ALT-right, but not ALT-Right Click… or CTL-ALT… or what?

It would seem that I’ve fallen woefully behind on currency with Slander Terms Of Art as applied by The Loony Side Of Left.

I’d kept up on “racist” and “homophobe” and even managed to figure out what “misogynist” was (but it isn’t the same as miscegenation even though it sounds similar…), but I’d not been able to keep up with the onslaught, it seems.

So Madam Hillary seems to have used a new one. ALT-Right. Near as I can tell, it’s a basket term that basically is used to tie all prior “Democratically Defined As Evil” epithets to the Right, and thus to Trump.

Now I’m most likely going to vote for Trump. Not with great enthusiasm, but as a much better alternative to Madam Hillary (the thief, liar, and perjurer who likes graft). That, by extension, given what the news has said, labels me as being “Alt-Right” and therefore hideously evil.

Well, nice to know that. Now I can just give up on ever being PC enough to be accepted in Polite-Left circles and return to eating roasted babies and murdering puppies and kittens, but without the guilt that I might be found out… (For those who are from The Left, and therefor sarcasm and humor impaired, that’s sarcasm… ask a friend that goes to church or doesn’t do drugs to explain it to you… if you have any…)

Sidebar on Me: Should those on the left want to color me rabid right wing, please read this first: If wishing to call me a Fascist, please read: and realize I’m not that socialist… and finally, realize that the whole “right wing” and “left wing” thing is just garbage. and I’m not on that monolithic axis. I’m for individual liberty and responsibility, not Central Authority from Socialists nor Central Authority from Autocrats, Emperors (or Empress wanna-bees), Kings, Princes, Popes, Dictators or even Presidents. I’m not on your idea of a right-left axis, nor are most people. That is a choice between dictatorship of the Peoples Commissar or dictatorship of El Presidente. I reject both.

Besides, I am a Liberal, of the Classy sort.

So Hillary used it. I saw the clip on, I think, Fox news. (Oh Horrors! I must be the most Altered Of Alt-Right Wing Nuts!!! I watched Fox!!… again, those on the Left: this is more of that sarcasm stuff… I’m going to trust you to remember that all the way to the end of this piece… I know it’s hard, but do try.) So I saw Hillary say it on Fox and had no clue what an Alt-Right was, thinking it sounded like a chord I’d play on the keyboard to reboot or something… Over to CNN, then MSNBC to see if they elaborated.

Both dutifully and with great vigor used the term, right on queue. Seems they’d been emailed the same talking points in time for script writing. But still, no definition of what it was… though clearly it was very very evil and only dead souls of ax murderers, or anyone a Republican, was one. Oh, and anyone related to Breitbart News. See, Trump had hired a guy who had worked at Breitbart, so somehow that makes all of them Alt-Right and thus the evil first cousin of the Devil Himself… Which is good news for me, since I’ve worked at Apple Computer in the past, and they are quintessentially cool, so by their reasoning I’m essentially quintessentially cool forever!!! Oh Boy! (The spouse will be thrilled…)

Then, on the Rachel Maddow? show on pMSNBC they were kind enough to devote what seemed like hours to the topic of how to do character assassination by innuendo, labeling, smear, and application of neologisms that you’ve defined to turn good things into clearly evil things. Complete with a guest who makes a living out of identifying who is to be labeled, smeared, shunned, and have character assassination applied (until and unless Herr Clinton can apply the real thing…) That pointed me firmly at the definition being something of a ‘roll up’ of sexism, misogyny (that is somehow different from sexism), and racism and a few other isms. I also learned there was something called “white nationalism” that was also evil.

Being accidentally born white, I thought maybe I ought to find out what it was, and where this all white nation was located, as last I looked there were none such left on the planet…

So I started with the wiki on “Alt-Right”.

The alt-right is a segment of right-wing ideologies presented as an alternative to mainstream conservatism in the politics of the United States. The alt-right has been described as a movement unified by support for Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump, as well as opposition to multiculturalism and immigration.

OK, right off the bat, we’ve got issues. First off, “right-wing” is already a broken concept. (See above link on isms). Then it is tied to the United States. Any useful concept is generic and NOT tied to a single nation unless directly derived from that nation (like Finish is a language derived from Finland.) Next they nail it to Trump. OK, a custom cut slur just for him. Got it. No content, just insult.

Then it gets glued onto opposition to “multiculturalism and immigration”. Well gee… IF I happen to think the country is being broken by a massive influx of folks who have no reasonable cultural connection to it, nor any interest in the success of it, nor the job skills to be a success in it, that is evil? OK… So I guess that makes Japan and China “Alt-Right” as they both are interested in cultural preservation and only letting in immigrants who can improve their country… And here I thought The Peoples Republic Of China was “left wing”… (starting to see the problem with those ‘wings’?) This would also mean that the USA, all of Europe, and pretty much everywhere else in the world was “Alt-Right” up until about 1980…

As per opposition to multiculturalism: I love Chinese food and restaurants, my date to the high school reunion was a Chinese girl from my class, and I’m just about as much fond of Japanese food and culture (though the language is a bit hard due to the writing system). I grew up taking about 1/2 my meals as my Mexican best friends home (and him about 1/2 at mine). Yet I’m in favor of having One American Culture as our base, to which the rest are personal overlays. I’m opposed to the idea that just any old group can move in here, set up shop separate from America and do well. So what does that make me? “Alt-Right”? Pro cultural diversity? Pragmatist who realizes that some things just don’t mix? (Like Sharia and Liberal Democracy – one is authoritarian and absolutist, the other is not and demands acceptance of others. That’s just a logic problem result, not a statement of personal preference, BTW. Liberal Democracies are not stable over time and that bothers me… I prefer a Representative Libertarian form.)

Bold bits mine:

Although the alt-right lacks an official ideology, various sources have described it as a loosely-defined conservative movement composed of elements of white nationalism, white supremacism and antisemitism. The alt-right has also been linked to right-wing populism, nativism and the neoreactionary movement.

The alt-right has been said to be a largely online movement with internet memes widely used to advance or express its beliefs, often on websites such as 4chan.

Man that’s a lot-o-isms! Lets start with the easy one “antisemitism”. OK, so they are saying Trump hates Jews… like his daughter, son-in-law, and their children? OK…. so how’s that work again?

Sidebar on Me: Please note, I’m terribly biased here. I have Jewish relatives (Uncle, Cousins) and a kid somewhere in Israel. I’ve dated a Jewish girl and liked it. I’ve been to the weddings of Jewish friends, and I’ve worked for a Jewish owned and managed company. I prefer Kosher meat (though Halal is OK in a pinch) and really like a good Jewish Deli (but who doesn’t?)

Now we get into the harder ones. “White Nationalism”? Where’s that mysterious white nation? The original has further Wiki links where we find it means:

White nationalism is an ideology that advocates a racial definition of national identity. These individuals identify and are attached to the perceived white nation. It ranges from a preference for one’s ethnic group, to feelings of superiority, including calls for national citizenship to be reserved for white people, as in Rhodesia.

White separatism and white supremacy are subgroups within white nationalism. White separatists seek a separate white state, while white supremacists add ideas from social Darwinism and Nazism to their ideology. Both generally avoid the term supremacy because it has negative connotations.

Critics have argued that ideas such as white pride and white nationalism exist to provide a sanitized public face for white supremacy, and that most white nationalist groups promote white separatism and racial violence.

OK, I get it, it means “Bash Whitey”… So a white who believes in “white pride” is a racist bigot while a black who believes in “black pride” isn’t. Got it…

So the slam here is to assert Trump and by extension anyone who votes for him, is wanting to reserve citizenship for whites and create an all white country… Not seeing how that fits Trump and his followers. Nor me. (The Sisters kids are various ‘mixes’ including some American Indian and Hispanic and my grandkid is a Hispanic mix with maybe a touch of Africa, but nobody knows for sure, or cares.)

Somehow I’m not seeing how this fits…

Then again, I’m not seeing how misogyny fits a guy like Trump (since it means hatred of women) when he clearly adores his wife, and put his daughter in charge of significant businesses, hired a woman campaign manager, and promoted many women inside his companies. Then again, facts never stood in the way of a good Democratic Smear Campaign…

Returning to the ALT-right discussion:

We have “right-wing populism”. What the heck is that? Appealing to conservative populace? It is bad for a conservative politician to appeal to conservative people? Huh? So we’ll hit that wiki-link to see what the biased “left wing” guardians of all things wiki thinks it means:

Right-wing populism is a political ideology that rejects existing political consensus and often combines laissez-faire liberalism and anti-elitism. It is considered populism because of its appeal to the “common man” as opposed to the elites.

OK, so belief in capitalism / liberalism(classical, not American-Social see above “I am a liberal” link) and The People instead of their Elite Overlords is somehow bad? And equally somehow “right wing”? I thought the Right Wing was supposed to be the Fat Cat Rich Elite? And “the peoples movement” left? (Again that wing-ding fails us…)

In Europe right-wing populism is also an expression used to describe groups and political parties generally known for their opposition to immigration, mostly from the Islamic world, and the European Union. Traditional right-wing views such as opposition to an increasing support for the welfare state and a “more lavish, but also more restrictive, domestic social spending” scheme is also described under right-wing populism and is sometimes called “welfare chauvinism”.

From the 1990s right-wing populist parties became established in the legislatures of various democracies including Canada, Norway, France, Israel, Poland, Russia, Romania and Chile, and entered coalition governments in Switzerland, Austria, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Italy. Although extreme right-wing movements in the US have been studied separately, where they are normally called “radical right”, some writers consider them to be the same phenomenon. Right-wing populism is distinct from the historic right, which had been concerned with preserving the “status quo”, and mostly do not have roots in their political parties.

Ok, so “I like my country, language, and culture, and would like them to continue” is evil, eh? Well, guess we all ought to just march right out and commit cultural and ethnic suicide then…

I do have to ask, though: What makes the invading culture (from anywhere) superior? If they are not interested in becoming Germans or French, why invade Germany and France? And, pray tell, why ought the citizens of a country working hard for a living provide “welfare benefits” to random immigrants who have no interest in that country?

But at least we’ve now generalized to folks outside the USA. Though it does still seem to be a “Get Whitey!” theme… as it is pejorative to historically white Europeans and doesn’t seem to care that China and Japan and even Saudi Arabia are not very willing to let a large foreign national influx happen, and tend to think you ought to learn THEIR language if you would be a citizen…

I’m going to skip over ‘neo-reactionary’ as I’m pretty sure it’s the usual International Communism / Socialism definition of reactionary.

That leaves “Nativism”. That’s another new one for me.

Nativism is the political position of supporting a favored status for certain established inhabitants of a nation as compared to claims of newcomers or immigrants. According to Fetzer, (2000) opposition to immigration is common in many countries because of issues of national, cultural, and religious identity. The phenomenon has been studied especially in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, as well as Europe in recent years, where immigration is seen as lowering the wages of the less well paid natives. Thus nativism has become a general term for ‘opposition to immigration’ based on fears that the immigrants will distort or spoil existing cultural values. In situations where immigrants greatly outnumber the original inhabitants, nativistic movements can allow cultural survival.

In scholarly studies nativism is a standard technical term. The term is typically not accepted by those who hold this political view, however. Dindar (2010) wrote “nativists…do not consider themselves as nativists. For them it is a negative term and they rather consider themselves as ‘Patriots.'” Anti-immigration is a more neutral term for opponents of immigration.

So the idea that a country ought to take care of the stock of Citizens first, before letting a few million other folks flood in and get on the dole or suck up the available jobs at lower wages, that’s somehow bad?

Isn’t the PURPOSE of a country to protect and provide for the citizens of that country?

I note in passing that the list of “studied” (i.e. offending) nations reads like a list of British derived capitalist built successful nations. How about asking the Chinese, Japanese, Russians, Saudis, Iranians, heck, even the Egyptians and Indonesians how they feel about having a few millions of White Christians moving in, expecting welfare payments, refusing to learn the language, and generally rejecting the local culture….

Nations exist to serve the people of that nation, not the entire world.

But moving on…


Although the alt-right lacks an official ideology, various sources have described it as a loosely-defined conservative movement composed of elements of white nationalism, white supremacism and antisemitism. The alt-right has also been linked to right-wing populism, nativism and the neoreactionary movement.

OK, so mysterious “various sources” decided to “link” or label it as those things. Hardly very informative. Or reliable.

Then it gets personal with Trump again:

Discussing the origins of Donald Trump’s support, Jeet Heer of The New Republic identified the alt-right as having ideological origins among paleoconservatives, particularly with respect to restricting immigration and supporting a more openly nationalistic foreign policy. Newsday columnist Cathy Young also noted the alt-right’s strong opposition to both legal and illegal immigration and its hard-line stance on the European migrant crisis. Robert Tracinski of The Federalist stated that the alt-right opposes miscegenation and advocates “hard-core” collectivism as well as tribalism.

Commonalities shared across the otherwise loosely defined alt-right also include a disdain for mainstream politics and strong support for Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Well, we’ve got another load of ‘isms’ larded on. Though I must point out that “‘hard core’ collectivism” is not usually associated with ‘right wing’, being a communist ideal…

OK, so Paleoconservative sounds a bit like Troglodyte or Neanderthal (and given my Neanderthal genes, I’d have to assume it’s a good thing ;-)

Paleoconservatism (sometimes shortened to paleocon) is a conservative political philosophy found primarily in the United States stressing tradition, limited government and civil society, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity.

Paleoconservatives in the 21st century often highlight their points of disagreement with neoconservatives, especially regarding issues such as military interventionism, illegal immigration and high rates of legal immigration, as well as multiculturalism, affirmative action, trade blocs, trade unions, and foreign aid. They also criticize social welfare and social democracy, which some refer to as the “therapeutic managerial state”, the “welfare-warfare state” or “polite totalitarianism”. They identify themselves as the legitimate heirs to the American conservative tradition.

Well, looks like I could be comfortable as a “paleoconservative” (but not a ‘paleocon’ that sounds like an old convict ;-)

But I wonder if they are OK with folks smoking MJ, having sex with anyone as long as by mutual concent, and would be OK with the idea that Marriage ought to be between 2 (or more) people and not involve the government in any form? Maybe I’m not a paleoconservative…
Where’s the “Get the government The Hell Out Of Our Lives!!!!”-ism?

In Conclusion

Well, it looks to me like The Loony Side Of Left just got tired of saying:
Sexist, racist, misogynist, nativist, right-wing populist, antisemite, white nationalist, white supremacist, tribalist, monoculturalist, homophobic, neo-reactionary, baby eating woman killer;
and needed a shorthand for it… so chose “ALT-right”.

Well, at least it is efficient…

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

150 Responses to ALT-right, but not ALT-Right Click… or CTL-ALT… or what?

  1. Eilert says:

    See Donald Trumps response to ‘Racism’ charges yesterday at rally in Manchester, New Hampshire (Start at 1:38, the whole speech is actually very good, Ben Carsons introduced Donald):

  2. philjourdan says:

    I thought it was an aborted attempt to reboot a computer. But thanks for the explanation. ;-)

    It is somewhat comforting to see that Wiki has retained its liberal bias (old guys do not like change), and that now even communists are being lumped on the right. It was only a matter of time. I recall not long ago Obama talking about the Republican primary and calling all of them so far to the right as to never have existed in America previously (which was just another lie, but of course the media never called him out on it). So this is just another way of trying to redefine the center and move even parts of the rabid left to the right.

    But the one thing I noted was when Hillary started this, Trump did not act like the old tired republican establishment. He attacked. And not a shotgun attack, direct. To exactly what many of us have been saying for a long time. It is the same old tired playbook of the democrats. That is step 1. Step 2 is to merely let the democrat speak for themselves. Ala the hacked emails from the primary.

    Many have commented that Trump is not spending money on ads or any other such “standard” campaign stuff. But Trump wrote the “Art of the Deal”, and the main thing about the art of the deal is you do NOT reveal your hand until the deal is done. For many years, the media have whined about an “October Surprise”, and most of them have been fairly lame. Why? Politicians are lousy strategists (and even campaign managers suck at it – they are reactionaries). Trump is not. It is going to get very fun after Labor day. Even if you are not voting for Trump, it will be fun to watch this one play out.

    ALT-right? A trial balloon supporter by the media that is comprised of nothing. And once they start defining it, they are going to find out that folks such as you (less you as you are not a reactionary either) are tired of being labeled with the sins of the accusers. They seem to be still playing to their base, not to the middle as they just called the entire middle a bunch of racists. But, like the Geico ad, that is what they do.

