Category: News

Luke Combs performs “Hurricane” from his album “This One’s For You”.

Based on a story from Stephen King’s collection Skeleton Crew, Spike’s THE MIST centers around a small town family that is torn apart by a brutal crime.

As they deal with the fallout, an eerie mist rolls in suddenly cutting them off from the rest of the world and, in some cases, each other. Family, friends, and adversaries become strange bedfellows, battling the mysterious mist and its threats, fighting to maintain morality and sanity as the rules of society break down. THE MIST stars Morgan Spector, Alyssa Sutherland, Gus Birney, Danica Curcic, Okezie Morro, Luke Cosgrove, Darren Pettie, Russell Posner, Dan Butler, Isiah Washington, Jr. and Frances Conroy.

Fear. Human. Nature. “The Mist,” from a story by Stephen King, premieres Thursday, June 22nd on Spike.

Prepare for another week of White House press releases where the Trump administration correctly points out they have truly made America great again, because now even a European study group says so.

The United States is once again the most competitive economy in the world and the top in tech.

The USA leads the IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2018 followed by Singapore, Sweden, Denmark and Switzerland. Rising from the 3^rd spot, the USA overtakes Singapore and Sweden to top the ranking.

and [emphasis added]:

The top five most competitive economies in the world remain the same as in the previous year, but their order changes. The United States returns to the first spot, followed by Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands and Switzerland. The United States improves three positions from last year while Hong Kong drops one spot and Singapore remains 3^rd. The return of the United States to the top is driven by its strength in economic performance (1^st) and infrastructure (1^st).

Of note is that the previous report had the U.S.A. at #4 which demonstrates that the Trump administration’s policies have had a dramatic effect on the American economy and have literally put America first.

The US also jumped two spots from #3 to #1 in the digital competitiveness ranking:

In 2010, at the equivalent time period in Obama’s first term, the US dropped from first to third in its ability to compete with the world. By the end of his administration, his progressive policies had pushed the American economy to #4 in competitiveness while he oversaw the slowest economic recovery in decades.

For the first time in decades, Singapore (1) and Hong Kong (2) have topped the US (3) in IMD’s [2010] World Competitiveness Yearbook rankings.

Yeah, America isn’t really missing Mr. “You didn’t build that!” Ok, well maybe Obama’s Education Secretary is:

“We’re not top ten in anything!” Arne Duncan exclaimed Sunday on CBS “Face the Nation.” He apparently missed the IMD reports … among other things.

Pretty sure CNN, NBC, The New York Times and Washington Post will also downplay America’s amazing accomplishment, but that’s why we’re here.

America is exceptional. America is first again. America is great again. America … is back!

• President Donald Trump has tapped seven of Justice Clarence Thomas’s former clerks for appeals court nominations since taking office.
• An eighth former Thomas clerk, Neomi Rao, will likely be confirmed in the near future.
• The justice actively mentors his closely knit network of acolytes. 

One credential, in particular, has been a boon to candidates President Donald Trump considers for judicial appointments: a clerkship with Justice Clarence Thomas.

As of this writing, the president has appointed seven Thomas clerks to the federal appeals courts, while an eighth is expected in the near future. As such, Thomas’s legal approach — sometimes branded unusual or idiosyncratic — can claim adherents among a new generation of judges.

“At this point, Justice Thomas is clearly the leading intellectual force on the conservative side of the bench,” said Carrie Severino, a former Thomas clerk who leads the Judicial Crisis Network, an advocacy group that supports Trump’s efforts to recast the judicial branch.

“His principled approach to the law is very much in the ascendency and those are the kind of judges that this president has pledged for the courts,” Severino added.

Thomas generally hires law clerks who share his originalist judicial philosophy. Among the court’s conservatives, he is somewhat unique in that respect: former Justice Antonin Scalia periodically hired liberal “counter clerks” to sharpen his work, while the hiring practices of other conservatives like Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh appears slightly more varied.

“I’m not going to hire clerks who have profound disagreements with me,” Thomas said during a 1999 lecture at the National Center for Policy Analysis. “Someone said that it’s like trying to train a pig. It wastes your time, and it aggravates the pig.”

