See The New American’s special report on the Deep State.-
Article by Gary Benoit–
When news spread that former San Diego City College student Douglas McCain had died in battle in Syria — making him the first U.S. citizen to be killed fighting for the Islamic State — the investigation quickly pivoted close to home. How had he gotten there, and who had been supporting him
by David Montero-
It started four years ago, when Cliven Bundy and his sons refused to pay federal grazing fees and stared down government agents in an armed standoff outside their Nevada ranch.
The Bundys dared the federal government to arrest them. The government did, charging them with a range of felonies.
On Monday, a federal judge in Las Vegas set them free.
The decision left federal prosecutors swallowing another defeat at the hands of a family whose defiance has become a rallying cry for Westerners who believe the federal government has no business managing public land. Four times now — in high-profile cases in Nevada and Oregon — the Bundy family and its allies have beaten the federal government in court.
For the latest showdown, supporters set up banners and signs on Las Vegas Boulevard. One drove from Montana to provide Facebook updates for devotees of the cause.
At least 100 Bundy backers filled the courtroom Monday. Some wore shirts with American flag motifs. Others carried pocket Constitutions in their button-down shirts. More than a few wore cowboy boots.
Their heroes sat looking up at U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro. Cliven Bundy, 71, wore a jailhouse jumpsuit. His son Ryan, 44, who led a large group of supporters in prayer before entering the courtroom, removed his cowboy hat. Another son, Ammon, 42, and a militia member, Ryan Payne, barely moved.
It was their moment.
Navarro rebuked federal prosecutors — using the words “flagrant” and “reckless” to describe how they withheld evidence from the defense — before saying “that the universal sense of justice has been violated” and dismissing the charges.
Supporters dabbed their eyes with tissues. Outside in the hall, there were cheers.
The four defendants were charged with threatening a federal officer, carrying and using a firearm, and engaging in conspiracy. The case had once looked like a slam-dunk to some.
The images that had made the Bundys heroes to some — armed supporters facing down federal agents as contractors with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management tried to seize cattle — seemed to be compelling evidence.
Monday’s dismissal was hinted at last month when Navarro ordered a mistrial. But she offered prosecutors a chance to make their case for why she should grant another trial.
Assistant U.S. Atty. Steven Myhre wrote in his brief that the government had shared 1.5 terabytes of information with defendants and noted that it was “by far the largest review and disclosure operation in this [U.S. attorney’s office] history.”
Myrhe also argued the government needed to protect some witnesses from leaks that might lead to threats, so it “culled the database with witness protection in mind.”
“Unprecedented database volume and witness concerns aside, the government never let these obstacles stand in the way of diligently working to fulfill its discovery obligations,” he wrote.
Navarro didn’t buy it and shredded the government for a “reckless disregard for Constitutional obligations.” She said she was troubled by the prosecution’s tardiness in delivering information about the government’s placing of surveillance cameras and snipers outside the ranch.
After the decision, Cliven Bundy emerged from an elevator at the courthouse dressed in jeans, button-down shirt and gray blazer.
“I’m not used to being free, put it that way,” he said. “I’ve been a political prisoner for right at 700 days today. I come into this courtroom an innocent man and I’m going to leave as an innocent man.”
He also seemed ready to resume his role as a leader on the issue of local control of federal land. It’s a decades-long fight for Bundy, who first tussled with the Bureau of Land Management in the 1990s by refusing to pay grazing fees for his cattle using federal land.
As he and his wife, Carol, walked out into a spitting rain, hundreds of supporters cheered. A “Not Guilty” sticker had been stuck to his lapel. The rancher took off his hat and waved it to the crowd before posing for pictures.
He criticized Clark County commissioners, the Clark County sheriff and Nevada’s governor for not coming to his defense.
“My defense is a 15-second defense: I graze my cattle only on Clark County, Nev., land and I have no contract with the federal government,” he said. “This court has no jurisdiction or authority over this matter. And I’ve put up with this court in America as a political prisoner for two years.”
His attorney, Bret Whipple, said there would be a news conference Tuesday in front of Las Vegas police headquarters to talk about control of public land.
U.S. Atty. Dayle Elieson of Nevada, who was appointed by Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions last
week, released a short statement after the decision. “We respect the court’s ruling and will make a determination about the next appropriate steps.”
Ian Bartrum, a law professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said that while the court decision was a defeat for the Justice Department, it could be seen as a victory for Trump administration policy to shrink national monuments and push for local control of federal land.