  3. bruce says:

    There was a time when New Zealand sounded like a wonderful place to be, it was a rude awakening to me to find out that you couldn’t just go there to live. If you were allowed to immigrate it was because you were a net benefit to that country.
    At the time I was in my hippyish phase, but even then I could understand why their laws were as they were.

  4. Larry Ledwick says:

    It is really funny that I went through the exact same drill just yesterday. I was reading stuff online and kept bumping into all this jargon (Paleoconservative, Alt-right) and had one of those WTF moments where I just stopped what I was doing to figure out what the heck they were talking about. I found the same thing as you (even some of the same sources) and realized that inside their little pigeon hole world they had been using these terms for some time but they never leaked across the semipermeable barrier they surround them selves with into the normal world until recently. Apparently that is hot jargon in certain web forums etc. but if you don’t hang out in those echo chambers you have never heard of the terms, and then they get the pleasure of thinking you are ignorant because you have no clue what they are talking about because you are not up on the latest words they have made up to pigeon hole people.

    What really started me on my search was repeated references to “frog memes” which is a hole ‘nother rabbit hole, and good example how self contained some internet cultures are. I had never heard of or seen these but apparently they are popping up “every where”.

    I prefer to use common English for general discussions and have often referred to myself as a small government conservative, fiscal conservative and socially liberal (or libertarian) depending on the nuance I wanted to communicate.

    I guess that makes me an evil paleoconservative Alt-right sort of guy too.

    I do find it fascinating how the “in crowd” keeps redefining terms and by incremental change slowly moving someone in the middle to the right, then the far right, then the extreme radical right, then …
    Like I have observed in the past Jack Kennedy would fit in just fine as a Republican, and LBJ would be a rather conservative Democrat compared to Elizabeth Warren etc.

  5. catweazle666 says:

    Watching the US Presidential election from the far side of the Pond and speaking as that lowest form of political life an authentic card-carrying UKIP member – hence worse than Hitler in the eyes of the “Progressive” Left or whatever they call themselves these days, it strikes me that it looks likely to be very similar to the 1992 UK General Election.

    Correct me if I’m wrong, it appears to me that the great hope of the Democrats is that a sufficient number of Republican voters will be so disgusted by Trump that they will either vote Democrat, vote Independent or not vote at all.

    But what happened in 1992 was that the Conservative government under Margaret Thatcher appeared to be trailing badly in the polls and was, in the eyes of the pundits and other opinion formers so despised – hated even – even by Conservative supporters that Kinnock’s Labour party was going to win by a landslide. It was widely reported that the Champagne Socialist Kinnock and his cronies had the bubbly on ice, as they confidently anticipated the crushing victory that the media, polls etc. promised them. But it didn’t work out like that…

    What happened on the day was that when the voters got into the booths, they put their cross in the Conservative box. Seems they had told the pollsters what they believed the pollsters wanted to hear, or possibly they were afflicted with a sudden attack of common sense. Thatcher won by a very comfortable margin.

    We witnessed a similar happening on June 24 this year, as the votes started coming in for the UU Referendum which once again the polls, the bookies and the pundits had predicted to produce a majority of around 8% for the Remainers. It was very enjoyable sitting up through the night, fortified by doses of single malt (Islay, naturally), watching the smug confidence of David Dimbleby first evaporate, then turn into absolute horror as it dawned on him that the result was developing not necessarily to the advantage of the Europhiles, to plagiarise a certain Emperor. My wife (also a UKIPper) and I finally retired to bed suffused with a warm glow of satisfaction…

    To a somewhat lesser extent, a similar thing happened during the last General Election too, the polls etc. confidently predicted a Labour victory, or at best a hung parliament, although how that was going to happen with Miliband in charge of Labour was not clear. In the event, the Conservatives won.

    My somewhat long-winded point is, it looks from over here that Trump is likely to win somewhat more comfortably than a LOT of people would have us believe.

    I sincerely hope he does, another Clinton presidency would be unthinkable, and whatever else Trump does, he will sure as hell piss off all the right people!

  6. philjourdan says:


    Seems they had told the pollsters what they believed the pollsters wanted to hear, or possibly they were afflicted with a sudden attack of common sense.

    ON this side of the pond, we call it the “Wilder Effect” (some call it the Bradley Effect). In both of these cases, a black was running for governor of a state and polls showed them well ahead of the opposition. In one case (Wilder), he barely squeaked out a win. The polls were off. The assumption is that people told the pollsters what they wanted to hear, but in the privacy of the voting booth, voted how they really felt.

  7. Serioso says:

    There’s a logical fallacy here, and i can’t understand why the Chief fell for it. Just because you are voting for rump doesn’t make you part of the Alt-right, although it seems clear that many of his supporters fit the profile. Why spend so many electrons fighting a description that clearly doesn’t fit? The question I have is why vote for a con man? Or are you so easily conned as a sometime believer in low temperature fusion suggests you are? The Donald is one of the great con men of modern times, and those who can’t see the con are self-professed fools.

  8. Glenn999 says:

    okay Mr. Seriososo,
    There are only two possible people who can win this race.

    Ms. Clinton has committed treason by placing state secrets on an unprotected server, knowing they would be hacked by foreign and hostile governments.
    She has personally enriched herself by using her office and the Clinton Global Initiative to grant favors.
    Now compare that to Trump……

    So why do you fear Mr. Trump so much?
    Who is your Senator? Your federal Representative?
    Do you know who your State Reps even are??
    How engaged are you really?

  9. Gail Combs says:

    AHHhhh I see You have picked up one of Hitlery’s paid propagandists. They seem to be all over the place lately.

    For the propagandist:
    Trump is NOT a con-man he is a businessman and a good one. You do not become a good businessman by cheating on your contracts. This was attested to by people who know him and do business with him. Trump believes his word and a hand shake is good but can also do the complicated contract too.

    I went out and bought his books and listened to most of his rallies, policy talks… His basic ideas have stayed pretty much the same over the last decades BUT he is willing to modify them as additional information comes in. Of course the Media, aka Hitlery’s cheering squad, sees modification of a position not as the encouraging sign it is but as flip-flopping or what ever.

    I do not want a rigid person as a President. I want someone who can listen to several others and can come to an informed decision. The fact that Trump can do this and also can pick out the diamonds in the rough and promote them, men, woman, black, white, hispanic is also a great characteristic in a leader. I also want someone who can pick winners to head his admin. Trump has proved he can do that too.

    This election we have two choices.
    A country = Trump
    A slave state run by the international Elite = Hillary.

    This is or last change of salvaging a free country and Western civilization from the would be totalitarian world leaders. If you can not figure that out go read:

    Trans-Pacific Partnership Synopsis FROM THE US GOVERNMENT
    This treaty literally strips the USA of sovereignty and allows totalitarian rule by Corporations and bureaucrats with a bit of help from NGOs to add a veneer of ‘democracy.’

    ” ….TPP Parties aim to have these disputes resolved through impartial, unbiased panels. … Panels will consider requests from non-governmental entities located in the territory of any disputing Party to provide written views regarding the dispute to panels during dispute settlement proceedings.

    Panels will be composed of three international trade and subject matter experts independent of the disputing Parties, with procedures available to ensure that a panel can be composed even if a Party fails to appoint a panelist within a set period of time. These panelists will be subject to a code of conduct to ensure the integrity of the dispute settlement mechanism.

    To maximize compliance, the Dispute Settlement chapter allows for the use of trade retaliation (e.g., suspension of benefits), if a Party found not to have complied with its obligations fails to bring itself into compliance with its obligations. Before use of trade retaliation, a Party found in violation can negotiate or arbitrate a reasonable period of time in which to remedy the breach….”

    The Groniad says this about the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement:
    ” Leading arbitration lawyer, George Kahale (chairman of Curtis, Mallet-Provost, Colt & Mosie LLP, an international law firm) says there are critical loopholes in the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s investment chapter that leave Australia wide open:

    “….an MFN clause is tantamount to a classic wipeout move. It would enable foreign corporations from TPP states to make a claim against Australia based on the ISDS provisions in any other trade deal Australia has signed, no matter which country it was signed with. That means it does not matter how carefully the TPP is drafted: foreign investors can cherrypick another treaty Australia has signed, and sue the Australian government based on the provisions included in that treaty…..”

    From The Hill by former Bill Clinton advisor Dick Morris

    The TPP, generally supported by pro-free-trade Republicans but opposed by labor-union Democrats, reportedly contains a barely noticed provision that allows for the free migration of labor among the signatory nations. Patterned after similar provisions in the treaties establishing the European Union, it would override national immigration restrictions in the name of facilitating the free flow of labor.

    The draft treaty, now under discussion among 12 Pacific Rim nations, including the U.S., Canada, Mexico, Vietnam and Japan, makes provision for needed labor to move across national boundaries without restraint. While much of the commentary on the deal has been focused on high-skill, white-collar migration, it could easily be interpreted as allowing farm workers and others to flow back and forth without legal regulation…..

    Curtis Ellis, executive director of the American Jobs Alliance, calls the trade deal “a Trojan horse for Obama’s immigration agenda” on The Hill’s Contributor’s blog. He notes that “one corporate trade association says bluntly that ‘The TPP should remove restrictions on nationality or residency requirements for the selection of personnel.’ ”

  10. Gail Combs says:

    On a more positive note,
    Hillary made the mistake of saying she would BAN the alternate media like Breitbart and blogs like this. Swift retaliation from Paul Watson in this vid:

    And an earlier vid by Mr Pinko

  11. Larry Ledwick says:

    I agree I think a lot of conservatives (and probably other non-liberal voters) have shifted to a go silent mode as far as pollsters and others. After getting vilified every time they express an opinion on a candidate by the rabid left it gets tiresome and people figure out it is not worth the brain damage to try and debate the issue with ideologues who will brook no variation to their script.

    I have seen several news stories where folks are saying if the polls are so strongly in favor of HRC why can’t she get large crowds at her campaign events? I also know that in the black community conservative voters have learned not to express support for conservative candidates or they might get shunned like Stacey Dash. So they just shut up and nod their head without commenting.

    I think the crowd size metric is far more likely to be accurate than traditional polling this time around.

  12. Gail Combs says:

    Transcript of Hillary Clinton’s actual speech about the dark global conspiracy against her carried by Brietbart:

    If you can wade through that disjointed list of American Citizen bashing, you are doing better then I.

    I am a GDI — G–D D@m Independent and a civilized human.

    I pretty much agree with E.M. and highly resent having some crooked as Hades politician who never did anything productive in her life stuff me in some pigeonhole.

    BTW, Trump leans towards states rights. He thinks education should be left to the locals as well as the abortion issue. He spent 5 to 6 years in a military school so I think he has a pretty good grounding in the Constitution. I can not imagine a 1960s military school would not cover the Constitution in depth.

  13. Gail Combs says:

    “I think the crowd size metric is far more likely to be accurate than traditional polling this time around.” Agreed Larry.

    Also enthusiasm, Trump really really stirs the crowds up.

    After 8 years of Obummer, I think many middle of the road Democrats as well as Independents have seen the writing on the wall and are scared to death. How can you not look at the muslim immigration into Europe and the terrorist attacks here in the USA and NOT have concerns? Calling rational fear islamophobia may shut people up but it does not remove common sense self preservation. The bank bailouts, the terrible trade deals resulting in a stagnant economy with an INCREASING trade deficit, increasing federal debt and a SHRINKING ECONOMY (GDP is negative ) would cause any intelligent person to want a change from failed policies.

    If we had a fair media Trump would win by a land slide especially after the DNC royally PO’d the Bernie supporters.

    Another vid

  14. Gail Combs says:

    HMMMmmm, lost a comment to Larry. Maybe in trash. Commenting has been really wacky lately at several sites.

  15. Gail Combs says:

    Sorry E.M, comment finally showed when page refreshed.

  16. Trump has little to do with the Alt-Right – he is a fairly basic civic nationalist.

    The Alt Right has embraced Trump though for three reasons:
    1) He will potentially curb illegal immigration, and half the process of white demographic displacement in the US.
    2) His stands against PC are in alignment with the Alt-Right. The Alt Right is all about uncomfortable facts and truths which are regarded as beyond the pale in polite conversation.
    3)Trump shifts the “Overton Window” of political acceptability towards the right.

    Slandering Trump may be an effective tactic for Hillary, but it is a strategic error for the Left.

    If you are interested in what the Alt Right actually believes, not just the demonization of their enemies, this is a good place to start:

    Many of their beliefs you will find offensive. However, your perception of those beliefs may change as you understand why they hold those beliefs. They are hands down the most interesting analysts of the current political scene.

  17. Gail Combs says:

    This is an interesting article linked to the Counter-Currents article.

  18. David A says:

    It is very sad that a group of Ivory Tower elitists imagine that the creation of a lexicon somehow adds legitamcy to their pseudo intellectual ideology.

  19. David A says:

    In fact people are getting PHD based on this lexicon

  20. Larry Ledwick says:

    An item I found that shows some demographic groups that used to be a complete lock for the Democrats are getting significant interest in Trump. If conservative blacks are finally getting fed up with being taken for granted (and to the cleaners) by the Democrats, then this could be an interesting election and blow a lot of polling assumptions out of the water completely.

  21. Gail Combs says:

    Larry, there are a lot of middle class blacks they have no more use for Blk Lives Matters trashing their businesses than we do. Remember most crime is Black on Black so I think they are finally waking up.

  22. catweazle666 says:

    Serioso, I have only one thing to say to you – BOLLOCKS!

  23. Larry Ledwick says:

    Worth while to remember that all may not be what it appears to be, and many of the extreme progressive left were trained by or strongly influenced by Soviet methods in their “radical days”.

    It is not outside the realm of possibility that some incidents that make trump look bad may in fact be intentional provocations by outsiders masquerading as trump supporters. The way politics have played out in the last 8 years leads me more and more to suspect the sort of overt / covert manipulation we see in Europe and eastern Europe is now playing out fairly openly in the US.

    Since we no longer have an FBI or department of Justice who clearly is on the side of law and order, to avoid being played by wishful thinking and normalcy bias with a nudge from intentional manipulation of the news and events, it is wise to always spend a moment considering the “who benefits” question and watching closely who shouts the loudest to spread the word about event which could be intentional provocations.

    The old Soviet Model is alive and well in our politics, and it is worth considering who’s agenda various talking heads and “experts” are really pitching for.

    Although this is a two year old page it is worth reading and applying the lessons to current events, at least accept that such manipulation is possible and even probable in some venues.

  24. Gail Combs says:

    Sundance (ConservativeTreeHouse) and his group figured out the agent provocateurs at Trump rallies, beating up on Trump Supporters, were Paid Hillary Agents even though they wore Bernie shirts.

    The media did their darnest to try and say Trump and his people were violent but it backfired badly when people (and horses) had the crap beaten out of them by paid agents AND the videos went viral.

    Cell phone vids and the internet have made it very very clear the MSM are lying scumbags. People dislike politicians but it is no surprise they are crooked, however finding out the Four Estate is actually the Fifth Column has made people very very angry.

    If the USA blows-up into chaos, I would NOT want to be a journalist!

  25. Larry Ledwick says:

    Yes that is a good example of how it works, without outside information sources it would tarnish both Trump and Bernie supporters, but the political manipulators have not quite figured out how to cook video taken by third parties that shows something other than the “approved” manipulated media view point. Modern technology is making it much harder for goon squads to thump people at rallies and make it look like the other guy’s supporters were the problem.

    Crowd sourcing and open source social media geolocating is an entirely new counter to traditional techniques of news manipulation.

  26. E.M.Smith says:


    The logical fallacy is applied by The Left and their news outlets TOO me, so I figured I ought to investigate it. In particular, MSNBC was happy to exploit it for effect and apply ALT-right to all things Trump proximal. So no, I didn’t “fall for it”. In fact, I spotted it and it was what caused me to go hunting… BTW, that is a very productive technique: spot the logic flaw used for effect, then “dig here”. I find daily use for it.

    Per LENR: Don’t confuse hope for belief. I have no belief in LENR as energy plant. One can’t believe in a technique that isn’t repeatable in public. (Though more asserted replications are stacking up, so eventually the scales may tip). I do strongly hope it is real, so periodically take a look for any new progress. That the Navy has patents and working lab demos is very promising, but that scale is a long way from industrial scale energy making. So I believe in low energy nuclear reactions (since they happen every day… put a counter next to a banana…) but have hope some clever person finds a way to add a few orders of magnitude to the rates and capture the heat.

