The Democrats’ Likely Nominee Appears To Be A Felon – This Is Not Business As Usual (Andrew C. McCarthy)

The Democrats’ Likely Nominee Appears To Be A Felon… This Is Not Business As Usual – Andrew C. McCarthy

.

.
Competing Democrats debate each other one night. Republican rivals take their shots at each other a couple of nights later. An air of frenetic normalcy sets over primary season: The country is $20 trillion in the red and under heightened terrorist threat, yet pols bicker over the legacy of Henry Kissinger and the chameleon nature of Donald Trump – another liability the mogul is marketing as an asset. It is business as usual.

Except nothing about the 2016 campaign is business as usual.

For all the surreal projection of normalcy, the race is enveloped by an extremely serious criminal investigation. If press reporting is to be believed – in particular, the yeoman’s work of Fox News’s Catherine Herridge and Pamela K. Browne – Hillary Clinton, the likely nominee of one of the two major parties, appears to have committed serious felony violations of federal law.

That she has the audacity to run despite the circumstances is no surprise – Clinton scandals, the background music of our politics for a quarter-century, are interrupted only by new Clinton scandals. What is shocking is that the Democrats are allowing her to run.

For some Democrats, alas, any criminality by the home team is immaterial. A couple of weeks back, The Donald bragged, as is his wont, that he “could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters.” Trump was kidding (at least, I think he was). Unfortunately, the statement might have been true had it sprung from Mrs. Clinton’s lips.

In a Democratic party dominated by the hard Left, the power Left, what matters is keeping Republicans out of the White House, period. Democrats whored themselves for Bill through the Nineties, seemingly unembarrassed over the lie it put to their soaring tropes about women’s rights, good government, getting money out of politics, etc. They will close ranks around Hillary, too. After all, if she was abusing power while advancing the cause of amassing power – er, I mean, the cause of social justice – what’s the harm?

More-centrist Democrats realize there could be great harm, but they seem paralyzed. The American people, they know, are not the hard Left: If Mrs. Clinton is permitted to keep plodding on toward the nomination only to be indicted after she has gotten it, the party’s chances of holding on to the White House probably disappear. By then, there may not be time to organize a national campaign with a suitable candidate (as opposed to a goofy 74-year-old avowed socialist).

So these Democrats play Russian roulette: hopefully assuming that the FBI won’t dare recommend criminal charges with the stakes so high; that the Obama Justice Department won’t prosecute if charges are recommended; that Obama will figure out a way to intervene with a pardon that won’t do Clinton too much damage, and that the public can be spun into thinking an investigation led by Obama appointees and career law-enforcement officers is somehow a Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiracy plot dreamt up by Republicans.

Many of these Democrats know that the right thing to do for their party – and country – is to demand that Mrs. Clinton step aside. They also know that if they do the right thing, and Clinton wins anyway, there will be vengeance – Hillary being the vengeful sort. So mum’s the word.

Their silence will not change the facts.

To take the simplest of many apparent national-security violations, it is a felony for a person “being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any… information relating to the national defense” to permit that information “through gross negligence… to be removed from its proper place of custody” or to be “delivered to anyone in violation of his trust” (Section 793(f) of Title 18, U.S. Code).

Mrs. Clinton was entrusted with national-defense information and knew that working with such classified intelligence was a substantial part of her duties as secretary of state. Despite this knowledge, she willfully, and against government rules, set up a private, non-secure e-mail communication system for all of her government-related correspondence – making it inevitable that classified matters would be discussed on the system. This was gross negligence at best. And the easily foreseeable result is that classified intelligence was removed from its secure government repository and transmitted to persons not entitled to have it – very likely including foreign intelligence services that almost certainly penetrated Mrs. Clinton’s non-secure system.

The penalty for violating this penal statute is up to ten years’ imprisonment for each individual violation. Mind you, there are already 1,600 reported instances of classified information being transmitted via the Clinton server system, and the latest indications are that at least twelve, and as many as 30, private e-mail accounts are known to have trafficked in our nation’s defense secrets. Many of these account holders were certainly not cleared for access to the information – and none of them was permitted to access it in a non-secure setting.

Fox has also reported that the FBI has expanded its investigation to possible public-corruption offenses – the cozy connections between the State Department, the Clinton Foundation, and Clinton-connected businesses; the question whether Clinton Foundation donors received favorable treatment in government contracts. Such allegations could fill a book. Indeed, investigative journalist Peter Schweizer has written just such a book: Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

It’s a hair-raising story, but corruption cases are tough to prove. Comparatively, classified-information offenses are straightforward: There is a paper trail and secret intelligence either ended up someplace it was not supposed to be or it didn’t. Corruption cases, by contrast, can involve complex transactions and the gray area between grimy political deals and actionable quid pro quo. They hinge on proving the state of mind of the players, which can be challenging.

