AMERICA…land of the Free BECAUSE of the brave!
“Politics has turned the lofty ideal of equality into the ugly reality of resentments of other people’s achievements — and a feeling that the world owes you something, while you owe nobody anything, not even common decency.”
-Thomas Sowell
Never Forget 9-11: Sounds of Silence…powerful tribute.
Trump’s America: The Democrats have no shame. The Democrats and their allies created the “resist” movement, encouraging Antifa and Black Lives Matters to riot in cities across the country. Local Democrats empowered the rioters by NOT prosecuting those who were rioting, looting, burning, attacking police and destroying private property.
Now, the Democrats are claiming “that” is Trump’s America. The President has offered Democratic state governors and mayors help if they want it, but most have been fighting any federal involvement to make things look worse. The lowest political tactics in the history of our country.
Blackmail and extortion should NOT be a political tactic. I hope Americans reject these tactics and liberal/progressive Democrats that empower and support them.
The Far Left’s Coup Attempt?: Please read the articles below about how the progressive far left (in cooperation with the establishment Democrats) are preparing for a coup attempt if Trump wins re-election. I’m fearful there is more truth to these “theories” and “scenarios” than just some suggestive articles. There are serious “resist” movement Democrats and much of the mainstream media on board. This is dangerous.
The “Cancel Culture” is Dangerous: Time and time again, liberal and progressive Democrats are now in the mode of cancelling alternative thought and erasing history that doesn’t match their twisted narrative.
This country has many faults, but its history and culture still makes it the greatest country in the world. It is literally the only country in the world people are willing to risk their lives to get into.
Let us be rationale and patriotic as we constantly strive for that more perfect union!
Protests vs Riots – But Mostly Peaceful: “Right to Peaceably Assemble” is granted. “Right to Vandalize, Destroy Public & Private Property, Assault, Injure, Kill, Inflict Fear, Public Nuisance & Hide – These & Other Criminal Behaviors Under the Cover of Angry Mobs” is not.
The problem is innocent people, families and private businesses, who had NOTHING to do with police shootings or excessive force are being targeted and terrorized by arsonists, vandals, looters and rioters.
Obamagate: The weaponization of both domestic and foreign intelligence against a presidential campaign from a sitting administration solely for political purposes to prevent the smooth transition of power and weaken his presidency to limit his legislative successes.
That’s what Obamagate is all about…they spied, they lied and tried to cover it up.
This should NEVER happen to ANY American…there should be bipartisan outrage!!!
-Saul Anuzis
Click Here for Past Commentary from Saul
Amazon will help US if you say yes: At NO cost to you, you can help the 60 Plus Foundation in its efforts to support conservative policies to protect senior citizens, get rid of the death tax and defend social security and medicare using sound fiscal policies.
Sign up…and Amazon will donate 0.5% of what you spend to the Foundation! Please help us out by signing up here…at NO cost to you!
60 Plus Weekly Video Rewind
Links to the articles discussed in the video:
Pay attention to Trump’s real successes, not media distractions
Sometimes there is a split-screen moment that perfectly encapsulates the country’s divisions. We witnessed this Friday, when Beltway and media elites were consumed with chasing yet another story about President Trump — one from a fine reporter but still resting entirely on anonymous sources. Meanwhile, they once again ignored, or failed to grasp, another significant foreign policy achievement by the Trump administration.
Trump presided over a very important set of handshakes Friday. Judging how important requires memory. I visited Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo in 2009 at the invitation of the California National Guard, only a few weeks after then-Vice President Biden. We were assigned the same room. Not plush. Nothing at Bondsteel is plush. But the tour of the border, the heavily armed crossings, the burned-out villages, was eye-opening. (Joe Biden must know what these accords mean. Watch his 2009 speech at Bondsteel. He understands how deep the ancient hatreds in the region run.)
To have Kosovo and Serbia normalize economic relations is a big deal in itself. But both countries agreed to take steps to support the momentum for peace in the Middle East generated by the peace treaty between the United Arab Emirates and Israel. National security adviser Robert C. O’Brien and senior adviser Jared Kushner had traveled to Israel to make a historic, first direct flight from Tel Aviv to Abu Dhabi. While Kushner continued on to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, O’Brien split off to join the president and Richard Grenell, former ambassador to Germany, in the final negotiations between Kosovo and Serbia.
