Obama Administration spied on Sharyl Attkisson

She doesn't think that she is the only one.  One wonders why all the silence about Obama, and yet, they cannot endure Trump's tweets.

Has Trump really done anything to reporters?  But you'd think the Second  First Amendment to the US Constitution has been shredded.

Actually, stuff like that was happening with Obama in the White House, but nobody seemed to care then.

Sharyl Attkisson: I Don't Think I Was the Only Reporter the Government Surveilled https://t.co/dCqpIpe2fl #Video via @pjmedia_com

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 28, 2018

Intellectual political advice...

With respect to self serving demands of leftists, who accuse you of being evil if you don't give them what they want, I offer them this:





Lefties want to accuse you of something and make you feel guilty, you see.  A good response is right here---- channel Archie Bunker.

Of course Archie Bunker is dumb, according to lefties.  If you don't cave in to their guilt tripping, then here comes the insults.

As for the insults, you can respond "Mayel kiss mah greeyuts!"

Brought to you as a public service in the name of supreme patriotism.  For now, I bid you adieu.

Obligatory, 7.27.18

The big news today is that the economy grew 4.1 percent.  Or is it the big news?  It seems to be going over like a lead balloon.

Nothing makes sense anymore. 

If a Democrat president had these numbers, there would be dancing in the streets.  But not now.

Once upon a time, I wrote something to the effect that propaganda alone cannot run a country.  Maybe that was wrong.

People believe what is false, and don't believe what is true.  Call that what you will, but it cannot be good.

If we are to believe it, young people prefer the socialism of Venezuela, which has an inflation rate which cannot even be believed.

Could it be that nothing matters more to these people than to enforce equality even if it means that the rest of the country will suffer terribly because of it.  All of this because of the few who won't or cannot succeed in this society.

Of course, the reality could be that people are all too happy to send Trump back for four more years.  But you'd never know that from what you hear in the news.

Free trade hocus pocus

One thing that never convinced me was this idea that trade deficits didn't matter.  With the current changes in our trading relationships, it appears that Trump is going to erase at least some of that problem.

Lest anyone get too excited about all this, there are other ways towards protectionism than tariffs.  Of course, as long as Trump is on the job, he'll keep the other guys as honest as is possible to keep them.

Unfortunately, Trump will never get credit for this.  There is a lot to do to correct the ills that this society has.  One of the worst ills is this outlandish amount of dishonesty in the media.

We have the First Amendment and all, but there needs to be an understanding about the role of corporations in all of this high stakes propaganda.  These corporations are multinational.  They have little loyalty to this country, if any at all.  If screwing the people of this country is to their advantage, you can be assured that they would have no problem with it so long as it helps their own bottom line.

I've gone on rants about corporations before.  But anybody in the world can own a stock traded on the stock exchanges.  Hopefully people will start thinking about that.

By the way, that link in the paragraph above was in 2014.  So this really isn't about Trump.  Trump is only giving expression to what people think.  There is no cult of personality.  It is just another one of their lies.


Update:

next morning:

Dick Morris weighs in.  GDP numbers out this morning, could be big news.

Dick Morris: Trump Scores Big on Trade with Europe https://t.co/LNdYAu5H05

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 27, 2018

... more here from Last Refuge.  My concerns about other trade barriers may be getting addressed.  That would be welcome news.

Freedom Caucus backs down on impeachment of Rosenstein

There was a discussion of this on Limbaugh today.

Let's face reality here boys, impeachment was not going to work.  A good many on the GOP side like what Rosenstein is doing.  The rule of law is out the window.  Of course, they'll claim they are for the rule of law, but if they were, Rosenstein would be forced to resign.  Not to mention, Bob Mueller's gig would be over and done with.  The entire Russian fake scandal is built around the illusion that this phony investigation is in support of the rule of law and of democracy.  It is not that, but for the "crime" of the wrong person winning an election!

There has to be an appearance of unity though, and so the Freedom Caucus had to back down.  We can't have the public seeing this kind of dissension within the GOP ranks. 

Perhaps that is the real reason the Freedom Caucus brought it up.  People might notice this, and start asking some questions.

You have to know that the media is never going to report the truth about what this so-called investigation is really about.

IMPORTANT!!! What Putin Conceded To Trump – Lunch Alert!

IMPORTANT!!! What Putin Conceded To Trump – Lunch Alert!

comment:

More on why this was NOT treason, but a successful summit.

The left is lying, as usual.  But you should already know that.

Spacex's big plans

First, is the rocket itself.

It should be noted that this rocket concept is well-thought out.  It could be mass produced like an aircraft, and be used as an aircraft for point-to-point landings on Earth.  This gives it an economic base on Earth, which can be leveraged to space.





Where it's built, where it's launched, and how it gets there to be launched.  Nuts and bolts stuff.







Finally, what the big plan is.

Ultimately, the ship is intended for Mars.  But it could be used for any number of missions.  It can go anywhere in the solar system, says Musk.  That may sound a bit too optimistic, but it is really designed to do a lot of different tasks.

It will need a lot of help for such an ambitious project, but Musk is thinking well ahead, so this is not out of the question.  It may take a bit longer than what he says, however.






Hypothetical situation:

You could start whole new industries with this idea.  Like a trip to Mars as a tourist.  You can even go on an "ego trip".

On the other hand, maybe not.

Creepy, crawly things

Ain't necessarily nice.  In most cases, they are not what you would like to run into.  It so happens that I ran into a rattlesnake this morning.

There are scorpions, spiders, and killer bees around here.  Never a dull moment.

I think the Russians must have sent this snake to get me.

What's a liberal?

Now this is a liberal song?  Right?

Well, I don't disagree with the point he is making, except for one thing.  Sometimes things will never change.  You cannot fight things that can never change.  It is like Don Quixote fighting the windmill.

When you don't accept things as they are, you can literally drive yourself over the brink.  It is up to a reasonable person to be able to figure out the difference.

Just saying...

Two tribes, one country-- big trouble ahead

At some point, it must become all one or all the other.  This isn't new, but a paraphrasing of what Abraham Lincoln said prior to the beginning of the Civil War.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.

The two tribes today are not about slavery, as in Lincoln's time.  Today, it seems to be about what is truth and what isn't.

One of  the tribes denies truth altogether.  For them, a thing can be true if it is desired to be so.  Truth is malleable to individual will.  Therefore, if one is born female, and she doesn't like being female, she can be changed into a he.  This despite the fact that the DNA of  a female cannot be changed to a male.  What you get from the factory is what you get, it doesn't matter how you feel about that outcome.  But the postmodernists believe that one determines one's own truth because that is what one wishes.  Such thinking used to be considered insanity, but today, that no longer applies.  Let's call this tribe the postmodern tribe.

On the other hand, you have the traditional tribe.  Truth is what it is, and cannot be changed even if we do not like it.  It all seems harsh and cruel to a postmodernist, but a traditionalist will resign himself to the the realities of a situation, as opposed to denying it.  Therefore, if you are born female, you are required to conform with what is considered female---you use the female restroom.  A woman cannot be a man in this tribe.  If you have a problem with your gender, you need to change your attitude, buster.

The truth tribes can disagree on a great many other things, too.  If the postmodern tribe believes that the Russians stole the election, even when there is no evidence of this having been the case, then by golly it must be true.  The traditional tribe may offer all the evidence, logic, and reason that  it can muster that this is not so, but that will never make a difference with the post modern tribe.  To them, the truth is what they want it to be.  Damn the facts!  The Russians are evil and mean because they hate gays!

Hence the trouble in this society.  You cannot have peace in the realm when you cannot agree that two plus two equals four.  If one side insists upon four, and the other insists upon five, how can there ever be a possibility of harmony?

Without agreement on principles, there is the inevitability of conflict.

Does the truth matter anymore in this society, or has it gone over the postmodern cliff?

The rule of law won't matter if they get Trump

The "rule of law" is on a lot of lips these days, but the rule of law is being lost just the same.

The reason the rule of law is being lost is that it is just a cover for destroying it.

There are many examples of this in this Russian election meddling business.  There would not be any controversy if it weren't for the Steele Dossier.   The Dossier was salacious and unverifiable, but was used anyway to get a FISA warrant on Carter Page.  Carter Page could not be wiretapped legally unless it was found that he was a foreign agent.  Besides that, Page would have had to been breaking the law, and thus liable for punishment.  But note that Page was not charged with a crime.  Furthermore, without the FISA warrant, it is doubtful that there would be any Special Prosecutor- Bob Mueller.

Now, we are at the point where, a tape that has been obtained by a search warrant initiated by the Mueller investigation, is going to be used to cause political damage to Trump.  This violates not only attorney client privilege, but there still hasn't been any crime demonstrated.  How then are they in the position of obtaining this tape?  Even the production of the tape was a violation of Trump's rights.  Indeed, throughout all of this story regarding Russia, no crime has been detected that had anything to do with the 2016 election.  But clear violations of the law have occurred so that political points could be scored.  Rule of law?  What law?

Incidentally, this was all predictable when Mueller was appointed.  It was inevitable that this investigation would produce such an outcome.  The real target is Trump.  There does not have to be a crime.  It is the politics that matter.

The real crime as far as this one party government is concerned, is that Hillary lost the election.  But to justify this "investigation", it is said that it is necessary to protect the rule of law and democracy.  This is an out and out lie.  The real point is to reverse the outcome of an election.

The rule of law is what protects the citizens against a rogue government.  What does the citizenry do when a government goes rogue?  Why bother to vote if the vote isn't honored?

It won't matter that none of the convictions obtained by Mueller's crew will hold up under scrutiny.  If this conspiracy succeeds in deposing Trump, a subsequent lawful ruling that he was wronged won't matter.  The rule of law would have been used to circumvent the rule of law, and to subvert democratic rule.  All the more reason to shut it down now.

It should be obvious.  It is politics, not law.

Who is Max Boot?

Supposedly, he is a conservative.  The word "conservative" has become so ambiguous that it is necessary to make an attempt at clarification.

In politics, as in war, obfuscation reigns supreme.  In war, it's all about deception.  Politics is war by other means, it has been said.

There is a huge symbolic war going on, so it behooves one to understand what is true and what isn't.  This isn't easy when obfuscation reigns supreme.

But first, who is this guy?

I think it is fair to label him as a neo-conservative.  This flavor of conservatism is of the stripe that got the USA in the war in Iraq.  There's plenty more to put him strongly in that category.  This is the type that would definitely be opposed to Trump.

Further reading ( this is Wikipedia, mind you ) reveals him to be of the open borders type.  He is definitely NOT conservative, in my opinion.   He is definitely leaning in the direction of your typical Democrat.

How does this guy get to call himself a conservative???  It is part of the obfuscation intended to sway people to think he is somebody that he is not.  It is all a part of the symbolic war raging within the nation at the present.  Part of this war is redefinition of language.  That includes such words as "conservative".  We even had a president who once said what the meaning of "is" is.

The extreme irony here is that he was born in Russia.

Even a short study of Wikipedia uncovers some major truths about the guy.  How many people know this?  I didn't until I just looked it up.

Mark Wauk: The Big Picture on the Carter Page FISA

Note:

Mark Wauck is a retired FBI agent who blogs on religion, philosophy, and history.

comment:

Which way forward may be proposed after this settles down ( if it ever does)?

The Big Picture on the Carter Page FISA https://t.co/HUA4u5WJak

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 25, 2018

Sharyl Attkisson: What did Peter Strzok do?

The article is a bit old, but well worth reviewing again if you missed anything.

Seems like out of sight, out of mind.

What did Peter Strzok do? https://t.co/0AtxENUJ0F

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 25, 2018

Dems ponder on Trump resilience

The piece concludes that this is food for thought, and I agree.

A few thoughts then...

• maybe nobody believes the hysterical media anymore
• maybe nationalism works better than globalism
• maybe people really don't believe that to be a Trump supporter, you are "deplorable"
• maybe truth works better than lies ( hopefully that isn't wishful thinking)
• maybe globalism fails because people prefer nation states after all
• maybe people see that Trump's policies work better

But what explains Democrat "resilience".  Frankly, I haven't the slightest idea.  If I could understand it, I may solve the ultimate mystery of the human race.

A few thoughts...

• maybe people prefer shitholes 
• maybe people prefer anarchy over order
• maybe people prefer crime
• maybe people prefer to be ignorant and afraid
• maybe people prefer to live at stone age living standards
• maybe people prefer to be lied to
• maybe people are just stone cold stupid

Well, it is food for thought.  But my thoughts may not be appreciated.  Especially by those who consider themselves to informed because they watch CNN and MSNBC.  Or those who went to Harvard.

You cannot please everybody.

The Last Refuge Added to Preferred Blog List

There are but a few blogs which I recommend as a reading list.  Actually, I do not always read these blogs.  For some reason, I have forgotten why I listed any of them.  So what else is new?  I am not the most organized person in the world.

Even though there are but a few blogs in this list, I do read other stuff.  Actually, most of what I read each day is not on this list.

Today, I changed the list just a little.  I took down Knowledge is Power, and replaced it with The Last Refuge.  I DO read The Last Refuge a lot.  Every day, as a matter of fact.  Perhaps this is why I am adding it.

Another reason I am adding it is that I think the author does a damn good job.  Enough said on that.  What else needs to be said?

Knowledge is Power is not necessarily a bad blog, but I felt like I should not include it because I don't read it that often.  I think I might have included it because I used to read it a lot more than now.  There are many blogs that I used to read from the "old days" that I no longer read. 

I renamed the "Quality Reading List" as "Preferred blog list".  I could not think of another name.  Let's just say that this is a list of blogs that I do not wish to forget about.  That makes it easier for me, because I forget things easily.

Why should you read these blogs?  I think they are all worth reading.  There is one in the list is about Chordoma, which is what I have.  ( that's kinda personal )

Anyway, there are no other changes for now.

Cal Thomas: The Name Of The Game: Votes For Democrats

As Trump once said, and presumably keeps saying, "no borders, no country".  Why would anybody want that?

Only a few do want it, and they have a lot of clout, "punching above their weight", or so it seems...

The Name Of The Game: Votes For Democrats https://t.co/MoR5kSIcwq

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 24, 2018

Democrats brazenly lie about the FISA release

Updated,

7.24.18:

There's a claim that Trump's statements are preventing a fair trial.  I read the article in question ( no link ), and I cannot find the tweet they are talking about.  No information to support the claim.  I looked at Trump's tweets, and I found nothing.

The matter in question is relating to an indictment concerning leaks.  I read the indictment, so I am somewhat familiar with the case.

Actually, the impression I get is a bit different from what is being claimed, but this is our legal system.  You have to be careful with that, but as far as I can tell, Trump hasn't done anything to jeapordize anybody's rights.  I looked.

updated a little later:

I found an article that quotes a Trump statement made weeks ago.  Again, my impression is different from what is claimed by the defendant's attorneys.  But that is what they get paid for.
 

posted originally on 7.23.18:


It is reminiscent of Clinton's denial of an affair with Monica Lewinsky.  Clinton pointed his finger and denied it vehemently, but the DNA tests showed his semen on her dress.

Likewise today, the evidence is clear.  There is no lawful basis for the Mueller probe.  The Democrats are covering up a scandal of monstrous proportions.

Perhaps they feel that there is nothing left for them to do but to brazenly lie about it.  Lying seems to work for them, somehow.

But that is not the whole story.  Pelosi is accusing others of disloyalty.  That goes beyond mere denial.  So, those who investigate corruption in law enforcement are somehow traitors?

During the Watergate years, it was often said that the crime wasn't the worst part, it was the cover up. A better response would be a pledge to honestly look into the questionable investigative methods of the DOJ, and to suggest improvements that would stop this kind of abuse in the future.

Lest there be any doubt, CTH has the goods on the Democrats.  One post today discusses the indictment of a leak of this very same FISA warrant to a reporter last year.  This leak was from a Democrat staffer, James Wolfe.  The FISA warrant was classified information.  That's why Wolfe was indicted.  Even the recent authorized release was heavily redacted, supposedly because of national security concerns.  Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Are RINOS just dumb, blind, or what?

If you are a Republican, as Christine Todd Whitman claims to be, how can you ignore the overwhelming evidence of corruption within the Democrat party apparatus?

How can you ignore Hillary Clinton's willful violations of the law?  How can there be any doubt that not only did she break the law, but also that the Democrat party apparatchiks made sure she would never have to answer for it?

Why would you support the removal of the president on fraudulent grounds?

Why would you ignore the benefits of improved relations with Russia, and why would it be against the interests of the United States to talk to the Russian leader?  It has been a long term practice of talking to Russian leaders even during the height of the Cold War.  Such talks may have prevented Armageddon during those times, and surely cannot hurt today.

Why take the part of Democrats, who show a complete lack of candor in virtually all matters?  Do you really believe what Democrats have to say about much of anything?  Have you any independent judgment at all?

This doesn't even cover distinct policy issues.  That could be the basis of yet another essay.  With all that said, why would any Republican listen to Christine Todd Whitman?

So, I read Whitman's op-ed in the LA Times, and I am not at all impressed.  She cannot be following the events all that closely, and say what she says with a straight face.  What that says about her, you can figure out for yourself.

A little more...

Losing candidate Mark Sanford, a never Trumper himself, accuses Trump supporters of being part of a cult of Personality.  This is a typical dishonest remark that often can be attributed to the lefty Democrats, but unfortunately has sprung up against Trump.

Trump is anything but Cult of Personality, as a Cult of Personality would require strict media control, which is not the case here.  Indeed, the cult is on the left wing, who do not brook any dissent.  It is not that the GOP supporters of Trump blindly follow him, it is because it is vitally necessary for his continued political survival.

When significant numbers of his own party will not support him, even to the level which is customary in former times, one cannot credibly claim that a cult of personality exists.

What should unite the GOP more than anything else is the quite obvious corruption that exists in Washington DC.  If there was anyplace in the USA that could create the conditions for a cult of personality, it is Washington DC.  Washington DC votes Democrat over 90 percent of the time.  That is the kind of political atmosphere that Sanford should be criticizing.