    Per cons: I’d rather have a huckster who creates wealth than a Liar In Thief Hillary who is fundamentally immoral and practices 3rd world graft. Oh, and has a history of death and destruction behind her, along with manifest incompetency displayed in things like her original Hillary Care plan (so complicated it was dumped even by her own party…) and the Big Bungle that was her Middle East policy. So how stable, productive, and US leaning today are: Libya, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc etc etc… Oh, they are a mess and hate us…

  27. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh, and Serioso, do note that I’ve actually donated to Bernie (letter of thanks was posted here on some artcle or other) but not to Trump… So you really ought to be asking why I would “fall for” Socialism amd support a socialist candidate….

    The answer is: Bernie was an honest man.

    I’d rather have an honest socialist with a good heart (even if his beliefs are a bit feeble) than a dishonest Hillary with intent to evil.

  28. philjourdan says:

    @E.M. – I too saw Bernie as an “Honest” man. I would never contribute to him as he is so far left, but was hoping he would beat Hillary (he did, but could not beat her and the DNC) as then, even if the person on the right lost, we would get back to honesty. Or that was the hope (you never know).

    I also saw him as the left’s anti-establishment candidate. Which means the Trump phenomenon crosses party lines.

  29. E.M.Smith says:


    Oddly, I find very few beliefs held by other “offensive”. Mostly just find some of them stupid, but that can sometimes be fixed. The stuff I find offensive is largly “attacking” another person. Name calling. Lying for effect. That kind of stuff. Passion devoid of moral compass. That, and the desire of some folks to force others against their will to do things. The control freak behavior is offensive. (Another reason I don’t want Hillary…she’s a sociopathic control freek first order… rather like Soros …)

    FWIW, I deliberately chose lefty sources so as to see what they thought it meant, since they were using it as a slander label. I might look up what the so labeled thinks it means… but really I’m not into lables a whole lot. I’m more about actions and effects. So I’m neither pro nor anti immigration, for example. I just want it done legally and in conformance with the wishes of the present citizens (whatever that may be… it IS their country…) with full understanding of the demographic impacts. (My kids had no choice of German or French as their required foreign language. Only Spanish was offered… as one example)

    So what I find offensive about Hillary is not her left leaning, but her lying for effect and her manipulative tactics and her immorality and graft. Thus I could support Bernie. Similarly, what I find offensive about white supremacist groups isn’t their racial beliefs, but their violent leanings (well, and sometimes the level of stupid) and tendency to be angry. (It is pretty obvious there are racial differences in abilities. My son’s honor crowd at graduation was mostly Asians and him… and look at the NBA and compare the number of Black millionaire players to asian or white… I find denial of those facts offensive.)

    So somebody wants to make a white or black racial enclave? I don’t care. The asians already do it functionally, they just don’t talk about it…

    I know. Pointless digression. But I’ve noticed folks often can’t predict what I think, largely because I’m not driven by emotional triggers I don’t have. My one significant emotional trigger is that “attacks” and emotion based slander cause me to get grumpy and I don’t like being grumpy, so act to stop it. Part of why I don’t like PC crap. It IS such an attack AND insists I must internalize a huge list of emotional triggers. Um. no. Hell no.

  30. Gail Combs says:

    E.M.Smith says “… I’ve actually donated to Bernie… but not to Trump… So you really ought to be asking why I would “fall for” Socialism and support a socialist candidate….

    The answer is: Bernie was an honest man.”

    Trump and his supporters were kindly inclined towards Bernie. That is why they never fell for the obvious Hillary Agents beating on Trump supporters while carrying/wearing Bernie stuff.

    Trump acknowledged that Bernie had IDed some of the problems but did not have the know-how or expertise to fix them.

    From all the reading I have done, I never saw any real dislike for Bernie or his supporters in the Trump camp over the last year. What I saw was sympathy because they were cheated and it was obvious.

    Is Trump a ‘conman’? no more than any savvy business person. He had to know politics and how to work the system. As he said he KNOWS how politicians work in the USA. Also I think he genuinely CARES about the USA. He has kids and grand kids and wants them to have the opportunities he and his father did.

    Unlike Hillary Trump has personally given to those in need. He just never publicized it. For example.

    Orthodox Child with Rare Ailment is Rescued Aboard Tycoon’s Jet

    July 20, 1988

    NEW YORK (Jul. 19)

    The private Boeing 727 of real estate tycoon Donald Trump arrived from Los Angeles at LaGuardia Airport Tuesday morning, carrying aboard an Orthodox Jewish child with a rare and still undiagnosed breathing illness.

    The child, Andrew Ten, age 3, arrived with his parents — accompanied by three nurses who attend to him around the clock — to try to seek medical help in the New York area.

    Trump made his plane available for the special trip to New York after the boy’s parents, Judy and Harold Ten, called Trump and told him of their plight.

    Commercial airlines refused to fly the child because he could not travel without an elaborate life-support system, which includes a portable oxygen tank, a suction machine, a breathing bag and an adrenaline syringe.

    “Mr. Trump did not hesitate when we called him up. He said ‘yes, I’ll send my plane out,’” 29-year-old Harold Ten recalled shortly after he landed here Tuesday morning….

    So much for the anti-semite claim.

    According to Guiliani at the RNC, Trump helped the injured firefighters and police of NYC and their families if they died. He did it anon.

    Trump Saved NY Veterans Day Parade Marking 50th Anniversary of End of WWII

    A meme was started by Trump antagonists in certain conservative circles that Donald Trump does next to nothing to help veterans. It turns out Trump has been generous with veterans over the past decades–all it takes is a little more research than those with an ax to grind seem willing to do….

  31. Gail Combs says:

    Then there is the Clinton ‘generosity’ errrr scam.
    The Clinton Foundation Exposed Charles Ortel and Stefan Molyneux

    Stefan Molyneux is an anacrocapitalist

    Charles Ortel – “Expect an increased flow of detailed disclosures centering upon Exhibits 1 through 40 through this website.”

    The vid is long (1 hour) but quite interesting. I was not aware that while Obummer can pardon Hitlery on FEDERAL crimes he can not pardon on STATE crimes or crimes committed against foreign countries. The Clinton’s ripped off lots of foreign countries as well as people here in the USA.

    Charles Ortel is going after the Clinton’s on a state level.

  32. Gail Combs says:

    Oh and as far as Bernie being honest…
    From Tony Heller, Bernie Sells Out, Buys $600,000 Home A Week Later

  33. Gail Combs says:

    I am still not clear whether the candidate gets to walk away with the $$$ from his campaign. Kent Clizbe was claiming that is why Ben Carson was in the the race, for the $$$. (I do like Ben Carson and hope he ends up with a good spot in the Trump Admin if Trump wins.)

  34. Serioso says:

    Chief, I am often astonished at the stubborn obtuseness of some of your readers. Some seem to believe the Donald actually wrote the books attributed to him, while others claim that Hillary’s emails contained material marked classified, and others respond to a rational argument with the word “bollocks.” Such thoughtful, well-read, and intelligent people!

  35. catweazle666 says:

    Serioso: “Such thoughtful, well-read, and intelligent people!”

    As if you would know…


  36. Gail Combs says:

    “…Some seem to believe the Donald actually wrote the books attributed to him,….”

    Doesn’t matter they were written over the last two decades and are consistent with what he now says. Also Trump DOES NOT allow others to put words into his mouth. Just ask the journalists.

    As far as Hitlery and classified material goes, Listen VERY CAREFULLY to Comey:

    Also go back and listen to Charles Ortel and check out his documents. Since Ortel is pushing this into the court system, The documents he shows at his website are probably more legit that Barry’s Birth Certificate.

    You are NOT going to get away with the standard PAID FOR Hitlery propaganda at this website BTW. We are not stupid like the DemonRat voters.

  37. Glenn999 says:

    Seriously, what a maroon…
    “while others claim that Hillary’s emails contained material marked classified”
    Now I know you’re either a fool or a tool; and I won’t waste the time to respond to such idiocy again.

  38. Glenn999 says:

    Just to lighten the mood.
    “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”

    Here goes link:

    Thought it might look different:

    Okay, little help…

  39. Gail Combs says:

    Trump wants tougher vetting policies for people coming into the U.S. from countries that don’t hold our values, but Hillary disagrees. Cartoon by A.F. Branco — @

  40. Gail Combs says:

    An interview with that cartoonist…..

  41. Glenn999 says:

    Interesting article. Never heard of the alt right until a few days ago. Turns out you might be one and not even know…

  42. philjourdan says:

    @Serioso – James Comey said some of her emails did contain the markings. So who do we believe? You and Hillary (now both proven liars), or the director of the FBI?

  43. philjourdan says:


    We are not stupid like the DemonRat voters.

    YOu mean the Gruberites?

    It is amusing to see the liberals try to paint conservatives as gullible, when they are the ones that fell for the lies of Gruber. And he is laughing at them! Their own people laugh at the simplicity of the liberal mind.

  44. E.M.Smith says:


    Once saw Biily (goat?) and Hillary in front of reporters in response to a question (IIRC about tax cuts) say ~”What, you think we should let you keep your money and spend it stupidly?”

    Somehow that film clip disapeared fast and hasn’t been seen since…


    “Chief, I am often astonished at the stubborn obtuseness of some of your readers”

    Pots, kettles and mirrors come to mind…

  45. Serioso says:


    Looks like you were right!

    During an extended exchange with Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Comey affirmed that the FBI’s investigation found information marked classified on her server even after Clinton had said that she had neither sent nor received any items marked classified.
    “That is not true,” Comey said. “There were a small number of portion markings on, I think, three of the documents.”
    Asked whether Clinton’s testimony that she did not email “any classified material to anyone on my email” and “there is no classified material” was true, Comey responded, “No, there was classified material emailed.”

    Read more:
    Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

  46. hannuko says:

    If I am correct, alt-right is nothing but a blowback from the excesses of those-who-prefer-not-to-be-named-but-can-be-described-as-cultural-marxists.

    You know, the people who are for the rights of the “oppressed” as defined by intersectionality (meaning anyone other whan white heterosexual males), who fight capitalism, free markets and “islamofobia”, defending people who prefer to kill gays, while at the same time being pro-gay. Who fight against the oppression contained in words like mother and father and who announce that they want to destroy the concept of a family, because… you know… progress n’ stuff.

    Who are against blacks being killed, yet want to ban police from entering black neighborhoods and preventing the murder of blacks by other blacks. These people who post with tags like #killallwhitemen, while at the same time crying for sympathy and limits to free speech, if anybody responds to their hate.

    Who are against any form of nationalism and patriotism, even in countries like tiny Finland, who is yet to colonize and oppress anyone.

    Who are adamantly against free speech and preach for multi-valued society, yet attack viciously anyone who they consider not agreeing with their militant ideology that in their mind “does not even exist”.

    The people who carry titles like Atheism+, Third wave feminists, Black Lives Matter, and countless government funded NGO’s all over the western world.

    This kind of maoist-fascist movement, that considers giving it a name a “conspiracy theory” and masquerades as “reasonability” is bound to create a counterforce of people, who have nothing in common except hate for them.

    I think it is quite clever to not label themselves as representing any particular political movement and just claiming to be “normal”. It makes it much harder to fight against. But alt-right does that, and therefore it has to be defined as something abnormal. Evil. Sick. Racist.

  47. philjourdan says:

    @Serioso – I am impressed. You learned something.

  48. Serioso says:

    Yeah, I learned that about one email in 10,000 was marked classified. Seems like small potatoes to me.

  49. Larry Ledwick says:

    2,079 classified emails = 2,079 felonies committed by her, and her staff.
    This tally does not include the 32,000 emails she (contrary to a court order) deleted unilaterally. They keep finding more and more as they follow the email chains and harvest copies from various sources. Being a small percentage of the total is no defense.

    Tell the IRS you only lied on your tax returns 2,079 times and see what happens, no matter how many times you correctly filled out their forms. You can’t put enough lipstick on this pig to make it look good.

    The simple fact is she violated her security clearance and mishandled classified information repeatedly. There are only two possible explanations. She is the most incompetent senior government official in US history, or she is a liar, and a clear and present danger to the security of the US, and should not ever hold any government job of any kind, including dog catcher.

  50. Gail Combs says:

    Comey said said 110 emails sent or received on Clinton’s server contained classified information. Note that info does not have to BE LABELLED classified to BE classified otherwise that would give a very easy out to spies and foreign agents in a court of law.

    One of the e-mails had Clinton directing aide ( top adviser Jake Sullivan) to remove classified markings.

    Back in January there was this story:

    The latest batch of emails released from Hillary Clinton’s personal account from her tenure as secretary of state includes 66 messages deemed classified at some level, the State Department said early Friday.

    In one email, Clinton even seemed to coach a top adviser on how to send secure information outside secure channels. Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, has repeatedly maintained that she did not send or receive classified material on her personal account. The State Department claims none of the emails now marked classified were labled as such at the time they were sent. However, one email thread from June 2011 appears to include Clinton telling her top adviser Jake Sullivan to send secure information through insecure means. In response to Clinton’s request for a set of since-redacted talking points, Sullivan writes, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

    Ironically, an email thread from four months earlier shows Clinton saying she was “surprised” that a diplomatic officer named John Godfrey used a personal email account to send a memo on Libya policy after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi.

  51. Gail Combs says:

    Final Score: Hillary’s Unsecure Server Held 2,079* Classified Emails

    Why the asterisk? Because that “finalized” number is based upon Hillary’s emails that did not include any of the 32,000 messages she and her lawyers unilaterally deleted with no oversight. She has claimed that all of the emails she failed to produce were unrelated to official business. We know for a fact that this is not true, based on emails discovered by the Pentagon, as well as work-related missives that turned up when Sidney Blumethal’s private emails were hacked. So she lied about that, as she’s lied about so many things pertaining to this national security-compromising scandal. That (important) caveat aside, the State Department has determined that more than 2,000 emails on Mrs. Clinton’s unsecure, improper server were classified. Many of these emails were low-level and retroactively classified, still a far cry from her categorical, false “there is no classified material” assertion last March. But there were dozens of emails designated as secret, top secret and even above top secret — allegedly covering extremely sensitive topics from the Iran nuclear negotiations, to North Korean nuclear weapons, to the identities of foreign nationals on the CIA’s payroll…..

  52. Larry Ledwick says:

    The State Department said the contents of the 22 emails were so highly classified that not even the subject matter could be disclosed.

  53. E.M.Smith says:

    Looks like Serioso’s “small potatoes” are more like a few thousand vipers…

    BTW, Serioso, a FELONY, is not made smaller by being surrounded by many misdemeanors and loads of poor judgment…. Ask the military folks crucified for ONE much smaller infraction…

    I’m all for forgiveness and second chances, but do note:

    When genuinely an error and accompanied by contrition

    In Madam Her Highness Hillary’s case, there is no contrition, and the act was obviously deliberate, premeditated, and with full understanding. That is what is most accurately called criminal intent with malice a fore thought. I.e. criminal.

    Now you may like supporting criminals for high office, but I don’t see how that’s good for the masses… Thus my vote for Bernie in the primary. (Yes, I gave him money AND my vote. I’m a Bernie supporter… suprise suprise…)

  54. E.M.Smith says:

    Just to clarify,

    I’m in favor of anyone working for the average Joe and Jane in America. While I think Socialism fails due to some poor understanding of reality I agree with the goal of “for the people”.

    That is why I am both a Berie supporter AND a Trump supporter (though I’ve done more for Bernie than for Trump). I am against more power, control, and authority to the rich elite; be they Connected Republicans or Limousine Liberal Democrats. I’m for the Po’ Black Democrat with no job AND the bluecollar Republican asking why Obanna and Hillary want to close the mine and kill his job.

    I grew up poor, and don’t like the way The 1% keep trying to push me back there. Oddly, more from democrats than republicans.

    In short, I’m a populist independent.

  55. Gail Combs says:


    These emails were not previously provided by Clinton to the State Department

    The State Department says about 30 emails involving the 2012 attack on U.S. compounds in Benghazi, Libya, are among the thousands of Hillary Clinton emails recovered during the FBI’s recently closed investigation into her use of a private server.

    Government lawyers told U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta Tuesday that an undetermined number of the emails among the 30 were not included in the 55,000 pages previously provided by Clinton to the State Department. The agency said it would need until the end of September to review the emails and redact potentially classified information before they are released….

    Who knows what was in the 33,000 e-mails that her lawyers scrubbed from her server.

    Who the heck has ever heard of a person’s lawyer being able to SCRUB evidence clean before giving it to law enforcement?? That certainly doesn’t apply to the swat teams breaking down people’s doors!

