardon, Joe Arpaio’s plans have gone from possible prison to book-writing, speeches and potentially another run for office in Arizona, with Sen. Jeff Flake’s seat one opportunity he is eyeing.

The former Maricopa County sheriff told the Washington Examiner he’s upset at negative reaction to the Friday pardon, and that he feels Republican politicians are insufficiently supportive of the president, who he calls a great man.

“I could run for mayor, I could run for legislator, I could run for Senate,” Arpaio said Monday. One particular race, however, is likely to gain significant attention: the GOP primary next year facing Flake, R-Ariz., a forceful Trump critic. (Read more from “Sheriff Joe May Run for Senate – Perhaps to Punish RINOs McCain, Flake, Ryan, Others for Criticizing Trump’s Pardon” HERE)

__________________________________________

Schumer, Ryan Criticize Trump for Arpaio Pardon

By Emily Goldberg. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) sharply criticized President Donald Trump’s Friday pardon of Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his directive to halt recruitment of transgender troops Friday — just as Hurricane Harvey was barreling towards the Texas coastline.

“As millions of people in TX and LA are prepping for the Hurricane, the President is using the cover of the storm to pardon a man who violated a court’s order to stop discriminating against Latinos and Ban courageous transgender men and women from serving in our nation’s Armed Forces,” Schumer posted in a series of tweets.

“Then he ran to Camp David. The only reason to do these right now is to use the cover of Hurricane Harvey to avoid scrutiny. So sad, so weak.”

In a separate tweet, Schumer blasted Arpaio, known for his aggressive treatment of Latinos in Arizona.

“Joe Arpaio ignored the courts of law in order to systematically target Latinos in AZ. The definition of racism and bigotry,” Schumer posted. (Read more from “Schumer, Ryan Criticize Trump for Arpaio Pardon” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Time to Reverse Republican-Protected Abortion With the Life at Conception Act

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Roe v. Wade decision struck down dozens of state abortion laws when I was a college freshman. It was a 7-2 decision that prevailed only with the help of three Republicans appointed to the Supreme Court by Richard Nixon, including Chief Justice Warren Burger. Otherwise the Texas abortion statute would have been upheld by a 5-4 prolife decision, and the other states would have been allowed to make their own abortion laws instead of obeying the Supreme Court’s abortion law.

Roe’s guardians against reversal over the ensuing decades were two Justices (Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day O’Connor) appointed by Ronald Reagan and one (David Souter) appointed by George H.W. Bush. Pro-abortion Democrats on the Court never broke a sweat.

I would have been thrilled to see the Constitution amended to protect unborn life, but it hasn’t happened in 44 years and that was more than 61 million dead babies ago. Are we willing to let another 61 million die before we end legalized baby-killing in America?

“We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins,” wrote Justice Harry Blackmun on behalf of his colleagues in the Court’s majority. And they didn’t. He wrote that “the judiciary, at this point [1973] in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.”

And yet they admitted elsewhere in the same decision that “if this suggestion of personhood is established, [Roe’s] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.” That is the Amendment that forbids states to deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.

Who can legally establish the personhood of unborn children, then, if not the Supreme Court? Well, Section 5 of the 14th Amendment says Congress has the “power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this [14th Amendment] article.” Those provisions include, in Section 1, the guarantees of due process and equal protection of the laws to “any person.”

The United States Congress, therefore, by a simple majority of both chambers, may establish the personhood of an unborn child. It’s not necessary to amend the Constitution. It’s not necessary to overturn Roe v. Wade. It’s only necessary to take the Roe majority at its word, and establish the personhood of unborn children – legislatively – from conception. Then enforce the 14th Amendment guarantees of due process and equal protection.

S. 231, the Life at Conception Act of 2017, was introduced in January by Sen. Rand Paul. It declares “that the right to life guaranteed by the Constitution is vested in each human being at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning, or other moment at which an individual comes into being.”

If you have a Senator – Republican or Democrat – who claims to be prolife but isn’t on the list of 11 co-sponsors (Google it), you might have a fake pro-lifer on your hands. This is the time of year when they’re going home and meeting the folks. Ask them if they’re fake. Maybe they’re not, in which case – what are they waiting for?

The bill has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, chaired by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). Its Republican members include Orrin Hatch of Utah, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Ted Cruz of Texas, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Jeff Flake of Arizona. None are co-sponsors of S. 231. What are their intentions?

Alexander Mooney (R-West Virginia) introduced an equivalent bill in the House of Representatives, H.R. 681, “to implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person.” It declares that the right to life is vested in each human being.

H.R. 681 defines “human person” and “human being” as “each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization, cloning or other moment at which an individual member of the human species comes into being.”

The House bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee, and from there to the Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) is chairman of that subcommittee. Four other Republicans are members: Ron DeSantis of Florida, Trent Franks of Arizona, Karen Handel of Georgia and Louie Gohmert of Texas. King, Franks and Gohmert are listed as H.R. 681 co-sponsors. This is a solidly prolife subcommittee. When are we going to see some movement on H.R. 681?

I see my own Congressman’s name listed as an H.R. 681 co-sponsor. Now I wish he would have a talk with my two invisible prolife Senators.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.