It paid off: Serbia agreed to move its embassy to Jerusalem, and Kosovo, a majority Muslim nation, said it would establish ties with Israel. More dominoes were falling toward peace. Another may follow soon.
So when Grenell teed off on a seemingly disinterested media, his frustration was understandable — and helps explain Trump’s rise and continuing appeal. Elites in the country — represented by those reporters — have power to shape narratives but not necessarily the wisdom to choose the important ones.
Trump Has Had a Historically Great First Term
You would never guess any of this from the Trump-hating media in full campaign for Joe Biden, but the voters will have reason to reflect on it before the electoral die is cast.
disparaging American war dead on the centenary of the end of World War I—fades into ignominy with its propagator, the egregious Jeffrey Goldberg, acknowledging that anonymous denunciators are insufficiently convincing, we may dare to hope that in the last seven weeks of this tumultuous campaign, some serious, legitimate questions will be addressed. One of them is that, like all incumbents, President Trump is seeking reelection on the basis of his record in office.
The demonic efforts of the Democrats (and particularly of the rabidly Democratic national political media) who are conducting their party’s campaign in the masked and highly self-distanced absence of the inarticulate nominee, to avoid a discussion of what this administration has achieved, will not make it all the way to election day.
This president is the 28th who has sought reelection after an entire, or almost complete, term in the White House, (Theodore Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman, sought reelection after serving almost whole terms, having acceded to the presidency as vice presidents upon the death in office of their predecessors.) Of these 27 previous presidents who sought reelection, 18 were successful, and among the nine who were not were a number who were more than adequate in the office, including both presidents Adams, Grover Cleveland, William Howard Taft, and George H. W. Bush.
After an extensive review of the claims to reelection of all of these presidents, I believe that President Trump has had the most successful first term of all but three or four of his predecessors, and of those, one candidate, James K. Polk, did not seek reelection in 1848 for health reasons.
President Trump, in his rather unseemly manner of self-serving evaluations, claims to have achieved more in one term than any other president. He also claims to have done more for African-Americans than any president except Abraham Lincoln, and with Fox News Channel’s Harris Faulkner, wondered about Lincoln, to which she gently replied: “We are free, Mr. President.” This is what Trump himself describes as his “constructive hyperbole,” and he has paid a heavy price for allowing his enemies to represent his exaggerations as lies.
They are generally not lies, unlike in 90 percent of the heinous slanders his enemies have leveled against him, but they aren’t entirely truthful either. This is an important distinction: the habitual boosterism of a New York developer, though often irritating and frequently imprudent, is not remotely equivalent to the satanic defamatory calumnies of the Trump hating-media.
CNN, MSNBC ignore Trump’s major Israel-Bahrain peace deal during primetime
The most-watched programs on CNN and MSNBC on Friday night completely ignored President Trump’s foreign policy achievement of brokering a peace deal between Israel and Bahrain.
According to a formal statement issued by the U.S. and the two Middle East countries, they agreed to “the establishment of full diplomatic relations between Israel and the Kingdom of Bahrain.”
“This is a historic breakthrough to further peace in the Middle East. Opening direct dialogue and ties between these two dynamic societies and advanced economies will continue the positive transformation of the Middle East and increase stability, security, and prosperity in the region,” the statement said.
However, the major Middle East peace agreement received no mention during CNN and MSNBC’s primetime shows.
The Donald Trump I Know
Why The Atlantic’s smear on the president as disrespectful of fallen soldiers does not hold up.
I had never met Donald Trump when I began serving in his White House. I took the job expecting that I would never meet him. My (former) role—head of communications at the National Security Council—is not one whose occupant traditionally interacts with the president all that much (my immediate predecessor notwithstanding). The NSC comms director’s “principal,” as we say in the flak trade, is the national security advisor, not the president. The president has higher-ranking aides to look after his interests.
Plus, the top NSC flak has a rather large organization to worry about. Within the Executive Office of the President, only the Office of Management and Budget is bigger than the NSC. And given the latter’s somewhat secretive nature and placement at the center of various secretive yet intensely interesting agencies, keeping track of its happenings and fending off mis- and disinformation tends to be a full-time job in and of itself.
Anyway, having worked there before (in the George W. Bush Administration) and seen the NSC up close, I had definite ideas about how its comms office should function. As a supporter of the new president, I wanted to use that experience to help his administration communicate the significant changes he intended to make to American foreign policy. All that, I assumed, would be done without him having any knowledge of my role, or even of who I was.
But to my surprise, I ended up spending a great deal of time with President Trump—far more, for instance, in my 14 months in his administration than I spent with President Bush over my four years with his.
The first time I talked to President Trump was unexpected. I had to tell Hope Hicks about some crazy thing the North Koreans had just done or were about to do (I don’t remember the details). Her desk, in those early days, was the first one outside the Oval Office door, which the president likes to keep open.
But Hope was on the phone. She held up one finger as if to say “Give me a minute.” So I waited. I was, without quite realizing it, directly within the president’s line of sight. Somehow my eyes wandered in his direction and I saw him, behind the Resolute Desk, looking right at me. He raised a hand to wave me in. I panicked. This is not what I came over here for!
I turned to Hope and blurted out: “He’s waving for me to go in!”
“So go!” she said, annoyed.
“But—”
She put her hand over her phone’s mic and cut me off. “Anton”—in nearly four years of working for and hanging out with Hope, I don’t think she’s ever once called me “Michael” or “Mike”—“DJT likes to talk to and get to know all the people who work for him. This was going to happen sooner or later. Go,” she said, shooing me with her left hand.
Bad Teaching Is Tearing America Apart
Education’s dumbing down frays the bonds of citizenship and is hardest on the poor, says E.D. Hirsch, the man who wrote the book on cultural literacy.
If you have school-age children, the pandemic-induced move to online classes may give you an unusual window into their education. E.D. Hirsch expects you’ll be surprised by “how little whole-class instruction is going on,” how little knowledge is communicated, and how there is “no coherence” from day to day, let alone from year to year.
The current fashion is for teachers to be a “guide on the side, instead of a sage on the stage,” he says, quoting the latest pedagogical slogan, which means that teachers aren’t supposed to lecture students but to “facilitate” learning by nudging students to follow their own curiosity. Everything Mr. Hirsch knows about how children learn tells him that’s the wrong approach. “If you want equity in education, as well as excellence, you have to have whole-class instruction,” in which a teacher directly communicates information using a prescribed sequential curriculum.
Mr. Hirsch, 92, is best known for his 1987 book, “Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know.” It is an argument for teaching “specifics,” followed by a lengthy list of them—thousands of historical figures, events, concepts and literary works with which, in Mr. Hirsch’s view, educated Americans should be familiar. Heavily weighted toward Western history and civilization, the list provoked charges of elitism. Yet Mr. Hirsch is singularly focused on helping disadvantaged kids. They “are not exposed to this information at home,” he says, so they’ll starve intellectually unless the schools provide it.
He continues the argument in his new book, “How to Educate a Citizen,” in which he describes himself as a heretofore “rather polite scholar” who has become more “forthright and impatient because things are getting worse. Intellectual error has become a threat to the well-being of the nation. A truly massive tragedy is building.” Schools “are diminishing our national unity and our basic competence.”
Exclusive from Gen. Flynn: If We Don’t Act, 2% of the People Are About To Control the Other 98%
I was once told if we’re not careful, 2 percent of the passionate will control 98 percent of the indifferent 100 percent of the time.
The more I’ve thought about this phrase, the more I believe it. There is now a small group of passionate people working hard to destroy our American way of life. Treason and treachery are rampant and our rule of law and those law enforcement professionals who uphold our laws are under the gun more than at any time in our nation’s history. These passionate 2 percent appear to be winning.
Despite there being countless good people trying to come to grips with everything else on their plates, our silent majority (the indifferent) can no longer be silent.
If the United States wants to survive the onslaught of socialism, if we are to continue to enjoy self-government and the liberty of our hard-fought freedoms, we have to understand there are two opposing forces: One is the “children of light” and the other is the “children of darkness.”
