Image via South Park is one of television's longest-running shows, a 20-seasons-and-counting award-winning cultural behemoth that has spawned movies, imitations, and countless time-wasting memes. But could the show be, at least in part, responsible for one of the scariest political movements of the present moment? Lindsey Weedston thinks so. Weedston, a 29-year-old writer from Bothell, Washington, penned an article for The Establishment recently which argued that the show helped lead to the rise of the alt-right. The piece, " How 'South Park' Helped Empower the Alt-Right," grabbed my attention enough that I decided to call her up and see why exactly she thought Kyle, Cartman, and crew led us to Richard Spencer, 4Chan, and Charlottesville. Our conversation, edited lightly for length and clarity, is below. To start off, how does South Park treat what some people might think of as "PC culture"? I read a post that explained this really well—South Park’s highest moral goal is to not care. It treats PC culture as [if] the opposite of PC culture is not to care about anything. So caring about an issue is basically stupid, and pretty much every episode goes back to: it doesn’t matter, being PC is uncool, and not giving a fuck about anything is the way you should feel. In your article you trace a history of that attitude, starting with the misinterpretation of a character in an Oliver Stone movie. Can you take me through that? That was interesting. So [the 1987 movie] Wall Street, I didn’t know before I researched for the article that Oliver Stone actually meant it the opposite of how so many people took it. Wall Street was supposed to be an indictment of Wall Street and the type of person that thinks greed is good. It was very interesting to find that so many people actually went with the mantra "greed is good," and it seems like that has shaped a lot of our culture. Now we have prosperity Christianity—actually telling people that God wants them to collect as much wealth as possible. It’s not just Wall Street. For a long time, our capitalist society has led up to this idea that the ultimate goal is to collect as much wealth as possible. That movie accelerated the idea of collecting all the wealth and power you can. And then you talk about shock jock’s of the ’80s and ’90s, the Howard Sterns of the world. What does that have to do with the South Park-popularized attitude of caring being uncool? The original title of this article I pitched was actually "The History of Celebrated Assholes." My first draft of the piece, I ended up researching early forms of shock and asshole comedy. I found out the person considered the first shock jock was actually a black man, Petey Greene. Howard Stern was influenced by him. It’s really interesting to learn the kind of things he talked about. He was appealing because he was very down to Earth, and he spoke to the black community in a very straightforward way that no white disk jockey had ever before. When Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, he went on air and started speaking to the community, and is credited with calming the situation down. You can go on YouTube and find some of the shows and listen to the way he speaks. It’s very colloquial. He just acts like a normal person. I think white people at the time looked at that as being shocking, and that’s why he was labeled as a shock jock. He was really active in the community. He promoted education and feeding the hungry. He wasn’t an asshole, but history is very interesting. In my original draft, I wrote about how he influenced Howard Stern. Howard Stern was actually invited onto his show. Stern went on in black face and used the n word, and Greene thought it was funny. Greene died fairly young, so then you move onto Howard Stern’s career. Howard Stern, I’m sure, has done some good stuff in his life. But he is very much associated with the shock jock label, and a lot of what he does is just to rile people up. I think it’s interesting how you have that transition from somebody who was just being real and communicating to his people in a way that made sense to him; and then you have Howard Stern, who makes a lot of money—and in fact an entire career—from pissing people off. How do you get to the alt-right from that? How does South Park's overall attitude connect to the alt-right? I believe that South Park's anti-PC messages paved the way for white supremacist groups to recruit much of the largely white male fanbase into what is now referred to as the alt-right, or other groups that are identical in all but name. Matt and Trey promoted this idea that you should be able to say or animate anything you want in the name of satire and humor, and any harm that it caused either didn't exist or didn't matter. When they experienced backlash for their intensifying mockery of already-vulnerable groups and their attitude of, "Repeating horrible things said by bigots up to and including Nazis is funny because it upsets people," they reacted by depicting their critics as free-speech-oppressing caricatures like the " PC bro." They promoted the idea that marginalized people—trans people, people of color, Jewish people, etc.—speaking out against harm caused by South Park's brand of "humor" and [the show's] "I do what I want" attitude are the real oppressors. White supremacist groups and their better-at-PR counterpart the "alt-right" use this message constantly to recruit young white men and boys. They tell these kids that they're the ones being oppressed by those telling them that they have privilege, and therefore need to make some effort to at least not use certain words and maybe examine prejudiced attitudes they might have picked up from a culture that is prejudiced in many ways. The alt-right promotes the idea of white male victimization, drawing in youth that has been told by South Park that the plight of marginalized groups doesn't matter and that "political correctness" is oppressing them. Once those groups have their loyalty, they can then indoctrinate these young guys into straight up white supremacist ideas under the guise that "the PC police don't want you to think about this." I don't think Matt and Trey meant to create an army for the alt-right, but they seem to be leaning into it rather than admitting that they might have messed up. Cartman plays a big part in your article. He’s often not the hero in the storylines of the individual episodes, but he is a fan favorite. Can you break down why that’s a problem? Cartman is a perfect representation of satire gone wrong. Just like with Wall Street, the people who view your content take the literal meaning of something instead of taking it as the indictment that it is. It’s pretty clear, especially in the earlier episodes, that you’re not supposed to like Cartman. You aren’t supposed to identify with him. You’re supposed to hate him, or at least understand he is the opposite of the ideal of a human being. That is supposed to be represented in his bigotry, his ignorance, and his appearance as well, with him being fat. And yet he is a fan favorite, and people do identify with him. I think it was Matt Stone who said he identifies with Cartman more than any of the other characters. I think their original intention was to say, okay, don’t be like Cartman. But instead, you have the opposite reaction of people idealizing his attitude and his selfishness and his desire to make people suffer and his bigotry. He has become a representation of how the fans feel that you should be. Can you talk about " South Park Republicans"—South Park being adopted by right wingers? That plays into what I think is the logical conclusion of the anti-PC movement. Like I said in the article, there has been a rebellion against this idea of being PC. Political correctness has evolved into a derogatory term meaning, you are being sensitive to someone. It has become this big boogeyman. There is an idea that there is this social justice warrior, PC police entity who will come and yell at you and punish you if you say what you are actually thinking. So there has been a rebellion against this strawman. It has come down to, if you care about anyone at all, if you want to be sensitive to anyone’s needs, then you’re this politically correct nerd or you’re a nun with a ruler or an authority figure telling people what to do. You are therefore uncool and the enemy. It’s very reactionary. But it’s so popular and so widespread on the right now, and you actually have people coming out with articles and people in the White House using that rhetoric to help further their political careers. So it’s really not surprising to me that there articles out there saying South Park is right on actual political issues. What has followed South Park’s wake? The first example that comes to mind is a lot of the cultural treatment of trans people. South Park has had some really transphobic content. Even before the Caitlyn Jenner episode, there was the whole treatment of Mr. Garrison and his sex change. I remember the episode where they included footage of an actual gender affirmation surgery, just saying, "look how gross this is." They had a caption like, "This is footage of the actual surgery," as though it’s supposed to be horrible and sad because it’s gross. But any surgery looks gross and disgusting. Their definite goal was to be like, this is gross and this is wrong. You see a huge amount of transphobia from a lot of alt-right groups. You have these bathroom bills that are trying to keep trans people out of public restrooms, which is basically keeping them out of public life. It’s trying to keep them from having access to any kind of normal life. The sudden emergence of the bathroom bills surprised me, but maybe it shouldn’t have. It seemed to come out of nowhere, but then you look at the timing and it does kind of follow Caitlyn Jenner’s coming out to the public as a woman. That in itself probably would have gotten some backlash, but then you look at how popular South Park is, and there’s no way it didn’t play a role in people reacting the way they did: reacting like, oh that’s just so gross—their existence is gross and wrong. You end your essay with a call for what you call radical kindness. What does that mean? Radical kindness comes from being around young people, specifically in communities that are more social justice-oriented. In my community, I’m seeing a shift towards memes being positive and used to uplift people. I think people are just tired of beating on each other and attacking each other, and the younger generations especially are starting to rebel against that. I feel like a lot of what my generation, millennials, has put out there has been negative. We’re kind of a depressed generation, so I think younger people are reacting to that and deciding, let’s be nice to each other. In a society where being mean to each other is the norm, kindness is punk. That’s rebelling. That’s what’s cool.