“Most of Trump’s base are Bundy supporters,” Bartrum said in an email. “This plays right into the larger Trump narrative about the Swamp versus the People. I think you might be right to say they aren’t that unhappy … and will likely make some political hay out of it.”
Advocates for federal enforcement of land regulations were quick to criticize the government’s handling of the case.
“Federal prosecutors clearly bungled this case and let the Bundys get away with breaking the law,” Kieran Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “The Bundys rallied a militia to mount an armed insurrection against the government. The failure of this case will only embolden this violent and racist anti-government movement that wants to take over our public lands.”
Twice last year, Las Vegas juries acquitted or deadlocked on felony charges against Bundy supporters. Then Ammon and Ryan Bundy each beat federal felony charges in a case stemming from a 41-day standoff in 2016 at an Oregon wildlife preserve.
Tucker Carlson on who American right should be worried about;
For generations, American conservatives have been taught to defend free enterprise at all costs. Any hint of regulation of major corporations has been regarded as inevitably leading to socialism. And even the populist President Trump’s main accomplishment thus far has been a reduction in the corporate tax rate.
But one of the American right’s leading voices is calling for a fundamental shift in conservatism. Because it’s not the state which is cracking down on conservatives – it’s tech companies.
“It might be difficult to get your head around what is happening in this country,” Tucker Carlson said in a recent episode of his Fox News show “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” “So much has changed. But here’s the bottom line – the federal government is no longer the main threat to your privacy and to your freedoms. You’ve grown up thinking that; it’s no longer true. Big corporations are the main threat to your freedom and your privacy.”
Carlson argued the government “doesn’t own your private emails: Google does.”
“Federal employees can’t be fired for their political views. Private sector employees are all the time. The federal government can’t end your ability to publicly communicate your ideas. Twitter and Facebook can do that and they do do that all the time. The Orwellian future is increasingly the Orwellian present, and tech barons are becoming our new commissars. Liberals who once admirably stood up for free expression and opposition to concentrations of corporate power have been thoroughly co-opted. They’re getting rich from it.”
Carlson drew attention to the recent lawsuit filed by James Damore against Google, which alleged a systematic anti-white agenda at the powerful corporation, including excluding white men from jobs. Interviewed on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Damore said he was attacked by Google after being fired because the company is nervous.
“I attacked their orthodoxy,” he told Carlson. “They really need to send a message to all their employees that no, you can’t do this, you can’t question our policies.”
But Carlson argues the question goes beyond bias. Indeed, it is almost existential in Carlson’s view.
Because Google has such an overwhelming share of the digital ad market, the company can deny market share, sales and exposure not just to business competitors, but to political opponents. And as Damore’s lawsuit makes clear, there are serious allegations Google does not just lean left, but is a far-left, activist company.
What’s more, as companies such as Google control the private information of consumers, and even control what people can find online, their potential power over the public debate is all but unchallengeable.
Such concerns are especially valid given the mainstream media’s focus on an alleged Russian effort to “hack” the American election by placing ads online. Two corporations, Google and Facebook, have the ability to set the tone for the entire political debate.
“Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter – they all have your private information, they all can control not only what you can see online but what you are allowed to say,” Carlson said. “And maybe, over time, what you are cable of thinking and believing. In many cases their services are additive and harmful, and they know that. But it’s recently become clear tech giants are not just a threat to our privacy but they are a threat to our basic American freedoms. For most people, there’s not much you can do about it except just get increasingly paranoid, but Congress can do a lot.”
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who recently appeared on Carlson’s show, disagreed with Carlson’s contention that tech companies are the biggest threat to the privacy of ordinary Americans.
“That is not to say that [a] company like Google couldn’t at some point become too powerful and inflict consumer harm,” he said. “But in no way is it as much of a threat as the government to your privacy. Google doesn’t have guns, it can’t shoot you, it can’t tax you, it can’t regulate you the way that the government can. And so my much bigger focus is the threat posed by the federal government to your privacy.”
Lee also pointed out the government can also already get access to people’s emails without a warrant.
But Carlson noted tech companies actually have more power than the government in some ways, especially because they can not be held accountable.
“In the case of the government, I have FOIA [the Freedom of Information Act, which allows Americans to request government documents which may affect them],” Carlson said. “But in the case of Google, which in many ways is the portal through which people understand reality, you don’t know things if they’re not on Google, Google has jiggered its search results to eliminate concepts that it disagrees with. Political concepts. This is not a fever dream of mine, this is a fact which is proven … they have changed the search results to disappear results they don’t like.
