Abby, our real estate daughter in Maitland,Florida, is being highlighted on the cover of a September real estate magazine issue and the photographer e mailed his comment along with her picture which I have not been able to copy and re-post. (The above picture is from her Facebook Page.)
Abby has built a successful business and now employees, I believe, 5 staff associates. She has been recognized in a variety of ways and has received many awards for her accomplishments. What I am most proud of are the volunteered/unsolicited accolades she receives from her many and faithful clients regardless of the size of the transaction. She has also distinguished herself by the repeat business from satisfied clients as well as referrals. Abby attended and graduated from Rollins College where she met Brian, her husband. They have two children, Dagny 6, Blake 4 and have been married 10 years.
.
"I just got the #EarlyEdition of September's Orlando Real Producers magazine featuring Abby Nelson, Joseph Sipp (Systematic Home Staging, LLC), Tammy Birchler (Home Warranty of America, Inc.), Maria Quintero, "The State of Maitland" by Rick Singh and Realtor Safety articles from Andy Werger Tolbert (Safer Agent) and Christian Bear
Hitting the mailboxes of the top 500 realtors in Orlando next week!"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Radicals, who have taken over The Democrat Party, are helping it self-destruct. You will not get this from the mass media but they, too, have contributed because of their overwhelming bias. (See 1 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "marinade process" now begins in grade school but eventually you might have the opportunity of going to an elite college and for a quarter of a million dollars you too can have the privilege of having your brain fried by radical, far left, progressive professors who dominate our colleges and university faculties.
Their goal is to radicalize future Americans who will go forth and eventually destroy our Republic. This is why I reposted the old speech by Governor Lamb, in yesterday evening;s memo.
Start them young, inculcate them with nonsense and false propaganda and you have them forever.
This is what was done to Obama and why he was able to transform America in ways that reflect the teachings of his radical friends. (See 2 below.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Next week Congress begins hearings regarding how our government should regulate social media companies engaged in censorship. I mentioned it was coming and depending upon what legislation evolves will go a long way toward what the overall prospects are for the market. Several "Fang" stocks are involved and if multiples are impacted it could send a chill through the entire market.
Not suggesting it will be earth shaking but it could be a wet blanket event. Stay tuned.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ohr just an innocent participating bystander. (See 3 below.)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dick
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1) Radicalized Democrats: Destroying the Country and Their Own Party
From the wee hours of the morning on November 9, 2016, as they grappled with the sting of President-Elect Donald Trump triumphing over the anointed Queen of the Swamp, Democrats have been radicalizing by the minute.
Objective Americans have witnessed the transformation of JFK-style classical liberals into Marxist protégés even the namesake himself would be proud to call his pupils, not to mention the hostile takeover of the Democratic Party by the "three home-owning multi-millionaire," Bernie Sanders, and "I'm not an expert on American-Israeli policy, but let me comment on it anyway" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The Democratic Party is soon to be more aptly referenced as the Democratic Socialist Party.
And it's not as if the Democrats don't have the resolve to combat such a monumental shift to the left. They've certainly been known to fight when something has truly mattered to them – like the times when they fought tooth and nail to unanimously oppose the 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, giving citizenship to freed slaves and an equal right to vote for all, respectively. Or the time when they overwhelmingly opposed abolishing slavery by fighting to kill the 13th Amendment.
If Democrats really opposed the radicalization of their own party, they would fight it, but the quiet truth is that they welcome it
Whether by choice or necessity, radicalized Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, and the rest of the bunch welcome the violence of groups like the Alt-Left Antifa thugs, the anti-Americanism being normalized for millions of impressionable young sports fans when athletes kneel during the National Anthem, and the anti-police mentality being homogenized within our inner-city and minority communities by political propagandists like Black Lives Matter.
Radicalized Democrats welcome the intentional confusion and sexualization of our children through concepts like gender fluidity, pre-teen sexual experimentation, gender-neutral bathrooms and locker rooms, mandatory pornographic sex education, abortions on demand, and more. These extremist concepts may fly in pockets of San Francisco – the city that hands out tens of thousands of needles each year to homeless drug addicts and has recently been described as dirtier than many third-world countries – but they are resoundingly unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of taxpaying, hardworking, freedom-loving Americans throughout the rest of the country.
Radicalized Democrats welcome the complete and utter degradation of law and order as documented abuses of power and rampant corruption go unpunished because the FBI agents are "with her." Just last week, Nancy Pelosi had the temerity to suggest that Democrats – the Party that failed to demand answers for even a single Hillary Clinton corruption scandal – are the party responsible for rooting out corruption. Nancy has been known to say some idiotic things, but this truly exceeds all expectations of her lunacy.
Not only does the Democrats' double standard damage their credibility as a party, but it threatens one of the foundational tenants of our society: rule of law.
Radicalized Democrats welcome the erosion of trust in the media and fan the flames of fake news-promulgators like CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post. Consider that even at a time when the distrust of the establishment elite is at an all-time high, a CNN producer was caught on video calling the Trump-Russia story "b-------" while the network continued to run with it as the top story for months. The radical left, both inside and out of the mainstream media machine, has resorted to lying in an effort to achieve its political goals without regard for the negative consequences it has had and will continue to have on our nation.
Instead of engaging in vigorous and civil debate, radicalized Democrats welcome the totalitarian censorship of ideas they disagree with – whether on college campuses, in the public square, or online through social media. The left, which claims to stand for freedom of choice, has yet to be held accountable for this censorship blunder. Instead, leftists have created justification for even more aggressive censorship under the false pretext of fostering
"conversational health" and "tolerance," which is really just leftist code for "agree with me or you will be silenced."
While political shape-shifters like Obama, Schumer, Pelosi and Clinton opined about the need for strong border policy as recently as 2009, radicalized Democrats now welcome the voluntary abrogation of our national
sovereignty and security through unabashed open borders and amnesty-centric immigration policy that, according to data from the Government Accountability Office, equates to 438 "homicide arrests of criminal [illegal] aliens" each and every year since 1955 – more than 25,000 in total.
As opposed to retooling their party platform and political agenda to better appeal to a black community no longer inclined to vote by rote for Democrat, radicalized Democrats have instead continued to encourage the genocide of the black community through the ritualistic annual disbursement of more than 500 million taxpayer dollars to the nation's largest abortion mill, Planned Parenthood.
Despite the left's laughable narrative on Russia, the only obvious subversion of our republic stems from radicalized Democrats' own network of shadowy multi-billionaire donors like George Soros and Tom Steyer, among others, who seek to undermine and exploit our nation's electoral process for their own gain.
Radicalized Democrats mandate that pre-teens and teens need parental permission in order to receive a Tylenol from a school nurse or participate in a school-sanctioned field trip to the zoo, while simultaneously demanding that those same girls have the incontrovertible right to a surgical abortion without their parents even being notified.
Radicalized Democrats believe that the same government that is demonstrably incapable of delivering quality health care to America's approximately 20 million veterans should be responsible for providing health care for nearly 330 million Americans through a "Medicare for All" program – a decision that would lead to care rationing and British-style death panels, to be sure.
As if there weren't a bridge too far for the left, radicalized Democrats now demand the abolition of ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), an agency that, according to President Trump and Senator Lankford, in collaboration with Border Patrol, is responsible for apprehending on average ten terrorists per day trying to enter the United States illegally.
It doesn't take a sociopolitical expert to follow the signs to the ultimately destructive end that the Democrats' extremist positions and policies will have on our nation in both the short and long terms. The real question is why.
Why would Democrats radicalize to the point that they run the risk of destroying the very nation that gives them refuge and prosperity? The answer is simple: desperation. The American people have largely woken up to the long con of the left, forcing radicalized Democrats to the realization that on the battlefield of ideas, they lose, and they lose big.
