Sean Hannity (5/17/17) interview with Democrat Congressman Dennis Kucinich stuns. Watch it
Russia Special Counsel Mueller Worked with Radical Islamic Groups to Purge Anti-Terrorism Training Material Offensive to Muslims
The Judicial Watch Blog - Corruption Chronicles May 18, 2017
Now that Robert Mueller has been appointed special counsel to investigate if Russia influenced the 2016 presidential election it’s worth reiterating his misguided handiwork and collaboration with radical Islamic organizations as FBI director. Judicial Watch exclusively obtained droves of records back in 2013 documenting how, under Mueller’s leadership, the FBI purged all anti-terrorism training material deemed “offensive” to Muslims after secret meetings between Islamic organizations and the FBI chief. Judicial Watch had to sue to get the records and published an in-depth report on the scandal in 2013 and a lengthier, updated follow-up in 2015.
As FBI director, Mueller bent over backwards to please radical Islamic groups and caved into their demands. The agency eliminated the valuable anti-terrorism training material and curricula after Mueller met with various Islamic organizations, including those with documented ties too terrorism. Among them were two organizations— Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)—named by the U.S. government as unindicted co-conspirators in the 2007 Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing case. CAIR is a terrorist front group with extensive links to foreign and domestic Islamists. It was founded in 1994 by three Middle Eastern extremists (Omar Ahmad, Nihad Awad and Rafeeq Jaber) who ran the American propaganda wing of Hamas, known then as the Islamic Association for Palestine.
The records obtained as part of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit show that Mueller, who served 12 years as FBI chief, met with the Islamic organizations on February 8, 2012 to hear their demands. Shortly later the director assured the Muslim groups that he had ordered the removal of presentations and curricula on Islam from FBI offices nationwide. The purge was part of a broader Islamist operation designed to influence the opinions and actions of persons, institutions, governments and the public at-large. The records obtained by Judicial Watch also show similar incidents of Islamic influence operations at the Departments of Justice and State, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Obama White House. READ it HERE
President Donald Trump smiles as he listens to Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, speak during a news conference in the East Room of the White House, Thursday, May 18, 2017, in Washington. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
By Wesley Pruden - The Washington Times - Thursday, May 18, 2017
Now anything goes. All restraints are loosened, all self-discipline trashed. There’s no cure or even treatment for Trump Derangement Syndrome, a disease as wild and as swiftly lethal as anything imported from the Ebola River valley of the dark continent. The rules and taboos that once guided even the sleaziest excuse for a newspaper no longer apply.
Destroying Donald Trump is all that matters in the newsrooms of the mainstream media, so called, and by any means necessary. Rarely have so many hysterics contributed so much of the national conversation.
A columnist in The New York Times, ground zero in the epidemic of Trump Derangement Syndrome, suggests that a mutiny at the White House is the “more appropriate” way to rid the nation of the legitimate 46th duly elected president of the United States. Why waste time on impeachment? Mike Pence, Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell could organize the ambush. The columnist likens them to “stewards for a syphilitic emperor.” READ it HERE
Judicial Watch's Chris Farrell on Trump/Russia Probe: “There are two sides” to Fmr. FBI Director Robert Mueller
“While I’m pleased that [Mueller] is leading an effort to clear up what I believe is really nonsense concerning Russia & Trump allegations, there is a peculiar backstory…” –JW Director of Investigations Chris Farrell, JudicialWatch.org
WATCH his speech HERE. Please keep President Trump in your prayers.
The Left’s War on Free Speech
by Kimberley Strassel April 2017 • Imprimis Volume 46, Number 4
Kimberley Strassel writes the weekly “Potomac Watch” column for The Wall Street Journal, where she is also a member of the editorial board. She is the author of The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech. The following is adapted from a speech delivered on April 26, 2017, at Hillsdale College’s Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship in Washington, D.C., as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series.
Anecdote about family begins this article . . . . then it continues with:
I realized that what we’ve experienced over the past eight years a profound shift in our political culture, a shift that has resulted in a significant portion of our body politic holding a five-year-old’s view of free speech. What makes this shift notable is that unlike most changes in politics, you can trace it back to one day: January 21, 2010, the day the Supreme Court issued its Citizens United ruling and restored free speech rights to millions of Americans.
For nearly 100 years up to that point, both sides of the political aisle had used campaign finance laws—I call them speech laws—to muzzle their political opponents. The Right used them to push unions out of elections. The Left used them to push corporations out of elections. These speech laws kept building and building until we got the mack daddy of them all—McCain-Feingold. It was at this point the Supreme Court said, “Enough.” A five-judge majority ruled that Congress had gone way too far in violating the Constitution’s free speech protections.
