Mueller report into collusion a stunning victory for Donald Trump

Mueller report into collusion a stunning victory for Donald Trump, by Cameron Stewart.

The summary of the Mueller report issued today by Attorney General William Barr clears the president and his aides of any collusion with Russia and says there is no legal case to support obstruction of justice charges against him. …

No more trumped-up speculation on US TV about the President being led away in handcuffs.

It is a devastating defeat for the Democrats and for much of the US media who had hoped, prayed and frankly expected that Mueller would somehow find a silver bullet to end or at least cripple Trump’s presidency.

The fact that Mueller did not find such evidence is a failure of their expectations, rather than any shortcomings by Mueller who appears to have been the lone person in this whole affair to have conducted himself with professional dignity.

The Democrats invested far too much hope in the snippets of anecdotes which they — aided by liberal networks like CNN and MSNBC — conflated into what they said were obvious examples of collusion and obstruction.

Three big takeaways from Mueller’s report:

Firstly Mueller found Russia was actively and comprehensively trying to interfere in the 2016 US election. Russia wanted Trump to win and Hillary Clinton to lose. This is no surprise, but Mueller’s work has exposed the Russian groups that carried it out and issued several dozen indictments against those people involved. US national security is better off for this aspect of Mueller‘s investigation.

Secondly, and crucially, Mueller found that neither Trump and his team aided or co-operated with this criminal effort by Moscow. This supports the public evidence that was available and ends speculation that there was other evidence out of the public view which Mueller would somehow find.

Thirdly, Mueller draws no conclusions on the issue of obstruction of justice, saying he did not find enough evidence to sustain such a charge but specifically adding that he did not exonerate Trump. Barr has examined Mueller’s evidence and says the Justice Department will not pursue charges.

So, no grounds for impeachment from Mueller.

Glenn Reynolds:

I suspect it’s going to turn out that Trump was doing more than tweeting throughout all this, and that it reflected a strategy that has now paid off. But Republicans — including NeverTrumpers still capable of some degree of rationality, if such exist — should ask themselves what other Republican candidate in 2016 could have withstood this sort of assault. As with the Kavanaugh character assassination attempts, I think the answer will be damn few. Maybe Ted Cruz, but nobody else really comes to mind. And, say, Mitt Romney? It is to laugh. We got Trump because of a media/political environment that only Trump could survive and flourish in.

And note that the past week has been a bad one for Trump’s enemies in general: Higher education is facing its biggest scandal ever, the SPLC is folding, the Democrats are split over anti-semitism and more or less open Marxism. . . . Stay tuned. It’s going to get interesting.

No price is too high to pay in the pursuit of power by the left:

Modern politics, leftist style with the help of their media ownership:

Collusion by Democrats and the media, but don’t expect any apologies:

Attorney General expected to send Congress Mueller summary

Attorney General expected to send Congress Mueller summary  by Olivia Beavers (TheHill)

Special Counsel and Former Director of the US FBI, Robert Mueller

Ed Note: This WILL BE the dominant news story in the USA this coming week.  The leaks so far have the Democrat Party operatives running for cover and trying to obfuscate the conclusion.

Trump didn’t collude with anyone, but will Hillary’s malfeasance be exposed? Unlikely, but we’ll see. Time will tell.

How A Progressive Government Will ‘Disappear’ America

How A Progressive Government Will ‘Disappear’ America by Dr. Ileana  Johnson Paugh (Canada Free Press)

Ileana Johnson Paugh

Ed Note: Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh, who bills herself as a “Romanian Conservative”, knocks it out of the park with the editorial package she pens below:

It is interesting to note that, the more that is penned on the subject, the more skepticism prevails, the messenger becoming a Cassandra. The Greek mythological Cassandra was cursed to voice prophecies that were true, but her prophecies were not believed.

As evidence, Dr. Johnson Paugh sites this youtube video by Katie Hopkins – another “Casandra” of the UK:

Katie Hopkins warned  (“America Needs to Wake Up” – video link is 2:12 seconds), Americans about the dangers of unrestricted Islamic immigration and described in frank detail how it has affected the U.K. and Europe, contributing to a social decline and an inimical atmosphere. Thanks to Barack Obama’s eight-year islamophillic presidency, unrestricted immigration has spread to the United States.

And another brilliant tome written by Douglas Murray – yet another “Casandra” of the UK:

Douglas Murray’s “The Strange Death of Europe.”

Douglas Murray explained that Europe has been afflicted by a fatal disease that is impossible to cure.

“As a result, by the end of the lifespans of most people currently alive Europe will not be Europe and the peoples of Europe will have lost the only place in the world we had to call home,” said Murray.

Dr. IJP opines – The Mainstream Media, their acolytes and financial contributors; succinctly exposed:

The politicians and corporatist billionaires have decided that our civilization is passé and must be replaced by fresh blood from the third world—easily duped and manipulated.

The UN, the supposedly neutral NGOs and the continuing influence of their Agenda 21:

The U.N., with help from its affiliated NGOs (non-governmental organizations) aims to dictate population control and birth, diversity, border erasure, education, immigration, business, transportation, commerce, energy consumption, private property, housing, food production, water use, and healthcare.

For decades, they have chipped at our lives bit by bit, making incremental progress at local, state, and federal levels via their 1992 U.N. Agenda 21 now morphed into Agenda 2030. Rep. Ocasio-Cortez’s New Green Deal is not new, it is not green, and it is not a deal. It is a derivative U.N. Agenda 2030 on steroids.

The Elites (our “betters”) have “plans” for the rest of us:
Ed Note: Does anyone see the hand of George Soros, Tom Steyer, Michael Bloomberg and other billionaires at work here?

Their plan is that each country is meant to become a “home for the entire world,” no borders, endless welfare, all controlled by the United Nations and the billionaire elites who hold the purse strings of each former government.

The tactic is to discourage the dream of a free and truly open society by tarnishing, obfuscating and simply lying about our forbearers intentions.  As Orwell said:  “Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.”

(the) American people seem to have lost faith in their own beliefs, traditions, and argue against their historical legitimacy to exist, an “existential tiredness,” or as my wise grandmother used to say, being tired of the good life and having democracy gone to their heads.

Dr. IJP then describes and lists her 11 bullet points of why immigration continues and has been justified:

We’ve heard many justifications as to why we are importing so many immigrants who refuse to assimilate and change the face and future of many countries:

We have an ageing population
Diversity is important
Immigration cannot be stopped
This is not who we are as a country
The downtrodden are flooding the West for a better life
Illegals come
It is very easy to deceive the authorities
The borderless world agenda

Destroying free speech
Europeans still believe that a core culture can be maintained

Douglas Murray she adds, states that:

They are here, there is nothing we can do about it
“The tyranny of guilt”

“If free countries have to have unsightly security controls, why don’t they have them around the national borders rather than around every single thing inside those borders?” (Murray, p. 333)

In conclusion, Dr. IJP states and quotes T.S. Eliot:

And academia has filled the heads of their students with pipe dreams of Marxism and communism, where everyone’s problems will be solved by the benevolent government.

As T.S. Elliott said, “dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good” and nobody will have to ever work if they don’t want to.

Overall, a brilliant package that tidily sums up where the Left is directing Western societies.

The only thing we must ask ourselves now is: Will we let them and  what can we do to stop them?

The Days of Even General Consensus Seem Lost

The Days of Even General Consensus Seem Lost (by

Ed Note: I found this editorial particularly poignant in it’s explanation of what is happening throughout Western civilization. Its application is universal and shows how we’re truly going down the rabbit hole into unprecedented territory for the experiment of self governing societies.  As the editorial points out:

Not since slavery has there been such a stark contrast between the ideologies of the states. America survived, but barely.

“We’re at war,” one frustrated Californian wrote to her local paper. “Not with another country, not with terrible diseases and plagues, not with ruthless dictators. We are at war with ourselves.” Red, blue, purple – America is a tangle of ideologies all pulling in different directions. These days, as the debates rage on, the map no longer seems to show state lines – but ideological battle lines. It’s not as if Americans have always seen eye to eye on every issue. But the days of even general consensus seem lost. Things that we used to take for granted – values like common decency and civility – are suddenly rare. Issues that were once uncontested – the value of a fully born human life – are suddenly grounds for fierce debate. In the states, the see-saw battles are even more pronounced.

In Illinois, New York, and Rhode Island, locals have watched leaders fight to make newborn killing legal – while Missouri, North Carolina, and Arkansas try to stop doctors from dismembering fetus in the womb. In one state, legal infanticide is a street party. In another, it’s a cause for community mourning. And it’s not just abortion. On education, sexuality, gender identity, immigration, and counseling, the gulfs are growing.

But how people think about the issues is just one part of the divide. As noted in the Harvard Political Review, “According to Pew Research, there are no issues that are widely considered top priorities by both Democrats and Republicans today. The average partisan gap between the parties’ rankings of priority issues in 2019 is 19 points, representing a 36 percent increase over the last two decades.” As reported by Pew, “[E]ven as recently as 2014, the top priorities of Democrats and Republicans were much more aligned than they are today.”

There are profound differences in how the two sides view the world today. Not since slavery has there been such a stark contrast between the ideologies of the states. America survived, but barely. Of course, the silver lining is that things can shift quickly. We’ve seen entire scripts flip on abortion after the New York law. In a matter of weeks, the number of people calling themselves “pro-life” jumped by 17 points. Change is possible – but it’s also up to us. As William Penn once said, “Governments, like clocks, go from the motion men give them … and as governments are made and moved by men, so by them they are ruined too … Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad.”

The Left Capitalizes On Terrorism To Target Political Opponents

The Left Capitalizes On Terrorism To Target Political Opponents by Ben Shapiro (

Chelsea Clinton

Of course Chelsea Clinton has been knocked lower on the “intersectional rights” ladder as she married a Jew and no one disputes her “white privilege”.  So when it comes to issues of calling out anti Semitism; she becomes fair game to the new left. As we have all seen and have history as our teacher, the Left is at its ugliest-best, when it eats its own.

Ed Note: for those of you not familiar with the term “intersectionality”, it is the buzz word de jour of the New Left. From their own words – “Intersectionality: a Tool for Realizing Human Rights”  by Yolandet (New Tactics in Human Rights)

The “Newspeak” of the Left continues:

Now Omar’s defenders have come out of the woodwork to suggest that criticism of her anti-Semitism was somehow responsible for the white supremacist shooting of 50 innocent people in two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.

Many of them suggested that labeling Omar’s anti-Semitism actually represents a type of censorship.

Two protesters, New York University students and best friends Leen Dweik and Rose Asaf, confronted Chelsea Clinton, who had gently chided Omar for her Jew hatred. “After all that you have done, all the Islamophobia that you have stoked,” Dweik screamed, “this, right here, is the result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words you put out in the world. …

When the terrorists call YOU (the collective conservatives – guilt by association) a terrorist:

Her message was parroted by terror supporter Linda Sarsour, who tweeted: “I am triggered by those who piled on Representative Ilhan Omar and incited a hate mob against her until she got assassination threats now giving condolences to our community. What we need you to do is reflect on how you contribute to islamophobia and stop doing that.”

Anything to avoid the reality of Islamist doctrine. Read the Quran, it’s all there to be seen in black and white:

Here’s the truth: Radical Islam is dangerous. The Islamic world has a serious problem with radical Islam.

Appointing Iran to UN Women’s Rights Panel Sends “Worst Possible Message”   by (the – staff)

large swaths of the Muslim world are, in fact, hostile to Western views on matters ranging from freedom of speech to women’s rights.

And here’s another truth: Anti-Semitism is ugly, whether it’s coming from white supremacists or Ilhan Omar. Making that point has nothing to do with the killing of Muslims in Christchurch.

And the Mainstream Media continues its “Crusade” to a globalist agenda and vanquishing whom they see as the “Crusaders”.

So long as the media continue to push the narrative that criticism of Islam is tantamount to incitement of murder, radical Islam will continue to flourish. So long as the media continue to cover for the dishonest argument that criticism of anti-Semitism forwards the goals of white supremacists, anti-Semitism will continue to flourish.

Precisely what the Left wants to avoid at all costs.  If it doesn’t fit the agenda and meet the narrative of the “talking points”, it’s not just wrong; its proponents are “bad people”.  Good Grief!

As if the following really need be stated, but apparently it must be shouted from the rafters if sanity is to ever return.

Honest discussion about hard issues isn’t incitement.

UK Coup Erupts: Theresa May Cabinet In Revolt, Plotting Her Imminent Overthrow

UK Coup Erupts: Theresa May Cabinet In Revolt, Plotting Her Imminent Overthrow, by Tyler Durden.

Theresa May may have days, if not hours, left as prime minister of the UK following a full-blown cabinet coup on Saturday night as senior ministers moved to oust the UK prime minister and replace her with her deputy, David Lidington.

According to the Sunday Times, following a “frantic series of private telephone calls”, senior ministers agreed the prime minister must announce she is standing down, warning that she has become a toxic and “erratic” figure whose judgment has “gone haywire.”

The plotters reportedly plan to confront May at a cabinet meeting on Sunday and demand that she announces she is quitting. If she refuses, they will threaten mass resignations or publicly demand her head. The “conspirators” were locked in talks late on Saturday to try reach a consensus deal on a new prime minister so there does not have to be a protracted leadership contest. …

For those who still pretend to bother about the Brexit process and where we currently stand, the following flowchart from AFP should give you a rough idea.

Letter to the Editor of Farm Weekly

Letter to the Editor of Farm Weekly, by David Archibald, who writes:

The global warmers have cranked up the hysteria in recent months including using children as props. They have also tried to convince farmers that nature has turned against them with droughts and floods as evidence of Gaia’s displeasure.

It is important to show productive elements of society, such as farmers, that the global warmers are rootless cosmopolitans, discredited elements and agitated loons.

Thus this letter to the editor of Farm Weekly in response to agitprop from such a creature.

Former SPLC Employee: “We Were Part of the Con, and We Knew It.”

Former SPLC Employee: “We Were Part of the Con, and We Knew It”, by Bob Moser, via Steve Sailer.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) are the source of most of the lists that the tech giants use to say who is forbidden, who is hate specking, who gets banned. Left? And then some.

In the days since the stunning dismissal of Morris Dees, the co-founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center, on March 14th, I’ve been thinking about the jokes my S.P.L.C. colleagues and I used to tell to keep ourselves sane. Walking to lunch past the center’s Maya Lin–designed memorial to civil-rights martyrs, we’d cast a glance at the inscription from Martin Luther King, Jr., etched into the black marble—“Until justice rolls down like waters”—and intone, in our deepest voices, “Until justice rolls down like dollars.”

SPLC HQ in Montgomery Alabama

The Law Center had a way of turning idealists into cynics; like most liberals, our view of the S.P.L.C. before we arrived had been shaped by its oft-cited listings of U.S. hate groups, its reputation for winning cases against the Ku Klux Klan and Aryan Nations, and its stream of direct-mail pleas for money to keep the good work going. The mailers, in particular, painted a vivid picture of a scrappy band of intrepid attorneys and hate-group monitors, working under constant threat of death to fight hatred and injustice in the deepest heart of Dixie. When the S.P.L.C. hired me as a writer, in 2001, I figured I knew what to expect: long hours working with humble resources and a highly diverse bunch of super-dedicated colleagues. I felt self-righteous about the work before I’d even begun it. …

But nothing was more uncomfortable than the racial dynamic that quickly became apparent: a fair number of what was then about a hundred employees were African-American, but almost all of them were administrative and support staff — “the help,” one of my black colleagues said pointedly. The “professional staff” — the lawyers, researchers, educators, public-relations officers, and fund-raisers — were almost exclusively white. Just two staffers, including me, were openly gay. …

In the decade or so before I’d arrived, the center’s reputation as a beacon of justice had taken some hits from reporters who’d peered behind the façade. … In Harper’s, Ken Silverstein had revealed that the center had accumulated an endowment topping a hundred and twenty million dollars while paying lavish salaries to its highest-ranking staffers and spending far less than most nonprofit groups on the work that it claimed to do. The great Southern journalist John Egerton, writing for The Progressive, had painted a damning portrait of Dees, the center’s longtime mastermind, as a “super-salesman and master fundraiser” who viewed civil-rights work mainly as a marketing tool for bilking gullible Northern liberals. “We just run our business like a business,” Dees told Egerton. “Whether you’re selling cakes or causes, it’s all the same.” …

The staffers wrote that Dees’s firing was welcome but insufficient …

The controversy erupted at a moment when the S.P.L.C. had never been more prominent, or more profitable. Donald Trump’s Presidency opened up a gusher of donations; after raising fifty million dollars in 2016, the center took in a hundred and thirty-two million dollars in 2017, much of it coming after the violent spectacle that unfolded at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, that August. George and Amal Clooney’s justice foundation donated a million, as did Apple, which also added a donation button for the S.P.L.C. to its iTunes store. JPMorgan chipped in five hundred thousand dollars. The new money pushed the center’s endowment past four hundred and fifty million dollars

Steve Sailer:

Can you imagine how much Morris could have reaped for the SPLC off of New Zealand if he hadn’t been fired the day before?

The stunning conclusion comes from Moser:

For those of us who’ve worked in the Poverty Palace, putting it all into perspective isn’t easy, even to ourselves. We were working with a group of dedicated and talented people, fighting all kinds of good fights, making life miserable for the bad guys. And yet, all the time, dark shadows hung over everything: the racial and gender disparities, the whispers about sexual harassment, the abuses that stemmed from the top-down management, and the guilt you couldn’t help feeling about the legions of donors who believed that their money was being used, faithfully and well, to do the Lord’s work in the heart of Dixie. We were part of the con, and we knew it.

Outside of work, we spent a lot of time drinking and dishing in Montgomery bars and restaurants about the oppressive security regime, the hyperbolic fund-raising appeals, and the fact that, though the center claimed to be effective in fighting extremism, “hate” always continued to be on the rise, more dangerous than ever, with each year’s report on hate groups. “The S.P.L.C.—making hate pay,” we’d say.

Joanne and I have learned from the climate debate that it is difficult to overestimate how cynical and unscrupulous the modern left are. Always you are left wondering: are they stupid or are they evil?

The Chilling Censorship of the Christchurch Shooting

The Chilling Censorship of the Christchurch Shooting, by Barbara Boland.

In the wake of the attacks, the prime minister promised to keep the murderer “nameless,” and the internet promptly obliged by flushing the perpetrator’s identity down the memory hole. New Zealanders’ access to online material about him was blocked. In what has become standing operating procedure after mass attacks, social media accounts connected to the perpetrator disappeared.

Internet service providers in New Zealand blocked access to sites like 4chan, 8chan, LiveLeak, and the file-sharing site Mega if the sites did not take down material related to the shooting. …

What this means:

Her actions raise the question: can we prevent evil by simply deleting its mention online? Imagine if the same decision had been made in the wake of other horrific historic crimes. Should we delete all footage of 9/11 from YouTube? How about never uttering the name Osama bin Laden or the acronym ISIS? What about banning all mentions of Adolf Hitler, burning all copies of Mein Kampf, and deleting all references to the Holocaust from our history books, lest we inspire neo-Nazis?

World tower center 9/11

Should our society censor all mentions of 9/11 and Hitler? That’s the way we are dealing with thought criminals like the Christchurch shooter. Or is better to discuss?

Would these actions honor the memory of the dead, or simply erase their suffering? Such logic would replace “never forget” with “never remember.” …

Obviously dopey. What they really want to is to suppress certain ideas that challenge the leftist PC notions. Shhh, don’t mention them. So ban bits of the Internet — but how much of the Internet? And nearly every Australian politician who is allowed on the media — with one or two obvious exceptions — is on board with that.

We need so-called “negative” emotions to rouse ourselves from lethargy. I know this from personal experience. At the beginning of August 2014, I discovered a horrifying bit of news buried within a seven-minute CNN video report: an American businessman alleged that ISIS was “systematically beheading children” in a “Christian genocide.” It was incredibly dangerous for Western media to send reporters into ISIS-occupied territory then, but citizens working underground nonetheless were surreptitiously recording videos and tweeting out details of life inside the regime. Thanks to the unfettered access social media provided, I was able to peer into marketplaces in Raqqa and find video evidence of everything from child marriages to crucifixions to beheadings.

The news story I wrote about all this received over seven million viewers, eventually crashing the servers of the small news website I worked for. People the world over were incensed and rightly so. It was impossible to deny what those real-time uploaded images showed: a seemingly modern marketplace, teeming with with people, only for the camera to pan out over the spectacle for which the crowd had gathered, a brutal display of torture and death …

An open society is not afraid of the evidence of terror. Rather than running away from reality, democratic societies should confront evil directly, allowing evidence of it to be freely available, daily confronting and confounding those who would deny that such things ever happen. We must remember history, lest we be doomed to repeat it.

Esoteric Political Language

Esoteric Political Language, by the Z Bog.

The most recent and best example of this is the Pepe the frog stuff in 2016. It was not just a pointless gag. It was about testing limits. Initially, it was about getting forbidden subjects into the mainstream of social media in a way that the designer could understand, but that made little sense to others. Eventually, a general awareness of what was happening turned the Pepe image into a symbol. Clownish political hucksters then adopted it as a symbol of their edginess, because it carried with it an implication of radicalism. …

Currently, a similar dynamic is at work with the long shot candidacy of Andrew Yang, the Taiwanese businessman running in the Democratic primary. …

That’s where Yang’s UBI proposal comes in.

The Universal Basic Income is a dumb idea, but that’s part of its appeal to those engaged in esoteric politics. The point of backing it and Andrew Yang is to take the reality of modern politics, that it is a bust-out, where non-white tribes loot the country, and pushing it to the limit. If non-whites have their snout in the trough, then everyone should have their snout in the trough. It’s also an oblique way of introducing white identity politics into the discussion. White Nationalists want their thousand bucks.

The Yang phenomenon is more than just an internet fad. According to 538, Yang is now a serious candidate and as such he is getting serious attention. It is the epitome of esoteric politics that an Asian candidate will become a cat’s paw for a wide range of issues important to white Americans, but forbidden in conventional discourse. You can be an open white nationalist, by sporting a YangGang ball cap, while BoomerCons are getting beat up for wearing their old MAGA hats to their grand kid’s ballgame.

Esoteric political language is not simply about camouflaging taboo subjects. That’s never worked, as evidence by the collapse of libertarianism. That was always the truth about libertarian politics. Outside of the weirdos and potheads, people identified with libertarian ideas as a form of implicit whiteness. Free markets and meritocracy assume that biological reality will take care of the rest, leading to a restoration of heritage America, but the obviousness of this is why it never got very far and is now a joke.

That’s what is different with things like the UBI support among white nationalists. It’s not just a proxy for white identity. It takes the logic of identity politics as practiced by the ruling class and pushes it to the boundary. It’s going to be hard for them to dismiss Yang as a white supremacist or his UBI idea as some sort of honky plot against the browns. In fact, any effort to do so will make them look ridiculous. That’s the point of esoteric political language. At its best, its critics confirm what they wish to deny.

An interesting perceptive. These are the trends and undercurrents that guide modern politics, and naturally will not be discussed by the mainstream media who want only to discredit and oppose such sentiments. More food for thought in the whole article.