Luis Ruiz is a fifth-degree black belt in karate and a martial arts instructor. His stepson, Antonio Pina, happens to be a third-degree black belt. Perhaps it was that the two men knew they could handle themselves that they fearlessly engaged with an attacker. One night, they were walking to their home in Brooklyn, NY. Ruiz heard a piercing scream. When they looked around, they noticed a woman being brutally beaten by a man. “We notice that he’s grabbing her and slamming her on the ground,” Ruiz told CBS. The father told his son to call for help. Ruiz quickly approached the criminal. “So I say ‘hey, is everything OK, are you guys OK?’ The guy gets up like nothing, turns to his right and walks away like he wasn’t doing anything wrong,” he said. Ruiz then comforted the woman, whose face, he says, was swollen beyond recognition and bloodied. The father and son were able to identify the attacker as Todd Deas. Police say he had 19 prior arrests, including rape and sexual abuse, and had recently been released on parole. Had they not been there, who knows what would have happened. “Hero is a big word. I’d rather think we just did the right thing, and that everyone in the neighborhood and in the world would do the right thing,” Ruiz said. Please SHARE if you think what Ruiz and his son did was very brave! Due to restrictions, this video cannot be viewed in your region.


US President Barack Obama and President-elect Donald Trump meet in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC. President-elect Donald Trump and future First Lady Melania Trump are meeting with President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama at the White House and are expected to discuss efforts toward a smooth transition of power. President elect Donald Trump , with his wife Melania Trump, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, gives the thumbs up after a meeting in the Majority Leaders office in the US Capitol in Washington, DC. Earlier in the day President elect Trump met with US President Barack Obama and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.


CreditCreditWin Images You can see where this is headed, the once bright and shiny democracy going down the drain before the holidays are out. The Russians, the special counsel Robert S. Mueller I and his agents, desperate men flipped and singing to save their souls — all may soon be gone, by President Trump’s design. If there’s any outrage left in the tank, use it now, because Trump has signaled exactly what he’s going to do. First, he had to set some brush fires, impugning the legitimacy of the rule of law — an old dictator’s trick. Trump is no Hitler, but when the German Reichstag burned in 1933, it was all the Nazis needed to gut civil liberties. So, before Trump can fire the prosecutor who is hot on the corruption trail of those in the president’s inner circle, he needs a pretext. He could just work his way down the line at the Justice Department, until he found a quisling willing to remove the special counsel. But before he gets to that, he has to delegitimize the whole investigation. Thus, he’s now attacking the F.B.I., saying the agency is in “Tatters” and its standing “the worst in History.” Bashing cops — wasn’t that what those Black Lives Matter people did to disrespect Blue Lives? Thank God we have Sarah Huckabee Sanders as a moral clarion in a crisis. “When you’re attacking F.B.I. agents because you’re under criminal investigation, you’re losing,” she tweeted. Sorry — that was Sarah Huckabee Sanders of a year ago, before she was paid to defend the liar in chief. Trump’s lawyer, John Dowd, has been busy clearing out more brush, making the preposterous claim that the president cannot obstruct justice because he’s the nation’s chief law enforcement officer. If Trump shot somebody on Fifth Avenue — his own suggested redline — he could, as the nation’s chief law enforcement officer, tell the cops to quash the investigation. See, when the president does it, it’s not a crime. This defense was floated during the two impeachment episodes of the 20th century. The third time will not be a charm. But Trump’s team already has gone from there is no collusion or obstruction to, so what? If it happened, it’s no biggie. They don’t appear to be the least bit troubled by a stunning report from a whistle-blower. As Trump was pledging to put America first during his Inaugural Address, his national security adviser, Michael Flynn, was texting a former business associate serving foreign clients. With Trump in, the sanctions against Russia would be “ripped up,” clearing the way for big money to be made on the inside, according to the report made public Wednesday. Ignoring that story, Trump’s media wing is doing its job. Sean Hannity, at state-run television, went on a vein-popping rant Tuesday against law enforcement, complete with conspiracy charts. He called the federal authorities “a team of so-called investigators.” As for their boss, he said that “Mueller is frankly a disgrace to the American justice system and has put the country on the brink of becoming a banana republic.” He’s certainly learned the art of projection from his master. The Wall Street Journal, channeling its owner and Trump whisperer Rupert Murdoch, has been making much of the same case, albeit without the spittle. Don’t forget, this is the same Robert Mueller who won wide bipartisan praise when he was appointed special counsel: a career prosecutor, the longest-serving director of the F.B.I. since J. Edgar Hoover, awarded the Bronze Star for his service as a Marine in Vietnam. Republicans love him. Or they did until he started closing in on Trump’s closest associates. Mueller should be fired, the Russian enablers now claim, because one of his agents said some bad things about Trump. This agent, Peter Strzok, was reassigned over the summer, as soon as his comments came to light. Wow, a G-man has opinions. The cops I know, a couple of longstanding friends, have more opinions than I. The facts are what matter. And the facts are pointing in a very bad direction for the gang that can’t collude straight. Trump has got to be sweating it; he was said to be “seething” when two of his campaign aides were indicted and a third pleaded guilty in October. He looked punch-drunk at recent public events. Now that he’s a felon from a guilty plea last week, Flynn is cooperating with Mueller. He knows plenty. Trump could pardon him and try to bring him back into the fold. The outrage would be minimal among the Banana Republicans. Sure, they got their tax-relief-for-the-rich bill passed, so they may no longer need Trump after he signs it. But now they’re dreaming of more — cutting Medicare and health care for children, so they have a reason to keep him around. If Trump fires Mueller, he can start the new year clean. His base will stick with him. Though voters believe, by a nearly 2-1 margin, that Russians interfered with the United States election, Republicans do not. Party before country — in the face of a dangerous turn toward authoritarianism, that’s all that matters.