So I want to pass over that for now and think about something rarely mentioned in the Clinton caper: the unknown e-mails. What has been revealed about Mrs. Clinton’s disclosed e-mails has been so shocking that we often forget: There are 30,000 other e-mails that she attempted to destroy. We do not know what’s in them, so it is only natural that we have focused instead on what is knowable – the e-mails that have been disclosed. But there have been media reports that the FBI, to which Mrs. Clinton finally surrendered her private servers some months ago, has been able to retrieve many of the “deleted” e-mails, perhaps even all of them.

Mrs. Clinton told us she destroyed these e-mails because they were private and unrelated to government business. Basically we are to believe that one of the busiest, highest-ranking officials in our government had time to send tens of thousands of e-mails that were strictly about yoga routines, her daughter’s bridesmaids’ dresses, and the like. This, from the same Mrs. Clinton who looked us in the eye and insisted that none of her e-mails contained classified information.

Anyone want to join me in indulging the possibility that many of the deleted e-mails involve government business?

I ask because, wholly apart from any classified information crimes, there is another penal law defining an offense that is very easy to prove: the federal embezzlement statute (Section 641 of Title 18, U.S. Code). This provision targets anyone who, among other things,
.

embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use…, or without authority… conveys or disposes of any record… of the United States or of any department or agency thereof…; or …conceals, or retains the same with intent to convert it to his use… knowing it to have been embezzled, stolen, purloined or converted.

.
As with the afore-described crime of mishandling classified information, the penalty for violating this statute is up to ten years’ imprisonment for each instance of theft.

To the extent Mrs. Clinton’s e-mails involved government business, they were not private – they were government records. When she left the State Department, however, she took these government records with her: She didn’t tell anyone she had them, and she converted them to her own use – preventing the government from complying with lawful Freedom of Information Act disclosure demands, congressional inquiries, and government-disclosure obligations in judicial proceedings, as well as undermining the State Department’s reliance on the completeness of its recordkeeping in performing its crucial functions.

I believe that Clinton has already violated the embezzlement law with respect to the 30,000 e-mails she finally surrendered to the State Department nearly two years after leaving. But for argument’s sake, let’s give her a pass on those. Let’s consider only the 30,000 e-mails that she withheld and attempted to destroy but that the FBI has reportedly recovered. Does anyone really doubt that this mountain of e-mail contains State Department-related communications – i.e., government files?

In a better time, responsible Democrats would already have disqualified Mrs. Clinton on the quaint notion that fitness for the nation’s highest office means something more than the ability to evade indictment for one’s sleazy doings. But now we have a candidate who may not – and should not – be able to meet even that lowly standard. No self-respecting political party would permit her to run. Obviously, a plea to do the right thing is not a winning appeal to today’s Democrats. But what are we left with if appeals to self-interest also fall on deaf ears?

.

.

Cultural Stalinists: History? We don’t need no stinkin’ history!

The Left is evil for many reasons.

The Left supports the butchering of babies in the womb

The Left prefers good people be disarmed, rendering them far more vulnerable to violent criminals

The Left, despite their best rhetoric, do not embrace freedom of speech, religion, or association

The Left supports economic policies that punishes success, hampers small business, and destroys ambition, and competition in the name of “fairness”

The Left loathes Individualism, and instead embraces Collectivism. Left unchecked, Collectivism destroys liberty, human rights and leads to Totalitarian atrocities. If you do not believe me, ask the 100,000,000 plus dead that Marxism/Communism/Maoism/Stalinism/Leninism/Collectivism slaughtered last century.

And the Left, is also evil because it seeks to destroy not only liberty, and self-government, but history as well. Independent Sentinel highlights the march of the Cultural Stalinists

Another piece of Civil War history is about to bite the dust.

Portsmouth, Virginia is looking to remove a memorial to Virginians who served the Confederacy during the Civil War. It is falling victim to political correctness. There is a battle being waged with most wanting it to stay.

The memorial commemorates those soldiers who never returned home, it does not commemorate slavery, and most soldiers who fought overwhelmingly did not own slaves. It was also over 150 years ago.

The city estimates the taxpayers will have to pay about $105,000 to erase the monument and statues.

The courts will rule on the decision.

This is going on throughout the country, particularly in the south.

In South Carolina, where the first shots of the Civil War rang out in 1861, the state legislature voted to end the display of the Confederate flag on the grounds of the state capitol.

Monuments to the Confederacy in New Orleans  have been targeted. The Park and Recreation Board of Birmingham, Alabama, voted last July to remove that city’s Confederate Soldiers & Sailors monument.

This is all part of the Left’s campaign of indoctrination folks. First they demonize, then they destroy, all in the name of “inclusion” and “tolerance” of course. And, yes, yes, they will come for every last vestige of our Founders next. Are prepared to tolerate that too? Are we prepared to have a small minority of agitators dictate whom we memorialize? Remember that to truly destroy a nation, you destroy their heritage, history, and culture first. That is what the Left has been doing for decades now. There can be no question as to their goal here. The only question is will we allow it?

