Race for Justice

Clinton Turns Off Cameras in White House Briefings...

2017-06-29T07:19:00.002-04:00

Am I Missing Something...

2017-06-24T17:04:00.000-04:00

John Podesta's emails.

The Russian's hacked the election. They "hacked" into the Democratic National Committee's computers. And they got...one guy's emails.

Am I missing something?

Not doner lists.
Not marketing strategies.
Not Wassermann-Schultz nude selfies (thank God).

John Podesta's emails.

The leaders of the NSA and the FBI testified - the Russians successfully hacked us. And got one guy's emails.

The head of Homeland Security also said the Russians also are believed to be behind hacking attempts in approximately 21 states, wherein companies involved in electronic voting devises were targeted. But, no emails were stolen.

John Podesta's emails.

"Our hackers are as potent as our military...ja, ja, ja, ja..."

Smoke'em The Bear...

2017-06-17T11:24:00.004-04:00

from Article 15 Clothing

Why Trump Fired Comey...

2017-06-10T08:33:00.004-04:00

I was asked this when it happened. My answer was that Comey was too soft. Comey wants people to know what he is thinking and feeling, so that his honorable and ethically sound principles are there for everybody to see. But how then did he get everybody so mad by publicly announcing the findings in the Clinton Private email Server investigation, and get Trump so mad by NOT saying publicly that Trump was not a "target" of the Russian Collusion investigation?

Read This: Why Trump Fired Comey by Andrew McCarthy

Summary: Comey got into the political pool, and then did not understand that he can not swim, and it was too deep for a guy only 6'8".

"Comey maintains, as he did in the July 2016 Clinton-e-mails press conference, that there is a “public interest” exception to the Justice Department rule against commenting on investigations. But public interest is the very reason for the no-comment rule. The point is to avoid smearing people who have not been charged with a crime. Such a smear happens only if the public is interested in the case."

"I didn't know politics was so political"

Leaker Caught!

2017-06-09T07:04:00.000-04:00

It is not Reality Winner, it is reality, loser. The Director of the FBI, whom Trump challenged to clean up the leakers...was a leaker.

But more on that later...

First, I want to know - what is it that the Russians are exactly accused of doing? Hacking? Colluding? It is pretty much common knowledge that the Russians have attempted to interfere in American elections and politics, and that they are currently attempting to, and they will in the future continue to do so. But what is it the "hacking" and "colluding" that these investigative committees are looking for?

Comey all but explained it. "Spear phishing," he said. Which is to say, they targeted specific people with fake emails. Not the Nigerian Prince emails, but some designed to look official. A dupe opens up an attachment on the emails, and a computer can be "infected." This is alleged to have happened.

But what is the evidence? What was the results? Are we to believe that the DNC was 'hacked' - and all they got was John Podesta's emails? That was the hack? One guys emails? Not strategy files. Not Wasserman-Shultz's emails (thank God). Not party donor lists? One guys emails? A foreign government, the stinking Russians, hacked the Democrat Party in the year of a Presidential election...and got one guys emails?

"Da, we said, 'Believes us, click here to be big strong American man,' and he did!"

And what of the "colluding?" To do what? What exactly would the colluding, or evidence of it, look like? The Russians helped the Trump campaign...what? You can not fill in the blank because it does not make sense. What does make sense - is that the Democrats (media) want to talk about it over, and over, and over again, without any evidence, or without even saying what it is that they are looking for? I get it - unexplained money in accounts, meetings in secret - but to what end? They met, or paid money - for what? Somehow that would effect the election?

The FBI is looking into the Russians. Because the FBI is ALWAYS looking into the Russians. Every meeting with a Russian is a chance for the Russians to attempt...fill in the blank. That didn't start with this (obviously the Russians were the ones really getting hacked, and tapped), and it won't end with this.

FBI Director...

2017-06-08T07:03:00.003-04:00

I've been busy. Blogging has taken a backseat to everything. I guess a lot has been happening in the real world too.

Today former FBI Director James Comey will testify before a committee of Senators. Yesterday, President Trump named his nominee to replace Comey. Another lawyer from the Department of Justice.

In Comey's opening statement today, he will say that he was made uncomfortable by President Trump when Trump wanted to speak to him alone without the Attorney General. Comey will say that the FBI Director reports to the Attorney General.

That underlies two of the problems with James Comey.

He honestly told the story of Hillary Clinton so that he could be transparent with the American People. That could have been done in a written report of the facts, and the facts supported a charge of multiple violations of the law. Comey revealed to the public that he could not think of a "reasonable prosecutor" that would bring charges - because he could not match it with a historical prosecution. That was simply due to the fact that what she did was unprecedented. Obviously, many prosecutors came forward after his press conference and said they would have prosecuted. Either way - the fact was the the Director made himself the center of it all, and that is a bad thing.

Oh, back to two problems with Comey...

One, his discomfort with Trump was a weakness. I can hear him now in an email to agents, "...I just felt deep inside that the American people would best be served if I just supervised the FBI and let blind Lady Justice deal her cards..." We, the American people, should not know how he feels, or what scares him. Which leads to Two, the Director of the FBI should report directly to the President. There are things the FBI does that do not involve the Attorney General, or the Director of National Intelligence.

But you will never hear that in today's world run by lawyers. I have met a lawyer or two who I thought had a mind for investigations, and could drive them. But it takes and investigator to understand investigations, the process and the people who conduct them. A lawyer could do a good job at the helm of the FBI, but why skip all the great lawmen and hire another bureaucrat lawyer?

Who would I nominate? There were a couple of former agents in the running - not sure if they would have been good. I want Joe Friday. Just the facts, cut the feelings, thoughts, emotions and get the job done.

FBI Director Friday

Give Me Free Markets, Or Give Me Death...

2017-04-12T08:07:00.002-04:00

The terms "Fascist" and "Fascism" get thrown around a lot, especially when Republicans are elected. Like most complex topics, or ones involving history, the terms are misunderstood and misused by most people.

I looked it up, and the simplest short definition could be "a form of radical authoritarian nationalism." So, a small-government Republican or conservative should be far from being confused with 'radical authoritarianism.' But, a no-borders Democrat or progressive can hardly be confused with anything 'nationalistic.'

So - can we drop it?

The person most closely associated with Fascism is Benito Mussolini, who said, "We have buried the putrid corpse of liberty."

There. Sounds like a Democrat to me.

[ I was aware of how Mussolini died (see Mummer Gaddafi for modern reference), but I was unaware how many photos exist of his mutilated body. Thanks Internet. ]

Mussolini is also credited with saying (before his head was caved in), "The definition of Fascism is the marriage of corporate and state." Sounds like a Cable TV company to me?

Why People Hate Capitalism by Kevin Williamson, National Review

We Are Living In The Bizarro World...

2017-03-29T15:58:00.000-04:00

Sanctuary Cities are filing in Federal Court asking to be able to ignore Federal Law.

California (after similar charges were thrown out in Texas) is charging investigative journalists with filming Planned Parenthood employees admitting they sell baby parts.

Ted Koppel says Sean Hannity, who sells his opinion, is bad for America because lots of people like him.

...and now this.

First it was leaked that conversations between future National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and the Russian Ambassador were intercepted and recorded.

Then President Trump tweeted this:

Congress had hearings over this Tweet (while they still needed more time to come up with a repeal of Obamacare) - the FBI Director and Congress discussed on national television if Obama actually did the tapping, or the ordering, as if Trump had just produced an affidavit of fact...rather than a Tweet. Completely ignoring the fact that the Flynn affair was already public. Am I the only one that believes Trump was referring to these recordings?

Now this:

No hearings on this. It is PERFECTLY NORMAL for the outgoing administration to change the rules, and leak foreign counter-intelligence informaiton. She is on MSNBC bragging about this, because the Republicans are not going after leakers, or the use of foreign counter-intelligence information for political purposes - instead they are going after Trump over a Tweet.

Earlier in the above video they discussed that the Congress may force the IRS to provide Trump's tax returns because they may reveal that he may have received money from the Russians. Whether he did or not, he was elected President, and you can't change that. Obama lied about his connection to Bill Ayers and the depth of his relationship with America-Hating Jeremiah Wright, and the guy he bought his house from at a HUGE discount while a senator, subsequently went to prison for bribing public officials - but he was still elected President, and there was nothing anybody could do about it.

But that is not all in our BIZARRO NEWS. Less than a year after the FBI said that while Hillary Clinton violated the law in her mishandling of classified information (while lying to the American public on numerous occasions about it) two staffers for Chris Christie were sentenced to prison for pulling a prank by closing a lane on a bridge.

I'm calling shenanigans!

Where Are You Getting Your Information...

2017-03-25T08:22:00.002-04:00

"...from reality."

The "reporter" tries to ask him the question the same way that politicians are asked questions.

Congratulations Minnesota...

2017-03-23T07:22:00.000-04:00

Evidence of Collusion With Russia...

2017-03-07T07:08:00.002-05:00

I'm Really Busy...

2017-03-02T07:10:00.001-05:00

I have so much real 'stuff' to do in my life I do not have time to blog. I know that my three part-time readers realize this, and have just had to make do. But I just had to respond to this.

It is not Trump's speech.

It is not Keith Ellison (Muslim) not standing to honor the wife of an American serviceman killed in Yemen.

It is this:

Soldier in Miami Takes Pictures of Illegally Parked Police Cars

I did not read the entire article, I will admit. Maybe I am wrong about the view of the person taking the pictures, or the article in general. But it is a basic misunderstanding, and contempt, and condescension, etc., etc. that just gets my blood boiling.

Why do we have parking laws?

Why is it illegal to park like the vehicle below?

It blocks the crosswalk - makes it unsafe for pedestrians to have to go around.

It is too close to a fire hydrant, makes it unsafe for a firetruck to have to work around in case of a fire.

Cities have "NO PARKING" all over the place - when cars can clearly fit, like the one above. Some cities, or in some areas of cities, they want to generate revenue for parking so EVERYWHERE is illegal to park, except in metered or paid spaces.

I will cut to the chase. Why do we have police cars?

Police officers respond to emergencies. Police officers work shifts, and during those shifts they must respond to a domestic violence call, a subject with a gun, a vehicle accident, and yes, to barking dogs (but barking dogs can lead to murder). Instead of measuring each instance on a case by case basis - typically police officers park in a place where they can get to their cars quickly, which is often in an "illegal" space. Police officers often drive on the wring side of the road, they speed, they do not use their turn signal, they have sirens - they do many things that for a normal citizen would be considered illegal. In most states - they are exempt from those moving violations if they are responding to a call. And, in most localities, they are exempt from parking laws.

Now, this is not to say that they should not consider safety where they park, such as forcing cars to drive around the parked police car in to oncoming traffic. But citizens must realize that police officers DO NOT KNOW what they will have to respond to, and how quickly they will need to get to their vehicles and get them moving.

I have heard people complain when cops that are in a restaurant have parked illegally. It is a known fact, that the more comfortable an officer is while eating, the better tasting the food, and the more the officer eats, the higher the probability the officer is about to get into something requiring running.

*Further, if there is a hose dragger reading this - police get the fire calls too, so if a fire truck needs to access the hydrant - the cop should know to move the car, or you may block it in.

You Don't Say...

2017-02-22T07:19:00.005-05:00

John Podesta: 'Forces Within the FBI' May Have Wanted Clinton to Lose

I am not sure where Mr. Podesta is getting his information, but how could anybody, let alone FBI agents, have wanted that woman to lose?

What is he going to say next, that some agents wanted Trump to be President? That some even want Hillary behind bars for her selling access to our government through the Clinton Foundation?

Preposterous.

Besides. What difference, at this point, does it make...

Thank You Democrats...

2017-01-24T05:25:00.003-05:00

Just be yourselves...

Starting Today...

2017-01-20T02:51:00.003-05:00

...are people really surprised that Make America Great Again won over I'm With Her?

The media has portrayed the inauguration as a failure, democrats are not showing up, nobody will sing, and it is mostly protesters. Just like the election - they got it all wrong. They are selling an image. They will continue to sell it throughout the day, looking for any acts of violence, any racism - and we know from Project Veritas - the Left will be the cause of any, and the media will look the other way.

No matter - its a great day.

Please...

2017-01-15T16:39:00.001-05:00

Things Are Different Now...

2016-12-30T10:08:00.000-05:00

Merry Christmas!

2016-12-24T15:36:00.001-05:00

Popular Update...

2016-12-22T07:34:00.000-05:00

The Left will not drop the "popular vote" victory by Hillary. It is a fact that she received more votes (as Mrs. Bannon would say - despite the fact that we know every election they DO find voter fraud in the way of dead people voting, entire boxes of ballots filled out in one handwriting, etc.).

However, the Left can not decide if they want to scrap the Electoral College because they think it had something to do with slavery, or that the Electoral College was a product of the genius of Alexander Hamilton, whom they now love because he is a black musical on Broadway, and electors should not cast their ballots for Trump because the Left wants Hillary (the logic of that argument escapes me).

Either way she received more votes, and the Right would be claiming the same thing (though I believe with less tears) if the roles were reversed, and, none of it matters.

Part of the genius of the Electoral College is that it apportions the voting according to the states - so that while a populous state DOES have influence in relation to it's greater population, it does not overwhelm the influence of the smaller states. We are a Republic.

It is worth noting...(drum roll please)...that if you remove San Francisco and Los Angeles Counties and 4 of the 5 boroughs of New York City...Trump wins the national popular vote. Not by a lot, but it points out the lunacy of Hillary's claim to be the choice of the people nation wide.

Nation Wide Popular Vote Totals

"The Left always wants to change the rules
after the game has started...bigly"

Hillary Clinton	65,844,610	(+2,864,974)
Donald Trump	62,979,636

Liberal Nests Popular Vote Totals

	Hillary Clinton	Donald Trump
San Francisco	312,443	34,493
LA County	1,893,370	620,285
Brooklyn	595,086	133,653
Queens	473,389	138,550
Manhattan	515,481	58,935
Bronx	318,403	34,424
	4,108,572	1,020,340

Remove those counties and Trump wins 61,959,296 to 61,736,038, a victory by 223,258 votes.

The Right must, and I believe does, acknowledge that Hillary received more votes than Trump, but the Left must acknowledge that it does not matter...

That Was Then, This Is Now...

2016-12-16T06:56:00.000-05:00

This is a dangerous precedent for a President. Obama was Campaigner in Chief for Hillary, and now he is trying to undermine the credibility of the next President.

In this fist video Obama mocks Donald Trump for his claims that he distrusts the establishment with regards to the election.

In this video Obama's spokesman claims Donald Trump benefited from Russian hacking, without mentioning that the emails "hacked and leaked by the Russians" were actual emails written, and actual subjects discussed by corrupt political insiders.

Stop It...

2016-12-08T14:34:00.003-05:00

L.A.-based Lawyer Sues FBI Over Clinton Email Warrant

First of all, people do stupid things all the time, not all those things deserve a story on Fox News. I could just leave it at that. But I clicked on the article, and it angered me, so I will post about it. That is what blogging is all about.

I work with lawyers all the time - and frequently I find that they can not see the forrest for the trees. This clown is suing the FBI to see the search warrant that lead to the search of Anthony Weiner's devices (phones and computers).

Again, I should stop right there - he read an article in the NY Times, and based on that, filed a lawsuit.

Several quick points - he wants to see the search warrant to see if there was probable cause, and mentions that probable cause is mentioned in the Constitution. A search warrant is a document that a law enforcement officer provides to a judge proving...probable cause. Next - the probable cause he seeks was pretty much all over the press - Anthony Weiner was using his device (phone or computer) to send messages to an underage person. The nature of those messages made the transmission to a minor...a crime.

But, then again, we live in a country where people sent millions of dollars to the accounts of a person who received 1% of the presidential votes, to fund a recount.

What Bias?

2016-12-05T09:04:00.001-05:00

The New York Times admitted it can not be unbiased, and then after the election of Donald Trump, admitted they were out of touch with the American voter.

From the Washington Post today:

It is a wonder that Republicans ever win elections...

Happy Thanksgiving...

2016-11-25T08:28:00.001-05:00

In honor of the first Thanksgiving, the NFL gave us Cowboys vs Redskins...

...among other things.

Hillary Spotted Again...

2016-11-20T07:50:00.003-05:00

There she is, under the pile of burning ruble...

Popular Perspective...

2016-11-16T13:33:00.005-05:00

All this nonsense about the Popular Vote vs the Electoral College is just like the Left, they always want to change the rules, change laws, after the game has begun. The far Left want a full Democracy, either because they do not understand our nation's history, or because they never liked it. I believe it is largely the former, because are not they the ones who claim to want to protect every conceivable minority (not race minority, statistical minority).

Election by County (can not find one by Congressional District)

The original system created by the Founding Fathers was the Electoral College. Put one way, our elected leaders elect our leader. This is a Republic. Each Representative and Senator gets one vote. Then it changed, for the better in my opinion. Each State gets the number of votes equal to it's number of Representatives and Senators. However, the State's get to decide how to divide those votes. And almost all have chosen winner take all in a popular vote (does not sound like they gave it much thought). 1828 was the last time a significant state split its electoral vote when New York went 20 for Andrew Jackson and 16 for John Quincy Adams (Maryland always split their vote until 1836 when either they changed it, or they all got on the same page - I have not researched it).

People saw winner-take-all in both the Republican and Democrat Primaries as both were hotly "contested" (Bernie contested the vote, but the final counting was not really a contest). My informal survey results - people do not like the winner-take-all for primaries...unless their candidate won.

I believe in the Electoral College, but I believe in awarding votes by Congressional District (not county). In that way, Presidential Candidates would have "battle grounds" all over - not just in a few states. It would have the added benefit of BEING WHAT THE COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED ON. It would still be a "popular vote" and every vote counts and matters, but it would be more representative. Instead of just letting the Congressmen vote for who they want, each district would tell them who to vote for. The Senators could be assigned by the statewide popular vote.

To say this would then just mirror the House of Representatives would ignore the Senate - and also would ignore the fact that in places like southern New Jersey where Democrat Hillary Clinton won 54,472 to 47,882 in Atlantic County, yet Republican Congressman Frank Lobiando won 53,679 to 41,386.

So let me give you some perspective. My analysis...the voting public nation wide in the current voting scheme is basically 50/50. I will concede that. So far the 2016 results look like this:

Hillary Clinton 61,324,576
Donald Trump 60,526,852

That is a 797,724 vote lead by Clinton. Democrats (the goofy ones, but some of the leaders too) claim that number of votes is a mandate to throw out the founder's vision of a Republic, or a reason for Republican Electors to vote for Clinton (that one seriously shows the lack of understanding of who "electors" are).

Perspective. Clinton is winning California by 3,071,770. So in the rest of the country, Trump wins the popular vote by 2,274,046. Three times Clinton's lead in the nationwide popular vote. Unfortunately, California still matters, and she is winning the popular vote - but that is like giving the win to the football team with the most yards, not the most points. Trump gets the W, and now they will treat him just like they treated W.