The State Department released 2,000 documents late Friday that would seem to net more trouble for Hillary Clinton. Documents and emails were included in the release, but at issue are the 22 emails the Obama Administration is steadfastly refusing to release, which are deemed too sensitive for anyone to see, even the federal court that ordered Hillary and the State Department to turn them over.
For the first time since the beginning of the Clinton email scandal, the State Department has admitted that at least 22 of the emails in question are too dangerous and explosive to be released. This means that by merely making such a claim, State has just confirmed that ....
Click here to read it all.
Saturday, January 30, 2016
Thursday, January 28, 2016
Judge thinks Justice Department delay bodes ill for Hillary Clinton
Judge Napolitano believes the FBI has ample evidence that Clinton broke the law, but someone at the DOJ has successfully avoided taking the next step when it comes to corruption within the Clinton and Obama DOJ and State Department. In spite of the fact that FBI Director James Comey is an Obama appointee, he is known among Democrats and Republicans as fair and honest -- a man of integrity who is not politically motivated.
Read the rest here! Thanks!
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
A few concluding remark on Trump and National Review
The American electorate today is easily bored. And they are so bored, in fact, that they have tuned out serious issues facing the country. Although this is a sad and potentially dangerous issue, it is one that must be addressed in times such as these when so many are completely oblivious to politics and how their lives are impacted by decisions made by our elected officials and those who work under them. Even more disturbing is the number of citizens who report that they don't care who gets elected, not even the president.
Enter Donald Trump. Trump seems to appeal to (a., those who are not interested at all in politics. or (b., those who are very interested and yet so disappointed by elected officials and the decisions they have made, that voting seems futile and a waste of time, or (3., basic citizenship, voting,, and knowing enough of the issues of the day to cast informed votes. But another factor has surfaced that should be considered. Many of our fellow citizens like Trump tremendously because he voices their deep disappointment with and even outright disdain for big government and those who run it. They want hope and change alright, but not the kind offered up by Obama and his cronies.
Those who support Trump do so not because they agree with him 100 percent but because they have heard enough from the candidate to feel comfortable in voting for him. And whether fellow conservatives agree with him or not, one can certainly understand their point of view. A friend told me recently, "As you know, Trump is not my kind of politician. He may not even be suited for the presidency. I need to see more and hear more first, but I am strongly leaning in that direction,"
As longtime readers know, I cut my political teeth under William F.Buckley by joining his Young Americans for Freedom -- the organization Buckley started to recruit college students for the conservative cause, to educate them as to the need for young people to read and learn the nation's founding document, to bring the Constitutional concept of low taxes and limited government, and then take these concepts to the public to anyone willing to hear.
It so happened that at time I joined the organization, Buckley had decided the conservative movement should use it's vast resources and influence to unite behind one candidate. Thus, our goal was to get Ronald Reagan elected to the presidency. Of curse we would continue with the work we had been doing all along.
Buckley had launched National Review early on, shortly after he graduated from Yale, It is, therefore, one the oldest conservative magazines on the planet.With the National Review, along with his long-running television program, Firing Line, his political books on the conservative movement,, and his popular spy novels. He would endorse candidates. He would lay to waste liberals by the sheer weight of his rhetorical skills.
These facts are important when considering the current flap over National Review and it's smack down of Donald Trump. Some believe the Review went too far in it's examination of Trump. Others believe the magazine did not go far enough in their assessment. Still others believe that the Review should have waited a bit longer to issue such such harshly worded manifesto,
As I stated early on last year, I am not endorsing a candidate this year. There are some good conservatives seeking the nomination, and I will support the best one of the bunch. But it is way too early yet.
Back to Buckley. One never had the guess where he stood. He would endorse and support "the most conservative candidate who can get elected. He also would not hesitate to sever ties with some who claimed to be conservative but who actually hurt the movement and the Republican Party.
For example, Buckley disavowed all ties to the John Birch Society due to a variety of issue. This he did even if it meant loosing subscriptions and a truckload of money. Buckley believed that the movement could not lend its name or its influence to a group like the John Birch Society, racist groups, and a myriad of others that Buckley saw as more destructive than helpful,
Thus, it is clear that Buckley would not hesitate to severe ties with candidates and groups if he saw the as hurtful to the cause. In the current controversy, the question revolves around whether or not Trump can be trusted. The National Review says no. But a majority of Republicans say he can.
Enter Donald Trump. Trump seems to appeal to (a., those who are not interested at all in politics. or (b., those who are very interested and yet so disappointed by elected officials and the decisions they have made, that voting seems futile and a waste of time, or (3., basic citizenship, voting,, and knowing enough of the issues of the day to cast informed votes. But another factor has surfaced that should be considered. Many of our fellow citizens like Trump tremendously because he voices their deep disappointment with and even outright disdain for big government and those who run it. They want hope and change alright, but not the kind offered up by Obama and his cronies.
Those who support Trump do so not because they agree with him 100 percent but because they have heard enough from the candidate to feel comfortable in voting for him. And whether fellow conservatives agree with him or not, one can certainly understand their point of view. A friend told me recently, "As you know, Trump is not my kind of politician. He may not even be suited for the presidency. I need to see more and hear more first, but I am strongly leaning in that direction,"
- "So what do you think about National Review's major slam dunk against Trump? What would Buckley do? Would he wince, or would he welcome the Trump people as a source for new subscribers an the ever growing conservative movement?
As longtime readers know, I cut my political teeth under William F.Buckley by joining his Young Americans for Freedom -- the organization Buckley started to recruit college students for the conservative cause, to educate them as to the need for young people to read and learn the nation's founding document, to bring the Constitutional concept of low taxes and limited government, and then take these concepts to the public to anyone willing to hear.
It so happened that at time I joined the organization, Buckley had decided the conservative movement should use it's vast resources and influence to unite behind one candidate. Thus, our goal was to get Ronald Reagan elected to the presidency. Of curse we would continue with the work we had been doing all along.
Buckley had launched National Review early on, shortly after he graduated from Yale, It is, therefore, one the oldest conservative magazines on the planet.With the National Review, along with his long-running television program, Firing Line, his political books on the conservative movement,, and his popular spy novels. He would endorse candidates. He would lay to waste liberals by the sheer weight of his rhetorical skills.
These facts are important when considering the current flap over National Review and it's smack down of Donald Trump. Some believe the Review went too far in it's examination of Trump. Others believe the magazine did not go far enough in their assessment. Still others believe that the Review should have waited a bit longer to issue such such harshly worded manifesto,
As I stated early on last year, I am not endorsing a candidate this year. There are some good conservatives seeking the nomination, and I will support the best one of the bunch. But it is way too early yet.
Back to Buckley. One never had the guess where he stood. He would endorse and support "the most conservative candidate who can get elected. He also would not hesitate to sever ties with some who claimed to be conservative but who actually hurt the movement and the Republican Party.
For example, Buckley disavowed all ties to the John Birch Society due to a variety of issue. This he did even if it meant loosing subscriptions and a truckload of money. Buckley believed that the movement could not lend its name or its influence to a group like the John Birch Society, racist groups, and a myriad of others that Buckley saw as more destructive than helpful,
Thus, it is clear that Buckley would not hesitate to severe ties with candidates and groups if he saw the as hurtful to the cause. In the current controversy, the question revolves around whether or not Trump can be trusted. The National Review says no. But a majority of Republicans say he can.
The Trump, Buckley, controversy at National Review forces voters to think
The American electorate today is easily bored. And they are so bored, in fact, that they have tuned out serious issues facing the country. Although this is a sad and potentially dangerous issue, it is one that must be addressed in times such as these when so many are completely oblivious to politics and how their lives are impacted by decisions made by our elected officials and those who work under them. Even more disturbing is the number of citizens who report that they don't care who gets elected, not even the president.
Enter Donald Trump. Trump seems to appeal to (a., those who are not interested at all in politics. or (b., those who are very interested and yet so disappointed by elected officials and the decisions they have made, that voting seems futile and a waste of time, or (3., basic citizenship, voting,, and knowing enough of the issues of the day to cast informed votes. But another factor has surfaced that should be considered. Many of our fellow citizens like Trump tremendously because he voices their deep disappointment with and even outright disdain for big government and those who run it. They want hope and change alright, but not the kind offered up by Obama and his cronies.
Those who support Trump do so not because they agree with him 100 percent but because they have heard enough from the candidate to feel comfortable in voting for him. And whether fellow conservatives agree with him or not, one can certainly understand their point of view. A friend told me recently, "As you know, Trump is not my kind of politician. He may not even be suited for the presidency. I need to see more and hear more first, but I am strongly leaning in that direction,"
It so happened that at time I joined the organization, Buckley had decided the conservative movement should use it's vast resources and influence to unite behind one candidate. Thus, our goal was to get Ronald Reagan elected to the presidency. Of curse we would continue with the work we had been doing all along.
Buckley had launched National Review early on, shortly after he graduated from Yale, It is, therefore, one the oldest conservative magazines on the planet.With the National Review, along with his long-running television program, Firing Line, his political books on the conservative movement,, and his popular spy novels. He would endorse candidates. He would lay to waste liberals by the sheer weight of his rhetorical skills.
s
These facts are important when considering the current flap over National Review and it's smack down of Donald Trump. Some believe the Review went too far in it's examination of Trump. Others believe the magazine did not go far enough in their assessment. Still others believe that the Review should have waited a bit longer to issue such such harshly worded manifesto,
As I stated early on last year, I am not endorsing a candidate this year. There are some good conservatives seeking the nomination, and I will support the best one of the bunch. But it is way too early yet.
Back to Buckley. One never had the guess where he stood. He would endorse and support "the most conservative candidate who can get elected. He also would not hesitate to sever ties with some who claimed to be conservative but who actually hurt the movement and the Republican Party.
For example, Buckley disavowed all ties to the John Birch Society due to a variety of issue. This he did even if it meant loosing subscriptions and a truckload of money. Buckley believed that the movement could not lend its name or its influence to a group like the John Birch Society, racist groups, and a myriad of others that Buckley saw as more destructive than helpful,
Thus, it is clear that Buckley would not hesitate to severe ties with candidates and groups if he saw the as hurtful to the cause. In the current controversy, the question revolves around whether or not Trump can be trusted. The National Review says no. But a majority of Republicans say he can.
Enter Donald Trump. Trump seems to appeal to (a., those who are not interested at all in politics. or (b., those who are very interested and yet so disappointed by elected officials and the decisions they have made, that voting seems futile and a waste of time, or (3., basic citizenship, voting,, and knowing enough of the issues of the day to cast informed votes. But another factor has surfaced that should be considered. Many of our fellow citizens like Trump tremendously because he voices their deep disappointment with and even outright disdain for big government and those who run it. They want hope and change alright, but not the kind offered up by Obama and his cronies.
Those who support Trump do so not because they agree with him 100 percent but because they have heard enough from the candidate to feel comfortable in voting for him. And whether fellow conservatives agree with him or not, one can certainly understand their point of view. A friend told me recently, "As you know, Trump is not my kind of politician. He may not even be suited for the presidency. I need to see more and hear more first, but I am strongly leaning in that direction,"
It so happened that at time I joined the organization, Buckley had decided the conservative movement should use it's vast resources and influence to unite behind one candidate. Thus, our goal was to get Ronald Reagan elected to the presidency. Of curse we would continue with the work we had been doing all along.
Buckley had launched National Review early on, shortly after he graduated from Yale, It is, therefore, one the oldest conservative magazines on the planet.With the National Review, along with his long-running television program, Firing Line, his political books on the conservative movement,, and his popular spy novels. He would endorse candidates. He would lay to waste liberals by the sheer weight of his rhetorical skills.
s
These facts are important when considering the current flap over National Review and it's smack down of Donald Trump. Some believe the Review went too far in it's examination of Trump. Others believe the magazine did not go far enough in their assessment. Still others believe that the Review should have waited a bit longer to issue such such harshly worded manifesto,
As I stated early on last year, I am not endorsing a candidate this year. There are some good conservatives seeking the nomination, and I will support the best one of the bunch. But it is way too early yet.
Back to Buckley. One never had the guess where he stood. He would endorse and support "the most conservative candidate who can get elected. He also would not hesitate to sever ties with some who claimed to be conservative but who actually hurt the movement and the Republican Party.
For example, Buckley disavowed all ties to the John Birch Society due to a variety of issue. This he did even if it meant loosing subscriptions and a truckload of money. Buckley believed that the movement could not lend its name or its influence to a group like the John Birch Society, racist groups, and a myriad of others that Buckley saw as more destructive than helpful,
Thus, it is clear that Buckley would not hesitate to severe ties with candidates and groups if he saw the as hurtful to the cause. In the current controversy, the question revolves around whether or not Trump can be trusted. The National Review says no. But a majority of Republicans say he can.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)