“So why is that is not terrifying to the prospect of running a democracy that requires an informed citizenry?” he asked.
Lee retreated to establishment libertarian positions, saying Google should be able to do whatever it wants as a private company. However, as Carlson pointed out, Google controls the overwhelming majority of digital advertising, thus giving it the power to make or break not just other corporations but the news organizations Americans rely on to stay informed.
“Every news organization that relies on digital advertising, which is all of them, are dependent on two companies [Google and Facebook] that are wildly political and working against free speech,” he said. “That’s not a concern?”
Lee admitted it is a concern but not anything that he is going to do anything about.
“Not everything rises to the level of market concentration combined with consumer harm,” he assured Carlson. “And we have options that consumers have access to. They can use other search engines. They can avoid Google if they want to. And that does make a difference here.”
But the nature of social networking sites and some Internet companies is that they are useful only if a large number of people are using them. And some conservatives are already arguing large tech companies should be regarded as utilities and subject to federal regulation, especially to ensure the right of all users to free speech.
This would represent a departure from the traditional conservative or libertarian position. But as right-leaning news organizations face annihilation and Republican politicians face an uphill battle online, change may be coming within the Republican coalition.
“I used to be a libertarian until Google,” said Carlson.
Read more at :
Every day, like vultures circling a fallen prey, they descend upon the centers of political power with their hands outstretched and without a hint of compunction or embarrassment, they beg, lobby, or riot for what they consider to be their “fair” portion of the sweat, blood and tears of those who are successful, self-reliant, responsible and independent. Black, white, tan, red or yellow, these mostly urban beggars and whiners epitomize the Occupy Wall Street crowd that say they aren’t getting their fair share of America’s wealth and demand that those that produce and earn their way, must cough up more in taxes to pay those who won’t work and want something for nothing, using the power of government to get it, in a grand scheme of wealth re-distribution. This “scheme” is socialism by any other name. If the urban beggars and whiners don’t get their way, they resort to violence, property damage and mayhem. This display of “Gimee! Gimee! Gimee!” is disgusting and not worthy of a people who once called them selves free, sovereign and independent.
Over the last 50 years, America has spawned at least hall of the population (if not more) as a mindless collective of Bernie Sanders whiners and takers, egged on by corrupt politicians scrounging for votes to remain in power. The legislatures, local, state and federal, exploit human weakness and greed and can’t wait to rob the public coffers to pay the bloodsuckers for what they have not earned. Government then uses the education system, the court system and law enforcement to brainwash the next generation into government-compliant robots. Then they pass never-ending social legislation to make the people and their offspring weaker and more dependent.
Unfortunately, these whiners and takers can vote and thus will always vote for the corrupt politician (and there are so many of them, “R’s” and “D’s”) that will keep their entitlement “pig trough” full. When the whiners and takers demand more, the corrupt politicians, eager to placate and pander to the rioters and complainers, scream that the rich aren’t paying their fair share.
“Fair Share?” Let’s talk about fair share! 10% of the top income earners in America pay 70% of the income taxes. That’s not just fair it is way more than fair, to the point of outright theft. The productive middle-class pay the other 30%. 47% of the population pay no income taxes at all and that 47% receives money FROM the government for just being poor or lazy, paid by those that pay 70% and 30% of the taxes. This unconstitutional re-distribution of wealth is class warfare run amok! In a free society, it is inexcusable. If this author had the fortune of being in the top 10% of income earners, you can bet we would do everything in our power to shield our income from the rapacious government and the bloodsuckers. By what right, or by what common sense law, or by what constitutional principle, does the poor obtain a benefit from the rich by the mere fact of being poor? You won’t find that in the U. S. Constitution.
As politicians dodge along the campaign trail towards election or re-election, lies come out of their mouths like water over Niagara Falls. They purposely divide the country between ethnic and white, naive’ and intelligent, socialist and patriot, un-wise and wise and the rich and the poor. Politicians will do or say anything to get elected, or re-elected. They will tell any lie, use any meaningless example, dupe any group, or exploit any opportunity or emergency, to fulfill their goal of two, four, or six more years.