Democrats recognize that if they lose on the battlefield of ideas, they can win only through the smoky cloud of chaos and division, wherein Americans are pitted against each other like gladiators in the Colosseum. To this end, the left has been strategically dismantling the bedrock institutions that have made America the freest, most prosperous nation the world has ever known.
While all the eyes should have been focused on the Republicans and how we would embrace Trump's brand of conservatism, the Democrats fumbled – in truly epic fashion – whatever opportunity they thought they might have had to regain their death grip on the levers of power.
As is common with addicts, the Democrats' uncontrollable and intensifying desire to regain control and oppose everything coming out of the White House has caused them to reveal the sinister intentions of their party.
Like drugs and pornography, their addiction to radicalization has become a self-perpetuating devolution, a race to the bottom of sorts, where greater and greater extremes are needed to continue satisfying their appetite for rage and division. Sadly, society knows the ultimate outcome of addiction: an unyielding downward spiral into total self-destruction – a fate that Democrats may face sooner rather than later, given their current trajectory.
The pending implosion of the Democratic Party is not something that should make conservatives rest easy, as such chaos within a major political Party may ultimately spread to the rest of the country like a cancer.
The radicalization of the Democrats should only serve as further evidence that we are winning and must continue to fight harder on the battlefield of ideas, for freedom's sake.
Jake Hoffman is the founder, president, and CEO of Rally Forge, one of the nation's top conservative digital communications and media strategy firms.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) The Permeation of Propaganda in the College Student Brain
In 1937, an editorial in The New York Times declared that "what is truly vicious is not propaganda but a monopoly of it." Thus begins an article titled "Propaganda Techniques of German Fascism," written by Clyde R. Miller and reprinted in the fifth edition of Modern English Readings (1946). This text was used by college students. There is nothing dealing with gender, white privilege, social justice, the religion of peace, or alleged microaggressions.
When pundits discuss the culture wars, it is essential to see how so many present-day textbooks have contributed to generations of young people who have, for the most part, never been exposed to how America's ideals have shaped the country. Instead, students are indoctrinated by public school teachers with connections to Antifa. More chilling is that these same teachers publicly acknowledge they would not protect the rights of students who disagree with them.
Thus, the article by Miller is quite apropos at a time when the education establishment, as well as the hi-tech companies' "monoculture," seeks to monopolize the information highway. As Jeremy Carl writes:
The evidence of Silicon Valley's hostility to the Right is everywhere. Prominent conservatives from Michelle Malkin to William Jacobson to Dennis Prager ... – and an even greater proportion of those whose politics lean farther to the right, many of whom do not have access to mainstream media and rely on social media to fund their work – have seen themselves banned from major Internet platforms or had their content censored or demonetized. In most cases they are not even given grounds for their punishment or means of appealing it. While some more 'mainstream' conservatives may not feel excessively troubled by the banning of more provocative voices farther to the right, in taking this attitude they make a tactical, strategic, and moral mistake. They do not understand how the left operates. When voices farther to the right are removed, mainstream conservatives become the new 'far-right extremists' – and they will be banned with equal alacrity.
Then there is Project War Path, a clothing company owned by Navy SEALs and Army Special Forces combat veterans, which "has been permanently suspended from Facebook's Instagram platform for 'hate speech' after criticizing NFL players who kneel during the national anthem."
In fact, as Miller asserts, "the extent to which the propaganda machinery of a country has been brought under the control of one organization or a group of related organizations is a useful measure of the degree to which absolutism dominates it, of the extent to which democracy has been eliminated."
But "when ... this monopoly aspect of propaganda is held in check by rivalries between competing organizations, then political, economic, educational, and religious spokesmen are able to and actually do disseminate rival propagandas. This gives those at whom the rival propagandas are directed some freedom of choice among the alternatives offered them."
That is why to any freedom-loving American, the spectacle of censoring speakers such as Candace Owens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, David Horowitz, and others is so terrifying. Yet, "on Feb. 1, 2017, the University of California, Berkeley erupted into violence. Former Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos was set to speak and an estimated 1,500 people showed up to protest, some with the goal of shutting down the speech 'by any means necessary.' Protesters set fires, hurled Molotov cocktails, and allegedly assaulted other members of the crowd. Their efforts were successful. The speech was canceled. There was $100,000 worth of damage. In an essay for the Berkeley student newspaper, one student wrote, 'Behind those bandanas and black T-shirts were the faces of your fellow UC Berkeley and Berkeley City College students[.]'"
These students ignore the words of Zechariah Chafee, Jr., who wrote in 1941, "freedom of speech creates the happiest kind of country. It is the best way to make men and women love their country."
The "power of propaganda increases as its control becomes more centralized, as the trend to monopoly increases." Moreover, "this process is stimulated by the centralization of the control of the economic structure of a country." This is the real reason why the Democrat/Socialist Party decries the economic success of Trump and the American people – "the ability of individuals and organizations in democracies to enter their special viewpoints into the rivalry of propagandas is restricted chiefly by economic considerations. Professional propagandists, public relations counselors and individuals and groups with large financial resources have an advantage over those with small resources." It is why George Soros's fingerprints are all over any progressive message.
But when the little guy gets a chance at capturing the brass ring, this infuriates the progressive socialist leanings of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Andrew Gillum, both supported by Bernie Sanders. They and others who espouse centralized control pose an economic existential threat to America. As Miller asserts:
Fascism is the outcome of economic and political instability. It is an undemocratic means for dealing with the mass unemployment of city workers, the economic distress of the middle classes, the impoverishment of farmers and the efforts of those groups for economic reforms.
Thus, we are privy to Pelosi trying to convince Americans that more jobs is a bad thing for the country and a booming economy is something to scoff at.
Miller writes that fascist Germany "helped convince the people of the efficiency of the national Socialist solution for the country's political and economic problems." It was also "reinforced by an army of storm troops that weakened opposition through terrorism."
Antifa, Black Lives Matter, La Raza all seek to harm America through any means possible. They are the latter-day storm troops.
The term "economics precedes politics" is often quoted, but in Nazi Germany and, I daresay, any dictatorial environment, it seems to work the other way around. Miller contends (emphasis mine) that under Nazism, "political control dominated economic control and capitalism as free enterprise became a Glittering Generality [a device by which the propagandist identifies his program with virtue words such as love, generosity and brotherhood]." When one considers the suicidal path of socialist/communist countries, e.g., Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, it is clear that people grievously suffer. Constantly publicized as a means to assist the common man, socialism always fails to improve the general welfare as the government conceives it."
During Hitler's reign, American newspaper correspondents would point out (emphasis mine) that "Hitler's addresses [were] often unintelligible [yet] large numbers of his listeners apparently listen[ed] with their emotions. When their tension [became] high, they intercept[ed] the speech by emotional outbursts[.] Here we see the force of language with or without meaning as a molder of public opinion. Only intelligent citizens skilled in analysis of propaganda and immunized against the wiles of the orator were unaffected by Hitler."
A "master propagandist to be effective, must be keyed to the desires, hopes, hatreds, loves, fears, and prejudices of the people." He knows "that most human beings crave a scapegoat to take the blame of disaster and to bolster their own pride." In Nazi Germany, it was the Jews; in Communist China, it was the intellectuals. In America, it is the one percent or the people who cling to their guns and Bibles. Thus, it is imperative that impressionable people learn about the dire results of socialism.
It was Ronald Reagan in 1975 who warned that "if Fascism ever comes to America, it will be in the name of Liberalism." You can add the terms "socialism," "progressivism," and "democratic socialism" to the brew. They all add up to the same ultimate misery.