As such, the Thomas chambers are an incubator for elite conservative legal talent, producing a pool of candidates for executive and judicial appointments in Republican administrations.

The Thomas clerk who most recently took the bench is Judge Allison Rushing, who was confirmed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday. Democrats and civil rights groups opposed her nomination.

The six other Thomas clerks confirmed to the federal appeals courts under Trump include Judge Allison Eid, who took Justice Neil Gorsuch’s seat on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Jim Ho for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge David Stras for the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Eric Miller for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals; Judge Greg Maggs for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and Judge Greg Katsas for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Thomas, who has served on the court for over 25 years and will turn 71 in June, may well be succeeded by one of his own clerks. Eid and Stras are on the president’s list of possible nominees for the Supreme Court. Judge Margaret Ryan of the Armed Forces appeals court, a Thomas clerk whom former President George W. Bush appointed, is also listed.

Neomi Rao, who clerked for Thomas in the 2001 term, is currently awaiting confirmation to the D.C. Circuit. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell teed up a cloture vote on her nomination Thursday, meaning a final confirmation vote will likely come next week.

Social conservatives met Rao’s nomination with skepticism, prompting several Republican lawmakers to consult privately with Thomas, though the substance of those discussions has not been made public.

Thomas’s own thinking has already appeared in the written work of his proteges. Ho’s first opinion on the 5th Circuit was a dissent from the court’s refusal to review a decision upholding a $350 limit on campaign donations for Austin City Council races in Texas. Ho opened with a reference to a Thomas opinion that accused the courts of elevating certain constitutional protections over others. Additional Thomas citations recur throughout the opinion.

Severino said Thomas actively embraces his mentorship role, regularly holding court with former clerks and dispensing advice on professional matters. Among the other justices, reunions with clerks are common but generally infrequent. For example, retired Justice Anthony Kennedy convened clerk reunions once every few years.

“Justice Thomas is an exceptional mentor,” Severino told The Daily Caller News Foundation. “He is someone that doesn’t just view his clerks as a great source of bright young labor for a year, but really as almost members of his family. He takes on a role in helping them and advising them on their careers.”

Perhaps most importantly, the justice also encourages his alumni to assist one another as a mutually supportive network. Recalling his own bitter confirmation, he hopes his acolytes will never want for allies.

“He encourages his clerks to get out of Dodge as fast as they can,” Severino told TheDCNF. “But for those of us who stay [in Washington], he wants to make sure that there’s always someone who will have your back in what can be a very dog-eat-dog town.”

The contortions to which those in the Obama Administration will submit themselves in order to avoid calling Islamist terrorism just that would be comedic if the subject matter weren’t so deadly serious. Case in point comes to us in an announcement by the White House that a “summit on how to counter violent extremism” will be held next month amid fears amongst the American populace that Islamist terror attacks on US soil are all but certain.

The Washington Times reports:

“The White House on Sunday announced it will host a summit next month on how to counter violent extremism amid renewed fears among Americans that terror attacks on the homeland are inevitable.

 

 

“A Rasmussen poll released Sunday shows that 65 percent of Americans believe it is at least somewhat likely an attack ‘on those critical of Islam’ in the US will occur over the next year. Just 26 percent said such an attack is not likely, the survey shows…

 

 

“‘The [ani-extremism] summit will include representatives from a number of partner nations, focusing on the themes of community engagement, religious leader engagement, and the role of the private sector and tech community,’ White House press secretary Josh Earnest said in a statement Sunday. ‘Through presentations, panel discussions, and small group interactions, participants will build on local, state, and federal government; community; and international efforts to better understand, identify, and prevent the cycle of radicalization to violence at home in the United States and abroad.’”

Missing in this grand overture was the words “Islamist” and “terrorism”. Go figure.

The Rasmussen poll cited as the catalyst for this “summit” (as Mr. Obama would say, “Just words. Just speeches…”) centered on the American population’s concern about terror groups executing attacks on institutions of free speech here in the United States. It didn’t ask about “extremist groups,” which the Obama Administration has bastardized to include TEA Party groups and Second Amendment groups. It focused solely on Islamist terrorism, period. But, as then Obama Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel famously (or infamously) said, one should never let a good crisis go to waste. So, the Obama Administration widens the focus area from Islamist terrorism to “extremism” providing a wider blanket of topic coverage, and purely for political gain. It is sickeningly disingenuous.