But all of the politician’s lying and propaganda wouldn’t work if government hadn’t been so successful in dividing us, such that we are so split up now we fight with each other instead of taking our anger and actions out on those who manipulate us, pull our strings and given the chance, would enslave us. We have spawned more than two to three generations that no longer value freedom, self-reliance and independence. They only value what they can get for free. They no longer value the therapeutic and monetary rewards of hard work. They have willingly sacrificed their freedom for welfare payments, guaranteed jobs, free housing, free college tuition, free health care, a so-called “living wage” and the false umbrella of security, as defined and provided by government.
At least half of these last few generations of Americans find no value in personal pride or doing the best job they can because they haven’t been taught that doing a good job reflects well upon them and gives them credibility and honor. Instead, they are obsessed with alcohol and drugs, electronic and other toys, communication devices and mindless, guttural TV shows, or movies with no redeeming value or substance. They are also obsessed by the lie of “unfairness”, spoon-fed to them by a government that exploits the looters, moochers and freeloaders for their votes. What is even worse, these folks that hate a free and prosperous America and would take her down if they could, are spawning more generations of dependent Americans with the same Gimee! mindset.
But bear in mind, none of this has happened by accident, because throughout history government has learned that the best and easiest way to govern is to keep the masses happy, dumb, brainwashed, distracted ….. and divided. What faces America today could not have happened if the people were honorable, honest, trustworthy, self-reliant and vigilant against government’s shadowy, covert and massive expansion of its seventeen (17) constitutionally enumerated powers.
It is quite possible from the foregoing that you think that we are heartless and without compassion. Nothing could be further from the truth. On the contrary, we believe there is a limited role for government to play funding national disasters and in helping those that can’t help themselves by providing incentives and enhancing the role that private charities play in providing this assistance. When a person gives to a private charity as a voluntary charitable act that is an act of free choice. There are millions of Americans who give regularly to charities every year. There are millions more that give to their churches that also provide assistance for the poor. In fact, America is the most generous nation on earth.
However, when government says you MUST pay higher taxes so that government can transfer those taxes to the poor and the un-deserving, that is an involuntary, forced act of charity through law and the gun and takes away your right of free choice. But what so many forget is, without free choice there can be no freedom. Free choice is the first casualty of a tyrannical government.
Here is what Benjamin Franklin said about the poor:
“I am for doing good to the poor, but … I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed … that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
When the government gets in the act of providing for the poor, especially when their motive is to buy votes, the poor grow in number and the cost to continue their support grows as well. The cost for government to support the poor in America since President Johnson’s Great Society, (click on “Great Society” link for more information about the poor from the Heritage Foundation) has been in the trillions of dollars and yet we have neither “….. led or have driven the poor out of poverty”, in the words of Benjamin Franklin. We have only succeeded in growing poverty and growing exponentially, the cost to support it. As a result, we are weaker as a people, weaker financially in un-payable debt and weaker as a nation.
Of course, being poor is no picnic and not all poor people are looters, moochers, or freeloaders. But in America, where anyone who will get an education, work hard to the best of their physical and mental ability, stay on the right side of the law and be personally responsible for their actions, can rise above being poor. The history books are full of individuals that have risen out of poverty to become household names. But the poor will never rise out of poverty if they continue to surround themselves with other people who care so little about themselves. The poor will never beat the odds if they settle for a life of dependency on government and pick roll models that are the dredges of society.
The reality is, the poor in America live far better off than the poor anywhere on the planet, with subsidized housing, food credit cards, plasma TVs, free health care, free education, free school breakfasts and lunches and free cell phones, all paid for on the backs of the American taxpayer and administered by a grossly in-efficient and hopelessly corrupt government. The reason that they live so well is, they are just the pawns of government who pay them off to buy their votes. This is why the Democrats have been so successful at maintaining political power in America for the last 80 years. They pander to the poor, the un-deserving and ethnic minorities with your tax money for their votes.
Through ever-expanding entitlement programs, government has been instrumental in spawning generation after generation of people whose only reason for living is being dependent on the great mother, government. Having done so, the government has brought us to the brink of national bankruptcy and has created a large segment of the population that is weak, wholly dependent upon government and votes for those politicians that promise and deliver their continuing subsistence, in a classic example of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
We predict that the law of diminishing returns will eventually bring this scheme for buying votes through government handouts crashing down (as it has in Greece and much of the rest of Europe) and those now dependent on government for their lives and livelihoods will either have to become self-reliant and independent, or find the skirts of another “mother” to hang on, or suffer, or die needlessly.
Ladies and gentlemen, the history books tell us that it took just 3% of the colonials to give birth to freedom some 241 years ago, by making the greatest sacrifice that anyone can give, the sacrifice of life. Can 3% of Americans restore freedom again this time peacefully, or are there 3% of Americans who even care about freedom anymore?
The presidential election in November of 2016 has given us a clue as to which way the wind might be blowing but the wind can shift in an instant. If the wind is blowing in the right direction, perhaps we can “spawn” a different generation of greater, self-reliant Americans who believe in freedom so much that they will give whatever sacrifice is necessary to preserve, protect and defend that freedom for their children and grandchildren. However, given that 57% of Americans want more government in their lives, our confidence that this will ever happen is diminishing rapidly.
What say YOU?
Ron Ewart, a nationally known author and speaker on freedom and property rights issues and author of this weekly column, “In Defense of Rural America“. Ron is the president of the National Association of Rural Landowners (NARLO) (www.narlo.org), a non-profit corporation headquartered in Washington State, acting as an advocate and consultant for urban and rural landowners. Affiliated NARLO websites are “SAVE THE USA” (http://www.stusa.us/) and “Getting Even With Government” (http://www.gewgov.com/). Ron can be reached for comment HERE.
From the print edition of The New American. Written by Charles Scaliger –
By Onan Coca January 1, 2018-
by Bob Bennett–
Published on Dec 20, 2017–
You may not be aware of it, but Europe is dying. More accurately, it’s committing suicide by Muslim migration. For perhaps a decade, the EU has admitted far too many Muslim migrants. In 2015, this wave of admissions became a flood.
Germany’s chancellor Merkel openly invited all who wished to come. That year Deutschland admitted a net 1.14 million immigrants according to Deutsche Welle. Germany’s population in 2014 was 80.98 million, so Germany took in over 1 percent of its population in one year.
Gatestone Institute estimates that: “At least 80% … [912,000] of the newcomers were Muslim, according to the Central Council of Muslims in Germany.”
Put another way, that’d be like the United States taking in 25,840,000 Muslim migrants next year. (But don’t be complacent: gradual change for the worse leads to the same place.)
Two things happened as a result of Merkel’s idiotic policy. 1. The rest of Europe was swamped with migrants spurred on by Germany’s open-door policy; 2. Many of the EU nations suffered an enormous increase in crime—particularly crimes against women. A third thing will happen: due to Muslims’ much higher birth rate than Europeans, in a few decades Europe will be Muslim, just as Indonesia—once Buddhist— is today home to the world’s largest Muslim population.
Lesson to be learned? Do not invite in large numbers of people from nations with an alien, inimical culture. Nevertheless, Europe’s leaders—with Germany as the tip of the spear—consider it a matter of policy to keep admitting Muslim migrants, who are to be divided up among the EU nations whether they like it or not. Nations who refuse are to be punished. Hungary and Poland are examples of the latter.
Those who publicly object to the EU’s migration policy are demonized as extremists, Nazis, white supremacists. In Germany, anti-migrant comments in social media can lead to indictment for “Incitement to Hatred.”
By now, you must be asking, Why?? It may have something to do with the uber-left border-hating George Soros who, as Nigel Farage recently told the European Parliament, Soros’s Open Society “even published a book of reliable friends in the European Parliament and there are 226 names on that list.” That’s roughly one-third of the members of parliament in Europe.
The book, titled Reliable Allies in the European Parliament (2014-2019),” comprises 177 pages; it defines “reliable allies” as members of parliaments who “are likely to support Open Society’s work.” RT.com writes:
“A quick preview of the candidate’s description field provides some good indication as to what Soros expects from his allies, including a political philosophy that includes support of the LGBTI … movement, open borders and an anti-Russia stance.” [I = intersex]
RT adds, “Thanks to the advocacy work of the Migration Policy Institute and the Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants (PICUM), both Soros-sponsored organizations, the mass resettlement of Muslims from the Middle East and North Africa into Europe became the norm.”
In 2015, Russia banned Open Society’s operating on its soil, as a threat to “constitutional order.”
The Reliable Allies book was hacked and leaked on the Internet, or we wouldn’t be aware of its existence. You can be certain there’s a similar listing of American “reliable allies” yet to be uncovered.
Lies our leaders tell us
It’d be worth knowing what kind of justifications for this destructive immigration .
Read More at: