TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Slouching Towards Anti-Semitism 
by Arnold Ahlert
.
Massive Iranian Missile Buildup 
Sparks Fear of ‘Second Holocaust’ 
by Adam Kredo
{ freebeacon.com } ~ Iran is undertaking a massive buildup of its ballistic missile program, sparking fears of a "second Holocaust"... amid sensitive international negotiations that could see the Trump administration legitimize Iranian missiles capable of striking Israel, according to multiple sources familiar with ongoing diplomatic talks. As the Trump administration and European allies continue discussions aimed at fixing a range of flaws in the landmark Iran nuclear deal, sources familiar with the progression of these talks say the United States is caving to European demands limiting restrictions on Iran's ballistic missile program. While the Trump administration went into the negotiations with a hardline stance on cutting off Iran's ballistic missile program, it appears the United States is moving closer in line with European positions that would only regulate a portion of the missiles... http://freebeacon.com/national-security/massive-iranian-missile-bui... 
.
Remote-access software 
found on popular voting machines
by wnd.com 
{ wnd.com } ~ Despite alleged Russian hacking of the 2016 presidential election, no evidence has been produced showing Moscow’s hackers – or anyone else... being able to remotely access and change votes on any of the 350,000 electronic voting machines used in the U.S. Americans have largely accepted that the machines are safe from hackers because they’ve repeatedly been told the devices are “air-gapped” – isolated from all unsecured networks, including the internet. That is untrue, according to a New York Times Magazine investigation last month that described Election Systems & Software, the largest manufacturer of voting machines, selling hardware with election-management systems pre-installed with remote-access software. The company also is said to have encouraged past purchasers to install the software on machines that did not currently have it so ES&S technicians could do troubleshooting and maintenance without having to be onsite...  http://www.wnd.com/2018/03/remote-access-software-found-on-popular-...
.
The Second Era of No Decision 
by Matthew Continetti
{ freebeacon.com } ~ I had to travel to Silicon Valley to be reminded of how much our time resembles the late nineteenth century... Visiting the Stanford campus this week on a Hoover Institution media fellowship, I spoke to professors who view D.C. politics from a distance both critical and geographic. I was startled by how often the Gilded Age came up, unprompted, in my conversations. It was helpful to be reminded that, while the Beltway is obsessed with personalities—Stormy Daniels, Gary Cohn, Robert Mueller, Jared Kushner, and above all Donald Trump—the structural forces that have brought us to this moment are more important and more enduring. Niall Ferguson mentioned a lecture he first delivered in 2016 on the five ingredients of a populist backlash. Recalling the Gilded Age of robber barons, bimetallism, the Panic of 1873, and Yellow Journalism, Ferguson pointed to income inequality, immigration, elite corruption, financial crisis, and demagogues as commonalities between that distant era and our own. In an excellent 2017 presentation, D.C. consultant Bruce Mehlman noted further parallels. Both epochs had massive changes in employment. During the Gilded Age, agricultural jobs disappeared as workers poured into manufacturing. Today, manufacturing jobs go missing as workers enter the service sector. Disruptive technologies and the men who amass fortunes from innovation also define both periods. Then it was Carnegie and steel, Rockefeller and oil, Vanderbilt and railroads. Now it is Sergey Brin, Larry Page, and web search, Jeff Bezos and e-commerce, Mark Zuckerberg and the social network...  http://freebeacon.com/columns/second-era-no-decision/?utm_source=Fr... 
.
AIPAC has a substantive case to make 
to Dems --- but are they capable of doing so?
by Caroline B. Glick 
{ jewishworldreview.com } ~ AIPAC’s mission to cultivate and maintain bipartisan support for Israel in the United States is an important mission... Unfortunately, the messages AIPAC’s leaders delivered during the organization’s annual policy convention this week in Washington indicate that they are at a loss for how to achieve their mission in the contentious political environment now prevalent in post- liar-nObama America. Their befuddlement is not surprising. For the eight years of Barack liar-nObama’s presidency, AIPAC’s leaders showed a consistent inability to understand the challenges they faced. And since they were unable to understand how or why the liar-nObama administration was undermining AIPAC, they couldn’t protect AIPAC or advance its mission during his tenure in office.  At this week’s AIPAC convention, the message emanating from the speeches AIPAC’s senior leadership delivered was that they still don’t get what happened.  And largely as a consequence, they do not understand the challenges they face as an organization moving forward. And again, since they don’t understand what happened, or what is happening, they are incapable of meeting today’s challenges to AIPAC’s mission in a constructive way... http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0318/glick030818.php3
.
The Real Foreign Threat to 
Our Elections is Non-Citizen Voters 
by  J. Christian Adams  
{ news.grabien.com } ~ PIRRO: "Welcome back to “Justice.” My next guest believes the real uninfluence in our elections has been ignored for years... Jay Christian Adams joins me to explain. Christian, thanks for being us tonight. When our government says illegals don’t vote and they tell us that all the time. Is that a lie?" ADAMS: "It’s certainly not true because I can give name after name after name of foreign citizens in Pennsylvania, Virginia, Texas, California, who have been posting ballots in federal elections. At least the years in federal prison when an illegal registers and votes." https://news.grabien.com/story-j-christian-adams-foreign-influence-... 
VIDEO at the site.
.
.

Slouching Towards Anti-Semitism 

by Arnold Ahlert:  At the 2012 Democrat Party Convention, the effort to reinstate the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital into the party’s platform was met with a chorus of boos loud enough to completely fluster convention chairman and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. After calling for a vote three times, Villaraigosa simply decided the “ayes” were in the majority — an assertion met with another chorus of boos. An anomalous moment?

            Clarifying is more like it. “The California Democratic Party adopted a resolution at their annual convention on Sunday to oppose federal bills intended to thwart the movement to boycott Israel,” The Forward reported on Feb. 28.
            In 1977, Congress passed legislation prohibiting Americans from complying with foreign government-imposed boycotts against nations friendly to the United States. It was supported by the Business Roundtable, American Jewish organizations and Jimmy Carter’s administration. In 2017, Congress sought to update that law with the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, adding international organizations like the United Nations or the EU that might also be inclined to pressure businesses to boycott the Jewish State.
            This effort was aimed at defusing the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which has been the radical Left’s favorite pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel platform, with all the attendant assertions of Israeli “occupation” of Palestinian territories included.
            “Radical” is a key word here. In 2016, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law Assembly Bill 2844. The anti-discrimination law made it clear that California’s government would bar companies that engage in discrimination against any sovereign nation from doing business with the state. Sec. 2. (c) of the law specifically barred discrimination against “the nation and people of Israel.” The State Senate approved the bill by a vote of 34 to 1, and the State Assembly approved it by a vote of 69 to 1.
            Eighteen months later, these same Democrats opposed federal legislation similar to the bill they had passed almost unanimously. Thus, what used to be “radical” leftist politics is now mainstream Democrats Party politics in the Golden State — all the attendant anti-Semitic implications included.
            Is it just Golden State Democrats? The ACLU branded versions of the act making its way through both chambers of Congress as anti-First Amendment, despite the reality that nothing prevents anyone from expressing any opinion about Israel. Yet that was all the necessary cover for Democrats fearful of their increasingly leftist, pro-BDS base. New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand withdrew her support for the bill, and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth dinky-Warren hedged, insisting, “The boycott is wrong, but I think outlawing protected free speech activity violates our basic Constitution.” Democrat Senators Chris Murphy (CT) and Tammy Duckworth (IL) and Rep. Joe Kennedy (MA) were also vacillating with regard to the legislation.
            And not just that legislation. Last August, Senate Minority Leader Chuck clown-Schumer (D-NY) announced he’d co-sponsor the Taylor Force Act, named after Army veteran Taylor Force, who was murdered by a Palestinian while touring Israel. The act would stop American taxpayers from subsidizing the Palestinian Authority (PA) until it ended its reprehensible habit of providing terrorists freed from prison with a government job and a salary — one that is higher if their crime is more heinous.
          The consummate no-brainer? Four Democrat senators, Chris Murphy (CT), Tom Udall (NM), Jeff Merkley (OR) and Corey Booker (NJ), voted to kill it in committee. And while the bill passed overwhelmingly in the House, it has yet to be voted on in the Senate.
            Why are many Democrats embracing such hostility toward Israel? According to a poll conducted by Nielsen Scarborough, 56% of their constituents back economic sanctions and other get-tough measures against Israel, and 72% believe America unfairly favors Israel over the Palestinians.