The right to dissent is a long held American custom.  Trump is no threat to that, but the Democrats, with their political correctness, are a definite threat.

10 Key Takeaways From Released FISA Warrants Against Carter Page

Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty member and current adjunct instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame. 

10 Key Takeaways From Released FISA Warrants Against Carter Page https://t.co/zFK2ydgTPb

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 23, 2018

FISA court judge

Who approved the FISA warrant ( Carter Page ), which was released this past weekend?

There are some questions that need answering.

We know that Mr. Integrity signed off on it.  ( James Comey, then Director of FIB)

Could it be Contreras?  Contreras was recused in the Flynn case.  Peter Strzok had a connection with this judge, it has been found.

Evidently Bagdad Bob found a job at AP, who says that there isn't any evidence from the FISA warrant.

The evidence is piling up of a massive fraud perpetrated upon the public.  The media is working hand in hand with the Democrats in covering it up.

Mueller is delaying the sentencing of Flynn so as to maintain an aura of suspicion of Trump.  But the whole thing was manufactured out of thin air.

Mr. Integrity said the Steele Dossier, upon which the FISA warrant was based, was salacious and unverified.   Yet, Mr. Integrity signed off on it.

Without Mr. Integrity's signature, no FISA warrant.  No FISA warrant, no Bob Mueller.

With Mueller, the Dems and the RINOS hope to run Trump out of office.

A coup d etat has been perpetrated.  A coup is defined as

The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority.

These people even referred to themselves as the "small group".

Who and what the News Media is

Does anyone really know?

If the news media is not reliable, then where do you get reliable information?

Always start with the premises.  The premise for news organizations is that their information is reliable and accurate.  But who verifies this?  What if it is not???

Seems to me that a lot of folks don't think the news media is accurate or reliable.

Just asking....

Caroline Glick: Trump won Big at Helsinki

Don Surber made a mention of this piece, and BOTH are well worth reading.

Peace and prosperity, it is a beautiful thing.

Trump won big at Helsinki https://t.co/1kuRO5UMcy

— Greg Meadows (@BootsandOilBlog) July 22, 2018

Update shortly later:

More from Caroline Glick via Instapundit.

Who is Caroline Glick?  I've heard of her, but I decided to dig a bit deeper.  She is impressive.

Without much comment, I offer this...

Parents of fraternal twins want to raise them as "gender-less".

Just my two cents, the kids ought to be taken away, and these people jailed for child abuse.

Panning for Gold

Everything is a metaphor these days.  This blog doesn't pan for real gold.  Rather it is panning for "gold nuggets" in the current events of the day.

My opinion of gold may differ from yours.

Here's the gold nugget in the following quote from an article in CTH:

a comment by "phoenix rising"

The irony here is unbelievable…
The very people who executed/attempted a coup upon candidate/president-elect/POTUS Trump…

cannot be relieved of their positions because

their target would be IMPEACHED…

talk about a gordian knot…

Perfectly stated!  The only reason this "collusion" controversy even exists, is because of traitorous scum in the GOP who allow it to exist.  They could end this today, but won't.  The nugget here is that Trump's political existence could hinge on people like this.   It is already too late to primary them out, so the only way to avoid impeachment--- is to allow this attempt at impeachment to continue.  How do you fight it????  Can't vote them out now.  The opportunity has passed.

These people fight with lies.  Lies can be uncovered by truth.  But that may take a lot of guts to find.

Here's more...

If you want the names of those who won't, look at the vote on the Goodlatte immigration bill. It's a reminder of how tenuous Trump's position is.

About 30 Rs are RINOS who would join the DemoKKKrats to impeach Trump if he were to fire Sessions or Wray or RR. https://t.co/Ur9rxGXv61

— Larry Schweikart (@LarrySchweikart) July 22, 2018

Today’s Immigration Debate Parallels The Crime Debate In The 60s & 70s – History Video!

Today’s Immigration Debate Parallels The Crime Debate In The 60s & 70s – History Video!



summary:  Morris says that the elite refused to see crime as a federal problem back then, and it helped the GOP rise to ascendancy for the next twenty years.  He adds that there is a similar situation developing now with immigration, and that Trump is emulating what Nixon did then. Nixon claimed the crime issue with his "Silent Majority".



comment:



Yes, there may be a parallel there, but I think this issue is a lot more serious than the crime issue in the sixties and seventies.  Moreover, the Feds have already taken over the immigration issue.  They are deliberately botching it.  If there is any similarity, there is the lack of enforcement of the laws.