Thursday, December 29, 2016

MORT’s meanderings

“We’ll retaliate at a time and
place of my choosing.”                                     
                       -  Pres. Barack Hussein Obama

This is a quote from the tough-talkin’ Coward-in-Chief of the United States of America who really knows how to strike fear into the hearts of this nation’s enemies.

When he responds to intentional acts of open aggression by our sworn enemies, against this nation’s citizens and property with a statement like, “We’ll retaliate at a time and place of my choosing.”, what he means is . . .

“You can bet your ass I’ll leave this mess for the
next president; I ain’t not gonna do nuthin!”

Those sounds you hear are coming from all the dead    Presidents spinning in their graves or in the case of the living ex-Presidents, gagging in front of their TVs.

While the soon-to-be former-President will openly bask in his twisted version of reality regarding his legacy, he will despite his Narcissism, know he has been sidelined by his own screw-ups, by factual history, by Hag Hillary  by a guy named Donald J. Trump and by a few million people in fly-over country, still clinging to their Bibles and guns who finally grew sick & tired of his never-ending, nonsensical blabbering, utter ineptitude, cowardice and unforgivable stupidity.  Good riddance to Obama, his un-American family and all his other un-American trash.

                   MORT KUFF  © 12-17-2016

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, December 25, 2016


The amount of economic ignorance on the part of a good portion of our citizens is alarming. Either they never learned basic economics in school or they refuse to acknowledge basic economic facts because of partisan political considerations. Either way, it is appalling.

There has been a blurb bouncing around the internet for a few years that cannot be attributed to any one person (I understand Ronald Reagan used this in one of his speeches back in the 80's), but it is succinct and to the point and makes a lot of economic sense. It goes like this: “A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. The majority will then vote for the candidate who promises the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy” (ex: Ancient Greece). Doesn't that remind you of the thinking of the present day liberals and Progressives?

Today, many people think they are entitled to a “free” this and a “free” that supplied by the government, even though the worst practitioner of running anything, is the wasteful and inefficient government itself. Our politicians, in their mad rush to perpetuate their careers in the executive and legislative branches of government, will go out of their way to promise prospective voters largesse (freebies) from the public treasury, like it was their own money, in order to “bribe” the voters into voting for them by giving the voters something for nothing.

Think of all the “freebies” that many of the people are getting today, thanks to our feckless politicians. The list is enormous, but some of the most egregious examples are, food stamps (46 million people are getting them), sub-prime mortgages (even today after the mortgage meltdown led by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a couple of years ago), health care waivers (for certain favored unions and companies), grossly generous pensions and perks for government workers (and politicians), subsidies to farmers and some corporations, and our foreign aid to countries, some of which don't like us very much, etc., etc. And you wonder why our fiscal house is in disarray and headed for bankruptcy?

The politicians who are using “class warfare” to squeeze money out of our producers and job creating entrepreneurs, are doing one of the basic things exactly what the father of Communism, Karl Marx, said people should do to hasten the demise of Capitalism. Look around you, in a little over 8 years we have added 10 trillion dollars of debt to our already over burdened economy. Multi-billion dollar deficits, now and into the future, cannot be sustained. Our GDP today is over $17 trillion, but our debt is almost $20 trillion (more than 3 trillion dollars more than our GDP). Eventually, the “Piper” must be paid and we'll be unable to pay him (could that “Piper” be China?).

When people have little or no incentive to work hard and produce in hopes of getting a monetary reward without it being taken by the government (through excessive taxation and regulation), that's the day we will lose our liberty and our freedom to an impersonal and wasteful government. We will then become the future Greece, Venezuela, Cuba, or another Third World nation. We're heading in that direction under the leadership of the politicians that are running the country now. We can't overcome that direction if, we the citizens continue to elect the politicians that have caused this situation to become the problem that it has..

Basic Economics 101 should be taught to all our students so that sound fiscal policy can be initiated and sustained in our society. Today we have a gaggle of leftist, liberal progressives dominating our educational system and basically teaching our younger generation, students with “heads full of mush”, the glories of Marxism/Socialism. If we can't reverse that trend, we are goners, or should I say our children and grandchildren are goners. I hope that's not what will happen, but all of us must stand up now and be counted and you must champion our free enterprise system and you must stand up to the onslaught that is being waged against it. Let's institute basic Economics 101, not just talk about it, in all our schools, with teachers and professors who believe in life, liberty, and private property. We are not a Marxist, Socialist, or Communist country, we are a democratic republic, let's hope we can keep it that way.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 22, 2016

Fake News!

