The Front Page Cover
~ Featuring ~
Procter & Gamble's Identity-Politics Pandering
by Michelle Malkin
 Unpacking the Unmasking Scandal 
Almost immediately after Donald Trump won the election, Democrats and their cohorts in the mainstream media began pushing the narrative of a Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy. The Leftmedia ran story after story of leaked information from various government sources, spun in such a way as to imply that it was only a matter of time before Trump was found guilty of colluding with Vladimir Putin. Some of the leaked information contained the names of Trump campaign personnel, with the biggest and most damaging being that of former National Security Advisor Mike Flynn. He was forced to resign, but questions emerged about the intelligence community and "unmasking" after Trump tweeted that Barack liar-nObama had "wiretapped" his phones.
          Suddenly, questions were being asked about this unfamiliar practice. What was it, and who had the authority to do it? It was learned that the names of Americans who had been incidentally caught in intelligence surveillance of a foreign individual were to be redacted in order to protect their Fourth Amendment rights. Unmasking was the practice where special authorization was given by the appropriate authority to un-redact the name of an American caught up in surveillance. The rules for unmasking were created in 1992 and stipulated that only the director of the CIA could authorize an unmasking after providing a written reason for doing so.
          Fast forward to 2013, when James Clapper, head of the National Security Agency at the time, issued a revision to the procedures for unmasking. The updated procedures effectively made it easier for executive branch officials to unmask the names of lawmakers or congressional staffers who had been caught up in intelligence intercepts overseas. On the surface, it may appear that Clapper's reasoning for the revision was politically motivated, but there's far more to the story that is not nearly so nefarious. To put it simply, Clapper seems to have been primarily motivated by a desire to bring the official unmasking guidelines up to date with the current practice. Over the years, unmasking procedures had unofficially evolved — significantly so since 9/11. Clapper's revision did little to change the widely accepted and practiced unmasking procedures; it simply made those practices official.
          Yet while Clapper's motives may not have been politically calculated, it is clear that the liar-nObama administration took advantage of the rule changes as the number of unmaskings increased significantly following the revisions. As an intelligence official familiar with the rule changes stated, "We understood we were more than doubling the universe of those who could make special requests outside the normal de-minimization process and that language was added to ensure we did not accidentally create downstream leaking of information." And this is where the scandal lies. Who within the liar-nObama administration was responsible for leaking the information "downstream"?  ~The Patriot Post
Dobbs, Napolitano – What GAME Is SESSIONS
Playing? No INDICTMENTS of Criminal DEMS
{} ~ Lou Dobbs points out that new documents are revealing “liar-nObama administration efforts to unmask long before Donald Trump began running for President.”... He describes how pathological liar and former DNI James Clapper “revised government rules back in 2013, according to John Solomon, reporting in ‘The Hill.’ Clapper made it easier for the executive branch to unmask names of lawmakers or congressional staffers caught up in intelligence intercepts overseas.” Dobbs brings in Judge Andrew Napolitano who believes the changing of the unmasking rules may have been done for political purposes, not for national security, which, if it could be proven, would be a felony. He takes the revised rules in combination with another rule change initiated by Loretta Lynch at the behest of Hussein liar-nObama to tremendously broaden the distribution of unmasked information...
Debt Ceiling Debate Charade Begins, Again
by Bob Adelmann
{} ~ Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin warned Congress in a letter sent Friday that they had precious little time to raise the federal government’s debt ceiling before his department ran out of money... He even put a date on when that would happen if the ceiling wasn’t raised: "Based upon our available information, I believe that it is critical that Congress act to increase the nation’s borrowing authority by September 29." That’s the day before the end of the government’s fiscal year, and closely coincides with the moment when the Treasury will be unable to pay the government’s bills. The Treasury’s cash balances are expected to drop close to $25 billion in September, dangerously low when compared to the government’s budget of $4 trillion. Mnuchin no doubt is referring to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report released in June that reminded citizens that the debt limit of $19.8 trillion was reached in March and that the Treasury Department has been using “extraordinary measures”...
Citing Indefinite Detention
Without Trial, Sen. Paul Delays NDAA
by Alex Newman
{} ~ In an effort to secure protections for the U.S. Constitution and the inalienable rights of Americans, Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) last week blocked a controversial effort by Senate leaders to advance the giant National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)... The effort is expected to delay the bill until at least September. Big Government-supporting “Republicans in Name Only” (RINOs), globalists, and neocons hoping to rush the bill through without discussion, such as Senator John RINO-McCain (R-Ariz.), were outraged by the move. But among liberty-minded Americans, Paul's efforts to protect constitutional liberties received widespread praise. Specifically, Senator Paul is hoping to add two important amendments to the NDAA. The first one would prohibit the indefinite detention of American citizens by the military or other arms of the federal government, something Congress purported to authorize in 2012 in a previous NDAA. The other amendment being sought by the liberty-minded Kentucky senator deals with the so-called “Authorizations for the Use of Military Force.”...
Kellyanne Conway Could Be Getting A Promotion
by Jason Hopkins
{} ~ White House adviser and former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway could become the next White House communications director, an executive branch source told the The Daily Caller. .. The report came just hours after news broke that former communications director Anthony Scaramucci was let go from his position just 10 days into the job. The White House has not commented on rumors that Conway is being considered for the role of communications director.
Samantha Power Had No Legitimate Reason
To Unmask – So Why The 100s Of Requests?
{} ~ It’s difficult to imagine a situation where a United States UN Ambassador would have a reason to unmask an American citizen in the normal course of their duties... One would expect that legitimate matters important enough to rise to the level of international relations and the attention of the Ambassador would have already resulted in all parties being identified by the security agencies involved prior to being presented to our UN Ambassador. That would probably be the case for legitimate unmaskings, but there’s no indication that any of the hundreds of requests made by Samantha Power in the last year of the liar-nObama regime and her tenure as UN Ambassador are in any way legitimate...
Procter & Gamble's Identity-Politics Pandering
by Michelle Malkin
{} ~ Once upon a time, brothers-in-law William Procter and James Gamble sold candles and soap. Their 19th-century family business grew into the largest consumer goods conglomerate in the world -- launching the most recognizable brands on our grocery shelves, including Tide, Pampers, Crest, Nyquil and Old Spice.