The Citizens United ruling was viewed as a blow for freedom by most on the Right, which had in recent years gotten some free speech religion, but as an unmitigated disaster by the Left. Over the decades, the Left had found it harder and harder to win policy arguments, and had come to rely more and more on these laws to muzzle political opponents. And here was the Supreme Court knocking back those laws, reopening the floodgates for non-profits and corporations to speak freely again in the public arena.
In the Left’s view, the ruling couldn’t have come at a worse time. Remember the political environment in 2010. Democrats were experiencing an enormous backlash against the policies and agenda of the Obama administration. There were revolts over auto bailouts, stimulus spending, and Obamacare. The Tea Party movement was in full swing and vowing to use the midterm elections to effect dramatic change. Democrats feared an electoral tidal wave would sweep them out of Congress.
WILL Press Release |Analysis on Campus Free Speech Legislation Pending in the Wisconsin Legislature
By Cameron Sholty May 15, 2017
WILL concludes that “Both bills are a good start in that they seek to reaffirm the UW’s historic commitment to free speech”
May 15, 2017 – Milwaukee, WI – Today the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty released an analysis titled “On Freedom of Expression in the University of Wisconsin System.” The report provides a history of freedom of expression in the UW system and analyzes current legislative proposals for reform that are pending before the Wisconsin Legislature.
In December 2015, the UW Board of Regents adopted a statement on “Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression.” In his proposed 2017-2019 budget, Governor Walker sought to have a similar statement enacted into statute, but his proposal (along with all other non-fiscal items) was stripped from the budget.
Following that, members of the legislature sought to enact protections on freedom of speech on campus through stand-alone bills. The WILL report analyzes bills introduced by Representative Jesse Kremer and Senator Leah Vukmir. WILL concludes that “Both bills are a good start in that they seek to reaffirm the UW’s historic commitment to free speech and address the disturbing trend of official censorship and student interference with and ‘shout downs’ of speech.” However, WILL also concludes that both bills must be improved and offers several suggestions for improvement.
“Freedom of speech on college and university campuses is under assault nationwide,” said WILL President and General Counsel Rick Esenberg. “With speakers shouted-down, disinvited, and unable to speak on campuses for fear of being prevented by protestors, the heckler’s veto has been effective. It is appropriate for state legislatures to consider and enact legislation that protects the rights of these speakers, allows for appropriate protest, and requires discipline of offenders. Too often those who disrupt others’ right to speak are not punished, and the protestors know that, which only ensures future speakers will also be disrupted. This legislation is necessary to ensure the institutions of higher learning in our state both protect speech and discipline those who inappropriately interfere with the rights of others to speak.” READ it HERE
Above, Student representative from FIRE.org presents in favor of free speech protection at hearing at State Capitol 5/15/17
FIRE - Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
Freedom of Speech Attacked, Defended During Public Hearing MacIver News Service | May 15, 2017
[Madison, Wisc...] Advocates and Opponents of campus free speech testified at an Assembly Hearing on a bill that would require the UW Regents to adopt policies to safeguard the First Amendment throughout the UW System.
Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Representative Jesse Kremer are co-authors of the bill. They cited an event at UW-Madison in November where protesters blocked a speech by conservative commentator Ben Shapiro for over a half-hour.
Conservative and Liberal students talked about the importance of free speech on campus. However, some students, like Savion Castro, also presented a unique interpretation of the First Amendment, where speech is considered a luxury and their right to not be offended takes precedence over other's constitutional rights. WATCH VIDEO CLIP from hearing.
Business-Friendliness, Location Fuel Wisconsin’s Rise
By Dale Buss May 4, 2017 Chief Executive.net
Wisconsin’s rise into the top 10 of Chief Executive’s “2017 Best States for Business” has been the steadiest ascension in the rankings over the past five years—and one of the most deliberate.
Since Gov. Scott Walker took office in 2010, he has pushed and deployed a laundry list of business-friendly policies in large part to persuade CEOs that Wisconsin would be a great place to site or expand their facilities and companies.
At the same time, the biggest boon to the state might not be of Walker’s creation: the accident of its location across borders from two of the Midwest’s most important population centers, Chicago and the Twin Cities.
He’s done a tremendous job of communicating to the world that Wisconsin is open for business.
In any event, Wisconsin has climbed the list to No. 10 this year from No. 41 in 2010, to No. 24 in 2011, to No. 20 in 2012, to No. 17 in 2013, to No. 14 in 2014, to No. 12 in 2015, and to No. 11 last year. And after the addition of thousands of jobs over that span, Wisconsin’s rate of workforce participation is nearly 69 percent, putting it in America’s top 10 states—and at an all-time high for the Badger State. READ it HERE