NATO Trump Truth

Trump’s Openness Is Forcing A Stronger NATO And Europe

Rod Thomson

The American people and the world are witnessing a revolution of openness brought on by none other than the frank, brusk, always to the point methods of President Trump.

This was on full display this week as Trump held public press conferences with world leaders during the NATO meeting in London, and repeatedly had shockingly open and honest discussions — the things that have always been kept behind closed doors in the past, and then reported via leaks through a partisan media.

Trump’s method forces difficult issues out into the light without the bias filter.

With French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump pushed again on the issue of NATO and the Europeans’ unwillingness to keep their promises on spending. The NATO agreement called for all member countries to spend 2 percent of the GDP on military spending. This was done to ensure that there would be no free-loader countries. 

Turns out, they have almost all been freeloaders — a freeloader continent — because of the major countries, only the United States has kept its promise, and actually spends more than twice that. This is part of the reason Europeans can afford broader welfare programs, because they aren’t spending the money on their own defense. American taxpayers are, and now that Trump alone has made this an issue, a whole lot more Americans are aware of this truth.

Trump’s relentless efforts are having an impact. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told Congress a few months ago that Trump’s push had a “real impact” as European allies are adding military investments totalling an additional $100 billion by the end of next year.

Further, Turkey’s increasingly rogue and anti-West actions are making it a problematic member of NATO. It was considered a good addition during the height of the Soviet Union’s threat as it created a southern buttress to Soviet expansion. But the Muslim nation has lurched toward a more Islamist and less free society, has been persecuting minorities, has been making overtures to Russia for an alliance and recently invaded Northern Syria when the U.S. pulled out its troops. 

Trump’s methods and personality has exposed this and now there is serious talk about what to do with Turkey.

In another press conference, Trump cornered Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau into admitting Canadian military expenditures amount to a paltry 1.4 percent of GDP. Canada too promised 2 percent as a member of NATO. This willingness of Trump to put foreign leaders on the public hotspot is refreshing, revealing and productive.

His push on Europeans doing more for NATO has caused some to talk openly of a European Union Army to replace NATO. But this is delusional. First, Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Spain and so on forming a cohesive fighting army is historically absurd, particularly without the U.S. leadership. Someone has to lead and Germany is obviously the leader of the EU. The French Army is going to take orders from the Germany Army? Non, je ne pense pas.

Second, there is no way the Europeans realistically could, or would be willing to spend the amount of money necessary to create an army of deterrent power without the United States. They’d have to strip back their welfare systems. No politician wants to do that.

This on-the-ground reality is understood by sober people. But Trump’s willingness to speak his mind on camera, with other leaders, and even push them on live, global television, means that the world — and most importantly, the American people — can see it all happening. If we had to rely on the media to accurately transmit this information, it would merely be a story about how dangerous Trump is in destroying relationships and systems.

But what we now know is that it’s not the true rendering. In reality, these have been fraying relationships without a Soviet Union all along. It’s an added problem that Europeans don’t pay their fair share and that Turkey is going rogue. But the media would largely ignore all of this and just focus on the blunderbuss that is an “existential threat.” 

Looking at a post-modern security structure, where the U.S. can adequately and fairly assess our own security needs, is overdue. These needs range from fair trade agreements with China, Europe and our North American neighbors, to full-scale security on our southern border, to military security as we see fit.

We should always be allied in some fashion with the free democracies of the world, and that means most of Europe and certainly the big countries. NATO may or may not be the proper method for that anymore. If it is, it will almost undoubtedly become a more meaningful mutual security organization without Turkey and with more committed spending and focus.

That would be an ironic legacy for Trump on NATO, but not an unrealistic one.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Deep State Trump Truth

The Faces And Strategies Of The Deep State

Rod Thomson

We are constantly being lectured to by the media and Democrats that there is no “deep state.” That Trump and Republicans are just making up conspiracy theories to cover their own nefarious deeds.

Most people who do not imbibe only quasi-propaganda outlets such as the New York Times or CNN, understand there is a deep state, or permanent state, or some ongoing cabal of government bureaucrats that pre-date and outlast presidential administrations and have their own agenda. And they understand that agenda for three years has included getting rid of a duly elected American President.

The #resistance has included seemingly boundless denizens within the federal government. We will never know the full scale of the leakers — the primary weapon of the deep state against Trump — but we can identify dozens of people who have publicly acted, or been caught acting, in precisely a deep state sort of way.

Publicly, the resistance deep state probably starts with one of its heroes: Sally Yates.

Yates was Deputy Attorney General under Obama’s AG Loretta Lynch. When Trump was sworn into office, Lynch resigned and Yates became acting AG. When Trump signed an executive order temporarily restricting travel from a select few Middle Eastern and African countries to the United States, Yates went full resistance.

She ordered DOJ lawyers not to defend Trump’s executive order in court because she personally believed it was not consistent with the DOJ’s responsibility and questioned its lawfulness. Of course, defending it in court is what would determine its lawfulness. Yates did not hide the ball.

“For as long as I am Acting Attorney General, the Department of Justice will not present arguments in defense of the Executive Order,” she wrote. Trump fired her the same day.

Yates’ action was about more than the particular EO she didn’t like. It was a banner being waved in front of the pre-existing deep state to rally more bureaucrats to the cause. It’s important to remember that the permanent state long precedes Trump and resides on the ideological left. People throughout the George W. Bush administration decried how the State Department continuously undermined Bush policies abroad. For eight years.

In Yates’ case, she was clearly violating her oath and job description, which was to defend the executive order. If she could not, she should have resigned. She was an unelected federal hire. Not one American voted for her. But her renegade approach had the desired effect.

According to the inestimable Kimberly Strassel at the Wall Street Journal: “The Yates memo was the first official act of the internal resistance — not only a precedent but a rallying cry. Subordinates fawningly praised her in emails.”

Judicial Watch filed Freedom of Information requests and found a treasure trove of other deep staters doing that fawning through emails to Yates. One federal prosecutor called her his hero, another thanked her profusely for fighting against an unlawful president. 

Perhaps the most enlightening came from Andrew Weissmann—a career DOJ lawyer and head of the Criminal Fraud Division, who wrote: “I am so proud. And in awe. Thank you so much.” Weissmann was later hired by Robert Mueller as part of the team investigating Trump-Russia collusion. Another face of the deep state.

According to a Washington Post story a few weeks after Trump’s inauguration, 180 federal employees had signed up for a workshop to learn how to “successfully express civil disobedience.” The Post’s story revealed that bureaucrats were in “regular consultation” with Obama appointees to create strategies for opposing the administration, including work slowdowns for any policies they opposed.

The story seemed meant to paint a picture of federal employees righteously standing up against an unlawful, illegitimate and dangerous president. They were heroes like Yates, and underminers secretly following her like Weissmann. But the story actually revealed the reality of the deep state and the lengths to which it would go to stop Trump.

Another identifiable deep stater is Walter Shaub, whom Obama appointed in 2013 as head of the Office of Government Ethics, an oxymoron if there ever was one. The office is simply mandated to advise and assist the presidential administration in office and is not to be confused with being a watchdog, as the name may imply. This office was perfectly situated to actually help Trump, who never held elected office before, to avoid ethical pitfalls. That was its mandate and its purpose. That’s not what Shaub did.

The Wall Street Journal’s Strassel writes of Shaub:

“…within weeks of the election, Mr. Shaub was mimicking the president-elect from an official Twitter account: “@realDonaldTrump OGE is delighted that you’ve decided to divest your businesses. Right decision!” “@realDonaldTrump Brilliant! Divestiture is good for you, very good for America!” When Mr. Trump released his plan for his assets, Mr. Shaub blasted it at a public event with press in attendance. At one point Mr. Shaub sent one of his critical missives to hundreds of government ethics officials, every inspector general, and the chairmen and ranking members of numerous congressional committees. When administration officials began to call him out on his behavior, he loudly resigned and immediately landed a job at the liberal Campaign Legal Center.”

Of course the acts of people like James Comey, John Brennan and James Clapper are now legendary. But they are political appointees. The deep state is the permanent, unappointed and unelected bureaucrat class that also enjoys civil service protections that make firing them virtually impossible.

Deep staters have filed an enormous number of official internal complaints — perhaps as part of that civil disobedience training, or on the advice of the former Obama officials — in attempts to have the authority to define policies for their own fiefdoms, which is the sole prerogative of the executive. The Washington Post ran an infamous guest column by an Interior Department employee named Joel Clement titled: “I’m a Scientist. I’m Blowing the Whistle on the Trump Administration.”

His beef was that Trump policy was endangering some native populations in Alaska. How? Climate change. A scientist blowing the whistle! There was no merit, nor did he have standing. But, as we have seen repeatedly, it allowed eight Senate Democrats to demand an IG investigation and that, certainly, was part of the purpose, along with publicly damaging Trump.

The pattern is pretty clear in that Clement is now a senior fellow with the activist, leftist Union of Concerned Scientists.

Of course we see these patterns repeating themselves right up to the “whistleblower” on the Ukrainian phone call, but instead of IG investigations or a special counsel, we now have impeachment proceedings, or something. It’s not really clear.

Everything Trump did, from meetings, to internal memos to private phone calls with heads of state, were leaked to an eager media accurately or inaccurately. 

One study by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs found that in just the first 18 weeks in office in 2017, the Trump administration “faced 125 leaked stories — one leak a day — containing information that is potentially damaging to national security under the standards laid out in a 2009 Executive Order signed by President Barack Obama.”

The report summarized it this way: “Under President Trump’s predecessors, leaks of national security information were relatively rare, even with America’s vibrant free press. Under President Trump, leaks are flowing at the rate of one a day.”

About 100 of the 125 dealt with Trump-Russia collusion, and the majority of those contained classified information. Which means not only were they potentially damaging to national security, they were felonies. By the time of this writing, the number of leaks must be north of 1,000 — too many for the Senate committee to even try to study. That is a lot of felonies committed by the deep state. 

Virtually all of those leakers remain unknown to the public and are likely still toiling away in the bowels of the deep state, ready to leak and otherwise undermine President Trump and the security of the nation in any possible way.

The deep state is real, and provably so. They are protected and acting in concert with each other and with Democrat lawyers and lawmakers. Re-electing President Trump is one of the greatest bulwarks against this continuing. If it works, it will become enshrined in D.C.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Facebook Social Media Trump Truth

Trump’s Decline In Suburban Women Is Not Why The Media Says

Rod Thomson

I’ve been following the polls, media analysis and social media activities since the 2018 midterms regarding suburban women voters. As per our usual arrangement, the media is suggesting the sky is falling for President Trump and Republicans because suburban women are turned off by Trump’s abrasive antics in office.

But the evidence doesn’t really show that. 

First, let’s stipulate that it’s almost assured that the polls are continuing to underestimate Trump ballot box support for the simple reason that the angry radicalization of the left and the relentlessly negative coverage by the partisan media has made it taboo in many parts of the country to even voice support for the President. People lose friends and family members’ relationships by saying something positive about Trump outloud. We hear and see it regularly. It’s worth noting also that it does not generally happen the other way; Trump supporters don’t typically cut off from their lives anyone who does not support him.

Given this level of publicly acceptable animosity, there will be a few to several percentage points of Americans unwilling to say they support the President or would vote for him even to a stranger on the phone.

But let’s consider the very real possibility that all the negativity and Trump’s own bull-in-a-china-closet tomfoolery could turn off some suburban women.

The actual facts suggest that the reason is not the china breaking, but much more likely that suburban women — who are known to get a heavy dose of their news information through Facebook — are no longer seeing that information. In fact, Facebook and the rest of the Democrat social media complex began erasing the presence of conservative sites immediately following the 2016 election of President Trump and expansion of the Republican majority in the Senate.

I recently wrote about how the left is, piece by piece, creating an Orwellian Memory Hole down which it can toss almost every piece of conservative news, information and commentary by blocking almost every avenue by which that information is disseminated:

“It is the unholy union of the leftwing mainstream media, the leftwing social media giants, leftwing Google and leftwing website and platform hosts. These are virtually all of the avenues for information outside of old-school radio and TV. Talk radio is already dominated by conservatives, but it also does not reach many people in the middle. Ditto for Fox News.”

This Memory Hole dynamic is already under way and was demonstrated in the 2018 midterms when suburban women voted more heavily Democratic than previously. The media pinned the 40-seat pickup by Democrats along with control of the House on this voting bloc — although it was much more complicated than that, including such rubbish as ballot harvesting in California.

Facebook was initially the most aggressive. Gateway Pundit reported a year ago that Facebook eliminated more than 1.5 billion links to conservative articles in the previous year. That wiped out enormous amounts of access to information right where these suburban women get their information. 

Remember, four out of five women age 18-49 have Facebook accounts, and a larger than average percentage of them get their news through the social media giant. Facebook executives are fully aware of this data. Eliminating conservative voices meant that suddenly this voting bloc was getting an avalanche from one side and precious little from the other. That’s bound to move the needle and assuredly did in 2018.

Google is not social media, but its impact on the flow of information to Americans is possibly as great. Recall that a leaked video of top Google executives were emotional, angry and crying after the Trump election. They’ve also been caught saying they would never allow another election of Trump to happen. Project Veritas interviewed a Google engineer who demonstrated how the algorithm is manipulated against Trump and conservative news sites.

All of this combined led the AP to joyfully report this summer that Trump is bleeding support from suburban women.

“Many professional, suburban women — a critical voting bloc in the 2020 election — recoil at the abrasive, divisive rhetoric, exposing the president to a potential wave of opposition in key battlegrounds across the country.

In more than three dozen interviews by The Associated Press with women in critical suburbs, nearly all expressed dismay — or worse — at Trump’s racially polarizing insults and what was often described as unpresidential treatment of people. Even some who gave Trump credit for the economy or backed his crackdown on immigration acknowledged they were troubled or uncomfortable lining up behind the president.”

It’s no mystery why Trump is losing support in the suburbs. The media want you to think its about Trump’s divisive rhetoric and abrasive style. Perhaps. But more likely it’s about the social media giants, led by Facebook, blacking out conservative voices and leaving the information field one-sided to the leftists mainstream media — a story that media will not be telling you.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Democrats Trump Truth

“Hi, I’m a Democrat and I’m an impeachoholic.”

Rod Thomson

Democrats’ impeachoholism is out in the open. It’s a disease that needs to be treated. But they refuse to admit the addiction — which is a problem because it is deadly to democracy.

We have a nearly three-year history of the American left being operatively anti-democratic. The latest hit of impeachment over the Ukraine phone call is really just one more piece in a continuing string of evidence that they refuse to accept the results of the 2016 election. And that is, indeed, anti-democracy.

Remember, for at least a year after the election, Democrats were proudly using the #NotMyPresident hashtag. It festooned bumper stickers and protest placards. It trended on social media. That is pretty boldly anti-democracy election results. They really weren’t hiding the ball.

And it wasn’t just the base and rank and file. It went up to the national leadership level. There were 66 Democrat members of Congress who boycotted Trump’s inauguration. 66!

Before Donald Trump was even inaugurated there were Democrats in Congress — not on Reddit, but members of Congress — along with Democrats in the media who were calling for a hit of impeachment. He was an illegitimate president. The million Democrat women march was the day after his inauguration. #NotMyPresident. This is all a pretty strong prima facie case that they were acting against democracy.

But in operation, the refusal to accept a duly elected President of the United States has continued unabated since then.

For more than two years, increasing numbers of Congress were calling for a hit of impeachment because of fictional Trump-Russia collusion, until that totally fell apart with the Mueller report earlier this year. There never was any Trump-Russia collusion. Democrats and the media dragged the nation through more than two years of division, angst, threats and dire warnings over something that never happened.

Democrats found themselves strung out without an impeachment hit available. They tried racism, but it just didn’t do it. Withdrawal was setting in.

One week ago, just one week ago, the media and Democrats found a hit of the impeachment drug after another partisan hit job masquerading as “journalism” against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Another vacuous charge of sexual escapades when he was in college — except the woman who was the supposed victim does remember it ever happening and won’t talk.

Because like the other charges against Kavanaugh, it never happened. Kavanaugh was just a leverage point against Trump, a non-human caricature to be ruined along with his family to try to take down the elected president. When you consider what his wife and daughters have been put through by really terrible people, it makes the blood boil.

Now comes Ukraine. Trump made a president-to-president phone call to the newly elected President of the Ukraine this summer to congratulate him and take his measure. Routine. But a so-called “whistleblower” claims that Trump threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine unless that country re-opened an investigation into Vice President Joe Biden. Biden is recorded regaling some folks of his threat to not release U.S. aid to Ukraine unless that country’s leaders fired the prosecutor investigating a company his son was involved with.

So Democrats saw a loaded syringe of impeachment and recklessly jabbed it in Tuesday, pursuing Trump over an alleged action they did not know the details of, but which if true is almost the exact same thing as Biden did to the same country. Astonishing! (As an aside, this impeachment hit is fatal to Biden’s presidential run, for obvious reasons. Might not be today or tomorrow, but it is over.)

Democrats demanded that Trump release the transcript of the Ukrainian call. Trump, who had the transcript, said OK and released it. Reading through the transcript, you have to really twist things to get the suggestion of a quid — but no quid pro quo. In fact, the Ukrainian president brought up both military aid and corruption and seemed eager to both ingratiate himself to Trump and to go after corrupt prosecution or lack of prosecution in his own country.

So now Democrats say we want the full whistleblower report. You see, if the transcript doesn’t show anything obviously incriminating, then maybe the whistleblower — who the Inspector General called partisan — said something they can use. Anything to keep the impeachment drug flowing through the system. But Trump said OK to releasing that as well. Sure doesn’t look like Trump is trying to hide anything.

Democrats are desperately trying to remove an elected president by non-democratic means — only one year before another election.

Ukraine is just another in the long string of evidence that the Democrats and their media allies refuse to accept the results of 2016. There is a preponderance of factual evidence that paints a picture that is coming into blindingly clear focus.

There are few larger threats to a democratic republic than when one of the two major parties develops an impeachment addiction because it won’t accept the results of an election. To save our democracy, Democrats need to enter a 12-step program. The first step is to admit to the problem: “Hi, I’m a Democrat and I’m an impeachoholic.”

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

First Amendment Religious Trump Truth

Trump Could Make History With A Religious Bill Of Rights For The Americas

Rod Thomson

President Trump has the chance to make history in one of the most memorable ways today and tomorrow at, of all places, the United Nations by making the case for religious freedom worldwide, but specifically for calling for a Western Hemisphere Religious Bill of Rights.

The President is sponsoring an event today (Monday morning) at the UN Headquarters in New York entitled a Global Call To Protect Religious Freedom. The goal is to highlight increasing religious persecution around the world and claim the high moral ground for all civilized countries to commit to liberty for all religious adherents. This is something that has not been done by previous U.S. presidents and in breaking this mold, he is doing a marvelous thing.

The religious liberty event is at the same time as another in the endless line of politicized climate change panels that are unceasing. The media will hyperventilate and bring out children to teach us all about having only 18 months before some climate changes are irreversible. But it will all be meaningless gibberish because there is zero consensus on action, because, in truth, the evidence of both severity and cause are just not strong enough.

Not so with religious liberty. The evidence is overwhelming. Here are some stats from the 2019 Open Doors USA report, which tracks Christian persecution — the most persecuted religion in the world.

In the top 50 World Watch List of countries persecuting Christians the most, nearly a quarter billion Christians experience high levels of persecution for their faith; 1 in 9 Christians worldwide experience high levels of persecution; 14% more Christians experience high levels of persecution than did in 2018; 4,136 Christians were killed for being Christians; 1,266 churches or Christian buildings were attacked; In 7 out of the top 9 countries in the World Watch List, the primary cause of persecution is Islamic oppression (the other is North Korea); 11 countries now score as “extreme” for their level of persecution of Christians, compared to only North Korea five years ago.

This is a true crisis. The world’s Jewish population is experiencing it also.

According to the World Jewish Congress: “…the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)’s December 2018 second comprehensive report on discrimination and hate crimes against Jews in the EU, found that an overwhelming majority… — 89 percent — feel that antisemitism is getting worse…The 2018 report also found that 79% of those who experienced antisemitic harassment in the five years prior to the survey did not report the most serious incident to police, indicating an even darker reality than the official national crime numbers. More than one-third of all respondents said they had considered emigrating in the five years preceding the survey because they did not feel safe as Jews in the country where they live.”

The United States has a long history of being the global leader in freedoms in general, but specifically in religious freedom — critical, as that has been the lever of most of the world’s atrocities. America is a known refuge for the religiously persecuted and sought to export the concept for many years. But we abdicated that role to the deification of “multiculturalism” where the left paralyzed American leaders’ ability to say our way was better.

Yet our way of religious freedom for all, enshrined in the 1st Amendment, is undeniably superior to any that do not have such protections. People like former President Obama and today’s Democrats are largely incapable of saying even that.

But Trump is fearless on such matters and will thumb his nose at the self-appointed elites in the U.S. and Europe for whom religion is just a pile of myths leveraged to violently oppress. Living in the 13th century apparently, they see white Christians as the primary religious threat. 

Here’s where the political incorrectness must come out, and it is backed by daily news accounts and Open Doors USA’ data: The giant source of religious intolerance and persecution today comes from Muslim dominated countries. In the past 50 years, Christians have been eliminated via forced conversion, displacement and massacre in large swaths of the Middle East. The region is becoming almost 100 percent Muslim, when it was the birthplace of Christianity. This is true in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Lebanon, Egypt, Libya and elsewhere.

And it is the rub at the United Nations, because part of the worthlessness of that body is that almost every scoundrel nation out there is a member. There are 47 Muslim majority countries that are part of the U.N., including those who are the worst persecutors of Christians. They are not all scoundrels, but that weight, along with Europe’s growing return to anti-Semitism, is one of many reasons for the rank anti-Semitism evident in the endless denouncements of Israel, but never of Palestinian terrorists.

Not only do none of those countries have a 1st Amendment, they do not even acknowledge such a concept as good. A resolution would have a hard time at the U.N. But that doesn’t matter because it would be as meaningless as most resolutions at the U.N. Those only have value when powerful and influential countries sign on and agree to enforce them — such as economic sanctions against places like North Korea and Iran.

But by laying the foundation for religious freedom, Trump can not only claim the high moral ground, but can also begin an entirely new effort that encompasses the Western Hemisphere — North and South America. This would be a sort of Western Hemisphere Bill of Religious Rights. Countries that sign on, enact and enforce religious freedom laws could get more favorable relationships with the rest of the Hemisphere, most notably the United States.

This is actually doable in this Hemisphere because there is not much religious persecution at this moment in North or South America, and most of the nations are Catholic, Protestant or maybe secular in the case of Canada. The persecution that does exist, is not by adherents of a different religion, but by militant political leftists operating in countries without a 1st Amendment (again, see Canada.) 

Let leftists, including those in the United States, oppose a Bill of Religious Freedoms, a majority of which will encompass “brown” people.

This may be more than Trump is going for this week. According to the White House statement:

“The President is working to broaden international support for ongoing efforts to protect religious freedom in the wake of increasing persecution of people on the basis of their beliefs and a growing number of attacks on and destruction of houses of worship by state and non-state actors.  The President will call on the international community to take concrete steps to prevent attacks against people on the basis of their religion or beliefs and to ensure the sanctity of houses of worship and all public spaces for all faiths.”

Religious intolerance always ends in terrible places. Using the United States as a model, President Trump could try something totally unique in world history.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Facebook Leftists Media Republicans Social Media Trump Truth Twitter

How The Left Could Erase Republicans In The 2020 Election

Rod Thomson

The Orwellian dystopia found in 1984 is our future if the trendline continues. And a startling pathway to that future is beginning to congeal before us.

George Orwell presciently wrote “The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became the truth.” This was accomplished in the novel through a device called the Memory Hole.

Protagonist Winston Smith’s job, along with innumerable other workers, was to search the news archives for any stories, phrases or even people who did not line up with the current official worldview and history as dictated by Big Brother. If he found an instance, he dropped it down a literal Memory Hole and it was erased from ever having happened. People’s entire lives disappeared, completely erased as though they never happened. Wars and movements and ideologies never happened and were replaced by a newly re-written history that aligned with Big Brother.

The internal operations of the Memory Hole were never described by Orwell. That was not important, it simply functioned as a metaphor for what Communism was doing around the world in 1948.

But today we are seeing how such a Memory Hole could practically function. No metaphors. Simple reality. And it could happen faster than we think. And like Communism, it comes entirely from the left.

It is the unholy union of the leftwing mainstream media, the leftwing social media giants, leftwing Google and leftwing website and platform hosts. These are virtually all of the avenues for information outside of old-school radio and TV. Talk radio is already dominated by conservatives, but it also does not reach many people in the middle. Ditto for Fox News. 

For elections, communicating to voters in the middle, those who swing elections, is critical. Talk radio and Fox News largely do not do that. There is a conservative media such as the Daily Caller, Daily Wire, Newsmax and so on. But they are in the same category of reaching and informing conservatives, who by definition are not swing voters. This dynamic holds for openly progressive media, such as the Huffington Post, Slate, Buzzfeed, Salon, etc.

Let’s walk through how the Memory Hole is beginning to come together. We’ll start with the mainstream media.

The legacy media of newspapers and network television and CNN has long been dominated by leftwing reporters, editors and producers. It has become more obvious over recent decades, increasing sharply in the non-coverage of Obama-era scandals and now being completely unmasked in the age of Trump. So that is in place now.

Google has been outed repeatedly, most recently by Veritas, which interviewed whistleblowers at Google who leaked documents showing that Google is intent on not letting another Trump or Trump-type election ever happen again. They’ve been placing their thumbs on the scales for awhile, but this is a new level and it is now not just fellow travelers at the same company, it is coordinated from the top. That means it will be quite effective.

The result already is that searches for things that were readily available even a year ago, are almost impossible to find now. News stories from “trusted sources” get top play. And of course Google trusts only the mainstream and even outwardly leftists sources. I am reminded of this daily. I googled Tropical Storm Humberto and just today. is a top 300 website. Yet the first two hits were for CNN and then NBC before getting to — even when I included the specific URL.

In this way, Google employees have become a little army of coding Winston Smiths to develop their part of the Memory Hole.

The social media giants of Facebook, Twitter, Youtube (owned by Google), Instagram, Pinterest and even the giant aggregator Reddit are run and dominated by leftwing executives and operatives. This is a crucial component, because social media was one of the few places where right, left and center could see everything if they wanted to. Everyone could post and link and be as political or nonpolitical as they desired. Since it was a social and familial gathering place, it allowed for the possibilities of seeing a real variety of views, even crazy ones. I described it as the Wild West and considered it a great step forward.

But alas, as the modern left has an instinct for censorship and shutting down discussion, debate and alternative views, so the social media giants are doing all those. From shadow-banning and demonetizing to de-platforming and outright banning, they are all creating what they call “community standards” that is simply leftwing ideology. So by definition, things that are overtly conservative are regularly running into the censor.

It’s not just whackadoodles like Alex Jones. It ranges from conservative comedians like Steven Crowder, who was actually trying to follow all of Youtube’s rules, to the mainstream pro-life outfit Live Action. But when the conservatively doctrinaire PragerU has large numbers of their videos hidden, you know the digital noose is tightening. 

And finally, there are the website hosts and platforms such as Godaddy, WordPress, Weebly and so on that are also run by leftists. They have the ability to simply shut down original websites if they deem those have violated their standards. So far, it has only been done with the most egregious sites, such as the white nationalist, Holocaust-denying,  neo-Nazi website Stormfront.  

But the line has been crossed. 

When you combine the mainstream media, Google, the social media sites, and the website hosts as all leftists, anti-Republican and virulently anti-Trump, they could act in concert — without ever holding a meeting — to scrub the conservative or pro-Trump message from most of the Web — and all the places where swing voters might be exposed.

This includes both organic reach of conservatives and promoted reach. Facebook, Youtube and Twitter can decide that Republican or Pro-Trump ads are violating their community standards and refuse them. This, too, has already happened. This would mean that the GOP would have virtually no pathway for reaching swing voters other than expensive and much less effective direct mail. 

Played in unison, these elements substantially become a Memory Hole.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Politics Trump Truth

Toward 2020: Answering The Main Objections To Trump

Rod Thomson

As I spend a fair amount of time on TV and in other media defending President Trump’s policies, I understand better than most that supporters of President Trump are tasked with the difficult job of defending the man’s presidency in a world dominated by every culture mover universally opposed to him on an unbelievable scale.

But supporters must be able to defend his presidency to neighbors, friends, co-workers and family who are middle-of-the-road voters. Hardened Democrats are not the target. Do not concern yourselves with any brand of hardened never-Trumpers. It is a fool’s errand today. Their minds are cast in concrete and no amount of evidence or argument will change them. So be it.

Elections are won on two fronts: turnout and swings in the middle. On the former point, that comes down to a lot of party and campaign infrastructure doing it right. Trump will take care of the energy for turnout because of who he is.

On the latter, however, a lot of this can fall to those who understand the threat of the shockingly radicalized Democratic Party and the measurable successes of President Trump. The country is much better off, and so is the world, under Trump’s presidency. But many voters in the middle don’t know that

Those swing voters don’t read conservative news outlets or watch Fox News or read commentaries such as The Revolutionary Act. Supporters must assume they do not know the rest of the story, because the mainstream media has not, and absolutely will not, tell them. They mostly know the Democrat-driven narrative through the mainstream media and the culture. 

You, in real-life relationships, are the ones who can inform them, who can change their internal thinking on Trump. Even if you are uncomfortable with Donald Trump the person and don’t like all of his communications, if you are voting for him you need to persuade others because as in 2016, but maybe even more so, the alternative is radically bad.

One thing Trump supporters cannot do successfully with those in the middle is be bombastic, exaggerate or get facts wrong. Calm, level-headed, rational and fact-driven responses can break through for some, and it will only take some. The case is so strong, but people are flabbergasted when they hear it. Frequently Democrats I debate cannot even respond to it, they are so completely unaware of the other side. 

(Here’s a clip of that from a recent ABC debate I was in, that is both enlightening and sort of shocking.) 

With that said, here are solid answers to what middle voters hear from the Democrat/media establishment (often taken from direct conversations and debates I’ve had.) This is the first of several parts coming.

A threat to the Republic

“Donald Trump is a direct threat to the Republic. He’s dismantling the Constitution and acting like a dangerous dictator.”

It’s tempting to want to laugh hysterically at this objection in all its myriad and daily forms. Resist the temptation. Too many voters who can swing elections are seriously concerned about this because they don’t pay close attention. They watch CNN in the airport or catch their local news or see “trusted news sources” on Facebook and are unaware of a few key facts.

Briefly, Trump has made Americans’ lives better through getting government out of our lives in many areas, reducing our taxes, spurring the economy, presiding over the lowest unemployment rates in generations and pushing back on our enemies abroad. He’s also continually deregulated — which is the opposite of what a dictator does. 

One great factoid: 4 million fewer people are on food stamps now than when Trump took office; 4 million Americans who have more self-worth, more purpose in life, and are contributing more to the country than before. That’s a win for everyone.

Well, not the Democrats. That party is running leading presidential candidates who are proud socialists, who would raise taxes, promise free college (more taxes) free healthcare (lots more taxes) abolish ICE and have open borders and pursue reparations. Sometimes it sounds ludicrous to go through even part of the list, but the people you need to reach may not know it exists and that it’s true. A surprising number of firm Democrats don’t even know it, and disbelieve me when I bring it up.

There is a threat to the Republic, but it is not President Trump.

Obstruction of justice

“The Mueller Report showed collusion with Russians and Mueller said he could not clear Trump of obstruction. There is a criminal in the White House.”

Believe it or not, this remains a thing and will remain one.

Robert Mueller was made Special Counsel to investigate Russian interference in the election. Democrats and the media immediately labeled it collusion and Mueller morphed into that, and then into obstruction. 

Here’s the key: In his report, Mueller specifically cleared Trump and Trump campaign officials of any collusion. That was the serious charge. He said he could not clear him of obstruction of justice. But that was not his job, nor the job of any prosecutor. The job is to either bring charges or close the case. This, along with airing 448 pages of dirty laundry — again something prosecutors do not do — is what leads many to believe Mueller ended up with a politicized investigation.

But it muddies the water for middle voters who the media leads to believe the accusation.

If he had stuck with an investigation of Russian interference, including collusion with any candidates or parties, the evidence would have led him directly to the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign, which through intermediaries assuredly paid Russians for “information” on the Trump campaign. This is the notorious Steele dossier, which has been largely discredited.

Attorney General Barr and other federal investigators are now looking into how such an investigation, that included bugging the presidential candidate’s team and planting informants in it, got so deep and invasive when there was no underlying evidence to support it, as Mueller concluded. 

Just as with the threat to the Republic, the real corruption appears not to be on the Trump side.

Inhuman immigration policies

“I can’t get past the inhumane treatment of our Latinx sisters and brothers, especially the children, at the border.” “The dead children at the border are Trump’s doing.”

We all agree that the border is a dangerous place, particularly for everyone crossing it illegally between the legal ports of entry. But this did not start with Trump. We’ve had a border crisis for as long as we have had politicians unwilling to enforce our border and immigration laws. A very long time. (As an aside, we’re obviously an exceptional country because people from all over the world are willing to risk their lives to come here.)

The picture of the drowned father and his 2-year-old daughter is heartbreaking, but it is the result of border policies that Trump has been trying to change. And let’s be honest, too many Republicans in the past have been complicit in those policies of wink-and-nod encouragement of illegal immigrants.

They are coming and crossing illegally so they can ask for asylum — which about 80 percent of them do not qualify for. They have to be housed and adjudicated. But because of the high numbers, they are overwhelming the system with wait times averaging almost two years. Combined with court rulings on dealing with adults and children, that means that those with minors must be released far before they can be adjudicated with just a promise to show up in court. 

This essentially means that virtually every illegal immigrant gets released into the interior and stays in the United States, in reality under pre-Trump enforcement, as long as they want. This is untenable at every level, and it leads directly to people doing exactly what this father did. It also leads to the overwhelming of border patrol facilities and poor conditions, which the Democrats decry even as they push policies furthering the situation.

But all of the deaths we hear about at the border under Trump. Surely all of this is much worse now, right? Wrong. Here’s a chart published by the BBC, no friend of conservatives.

So if the conditions for people at the border are a major concern, whatever else you do, vote for President Trump because he is trying to change it.

Remember, it was Obama who built the “cages” for children who were being used then as now as a tool to get in — due to Democrats in the Ninth Circuit rulings. It is Democrats who are encouraging people to come. It is Democrats who now want an open border. It is Democrats who have set much of the entire stage for this. And for a long period, it was Democrats who refused to fund more beds and more care for the waves of people coming, as Trump and the GOP sought.

This is Part I in an ongoing series of these issues. Future articles will cover the charges of racism, of attacking the media, of this being Obama’s economy, of being a puppet of Putin and of being anti-Christian.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Budget Swamp Trump Truth

Another Budget, Another Load Of Boulders On Our Children’s Backs

Rod Thomson

We should not be sleeping well at night, but not for the reasons you are thinking. 

Yes, there is the threat of socialism and open borders and unnecessarily fanned racial strife amongst other general insanities. But there is the reality that every single year we are binding our children as indentured servants. Right now. It’s happening. And it is shameful.

You may not have seen it, but D.C. is entering into another irresponsible and immoral budget agreement where the politicians, the bureaucrats and the D.C. establishment get what they want — and future Americans get the shaft.  

I warned that “draining the swamp” was going to be far, far bigger than a single president or a single election. It will take a change of who we send to Washington on an ongoing basis, which means that Americans need to think differently than we’ve been trending. That’s a tall order and it’s a challenge to be optimistic about it. 

Even after promising last year to never again bust the budget in a compromise agreement that piles on the debt, President Trump appears ready to do just that with the support of both Republicans and Democrats. When everyone agrees on spending, you know that the American taxpayer is about to get nailed — or more specifically, future taxpayers. But hey, it’s for two years, which pushes it past the next election as per the normal arrangement, so the hacks get to skate on the issue.

Yet it appears that by all polls, the national debt barely ever even shows up even at the bottom, and probably the number of views this article will likely get, that no one really gives a rat’s hiney about the budget and the debt. It’s just not all sexy and loud and Us versus Them. Too bad. Because eventually it’s fatal. And it’s immediately immoral.

I keep using that word. It does mean what I think it means.

In 2018, the per capita debt for Americans was $65,600 — about 50 percent more the national average income for a year. So if you took all of everyone’s income for an entire year, you wouldn’t come close to erasing the debt — plus you wouldn’t fund the government that year. And everyone would die.

But worse, it was $62,100 in 2017. For every trillion-dollar annual deficit, the per capita debt load increases about $3,400 per year. That actually does come due, and it won’t be Nancy Pelosi or Mitch McConnell paying it. So by the end of this budget deal, the debt per capita will be $72,400 — $10,000 more per person than in 2017.

Yes. That’s immoral.

Of course this comes about because of the decades of irresponsible spending and spending and spending, and the constant brinkmanship of the Continuing Resolutions that allow for larded up pork projects and no cuts because of the threat of a government shutdown. The GOP should have figured out by now that the shutdown issue is a media creation that virtually no Americans outside of some government employees and contractors notice even with the incessant media coverage.

And there is the deadline for the U.S. missing debt payments in September because of the spending cap, which is obviously not worth the piece of paper it was scribbled on in crayon as they just lift it every year, or in this case, every other year. The budget is not about spending or taxing, it’s about whether we use the “crisis” of a government shutdown or the “crisis” of not making a debt payment that requires whatever spending free-for-all we have to swallow.

Here’s the gist of yet another horrible deal.

The spending increase that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin agreed to would raise current budget caps by $320 billion over two years. The increase is a paltry $30 billion less than Democrats sought. They got 90 percent of what they wanted.

Further, Noah Rothman wrote on Bloomberg: “If split evenly over two years, that would equal a $17 billion increase for defense and $17 billion increase for domestic programs in 2020 over 2019 levels, giving Democrats the parity they sought for increases in both categories of spending.”

The Trump team wanted to partially offset the increases with savings from entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid that are not subject to annual budget caps. But of course, that did not happen. And don’t be fooled by the $320 billion number. That is the budget cap issue. The deficit is expected to be about $1 trillion each year. Because the Swamp always wins.

So the Democrats got essentially everything they wanted. This is what I meant when saying that one election of one president could not change the corruption level of the D.C. establishment.

But whatevs — just another trillion dollars dumped on our children and grandchildren while we debate the really big issues of rats in Baltimore, Trump’s tweets and who had the best sound bite at the Demcorat debates.

A few lonely Republicans have remained opposed to the irresponsible spending. 

“I paid off a third of the state debt when I was governor of Florida,” Sen. Rick Scott said on CNBC Wednesday ahead of Thursday’s vote. “There’s no focus up here on the debt. We can’t have $22 trillion worth of debt and growing a trillion dollars a year and it not have a consequence at some point.”

That’s right. But obviously we’re doing it anyway. The vote was 67-28. Scott went on.

“We’ve got to have a legitimate conversation about how do we spend our money up here, let’s stop the waste, let’s live within our means, we do it at the state level,” he said. “I paid off $10 billion worth of debt and cut $10 billion worth of taxes. We cut 20 percent of our regulations. And we added 1.7 million jobs. This is all doable, but you’ve got to make choices. Up here what happens is everyone gets everything, so there’s no tough choices made.” 

But even Scott, when pushed gently, would not name the big dogs in the debt — the ever-growing entitlement trifecta of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. We can eliminate entire agencies and squeeze out waste, fraud and abuse, but it won’t close the trillion-dollar annual gap. The Swamp knows what needs to be done, and has no intention of doing it.

No, we should not be sleeping well at night. We are loading up our offspring to pay off debts they did not incur.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

History Politics Trump Truth

Trump, GOP: Follow Alexander I And Muhammad Ali: Go On The Offensive

Rod Thomson

Like Muhammad Ali’s rope-a-dope or Russia’s forced military strategies against French and German invaders in back-to-back centuries, President Trump has endured more than two years on the defensive.

He can and should go on the offensive, and Republicans at every level should follow suit. 

There are plenty of military and competitive examples of one side allowing the other to spend themselves on an ultimately futile offensive, retreating and bobbing and weaving on the defensive. And when done right, the apparently superior power spends itself and the counteroffensive is invariably explosive and successful.

The parallels are clear and the timing is now. History shows the way.

The Grande Armée under Napoleon was an unstoppable force in the early 19th century, sweeping through Europe and defeating France’s rivals across the continent. Russia was the final hurdle and Napoleon was determined to knock out the giant. When he invaded Russia in the summer of 1812, the Grande Armée had 685,000 soldiers, the largest army ever seen up to that point. Napoleon had great successes in pushing the Russians back. But the Russian Army kept eluding the major, decisive battle Napoleon sought, the knockout blow. The French even took Moscow. But the Russians had burned it along with everything on their retreat, enacting a scorched earth policy that starved the vast French army.

The Russians used the huge land mass to their advantage and stayed on the defensive while Napoleon exhausted his army being on the offensive. When at last winter began to set in, Napoleon had to retreat and the Russian army went on the offensive, hounding the French and their allies all the way back to Poland. When the tattered remnants of Napoleon’s army crossed into Poland in December, there were only 27,000 left. It was decimated.

The same thing played out when the German Army invaded Russia in 1941. Hitler and his generals knew the story of Napoleon well, and sought a quick summer knockout of the Russian Red Army. But Russia has both land and a lot of people. Stalin did not purposely employ what the Russian Emperor had a century earlier, but it practically worked the same. The Red Army suffered defeat after defeat, but kept retreating and fighting. The Germans got to the gates of Moscow by December, but everything stalled. 