Armed Citizen Saves Cop From Vicious Youth Mob In Pennsylvania

Police: Gun Owner Saved Cop From Attack By Kids – Philadelphia Inquirer

.
…………….
Police Superintendent Michael Chitwood praised the efforts of licensed gun owner who came to the aid of a police officer.

.
Police are crediting a vigilant gun owner with saving the life of an Upper Darby cop Friday after he saw the officer being attacked and surrounded by a large group of teens.

“There were 40 kids. If it wasn’t for the good Samaritan stepping forward, he’d have been dead meat,” Upper Darby Police Superintendent Michael Chitwood said. “There’s no doubt they would have attacked him.”

About 3 p.m. every weekday, from six to eight township police officers patrol the area near Upper Darby High School as nearly 4,000 kids pour out of the building on Lansdowne Avenue near School Lane.

Most kids and most days are good, Chitwood said.

Friday was not.

That afternoon alone, police responded to three fights in three locations near the school. When the dust settled, eight teens, ages 13 to 17, were charged with crimes, and two officers were injured so severely that it’s unclear when they’ll be able to return to work, Chitwood said.

The most egregious of the incidents took place on Wayne Avenue near Marshall Road, less than a mile from the high school.

An officer who broke up a fight between two teen boys that had attracted a large crowd at that location was holding one of the combatants at bay when the teen’s opponent attacked the officer, Chitwood said.

“As he breaks up the fight, he takes one kid and then the other jumps [on] him. Now he’s fighting two of them and he’s calling for an assist officer at the same time,” Chitwood said. “There’s a crowd of 40 or 50 kids watching the fight, and they all move in towards the officer.”

That’s when the good Samaritan, who lives on the block, came out of his house with a gun in his hand and told the teens to get away from the cop, Chitwood said.

“He had the gun in his hand, but he didn’t point it at the kids, he just told them to back off,” Chitwood said. “If this guy didn’t come out and come to the aid of the officer, this officer would have had significant problems.”

The 35-year-old gun owner, who has a concealed-carry permit, kept the group of teens at bay until responding officers arrived, Chitwood said.

Not only did the officer who tried to break up the fight suffer significant hand injuries, Chitwood said, but an officer who responded to the request for backup also suffered a major injury to a leg when he was kicked by one of the teens in the fight.

The two juveniles in that fight each were charged with aggravated assault on police, riot, harassment, and related offenses. They were remanded to the Delaware County juvenile detention facility in Lima, Chitwood said.

Six more youths were arrested for fighting around the same time that day at two other locations near the school, Chitwood said; one was sent to the juvenile detention facility and the other five were released to a parent or guardian. Six of the eight arrested students attend Upper Darby High. The seventh attends Beverly Hills Middle School; the eighth goes to a school in Ridley Township.

“There’s thousands of kids that walk to and from that school without a problem, but every once in a while you get these wannabe gangsters, and if they want to be gangsters, we’ll treat them like gangsters,” Chitwood said.

Since Friday, police said, after-school patrols around Upper Darby High have been doubled.

“Our goal is to make sure these kids get home safe,” Chitwood said. “I can’t emphasize it enough, but the majority of these kids are decent kids.”

.

.

*AUDIO* Mark Steyn And Howie Carr Discuss The Presidential Primaries (02/05/16)

.

.

51 Muslim “Refugees” Beaten To A Pulp In Russia After Molesting Women At Night Club

Refugees Go Clubbing In Russia, Harass Girls, Wake Up In Hospital The Next Morning – Daily Caller

.

.
A group of 51 refugees were brutally assaulted outside a night club in Murmansk, Russia, after they groped and molested women at a night club Saturday.

The refugees had previously been ordered to leave Norway for “bad behavior” and tried their luck in Russia. What they didn’t realize when they went out clubbing in Murmansk is that Russians have less tolerance when it comes to sexual assault on local women than other European countries.

The refugees allegedly groped and harassed women in a similar manner as the assaults in Cologne on New Year’s Eve. A group of male Russian took them aside to “educate” them that “Cologne is 2,500 kilometers south of here.”

The refugees tried to flee but were quickly captured by the Russians. They then took them out to the street and gave them a beating they will remember. Police arrived to break up the fight but locals report that they threw a few punches at the refugees before arresting 33 of them. Eighteen refugees were in such bad condition they had to be take to the hospital.

Police decided to let the beatings slide and didn’t file a report. The only thing they could confirm was that there was “a mass brawl involving refugees.”

.

.

Another Record-Setting January For Gun Sales In U.S.

January Gun Sales Set Yet Another Record – Washington Free Beacon

.

.
The FBI conducted more gun-related background checks this January than in any other January since the system was created.

With 2,545,802 checks processed through the National Instant Background Check System, January 2016 beat the previous record, set in January 2013, by 50,326 checks. Though January’s number represents a drop from the all-time single month record set in December 2015, it is also marks the ninth month in a row that has set a record. It is also the third month in a row with more than two million background checks.