    This is what happened to the mayor of Berwyn Heights. No lawyer preventing a thorough search for him!
    “Oh, God, I thought they were going to shoot me next”

    The next thing Calvo remembers is the sound of his mother-in-law screaming. He ran to the window and saw heavily armed men clad in black rushing his front door. Next came the explosion. He’d later learn that this was when the police blew open his front door. Then there was gunfire. Then boots stomping the floor. Then more gunfire. Calvo, still in his boxers, screamed, “I’m upstairs, please don’t shoot!” He was instructed to walk downstairs with his hands in the air, the muzzles of two guns pointed directly at him. He still didn’t know it was the police. He described what happened next at a Cato Institute forum six weeks later. “At the bottom of the stairs, they bound my hands, pulled me across the living room, and forced me to kneel on the floor in front of my broken door. I thought it was a home invasion. I was fearful that I was about to be executed.” I later asked Calvo what might have happened if he’d had a gun in his home for self-defense. His answer: “I’d be dead.” In another interview, he would add, “The worst thing I could have done was defend my home.”

    Calvo’s mother-in-law was face-down on the kitchen floor, the tomato-artichoke sauce she was preparing still sitting on the stove. Her first scream came when one of the SWAT officers pointed his gun at her from the other side of the window. The police department would later argue that her scream gave them the authority to enter the home without knocking, announcing themselves, and waiting for someone to let them in.

    Rather than obeying the SWAT team demands to “get down” as they rushed in, Georgia Porter simply froze with fear. They pried the spoon from her hand, put a gun to her head, and shoved her to the floor……

    Calvo was turned around and put on his knees in front of the door the police had just smashed to pieces. He heard them rummaging through his house, tossing drawers, emptying cabinets.

    Calvo and Porter were held for four hours. Calvo asked to see a search warrant. He was told it was “en route.” The police continued to search the house….

  56. Serioso says:

    Amazing! We agree about something! I, too, gave money to Bernie’s campaign. But I can’t see Trump as anything more than a con man — A spectacularly good con man, a great con man, a man capable of selling even me the Brooklyn Bridge, but, let’s face it, I’d rather not be a con man’s victim. I’m not sure The Donald has ever had a coherent thought in his brain except how to screw his negotiating opponent and how to make the guy think he got the best of the deal. It’s a talent, no doubt, indeed, a talent much needed in international affairs, but, in a world where one miscalculation can destroy much of the human race, I find the prospect of a Trump victory alarming. He seems to have an exceptionally limited understanding of the world as it is [the Mexican wall is an absurdity, as is the deportation of millions of non-citizens], and no record of real intelligence. His bankruptcies do not indicate financial fluency, but only show how he has gamed and conned the financial system. Does he have good judgment when it comes to picking advisers and administrators? The jury is out, I think: The campaign so far indicates he is quick to replace people when they fail him, but most of the people he choose have failed. I cannot understand how any intelligent person can support Trump when there are other choices available.

  57. pg sharrow says:

    ABC Anybody But Clinton

    Trump or Clinton, There are no other viable choices. One or the other will be the next President.
    The Clintons have been selling out to the highest bidder as long as they have been in politics. Although I may be a life long Democrat these people are too much for me. I’ll be for Trump…pg

  58. Gail Combs says:

    “… and no record of real intelligence. His bankruptcies do not indicate financial fluency, but only show how he has gamed and conned the financial system. Does he have good judgment when it comes to picking advisers and administrators? The jury is out, I think: The campaign so far indicates he is quick to replace people when they fail him, but most of the people he choose have failed…..”

    First, I do not own a working TV and have not watched TV since 1974. I know from my own knowledge that the MSM LIES for the elite to gaslight the public. During the Vietnam era just after the Kent State riots, they showed film footage of a riot on my college campus THAT NEVER HAPPENED! It was shown on all stations and across the nation EXCEPT FOR THE STATE where my college and the majority of students was located.

    If you get your opinion of Trump for the MSM, who the DNC Wikileaks show take their orders from the Hillary camp, then you are being GASLIGHTED.

    The ‘right-wing Media, like Fox News, Glen Beck and Rush Limppaw are also anti-Trump because they are in the tank for the big corporations who want No Borders, low wages and serfs Remember the Chamber of Commerce went gunning for the Tea Party in the last election as did the Democrats and the MSM.

    Trump and intelligence.
    Trump’s IQ is 156 placing him in the genius level (145 – 159, Genius – Less than 1% of test takers).
    He went to a military Jr high and High School then Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

    Wharton’s MBA program is ranked No. 1 in the world according to both Business Insider and QS, while Wharton’s undergraduate program is also ranked No. 1 in the United States by U.S. News & World Report and Forbes. — WIKI

    He did not go into the military because of heel spurs (I have them and they make wearing boots very very painful)

    Business start. His father got a loan from his mother and Trump got a loan from his father. This is typical for start-ups. In 2013 “Only 16% of funding in the study came from banks, while 82% was from the entrepreneurs’ own savings or from friends and family.”

    Trump’s Bankruptcies/reorganizations. For one thing he sold off assets instead of closing the doors and walking away. For another 80% of businesses fail so having only four fail is a darn good record. For a third I matched his bankruptcies to the US economy. All were when the economy took a down turn. This means Trump has learned the hard lesson that a bad economy is BAD FOR HIM and his business empire. In other words he has a d@mn good reason for running for president and seeing that the USA has a good economy with a strong middle class. I like the fact that HIS vested interest is the same as mine. A strong US economy.

    If Trump was such a stupid idiot he would not be called on to talk to Congress.
    Trump Testimony on Economic Recovery (1991) to Congress.

  59. @Gail, you said “The ‘right-wing Media, like Fox News, Glen Beck and Rush Limppaw are also anti-Trump because they are in the tank for the big corporations who want No Borders, low wages and serfs Remember the Chamber of Commerce went gunning for the Tea Party in the last election as did the Democrats and the MSM.”

    Rush is absolutely pro-Trump, pro-borders. You may not like the man (many don’t), but you’re wrong on this.

  60. Gail Combs says:

    There are only two basic philosophies of governance. All types of governments can be put into one of these two simple categories and thereby clear up the fog used to manipulate us.
    The philosophy underlying our US Constitution is the state exists to protect the rights of the INDIVIDUAL, not some victim group construct, THE INDIVIDUAL.

    The other, more common philosophy, is the individual exists to serve the state. Who is ‘the state’? They are our owners, and the owners are not a nameless, faceless government, it’s other people.

    In the more common philosophy, the individual exists to serve the state. All individuals except for the king, emperor, pharaoh, dictator or whatever are slaves of the state. Since the ‘state’ is actually the collection of the ruler and his supporters, that means the aristocracy/elite are the actual owners of the rest of the country. This is the point Marxists always gloss over when spouting Marxism. Citizens in countries where the ideology is the individual exists to serve the state have no real rights only privileges that can be removed at any time by whim of the elite.

    There are two universal methods used to keep the people in a state of serfdom.

    The first is brute force.
    Only the aristocracy/elite and their bodyguards are allowed to have weapons when the citizens are slaves of the state. This is the underlying reason behind the Second Amendment. It was put in place to prevent tyranny. If you can not own weapons you are at the mercy of the state. Your ‘rights’ become ‘privileges’ that can be remove with little effort and therefore you are a defacto slave. This means gun crimes, gun deaths and all the rest of the excuses for ‘gun control’ floated by the totalitarian enablers are nothing but a false narrative to convince citizens to disarm themselves so they become slaves of the state.

    An armed citizenry threatens the totalitarian nature of the Elitists plans for us. An armed citizenry would have the wherewithal to rebel; to protect itself from tyrants, despots, and elitist oligarchs who would impose a system of government not based on individuality and freedom but a system of slavery to the state. This is the reason why those who would enslave us target our right to bear arms and our rights of free speech and assembly.

    The second method is brainwashing. Generally religion is used and the Priesthood is part of the privileged class, given a monopoly, as long as they support the divine right of kings. —Note that LBJ shut up US churches through 501c3. — In the case of Islam Religion and Dictatorship are combined.

    In Europe when the Rome Empire slowly crash and burned, and the USA and France rebelled the Elite scrambled to come up with a ‘new religion’ to brainwash the serfs. It was called Marxism.

    ALL in the Family:
    Karl Marx grandmother’s first cousin married Nathan Rothschild, founder of the British branch of the Rothschild banking dynasty. Lion Philips was married to Sophie Presburg, an aunt of Karl Marx. Lion Philips’ brother Benjamin was a “banker and industrialist”. Benjamin Phillips financed Karl Marx.
    Ludwig von Westphalen was the youngest son of Christian Philip Heinrich von Westphalen who had been de facto “chief of staff” to Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick during the Seven Years’ War. and from whom he inherited the aristocratic title of baron.] Through his mother he was the descendant of many Scottish and European noble families. Karl Marx married Ludwig’s daughter.

    Ludwig would have been well trained in the classics. This is key.

    In 1816 Ludwig was transferred to Trier and befriended the Marx family. Ludwig was seen as the mentor and role model of Karl Marx, who referred to him as a “dear fatherly friend”. It was Ludwig who first introduced Marx to socialist teachings. Marx’s dissertation was dedicated to Ludwig.

    What would be included in those socialist teachings that the gaslighters would not want us to know?

    Ancient Spartan Communism

    This original lawgiver, on whose persuasive powers the socialist laws of Sparta rested, is indeed a shadowy figure — a kind of cross between Moses and King Arthur. If we accept Plutarch’s account, Lycurgus was oppressed by the glaring contrast between riches and poverty, the vast number of poor and landless on the one hand, and, on the other, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few individuals — almost a Marxian vision. And so — although surely external circumstances must have reinforced his arguments — he persuaded the Spartans to agree to a new distribution of lands on a basis of equality, and by other measures he weaned them from the love of silver and gold, and led them to adopt that harsh simplicity of life which the very name of Sparta has come to connote. Plutarch’s description is of interest because, waiving the question of its historical accuracy, it gives a very adequate definition of the ideal communistic state, as ideally imagined by countless later generations. In general, he says,

    he trained his fellow-citizens to have neither the wish nor the ability to live for themselves; but like bees they were to make themselves always integral parts of the whole community, clustering together about their leader, almost beside themselves with enthusiasm and noble ambition, and to belong wholly to their country.

    … Sparta at least, the state existed, the rigorous discipline imposed on the individual with a view to the realization of these ends, have, taken together, provoked the eulogies of many simple-minded enthusiasts. The beauty and the stability of Sparta became, to take but one example, something of an obsession with the ineffective Mably. On the other hand, Sir Frederick Pollock has suggested — and one’s heart warms to him — that the Spartans were the most odious impostors in the whole history of antiquity. In any event, the Spartan state was probably unique in some respects in the record of political institutions. It is difficult to recall any other state in which the individual was so completely subordinated to the general ends of the community — and such subordination is, of course, of the very essence of socialism in its general sense, as distinguished from that species of socialism generally referred to as communism. From the day of his birth, when he might be not merely subordinated but suppressed for the good of the state, the young Spartan continued to be disposed of in one way or another until death opened up for him a way of escape. The common education, which began at the age of seven, was wholly designed to make good soldiers, to teach men to suffer uncomplainingly the extremes of heat and of cold, of hunger and of pain, and in each was implanted the conviction that he belonged not to himself, but to the state….

    If you can not OWN property you ARE property!

  61. catweazle666 says:

    Serioso: ” I cannot understand how any intelligent person can support Trump when there are other choices available.”

    Rubbish, as you are well aware.

    In reality there is only one other choice – Clinton.

    And I cannot understand how any intelligent person can support a warmonger who is currently attempting to start a war with Russia and who demonstrates such a cavalier attitude to US law and security, not to mention the suspicious number of deaths associated with anyone who appears to have undermined her. Trump on the other hand is adamant that he will eschew war and will attempt to work with Putin.

    Personally, I’d rather have a conman (I don’t believe Trump is one, or no more than any other senior politician) than a warmonger and proven criminal.

    Clearly your preference is for the second.

  62. philjourdan says:

    @Regis Llanfar – Rush is for the Republicans, he will support whomever has the nomination

  63. Larry Ledwick says:

    HRC was still sending classified information by email after she left the State Department.
    She is either completely clueless or she simply does not care about information security.
    Both of those options imply a profound level of stupidity.

  64. @philjourdan – and that is the biggest disagreement between Rush and me…it’s not Rep vs. Dem – it’s beltway vs. everyone else.

  65. Gail Combs says:

    Regis Llanfar says:
    “…Rush is absolutely pro-Trump, pro-borders. You may not like the man (many don’t), but you’re wrong on this.”

    I am sorry but no. Rush is OWNED by Mitt Romney (Bain Capital) and has been sly in his bashing of Trump. After all if he was not subtle then people would notice he is the ‘Controlled Opposition’ and he would lose his usefulness. (He has already lost a large number of Trump supporters.)

    Rush, like Mittens was PRO-Cruz who is STILL* bashing Trump. two examples plus the loss of his listening base.

    Rush also gives the libs good talking points. Here is the most recent which is complete chicken feces which I just explained else where. Trump will enforce the law and he says that over and over even though he acknowledges there are hard to deal with cases.

    Ann Coulter is interviewed by Alan Greenspan’s wife on MSNBC and they even played a clip of Rush laughing over Trump’s ‘softening’ on deportation. (Notice AMNESTY was never ever on the table, just round them up and throw them out deportation.)

    <b.This is a transcript of Rush BASHING TRUMP saying he now SUPPORTS AMNESTY!.

    Trump Converts the GOP to Amnesty?

    RUSH: Could you imagine what it’s like to be Jeb Bush today? Who knew — (laughing) I’m sorry, folks. “She’s a bigot!” Who knew. First they tried Marco Rubio. They tried the Gang of Eight. They tried Jeb Bush. They tried any number of people to convince — they tried me! They sent emissaries to the EIB Network Southern Command. They tried everybody they could think of to try to convince the Republican base to support some form of amnesty for illegal immigrants, and — (laughing) — sorry — who knew — (laughing) — I know it frustrates you to hear me laughing. Sorry.

    Let me regain my composure. Who knew that it would be Donald Trump to come out and convert the GOP base to supporting amnesty the same week Ann Coulter’s book comes out. Poor Ann. Oh, my God, she’s got this book In Trump We Trust, and in it she says the only thing, the only thing that could cause Trump any trouble whatsoever is if he flip-flops on abortion or on immigration, goes amnesty. It looks like he’s getting close to it, and she’s just beside herself with this. I mean, what timing.

    And yes this was a very big deal.

    *Cruzbots are now campaigning for Hitlery

  66. Gail Combs says:


    Rush Limbaugh was up for negotiating a new contract with Bain Capital (Mittens Romney)
    Wall Street Journal: Jul 3, 2008 – Rush Limbaugh signed an eight-year contract for about $400 million, a big jump from his last Clear Channel deal.

    From WIKI:

    Clear Channel Communications. — In 2008 it was taken private by Bain Capital, LLC and Thomas H. Lee Partners through a leveraged buyout
    ” In 1998 it made its first move outside of the United States when it acquired the leading UK outdoor advertising company More Group plc, which was led by Roger Parry; Clear Channel went on to buy many other outdoor advertising, radio broadcasting, and live events companies around the world, which were then re-branded Clear Channel International. These included a 51% stake in Clear Media Ltd. in China.” Yeah, Clear Channel is international with interests in China.

    Who owns Clear Channel?
    July 2008 – Bain, together with Thomas H. Lee Partners, acquired Clear Channel Communications

    Bain Capital is a global investment firm. “Bain Capital was founded in 1984 by partners Mitt Romney, T. Coleman Andrews III, and Eric Kriss, Romney initially had the titles of president. He was also the sole shareholder of the firm. Early investors included members of elite Salvadoran families and other wealthy Latin Americans invested $9 million primarily through offshore companies registered in Panama.”

    I’d add that Mitt Romney’s partner in Bain Capital T. Coleman Andrews, III attempted to run for Lt. Gov of VA (but family issues caused him to drop out) and John Hager won and John Hager’s son married Jenna Bush daughter of George W. Bush. They’re all in bed together literally and figuratively.


  67. Larry Ledwick says:

    Interesting video from Stefan Molyneux and Roger Stone with some historical perspective you don’t normally hear from the main stream media. It also discusses electronic election manipulation.

  68. Gail Combs says:

    philjourdan says:“… Rush is for the Republicans, he will support whomever has the nomination”

    Actually Rush is for the GOP establishment aka the Chamber of Commerce who want open borders and a socialist federal government and Global Governance. Borders and sovereign governments are a pain in the rump for international corporations.

    Chamber of Commerce Seeks to Destroy Donald Trump’s Trade Plan

    … Donald Trump is sparring with the Chamber of Commerce on Twitter following criticism of his speech on trade policy.

    On Tuesday, the New Yorker separated himself from Republicans who support the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade pact….

    According to CNN, the Chamber argues that NAFTA created roughly five million jobs and also charged that the TPP could add $77 billion in America’s economy in less than nine years.

    “Even under best case scenario, Trump’s tariffs would strip us of at least 3.5 million jobs,” the Chamber also tweeted.

    Of course those Chamber of Commerce statements are either misdirection or outright lies.

    Ross Perot’s prediction 20 years ago was “There will be a giant sucking sound going south.”

    …. prominent economists and U.S. government officials predicted that NAFTA – a trade agreement aimed at liberalizing trade between member countries — would lead to growing trade surpluses with Mexico and that hundreds of thousands of jobs would be created. “But the evidence shows that the predicted surpluses in the wake of NAFTA’s enactment in 1994 did not materialize,” notes Robert Scott, chief economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank in Washington,D.C.

    What kind of evidence? “Jobs making cars, electronics, apparel and other goods moved to Mexico, and job losses piled up in the United States, especially in the Midwest where those products used to be made,” says Scott. “By 2010, trade deficits with Mexico had eliminated 682,900 U.S. jobs, mostly (60.8 %) in manufacturing.”

    “The U.S. economy has grown in the past 20 years despite NAFTA, not because of it.” …

    December 2014 US Chamber of Commerce Threatens GOP on Immigration, Spending

    October 2013 Report: Chamber of Commerce to Spend $100 Million to Destroy Tea Party

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce will literally double down in its efforts to crush the Tea Party to get legislation–like a comprehensive amnesty bill and the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank–that it covets.

    After budgeting $50 million to elect establishment-friendly candidates in the 2014 election cycle, the chamber will reportedly spend as much as $100 million in the 2016 election cycle to crush conservatives. According to a Roll Call report, some of the group’s “top targets in 2016 will be right-wing, tea party candidates” who have opposed amnesty for illegal immigrants, Obamatrade, and reauthorizing the Export-Import Bank.

    The Chamber of Commerce’s ultimate goal is to reportedly win back “the soul of the Republican Party” by electing more establishment Republicans “in contested primaries to strengthen their hand during policy debates on the Hill.”…..

  69. philjourdan says:

    @Regis Llanfar – It is for me as well.

  70. Gail Combs says:

    Our trade deficit tells the tale of job exporting.

    Figure 1. U.S. Real and Nominal Trade Balance

    Figure 2. U.S. Trade Balance as a Percentage of GDP

    (Graphs from Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)

    NAFTA = December 1993

    WTO = January 1995

    China entry into the WTO = December 2001

  71. Gail Combs says:

    Larry Ledwick

    I just discovered Stefan Molyneux and love to listen to him. Unfortunately I have to boot Hubby off his computer to do so.

    He had a really great vid on why he changed his mind on the value of Christianity. Originally he thought it would be replaced by philosophy but as PC and Progressivism has swamped Christianity he realized Christianity is necessary for our enlightened western civilization. (Dang if I can find that vid again)

  72. Larry Ledwick says:

    I agree he (Stefan Molyneux) is very interesting to listen to, he is willing to tread where others will not and open topics of discussion that are otherwise black holes of no coverage. I first found him on one of his videos about Islam in europe and how the media and local governments are trying to throw a blanket over any objective coverage of the refugee crisis, and then the r/K discussion. Even if you don’t agree with him and his observations he makes you think and gives sometimes very interesting fresh looks at topics which sometimes open the door to new understanding of things you thought you had a handle on.

  73. philjourdan says:

    @Gail – I disagree. I know you can do the 7 degrees of Kevin Bacon on him, but Rush is very hard on the Republican establishment. He supports the republicans because they are not democrats. I have no idea whether he likes Trump or not, but he has supported him, and he loves the theater.

    Sorry, we will not agree on this one.

  74. Gail Combs says:


    I just wish I had more time to listen to Stefan. Most of his vids are about an hour long. Of course he needs that much time because he does indepth analysis, something TV never really does.

    I am glad to see he gets a lot of views.

    OH good he has a new vid up!
    What Is The Alt-Right? | Vox Day and Stefan Molyneux

    Dang now I HAVE to kick hubby off his computer!

  75. Gail Combs says:

    I think Vox Day has a much better explanation of the Alt-Right than Stirner (@heresiologist) does.

    Stirner links were a bit on the extreme side. Perhaps to give us a distaste for the Alt-Right?

    (It is election season and therefore I trust no one I do not already know without vetting.)

  76. Gail Combs says:

    philjourdan says …Rush….

    OK, so we agree to disagree. No problem. Rush does have some decent info but as I said he has ties too that make me take what he says with a grain of salt.

    I am afraid his Trump/immigration show may have done a lot of damage so I hope he rectifies that damage.

    Or perhaps it will make people sit up and pay attention to Trump’s Speech on immigration.

  77. pg sharrow says:

    It appears to me that Trump had a very good day today. Not sure how the International Communists will spin this tomarrow. We shall hear the MSM talking heads spout their scripted talking points in the morning. All the same words and sentences in concert! A Trump lead administration will be the end of our world.

    They greatly fear the people and the Trump of the Beast. The cozy world of the Elites is about to be turned upside Down. Their Gravy Train on the backs of the people is about to be curtailed.
    The Obamanation push to reduce the United States to a slave to the International will be reversed into a PAX Americana of the Beast.

    The Hard push to the Left will now result in a hard swing to the Right. The old way of rule by the anointed elite must give way to the new way. Free men can rule themselves.
    We don’t need them…pg

  78. Larry Ledwick says:

    I just finished watching Trump’s speech in Phoenix on youtube, and was impressed with how he carried it off. It was still his classic style but under control and with a clear message and agenda.
    I think it went very well for him. It will be interesting if the Media is sufficiently embarrassed by being called out in a major speech to actually start asking HRC the questions they have been avoiding for months now.

    Apparently after the speech Trumps donation server was over whelmed by all the folks wanting to donate and crashed. That should scare the crap out of the DNC.

  79. Gail Combs says:

    For those, like me with out easy access to video, the transcript of the speech.

  80. Gail Combs says:

    Here are videos of the speech. The bottom picture is of Bluto (FluffyDogAttack on Twitter) and family. He is a frequent commenter and will probably have a report tommorow.

    The crowd is really YUGE BTW Capacity is 15,000 – Trump’s last gig there. (max for building is 29,000)

  81. philjourdan says:

    @Gail – Are you supporting Trump solely because of his immigration position (before or after)?

    I will bet your answer is no. Neither am I. And I will also bet most people are not supporting him on the single issue either. Rush did no more damage than Trump did with his equivocation. Indeed, I thought Rush was soft on Trump during the primaries given they share little in common. But he was trashing Romney at every turn.

    He may have a link with Bain. But he is not going to be told what to do or say by anyone. His ego is just as big as Trumps, and now he has the base to tell anyone to take a hike.

  82. Gail Combs says:

    Actually the equivocation was from Manafort’s replacement, Kellyanne Conway. She worked on behalf of Mark Zuckerberg in 2014 to push the La-Raza backed gang-of-eight immigration bill through the House of Representatives with the full support of Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Kevin McCarthy and Eric Cantor. Was the equivocation, a bit of backstabbing from dear Kellyanne helped along by Rush?

    Others now loathe Rush for his Machiavellian twistings and turnings — Stab in the back then say you didn’t mean it after the damage is done. Start here for the view of others on Rush. (These are Christians who watch their language BTW.)

    Actually I think Trump really played them. He juiced up the media, got everyone talking and then goes to see the Mexican President followed by his Immigration Speech. — 3-D Chess. Followed by crashing his server with donations.

    Trump won me over when he called CAGW – bull s…t,
    refused to allow the media to use Political Correctness against him,
    said he would stop muslims from coming here until we know what the heck we are doing
    and would build the wall promised during the last Amnesty.

    Mostly I wanted a real business world CEO and not some Hostile Buyout Vulture like Romney.

  83. E.M.Smith says:

    Per Rush:

    He started in Sacramento long long ago when I lived there. He’s polished his gig a lot.

    IMHO his basic method is Shock Jock. I doubt he has any real conviction, and mostly just fell into the conservative gig as Sacramento had progressive government and conservative rural for a large radio range around it. At any one time 1/2 the audience would be shocked by any polarizing comment… and tune in tomorrow….

    Per Trump’s speech:

    Saw it live on CSPAN. Saw the news reports. Night and day.

    CNN and MSNBC both accusing him of lying, as is Mex.Pres, since Mex.Pres said he TOLD Trump Mexico not paying… Then Trump said they didn’t DISCUSS it. Now as I understand the word, discussion is 2 folks talking, not one telling… Some guy says “not paying” and I ignore him IS “not discussing”.

    I already had a low opinion of CNN MSNBC et al but they have managed to drive it lower with more deliberate lying ignorance for effect… Sigh.

    Mostly, Trump’s position is just to enforce our present laws on the books. Use the rules and methods of most of the world for most of the last century. But oh how that gores the ox of the “international socialist globalist’s” demographic destruction plans and upsets their “Nationalism is evil” propaganda push… So out come the long knives: Xenophobic, racist, ignorant, dangerous, demigog, even a few Musolini and a Hitler reference. I think he must be scoring direct hits to get that much counterfire…

    So much invective all for saying “follow the law and enforce the law”. Really amazing…

  84. Gail Combs says:

    The Lame Stream Media has really lost it.

    Trump had the mothers of murder victims on stage. These were kids killed by illegals OBAMA LET GO within the USA instead of locking up or deporting! Most with a history of violence. (Actually I think all had a history of violence) So by rights they should have never been in this country and were only here because of Obama’s policies of treating violent illegals better than Americans.

    IIRC in one case the judge gave the criminal a long sentence but he was let out in a very short time.

    …President Barack Obama’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency released nearly 20,000 criminal illegals – including rapists, sex offenders, and even around 200 murderers – back onto U.S. streets after their jail sentences ended in 2015, according to new reports.

    The 19,723 released illegals were not deported.

    As reported by Paul Bedard at the Washington Examiner, the number includes “208 convicted of murder, over 900 convicted of sex crimes and 12,307 of drunk driving.” The criminals had 64,197 convictions among them, representing a whopping 8,234 violent crimes….

    Last year former Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Congressman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, stated the release “the worst prison break in American history.” He added that “President Obama’s lax immigration policies have put the lives of Americans at risk.”

    This is just the ones they caught:
    Mar 14, 2016 – “U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has revealed that 124 illegal immigrant criminals released from jail by the Obama administration since 2010 have been subsequently charged with murder.” (wwwDOT)

    With that as background, here is the response of the Brain dead left.</b.

    “This is repulsive” Hillary Clinton Comms Staffer Lashes Out at “Angel Parents” Speaking at Trump Rally

    The Most Unhinged Liberal Reactions To Trump’s Immigration Speech

    Below are some of the most unhinged responses, many from journalists. Some even attacked the “Angel Moms,” parents whose children have been killed by illegal immigrants…


    @KirstenPowers Angel Moms is NOT like #MothersOfTheMovement unless you say it is the White Supremacist VERSION of it! #ThoseRNataionalists!

    — Christa V Sage (@TheBaltimoreCVS) September 1, 2016

    So the mothers of thugs who pull guns on cops and get shot are Heroine/victims. However the parents of innocent kids killed by ILLEGALS are a WHITE SUPREMACIST HATE GROUP. Jaz was black as was the son of the German lady and I am pretty sure one of the ladies was Hispanic.

    So am I living in the twilight zone?

  85. Gail Combs says:

    Here is an interesting tidbit.

    Remember Trump fills up rallies of 10,000 with more waiting outside while Clinton has to pay for seat warmers and is lucky to get a couple hundred.

    This is a question from the Fox News Poll and shows who is being sampled.

    It is from REDDIT: Proof that Trump supporters are being undersampled in polls. Page 11 of the latest Fox News Poll.

  86. Serioso says:

    Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, you have been conned once again, admittedly by one of the greatest con masters of our time. Did The Donald say in his Arizona speach he would deport all of the (circa) ten million illegals in the United States? NO HE DID NOT. What he said was he would “subject to deportation” these people. And how is that different from the current Obama policy? You tell me! A little skepticism is in order, folks! You all seem to fall for the sleaziest of linguistic tricks! Please tell me how the Donald’s proposed policy differs from Obama’s.

  87. Gail Combs says:

    Donald Trump outlined ten specific points which highlight his immigration position:

    ♦ One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.
    ♦ Two: End Catch-And-Release
    ♦ Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.
    ♦ Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities
    ♦ Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws
    ♦ Six: We Are Going To Suspend The Issuance Of Visas To Any Place Where Adequate Screening Cannot Occur
    ♦ Seven: We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported.
    ♦ Eight: We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system.
    ♦ Nine: We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet [E-Verify].
    ♦ Ten: We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers.

    Here are the first five of the ten from the Transcript of Trump’s Speech

    ♦ Number One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.

    On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border. We will use the best technology, including above-and below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall, find and dislocate tunnels, and keep out the criminal cartels, and Mexico will pay for the wall.

    ♦ Number Two: End Catch-And-Release

    Under my Administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country.

    ♦ Number Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.

    According to federal data, there are at least 2 million criminal aliens now inside the country. We will begin moving them out day one, in joint operations with local, state and federal law enforcement.

    Beyond the 2 million, there are a vast number of additional criminal illegal immigrants who have fled or evaded justice. But their days on the run will soon be over. They go out, and they go out fast.

    Moving forward, we will issue detainers for all illegal immigrants who are arrested for any crime whatsoever, and they will be placed into immediate removal proceedings….

    On my first day in office, I am also going to ask Congress to pass “Kate’s Law” – named for Kate Steinle – to ensure that criminal aliens convicted of illegal reentry face receive strong mandatory minimum sentences.

    Another reform I am proposing is the passage of legislation named for Detective Michael Davis and Deputy Sheriff Danny Oliver, two law enforcement officers recently killed by a previously-deported illegal immigrant. The Davis-Oliver bill will enhance cooperation with state and local authorities to ensure that criminal immigrants and terrorists are swiftly identified and removed.

    We are going to triple the number of ICE deportation officers. Within ICE, I am going to create a new special Deportation Task Force, focused on identifying and removing quickly the most dangerous criminal illegal immigrants in America who have evaded justice.

    The local police know who every one of these criminals are…..

    ♦ Number Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities

    We will end the Sanctuary Cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.

    ♦ Number Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws

    We will immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties, in which he defied federal law and the constitution to give amnesty to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants….

    Now go back to Hitlery, Serioso and tell her your poison didn’t work.

  88. Gail Combs says:

    Donald Trump outlined ten specific points which highlight his immigration position. ALL are legal under existing laws. All it takes is ENFORCEMENT which Hitlery has vowed NOT TO DO.

    ♦ One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.
    ♦ Two: End Catch-And-Release
    ♦ Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.
    ♦ Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities
    ♦ Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws
    ♦ Six: We Are Going To Suspend The Issuance Of Visas To Any Place Where Adequate Screening Cannot Occur
    ♦ Seven: We will ensure that other countries take their people back when we order them deported.
    ♦ Eight: We will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system.
    ♦ Nine: We will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet [E-Verify].
    ♦ Ten: We will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers.

    Transcript of Trump’s speech fleshes out each point.

    Here are the first five.

    ♦ Number One: We will build a wall along the Southern Border.

    On day one, we will begin working on an impenetrable physical wall on the southern border. We will use the best technology, including above-and below-ground sensors, towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall, find and dislocate tunnels, and keep out the criminal cartels, and Mexico will pay for the wall.

    ♦ Number Two: End Catch-And-Release

    Under my Administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country.

    ♦ Number Three: Zero tolerance for criminal aliens.

    According to federal data, there are at least 2 million criminal aliens now inside the country. We will begin moving them out day one, in joint operations with local, state and federal law enforcement.

    Beyond the 2 million, there are a vast number of additional criminal illegal immigrants who have fled or evaded justice. But their days on the run will soon be over. They go out, and they go out fast.

    Moving forward, we will issue detainers for all illegal immigrants who are arrested for any crime whatsoever, and they will be placed into immediate removal proceedings. We will terminate the Obama Administration’s deadly non-enforcement policies that allow thousands of criminal aliens to freely roam our streets….

    ♦ Number Four: Block Funding For Sanctuary Cities

    We will end the Sanctuary Cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.

    ♦ Number Five: Cancel Unconstitutional Executive Orders & Enforce All Immigration Laws

    We will immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties, in which he defied federal law and the constitution to give amnesty to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants….

    You can tell your handlers your disinformation didn’t work.

  89. Larry Ledwick says:

    I wonder if this change by the state department indicates that they think Trump will be their new boss in a few months?

  90. Gail Combs says:

    Unless there is massive voter fraud I do not see the race being close.