It is sad, really, that the American people possess the courage to call Islamist terrorism what it is, even as their elected President bobs-and-weaves to avoid even using the terminology, all the while conniving, manipulating and distorting the issue at hand to affect marginalization of his political foes. His actions are not only beneath the dignity of his office and a stain on American history, they are a harsh and wicked slap in the face to everyone affected by Islamist terrorism, and especially those affected by the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo and the people of France, America’s oldest ally.

I would identify Mr. Obama as a coward for his refusal to state the obvious where Islamist terrorism is concerned. But I fear his motives are much more nefarious that cowardice. They are political. I don’t really know which is worse.

Instagram has changed the way we think about food. Food trends like Starbucks’ Unicorn Frappuccino have people lining up to get the newest, prettiest food products, just for that photo opportunity. If you’re looking for your next Instagram food post, look no further than the newest trend, “cloud eggs.” Here’s how to make them.

Courtesy of: Visual Capitalist

The Benghazi story line never fails to shock.  The latest on the Petraeus Affair is worth noting, not for gossip purposes, but for the possible connection to the upcoming Benghazi hearing.  FBI sources say they began an investigation last spring, when they mistook an email Petraeus had sent to his girlfriend  as referring to corruption.   At that point they uncovered the affair, and continued to investigate the emails.  And here is where the story gets “murky”.  There are two conflicting reports in regards to the ending of the relationship.  One report, Ed Morrsisey at HotAir cites a series of tweets by Martha Raddatz:

Official tells me sevrl people who knew Petraeus got anonymous harassing emails. So investigation started. Emails then traced to Broadwell.

— Martha Raddatz (@MarthaRaddatz) November 10, 2012

(1/2) @martharaddatz reports thatfriends of Petraeus received weird emails, & i’ve learned the CIA& D/CIA ASKED the FBI to investigate.

— Marc Ambinder (@marcambinder) November 10, 2012
(2/2). The FBI did. They discovered that Broadwell was likely the source. They disclosed this to Petraeus 2 weeks ago.

Ok, so from this information it looks like it was Petraeus himself, who asked the FBI to investigate.  That Paula Broadwell, the mistress, went “Fatal Attraction” email version on Petraeus. From another source, Ronald Kessler   we read a total different version:

At some point after Petraeus was sworn in as CIA director on Sept. 6, 2011, the woman broke up with him. However, Petraeus continued to pursue her, sending her thousands of emails over the last several months, raising even more questions about his judgment.(emphasis mine)

This article also cites “FBI sources” for the information above.  Which is it?  And why is it important?  This affair happened prior to Petraeus becoming the CIA Director.  We can surmise that the CIA was well aware of the ended affair.  So why did he have to resign now?  Why did Petraeus have to “tell the world” the reason he was leaving?  Its logical to conclude that even if they told him to resign, or, if Petraeus had a moment of “guilt” and felt he needed to resign, what is the purpose of outing the whole affair?  Why not just say “I am leaving for personal reasons” and spare your family the embarrassment?  And lastly, why is this coming now, 3 days after the Election, and a week before the Benghazi hearings?

What if Petraeus had information as CIA Director that would point at the White House for the Benghazi debacle?  Petraeus went on record and stated

 No One In the CIA Ordered Operatives To Stand Down

No one in the CIA.  Does Petraeus know who ordered the “stand down” order?  Could it be that the White House knowing of Petraeus’ affair told the Director “he might want to play ball with their narrative on Benghazi, or that affair you had might just make it into the news?”  This is just speculation on this writer’s part, but much of this Petraeus resignation doesn’t pass the smell test.  Could have Petraeus then, decided to “just out the affair himself”?  The conflicting reports about the affair, seemingly both from “FBI sources” to the timing and circumstances surrounding the resignation are producing many more questions than answers.

UPDATE!  In an article by Aaron Klein this other bombshell

Perhaps overlooked is the CIA’s role in purportedly using the Benghazi mission to coordinate U.S. aid to Syrian opposition groups and information those same insurgents include jihadists openly acting under the al-Qaida umbrella.

Patraeus resigned at a time when the U.S. intelligence community is facing criticism over both its response to the assault in Benghazi and whether it had early warnings of al-Qaida plans to attack the U.S. mission in that country.

These issues, of the US “gun running” from Benghazi, and aiding jihadits is information that Petraeus needs to testify on.  Recall that the Benghazi “mission” was called the “Benghazi Consulate”, fact is, there is no Consulate in Benghazi.  Obama and Hillary Clinton were careful in the last weeks to refer to the Benghazi “mission”, as they dropped the term “Consulate”.  That is important, there was a “mission” in Benghazi, and that mission was arming the Syrian rebels, who have ties to al-Qaida.  Petraeus must testify if we are to know the truth.

–thanks to Diana Nowell of “Hidden British News” who contributed to this post.

 

 

The Obama administration has initiated a renewed push to convince the U.S. Senate to approve the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea treaty. Administration officials claim approval of the pact is necessary to protect the U.S. Navy’s right to carry out exercises off the coast of China. In the past Chinese ships have harassed U.S. vessels.

The administration’s push to approve the treaty comes at a time of increased focus by the Pentagon on China’s military buildup and the expansion of its influence in the Asia-Pacific region. The Pentagon is also watching escalation of a dispute between Beijing and the Philippines over a South China Sea island.

Ratification of the treaty has long been blocked due to congressional concerns that the treaty gives the UN far too much control over American oil and mineral rights while threatening U.S. sovereignty. Treaty opponents contend that China will not to change its maritime claims even if the treaty is ratified.

On the high seas, the U.S. Navy “locks in” its rights and freedoms by its capacity to sink any ship that would try to deny those rights.

The United States doesn’t need the Law of the Sea Treaty (or LOST). The Continental Congress established the U.S. Navy in 1775, and over the next 236 years it has become the greatest, most powerful maritime force in world history. LOST was first adopted by the United Nations back in 1982. Since then, the United States Navy has managed to protect the U.S. and her maritime interests without benefit of LOST.

In the interest of national security and sovereignty, the United States should withdraw from the UN, stop paying all dues to what’s become an Islamofascist/Communist criminal organization, and expel them from American shores permanently.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/05/11/obama-administration-renews-push-to-ratify-law-of-sea-treaty/

NYU hired a former New Yorker employee Wednesday who had been fired for falsely labeling an ICE agent as a Nazi, to teach on far right coverage.

Talia Lavin will now be teaching a class at New York University called “Reporting on the Far Right” in NYU’s Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute. She is a “writer and researcher focused on far-right extremism and social justice,” according to her university profile.

Lavin was fired from the New Yorker for accusing a disabled ICE agent and US Veteran of being a Nazi due to a cross tattoo on his arm. This accusation came after she viewed a photo of the veteran online, where she then tweeted about it. She later deleted her tweet, saying that “some vets said this ICE agent’s tattoo looked more like a Maltese cross than an Iron Cross (common among white supremacists), so i deleted my tweet so as not to spread misinformation.”

The official ICE twitter account responded to the incident by pointing out that the cross was the symbol of the agent’s platoon in Afghanistan. “Justin Gaertner is a combat wounded U.S. Marine who continues to serve his country as an ICE computer forensics analyst, helping solve criminal cases & rescue abused children,” they said in a tweet.

In a statement, ICE told Lavin and the New Yorker that they owed Gaertner an apology. The statement also advised that the writing on Gaertner’s arm was “the Spartan Creed” dedicated to protecting family and children.

The New Yorker disavowed any association with Lavin’s views.

Less than a month after she was fired from the New Yorker, Lavin was picked up by Media Matters, the progressive media watchdog, where she worked as a “researcher on far-right extremism and the alt-right.” Her work includes topics such as Russian influence on positive American coverage of Trump, far right anti-Semitic conspiracies, how YouTube assists in right-wing radicalization, and more.