Following the latest FBI developments in Hillary Clinton’s email probe, Donald Trump ripped the Justice Department and top Clinton aide Huma Abedin on Saturday, firing off a tirade during his triumphant swing through western states. “It’s reported today, this morning that the Department of Justice was fighting the FBI,” Trump said in Golden, Colorado. “And that’s because the Department of Justice is trying so hard to protect Hillary.” Trump was referencing reports that Attorney General Loretta Lynch recommended that FBI Director James Comey not publicly disclose the new emails -- what the Justice Department viewed as a violation of its long-standing practice not to comment on ongoing investigations. “There are those, and I happen to be one of them, who think Hillary offered Loretta Lynch a reappointment as attorney general. I happen to be one of them,” Trump said. Offering no proof, the Republican nominee posited that Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, had bribed Lynch with the position when the two had an impromptu meeting earlier this summer on a plane in Arizona. The two met just days before the FBI completed its probe into the private email server. “Perhaps, just perhaps, of course he said he only talked about golf and the grandchildren, but he was on the plane for 39 minutes, he went to Arizona, an unbelievable place, but there are those who think when he went onto the plane that’s what he discussed just prior to a decision being made,” Trump said. The New York real estate mogul then trained his biting attacks on Abedin and her husband, former Democratic Congressman Anthony Weiner. The emails tied to the Clinton probe were found on the separated couple’s electronic devices from a separate FBI investigation into Weiner’s sexting scandal. “Did I call him correctly, did anybody see?” Trump asked, pointing to his prior criticisms of Weiner. “It’s called good judgement, it’s called good instincts. If you check out the tweets, or if you check out whatever it is I wrote about him, it is so perfect, I said. And that was done a long time ago, but they found, by looking at Anthony Weiner, a major, major, major sleaze, they found what may be some of the 33,0 missing and deleted emails.” Trump has, in the past, wondered whether Abedin was a national security concern because of her relationship to Weiner. “[Abedin’s] receiving very, very important information and giving it to Hillary. Who else is she giving it to?” Trump said back in August. “Her husband has serious problems and on top of that, he now works for a public relations firm.So how can she be married to this guy who’s got these major problems? She’s getting her most important information, it could be, in the world. Who knows what he’s going to do with it? Forget about her.” Trump’s speculation on what the newly surfaced emails contained, however, remains unfounded. The FBI has yet to release any further details about the information found in the emails. Clinton’s campaign, in the meantime, has defended Abedin, with campaign chair John Podesta telling reporters on a conference call that the staff stands behind her. “There’s no evidence of wrongdoing, no charge of wrongdoing, no indication that this was even about Hillary,” Podesta said Saturday. He added that Comey’s letter to top Republicans in the House and Senate was “long on innuendo and short on facts.” Podesta added that Comey knew “full well what Republicans in Congress would do with it” and blasted House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, in particular for taking “the opportunity to distort the facts.” CBS News’ Hannah Fraser-Chanpong contributed to this report.


Donald Trump has, finally, all but united the Republican Party – in denunciation of his continued, race-based attacks on U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over the civil lawsuits against the candidate’s Trump University. “I disavow these comments. I regret those comments that [Trump] made,” said House Speaker Paul Ryan during a press conference Tuesday. “Claiming a person can’t do their job because of their race is sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment … it’s absolutely unacceptable.” And Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican from Illinois facing a tough reelection battle this year, flat out withdrew his support for his party’s nominee, saying “Donald Trump’s belief that an American-born judge of Mexican descent is incapable of fairly presiding over his case is not only dead wrong, it is un-American.” Last week, Trump charged that his plan to build a wall between the U.S.-Mexican border was “an absolute conflict” of interest, charging to the Wall Street Journal that Curiel could not preside fairly over the Trump University case because he is “of Mexican heritage.” (Curiel was born in Indiana to Mexican immigrants.) Speaking again to CNN’s Jake Tapper last Friday, Trump maintained his position: “He’s a Mexican. We’re building a wall between here and Mexico.” When Tapper asked if, by saying that Curiel could not due his job because of his race, “is that not the definition of racism?” Trump responded, “No, I don’t think so at all.” Amid the fierce backlash from his own party, Trump put together a damage-control statement late Tuesday promising not to say anything more about Curiel or the lawsuit – after this: “It is unfortunate that my comments have been misconstrued as a categorical attack against people of Mexican heritage. I am friends with and employ thousands of people of Mexican and Hispanic descent. … While this lawsuit should have been dismissed, it is now scheduled for trial in November. I do not intend to comment on this matter any further.” Just one day earlier, Trump encouraged supporters on a private conference call on Monday to join his chorus by publicly questioning the judge’s credibility, two participants on the call told Bloomberg Politics. Several Republican politicians, including former Massachusetts senator Scott Brown, were involved in the call, during which Trump overturned a Sunday email from his staff that ordered his most prominent supporters – those surrogates who speak for him on cable news talk shows and at campaign appearances – to cease all talk of the lawsuit and Curiel. “Take that order and throw it the hell out,” Trump said on the call, according to Bloomberg Politics. Is Hillary Clinton Intimidated by Donald Trump? Numerous other prominent Republicans have joined Ryan in disavowing Trump’s sentiments, including South Carolina’s junior senator Tim Scott – the Senate’s only black Republican – who told CNN the commentary is “racially toxic.” Added Arnold Schwarzenegger on Twitter, “Judge Curiel is an American hero who stood up to the Mexican cartels. I was proud to appoint him when I was Gov.” Freshly-minted presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton also issued a warning on Monday that Trump may next focus his attacks on “women judges … or maybe a judge with a disability, or perhaps one who was a former POW, or African-American.” “He’s trying to demean and defame a federal judge who was a very accomplished federal prosecutor,” she continued on MSNBC. “This is dangerous nonsense that undermines the rule of law, that makes him appear to be someone who has no respect for fellow Americans,” Clinton said. “And I think it is yet more evidence why this man is dangerous and divisive and disqualified from being president.”


Internet censorship is hurting conservative websites like DC Clothesline. If you enjoy our articles please consider making a small donation today. Thank YOU! ******************************************************************************** Peace through violence? A self-proclaimed Alt-Left “leader” has vowed to use a baseball bat embedded with nails to “crush skulls” during a “Patriot Prayer” peace rally set to take place in San Francisco this weekend. The Twitter user, who goes by the handle @ibPrinceJordan, tweeted, “The Patriot Prayer rally is a nazi white supremacist event. I’ll be their to crush some nazi skulls.” He repeated the threat in a series of other tweets that have now been deleted. “Can’t wait! Going to bring this nailed bat for some nazi pounding,” read one. The user is located in San Francisco, which is where the event will take place at Crissy Field on Saturday, suggesting he does indeed plan to attend the march. His Twitter bio reads, “Alt-Left resistance leader. iraq war survivor. cute communist & catholic.” Many Americans In The Dark About These BIG "Federal Rent Checks" Despite numerous other prominent Twitter users drawing attention to the violent threat, the account has not been suspended. What makes the threat even more absurd is that organizers of the Patriot Prayer rally have specifically said its aim is to “promote peace, love and unity,” and that racists are not welcome. The leader of the “Patriot Prayer” rally, Joey Gibson, has vehemently denounced neo-nazis, yelling “F*** white supremacists!” at a recent rally. Even the SPLC, which routinely tars conservatives with a broad brush, does not consider Patriot Prayer to be a hate group, reports Fox News. To the alt-left, that doesn’t matter. Anyone to the right of Michael Moore is fair game for violent assault. Remember, in the aftermath of Charlottesville, the mainstream media relentlessly attacked Trump for saying both sides were responsible for violence, tacitly endorsing the violent alt-left. CNN even changed a headline at the request of Antifa to disguise the fact that the group routinely engages in violence. Given that the mainstream media has emboldened unhinged thugs by exalting them as “anti-fascists,” any violence that occurs at the “Patriot Prayer” rally will be their responsibility. Facebook: .j.watson.71 ********************* Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.


Sen. Richard Durbin discusses President Trump's immigration comments following the City of Chicago's 32nd Annual Interfaith Breakfast commemorating the life of Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on Jan. 12, 2018. (Jose M. Osorio / Chicago Tribune) What did you say when President Donald Trump referred to Haiti, El Salvador and some African nations as “shithole countries”? What did you say when the president of the United States followed that comment by suggesting he’d rather see more immigrants from countries like Norway? No compatible source was found for this media. Whether now or in the future, you will be asked this question: What did you say? Did you call out the obvious racism behind those statements? Did you acknowledge that the leader of the free world — by title, anyway — had shown himself to be a white supremacist, casually expressing his dislike of brown-skinned immigrants and preference for white European immigrants? Were you outraged that such comments from a sitting president were antithetical to the ideals that have always made America a beacon of hope and opportunity? What did you say? Did you speak out? Did you denounce the comments, as Rep. Mia Love, a Utah Republican whose parents came to America from Haiti, did, saying in a statement: “This behavior is unacceptable from the leader of our nation. … The President must apologize to both the American people and the nations he so wantonly maligned.” Or did you keep quiet? Take note, because you will be asked. Trump’s has been a presidency filled with jaw-dropping moments of offensive behavior, but this one will stand out over time, both for its profane nature and its naked racism. So what did you say? Did you look for excuses? Did you toss out a “Well, what about …” scenario you thought might take the heat off? Did you scream something about “identity politics” and try to pretend that this is the fault of others, not the fault of the transparently racist old man in the White House? Did you say he has a point? Did you say, “Well, those countries are shitholes, aren’t they?” Did you forget how people once described immigrants from Italy and Ireland? Did you forget the words on a plaque at the Statue of Liberty? “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” Did you forget those words, or just ignore them? Did you smile about a tax break and say nothing? Did you not put the pieces together and consider all the other times Trump has shown us exactly who he is? Did you tamp down memories of his calls for the execution of the Central Park Five, even after the young men, four black and one Latino, were found innocent? Did you explain away what Trump was implying in this tweet from 2013: “According to Bill O'Reilly, 80% of all the shootings in New York City are blacks-if you add Hispanics, that figure goes to 98%. 1% white.” Did you disregard his years-long birther crusade against the nation’s first black president? His description of Mexican immigrants as rapists and criminals? His regular criticism that immigrants coming from predominately nonwhite nations are examples of those countries’ “worst people”? Did you not let yourself see the pattern? Did you twist logic into knots and blame it on the media? On political correctness? What did you say when our president called other countries “shitholes” and you had to shield your children’s ears from profanity on the nightly news? What did you tell your children about this moment? How did you explain the president’s words? Tell me, what did you say? Mark it down, let it be known. Because you will be asked this again someday. And if you stayed silent, if you made excuses, if you tried to fool yourself into believing this is appropriate presidential behavior, if you let it slide because this presidency might somehow line your pocketbook, then you will be remembered as complicit, as one who stood by and let America’s decency get dragged through the mud. And if you laughed, or if you smiled, or if you nodded your head in agreement, you will be remembered just as Trump will: as a racist, a fool and an absolute embarrassment. rhuppke@chicagotribune.com RELATED President Trump owes the country an apology » What happened when I followed Trump's example and started lying all the time » Trump attacks protections for immigrants from 'shithole' countries in Oval Office meeting »


"Day One" is a multi-part series in which CBS News' Margaret Brennan speaks with former U.S. government officials on the major foreign policy issues the next president will inherit on the first day of their presidency. The next president will face countless challenges on day one. Among the biggest is the ongoing civil war in Syria. Margaret Brennan spoke with Leon Panetta -- a former CIA director, defense secretary, and White House chief of staff -- about the road ahead for U.S. involvement in the war-torn nation. LEON PANETTA: Inaction is not an option in Syria because if you stand back, the situation is gonna get worse. Look, the best-case scenario would be to have Assad step down, to have a transitional government be able to establish itself representing each of the factions that are there -- the Sunnis, the Kurds, the Shias. And then, frankly, have the Russians and whatever is left of the Syrian forces join with the United States in going after ISIS to truly defeat them. That would be the best-case scenario. MARGARET BRENNAN: What are the odds of that? PANETTA: Not very good. Not very good. BRENNAN: What's the worst-case scenario? PANETTA: The worst-case scenario is that Assad continues to remain in power, continues to kill Syrians. That refugees continue to flow out of Syria, that the Russians continue to have a presence there and continue to attack our moderate forces that we're trying to train in Syria. And that ISIS then uses that and creates an even bigger base from which to conduct attacks against this country. That's the worst-case scenario. BRENNAN: Sounds like you're describing what's happening now. PANETTA: It is what's happening now. And it's what can continue to happen in the future if we don't deal with it. BRENNAN: There are around 300 special operators in Syria right now. Will the next president have to commit more American boots on the ground? PANETTA: I think the likelihood is that the next president is gonna have to consider adding additional special forces on the ground to try to assist those moderate forces that are taking on ISIS, and that are taking on Assad's forces. And we have to increase our air strikes. We've got to do all of those things in order to put increasing pressure on ISIS but also on Assad. We can't surrender one objective for the other. We've gotta continue to press on both fronts. BRENNAN: Is it possible to defeat ISIS without challenging Assad? PANETTA: I think it's very difficult as we've seen to conduct effective operations against ISIS when we're dealing with Assad's forces pressing us in different places. And when we're dealing with the Russians who go in and literally bomb the very forces that we're training to go after Assad and to go after ISIS. We cannot have that situation continue in the future. Protect our forces there. BRENNAN: So the U.S. has to confront Russia? PANETTA: We are hoping upon hope that the Russians will do the right thing. They're not gonna do the right thing without pressure. They're not gonna do the right thing without giving our diplomats greater leverage than what they have now to deal with the Russians. To do that we have got to make very clear that we have objectives to achieve, that we intend to press to achieve those objectives, and that we will not allow them to divert us from the goals of defending ourselves. Here's where the candidates stand: Hillary Clinton wants to increase airstrikes against ISIS. She said she would arm the moderate rebels, and pressure Russia to get out of Syria. We should add that Panetta is advising the Clinton campaign. Donald Trump has announced he'd declare war on ISIS, and he wouldn't rule out more U.S. troops on the ground -- although he offered few details.


The world Is watching and so is oil as the death toll rises in the streets of Iran, where the people revolt against a terrible economy and the lack of any real freedoms and rights. At least 19 people were reported killed in street protests in Iran, while President Hassan Rouhani on one hand defended their right to protest but on the other hand warned he would show “no tolerance” for those who incite unrest. Many arrests have been made and the government of Iran says it may seek the death penalty, for what they say are crimes against God, in demonstrations that have gone on for over 5 days in a row. President Trump tweeted that ”Iran is failing at every level despite the terrible deal made with them by the Obama Administration. The great Iranian people have been repressed for many years. They are hungry for food & for freedom. Along with human rights, the wealth of Iran is being looted. TIME FOR CHANGE!” The uprising in IRAN is just another risk factor in a global oil market that is tightening. Strong global demand and shale oil production that is falling far short of what the Energy Information keeps telling us it is. Reports from the Texas Railroad Commission is telling us that Texas shale oil production has been stagnant and not rising as the production decline rate year over year is taking its toll. Total oil stocks are down a whopping 135M barrels just since April even as U.S. oil production is supposedly at a record high. Bad data is becoming a bigger risk as underinvestment has led to the least amount of oil discoveries in 70 years and the global oil replenishment rate ratio fell to 11 percent this year, down from more than 50 percent in 2012 according to a new report. That is a dangerous situation, especially because of the over estimates of shale oil output. ETF reports that this has led to the lowest ever volumes of oil discoveries in 2017, Rystad Energy said last week. While the low-level of discoveries is not an immediate threat to global oil supply, it could become a threat ten years down the road, according to Rystad Energy. In ten years’ time, U.S. shale production may peak, at least according to OPEC that sees shale peaking after 2025, although the cartel has conceded that U.S. tight oil has defied previous forecasts and has increased production more than initially expected and will continue to do so in the short-term. This year has seen less than 7 billion barrels of oil equivalent discovered globally, a volume as low as last seen in the 1940s, Rystad Energy has estimated. What worries analysts the most is the fact that this year the reserve replacement ratio–the amount of discovered resources relative to the amount of production–was a mere 11 percent, compared to 50 percent in 2012, Sonia Mladá Passos, Senior Analyst at Rystad Energy, said. The other ongoing risk is Venezuela. An explosion over the weekend that hit Venezuela’s largest refinery was an accident waiting to happen. Deferred maintenance and bad management as the Venezuelan government stole money and failed to do even the most basic maintenance for the facility according to sources. Reuters reported that a former oil minister excoriated Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in a newspaper column on Sunday, accusing the leftist leader of behaving like biblical King Herod and plunging the oil-rich nation into economic devastation. Rafael Ramirez, who was the all-powerful head of the oil ministry and state energy company PDVSA for a decade, has long been a rival of Maduro. In recent months, Ramirez has grown increasingly critical of Maduro’s handling of a fourth straight year of recession that has triggered malnutrition, widespread food and medicine shortages, the world’s steepest inflation, and a surge in emigration. A furious Maduro ordered Ramirez to resign as the nation’s United Nations ambassador in New York last month after an article entitled the “The Storm” was perceived as an attack on his government. We haven’t even got to the cold. Wicked winter weather is causing a surge in oil and natural gas and coal demand. Demand for coal burns hit three-year high causing to temporarily put it above natural gas as the top s U.S. power sources. There are reports that they were shortages of natural gas in Northern Alberta county under state of emergency due to natural gas disruption. The report said that large parts of northern Alberta was under a state of emergency over the weekend due to low natural gas pressure and system outages. The Energy Report has kept our bullish outlook and we still believe that the double bottom at $26 a barrel was a generational low. Despite all the bearish hype that the market had last year and bad info this year oil looks poised for a big move. Make sure you are hedged! I am hearing from many folks still that were underhedged last year and are now paying the price. Thanks, Phil Flynn Questions? Ask Phil Flynn today at 312-264-4364 A Subsidiary of Price Holdings, Inc. – an Employee Owned Diversified Financial Services Firm. Member NIBA, NFA Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results. Investing in futures can involve substantial risk of loss & is not suitable for everyone. Trading foreign exchange also involves a high degree of risk. The leverage created by trading on margin can work against you as well as for you, and losses can exceed your entire investment. Before opening an account and trading, you should seek advice from your advisors as appropriate to ensure that you understand the risks and can withstand the losses. The information and data in this report were obtained from sources considered reliable. Their accuracy or completeness is not guaranteed and the giving of the same is not to be deemed as an offer or solicitation on our part with respect to the sale or purchase of any securities or futures. The Price Futures Group, its officers, directors, employees, and brokers may in the normal course of business have positions, which may or may not agree with the opinions expressed in this report. Any decision to purchase or sell as a result of the opinions expressed in this report will be the full responsibility of the person authorizing such transaction. Reproduction distribution of any portion of this report are strictly prohibited without the written permission of the author. Trading in futures contracts, options on futures contracts, and forward contracts is not suitable for all investors and involves substantial risks. ©2017 Tune into the Fox Business Network (FBN) is the best in business! Make it your New Year TV Home! The MoneyShow Orlando is coming in February. Get out of the cold! Go to the Money Show! Sign up for my class talking about a historic bottom in oil and what it means for your future. Time Is running out Go to Flynn.OrlandoMoneyShow.com.


Anonymous have denied claims that they hacked the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer, after a post appeared claiming that the hacktivist group was “now in control” of the site. A post titled ‘END OF HATE: ANONYMOUS NOW IN CONTROL OF DAILY STORMER’ appeared on the far-right site earlier this morning, suggesting that Anonymous were going to bring an end to The Daily Stormer following the events of the Charlottesville “Unite The Right” rally, which saw white nationalists converge to protest plans to remove a Confederate statue. The rally led to multiple conflicts between the nationalists and counter-protesters, ultimately leading to the death of civil rights activist Heather Heyer, who was one of many hit by a vehicle driven by white supremacist James Alex Fields. Many outlets reported that Anonymous had infiltrated The Daily Stormer website in response to the events of Charlottesville, with the post on the site reading: “WE HAVE TAKEN THIS SITE IN THE NAME OF HEATHER HEYER A VICTIM OF WHITE SUPREMACIST TERRORISM. FOR TOO LONG THE DAILY STORMER AND ANDREW ANGLIN HAVE SPEWED THEIR PUTRID HATE ON THIS SITE. THAT WILL NOT BE HAPPENING ANYMORE”. However, Anonymous have stated that they believe the post was made by The Daily Stormer in a “stunt” designed to “woo their clueless base.” The clarifications were made by @YourAnonNews, the largest Anonymous Twitter account, who believe that The Daily Stormer had made the post themselves in order to explain away technical issues the site was experiencing, after web hosting company GoDaddy had banned them from using the service. We have no confirmation that "Anonymous" is involved yet. Looks more like a DS stunt. Wonder if they are having issues finding a new host. 5p — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 This is likely to be the derps from dailystormer engaging in a silly troll to woo their clueless base. If we're proven wrong, so be it. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 And all the old content is left up by a "UNITED FORCE OF ELITE HACKERS" on a shit post site "UNDER THE CONTROL OF ANONYMOUS." Doubtful. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 If goal of Daily Stormer was to get us to celebrate a BS claim, it backfired. Seriously, suck less. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 The neo-Nazi site has been given 24 hours to find a new host, otherwise it will be taken offline by GoDaddy. The post suggesting Anonymous were now in control of the site also stated that The Daily Stormer would be taken offline within 24 hours, suggesting that its creators are looking for a conspiratorial explanation as to why the site has disappeared if GoDaddy removes it from the internet.


Channel 4 have been accused of “brownfacing” in a row over a documentary showing a white woman disguised as a Muslim complete with darkened skin. Katie Freeman, 44, was given a prosthetic nose, fake teeth and darkened skin as she filmed My Week As A Muslim. The show documents Ms Freeman's experiences in Manchester in the week after a terror attack at the city's arena that killed 22 people. Described as an attempt to challenge stereotypes, the show aimed to give the the 44-year-old a "chance to meaningfully walk in the shoes of someone from a different background." Katie Freeman starred in the documentary (Channel 4) However, when a trailer for the show aired on Tuesday, viewers took to social media to slam the nature of Ms Freeman's disguise. One wrote: "What the f*** is this? Channel 4 has totally missed the mark here. Who on earth thought it would be a good idea to put prosthetics on somebody to make them a caricature of people of a different race (as if being white and Muslim are exclusive anyway)? On primetime TV in 2017? Madness." Another bemused commenter simply wrote: "Did they.brownface her?" On Twitter, viewer Alice Beggs said: "Just saw Channel 4 have a show called 'My Week As A Muslim' where this white woman has brownface and prosthetics so she can learn about racism etc. Because god forbid we just listen to Muslims when they tell us what abuse they get." Another criticised Channel 4 for not "actually following a Muslim poc (person of colour) and documenting their life, instead of doing this". Before Ms Freeman underwent the transformation, she admitted she would avoid sitting next to a Muslim on public transport because "you see them and think they're going to blow something up", the Daily Mail reported. She later said she was shocked by the level of abuse she suffered in the course of the programme. During one incident in which someone shouted "f****** Muslims, in this town?" as she walked past her local pub. Ms Freeman lived with Saima Alvi, a Muslim woman, during filming for the show. The 49-year-old told of the abuse she suffers regularly. She said: "It's very humiliating that I am pigeon-holed or put in the same box as a terrorist. "What I have learnt is that there are genuinely nice people who are unfortunately misled about Islam." Speaking to the Daily Mail, Fiyaz Mughal, founder of community cohesion group Faith Matters, said: "This is trying to drive ratings by racial stereotyping. Channel 4 needs to apologise. "If you are trying to bridge divides, what message does it send to Muslim communities that people think of you in a certain way? That certain crude facial characteristics are what defines you as Asian?" The show's executive producer, Fozia Khan, defended the programme, told the Daily Mail: "The programme allowed Katie to meaningfully walk in the shoes of someone from a different background and to experience what it is like to be a part of the British Pakistani Muslim community rather than just observe as an outsider." My Week As A Muslim is due to be broadcast by Channel 4 on Monday at 9pm.


Are you tired of Liberals and lawmakers trying to undermine our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms? Then do something about it! We must get ahead of this storm because it is bearing down on us in full force! They preach that we need more and more gun control every single time there is some sort of mass shooting, even though the mass shootings are nearly always a crazed Democrat. The gun used by Stephen Paddock in the Las Vegas massacre on Sunday was already an illegal gun! Further more going to show that gun control does not work. Criminals DO NOT OBEY THE LAW! They will still have guns, even if they are illegal. As Sean Davis explains at the Federalist automatic weapons (or machine guns) are already banned or almost unattainable under existing federal law. Secondly, the concert was a “gun free zone.” All guns were already banned there. Thirdly, Paddock would have had to have done a lot of work beforehand to prepare for this unspeakable act. There is nothing that Congress could do to stop someone as committed as Paddock was. Finally, Ben Shapiro of the Daily Wire explains that making policy on the heels of a terrible event is usually a bad idea. Gun control laws remove guns from law abiding citizens, so that they can no longer defend themselves, and emboldens criminals, who won’t follow the laws anyway. In other words, without guns, we are sitting ducks! Taking rights away from law-abiding citizens is not the solution! If you agree, and want to have your voice heard, sign the petition to Congress! We WILL stand for what we believe in! MOLON LABE! 60 Celebrities Who Are Mega Trump Supporters - #20 Is Unbelievable! The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com


Junkbunny Who Tried Buying Xanax Off Turtleboy Tried Suing EMT After She Came After Him On An Ambulance Ride And Has Declared War On Turtle Riders Want to advertise with Turtleboy? Email us at Turtleboysports@gmail.com for more information. For the first time ever today two junkboxes messaged the Turtleboy business page to ask if we had Xanax for sale.One of them was Jessica Kane, who according to her Facebook page lives in Pawtucket, but she insists she lives in Smithfield, RI. Odds are she knows her way around the Bucket though, and could probably tell you which corners yield the highest dividends. Just sayin. Anyway, she reached out to us looking for zannies: But Jessica Kane was just warming up. Because it wasn’t enough to message a blog that frequently shames junkboxes and ratchets, looking for drugs, she had to take on turtle riders too……. “I’ll beat ur ass corn.” That’s a new one. As you can see she is alleging that we are the ones who solicited her to see if she wanted to buy drugs off us. Ya got that? This is what Turtleboys do every day. We scour the Internet looking for junkboxes to sell our excess zannies to. Definitely. Anyway, turns out she doesn’t have a drug problem, her “job” just doesn’t offer health insurance. Naturally then her only recourse was to message Turtleboy and see what he was charging. She can’t afford health insurance, but cash money sure ain’t a problem: That right there is a lot of mushroom tip participation trophies! As you can see, she’s sticking to her story that we messaged her first, which obviously makes TONS of sense. She kept posting a screenshot showing what appears to be us contacting her first, asking if she was looking for zannies. She just forgot that in the very blog she was commenting on anyone could clearly see that she was the one who initiated contact: Oops! After that it was time to bust out the CAPS LOCK! Thirteen years is a long time to be prescribed Xanax. And by “prescribed” she means, “treated Diego to a basket lunch in exchange for illegal narcotics.” Up next was the “I’ll fuck everyone up” portion of the Gospel of Ratchet: Yea guys, she’s totally not a junkie. She just so happens to message random community Facebook pages looking to score drugs. And occasionally she gets busted with crack cocaine: Besides that she’s totally NOT a junkie. But it’s all good in the hood because she got that shit dismissed! Therefore she never got caught with crack cocaine. (P.S. turtle riders are savage) Next up in the ratchet script was the threat to call the cops: So if you’re keeping score at home, this woman approached us about buying drugs, admitted to the cops that she did so, and the cops responded by turning their focus on cyberbullying. Because NOTHING IS MORE SERIOUS THAN CYBERBULLYING, EVEN ADDICTION! You can’t make this stuff up. Only on Turtleboy. This is why we are the greatest blog that’s ever existed. Good luck finding this sort of entertainment at Barstool. But her story checks out because her uncle is the chief of police: We just don’t know what town he’s the chief of police in. Wherever he is, I’m sure her imaginary uncle would be thrilled to find his junkie niece name dropping him on Turtleboy. But wait, it gets better. Last year she made headlines when she was getting her biweekly free ambulance ride to the ER when she claimed she was abused by one of the first responders. And in one of the greatest MSM fails of all time, NCB “Investigative” Team fell for her act hook, line, and sinker: That interview was amazing. She literally puts on a blazer and some non-prescription glasses and the schmucks on this “I-Team” just assume she’s a law-abiding non-ratchet member of society. A local woman turned to the NBC 10 I-Team for answers after she captured a confrontation inside a North Providence ambulance on cell phone video. The video shows an EMT lashing out at her, appearing to slap her in the face and swearing at her several times. “He then smacked me across my face,” Jessica Kane said of the July 30 incident. North Providence officers were responding to a domestic disturbance call when they came into contact with Kane, who is epileptic. A police report obtained by NBC 10 shows the officers saw her have a seizure and lose consciousness. They called the North Providence Fire Department for medical aid, and an ambulance arrived a short time later. “As soon as I was put into the rescue, I was called a drug addict, which I am not,” she said. “I was just belittled so much. It made me feel like the people here to treat me were there to just accuse me.” Oh yea, she’s TOTALLY not a drug addict. She’s just been arrested for crack cocaine and messages random Facebook pages with 99,0 followers to see if they can sell her Xanax. Oh, and her raspy “life kicked the shit out of me and I’m only 26” voice wasn’t a dead giveaway or anything like that. The video shows the EMT appear to slap Kane in the face, causing her to drop her phone. “That’s assault!” she screams on the tape. “I’ll give you assault!” the man responds. Watch the video if you haven’t already. She’s all fucked up and aggressive and is taping the guy who probably knows her middle name, date of birth, and blood type because he deals with her so often. She won’t shut the fuck up and approaches him while taping. She gets too close. He pushes her away from him. Assault. That’s how stupid the NBC 10 “I-Team” is. The unidentified EMT can also be heard telling Kane to “shut the (expletive) up.” She said the verbal abuse continued once she arrived at the hospital, moments not captured in the video. “He said, ‘If you don’t get the F up off this stretcher, I’m going to rip you by your hair,’” Kane told NBC 10. Funny that none of that is on the tape. Guess we’ll just have to take this crackbunny’s word for it. NBC 10 also reviewed the police report from officers who arrived that day. They noted that Kane was difficult to deal with, writing that, “Jessica was yelling and screaming in the middle of the road” and was “extremely belligerent.” The police report continues, saying that Kane “became hostile, trying to unbuckle herself and get off the stretcher.” Boom. Mystery solved. Kane was released after spending about five hours at Fatima Hospital, and her cell phone was returned. That’s when she said she found the video she recorded in the ambulance in her iPhone’s “Recently Deleted” folder. She believes someone tried to erase it while the phone was out of her control. “I actually received my phone back and I saw that they tried to delete the video,” she said. Oh yea, I’m sure that’s what happened. Why would she lie? She’s wearing a blazer and glasses! Kane hired an attorney and said she plans to file an assault complaint with Rhode Island State Police. As of Wednesday, state police said they had not yet received the complaint or been contacted by Kane about the incident. Translation – she called up Dick N. Vulva, never paid him, got high, and never followed through with her massive lawsuit. Anyway, we were still confused how the hell Jessica Kane got the impression that we were zanny salesmen. Turns out there was a whole background story: You can’t make this shit up. In August we blogged about this Lawrence ghettopoon selling Xanax on Facebook: Evidently Jessica Kane read the headline of this blog, assumed that we were the ones selling zannies, waited until she got her check on the first of the month, and then hit us up for the hookup. Just another day at Turtleboy. Shit like this never gets old. I love my job way too much. One guy suggested that it was a slow week: Dude, not one, but two junkbunnies messaged us assuming we sell Xanax from our Facebook page. If you don’t think that’s getting blogged about then you don’t know Turtleboy. Exactly! Someone gets it! From now on I think this is what you people should start doing: Brilliant. This could be a weekly segment. We urge you to support the following local businesses. They provide terrific services for the community!


The Aspiring Ashanti Regional Chairman of the opposition National Democratic Congress (NDC) Alhaji Mohammed Sani has called on the founder of Liberal Party of Ghana (LPG) Kofi Akpaloo to publicly apologise to Northerners in Ghana for saying they can never be Presidents. Mr Akpaloo in a recent interview with Abusua Nkommo hosted by Kwame Adinkra said ‘no Ghanaian will vote for a Northerner to be a President of Ghana’ after the abysmal performance by the former President John Dramani Mahama in the 2016 elections. According to Akpaloo, Northerners who were given the nod to lead the country failed Ghanaians and that Ghanaians will not vote for Northerners in 2020 elections. But speaking on Abusua Nkommo with Kwame Adinkra, Alhaji Sani described as ‘misguided missile’ the tribal comment by Mr Akpaloo that Northerners cannot be in the helm of affairs of the country. He advised the founder of Liberal Party of Ghana to retract his statement warning to retaliate in equal measure if he fails to do so. ‘…This is a misguided missile by Akpaloo, his comment is an insult to Northerners, what research has he conducted to come out with such comment. If he has personal issues with John Mahama, he shouldn’t rope in all Northerners in his hatred. What kind of language is that, he should stop insulting a group of people, is he important than other people. ‘He should withdraw and apologise, I am highly offended by his comment, if he refuses, I will be forced to wage war words against him,’ he stated. Alhaji Sani entreated Ghanaians to stop tagging people on tribal lines and judge them according to their performances.