What cost Hillary Clinton the election?

Well obviously it could not have had anything to do with her creepy, fake smile, her human-like warmth or the swamp of corruption and even treason that she has made for herself. You know, it must be the Russians! And of course FAKE NEWS! In his latest FIREWALL, Bill Whittle picks apart this nonsense and places the blame squarely on the head of the sore loser responsible for her thrashing.

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, December 18, 2016

The Election

If you listen to the Democrats and liberal media, you would never have thought that Trump won the election on his own.  First, they say Trump won because FBI director Comey re-opened his investigation into the Clinton email scandal.  
Then it was Russian hacking. There was never any proof that election machines were hacked by anyone.  Nor was there any proof that the DNC or Hillary Team’s emails were doctored in any way. At no time did Podesta, Clinton, or anyone in the DNC deny the content of the emails. Then it became that Trump appealed to racism, xenophobia, and bigotry. 
Clinton raised over $581 million and spent $132 million in the final weeks. Here in AZ it seemed that every 20 minutes there was another negative Trump TV commercial.  In contrast, Trump raised only $340 million including his self-funding, and spent $94 million in the final weeks. Clintons campaign staff – over 900 people -  and travel expenses far exceeded Trump’s campaign.  Nevertheless, Trump won so it could not be his money that did it.

Then there was the media.  Almost every newspaper endorsed Clinton.  Certain newspapers such as The New York Times devoted almost every issue to something negative about Trump.  The media companies such as NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN were solidly for Clinton.  CNN eventually became known as the Clinton News Network.  In fact, after a while it became evident that Clinton was given special treatment by being supplied debate questions in advance.  Further, whenever Clinton appeared on TV it was always in front of her allies such as former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos who fielded her softball questions.  The only TV media that was positive for Trump was Fox.  Despite what President Obama may claim, Fox does not have an audience as large as all the pro-Clinton media. Hollywood liberals were solidly for Clinton giving her vast sums of money and being at public events for her.  

In the postmortem discussion, there have been articles which talk about how Clinton was not liked, that she did not have a clear message, that she limited her campaign appearances to places where Democrats always had an advantage such as large cities.
One factor that is overlooked and is important is the economy.
Clinton basically promised to continue the Obama legacy including his economic programs – and that in my opinion was her greatest downfall.
Some figures to ponder:
·       Under President Obama there has been a record number of quarters following a recession where we have had economic growth of less than 2%.
·       GDP growth under President Obama has been less than 3% - the worst record since Herbert Hoover.
·       President Obama claims the unemployment rate has turned around.  However, the reason for that is that many of the unemployed have given up looking for jobs.  The labor participation rate is now 62.7% with 94.5 million out of work and no longer looking for work – he worst figure in 4 years. The US has lost 11,472,000 since Obama took office.
·       Real family income has declined by more than $4,000 during the past eight years
·       Home ownership is at a 48-year low.
·       People on food stamps has almost doubled since 2007.

Why Clinton would run on a promise of more of the same is a mystery to me.
There are some other interesting factors.

President Obama claims that he has created jobs.  The problem is what kind of jobs have been created and who got them.  More than 300,000 manufacturing jobs have left the US since Obama became president.  These higher paying jobs have been replaced by lower paying part-time and full-time jobs in various service industries. Of these lower paying jobs created, 56% went to Hispanics and 29% went to African-Americans. Whites who made up 81% of the workforce in 2007 under Obama have suffered -9% of the net job gains.  Since September 2014 more than 191,000 coal miners have lost their jobs due to Obama’s policies.  Wind mills and solar panels will not make up for this job loss and Clinton’s promise to end coal completely, cost her big.

President Obama says his policies have kept inflation down.  Yes, inflation is down except for two critical areas: health insurance and rent.

Under Obamacare health insurance premiums will increase an average of 25% in 2017!  In Arizona that figure is +116%.  For some, health care premiums are almost as high as housing expenses. Plus, there is no way to avoid these expenses since they are mandated.   

Rent costs also have risen at a higher rate.  In 2013 rents increased by 3.3%.  In 2014 the rate jumped to 3.9% and in 2015 that figure was 4.6%.

In brief, as Bill Clinton said when he ran for office: it’s the economy, stupid.  Or as Ronald Reagan said when he ran against then President Carter: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago.”

Conservative commentary from Jim Pirretti


Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 15, 2016

You don't have to call 911 for an SOS

I consider myself to be a traditionalist that falls in the realm
of conservatism, with no party affiliation, rendering my vote
to whomever most closely reflects my hopes and beliefs for
my country, my loved ones and me.

This prevented me from giving any consideration for Hillary
Clinton to earn my vote, because of her character and policy.
Compromise determined the direction I took, even with
some qualms, because the deception and corruption
attributed to her, was just to overwhelming to negate the
vote of my eventual choice.

Liberal promises have held minorities in a relationship with
a party of false hope that never materialized, like an abused
wife remaining with her husband, afraid to live without him,
thinking things will change for the better, but never does;
and continues to endure the deception, because she doesn't
know there is an alternative.

I and many others are gambling the alternative will finally
restore the foundation America was built on.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, December 11, 2016


I once came across a definition of the term “Political Correctness” which made sense, it went like this, “A set of unwritten rules that determine what you are free to say under the guise of tolerance as set down by the liberal left”. That sort of sums up one of the most destructive philosophical attacks upon our U.S. Constitution that has been attempted in over 200 years of our republic. It has affected all aspects of our lives from small children to our “senior citizens” (a nice politically correct term, I might add).

People today have to be very careful not to “break the rules” or they will face the punishment of the “P.C. Police”, who are unelected, undocumented, and self-proclaimed busybodies and “know-it-alls”, who will try to control your thoughts and actions so as to have you comply with their “rules and regulations”, whatever they might be?

The major area where “political correctness has raised its ugly head is in the area of race relations. As we all know, we, the citizens of the U.S., are covered by the 1st Amendment of our Constitution which guarantees free speech, with a certain few restrictions. Well, that's the way it was supposed to be before P.C. took hold in our society. What is ironic is that the people who are accused of not being “politically correct” are mainly from the conservative side of the political spectrum. The list includes the following people such as Donald Trump , Don Imus, Rush Limbaugh, former Virginia Sen. George Allen, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, former Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and many other “right” thinking people.

The old saying of “Who died and left you boss”, certainly applies to the people who are looking to jump into any controversy that might give them a partisan political advantage. Some of the people who come to mind as being self-elected “P.C. Police” are the “Rhyming Reverends”, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, Sen. Harry Reid, and CNN's Van Jones etc. God forbid, anyone, deliberately or not, says something which they don't approve of or sanction, then their “manufactured” outrage, by these “racial hustlers” and liberal partisans, will be manifested in by their beating of the drum by using the “race card” to generate compliance with or by having someone fired or have them thrown upon the the scrap heap of public scorn, derision and history. It seems their only concern is the preconceived “dissing” of a black person by a white person, never, it seems, of a black person “dissing” a white person. That's a blatant example of a double standard, to say the least. Isn't that a form of racism, only in reverse? I guess you could say that if liberals didn't have double-standards they wouldn't have any standards at all.

The “P.C. Police” have extended their scope, in the past few years, to areas other than race such as, physical disabilities, ethnic/religious heritage, gender, sexual orientation and a host of other areas where perceived insensitivity to some might occur. This has put a major crimp in our social fabric as everyone now has to to think twice or three times about the consequences of what they might say or what they may do. There was a time, in the not to distant past, that untoward behavior or slander upon another was treated by ostracism and rebuke, and not by filing a frivolous lawsuit suing the supposed offender. During that former time, comedy routines, especially by the Catskill Mts. comics, were filled with disses and exaggerations putting down others, in a good natured way, and it was met with laughter and acceptance. Very seldom did anybody take real offense at what was said. A couple of years ago, Don Imus found out, the hard way, that a twist of a phrase in the quest of a laugh, could get you fired or suspended from your job, even after a sincere apology was offered to make amends. There is no forgiveness by the P.C.police for conservative, white, or conservative black folk. They are guilty forever.

This insanity has got to stop or we'll create such animosity between the people that our country will be split even worse than it is now with our, soon to be retired, supposed “post-racial president” at the helm. Everybody should lighten up and not feign outrage when no outrage was intended or which doesn't or didn't exist. In the words of that famed “philosopher” Rodney King, “Can't we all just get along”?

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 8, 2016

MORT’s meanderings

The end justifies the remains.
In the case of Fidel Castro’s passing from the scene, it is far more than ironic that his memory is being celebrated as if he were a staunch advocate for the Cuban people and a strong, noble  leader.   He was neither.  Sadly, the Cuban people celebrating are still very much under the tyrannical thumb of his brother’s harsh, dictatorial regime. They dare not let their true feelings be known, or even hint at their relief that he is gone, much less – openly shout with joy at the too-long overdue demise of ‘Infidel’ Castro.
It is a master stroke of divine intervention that the Jeep pulling the cart with the flag-draped container of Castro’s cremated remains, broke down.  The Jeep broke down.  And the military escorts who  were walking on either side of this cart, were pressed into service to get behind the cart and the Jeep and push, push, push.
It made for an ignominious but altogether fitting tableau that will  last forever through the magic of television re-runs, in the memory of all who witnessed this tragic comedy on their TVs, worldwide.   Just think about it – you saw Cuban people, finally able to push back at the jackass who had made their lives so miserable while he lived a far different life at their expense.
It is truly said, “The end justifies the remains.”
             MORT KUFF  © 12-5-2016

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, December 4, 2016

Thank You Pres. Obama - For What?

Yes, even a hard-nosed conservative like me would like to thank Pres. Obama for his efforts, over the past 8 years, of being mostly responsible for turning over the presidency to the Republicans. In addition, the Senate and the House of Representatives are now in the Republican majority, and don't forget the 33 governorship's and the 68 out of 99 state legislatures that are now in Republican hands. We couldn't have done it on our own, we needed the help of our current "Campaigner in Chief", Barack Hussein Obama.

When Obama won in 2008, he had both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and what was his priority? Yes, it was Obamacare, a policy that 60% of the population didn't like or support. So in 2010, Obama (the Democrats) lost their majority in the House of Representatives, mainly because of Obamacare and all the waivers that were given to Democrat special interests. This scenario was repeated in 2014 as the Senate and the House went Republican, and in this past election, in 2016, a clean sweep for the Republicans of the Presidency, the Senate and the House of Representatives came about because of the stagnation of the policies of Pres. Obama and the Democrats and their nomination for president, the "Typhoid Mary" of politics, Hillary Clinton.

To listen to Pres. Obama, you'd think that we are living in "Nirvana" and that it was a disconnect that the American people were misguided in refuting his "great ideas and benefits" that he was responsible for during his two terms in office, by electing Donald Trump president,. To label Obama a narcissist and an egoist is not an exaggeration when you listen to him speak at a press conference here in the U.S. and overseas in Greece and Europe. Here is what Obama said at his final press conference, "I am very proud of the fact that we will, knock on wood, leave this administration without a significant scandal". What? Does he have a lapse of memory again? Did he forget the following? The targeting of conservative groups by the I.R.S. (which was later admitted to by the I.R.S,), V.A. manipulation of data, Fast and Furious (selling guns to Mexican drug cartels), the lies about what caused the Benghazi murders, the Secretary of State private e-mail server, money given to Solyndra (a company that went bankrupt after receiving a $500 million subsidy), the Iran nuclear payment and the toothless agreement that went along with it, and his signature "achievement" loaded with false promises, Obamacare. What, no sandal there Mr. President?

Before this past election, the Democrats were quelling about the demise of the Republican Party, as they were so confident of winning across the board, and the word filtered out that on election night, before the election results were finalized, the champagne corks at Clinton headquarters were being popped as they thought victory was imminent, and then came the big disappointment and eventually the gnashing of teeth and the total chaos within the Democrat Party when Donald Trump was declared the winner. The Democrats and the liberal media still can't believe that the Democrats were the big losers and they are still acting like spoiled brats as they are continuing the losing campaign rhetoric against Trump and the Republicans. It was a total reversal of fortune, and as I said before, "THANK YOU PRES. OBAMA" we couldn't have done it without you.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, December 1, 2016

House Breakers are Breaking the Law

The national election has revealed a portion of our society has a
Third World Nation mentality, unable to cope with disappointment
in a civil way, bolstered by elitists and members of an entertainment
industry, whose members skirt reality and their personal behavior
scornfully defies tradition. I don't want to dignify them by equating
them to animals.

Republicans won and the people have spoken, but the losers are
unwilling to suck it up, that the country no longer approves of a system
that finds our Constitution, a document holding our Judeo-Christian
beliefs and way of life incompatible with their shenanigans. Red states
sucked up the past eight years without violence, so if liberals have a
legitimate case, present it in 2020.