The number of background checks conducted by the FBI is widely considered the most reliable estimate for gun sales in the country since all sales conducted through federally licensed gun dealers and some sales conducted by private parties are required by law to obtain a check.

However, the number is not a one-to-one representation of gun sales. Many private sales are not included in the system. Also, in some cases a single background check can apply to the sale of multiple guns. Some states use background checks for their gun carry permitting process, which does not involve the sale of a gun.

The new record comes in the wake of President Obama’s executive action targeting gun sales. The White House had signaled that those selling even one firearm in their lifetime could be subject to federal licensing requirements, though it was later revealed that the written guidance issued by the ATF was at odds with the administration’s public comments.

A steady stream of comments supportive of gun control by Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton may also have contributed to record sales.

A move by Virginia Democrats to unilaterally eliminate gun carry reciprocity agreements with 25 states also received national attention in January. The policy was instituted by the state’s attorney general after the party failed to recapture the state Senate despite millions from gun control advocates. The backlash to the plan was strong enough that the state’s Democratic governor reversed it in a deal with Republicans.

The Second Amendment Foundation said the continued spike in gun sales was in line with other indicators from around the country.

“The Boston Globe reported last week that tens of thousands of new gun licenses were issued in Massachusetts last year,” Alan Gottlieb, the group’s founder, said in a statement. “In New Jersey, with tough gun laws, applications for gun purchases last year nearly tripled over what they were in 2005. One Missouri county reported a three-month back-up in processing permit applications. A county sheriff in North Carolina is so overwhelmed, he’s asking that citizens make appointments.”

“Add to this the fact that scores of sheriffs and police chiefs have encouraged citizens to arm themselves. Suddenly, gun ownership sounds like a very good idea to people concerned about personal safety,” Gottlieb said.

.

.

Official: Hillary Put Lives At Risk By Keeping Highly Classified, Operational Intelligence On Unsecure Server

Official: Withheld Clinton Emails Contain ‘Operational’ Intel, Put Lives At Risk – Fox News

.

.
Highly classified Hillary Clinton emails that the intelligence community and State Department recently deemed too damaging to national security to release contain “operational intelligence” – and their presence on the unsecure, personal email system jeopardized “sources, methods and lives,” a U.S. government official who has reviewed the documents told Fox News.

The official, who was not authorized to speak on the record and was limited in discussing the contents because of their highly classified nature, was referring to the 22 “TOP SECRET” emails that the State Department announced Friday it could not release in any form, even with entire sections redacted.

The announcement fueled criticism of Clinton’s handling of highly sensitive information while secretary of state, even as the Clinton campaign continued to downplay the matter as the product of an interagency dispute over classification. But the U.S. government official’s description provides confirmation that the emails contained closely held government secrets. “Operational intelligence” can be real-time information about intelligence collection, sources and the movement of assets.

The official emphasized that the “TOP SECRET” documents were sent over an extended period of time – from shortly after the server’s 2009 installation until early 2013 when Clinton stepped down as secretary of state.

Separately, Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who sits on the House intelligence committee, said the former secretary of state, senator, and Yale-trained lawyer had to know what she was dealing with.

“There is no way that someone, a senior government official who has been handling classified information for a good chunk of their adult life, could not have known that this information ought to be classified, whether it was marked or not,” he said. “Anyone with the capacity to read and an understanding of American national security, an 8th grade reading level or above, would understand that the release of this information or the potential breach of a non-secure system presented risk to American national security.”

Pompeo also suggested the military and intelligence communities have had to change operations, because the Clinton server could have been compromised by a third party.

“Anytime our national security team determines that there’s a potential breach, that is information that might potentially have fallen into the hands of the Iranians, or the Russians, or the Chinese, or just hackers, that they begin to operate in a manner that assumes that information has in fact gotten out,” Pompeo said.

On ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday, one day before the Iowa caucuses, Clinton claimed ignorance on the sensitivity of the materials and stressed that they weren’t marked.

“There is no classified marked information on those emails sent or received by me,” she said, adding that “Republicans are going to continue to use it [to] beat up on me.”

Clinton was pressed in the same ABC interview on her signed 2009 non-disclosure agreement which acknowledged that markings are irrelevant, undercutting her central explanation. The agreement states “classified information is marked or unmarked… including oral communications.”

Clinton pointed to her aides, saying: “When you receive information, of course, there has to be some markings, some indication that someone down the chain had thought that this was classified and that was not the case.”

But according to national security legal experts, security clearance holders are required to speak up when classified information is not in secure channels.

“Everybody who has a security clearance has an individual obligation to protect the information,” said national security attorney Edward MacMahon Jr., who represented former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling in the high-profile leak investigation regarding a New York Times reporter. “Just because somebody sends it to you… you can’t just turn a blind eye and pretend it never happened and pretend it’s unclassified information.”

These rules, known as the Code of Federal Regulations, apply to U.S. government employees with security clearances and state there is an obligation to report any possible breach by both the sender and the receiver of the information. The rules state: “Any person who has knowledge that classified information has been or may have been lost, possibly compromised or disclosed to an unauthorized person shall immediately report the circumstances to an official designated for this purpose.”

The Clinton campaign is now calling for the 22 “TOP SECRET” emails to be released, but this is not entirely the State Department’s call since the intelligence came from other agencies, which have final say on classification and handling.

“The State Department has no authority to release those emails and I do think that Secretary Clinton most assuredly knows that,” Pompeo said.

Meanwhile, the release of other emails has revealed more about the high-level exchange of classified information on personal accounts. Among the latest batch of emails released by the State Department is an exchange between Clinton and then-Sen. John Kerry, now secretary of state. Sections are fully redacted, citing classified information – and both Kerry and Clinton were using unsecured, personal accounts.

Further, a 2009 email released to Judicial Watch after a federal lawsuit – and first reported by Fox News – suggests the State Department ‘s senior manager Patrick Kennedy was trying to make it easier for Clinton to check her personal email at work, writing to Clinton aide Cheryl Mills a “stand-alone separate network PC is… [one] great idea.”

“The emails show that the top administrator at the State Department, Patrick Kennedy, who is still there overseeing the response to all the inquiries about Hillary Clinton, was in on Hillary Clinton’s separate email network and system from the get-go,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.

Kennedy is expected to testify this month before the Republican-led Benghazi Select Committee.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
Hillary Is Finally Asked About Non-Disclosure Agreement That Obliterates Her Classified Email Defense – Daily Caller

Hillary Clinton was finally asked on Sunday about a non-disclosure agreement she signed in Jan. 2009 which completely undermines the defense she uses to downplay the existence of classified information on her private email server. But as is often the case with the Democratic presidential candidate, she dodged the question and gave an inconsistent answer.

“You know, you’ve said many times that the emails were not marked classified,” said ABC News “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos.

“But the non-disclosure agreement you signed as secretary of state said that that really is not that relevant,” he continued.

He was referring to the “Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement” – or Standard Form 312 – that Clinton signed on Jan. 22, 2009, a day after taking over as secretary of state.

“It says classified information is marked or unmarked classified and that all of your training to treat all of that sensitively and should know the difference,” said Stephanopoulos, describing the document.

Clinton responded to Stephanopoulos but did not address the meat of his question. In fact, she appeared to reject the language of the SF-312, saying that “there has to be some markings” on classified information.

“I take classified information very seriously,” Clinton said. “You know, you can’t get information off the classified system in the State Department to put onto an unclassified system, no matter what that system is.”

“We were very specific about that and you – when you receive information, of course, there has to be some markings, some indication that someone down the chain had thought that this was classified and that was not the case.”

However, as the SF-312 makes clear, classified information does not have to be marked as such in order to require being handled as classified information. The document applies not just to physical documents and emails but also to oral communications.

Clinton revised her defense of the classified information on several occasions, as federal agencies release more damaging information about her home-brew email system.

“I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials,” she said in March, when news of her personal email account and server first broke.

In July, after the State Department began retroactively classifying many of Clinton’s emails, she revised her claim saying that she was “confident” that she “never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent or received.”

Days later, she changed her tune again, adopting the now-familiar claim that she did not send or receive information that was “marked” as such. That was after it was reported that the Intelligence Community’s inspector general had found highly classified emails which were classified when originated.

Clinton’s statement to Stephanopoulos about the inability to transfer “information off the classified system in the State Department to put onto an unclassified system” also fails to hold water.

Earlier this week, Fox News reported on a 2013 video showing Wendy Sherman, who served as Clinton’s Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, discussing how State Department officials often used Blackberries during overseas negotiations to send and receive information that “would never be on an unclassified system.”

WATCH:
.

.

.

Dozens Of Fed Up Swedes Drive Muslim Refugees From Stockholm Train Station (Video)

Swedes Fight Back – Powerline

.

.
We wrote here about the refugee crisis in Europe, including the fact that hundreds of Moroccan “youths” have taken over Stockholm’s central train station, stealing, assaulting women and attacking security guards. Last night, fifty or more Swedish men, described in some accounts as suspected soccer fans, decided they had had enough and swept through the train station, attacking and driving out the Moroccans who were living there.

The Daily Mail reports:
.

Before the attack, the group of 200 people handed out xenophobic leaflets with the message “Enough now”.

Swedish media reported that the thugs, allegedly linked to Sweden’s football hooligan scene, were targeting unaccompanied minors with a “foreign” background…

The mob, wearing all-black balaclavas and armbands, “gathered with the purpose of attacking refugee children” Stockholm police spokesman Towe Hagg said. “Police are now looking into the leaflets that were handed out by masked people before the attack”.

Authorities confirmed that at least 40-50 people went on a rampage at 9pm on Friday night attacking migrants.

.
This video shows the scene, which doesn’t appear to have been very violent:
.

.

“All over the country, reports are pouring in that the police can no longer cope with preventing and investigating the crimes which strike the Swedish people,” reads the leaflet.