            Moreover, a Pew poll released in January reveals that since 2001, the share of Democrats sympathizing more with Israel has declined 11 points, from 38% to 27%. The decline among Democrat Millennials is even more pronounced: Approximately 27% of Millennials now say they are more sympathetic to the Palestinians than Israel, compared to only 9% in 2006.
            The party’s schism is best revealed by the split between supporters of liar-Hillary Clinton and commie-Bernie Sanders. liar-Clinton’s supporters favored Israel over the Palestinians, 47% to 27%. commie-Sanders supporters favored the Palestinians over Israel, 39% to 33%.
            Since commie-Sanders supporters tend to be younger, Democrat politicians are apparently becoming more attuned to their social justice warrior sensibilities. Sensibilities increasingly aligned with the contemptuous notion that Israel is an apartheid state engaged in Palestinian genocide.
            Yet Israel is only part of the dynamic, or perhaps better described as a useful distraction for the increasing levels of progressive-supported anti-Semitism per se. Nothing speaks to this reality better than leftist support for Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who once called Judaism a “gutter religion.”
            In a major speech on Feb. 25, Farrakhan remained true to his worldview, asserting that Jews were “the mother and father of apartheid,” and declaring that “when you want something in this world, the Jew holds the door.
            CNN’s Jake Tapper sidestepped a media-imposed blackout and covered the speech, noting that despite the “inherent” anti-Semitism  and anti-homosexual comments expressed by Farrakhan, “several leaders of the Women’s March are supporters of Farrakhan and have not condemned him.” He also leveled the same accusation against members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
            The proverbial shoe fits. One of Women’s March organizers was Linda Sarsour, who has long supported Farrakhan. She once insisted “nothing is creepier than Zionism,” and justified terrorism as a response to a “racist, supremacist, violent [Israeli] regime” that views Palestinians as “less than human.
            Another organizer, Tamika Mallory, criticized by Tapper for attending Farrakhan’s rant, was “defended” by Bronx rapper and political activist Mysonne — who insisted Farrakhan was right to blame Jews for the “violence, control, pain and destruction” they have imposed on black people.
            Mallory herself, who received a shout-out from Farrakhan at the rally, posted a number of tweets insisting she was the victim of “bullying.”
          The Congressional Black Caucus? At least seven Democrats — Reps. mad-Maxine Waters (CA), Barbara Lee (CA), Danny Davis (IL), Andre Carson (IN), scum-Keith Ellison (MN), Gregory Meeks (NY) and and Al Green (TX) — have attended meetings with Farrakhan.
            The same Congressional Black Caucus that buried a 2005 photo of Farrakhan with Barack liar-nObama.
         

 Thus, the paper asserts, the Democrat Party’s “reliable support for Israel looks to be a thing of the past.
          Columnist Dennis Prager is even more assertive, declaring, “The day America abandons Israel will be the beginning of the end of America as we know it.”                  
                                                                                                                                                                      Not America, Mr. Prager. The Democrat Party. One on the verge of a moral meltdown fueled by identity politics, in all their tribalist — and burgeoning anti-Semitic — glory.    ~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/5461 9-slouching-towards-anti-semitism

Views: 22

Comment

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

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Henry Payne

Political Cartoons by Mike Lester

ALERT ALERT

Newt Says What The Rest Of Us Are Thinking:
It’s Time To Throw Peter Strzok In Jail

Disgraced FBI special agent Peter Strzok, a senior member of the bureau who gained notoriety in recent months over his anti-Trump text messages to a colleague, was grilled for nearly 10 hours during a joint congressional committee hearing on Thursday.

At issue was Strzok’s anti-Trump texts to former FBI lawyer and lover Lisa Page that coincided with his leading of the investigations into both former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server scandal and the alleged Trump/Russia 2016 election collusion, as well as his involvement in the subsequent Robert Mueller special counsel probe.

The hearing proved to be a heated battle, as Strzok displayed an arrogant smugness in defiance of pointed questions from Republicans that he largely danced around, while Democrats sought to upend and undermine the entire hearing with a plethora of interruptions, parliamentary maneuvers and outright praise for the man who helped let Clinton off the hook while ferociously targeting Trump.

Former House speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was less than impressed with Strzok’s performance and cooperation in the hearing and suggested during an appearance on Fox Business that the FBI agent should be held in contempt of Congress.

“I think they have to move to hold him in contempt and throw him in jail,” Gingrich said of Congress and Strzok.

“This is a person who is willfully standing up and refusing to appear as a congressional witness and he was a government employee at the time,” he continued.

“He has every obligation to inform the legislative branch, and I don’t think they have any choice except to move a motion of contempt because he is fundamentally — and so is his girlfriend (Page) — they’re both fundamentally in violation of the entire constitutional process,” he added.

Page had been subpoenaed to appear before Congress on Wednesday but refused to appear, saying she’d been unable to review relevant documents prior to the scheduled hearing, a closed-door hearing that has since been rescheduled for Friday.

Gingrich was not the only one who thought Strzok deserved to be held in contempt of Congress, as House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte informed Strzok that he remained at risk of such during the hearing, according to The Daily Caller.

That warning from Goodlatte came after Strzok had refused to answer a straightforward question posed by House Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy, regarding how many people Strzok had personally interviewed between a specific set of dates in relation to the Clinton email investigation.

“Mr. Strzok, please be advised that you can either comply with the committee’s direction to answer the question or refuse to do so,” Goodlatte stated. “The latter of which will place you in risk of a contempt citation and potential criminal liability. Do you understand that? The question is directed to the witness.”

Strzok still refused to answer, citing instructions received from his counsel and the FBI to not answer certain questions on certain topics.

Goodlatte replied, “Mr. Strzok, in a moment we will continue with the hearing, but based on your refusal to answer the question, at the conclusion of the day we will be recessing the hearing and you will be subject to recall to allow the committee to consider proceeding with a contempt citation.”

It is unclear if Goodlatte and the committee ultimately did consider a contempt citation for Strzok following the contentious hearing, nor is it clear if Page will be held in contempt for blowing off her subpoenaed appearance on Wednesday.

Hopefully Congress will follow through on the threats of contempt followed by actual jail time against Strzok and Page in response to their uncooperative behavior and failure to appear when subpoenaed, if only to ensure that future witnesses called before Congress for sensitive or contentious hearings don’t think they can get away with the same sort of behavior.

TEA PARTY TARGET

Cops Sent To Seize Veteran’s Guns Without A Warrant, He Refused To Turn Them Over

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” says Leonard Cottrell, after successfully staving off law enforcement and the courts from confiscating his firearms. Cottrell, an Iraq War veteran, was at work when he received a phone call from his wife. The cops were there, busting in to take his guns away. It all started after a casual conversation his son had at school.

Ammoland reports:

Police said their visit was sparked by a conversation that Leonard Cottrell Jr.’s 13-year-old son had had with another student at the school. Cottrell said he was told his son and the other student were discussing security being lax and what they would have to do to escape a school shooting at Millstone Middle School.

The conversation was overheard by another student, who went home and told his parents, and his mother panicked. The mom then contacted the school, which contacted the State Police, according to Cottrell.

The visit from the troopers came around 10 p.m. on June 14, 2018, Cottrell said, a day after Gov. Phil Murphy signed several gun enforcement bills into law.

After several hours, Cottrell said police agreed not to take the guns but to allow him to move them to another location while the investigation continued.

“They had admitted several times that my son made no threat to himself or other students or the school or anything like that,” he said.

Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was “not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing.”

The troopers searched his son’s room and found nothing, Cottrell said.

“To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” he said. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

“In the Garden State, the usual approach is to confiscate first and ask questions later, and victims of this approach often don’t know their rights. ‎In this case, the victim pushed back and confiscation was avoided — but the circumstances surrounding the incident are outrageous. A student expressing concern over lack of security is not a reason to send police to the student’s home — but it might be a reason to send police to the school to keep students and teachers safe” said Scott L. Bach, executive director of the Association of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs and a member of the NRA board of directors.

NJ.com adds:

Cottrell, a disabled U.S. Army veteran who served three tours during “Operation Iraqi Freedom,” owns a shotgun and a pistol. He has all the correct permits to own the firearms, he said, and predominately uses the shotgun to hunt.

He said his wife allowed the officers to enter the home, and with her permission, they searched his son’s room — but they did not find any weapons, he said. The officers, he said, didn’t have a warrant but still wanted to take his guns. Cottrell wouldn’t let them.

“No one from the state was going to take my firearms without due process,” he said Thursday.

He said the attempted seizure resulted because of a new law Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law that makes it easier for police to confiscate guns when someone in the state poses a threat to themselves or others. The law is part of a broader statewide effort to make New Jersey’s gun laws even tougher amid the national outcry for more gun control in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

Cottrell said the officers “danced around the issue” when he confronted them about the new law.

A New Jersey State Police spokesman declined to answer questions about whether this incident had anything to do with the new gun laws.

In an email, Sgt. First Class Jeff Flynn said, “Troopers responded to Mr. Cottrell’s residence in reference to the report of a possible school threat. Based on their investigation, it was determined that Mr. Cottrell’s weapons did not need to be seized.”

David Codrea, writing for Ammoland, further added:

To appease everybody, I had my firearms stored someplace else,” New Jersey gun owner and Army veteran Leonard Cottrell Jr. told New Jersey 101.5 after a June 14 visit from State Police,. “That way, during the course of the investigation, my son doesn’t have access to them and it’s on neutral ground and everything and everybody’s happy.”

Cottrell was recalling state troopers showing up at his door to confiscate firearms after his 13-year-old son was overheard discussing lax school safety with a friend.

Indoctrinated by a pervasive snitch culture — one that never seems to deter the blatantly obvious demonic nutjobs — the eavesdropping student told his parents, who told school administrators, who in turn called the cops. (Note “If you see something, say something” carries risks of its own – if you report the wrong person, you could end up smeared as a “hater.”)

“Cottrell said he made it very clear to the police that he was ‘not going to willingly give up my constitutional rights where there’s no justifiable cause, no warrants, no nothing,’” the report continued. Despite that, his home is now a “gun free zone” and that has been publicized by the media. He has, in fact, willingly ceded those rights, and by his own words in order to make authorities “happy.”

Before judging him for that, consider the environment that is New Jersey. Then consider the overwhelming force the state can bring to bear, and its predisposition to using it, especially if it’s to enforce citizen disarmament. It’s easy to anonymously declare “Molon Labe” on the internet. In meatspace, resistance is more effective when the aggressor doesn’t get to dictate the time and place, especially if that place is your home and you have family inside.

Appeasing gun-grabbers, generally couched as “compromise,” is impossible. It’s like throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting them to be sated and leave you alone — instead of sensing opportunity and fear, and moving in closer.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service