+++++++++++++++++++
3)+
What Bruce Ohr Told Congress
He warned the FBI that Steele had credibility problems. The bureau forged ahead anyhow
By Kimberley A. Strassel
To believe most media descriptions of Justice Department lawyer Bruce Ohr, he is a nonentity, unworthy of the attention President Trump has given him. This is remarkable, given that Mr. Ohr spent Tuesday confirming for Congress its worst suspicions about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s abuse of its surveillance and sourcing rules.
If Mr. Ohr is only now under the spotlight, it’s because it has taken so much effort to unpack his role in the FBI’s 2016 investigation of the Trump campaign. Over the past year, congressional investigators found out that Mr. Ohr’s wife, Nellie, worked for Fusion GPS, the opposition-research firm that gave its infamous dossier, funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, to the FBI. They then discovered that Mr. Ohr had numerous interactions of his own with Fusion chief Glenn Simpson and dossier author Christopher Steele, and that he passed on information from these talks to the bureau. So the G-men were being fed the dossier allegations from both the outside and the inside.
This week’s news is that Mr. Ohr’s deliveries to the FBI came with a caveat. Congress already knew that Mr. Ohr had been aware of Mr. Steele’s political biases. In notes Mr. Ohr took of a September 2016 conversation with Mr. Steele, he wrote that the dossier author “was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.” Congressional sources tell me that Mr. Ohr revealed Tuesday that he verbally warned the FBI that its source had a credibility problem, alerting the bureau to Mr. Steele’s leanings and motives. He also informed the bureau that Mrs. Ohr was working for Fusion and contributing to the dossier project.
Mr. Ohr said, moreover, that he delivered this information before the FBI’s first application to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a warrant against Trump aide Carter Page, in October 2016. Yet the FBI made no mention of this warning in the application, instead characterizing Mr. Steele as a “reliable” source. Nor does the application note that a senior Justice Department official’s spouse was contributing to the dossier and benefiting financially from a document the FBI was using in an investigation. That matters both because the FBI failed to flag the enormous conflict and because Mr. Steele’s work product potentially wasn’t entirely his own.
No reference to Mr. Ohr—direct or cloaked—can be found in any of the four applications for Page warrants, according to those who have seen them. This despite his more than a dozen conversations with FBI agents over the course of the probe that addressed the content in and sourcing behind the surveillance applications. I’m told Mr. Ohr made clear that these conversations variously included all the heavyweights in the FBI investigation—former lead investigator Peter Strzok, former FBI senior lawyer Lisa Page, and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. So senior people were very aware of his role, information and conflict.
All this is what Republicans are referring to when they hint that the Ohr interview provided solid evidence that the FBI abused the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. “Before yesterday, we thought the FBI and DOJ had not disclosed material facts they were aware of in the FISA application. If Bruce Ohr testified truthfully, we now know that to be the case,” Rep. John Ratcliffe of Texas tweeted Wednesday. (The Justice Department declined to comment, citing an inspector-general investigation.)
As for Mr. Ohr’s interaction with the FBI, he told congressional investigators this week that while initially he reached out to the FBI, the bureau also later came looking for information about Mr. Steele. That outreach happened after the FBI had terminated Mr. Steele as a source in October 2016 for violating bureau rules about talking to media. So even after having been warned of Mr. Steele’s motivations, even after having fired him for violating the rules, the FBI continued to seek his information—using Mr. Ohr as a back channel. This surely violates the FBI manual governing interaction with confidential human sources.
That Mr. Ohr came shopping the Steele info should have on its own set off FBI alarm bells. Mr. Steele was already in direct contact with the FBI by early July. Why would Mr. Steele then go to work on a Justice Department source, and refunnel the same allegations to the bureau? The likely answer is that the Fusion crowd wanted to exert maximum pressure on the FBI to act. Had the FBI bothered to try to find out what was behind such a pressure campaign, it might have stumbled upon the obvious answer: politics.
Unless it didn’t care. The evidence continues to mount that the FBI didn’t want to know about bias, or about conflicts of interest, or about the political paymasters behind the dossier—and it certainly didn’t want the surveillance court to know. It wanted to investigate Donald Trump.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment