Are they finally coming to their senses?

Geert Wilders calls for Trump-style Muslim travel ban in Europe

When Muslims are allowed into your country what's the first thing they do? Start bitching about the country they just migrated to! 

https://hemingwayreport.blogspot.com/search?q=happy+muslims

Don't have to tell you what the second thing is.

------------------------------

Dutch Freedom party leader tells far-right gathering in Prague Europe should also turn back migrant boats like Australia

Geert Wilders called for a ‘totally new strategy’ which might include building border walls. Photograph: David W Cerny/Reuters

European countries should adopt Donald Trump-style travel bans to counter a wave of Islamisation supposedly sweeping the continent, the Dutch anti-immigrant politician Geert Wilders has said.

Wilders, the leader of the Netherlands’ Freedom party (PVV), made his comments at a gathering of far-right leaders in Prague. He also urged Europe to adopt Australia’s tactics in turning back migrant boats and to build new border walls, as Trump has vowed to do along the US frontier with Mexico.

Wilders was flanked during his press conference by France’s Front National leader, Marine Le Pen, and Tomio Okamura, the leader of the Czech Freedom and Direct Democracy party (SPD), which finished joint third in the recent parliamentary election with nearly 11% of the vote.

Security was tight at the press event, held at a hotel just off Wenceslas Square, apparently in recognition of death threats against Wilders in response to his fierce denunciations of Islam.

Wilders, who was convicted last year by a Dutch court for incitement against Moroccans, cited US research he claimed showed that the Czech Republic would be bordered to the north, south, and west by countries that were more than 20% Muslim by the middle of the century if current demographic trends continued.

“It will be almost as if you are bordering a kind of Gaza Strip on almost every border,” he said.

“We must adopt a totally new strategy. We must have the courage to restrict legal immigration instead of expanding it, even if we sometimes have to build a wall.”

Trump’s travel ban, which applies to six Muslim-majority nations plus North Korea and Venezuela, has been one of his most controversial policies. It has been the subject of various challenges in court, and rulings that have overturned and suspended it. The US supreme court ruled this month that it could be implemented for now while numerous challenges were resolved. 

The Prague gathering came at an encouraging moment for the organizers, the European parliament’s populist Europe of Nations and Freedom grouping,. The Austrian Freedom Party (FPO), one of the participants, became the only far-right party in government in a western European state on Friday, after joining a coalition with the conservative People’s party.

That followed a year of setbacks for Wilders and Le Pen, who failed to make the electoral breakthroughs many had forecast. The PVV remains in opposition in the Netherlands after a poorer than predicted parliamentary election result last March, and Emmanuel Macron beat Le Pen in the second round of France’s presidential poll in May.

A similar meeting last January in the German town of Koblenz was held amid euphoric expectations of major successes in 2017.

Le Pen said Europe’s rightwing groups were linked by a belief that the European Union was a “catastrophic, disastrous organization” and that the migration flows were “unbearable”. She also praised Okamura, with whom she said she had been working for many months.

Tokyo born-Okamura, the son of a part-Japanese father and Czech mother, said the parties were defending European values.

Wilders, Le Pen, and Okamura later received rousing ovations at the weekend’s main event, a conference at the Top Hotel, a nondescript Communist-era building in Chodov, a bleak suburb several miles from the center of Prague.

The venue was cordoned off, a police helicopter hovered overhead and riot police monitored two groups of leftwing protesters. 

“The dangerous thing is that the extreme views we see on display here have entered the mainstream, with even the Czech Social Democrats accepting them,” said Honza, a protest organizer who declined to give his full name for safety reasons.

Similar mistrust was evident inside, where security personnel scrutinized journalists closely and escorted them to and from a sectioned-off area.

The independent British MEP, Janice Atkinson, a former UKIP member, invoked the Czech fight against communism, the failed 1968 Prague Spring and Margaret Thatcher to encourage her audience to campaign for a Czexit referendum that could enable the Czech Republic to follow Britain out of the EU.

“As Margaret Thatcher said, Europe is stronger precisely because France is France, Spain is Spain, Britain is Britain and, just as important, Czech is Czech,” she said. “Long live the Europe of nations. Long live the Czech Republic.”

Are they finally coming to their senses?

Kaepernick receives another award

Kaepernick receives another award

Gregg Jarrett: Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump?

Gregg Jarrett

New documents call into question integrity of FBI and DOJ

Comey edits reveal announcement on Clinton investigation was watered down.

There is strong circumstantial evidence that an insidious plot unprecedented in American history was hatched within the FBI and the Obama Justice Department to help elect Hillary Clinton and defeat Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. 

And when this apparent effort to improperly influence the election did not succeed, the suspected conspirators appear to have employed a fraudulent investigation of President Trump in an attempt to undo the election results and remove him as president.

Such a Machiavellian scheme would move well beyond what is known as the “deep state,” a popular reference to government employees who organize in secret to impose their own political views on government policy in defiance of democratically elected leadership. 

However, this apparent plot to keep Trump from becoming president and to weaken and potentially pave the way for his impeachment with a prolonged politically motivated investigation – if proven – would constitute something far more nefarious and dangerous.

Such a plot would show that partisans within the FBI and the Justice Department, driven by personal animus and a sense of political righteousness, surreptitiously conspired to subvert electoral democracy itself in our country.

(And...the Dems/ liberal media want you to stay focused on the Russian Collusion scam while all this is going on right under our nose)

As of now, we have no proof beyond a reasonable doubt of such a plot. But we have very strong circumstantial evidence.

And as the philosopher and writer Henry David Thoreau wrote in his journal in 1850: “Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.” 

Newly revealed text messages about the apparent anti-Trump plot are the equivalent of a trout in the milk. It smells fishy. 

The Plans

The mainstream media and Democrats dismiss talk of an anti-Trump conspiracy by the FBI and Justice Department as right-wing nonsense – paranoid fantasies of Trump supporters with no basis in facts. But there are plenty of facts that lay out a damning case based on circumstantial evidence.

Recently disclosed text messages between FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page suggest there may have been two parts of the apparent anti-Trump plot.

“Part A” was to devise a way to exonerate Clinton, despite compelling evidence that she committed crimes under the Espionage Act in her mishandling of classified documents on her private email server.

Absolving Clinton cleared the way for her to continue her candidacy at a time when all polls and just about every pundit predicted she would be elected president in November 2016. If Clinton had been charged with crimes she would likely have been forced to drop her candidacy, and if she remained in the race her candidacy would have been doomed.

But “Part A” of the apparent anti-Trump plot was not enough. A back-up plan would be prudent. It seems the Obama Justice Department and FBI conjured up a “Part B” just in case the first stratagem failed. This would be even more malevolent – manufacturing an alleged crime supposedly committed by Trump where no crime exists in the law. 

And so, armed with a fictitious justification, a criminal investigation was launched into so-called Trump-Russia “collusion.” It was always a mythical legal claim, since there is no statute prohibiting foreign nationals from volunteering their services in American political campaigns. 

More importantly, there was never a scintilla of evidence that Trump collaborated with Russia to influence the election. 

No matter. The intent may have been to sully the new president while searching for a crime to force him from office. 

But thanks to the discovery of text messages, circumstantial evidence has been exposed. 

The Texts

The text messages exchanged between Strzok and Page, who were romantically involved, confirm a stunning hostility toward Trump, calling him an “idiot” and “loathsome.”

At the same time, the texts were filled with adoring compliments of Clinton, lauding her nomination and stating: “She just has to win now.”

One text between Strzok and Page dated Aug. 6, 2016 stands out and looks like the proverbial smoking gun. 

Page: “And maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace.” (This is clearly a reference to a Trump presidency). 

Strzok: “Thanks. And of course, I’ll try and approach it that way. I can protect our country at many levels .…” 

It is reasonable to conclude that Strzok had already taken steps to “protect” the country from what he considered would be a dangerous and harmful Trump presidency.

Just one month earlier, then-FBI Director James Comey had announced he would recommend that no criminal charges be filed by the Justice Department against Clinton. Given all the incriminating evidence against Clinton, Comey’s view that she should not be prosecuted made no sense by any objective standard. 

This is where Strzok played a pivotal role. As the lead investigator in the Clinton email case, he is the person who changed the critical wording in Comey’s description of Clinton’s handling of classified material, substituting “extremely careless” for “gross negligence.”

As I explained in an earlier column, this alteration of two words had enormous consequences, because it allowed Clinton to evade prosecution. This removed the only legal impediment to her election as president.

Documents made available by the Senate Homeland Security Committee also show that Comey intended to declare that the sheer volume of classified material on Clinton’s server supported the “inference” that she was grossly negligent, which would constitute criminal conduct. Yet this also was edited out, likely by Strzok, to avoid finding evidence of crimes. 

This seems to be what Page and Strzok meant when they discussed his role as protector of the republic. It appears that Strzok was instrumental in clearing Clinton by rewriting Comey’s otherwise incriminating findings. 

Were Page and Strzok also referring to the investigation of Trump that was begun in July 2016, right after Clinton was absolved? After all, Strzok was the agent who reportedly signed the documents launching the bureau’s Trump-Russia probe. And he was a lead investigator in the case before jumping to Robert Mueller’s special counsel team. 

If there is any doubt that Strzok and Page sought to undermine the democratic process, consider this cryptic text about their “insurance policy” against the “risk” of a Trump presidency.

Strzok: “I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office – that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.…”

The reference to “Andy” is likely Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who was also supervising the investigation of Clinton’s emails at the same time his wife was receiving roughly $675,000 in campaign money in her race for elective office in Virginia from groups aligned with Clinton. 

What was the “insurance policy” discussed in Andy’s office? Was it the FBI’s investigation of Trump and his associates? Or was it the anti-Trump “dossier” that may have been used by the FBI and the Justice Department as the basis for a warrant to wiretap and spy on Trump associates? Perhaps it was both. 

The Dossier

The “dossier” was a compendium of largely specious allegations about Trump, compiled by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Comey called it “salacious and unverified.” 

Various congressional committees suspect the dossier was illegally used to place a Trump campaign associate, Carter Page, under foreign surveillance. When asked about that on Wednesday during a hearing on Capitol Hill, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein refused to answer, which sounds like an implicit “yes.”

Using a dubious, if not phony, document in support of an affidavit to obtain a warrant from a federal judge constitutes a fraud upon the court, which is a crime. 

The dossier scandal recently ensnared Bruce Ohr, a top Justice Department official, who was demoted last week for concealing his meetings with the men behind the document.

Ohr’s wife worked for Fusion GPS. This created a disqualifying conflict of interest for Mr. Ohr. He was legally obligated under Justice Department regulations to recuse himself from the Mueller investigation of Russia’s role in the election, but he did not. 

Congress needs to find out whether the dossier was exploited as a pretext for initiating the Russia probe against President Trump. It would also be unconscionable, if not illegal, for the FBI and Justice Department to use opposition research funded by Clinton’s campaign to spy on her opponent or his campaign. 

Both agencies have been resisting congressional subpoenas and other demands for answers, which smacks of a cover-up. Since the Justice Department cannot be trusted to investigate itself, a second special counsel should be appointed. 

This new counsel should also reopen the Clinton email case and investigate the conduct of Strzok, Page, Comey and others who may have obstructed justice by exonerating Clinton in the face of substantial evidence that she had committed crimes. 

If Strzok or anyone else allowed their political views to shape the investigations of either Clinton or Trump and dictate the outcomes, that is a felony for which they should be prosecuted. 

The Mueller investigation is now so tainted with the appearance of corruption that it has lost credibility and the public’s trust.

It is very much like a trout in the spoiled milk. 

Gregg Jarrett: Did the FBI and the Justice Department, plot to clear Hillary Clinton, bring down Trump?

Babies born near fracking wells more likely to be underweight, says study

Yes…and when my shoelace becomes undone that’s climate change.

Expectant moms who live close to fracking sites are significantly more likely to give birth to underweight babies, according to a comprehensive new study out of Pennsylvania.

And the closer they are to the well, the greater the risk, say researchers in the journal Science Advances. The researchers found that infants born within about a half-mile of a fracking site were 25 percent more likely to weigh 5.5 pounds or less, reports Science.

The study found an increased risk for a radius up to about two miles (three kilometers, to be exact) from wells, but not much of a risk beyond that.

The study is based on data from 1.1 million babies born in the fracking-heavy state between 2004 and 2013. Low birth weights are linked to later problems ranging from asthma to lower test scores, and the toxic chemicals used in the fracking process have long raised health concerns, notes the LA Times.

"I think I was surprised by the magnitude of the impact within the half-mile radius," co-author Michael Greenstone of the University of Chicago tells the Washington Post.

More on this...

But, he adds, while fracking opponents may focus on that part of the study, supporters may focus on the lack of a risk for babies outside the three-kilometer radius.

Still, given that 30,000 US babies a year are born within a half-mile and 100,000 within two miles of a fracking site, the results are noteworthy, he says.

An industry spokesperson countered that the study fails to take into account factors such as smoking and alcohol use, and says "it's dangerously misleading and inflammatory to suggest that natural gas development has done anything but improve public health.” 

Babies born near fracking wells more likely to be underweight, says study

Here's a switch

Woman Accused Of Sexual Harassment Drops Out Of Congressional Race

Democratic congressional candidate Andrea Ramsey announced that she will drop out of the race for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives on Friday after allegations of sexual harassment against a male coworker resurfaced.

“In its rush to claim the high ground in our roiling national conversation about harassment, the Democratic Party has implemented a zero-tolerance standard,” Ramsey said in a statement Friday, announcing her retirement from the race.

Her announcement comes after Gary Funkhouser accused Ramsey — the former executive vice president of human resources at LabOne — of subjecting him to “unwelcome and inappropriate sexual comments and innuendos” in 2004 when he was a LabOne human resources manager, according to the Kansas City Star.

“After I told her I was not interested in having a sexual relationship with her, she stopped talking to me,” Funkhouser wrote in a 2005 lawsuit against her. He alleges that prior to rejecting her advances, Ramsey had said great things about his performance, but that following his refusal of her posturing, she reported poor performance and subsequently fired him. LabOne dismissed the lawsuit in 2006 after mediation.

CNN political reporter Eric Bradner tweeted out the surprising news Friday morning.

Ramsey maintains that she fired Funkhouser because he was not adequately fulfilling the duties of his position in the company. It’s sad that “a vindictive, terminated employee’s false allegations are enough for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) to decide not to support our promising campaign,” Ramsey said in her Friday statement.

“If anyone is guilty of sexual harassment or sexual assault, that person should not hold public office,” said DCCC spokeswoman, Meredith Kelly, the Kansas City Star reports.

Her 2018 challenge to Republican Rep. Kevin Yoder in Kansas’ 3rd District will now go unfulfilled.

Here's a switch