One of the high points of disagreement was on immigration. These
delusionary humanitarians can't see the negatives of a chaotic open
border policy and the consequences it will create. It is an insult to
my parents and others who followed the law, who emigrated here and
assimilated with the customs of their new home, while maintaining
and being proud of the good things from their heritage; but not losing
the reason why they are here and not staying where they were.

There is no such person as an undocumented immigrant or citizen.
This is an oxymoron term invented by the media to brain wash the
public into accepting people who ignore America's law. In fact, they
can be described as uncontrolled illegal intruders who penetrate our
country without our permission, many of whom are criminals that
liberal officials provide them protection under an unofficial status
called Sanctuary City; but they do not offer protection to their victims,
most notably Kate Steinle.

I am called a racist and unfeeling, because I don't want anyone
breaking into my house. The United States is my home and I have
a right to protect it.

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 27, 2016

Are Enormous Speaking Fees and Huge Donations Really Camouflaged Bribes?

We all know that taking money by a politician or a government official from someone in order to get a favorable government action, is a felony and is called a bribe. Well, suppose the payment of money is in the form of an enormous speaking fee to a spouse or a generous donation to a certain charitable foundation that a particular politician or government official runs or has an interest in, should that be considered a bribe or a “quid pro quo”? Does that sound like a situation that the Clinton's are involved in?

Suppose Hillary Clinton was elected president, how then would she be able to to deal with foreign countries, foreign leaders or oligarchs that have contributed millions of dollars to her spouse, Bill Clinton, and to the Clinton Foundation? Do you think that those countries that have donated millions of dollars to Bill Clinton (and Hillary Clinton after her stint as Secretary of State), and the Clinton Foundation, did so out of the goodness of their hearts or do you think they expected something positive in return for their largess? Is the Pope Catholic? Of course.

If you think about this unholy alliance between donor and donee, many of whom are banned by law from donating to a politician or government official directly, could this be called a clever dodge of the law by circumventing the law already on the books? By paying a large speaking fee to a spouse or donating a huge sum to a charitable foundation, that is operated by the politician or government official, and then getting special favors, could that be called a bribe? Any astute and fair minded person would say that this just doesn't smell right.

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton, over the past 15 years have gone from being broke (which they claimed they were in 2001) to now be worth over $150 million. In addition, the Clinton Foundation is estimated to have around $2 billion in working capital , of which it has been estimated that the Foundation donates about 10% to charities in the U.S. and around the world. How did they make all the money, did they start a successful business, did they sell a product or idea, or did they inherit all those millions of dollars? The answer, of course, is that they sold “access” to the government which they had ties to and money to spend. Many people have claimed that the Clinton Foundation is just a Bill and Hillary “slush fund” used to pay big salaries to cronies, to pay for travel around the world and a host of other non-charitable expenses, while the Clinton's have claimed a million dollar charitable donation to the Clinton Foundation on their income tax return. That's like taking money out of one pocket and putting it into the other pocket.

Could you believe that anyone, who is so well connected in policy positions within the government (or being an ex-president as Bill Clinton is) would be worth from $200,000 to $800,000 for a 30 minute speech to various companies and countries within and outside of the United States? What words of wisdom could they possibly have to tell these companies and countries other than deal with me and something good will happen to you. Shouldn't that be called a bribe or a “quid pro quo”? You make the call.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 24, 2016

MORT’s meanderings

Thank Hillary for her dis-service.
Whenever I wear my NAVY cap, invariably someone will address me and say, “Thank you for your service.”  I’m always gratified and always respond, “Thank you; it was my duty and it was my honor.”
After an overly long career of documented dis-service to the legal profession and to those who chose her to represent them in her many positions and elected offices, I believe that Hillary should be recognized publicly for her abysmal record of dis-service to her former clients, constituents and to all the citizens of the United States.
As a young devotee of Saul Alinsky and his message of social revolution as espoused in his infamous book, “Rules for Radicals”, Hillary set her sights on doing things the wrong way, playing fast and loose with the truth, learning and applying all the short cuts to power and wealth and on honing her skills as a left wing, ‘radical’ politico.
Her record as an unprincipled lawyer; an unabashed suck-up to connected people starting with Bill Clinton; and her adventures in collusion as First Lady to ‘Bill’ when he was Governor of Arkansas then, as First Lady to ‘Slick Willie’ when he became President of the United States, is an indelible dark stain on the concept of ‘ethical public service’.
Following her unbecoming behavior as ‘First Lady’ during the Clinton years in the White House, she captivated the Liberal Democrats of New Yawk with her wit and charm and so, they elected her to represent them in the U.S. Senate. After her dynamic service in that deliberative body that included the highlight legislative achievement of re-naming a U.S. Post Office, she somehow imagined herself as qualified to run for the Presidency.  She was flattened by the Chicago street thug and Community Organizer, the half-black / mostly Muslim activist who became the 44th President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama.
In his infinite wisdom upon becoming the President, Obama anointed Hillary as Secretary of State. Her record of corruption and pay-for-play in which she compromised this nation in every conceivable way, shape and form by her misguided and ill-conceived diplomatic bungling, is a textbook on how not to serve as the nation’s chief diplomat. Her resounding defeat in her recent attempt to gain the Presidency is unprecedented in the history of this nation’s elections. It proved the fallacy that, ‘It was her turn”. And, it capped her utterly disgusting career of public dis-service.                                         
        MORT KUFF  © 11-13-2016

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 20, 2016

What a Disgrace!

Out of all the government agencies over the years, the military and the F.B.I. were considered the most responsible and honest in the U.S. government bureaucracy. Since the election of Obama, that perception of honesty and integrity has sort of eluded the once noble F.B.I. after this latest debacle about Hillary's use of a private e-mail server and the F.B.I.'s decision not to recommend an indictment.

F.B.I. Director James Comey, had a reputation for honesty and integrity, but it seems that he got caught up in the Clinton's “web of deceit”, and sold out for political purposes.

As an example, right after the 4th of July weekend, James Comey gave a review of the testimony and evidence of the questioning of Hillary Clinton by the F.B.I. (Director Comey did not attend the questioning) and his decision to indict or not to indict Hillary Clinton for “gross negligence” in using a private e-mail server in the conduct of her business as Secretary of State.

For the 1st 13 minutes of a 15 minute presentation, Comey laid out a forceful array reasons (including lying and obstruction of justice) why Hillary Clinton was guilty of violation of federal statutes. During the last 2 minutes, be did a complete 180 degree turn and said that he would not make a recommendation to indict her. It looked like the “fix was in” and that he “folded like a cheap camera” for blatant political purposes. Is that too harsh a criticism of Director Comey's decision?

Let's review as to what happened leading up to Director Comey's decision.

It has been verified and admitted to by Hillary Clinton, that as Secretary of State, Clinton used a private e-mail server (and 13 phones, not one like she first claimed) in conducting her business as Secretary of State, contrary to agency and government rules and regulations. In fact, when she was sworn in as Secretary of State, she signed a paper agreeing to use the the secured government e-mail server for conducting government business. She ignored what she signed and immediately, upon assuming her duties, used a private server and thereafter repeatedly lied about it, even after her stint as Secretary of State. Did she violate the law, contrary to what Comey determined, and therefore should have faced charges of “gross negligence” (a felony)?

Here's the law that pertained to her actions of using a private e-mail server in conducting her business as Secretary of State, contrary to agency rules and regulations.

U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2071 (b)

“Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroy the same, shall be fined under this title, or imprisonment of not more than 3 years , or both: and SHALL FORFEIT HIS OFFICE AND BE DISQUALIFIED FROM HOLDING ANY OFFICE AND BE DISQUALIFIED FROM HOLDING ANY OFFICE UNDER THE UNITED STATES”.

Isn't that what Hillary was guilty of? How could the F.B.I. Director Comey come to any other conclusion other than by recommending an indictment of Hillary Clinton?

Just prior to Comey's announcement, there was a suspicious meeting between Hillary's husband, Bill, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch (Comey's boss) on a tarmac in Phoenix, Arizona. For what reason was this meeting for? Immediately after that meeting, Director Comey made that bizarre decision. All circumstantial evidence points to that the “fix was in”.

Subsequently, it has been revealed that even President Obama (using a pseudonym) communicated with Secretary Clinton on her private unsecured e-mail server, thereby making him an accessory to the crimes Hillary was being investigated for. By proceeding with an indictment, he would most likely be called upon to testify about communicating with his Secretary of State on an illegal private server. He couldn't let that happen as it would tarnish more, his already flawed legacy. It looks like Director Comey was given the “word” - don't recommend indictment or all hell would break loose and you will be the one responsible for a candidate for president having to quit the race.

The feasible conclusion is, the F.B.I. compromised it's fine reputation by letting politics determine policy. Shame on the F.B.I. and Director Comey. What a disgrace!

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Another First Amendment Visit

Abuse of the First Amendment has been the subject of many of my writings in the past, and the need to look into honing its interpretation and application, where one side retrofits it to their devices and denies it to its opponent. It has become evident a neo liberal motion has invaded the democrat party, denying its protection to any one not in sync with their socialist agenda.

Under their code of political correctness, to express an opinion contrary to theirs is racist, misogynistic and bigoted.

The right to demonstrate against anything you feel harmful to your quality of life is one of the cornerstones of the First Amendment. No where in the First Amendment, or any other government document does it allow harm or destruction of anyone’s body or property as a freedom to express oneself. A majority of demonstrations we are being subjected to are fraudulent and motivated by organizations hostile to our American values and way of life. Example of this is the millennials taking to the streets, because their “Free Stuff” party lost a legitimate election, motivated to action by the leftist influences of professors who cut their teeth in the radical sixties.

Missing in the crowds were those who stayed home to use their brain in finding solutions to any discourse, while those rioting in the streets are the brain dead, resorting to violence for changes that can never be permanent.

The na├»ve are easily maneuvered by the anarchists infiltrating their ranks, who believe their efforts are humanitarian and keeping our borders closed is not humane. They don’t see the danger of undesirables among good people filtering through to create havoc, as is happening in Europe. Their plight is survival, but it is not bigotry to be cautious and deny entry for anyone who follows the tenets of a religion advocating Sharia law that is contrary to our laws, that negates the rights and protection by any of our amendments. Like most of us, our president elect, Donald Trump is not versed in the lingo of politicians and diplomats, so plain talk is not acceptable for elitists, so our words are open for them to ridicule and twist. By the demonstrations we are witnessing, it seems to be working.

Apparently it was OK to back a liar and non-indicted felon, who in the words of the FBI, was careless and negligent with state secrets, and by her ineptness, is responsible for the death of 4 of America’s best in Benghazi.

I ask any of you who are angry over the election results, if one of the four murdered in Benghazi was your son, would your vote be different? If your answer is no, you are a very sick person!

Conservative column from George Giftos

Bookmark and Share

Thursday, November 10, 2016

The Overwhelming Stench of Corruption is No More in Wash D.C.

Donald Trump, love him or hate him, is now the new sheriff in town. He pulled off the miracle of the century by promising that, by electing him, he would “drain the swamp” and get rid of the overwhelming stench of corruption that now permeates the center of our government in Wash. D.C. The elites and the members of the establishment, both Democrat and Republican, who have despised him, will now will have to adjust their ways of doing business. He accomplished this miracle with a main stream media being solidly and viciously being massed against him and his policies, and a small group of disgruntled Republican RINO's, who couldn't see the forest for the trees.

The “Typhoid Mary” of American politics, Hillary Clinton, has finally been shown the door before she could do any more damage to our democratic republic. Never did the voting public have a more clear choice to say, “no more Clinton corruption” now or in the future.

Donald Trump made a very conciliatory victory speech, which received much praise from both friend or foe, reaching out to all the American people regardless of race, ethnicity, national origin, religion or gender. Being the smart, intelligent person that he is (contrary to how he was pictured in the biased media), he will be the real uniter and not the divider, like our present leader was supposed to be these past 8 years.

Since Donald Trump was not beholden to any of the various special interest groups, like his opponent was, he will be able to do what is right and not what is expedient for the American people. What a breath of fresh air that is!

Now Donald Trump will have to produce for the American people, who gave him a mandate by returning, for him, a Republican Senate and House of Representatives, but after watching him tirelessly campaign the past year and a half, who doesn't think he won't succeed in his quest to “Make America Great Again”? He has been a tremendous success in most all of his endeavors. He does what only others talk about. His ego, which he has been criticized for, will be his motivating force to succeed as President for all the people. Don't underestimate him.

Yes, Trump is sometimes rough around the edges and sometimes he says things that get him in trouble, but you can't say that he doesn't put his heart and soul into what he believes in. He will not be all talk and no action like some of our feckless politicians have shown a propensity to say and not do.

The fumigating gun has or will arrive in Wash. D.C. to eradicate the “stench of corruption” that persists in the workings of the elites in the halls of Congress and in the bureaucracy that feeds off of it.

God bless President-elect Donald Trump, and may he succeed in bringing back the thoughts and ideas that our “Founding Fathers”, who have given us the means of righting our ship of state that has been off-course these past 8 years.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share

Sunday, November 6, 2016

The Clinton's “Modus Operandi”

“Modus Operandi” is a Latin word that that is defined , mainly by law enforcement personnel, as to determine the usual way that a criminal(s) performs a crime. In addition, it is a pattern or method used by criminals over and over in the commission of their crimes. For the past 30 years that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been in public service, they have, as their “modus operandi”, been able to skirt the law in ways, that are obvious to a discerning individual, that they have broken the law, but have rarely been held accountable for their actions. They seem to be above the law. One law for the Clinton's and one law for the rest of us poor “schlubs”.

Peggy Noonan, noted political columnist, has pointed out, in a recent column, what she called the “Clinton Scandal Ritual”. She said that the Clinton's “modus operandi” in facing charges of wrongdoing in their lives is to lie, deny, revise, claim not to remember specifics, and stall for time. When time passes, call the story (the scandal) “old news” full of questions that have already been answered. For them, this tactic has worked wonders as they have avoided jail time over and over again, whereas an ordinary person would not have been so lucky in disobeying the law and getting away with it like the Clinton's have.

The list of Clinton scandals over the years include the following.

Hillary once claimed that she parlayed a $1,000 investment in cattle futures into a $100,000 windfall, just by reading the Wall Street Journal. She got personal help, it was revealed later, by one of her husband's friend, as Bill Clinton was then the Arkansas Attorney General, as a favor (a quid pro quo?). When Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he was accused by cabaret singer, Jennifer Flowers, of being his mistress for 12 years as Bill was married to Hillary. He denied any such thing, but years later in a deposition, he admitted that the affair was true. It was not a crime to have an affair, but his blatant denial to the American people was an example of how they were so disingenuous, even back then.

While President Bill Clinton was in office, Hillary and Bill fired the White House travel office staff under a phony reason of malfeasance, and put in their place their friends from Hollywood. The travel office staff sued and won their case in court and were ordered reinstated.

Toward the end of Clinton's second term, Clinton was accused of having an affair with an intern, Monica Lewinsky, in the Oval Office. He denied the affair on T.V. to the nation, but admitted it later when confronted with evidence to the contrary. During a deposition in that case it was found that he lied to a grand jury, and was forced to pay another victim of his sexual abuse, Paula Jones, an $850,000 fine and the loss of his law license. You could say it was basically a slap on the wrist because he was a Clinton.

When they left the White House, they removed about $200,000 worth of White House furnishings, of which they were forced to return approximately. $120,000 of the items after it was revealed what they had illegally removed. No other penalty was assessed.

The “unpunished crimes” continued after they were leaving the White House. Bill Clinton, as he was leaving office, pardoned a number of unsavory characters including swindler Marc Rich (a fugitive from the U.S. and a Clinton campaign contributor), pedophile Mel Reynolds, a convicted former congressman, and a group of convicted Hasidic Jews from New Market, N.Y. , as a “payoff” to that community to vote for Hillary in her upcoming election for senator from N.Y. The town of New Market, a solid Republican town,voted for Hillary, 1,408 to 8 (another quid pro quo?)

In the years since, as Hillary became Senator and eventually being appointed Secretary of State after she lost the presidential primary and the general election was won by Barack Obama, the selling of access to government rapidly increased to make the Clinton's multi-multi millionaires. Enormous speaking fees (ranging from $250,000 to $800,000) paid to Bill, and to Hillary, after she left the State Dep't., and donations to their Clinton Foundation came from all over the world, even from extremely poor and corrupt nations who eventually got favorable treatment on business dealings they had with the U.S. government. It has been charged that the Clinton's got wealthy by selling access to our government and not by producing a product or a service, or promoting a new idea of how to make a profitable company and creating jobs.

Eventually, the extent of the crimes the Clinton's committed will come out, but don't count on them paying any consequences for their illegal actions for as I stated before, there are two sets of laws, one for the Clinton's and one for the rest of us.

These were just a few examples of the “modus operandi” of how the Clinton's have skirted the law for their own selfish benefit over the years. Let's hope that the voters don't make the same mistake they made in 2008 and 2012, by electing a “grifter” like Hillary Clinton (and Bill Clinton, as you get two for the price of one) to be president of the United States.

Conservative Commentary by Chuck Lehmann

Bookmark and Share