But they regrouped in 1942 and went on the offensive again. Hitler went after Stalingrad this time, an important city but hardly a knockout city, because he hated Stalin and wanted to take the city named after him. It was irrational hatred and it drove the Germans deeper into Russia during the fall of 1942. The Russians kept retreating, but also kept bleeding the German Army while on defense. At Stalingrad, they purposely lured the Germans into terrible street fighting that nullified the German armor and air advantage.

In November 1942, as winter was setting in, the Russians sprung the trap on the German Army bogged down in Stalingrad, enveloping the Germans and eventually annihilating them. Germany never recovered from this defeat, losing an army of 600,000 soldiers in that single battle. Russia went on the offensive and never stopped until the Nazi regime was totally destroyed (and the U.S. stood in her way in central Germany.)

In 1974, Muhammad Ali and his team employed the Russian strategy against the more powerful puncher, George Foreman, but called it the rope-a-dope, because Ali had a way with words. This was the much hyped Rumble in the Jungle. Foreman was considered the favorite because of his superior punching power, and Ali knew this. 

Ali purposely angered Foreman with taunts during the match, provoking the heavy-hitter to pound on him. Ali used the ropes of the ring (like the landmass of Russia) to absorb the blows for round after round. It looked like Ali was being just pummeled and Foreman was easily winning the match. Some feared for Ali’s life. But by using the ropes, Ali was more protected than it appeared because the blows energy were passed on to the ropes.

By the mid rounds, Foreman began tiring because he had done most of the punching. By the 7th round, Ali went on the offensive against an exhausted Foreman and won the match on a knockout in the 8th.

In 2016, Donald Trump was elected president and contrary to having the traditional “honeymoon” of new presidents, was immediately on the defensive. From the supposed million-woman pink hat march the day after his inauguration to the two-year Russia collusion probe by Robert Mueller to the endless and breathless coverage of being a traitor, racist and existential threat by the media, Trump and the GOP has been on the defensive his entire presidency.

Granted, the President has punched back consistently, but these have been counter punches, raiding parties, not a full-scale offensive.

The Mueller report results and the disastrous Mueller Congressional testimony last week are like the moments of Napoleon and Hitler at Moscow, or Ali in the 7th round against Foreman. The attackers have petered out on that front. The Trump offensive can began.

Yes, the House will keep holding hearings and the media will keep reporting things dishonestly, but Trump can go on the full offensive now. 

Just as importantly, so can and should the entire GOP. They’ve laid low, said “let’s wait on the report.” Well the report is out and the corruption appears to be on the part of the investigators. Now there is no further excuse for not fighting back. 

The ground is fertile for the counteroffensive:

— Highlighting the Russian counter investigations, where two reports will be coming out; one from the Inspector General very soon and the other from the district attorney appointed by Attorney General William Barr later; 

— The hypocrisy of Democrats from the border to Baltimore who either are generating the human suffering or are ignoring it while trying to play the compassion card; 

— Turn the race card back, pointing out the quality of life for Americans in this prosperous economy, and harping on the stats pointing out how well minorities are doing in America under Trump.

There are multiple fronts on which to go on the offensive. The GOP should be pushing the advantage daily or they will needlessly find themselves living on the defensive.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS

Democrats Justice Trump Truth

Mueller Upshot: Legal Rights Denied To Trump Family

Rod Thomson

Today’s hearings revealed again how two bedrock American legal principles have been terribly abused in the Mueller investigation’s final report on Russian election interference. The first principle is innocent until proven guilty, known in the legal profession as the presumption of innocence. 

After being essentially cleared in the first half of the report on colluding with Russia (Democrats won’t let go of the dead horse, but Mueller did) the special counsel jumped tracks in the second half and took away Trump’s presumption of innocence. 

Prosecutor Mueller and his team laid out in 200-plus pages of detailed evidence the supposed obstruction of justice. Yet Mueller declined to recommend charges, but then made the shockingly unprofessional statement that he could not “exonerate” Trump, and that if he could he would. That was just prosecutorial malfeasance of a very high order, and certainly gives the appearance of a political setup for Democrats to launch impeachment.

Now, some of you will say, but he’s the president! It’s different! That brings me to the second bedrock American legal principle under assault: equality under the law.

If everyone is equal under the law, which I should hope everyone on the left and right agrees with, then why is this President and his family members not presumed innocent? Why is this President and his family members left with the pall of “not exonerated” when in every other single instance of American prosecution, it is simply and rightly “not sufficient evidence” for prosecution? 

If your answer is, he’s the president! Or, this is too important! Then you don’t believe everyone is equal under the law. You believe Trump and his family are *less* equal under the law.

Remember, in this special counsel arrangement (I still contend a bad law), there is no other side presented. This is just a prosecutor’s report. In a normal courtroom, a full defense team would be breaking down the prosecution’s case and, very importantly, would be cross-examining witnesses. None of that has happened or is allowed to happen.

But Trump did obstruct justice, you may say, because Mueller couldn’t exonerate him! As previously noted, a prosecutor does not have the authority in the American legal system to “exonerate” anyone specifically because everyone is presumed innocent until *proven* guilty. 

But further, Mueller admitted during his testimony that he had not been in any way obstructed. Congressman John Ratcliffe asked Mueller whether his investigation been curtailed, stopped, or hindered at any point. Mueller answered, “No.” Not even hindered? So, there was no obstruction.

Ratcliff also asked Mueller on my main point: “Can you give me an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?”

Mueller’s bone-chilling answer: “I cannot, but this is a unique situation.”

No, it’s not if we’re all equal under the law. Trump has not been provided a presumption of innocence, nor has he had his “day in court” to go after the prosecutors and cross-examine their witnesses, which means he has not been treated equally under the law. I realize this means nothing to the Trump-haters. But it should matter to regular Americans.

As bad as foreign interference is in our elections (and Russia alone has been doing it since the 1930s, and aggressively since the 1950s) undermining our own jurisprudence for political gain is worse.

In the realm of stating what is un-American, that could hardly fit better.

Rod Thomson is an author, past Salem radio host, ABC TV commentator, former journalist and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act. 

Drudge Got You Down? / Try WHATFINGER NEWS