“In some cases, for example, in the latest murder of a woman employed at a home for so called ‘unaccompanied minor refugees’ in Molndal, it goes as far as the National Police Commissioner choosing to show more sympathy for the perpetrator than the victim,” it continues.

.
We wrote about that incident, and the perverse reaction of Swedish authorities, here.
.

“But we refuse to accept the repeated assaults and harrassment against Swedish women. We refuse to accept the destruction of our once safe society. When our political leadership and police show more sympathy for murderers than for their victims, there are no longer any excuses to let it happen without protest.

“When Swedish streets are no longer safe to walk on for normal Swedes, it is our DUTY to fix the problem,” the leaflet reads.

“This is why, today, 200 Swedish men gathered to take a stand against the north African ‘street children’ who are running rampage in and around the capital’s central station.

“Police have clearly showed that they lack the means to stop their progress and we see no other way than to hand down the punishment they deserve ourselves.

“The justice system has walked out and the contract of society is therefore broken – it is now every Swedish man’s duty to defend our public spaces against the imported criminality.”

.
Is such vigilante action a good thing? Of course not. But it is inevitable when a nation’s authorities put ideology above their most basic duty to protect the citizenry. Across much of Western Europe, the authorities would rather cling to their discredited illusions than do their jobs.

Thus we have the absurd spectacle of the leaders of the European Union denying any connection between the sexual assaults perpetrated against hundreds of women in Cologne on New Year’s Eve and the million migrants who have recently entered Europe:
.

The sex attacks that took place in Cologne on New Year’s Eve were simply a “matter of public order” and had nothing to do with the refugee crisis, Jean-Claude Juncker’s inner circle believe.

The European Commission will be the “voice of reason” and tell the public that there is no link between the migration crisis affecting the continent and attacks on women in Germany, internal minutes disclose, amid growing concerns at a “xenophobic” backlash.

The minutes of the European Commission’s weekly cabinet meeting from January 13 hint at officials’ fears that the events in Cologne could turn public opinion sharply against the million migrants who have entered Europe.

.
That and many other events, yes.
.

“As far as the crimes in Cologne were concerned, he said that these were a matter of public order and were not related to the refugee crisis,” the minutes say.

.
European democracy is broken, to an even greater extent than our own.

.

.

*VIDEO* Prissy Holly: Exposing Mark Zuckerberg And A Direct Message For The Rape-ugees In Europe

.

.

*VIDEO* Steven Crowder: Gun Show “Loophole” Exposed

.

.

No Trump For You!

Donald Trump To Skip GOP Debate – Wall Street Journal

.
…………….

.
Donald Trump’s presidential campaign said the GOP front-runner plans to skip the Fox News debate Thursday in Des Moines, the final one before the Iowa caucuses, in the latest turn in its long-running dispute with the TV network.

Mr. Trump told reporters Tuesday he would likely skip the televised event. Shortly afterward, his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, said the candidate had decided to bypass the debate.

“He is definitely not participating in the Fox News debate on Thursday,” Mr. Lewandowski said.

The announcement came amid a long-running public spat between Mr. Trump and the network. The billionaire businessman had threatened to boycott the debate if Fox’s Megyn Kelly served as a moderator, calling her “biased.”

A Fox News spokesman later Tuesday criticized Mr. Trump’s decision not to participate in the debate, calling it “near unprecedented.”

“We’re not sure how Iowans are going to feel about him walking away from them at the last minute, but it should be clear to the American public by now that this is rooted in one thing – Megyn Kelly, whom he has viciously attacked since August and has now spent four days demanding be removed from the debate stage,” the spokesman said.

“Capitulating to politicians’ ultimatums about a debate moderator violates all journalistic standards.” The spokesman added that Mr. Trump is still welcome to attend Thursday’s debate and would be “treated fairly,” but added: “He can’t dictate the moderators or the questions.”

Aside from Mr. Trump, seven other Republican candidates are slated to appear on the prime-time stage.

Earlier in the day, Fox News issued a tongue-in-cheek news release, suggesting that a presidential candidate should be prepared to deal with those he thinks will treat him unfairly.

“We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president – a nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings,” a Fox News spokesman said.

At a news conference here, Mr. Trump took credit for the high ratings that Republican presidential debates have drawn and presumed advertising revenue Fox News has earned from the events. He also said he had called on Fox News to donate a portion of the revenue to wounded warriors and suggested that while the rest of the GOP field appeared on stage Thursday, he would use the time to raise money for wounded veterans himself.

“Why should I make Fox rich?” he said. “Let me make the wounded warriors rich. Let me make the veterans rich.”

“Let’s see how they do with the ratings… We’ll have our own event,” he said.
.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related video:
.

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related article:

.
Trump Announces Event To Benefit Veterans During Fox Debate – CNN

Donald Trump’s campaign announced Wednesday that the GOP front-runner will hold a “special event” to benefit veterans during Fox News’ Republican debate.

The event on Thursday, hosted at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa, will start with a pre-program at 8 p.m. ET, and the main event will start at 9 p.m. ET, a statement said.

No other information was provided, with the statement only saying “additional details to follow.”

.
————————————————————————————————–
.

Related poll:

.
………………

.

.

Where Are The Men Of Germany? (Carol Brown)

Where Are The Men Of Germany? – Carol Brown

A 16-year-old German girl is more articulate and honest than most adults on the matter of the Muslim invasion and the transformation of Europe. Bibi Wilhailm has just made an extraordinary 20-minute video that I urge every reader to watch. In it she expresses her terror as she faces tectonic shifts in Germany’s cultural landscape. She makes stark and accurate observations while also sharing personal stories that highlight the nightmare that is now life in Germany. She speaks with unabashed clarity, best summed up by her own statement: “It’s really a sad truth.”
.

.
Like many of us, she struggles to make sense of what is happening – how the German government would admit throngs of people who behave in violent and threatening ways, how the police don’t seem to care, while also begging German men to step up to the plate to protect women and girls.

She states that her once beautiful Germany (and the rest of Europe) has been ruined.

She wonders how a person can be a guest in a country and behave in such a violent way and wonders why Germany is not doing anything about it. She wonders why “immigrants” chanting on the streets of German cities their intention to kill Germans are not deported. She states a theme repeated throughout the video: she cannot understand it.
.

How blind do you have to be that you don’t notice that there will soon be a war?

.
She says she does not want to live in a world like this and that she is “truly speechless.”

She reflects on Islamic supremacy, wondering why Muslims push Allah on everyone else and can’t let people believe what they want.

She notes how the media covers demonstrations in Germany against immigration but are silent about the havoc “migrants” are wreaking across the country.

She mocks the recommendation the mayor of Cologne made for women to keep an arm’s length between themselves and strangers, stating: “Who [s***] in your brains?” She continues: “Do you really think when someone attacks you, you do this [gestures by extending her arm]? That’s the solution. Yes. OK. I wanted to rape you, but you stretched out your arm. I can’t do it anymore. Bummer.”

She imagines how “migrants” must be laughing at how stupid Germans are, while noting that the entire German government is also laughing because they don’t take their citizens seriously when they say they are scared. Her desperation is palpable as she implores listeners for help while observing the government dragging the country down farther and farther.

About a third of the way through the video, she makes a desperate plea, one first directed to the men of Germany and then to politicians:
.

Protect your children and women… We need this protection. We are really afraid to go out. Protect them. Be there for them, and don’t let them go out alone. Like shopping when it’s already dark. We are afraid. It’s a cry for help, and you still don’t do anything. You politicians sit there in your mansions, slurp your cocktails, and do nothing. I don’t know in what world you are living, but people are afraid. Please, finally help us. It can’t go on like this. Please do something. I really can’t understand this anymore… I am, we are all very frightened. Please, please, please do something.

.
She shares many stories of her experiences and those of people she knows, including an experience of a Muslim who verbally degraded her because she was wearing a tee-shirt. She says: “People, we are in Germany. Yes, I wear a tee-shirt. I will not wear a headscarf. I will not mummify myself.” She continues, as if speaking to the barbarians directly, telling them they have no right to insult, to grope, to touch, to sexually assault, to rape German girls because of what they wear.

She notes that the German government has abandoned its people and that “sometime the German citizens will take the matter into their own hands,” adding, “believe me, that won’t be funny.”

Near the end of the video, she wonders if Germany still has a chance to survive, if it can “regenerate from this big crisis.” She makes a plea to everyone listening not to give up on Germany. She urges every German citizen to pour into the streets for peaceful demonstrations. And she begs people to do it for their women and children.

She hopes the government will change its immigration policy and wonders what is wrong with Merkel, questioning her state of mind while making a general comment that things aren’t “normal anymore.” She calls Merkel out for playing with “the German psyche” and doubts that Merkel even knows what she’s doing.

She hopes her video will have an impact, thanks people for watching it, and makes a final plea: “Protect the women and us girls because it is a cry for help that everybody ignores right now.”

She hopes something changes for the better soon, “because nobody wants to live in such a world… Protect us.”

To say the video is heartbreaking would be a vast understatement. This young woman has stated what so many are thinking and feeling. And she has done so with incredible clarity. And bravery. She has summed up the situation, posed the questions so many have, and ultimately begs for help in this mad, mad crisis that was all unavoidable and is entirely inexplicable.

My heart goes out to this girl, and to every single human being feeling the weight of Islamic supremacy fall upon him and his country – falling that much faster because the country will not protect and defend itself. We are all somewhere on that curve right now with no end in sight.

May God help us all. And with a special prayer for Bibi Wilhailm, that He keep her safe. And may her urgent pleas be answered.

.

.

Leftist Mizzou Professor Who Called For ‘Some Muscle’ To Silence Journalist Is Charged With Assault

Fascist Mizzou Prof Who Smacked Journalist Has Been Charged With Assault – Right Scoop

.

.
We reported a lot about the fascist professor at the University of Missouri that smacked a photojournalist who was covering their racist temper tantrum last year.

Well, we can all sigh in relief because the totalitarian ginger has been charged with assault:
.

.
More from USA Today:
.

A misdemeanor assault charge was filed Monday against a University of Missouri assistant professor who received nationwide attention when she called for “some muscle” to help remove a student journalist from a campus protest in November.

Melissa Click, who works in Missouri’s communication department, faces a Class C misdemeanor simple assault charge for the incident, in which she was filmed having physical contact and berating a student journalist, according to the office of Columbia, Mo., prosecutor Steve Richey. The student was trying to conduct interviews at a site set up on the university’s quad by students protesting the treatment of African Americans by administrators.

A video of the confrontation, which was taken by student journalist Mark Schierbecker and went viral on the Internet, begins with a group of protesters yelling and pushing another student journalist, Tim Tai, who was trying to photograph the campsite. At the end of the video, Schierbecker approaches Click, who calls for “some muscle” to remove him from the protest area. She then appears to grab at Schierbecker’s camera.

Schierbecker filed a simple assault complaint with the campus police department days after the incident.

Richey’s office confirmed that charge has been filed but declined further comment. If convicted, Click could face up to a $300 fine and 15 days in jail.

The incident occurred as the campus had been embroiled in weeks of protests over school administrators’ handling of a series of a racially charged incidents on campus. Shortly before the confrontation, the state’s university system president, Tim Wolfe, and Missouri chancellor R. Bowen Loft announced their resignations. Click was at the campsite to show her support for the student protesters.

Under fire, Click resigned her courtesy appointment with the journalism school the day after the incident but remains an assistant professor in the university’s Department of Communication.

Yes, it’s a small victory, but I can dig it.

.

.

*VIDEO* 2016 March For Life – Washington, DC

.
Click HERE to visit the official website of the March For Life movement.

.

.

*VIDEOS* 2016 Shooting, Hunting & Outdoor Trades Show – Las Vegas, NV

DAY 1

.
DAY 2

.
RANGE DAY

.

.

RNC Strips National Review Of Debate Hosting Gig After Magazine Attacks The Donald

RNC Strips National Review Of Debate Hosting Gig After Cover Story Attacking Trump – ABC News

.
…………….

.
National Review will no longer be hosting a GOP debate in February after the RNC “disinvited” the conservative publication, the magazine’s publisher said.

The news comes on the heels of a harsh cover story from National Review, penned by 21 conservative columnists, calling Donald Trump a “menace to American Conservatism,” to which Trump and the RNC fired back.

“National Review is a dying paper, it’s got – its circulation is way down. Not very many people read it anymore. I mean, people don’t even think about the National Review, so I guess they want to get a little publicity, but that’s a dying paper,” Trump said Thursday night, speaking at the Outdoor Channel awards show, which includes the annual “Shot Show.”

“Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself,” National Review’s cover story out Friday reads.

Trump says, though, that the GOP is beginning to accept him. “I think they are warming up. I want to be honest, I have received so many phone calls from people that you would call ‘establishment,’ from people – generally speaking, conservative Republicans that want to come in our team,” Trump added.

And he may be right, as National Review publisher Jack Fowler wrote Thursday that his publication was being stripped of its hosting duties for a GOP debate with CNN in late February.

“Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited. The reason: Our ‘Against Trump’ editorial and symposium. We expected this was coming. Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald,” Fowler wrote.

RNC spokesperson Sean Spicer confirmed to ABC News that National Review will no longer be participating in next month’s GOP debate.

National Review was originally meant to share hosting duties for the debate with NBC, but earlier this month the broadcaster was also disinvited and CNN was given the debate.

.

.

*VIDEOS* Here Are A Few Of The Decent, Freedom-Loving Patriots That Britain Has Banned For Being “Islamophobes”

PAMELA GELLER

.
GEERT WILDERS

.
ROBERT SPENCER

.

*PODCAST* The Andrew Klavan Show

BERNIE SANDERS TO AMERICA: STICK ‘EM UP!


……………………………Click on image above for podcast

MORE:

WHAT THE GOP COULD LEARN FROM CREED

WHAT DO THE NEWS MEDIA AND COYOTES IN HEAT HAVE IN COMMON?

OBAMA’S SOTU: ‘THANK ME FOR YOUR DESTRUCTION’

HILLARY, SEX AND THE CHARACTER ISSUE


.

*PODCAST* The Ben Shapiro Show

EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT ‘NEW YORK VALUES’ ARE, SO STOP BITCHING


MORE:

IS MARCO RUBIO TOAST?

OBAMA’S BESTEST FRIENDS IN IRAN HUMILIATE HIM

PRESIDENT OBAMA IS ABOUT TO WORD-VOMIT ON YOU

INTELLECTUAL REPUBLICANS WILL GET HILLARY ELECTED


.