    1. Hillary is lucky to get a few hundred at a rally, Trump gets 10,000 or more.

    2. Hillary wants 100% amnesty, open borders, 500% increase in Syrians (with the Syrian Ambassador saying 20 Percent of Muslim Migrants May Have ISIS Links) While Trump has given fairly detailed policy speech about how he will enforce the immigration laws, reduce drugs, crime, and tax expenditure on illegals.

    3. Hillary will sign the sovereignty killing TPP and keep the job killing NAFTA, and WTO as is while Trump wants to renegotiate all our trade deals.

    4. Hillary wants to shut down free speech and the 2nd Amendment. Trump will install Supreme Court Judges that will protect the Constitution.

    5. Most important union workers and blacks no longer are falling for the pie in the sky Democrat promises. The Lame Stream Media called Trump’s acceptance speech ‘DARK’ but most people saw it as realistic and they want their country and their dreams back. Last year FORBES had the headline Shocker: 40% of Workers Now Have ‘Contingent’ Jobs, Says U.S. Government (That is part time, on call, contract or temp work.) Then add in the ~20% unemployed…

    Also Political Correctness has been taken to the point of ridiculousness so the screaming of racist and the rest now falls on deaf ears. When you are concerned with the roof over your head and food on the table PC goes out the window.

    Finally the insiders have the real polls and they KNOW Hillary is no where near 40% of the vote. “Today Rasmussen’s weekly tracking poll finds Donald Trump (40%) slightly ahead of Hillary Clinton (39%) Rasmussen discovered 25% of Independent voters are not willing to tell others who they are voting for. 17% of Republican likely voters are also unwilling; only 10% of Democrat voters feel the same way.” So you can figure those voters are NOT Hillary voters. (Rasmussen was sold and now leans left)

    The voter break down is 29% (R), 29%(D) and 42% (I) however polling companies over sample Democrats and under sample Independent voters heavily skewing the poll numbers in favor of Hillary.

    USA Demographics:
    YEAR ………………….. 2000 — 2010
    White ————- 75.1% — 63.7%
    Black ———— 12.3% — 12.2%
    American Indian – 0.9% — .7%
    Asian ———– 3.6% — 4.7%
    Hispanic ——— 12.5% — 16.3% (Counted under more than one cat)

    Business Insider: Why Blue Collar Jobs Are Disappearing

  91. philjourdan says:

    @Serioso – the difference is that Obama has NOT subjected all to the possibility. Indeed, he has even violated Court orders and rulings to make that stand.

    If you are going to debate an issue, do so honestly. Your lack of knowledge and outright lies are boring.

  92. Gail Combs says:

    A repeat of an interesting poll:

    …I like to watch “The Real Housewives” (New York and New Jersey editions) on Bravo TV and I always stay tuned for “Watch What Happens LIVE” with Andy Cohen (which is a follow-up show to The Real Housewives’ show).

    Since Andy Cohen is on vacation, Bravo has been running repeats for the past two weeks and last night’s episode was originally aired two days before the opening ceremony of the Olympics.

    In July, Andy decided to do a LIVE poll every month asking “Who are you voting for, Hillary or Trump?” He said he was dying to know.

    Last night the results were:
    Trump – 62%
    Hillary – 38%
    (Remember, this was originally aired 2 days before the Olympics [August 3rd.])

    In July the results were:
    Trump – 65%
    Hillary – 35%

    Andy Cohen then said “Oh My God! The viewers love Trump. I better stop making fun of him”

    I think Andy Cohen’s non-scientific poll is much more accurate than any of the other so-called “legit” polls…..
    Honest Abbey

    Remember this is in the LIBERAL NY/NJ metropolitan area and it is mostly WOMEN. These are Hillary’s target population!!!

    I would really like to see his more recent poll for the end of Aug, beginning of september. Maybe after the Labor Day Weekend

  93. Gail Combs says:

    LEAKED Pelosi Docs Reveal Obama, Clinton LIED About BENGHAZI A memo proving that the House Minority Leader knew the Obama Administration and Hillary Clinton lied to the American people about Benghazi and chose to hide those facts, has been released.

    Only someone who truly hates the USA could vote for this hag.

  94. catweazle666 says:

    philjourdan: “If you are going to debate an issue, do so honestly. Your lack of knowledge and outright lies are boring.”

    What do you expect from a Hitlery supporter?

  95. Larry Ledwick says:

    Well this is interesting !
    Apparently Reuters thinks they can censor the news for everyone when they are the pool feed for a major political event. A UK owned company censoring information to US voters?

    Just who in the hell do they think they are, the commissar of information?

  96. Larry Ledwick says:

    I sent a comment to Reuters feed back (only one I could find)

    Suggested they fire the jerk who pulled the plug and never ever cover an American political election event as the pool coverage. I also mentioned that the FCC should look into this.

  97. Gail Combs says:

    Shock Poll: Reuters/Ipsos Radically Changes Methodology to Favor Clinton

    July 1989 The Reuters Connection(s) By Eustace Mullins. Mullins, author of Secret of the Federal Reserve, became a researcher at the Library of Congress in 1950. He is really hated by the gang at Wiki.

  98. Gail Combs says:

    The kids at reddit did a bit of looking into the Reuters/Rothschild connection

  99. Gail Combs says:

    I will try that again since it comes up on my computer OK

  100. Larry Ledwick says:

    Surprisingly I got a response back from Reuters on the video feed cut at the Trump Detroit Church.

    Karen Pastor, Sep 6, 1:34 AM SGT:

    We appreciate your concerns. The Detroit Trump footage being circulated on Twitter and elsewhere was not filmed by Reuters. Reuters obtained the footage from third-party providers and the voices heard on the video are not Reuters staff or contractors.
    Thanks for taking the time to write and for visiting
    Best regards, Team

    So now the question is who did pull the plug?

  101. E.M.Smith says:

    I’d phrase The Question as “wtf is Rueters pool coverage if it doesn’t come from Reuters?” just selling a brand stuck on some random guy knock off product?

  102. Gail Combs says:

    Reuters — plausible deniablity?

  103. Larry Ledwick says:

    So I suppose they just hired some random freelance cameraman and producer off the street to handle the coverage as day labor?

    Someone some where knows the back story, it just may take time to find out who was doing what to whom.

    It appears that they have gotten enough flack over it that they have put together a talking point to cover the issue. That is at least a good sign that they actually bothered to respond. I wonder if there is an organization for Journalism like Judicial Watch that might poke around and ask questions of the right insiders to figure this out. Even if folks can’t get the real name and responsible party that demanded coverage termination it is sometimes enough to make them very uncomfortable with lots of embarrassing questions and maybe the party responsible will be black balled from similar coverage in the future.

    Folks have offered the unknown camera man who did not want to cut away a job.

  104. Larry Ledwick says:

    Clearly the religious focused media thinks this is an issue. Here is one item on it.

  105. Larry Ledwick says:

    Flash back here to email gate and the really big 800 lb gorilla in the room, who leaked highly classified NSA data to Sid Blumenthal and why did the FBI leave mention of this out of their report?

    Often when dealing with intelligence classified issues it is highly worthwhile to pay attention to what is NOT said or how it is not said.

    My personal suspicion is that they are chasing a Mole who leaked the info to Sid or know they have a huge leak and are trying to plug it. Now the important question is, especially in light of HRC’s other highly suspicious actions (defector link below), is she a witting agent of one or more foreign powers? Did she do this to intentionally create a back door leak path to very sensitive information for others outside our government? Given her history of predatory corruption I judge that likelihood at about 85%.

  106. Serioso says:

    According to ABC News, Hillary claimed that only one of her emails contained classified information that was ‘confidential’, the lowest level of classification, and, furthermore, said one email did not contain a proper headline indicating that some information in the email was classified. So, what I said originally, that none of her emails were “marked classified” is true. Any arguments? Probably! There is, any any case, no evidence that her server was breached (not that there was anything to discover in a breach), and it would appear that what she did was SOP in the Department of State [qv Colin Powell]. A tempest in a teapot!

  107. Larry Ledwick says:

    So, what I said originally, that none of her emails were “marked classified” is true. Any arguments?

    True if you are referring to the required headers and footers, but irrelevant. That is a strawman argument, because the information itself was classified the moment it was created. It does not need to the headers and footers to be classified. Lack of cover pages, headers footers etc. is irrelevant it is the content which is classified, even if you reword it so it is not word for word, the classification carries with the information not its form. The fact that someone on her staff stripped headers off (a felony) is no defense. By the way one of her emails has her “instructing” her staff to strip markings and send by unclass means (another felony).

    The implied intent of that bogus argument is that there was no harm done and if there was, it was someone else’s fault. WRONG!

    When you are given a clearance you are instructed about handling of information and that you are required to add headers and footers if you are the creator of the document, but you are also instructed about the types of information which is classified (and simple exposure would teach you the sort of things that should be classified). If you have any doubt at all about the proper marking of a document, it is your responsibility to talk to the security officer for guidance on if the document is classified and how it should be marked. Everyone in the chain of custody of the information is responsible for checking for and maintaining proper markings and making sure the information is properly handled. I say this based on having personally stamped and handled literally thousands of pages of TS material when I was in the service. If anyone else did what we already know she has done, they would be serving a life sentence in Leavenworth or similar Federal maximum security prison.

    There is also tons of evidence her server was breached. The fact that wikileaks is dumping her emails not to mention the testimony of the first hacker to get into her email is prima facia evidence it was breached and by multiple actors and that it was a trivial breach. The revealed lack of proper configuration for a server under control of one of the most sought after intelligence targets in the world says that it was probably hacked by at least 3 nation state actors, and probably 5. (Russia, China, and Israel almost certainly gained access), and very likely Iran one or more of the major islamic countries (Pakistan, Egypt, etc, possibly N.Korea) and who knows how many random Anonymous hackers after her email was outed by the original hack.

    There is no functional equivalency between Colin Powell and HRC, her level of incompetence is so blatant, with such total disregard for rules and just plain bad faith that there is good reason to suspect it was intentional. She literally did everything wrong. She didn’t break one or two rules in exceptional circumstances due to carelessness or time pressure, she broke every rule routinely with total disregard for the regulations she was sworn to uphold.

    Information released recently is that she quite literally broke every rule. She left the door open in her SCIF, she brought personal electronic devices into the SCIF (routinely), used uncertified personal devices on foreign territory (practically a guarantee that she compromised everything she touched on those occasions)

    It is no wonder that Russia and China have had an inside track on our actions for the last few years, they were literally looking over our shoulder.

    She had personal desktop computers inside the SCIF (major major major failure), especially if they were just routine over the counter desk tops rather than TEMPEST certified systems. If she did that and left the door open to the SCIF, premier nation state actors could literally see what she had on the computer screens if they could get within a mile or two of her location.

    In the absolute sense of the the word she did EVERYTHING wrong for data security, she is either a complete moron or a double agent who intentionally did everything she could to compromise information.

    This leaves out entirely the fact that Sid Blumenthal (who had no clearance and was not a government employee) was feeding her Top Secret SAP information almost in real time, yet no one is asking how he got this fire hose leak of data straight out of NSA within hours of its creation???

  108. Gail Combs says:

    And then there is her aide who is a Muslim Brotherhood operative who WAS literally looking over Hitlery’s shoulder.

    Not to mention ‘Serioso’ who is a paid Hitlery dis-information agent.

    Either here or at Tony’s, one of the commenters who was in Afghanistan, mentioned the security breech was so bad that they started sending the state department updates AFTER the operations were completed instead of before to keep their people from being killed.

    This is supported by the death rates in Afghanistan suddenly increasing after Hitlery took office. Also Hitlery and Obummer were shipping weapons to the middle east. Some of those weapons immediately showed up in Afghanistan. And then there was Fast and Furious. Some of those weapons showed up in the Paris France attacks. Alex Jones (a tinfoil hat type) had mentioned he had a whistleblower on who said that the Fast and Furious weapons were not just rifles but other portable weapons like rocket launchers and they were actually being transported to a port in Mexico for shipment to the middle east.

    If the Dynamic Duo of Obummer and Hitlery had been in office when I was a kid, they would have been hung as the treacherous tra1tors they are.

  109. philjourdan says:

    She admits one was. The question was NOT the level of classification, only if any were. Second, Comey said more than 1. So your statement is still a lie and stupid.

    Every company, and especially the government, has security training. It is SOP. And at the end, you take a test and sign it as having taken it. It may seem stupid, but it is part of the security rules. Hillary signed it as being taken. The training was about marked AND unmarked messages. But of course she forgot it as soon as she took it. But that does not matter. As they say, ignorance is no excuse before the law.

    Just in presidential elections.

  110. E.M.Smith says:


    Um, please tone it down just a bit on the personal attack… we have no evidence Serioso is paid.



    You do know that a navy man with many years of good service was being reassigned due to health issues, so took a ‘selfie’ of him with the sonar screen he had sat at for years in the background. This, on a sub, is ‘classified’, even though you can’t get any real information from it. He never sent the photo to anyone and only intended it as a memento for his old age. HE is now headed for prison…

    Now until you can square that with the incredibly lax actions of Hillary, you are fighting a firehose of anger from ANYONE with past security and / or military experience.

    Note that I, as a civilian was subject to prison for “export of a munition” if I let the wrong U.S. Resident(!) use the Cray at Apple or allowed a network connection (in the Apple global network OR the internet) into a remote location that was not approved. So if Apple hired an Iranian Christian who had left due to persecution and married a guy in the USA, and she was an engineer and wanted an account to do her job, I could go to prison if I let her have it. Wrap your head around that.

    Then consider that Guicifer was brought over on the USGovt dime for interrogation (and reduction of charges and a much nicer cell than in Romania…) to discuss just what all he had sucked off Hillary’s server and who all he thought had it… He described his method. It is simple (but very effective) and is SOP in the hacking world (though many folks don’t do it now, preferring BOT attacks since they are lazy…) It is essentially a ‘Dictionary Attack’ with the first pass being a list of names of family, friends, pets, addresses, etc. Essentially you compile a dictionary of personal terms and prepend it to the normal dictionary (season with 0 to 3 preceding numerals or special letters and postfix with the same) and turn it loose. I was doing that kind of thing in the ’80s (as a ‘white hat’ inside the company – when idle we would run a light weight dictionary attack on our users passwords… and send email to folks who failed telling them their password… it was a very effective program ;-) Our dictionary included proper names of people and pets…)

    So, in reduced summary:

    Hillary sent many many emails with classified information in them.

    Several contained classified markings (that she claimed not to know was a classified mark due to her brain injury / damage… hey, it was her testimony… from the concussion)

    What she did would put ANY person in the government or military in prison for life.

    Those of us who have handled secret information know this, up close and personal.

    Those of us who manage secret and secure sites are absolutely appalled at how her services were “managed”.

    As a data security professional, given her high profile, I can absolutely guarantee she was hacked, and likely by a whole hoard of agencies and actors. (They have stated it was shut down a couple of times when someone noticed the attack traffic was so high it was an issue… that means the subtile folks got in easy…)

    Please, don’t insult our intelligence by making claims that even the FBI “dismissal” speech shows are false.


    Look up the recent work with very high density WiFi. A synthetic antenna is created for each device via wave interference. It lets you pack a whole lot more devices into a cell and get more signal with less power.

    (For anyone unfamiliar with it, here’s a low end example with simple explanation: )

    IMHO, I would speculate that this same method moves that range for reading a screen out to many miles, and likely even from space (only 50 miles away and you can use really really big antennas…)

    This synthetic antenna via interference method is also just ‘way cool’ on the face of it ;-)

    So if “the door is left open” I would expect it to look like a raging beacon of information to any global reach TLA with space ability. (Russia, China, India, Japan, Israel, Britain, France, …)

    Part of why The Blue Cube has no windows at all and the entrance is a man-trap with baffles.

    If you would run a secure facility today, you must start with a grounded solid metal wall, floor, and ceiling, then ‘penetrations’ must all be shielded heavily and entry / exit via doors where one of the set must be locked before the other unlocks. After that, you can start working on the trick stuff ;-)

    FWIW, given State Actors, I’d expect either a satellite over Hillary’s server or even just a well equipped truck down the block would be fine for picking up her emails remotely. Since they were arriving over open wire, it is likely a truck under the poles a few blocks away could get the signal in transit, though if not, send one guy in a Telco truck out and tap the line over to your line and then you can sit on the couch watching TV while you read her email… The number of places to suck the signal are just gigantic. Taps, RF wire leakage, screen scrapers, keyboard, (Blue Tooth if used, WiFi if used), and then the fancy / hard ones of things like reading the Hard Disk leakage and the CPU radiation and the buss signals and … Regular Stock PCs radiate crap all over the spectrum. Just set an AM radio down next to one and try to get any station, even a 50,000 Watt Clear Channel one…

    To claim she was not hacked is an “Argument From Ignorance” and just absurd.