As I recently wrote, the art and exercise of self-governance require active participation by every American. I wasn’t kidding! And voting is only part of that active participation. Time and again, the silent majority have been overwhelmed by the “audacity and resolve” of small, well-organized, passionate groups. It’s now time for us, the silent majority (the indifferent), to demonstrate both.
The ‘Systemic Racism’ Canard
The claim that America’s awash in systemic racism is made and repeated as unassailable fact. It’s repeated casually, as if everyone concedes its veracity.
The term is ubiquitous in news and social media. Politicians invoke it daily, if not hourly. Corporations spend upwards of $10,000 an hour for lessons on how to eliminate their own purported systemic, institutional racism. Lately, it seems as if schools and colleges are devoted to teaching little else.
It’s now axiomatic that systemic, structural, or institutional racism accounts for almost all disparities between the races, whether in educational achievement, employment rates, income gaps, crime rates, or health. Individual behavior, family structure, perverse governmental policies, and culture have little or nothing to do with such disparities, and to contend otherwise is itself a manifestation of systemic racism — a convenient and politically expedient canard.
The allegation of pervasive systemic racism, as that term is used by politicians, media, academics, and woke mobs, is not merely false — it’s a lie. Almost everyone knows it but few are willing to say it for fear of being labeled racist, getting canceled, and/or becoming unemployed. So the lie persists, grows, and metastasizes.
In reality, a massive, multi-billion-dollar apparatus exists to identify and eliminate systemic, structural, institutional, and individual discrimination. That apparatus has existed for more than half a century and continues to expand. It consists of, inter alia, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Education, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, the FBI, state civil-rights commissions, local human-rights commissions, state attorneys general, and tens of thousands of investigators, enforcement and compliance officers, local prosecutors, and private attorneys who enforce a sprawling framework of civil-rights and equal-opportunity laws. These laws include, but are not limited to, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Sections 1981, 1982, and 1983 of the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1871, the 14th Amendment, the 15th Amendment, the Fair Housing Act, the Voting Rights Act, and thousands of state and local equal-opportunity and anti-discrimination laws. This mammoth regime doesn’t even include the tens of thousands of human-resource officers and diversity and inclusion personnel who guard against systemic/structural racism within their respective institutions.
The Left Is Planning To Litigate A Biden Loss Into A Military Coup
It’s been hard to miss the steady drumbeat of articles and think-pieces over the past few months about Election Day war games and post-election planning underway on the left, rooted in obsessive fears that President Trump will refuse to accept an electoral loss, triggering a constitutional crisis and maybe even widespread civic unrest, all in a desperate attempt to cling to power.
“The Left Secretly Preps for MAGA Violence After Election Day,” reads a recent headline at The Daily Beast. “Is Trump Planning a Coup d’État?” asks another recent piece at The Nation. “Is America in the Early Stages of Armed Insurgency?” frets Slate. Similar pieces have run at the Washington Post (“The election will likely spark violence—and a constitutional crisis”), The Atlantic (“What might he do? What should Americans fear?”), Vox (“Imagine that… Donald Trump refuses to concede defeat”), The New Yorker (“Trump’s threats about rejecting the results come November are not idle”), and on and on.
The news hook for most of these articles is a series of elaborate election war games hosted in June by a newly formed organization called the Transition Integrity Project, touted by the media as a bipartisan group of experts consisting of former elected officials, high-level government staffers, consultants, and journalists like David Frum, who wrote the Atlantic piece referenced above.
In other words, the Transition Integrity Project is a cross-section of our elite ruling class. In its own executive summary of the war games, the group states it was founded “out of concern that the Trump Administration may seek to manipulate, ignore, undermine or disrupt the 2020 presidential election and transition process” — never mind the many ways Democrats in Congress and the executive bureaucracy, aided by the media, have been doing just that since before Trump won the 2016 election.
The Coming Coup?
Democrats are laying the groundwork for revolution right in front of our eyes.
As if 2020 were not insane enough already, we now have Democrats and their ruling class masters openly talking about staging a coup. You might have missed it, what with the riots, lockdowns and other daily mayhem we’re forced to endure in this, the most wretched year of my lifetime. But it’s happening.
It started with the military brass quietly indicating that the troops should not follow a presidential order. They were bolstered by many former generals—including President Trump’s own first Secretary of Defense—who stated openly what the brass would only hint at. Then, as nationwide riots really got rolling in early June, the sitting Secretary of Defense himself all but publicly told the president not to invoke the Insurrection Act. His implicit message was: “Mr. President, don’t tell us to do that, because we won’t, and you know what happens after that.”
All this enthused Joe Biden, who threw subtlety to the winds. The former United States Senator (for 26 years) and Vice President (for eight) has not once, not twice, but thrice confidently asserted that the military will “escort [Trump] from the White House with great dispatch” should the president refuse to leave. Another former Vice President, Al Gore, publicly agreed.
One might dismiss such comments as the ravings of a dementia patient and a has-been who never got over his own electoral loss. But before you do, consider also this. Over the summer a story was deliberately leaked to the press of a meeting at which 100 Democratic grandees, anti-Trump former Republicans, and other ruling class apparatchiks got together (on George Soros’s dime) to “game out” various outcomes of the 2020 election. One such outcome was a clear Trump win. In that eventuality, former Bill Clinton White House Chief of Staff John Podesta, playing Biden, refused to concede, pressured states that Trump won to send Democrats to the formal Electoral College vote, and trusted that the military would take care of the rest.
The leaked report from the exercise darkly concluded that “technocratic solutions, courts, and reliance on elites observing norms are not the answer here,” promising that what would follow the November election would be “a street fight, not a legal battle.”
Democrats determined to treat November’s election as illegitimate — unless they win
A recent deep dive in the Washington Post, “What’s the Worst That Could Happen?,” exploring various potential outcomes of the 2020 presidential election, found that in “every scenario except a Biden landslide, our simulation ended catastrophically.” According to the article, any other outcome is destined to spark “violence” and a “constitutional crisis.”
Or, in other words, nice country you got there …
Every assumption in the article is awash in the conspiratorial paranoia that’s infected the modern Democratic Party. It’s a world where Trump officials — played, quite implausibly, by Joe Biden partisans Michael Steele and Bill Kristol — are “ruthless and unconstrained right out of the gate,” but the genteel statesmen of Team Biden “struggled to get out of reaction mode.” It is a place where Republicans aren’t only reflexively seditious and autocratic, but a “highly politicized” Supreme Court tries to steal the election.
In their “war game” scenarios, however, it’s the Democrats who refuse to accept the will of courts to adhere to the constitutionally prescribed system rather than hysteria, and it’s the Democrats who wishcast the wholly imaginary “popular vote” into existence.
One of the scenarios, we learn, “doesn’t look that different from 2016” — a contest in which, it must be pointed out, not one vote has been proven to be uncounted or altered. In that outcome, America is confronted with “a big popular win for Mr. Biden, and a narrow electoral defeat.” In the real world, incidentally, that scenario is called a “Trump victory.”
Trump Nominated For Nobel Peace Prize For Actually Doing Something
Once again, a sitting president of the United States has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, but unlike last time, when President Barack Obama received the honor, current president Donald Trump has been nominated for an actual achievement, not just being popular in Europe and a nifty public speaker.
Last month, the Trump administration pulled off a massive deal between Israel and The United Arab Emirates in which the latter recognized the former and commercial air flights between the two began for the first time ever.
Back in 2009 President Obama was not only nominated, but received the Nobel Peace Prize. He had been president for 10 months when it was announced and it was apparently owing to him fostering a “new climate in international relations,” whatever that meant.
In fact, as almost everyone knew and was quick to point out, Barack Obama had achieved approximately nothing in foreign policy at this point in his presidency. And in the eight years that followed he failed to usher in any change in the Middle East even remotely as significant as Trump’s recent deal, positive change anyway.
Media Are Playing Games Yet Again With Anonymous Russia Leaks
Watch nearly the entire corporate media establishment run wild with claims from completely anonymous sources in the intelligence community this week.
Much of the case for the Iraq War was based on the Bush administration’s claim that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. When the United States declared an end to the war late in 2011, more than 4,400 American military members had been killed and nearly 32,000 wounded. No weapons of mass destruction had been found.
It’s one of the most significant and catastrophic intelligence errors in U.S. history. A bipartisan commission found that U.S. intelligence “seriously misjudged” Iraq’s weapons program because of their “heavy reliance on a human source–codenamed ‘Curveball’–whose information later proved to be unreliable.” The commission wrote, “Even more misleading was the river of intelligence that flowed from the CIA to top policymakers over long periods of time–in the President’s Daily Brief (PDB)” and other reports that were “more alarmist” and “less nuanced.”
…None of the criminal leakers have been held accountable. Neither have the reporters who conspired with them to harm the republic, damage the Trump administration, hurt foreign relations, and destroy the lives of conservatives who allied themselves with Trump.
In fact, they’re free to continue their operation with the latest round of Russia stories, seemingly designed to undermine the Trump administration, hamper foreign policy changes that might lead away from the interventionist foreign policy of recent administrations, and otherwise hurt the country.
It is as if our political and media establishments refuse to learn anything from the weapons of mass destruction and Russia collusion hoax intelligence failures of recent years. Or worse, they learned just how easy it is to use unverified intelligence for political aims.
Vindman, Not Whistleblower, Was Driving Force Behind Impeachment
New book shows how Lt. Col. Alex Vindman was the real instigator of the Ukraine investigation that formed the pretext for Democrats’ impeachment of President Trump.
The most interesting thing about Byron York’s exhaustively reported and richly detailed new impeachment book, “Obsession: Inside the Washington Establishment’s Never-Ending War on Trump,” is that the whistleblower who filed the official complaint that got impeachment rolling isn’t ever identified.
It turns out that the heated discussion over the whistleblower, who was previously identified by Real Clear Investigations as the CIA’s Eric Ciaramella, was a diversion from allowing the American people to understand who was the actual instigator of the failed effort to oust President Donald Trump from office.
Rather than being a witness who independently supported the claims of the whistleblower, the National Security Council’s Lt. Col Alex Vindman was the driving force behind the entire operation, according to the book’s interviews with key figures in the impeachment probe and other evidence. The whistleblower’s information came directly from Vindman, investigators determined.
“Vindman was the person on the call who went to the whistleblower after the call, to give the whistleblower the information he needed to file his complaint,” said Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y.
“For all intents and purposes, Vindman is the whistleblower here, but he was able to get somebody else to do his dirty work for him,” explained one senior congressional aide.
Did a Math Error Lead to the Never-Ending COVID-19 Lockdowns?
More and more voices are now speaking out on the lockdowns, widespread testing, and other policies associated with the COVID-19 response. Now a professor from the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada, Ronald B.Brown, Ph.D., is questioning how mortality data was presented to Congress early in the pandemic.
This hearing was held on March 11, 2020, in front of the House Oversight Committee. During the questioning, Dr. Anthony Fauci asserted that the mortality rate for COVID-19 was 3%. He then extrapolated to claim that if you added in the mildly symptomatic cases, it would probably be about 1%, which is ten times more deadly than the seasonal flu.
Brown asserts that this testimony is what launched campaigns for social distancing, lockdowns, and shelter-in-place orders to varying degrees nationwide. He then goes on to explain that fatality rates are classified in two different ways, while mortality rates are a timebound calculation.
The CDC defines mortality rate as the frequency of deaths within a time period for a well-defined population. To calculate the mortality rate for women under 40 from breast cancer for 2019, you would divide the number of deaths from breast cancer for women under 40 by the total population of women under 40 during that specific calendar year.
A case fatality rate (CFR) is calculated as the number of people who die of a disease divided by the total number of confirmed cases of the disease during a period of time. This calculation is a measure of disease severity. Using the example above, the CFR for breast cancer in women under 40 would be divided by the number of confirmed breast cancer cases under 40.
By contrast, an infection fatality rate (IFR) is the number of deaths from an infection divided by the prevalence of that infection in the population. As we know, with COVID-19, there are a significant number of asymptomatic and mild infections. The number of infections is estimated based on representative samples of blood tests looking for an immune response. The CDC estimated that for COVID-19 the number of infections in the population was ten times the number of confirmed cases in July of 2020.