Now, Procter & Gamble want to conquer a new market: identity-politics pandering.

Industry marketers aren't satisfied with selling useful products people want and need. They're hell-bent on transforming successful businesses into social justice busybodies.

P&G's "My Black is Beautiful" campaign released a new video last week called, "The Talk." It "depicts the inevitable conversations many Black parents have with their children about racial bias to prepare, protect and encourage them" across the decades. The ad plays as a kinder, gentler version of Black Lives Matter propaganda, but the underlying themes are the same:

--Little progress has been made since the days of Jim Crow.

--Racial discrimination against black Americans is inevitable.

--Police officers are the enemy.

One especially offensive scene depicts a suburban black mom preparing her bubbly teenage daughter, a new driver, for "when you get pulled over." Not "if," you see, but "when."

As the daughter laughs her off, the mom gravely warns: "This is not about you getting a ticket. This is about you not coming home."

Because racist predator cops lurk on every corner, plotting to kidnap and kill black girls just trying to get to Forever 21? Really, Procter & Gamble?

Way to alienate the millions of law enforcement families -- of all colors -- who purchase your goods.

Naturally, media virtue signalers lavished praise on the corporate virtue signalers. It's a veritable virtue signaling bacchanalia.

Adweek raved that the video was "powerful." The Dallas Morning News cooed:

"The ad is a bold move, and the fact that a Fortune 100 company includes this cultural experience in an ad campaign not only acknowledges that the experience is real, but that it's important to a mass audience."

Yes, racial discrimination still exists. Yes, parents of all races and ethnicities must expose their children to hard truths about people who will judge them by their skin color, eye shape, socioeconomic status, physical stature and IQ instead of by their character.

But if inclusion, diversity and candid talk are such cherished values at P&G, when will they be airing bold videos about the brutal treatment Asian-American high school students have suffered at the hands of bigoted black students in Philadelphia over the past decade?

Or about the targeting of young female Asian Americans and elderly Asian-American crime victims by black gang members in New York and San Francisco?

Or on the long-simmering tensions between blacks and Latinos and blacks and Koreans in Los Angeles?

Or how about decrying the prejudice against multiracial children who are mocked for looking "too white"? Talk to black basketball star, Mike Conley, who was forced to fend off haters this week who attacked his white wife and their biracial 1-year-old baby.

Or how about monstrous, race-based hate crimes such as the kidnapping and assault of a mentally disabled white teenage boy by black thugs in Chicago who tortured him and forced him to declare on video "I love black people" and "F--- white people"?

Or how about the increasingly vile campaigns on college campuses celebrating a "Day Without White People," stereotyping diverse individuals under the dread banner of "white privilege," condemning those who believe in color-blindness as "unethical," and separating minorities into racially segregated dorms, classes and graduation ceremonies in the name of social justice?

P&G should stand for quality consumer goods, not empty Protest & Grumble that divides more than it unites.

If P&G isn't willing to tackle the full complexity of race relations in 21st-century America, perhaps the company should stick to selling diapers instead of filling them.

Views: 14


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center


Facebook & Twitter


BREAKING: Hillary Admits She Was Wrong About ‘Deplorables,’
White Nationalists Only ‘0.15%’ Of U.S. Population

( – Hillary Clinton, the failed liberal presidential candidate who sealed her fate by slamming half of U.S. voters as a load of racist, sexist, xenophobic “deplorables,” just came out and admitted she was wrong, Breitbart reports.

Speaking with Hugh Hewitt on his radio show about her book “What Happened,” he asked her if she actually believes that half of the American population are white nationalists and racists.

“Of the 62.9 million people who voted for President Trump, do you have a number in your mind that you think are actually white nationalist racists of that 62.9 million, a real number?” he asked.

“No, I don’t,” she said.

Still have any doubts? Later in the conversation, Hewitt asked the same question again. “Do you think there are more than a half million, you know, honest-to-God white nationalists running around the United States?”

Clinton: “Probably not, no.”

A white nationalist would like to establish a sovereign country for people of white European heritage, an idea everyone across the political spectrum finds unspeakably intolerable and offensive. Now, the woman who declared that this was the desire of more than half of Americans is saying that virtually nobody wants it. On both counts, she’s completely wrong.

There’s no doubt that Clinton is probably going to try running again for president in 2020 – if she’s even alive that long – and might be trying to absolve her guilt and pander to all those “undecideds” who instantly went MAGA the second she blasted them as no-good racist deplorables for not voting Democrat.

However, Clinton did later admit that there were more white nationalists in America than she had thought. Expressing her worries that the internet and the presidency of Trump is giving them a voice and a platform, she hinted that under her iron scepter, she will attempt to silence them.

“Unfortunately, their views, which used to be quite beyond the mainstream, you know, have a much broader audience now, because you know, of being online and having outlets and media presence that can promote those attitudes,” she said.

How many white nationalists are there in the United States? That’s a question with troublingly few answers, since for some mysterious reason the liberal mainstream media – even though it claims all the time that white supremacy is on the rise – hasn’t actually bothered to take polls and just ask people whether they are white nationalists.

Actually, there’s a simple answer to that. If such a poll were to be taken, our bet is that liberals would be very disappointed to discover that almost nobody is actually a white nationalist, and so there would be no way they could continue scaring people with those fears. A tactic Clinton has apparently given up on.

Left-wingers are entirely convinced that some vague but large majority of people who say they aren’t racists or white nationalists, actually share a lot of views with them – which is why Nazi and white supremacist have become interchangeable with Republican and libertarian.

An article by Newsweek, which polled around 5,000 in order address this very question, came up with this response:

About 70 percent of respondents strongly agreed that people of different races should be “free to live wherever they choose” and that “all races are equal,” and 89 percent agreed that all races should be treated equally. At the same time, 31 percent of respondents said they strongly or somewhat agreed that the country needs to “protect and preserve its White European heritage,” while 34 percent strongly or somewhat disagreed and 29 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed.

Reality is, it’s a little true that some Americans do have overlapping views with white nationalists, but the overwhelming majority of respondents STRONGLY believe that the races should be free, are equal, and should be treated equally. Sounds like none of these respondents would be joining a lynch mob or waging a second Holocaust any time soon – trying to equate the preservation of white heritage with support for slavery and genocide is obviously one of the Left’s biggest lies, and the very reason why 39 percent of people in this same survey believe white people are under attack.

So Clinton changes her mind, and now says she believes less than one percent of the American population are white nationalists – did she believe there were even LESS than that during the campaign trail? Either way, she’s either just lying or plain stupid.


© 2017   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service