  111. Larry Ledwick says:


    FWIW, given State Actors, I’d expect either a satellite over Hillary’s server or even just a well equipped truck down the block would be fine for picking up her emails remotely.

    Exactly, 40 years ago the military had training films on this exact tactic showing how easily communications can be captured. Something like 90%+ of all telephone traffic passes over microwave links when it is not going over fiber. Some of those microwave links are in very remote places (wyoming high desert, texas, etc.) and miles long. Since microwave dishes have side lobes you don’t even need to position your intercept van directly in between the towers, but a high gain antenna pointed at one of the towers in the middle of a side lobe of the microwave links could pickup the traffic many miles away.

    I was just being discrete in not making extravagant claims about intercept.

    Years ago I was working with an amateur radio group which did radio direction finding to locate emergency locator transmitters of downed aircraft or interference signals which caused problem on the commercial, public safety or amateur bands. I could sit in the parking lot of the company I worked for and hear the spurious emissions from the computer terminals inside the building without even trying with about $1000 worth of over the counter radio gear. The technology has been in common use for decades. That is why TEMPEST was developed to limit spurious emissions from computers to low enough levels it was very difficult to capture. (note I did not say impossible ! It just makes it more expensive and difficult )

    For someone skilled in electronic intercept she was a complete open book. She might as well have printed her emails on flyers and nailed them to telephone poles and store windows.

  112. p.g.sharrow says:

    don’t forget, is kind of obvious to any bored “Kiddy” search!
    Hillary is ignorant or arrogant? 50 years of her history say that she is Not ignorant or forgetful.
    This was deliberate to “Hide” her communications from F.O.I.A. and public investigations.
    The plea of ignorance and forgetfulness is Lawyer speak for a “lack of intent defense” .
    Hillary has always escaped using this defense. If something works why change it.
    Secrecy and hiding information has been Hillary Clinton’s modus operandi for all of her public life….pg

  113. Gail Combs says:

    Sorry E.M. however the Hillary Trolls have been seen all over and some of them are certainly paid.

    From the Daily KOS no less BEFORE DNC Wikileak and before Hillary’s nomination: Clinton SuperPac Admits to Paying Internet Trolls

    The Daily Beast reports that Clinton SuperPac “Correct the Record” is openly admitting to spending $1 million to hire fake online Hillary supporters to swarm social media sites like Reddit and counteract Sanders’ [actually existent unpaid] enthusiastic supporters’ points about Hillary in the interest of “unity”. Barf.

    Couple quick things: first, there have been a number of diaries claiming to “have switched from Bernie to Hillary” lately, and some of them have been from recently created accounts with no record of pro-Sanders remarks or diaries. More such people have populated the comment sections of such diaries, and someone is reccing them despite what I judge to be their incredible lack of helpful information. That is just a fact, and my opinion about said fact. Second, if one wanted to make the case that there were a vast Clintonian conspiracy behind that rash of new accounts and diaries, this is certainly what one might consider corroborating evidence. Note the SuperPac has already spent $4.5 million on God knows what. So let’s be honest this could have been already happenening, and now they believe they have more or less locked up the nomination and so are getting more belligerent/open about it….

    The Wikileaks email admitting paying on line trolls.

    To: Comm_Dxxxx
    Date: 2016-04-24 11:54
    Subject: RE: FNS 4-24-16

    Panel on Dems path forward
    * HRC ran through June in 2008, but right about this point she started to back off Obama attacks, Sanders isn’t really.

    o We’ll see what happens after Tues, Sanders will probably lose big in PA

    o He’s doing damage by hitting her on trust, honesty, authenticity, judgment

    * What is Sanders going to do to get his supporters on board? Dem party planks taking on Wall St, oil/gas

    o There will be negotiations, but Clinton people will have much more leverage

    * HRC will go into gen election has vulnerable candidate

    o Dems don’t even pay attention to email story

    o Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are lingering, will be exploited in general

    * Move to the left on illegal immigration, tougher for Hillary?

    o Yes, Super PAC paying young voters to push back online on Sanders supporters

    o She’s forced to continue to appeal to young liberals as opposed to pivoting back to center

    No reason to think the “Super PAC paying young voters to push back online” has stopped or that the target is not Trump. ESPECIALLY since there is very little real support for Hillary evidenced else where. I travel all over the Piedmont of NC and see only Trump sign. NO Hillary signs. Even in the Boston MA area my Brother-in-law who drives for UBER is seeing Trump signs all over but only three Hillary signs. Hillary’s rallies get a couple hundred at most and even at the DNC convention they had to pay for seat warmers!

    So why the large presence on line???

  114. philjourdan says:

    DO not forget OFA(l). I am sure he is lending it to Hillary for the campaign.

  115. Larry Ledwick says:

    On the North Korean nuclear test today, they are showing steady progress as yields are increasing with successive shots.

    The estimated yield in tons of TNT vs the recorded seismic signature.
    Note there are ways to “decouple” the blast energy from the surrounding earth, so those energy yields do not necessary represent the actual energy yield of the device, only the energy successfully coupled to the surrounding earth.

    Ton TNT    Magnitude
       42.5    =    4.3
      169.2    =    4.7
      673.6    =    5.1
    1,344.0   =    5.3

  116. Serioso says:

    I am curious to hear what EMS has to say about Trump’s misuse of classified data, data that was presumably marked more severely than merely ‘confidential.’ It seems unlikely that the information experts would have expressed policy preferences — that’s above their pay grade. As I keep saying, Trump dissembles.

    BTW, could someone direct me to the HRC website where I could collect my ‘troll money.’ Gail seems prone to a touch of paranoia. It would be nice if we could all carry on a civilized conversation, devoid of remarks lacking substantiation. I like to think of myself as a serious, informed person — which is why I follow this oft-misbeguided but generally intelligent blog — and it disappoints me to read uninformed (and, lord knows, lengthy) remarks from those simply pushing an agenda. I am grateful to EMS for an intervention. First time!

    Also by the way: Was anything on Hillary’s server marked more than ‘confidential?’ Or, even, unmarked more than confidential? I presume that the FBI’s non action shows there was no info that was more highly classified, which would be standard communications for the Department of State, which does not usually engage in technological discussions of methods and sources. I doubt that anything marked (or unmarked) more than confidential was on the HRC server.

    In any case, EMS’s tirade against sloppy handling of classified info made no distinction among the various levels of classification. He treated them as uniformly illegal. This is silly. ‘Confidential’ data is routinely leaked to the press by insiders with an agenda. Does anybody get prosecuted for leaking confidential data? Not to my knowledge, although I could be (and probably am) wrong.

    And did you see Colin Powell’s letter today? Just as I said!

  117. Gail Combs says:

    RETRACTION: Trump May Have Just Leaked A HUGE Intelligence Secret


    This story was reported based on information from several sources. Upon further review, those sources seem to have come from a single source with unverifiable information. While possible, there is no evidence that we are comfortable with at this time that Donald Trump has received any intelligence briefings before making his comments on Friday. We hereby retract this story. We sincerely apologize for any confusion.

    Seems the media jumped the gun.

  118. Larry Ledwick says:

    What misuse of classified information are you referring to regarding Trump?
    He said their body language (which is not consciously controllable) revealed they did not agree with the current administration when he asked probing questions of them. His impression of their body language is not classified, it is his personal opinion (of a person who makes his living reading and interpreting body language of the people he makes deals with).

    You are either intentionally playing stupid, can’t read or have totally ignored all coverage of this topic. Comy clearly stated during his original press briefing the answers to those questions and they have been repeatedly dissected for a week by everyone who had a TV or a computer, or personal device.

    From the New York Times:
    From the first 30,000 emails released, they included 8 email chains (composed of multiple emails) including Top Secret material. 36 email chains included secret material, 8 included confidential email. A total of 2000 instances of her email chains have been classified during the review process.

    So to directly answer your question – yes she sent over 2000 classified emails including information that ranged all the way from Top Secret, Special Access Programs, No Foreign distribution, SCI (Sensitive Compartmented Information) — ie so sensitive even among folks who hold TS clearances, it is only on a need to know basis. Gamma (communications intelligence which is NSA’s crown jewel, all the way down to confidential information which included paragraph markings indicating it was confidential.

    There are 14,900 additional emails yet to be released which are said to contain 1 secret and 2 more confidential messages.

    So your last paragraph consisting of unsupported assumptions about the source of the information is directly contradicted by the FBI Director’s statement. She compromised classified information from just about every high security department of government, CIA, State, DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), and NGA (National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency), much of this information was provided to her by her private mole and professional security leak, Sid Blumenthal who was supplying her this highly classified information (even though he did not work for the government or have any active clearance) often word for word from reports released only hours earlier by these agencies. Why the media is ignoring that and why he is not in a jail cell is a very interesting question.

  119. E.M.Smith says:


    I have nothing to say per Trump leaking anything since I’ve seen no evidence of it nor any story about it.

    BTW, you would get more “discussion” it you didn’t call folks comments a “tirade”, didn’t ignore clear provable facts widely known reported and presented to you (like Comy’s statements), and insult other posters by name calling (paranoia as one example above).

    I try to keep this space “food fight free” which is why you had been in moderation a few times. Being negative and tossing insults leads to food fights not discussions. And, as noted, I try to keep all sides moderate. (Though, frankly, it is hard to defend someone who tosses the most insult in exchanges. Thus my slow defense of you sometimes).

    Oh, and one far too subtile distinction I make: Describing an observable I tend to give more leeway and clear “insult to the person” I react faster. So, for example, “The statements about paid hoards of posters sounds like paranoid ideation to me” is a statement of observed condition, while “Gail makes paranoid posts” will get a slapdown. It is just an insult “to the person”. But hopefully that helps explain some of the choices I make as to when to toss a yellow flag.

    So, basically, be polite and avoid obvious troll like strategies (such as willful persistant ignorance, and name calling or flaming, or deliberate shift to orthogonal attack points when caught out…) and many good discussions are possible.


    No worries. Just note that Serioso and I have had a “relationship” of many years now and under a couple of posting names, spanning several non-Hillary topics. A very “progressive” voice, but generally consistent in POV and occasionally has interesting points and topics. While sometimes irritating, it does prevent the echo chamber and helps polish points. So while some of the tactics used look trollish to me, I think it is from years of web exposure, not being a professional troll.


    So everbody play nice and “many such journies are possible”…

  120. E.M.Smith says:

    Looks like the flap is over a statement Trump has made for a long time, he was not privey to anything classified about it, and the claim has been retracted.

    Others are slamming him based on our base in Saudi being closed for many years. This misses the point that a base can be repopulated quickly if needed.

    The facts are we built a huge base in Saudi. Used it in a couple of wars. Then packed up our kit when not needed and left. None of that is classified. As to direction of money flows, IIRC, Saudi paid us for the first Iraq war. I’m not sure about the 2nd. I’d not be at all surprised if we paid them a maintenance fee to keep it in operating condition. None of that is a secret. Nor is the naval facility elsewhere on the Arabian peninsula (that might be confounded with Saudi Arabia if speaking loosely).

    So, to me, the Trump Leak Flap is a manufactured story based on misinformation blown up with hot air and advocacy.

  121. Serioso says:

    Oftentimes Gail goes on for far longer than my attention span can handle. As do others. My question is simple enough: If the FBI guy can only find a few Hillary emails that were ‘ confidential,’ according to his testimony, what’s the fuss about? Deleted headers? Who deleted them? Clinton? Apparently not. What is the problem, aside from a server that COULD have been hacked (but apparently, as far as we know, wasn’t), Witch hunt? And no comment on this blog whatsoever on Colin Powell’s similar practice? NO COMMENT?? A little fairness would be more convincing. Fairness coupled with fewer words!

  122. E.M.Smith says:

    Short attention span? OK got it.

    FBI found only a few MARKED with (c) for confidential. They found MANY that WERE confidential up to Top Secret and beyond.

    Things that are secret need not be marked to be secret.

    Exposing secret is a FELONY and is supposed to go to JAIL.

    Many. Secret. Felony. Jail.

    Simple enough?

    Now the FBI guy whimped out on pushing for charges. Why isn’t known. MANY other people have gone to prison for much less.

    Hillary lied under oath, too, Also a jail thing. Jail, as in PRISON.

    So “the fix is in”, just unclear where and by whom and how.

    Who deleted the headers? The STAFF Hillary directed to remove them (so more folks ought to be up on charges…) and directing folks to commit a FELONY is itself a FELONY (start with conspiracy and work your way up from there, it’s a long list and I don’t want to stress your attention span…)

    What is the problem? FELONY.

    Also the server was clearly hacked, we have plenty of evidence for it (Guicifer, for one) but it is something they decided not to prosecute. He did a plea deal for a lower sentence, so someone got the goods…

    No comment per Powell as he is IRRELEVANT. If my neighbor kicks his dog, it has no bearing on my shooting someone… That, BTW, is about the relative level of fault. Powell was careful to only use personal email for non-secret things. He clearly stated he used an approved system for classified stuff and his private email for non-classified (and discouraged putting things in email in any case.)

    Got it?

  123. Larry Ledwick says:

    Interesting item here on the true leanings of the millennial generation. Perhaps another flaw in polling and election targeting. It appears there might be a large silent cohort of conservative millennials which everyone is ignoring.

  124. Serioso says:

    I don’t think one can commit a felony without intent. That’s why the law distinguishes among self-defense, involuntary manslaughter, first degree murder, etc. INTENT!

    As for Guccifer, is there evidence he cracked the Clinton server? The DNC server is another matter altogether.

  125. Serioso – I doubt if General Patreus intended that his pillow-talk would be passed to a foreign power, either. In the case of national security, not handling secrets correctly normally results in severe action even if that lapse doesn’t result in those secrets being lost.

    For the HRC mail server, it’s as close to certain as possible that several foreign powers and a numer of private hackers got into it. It wasn’t secured at all, and had her name on it so was a big and easy target. Even without any secret material in the emails, that would have given the hackers a lot of information as to intentions. It’s somewhat similar to playing poker with a mirror behind your shoulder.

    Maybe it’s time you actually read the comments here again and understand just how much of a security hole HRC made. This was then compounded by erasing 30k emails so that the intelligence services don’t know what data was leaked. If you know what has been compromised it’s easier to deal with it.

    The email server was intentionally set up, and the erasure of the emails was intentional. I expect that the erased emails will turn up from *somewhere* (maybe a gift from Russia, Israel or some other country) and that we’ll find out that there were more secrets lost than has been admitted so far. It really is a can of worms where each new revelation is worse than has been admitted earlier.

  126. p.g.sharrow says:

    I find that some people are “Fans” and will cheer for their team or leader regardless of the reality of the situation. “The Emperour is wearing the most wonderous regalia!” they say, while even a child can see that he is naked. There are some of us that will only report what we see reqardless of the consiquences. Too dumb to visualize the wishful discriptsion of the Emperors new cloths, I guess…pg

  127. Serioso says:

    General Patraeus KNEW what he did violated the law. He got a slap on the wrist (as opposed to more severe punishment) because his actions caused no obvious harm. Clinton, by contrast, seemed unaware that what she did violated the law. Her actions caused no harm that anyone has proved. Lots of insinuations, however!

    Common, people! The Patreaus stuff was on an unsecured computer. Could have been hacked!

  128. E.M.Smith says:


    The guy who took a selfy on the sub had zero intent to leak info. He is off to prison.

    You also hang far too much on intent. I can tell you personally that with zero intent, I was subject to felony export of a munition if I let the wrong people have a Cray account. I was subject to that even befor informed of the law as I was the responsible manager.

    Similarly, under SarBox, as corporate head of I.T., failure to preserve email, any and all corporate email, for the statutory years (5 IIRC, 7 for law firms) is subject to PRISON, regardless of reason or intent. Even if a junior employee erases the mail without my knowledge or permission. This is by design, and common in retention laws, to prevent plausible deniability defense (I.e. exactly what Clinton is doing).

    NetApp sells a device that is impossible to erase for exactly that reason, and I’ve sold / installed a few of them.

    Were the Clinton email a private corporation under Sarbox, at a bare minimum the head I.T. guy and lawyer in charge of erasing would be behind bars right now, and likely Clinton too based on her giving the direction to erase the email.

    And no, personal email on the corp system MUST be retained under the same term and penalties.

    You are out of your depth on the security and retention laws and decline to listen to those of us who work in those areas.

    Note that no damages need be shown for any of the examples I gave. This too is by design. Damages are usually very hard to prove, and once damages are known, you have already lost too much. The crime is from the RISK created, not the loss documented.

    Finally, by definition, any computer not meeting Tempest is creating unacceptable RISK and is easily hacked. Further, any Chineese, Russian, and Israeli cyber attack team that failed to hack Hillary would be courtmarshalled for gross incompetence or shot (depending on country). That they had to shut the server down a couple of times when they noticed excessive attack, pretty much proves the pro attacks got in (as they don’t make that level of ruckus and would run unimpeded. (If they had an intrusion detection system, it would never have let the heavy attacks get to that point… so they were running at least 1/2 naked and likely full bareasses naked.

    FWIW, I once (about the same era) brought up a new box on a residential IP service. We decided to finish the job after a night sleep. Within 10 hours the box had been hacked and botted. This was on a completely fresh system and service with no outbound connection made (I.e. idle traffic and not in any tracking systems or server logs).

    That is all the time it takes. The net is now populated with bots, crawlers, worms, and scripts / automated attack systems. So yes, we do know she was hacked. Guicifer took credit (and jail time) and the police who tracked him logged where he was attacking (sufficiently for the FBI to give him an all expenses paid trip to a plea deal in exchange for information on the Hillary Hack)

    (Next day we scrubbed the box and started over, 2 layers of firewall first…)

    Your postings indicate deep denial of known facts frequently supplied to you and easily verified. Tiresome to plough the same ground several times…

    Hillary willfully committed criminal acts and lied about it. We have enough records to show that. She ought to be in prison, big time. Why she isn’t likely relates to other crimes not yet public (like blackmail and that trail of dead bodies…) and pointing out the skate with a corrupt DOJ doesn’t make it better.

  129. Larry Ledwick says:

    @Serioso — the Cliff’s notes version of the HRC email scandal and her pattern of clear intent to interfere with the investigation.

  130. philjourdan says:

    @Serioso – Intent is in the seriousness of the crime, not the classification.

    And try googling Bryan Nishimura.

  131. Gail Combs says:

    Serioso says: “General Patraeus KNEW what he did violated the law. He got a slap on the wrist…”
    And Hillary did not??? You have got to be KIDDING ME!

    First she is a LAWYER. Second she was first lady for 8 years and then she was a Senator.

    She is not some uneducated garbageman who came across something interesting in the trash… Heck the secretaries in industry were trained on security as was everyone else.

    As Secretary of State it was her JOB to know and her JOB was to keep her trap shut. If she COULD NOT handle that job correctly she has no business being president.

    Handling classified to very secret documents were part of the job of the Secretary of State.

    SEPTEMBER 1999 Security and Intelligence
    Oversight Audit


    This Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit report addresses the effectiveness of State Department policies and procedures for protecting classified documents at the Main State Headquarters facility, in Washington, D.C. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) directed OIG to conduct the review in response to several reported incidents of lax security.

    This audit concluded that programs are in place to evaluate individuals trustworthiness and need to handle classified information. Likewise, physical and procedural safeguards are in place to protect information from unauthorized disclosure to individuals who do not have a demonstrated need for access to national security information, particularly material related to intelligence. Nevertheless, the level of security awareness and controls to prevent unauthorized disclosures could be substantially enhanced….


    U.S. Department of State — Security Clearances


    Eligibility for access to classified information, commonly known as a security clearance, is granted only to those for whom an appropriate personnel security background investigation has been completed. It must be determined that the individual’s personal and professional history indicates loyalty to the United States, strength of character, trustworthiness, honesty, reliability, discretion, and sound judgment, as well as freedom from conflicting allegiances and potential for coercion, and a willingness and ability to abide by regulations governing the use, handling, and protection of classified information. A determination of eligibility for access to such information is a discretionary security decision based on judgments by appropriately trained adjudicative personnel. Eligibility will be granted only where facts and circumstances indicate access to classified information is clearly consistent with the national security interests of the United States. Access to classified information will be terminated when an individual no longer has need for access.

    The Bureau of Human Resources determines if a Department of State position requires a security clearance based on the duties and responsibilities of the position. If the position requires access to classified information, the position will be given an appropriate security classification. Individuals applying to these positions must undergo a personnel security background investigation.

    Sorry dude, the poor little ole’ ignorant me defence doesn’t cut it AT ALL!

  132. E.M.Smith says:


    You go girl!

    (And if you can defeat my wife … oh never mind.. :-)

    Victor, spoils, and all that… though I’m not spoiled!!!…


  133. H.R. says:

    I suppose Hillary’s fix-it meme will be:

    Come to the dark side, Deplorables. We have cookies.


  134. Larry Ledwick says:

    Hmmm — looks like HRC’s goose is cooked, and the big switch play is beginning.

    A liberal newspaper just threw her under the bus. I presume they have been instructed to finish the job she started and take her down so she can be replaced by someone else (Biden).

  135. E.M.Smith says:

    I don’t know of any mechanism to remove a candidate from the ballot once they have been the only one their party put on it.

    There might well be (for example, in the case of a candidate dying before the vote), but I’ve seen “the dead guy wins” before….

    Write-ins are notorious for never working well… so I can’t think that’s what the DNC is willing to bet on…

  136. Larry Ledwick says:

    The infrastructure for a candidate change already exists, although as you mention state ballot rules might be problematic. The important point is the real election occurs in the electoral college.

  137. Larry Ledwick says:

    Little counter point to the DNC leak from wikileaks — as you have pointed out having an hack originate on a Russian server is no big deal they almost all do, but the other things mentioned her are a bit troubling, — to quote Paul Newman from the movie Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid.

    “Who are those guys?”

    The key question is are they the original hackers or just trying to play the media?

  138. Larry Ledwick says:

    Another source on DNC getting panicked over HRC health condition.

  139. Gail Combs says:

    Careful EM, I have a thing about redheads… So does Hubby so we agree to look but don’t touch unless it is our chestnut equines.

    On a weird note, I have found my chestnuts (redheaded horses) are more prone to hives and allergies than other colors.

  140. E.M.Smith says:

    Fascinating… I had no idea about that procedure.

    Michelle? I don’t think so… Too much resentment in the world toward the Obamas. It would be a spectacular “get out the vote” program for Trump. Even the DNC can’t be that dense. But that the process is being discussed is an interesting endorsement of the “media turn” idea.

    IF we start seeing CNN, MSNBC, etc. etc. talking about the Clinton’s hi-jink or Hillary’s Health, we’ll know the move is in the works…

    Per Russian Servers: Do note, the attacks don’t originate on them… it just masks where they do originate and assures no logs can be retrieved to help sort it out. They also act as a place to deposit “stuff” gotten via other lines of attack / systems and countries of origin. Again, the whole hack is hidden, and you can’t get the logs from Russia to find the depositor of the files. Russia is used as a blind relay and blind drop box, not the attack box. (The Russian Hackers have their own gear that is in Russia… I’m talking about the boxes used by folks like the UEA leaker…)

    In both cases, the FSB et. al. have access, so they both get the information early, and know who to thank… (unless the hacker is smart enough to use them as a tertiary rather than secondary indirection)…

    Me? I’d have at least a 4 space… My Puppet Pi, a “puppet” somewhere in a foreign land that it drives for the actual hack, a quasi-safe drop box , then via Onion Routing, to the Russian Drop. Russia can identify the node doing the drop, but the Onion Routing hides who’s driving it. The quasi box knows “someone” made the drop, and might be able to pick up some identifiers if you handle it badly, but then that, at best, leads to a Puppet in someone’s home in India… then they might be able to identify a Pi did it, but… a Pi with the IP of an open WiFi and a MAC address that’s melted into slag as the $8 dongle is disposed with each hack… and the chip is fresh “generic Debian” so useless as a finger print. The “hack” done from outside the WiFi provider, so at best the camera’s catch a hoodie and shades with a laptop (driving the puppet pi via hardwire ethernet…hidden from view) which is not the type of machine they are looking for…) IFF they have outside cameras and IF they keep the video long enough for someone to figure it all out and “go there”, which would be months, at very very best… and IF you didn’t cover your tracks and remove logs well enough and if… Oh, and the laptop booted from an SD or USB Linux (like Knoppix) that means if they Do somehow managed to get to the laptop, it contains nothing but an old MS Windows and a recent paper on the sanctity of the arts and how technology is evil and demeaning to normal people who don’t understand it ;-)

    Ideally, if doing this more than as a cheap one-off, done from inside a vehicle that permits no outside observation at all anyway. Fiberglass camper or truck shell. Using a really good antenna to connect to the WiFi from 1/2 mile away far side of the parking lot… or up the street on a hillside, so there is zero ability to know who, where, or what vehicle the hack originated, only that that vehicle was far away beyond normal WiFi range… ( I’ve used a 3 inch parabolic to connect via older WiFi with less range than the present crop, and got about 100 yards from the windows… ‘mile’ range is doable pretty easy).

    But then again, I’m a systems admin type and professionally paranoid about such things 8-{)

    So yeah, run any tracker over at least 3 countries with at least 5 networks (ethernet, WiFi, USA, East Latvia, Onion, Russia..) and 4 boxes (plus terminal server laptop) and several OSs. Divide hack from deposit and driver from hack / drop and leave no logs anywhere possible), plus burn your identity at the first link by destroying the MAC and having the IP not owned by you. I think that might be enough…. though if really slick, you capture a router in the middle of someone’s network and use it for your indirection server… so folks end up looking for a computer and don’t realize it was a router inside a company somewhere…

    The Russian guy did that when he couldn’t break into Apple on my watch. Bounced off our router into the military in Hawaii… but he didn’t know we were watching him the whole time… so you need a few indirects before you do a ‘capture the router’ at a site who might have clue… In any case, you want each “link” only able at best to see “something is happening” but not see much of what and none of who, and your very first link anonymised and Onion for the data drop.

    Can you tell I miss being “in the game”? ;-0

  141. E.M.Smith says:


    No worries. My red beard and mustache have become mostly white, and my head hair, what is left of it, was Dark Ash Blond anyway… I have the “redhead” gene, but not manifested in head hair. The daughter, however, is a full blown wonderful deep red.

    FWIW, the “gene as hologram” interpretation has each gene coding for multiple proteins. This would imply that the melanin gene codes for more than that, thus the ‘different’ melanin from redheads would also cause other things to be different.

    For at least my clan of redheads, it is more allergy and hive like responses (very sensitive skin…)

    One might guess that would be true of other redhead critters with similar genetic systems…

    I also like to think that maybe the ultra-fine hair thickness codes for ultra dense dendrites too, they a more densely populated brain and thus greater smarts, but that’s just a self congratulatory fantasy ;-)

  142. Gail Combs says:

    Larry, don’t forget ThreatConnect works for the DNC and therefore Hillary. We already know the first question is what do you want the answer to be? And as EM said, most leaks go through Russia.

    So why the mud tossed at Russia???

    The other Foreign Policy story indicated that Clinton just started back up the Cold War by insulting Putin. Don’t forget CAGW is wearing very thin. They know and we know the weather is going to be turning a lot colder for the next couple decades so they need a new ‘Hobgoblin’ as H.L. Mencken said.

    Pascal Lamy in “Wither Globalization” mentioned the Cold War was very helpful in the march towards a one world government so this maybe the fall back position as Nationalism fighting back against Globalism is poping out all over.

    …Mobilizing collective purpose is more difficult when we no longer face one common enemy, but thousands of complex problems. The Cold War was about the clash, not just of geopolitical interests, but of big ideas — democracy against totalitarianism, freedom against state control. But the Cold War “glue” has disappeared….

    On top of that Russia and China… the BRICS countries, challenged the World Bank with a gold backed Development Bank and Hillary’s Keepers sent her to kill Gaddafi for challenging the petrodollar and french franc in Africa with a gold dinar.

    Who actually was the leaker? If it was DNC Data Director Seth Rich like the tinfoil hat types think, then the last thing the DNC/Hillary wants is a bloody trail back to them. Arkancide is already haunting the Clintons. So deflect, deflect, deflect, accuse.

    Russia and Putin are a real handy two-fer with a mud sling at Trump to boot.

  143. E.M.Smith says:

    It all traces back to the globalization push. Putin is not on board with that, nor is Trump, so both must be vilified by TPTB in the EU and USA (and lesser lights in Australia / New Zealand / Canada / etc. who have bought into the push).

    Hillary wants to assure that anyone NOT on board with it (from smaller states) get flushed one way or another (even she is not [yet?] daft enough to consider a coup in Russia nor bombing it.) So smaller states get the political cleaning if possible, a coup if needed, and a murderous war if all else fails. Wash and repeat.

    The expectation is that once most of the globe is wrapped up tight, Russia and China will be forced into going along or be shut out. They noticed this, so made the BRICS deals… and now Russia is flat out spitting in their collective faces. The USA / EU responded with TPP / TTIP in the hope of sealing the deal with a unified EU / North America / Latin Am. / Pacific working group. (Africa just doesn’t have enough of an economy to matter and Asia will be a slow creeping spread out of TPP…) Now that whole big push is in jeopardy via Trump and the nation noticing that “trade deals” don’t work for them and some catching on to the hidden ‘hooks’ in them that destroy national sovereignty. One “commission” at a time…

    The Arab / Islamic nations just want to make their own caliphate, and were intractable, so they get reduced to rubble and a ‘start over’ in the process. I suspect Saudi is “bought in” (at the same time that the Masons added the Koran to the list of ‘holy books’ one could swear on to join…) so they are not on the bombing list. The “odd one out” is Turkey. Clearly “on our side” nominally at least in the past, but now having a bit of a think about how to become the center of the new Ottoman Turk Caliphate… so bears watching as a future destabilization target, but by whom?… Iran? Russia? Us? EU? I don’t know enough about Turkey / Saudi relationships to project that one…

    So what’s a scheming Globalist Evil Bastard to do when their plans for world domination start to take a dive? Usually they slow down, hunker down, and wait for a nice time to slide in a new slow frog boil push. This time might be different, though. Too many eyeballs have noticed that something looks wrong and a lot of noses starting to smell a rat… So I’d not be surprised if a wider war was not the “solution” to distract and “unify” (under their yoke) since the financial / trade angle is breaking down… (But then war with whom? We’re already at war with “terror” and “drugs” and “poverty” and much of the Shiia world… My bet would be North Korea or Iran; but I could see a case for a Turkey “collapse” and a small eastern Europe / Anatolia / Middle East gig… W.W.I Ottoman Empire war redux… trying desperately to keep it from spreading to EU and Russia… ) But then Trump puts his foot on that one too with his “be strong and avoid wars” angle.

    Trump better make darned sure he owns everyone and every facility that works on his vehicles, his buildings, and his food… and hope that the Secret Service is good at spotting snipers at a distance… There’s a lot of very well manicured toes in $10000 sandals he’s stepping on…

  144. Larry Ledwick says:

    So why the mud tossed at Russia???

    Don’t forget that the Clintons were joined at the hip with China when Bill was in office.

    Also as mentioned in one of the links if they can sell the Russian connection (even if not true) they might be able to delegitimatize the election if HRC loses. That could lead to two possibilities.

    If they are really crazy a soft coup and as mentioned in the link Obama refusing to step down and declaring the election invalid. A couple years ago I would have thought that ridiculous, but the ease with which Obama and the Democrats in Congress blow off legal requirements makes it plausible if very unlikely. That would likely be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and a lot of people would figure conventional measures were no longer effective and move up to extra-legal measures.

    The second would be simply a way to con their followers into thinking they got cheated like in the Gore vs Bush contest and set up years of justification for the most extreme and absurd abuse of the system.

    It all depends very much on how HRC handles the next few weeks. If she does another obvious face plant soon, she is washed up, and will be replaced by the DNC one way or another. If she hangs on and manages to make no major errors between now and election day she will likely lose (due to Trump’s recent more focused campaign, the constant drip drip drip of her leaks and flaws) and the likely issue that the poles are already totally cooked and she really is losing already (unless the Democrats can pull off another machine politics stolen election with convicts and illegal voters, spiced with a bit of fraud, and ballot fixing. They have been pulling it off in close election years for a few decades so not that big a stretch.

    Then the question becomes what happens if HRC gets past inauguration day and then croaks or becomes very obviously impaired — then we get VP–> Pres and that is not a good choice either because my understanding is Kaine is pretty much a marxist.

  145. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Larry; THAT could be a BIG deal if it gets into general circulation. Clintons rob from those that have and give to the “Poor” We. R. Poor Inc. The Clinton Family Organization is a world wide racket…pg

  146. philjourdan says:

    @Larry – re: Overcharge

    Still goes to show – a fool and his money are soon parted.

Comments are closed.