Donald Trump will address the nation from New York City this evening as the president elect of the United States. The Trump campaign has been holding its election night party all night at the New York Hilton Midtown, with the festivities beginning at 6:30 p.m. Eastern Time. Trump’s supporters have become more and more energized as the hours have ticked on, and Trump will take the stage to address them soon. The speech can be viewed live in the embedded YouTube player via Right Side Broadcasting. It’s not currently known when Trump will take the stage, as we’re still awaiting for many more results to come in. But at about 1:00 a.m., Decision Desk HQ officially made their call that Donald Trump has been elected president, and it looks incredibly unlikely that the election will end any other way at this point. It’s difficult to overstate how monumental of an event this is in the history of American politics. Donald Trump went into this election night being seen as having no real shot at the White House, with many Democrats not even expecting the race to be remotely close. Trump has pulled off what will likely go down as the most shocking political upset in history, and the election result proved nearly every single poll and electoral projection wrong. In fact, it seemed for a while that even Donald Trump himself wasn’t sure that he was going to win the election. After all, when he was asked during the presidential debate whether he would concede to Hillary Clinton if he loses, Trump refused to commit to doing so, saying, “I’ll keep you in suspense” seemingly because part of him doubted he could pull this thing off. Obviously, conceding to Hillary Clinton is no longer an issue. So what will Trump say in his speech tonight? Both supporters and detractors alike are hoping for the new president to start to heal the divide after an incredibly heated and contentious election cycle. It’s also unknown how Donald Trump may address Hillary Clinton, his opponent who he has repeatedly said should be in jail. Hillary Clinton is also expected to speak from the Javits Center in New York City, although many of her supporters have already left the arena in tears. Read more about Donald Trump and Melania in Spanish at AhoraMismo.com: Join over 240,0 people who get the most important news stories and the best shopping deals from Heavy – Delivered right to your inbox.


“I had two liberal colleagues at the CIA who believed in global warming and neither had any proof to justify their opinions.” By Joe Boatwright: I’m amazed that there is still an argument surrounding global warming. Most of the literature is full of articles from organizations that deal with planetary weather issues or other political organizations that have joined the climate change movement. Conclusively, none of any of their global warming predictions have come to fruition. Almost every assertion has been debunked or proven false, sometimes by other parts of the same organization! Why should conservatives continue to debate liberals on this topic? Firstly, conservatives should always try to stop any insanity from the left, no matter what the subject. Secondly, the left continues to put forth their agenda on global warming, no matter how idiotic. So unfortunately, the right must respond against these arguments (again, no matter how absurd). Rush Limbaugh agreed by positing another reason: “The only reason we’re even talking about global warming — well, the real only reason — is its part of the left’s agenda of expanding government worldwide, raising taxes worldwide, and a key ingredient of this is blaming average citizens for the problem.” The conservative fight is to keep the left’s ‘one world order’ and worldwide tax increases from happening. We should not allow them to blame anyone for something that does not exist and can’t be proven. Back in August 2014 Alex Newman wrote in The New American, “Embarrassing Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry.” This excellent article details in length the litany of failed global warming predictions. It also criticizes organizations like the UN that recanted some of their farcical claims, sometimes even before they could be proven wrong. In one instance, the UN discovered their ‘scientific’ evidence came from the World Wildlife Fund propaganda literature. The claims from the liberal agenda of these organizations are so outlandish that it wouldn’t be surprising for them to throw in some type of zombie apocalypse. Global Warming is not scientific; it has become a political issue with many commenters who act as experts. In addition, articles that have been debunked continue to be echoed in other commentaries. These commentaries continue to make further inane assertions based on information already proven wrong. Global warming theorists who act as though this information is the word of God have taken the definition of non-sequitur to another level. Neuman points this out: “the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has acted as the main scaremonger for the global warming lobby that led to the Kyoto Protocol.” However, “the IPCC is a political, not scientific, body.” Only liberal extremists still beat the global warming drum — you shouldn’t be listening. No compatible source was found for this video. However, global warming myths continue to circulate periodically, despite being dispelled at length. For instance, there is the worry of our ecosystems being disrupted by rising temperatures or increasing CO2. Numerous studies show that there is no proof of rising temperatures distinct from natural system variations, and atmospheric CO2 is a beneficial fertilizer for plants! Regardless of the causes of these variations, the planet’s ecosystems have been adapting since the beginning of time. Almost as an urban legend, abnormal ice melting claims about both the north and south pole regions continue. But the only thing that is abnormal is that anyone believes them. I had two liberal colleagues at the CIA who believed in global warming and neither had any proof to justify their opinions. One had just experienced a hurricane and said that he would crush anyone’s head who was a non-believer in global warming. He was later fired, not because of his global warming beliefs, but because of his poor analytical skills. Our very liberal office allowed the other colleague to show slides from a vacation trip to the Arctic Circle. In addition, an alleged diminishing local animal population was presented as further proof. Of course, no real proof was presented. As one of the senior analysts of the office, I took no real part in the discussions. Office politics aside, I took to heart Mark Twain’s saying, “never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.” However, in their defense, they never professed to be experts — they were just more misguided liberals (is that redundant?) who are plentiful everywhere including the intelligence agencies. How can you argue with the so-called global warming experts that use the inanest ‘evidence’ and arguments to support their claims? For instance, it is amazing how many ‘experts’ use fictional movies about global warming to support their claims! If Al Gore gives up on Global Warming, he should move on to vampires, werewolves, and zombies. There are plenty of movies with that type of scientific evidence! I’m surprised that people aren’t curious why there are no other climate claims other than global warming. For example, what happened to concerns about oceans. Seriously, decades ago severe pollution and rising sea levels was as big of a concern as global warming. I read that there was a swordfish in the Smithsonian that was over 150 years old, and that a group of global warming advocates would have conclusive proof of the effects of industrial man if the tissue in the swordfish was significantly different from fish of today. However, examination showed that it wasn’t. Thus, they had to go back to their old theory of rising oceans, which of course, can’t be proven either. When I was living in the D.C. area, one of the stations was particularly proud of their new Doppler radar that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. They touted that it could predict snow arrival, as well as depth. As a former Army air defender with a knowledge of this radar, I didn’t think they fully understood its capabilities or value. The other stations predicted the weather just as well without the radar, one station even used an old wooden yardstick to show the depth of the snow. Their depth measured the exact same as the station with the Doppler. Some cynics believe accuracy was never the goal in any global warming forecasts anyway; the goal was always to gain more money, power, and influence. I agree with other rational, logical ‘climate deniers’ that “the Earth’s climate has always changed, and very likely will continue to change, regardless of what humans do. What is now clear, though, is that the establishment has no idea what those changes will be — much less what drives the changes or how to control them.” However, does it really matter to a liberal what the truth is? They control almost all of the main stream media,which in turn presents their propaganda. It is shamefully evident why there are so few conservative messages from the media. If the left are so correct, shouldn’t they still compare and contrast their opinion with others to prove their point?


Clinton, who has grown increasingly public and vocal in recent weeks, appears ready to drive the bus again. But do we have to be the passengers? By T.A. Frank; VanityFair: With Donald Trump busy spreading havoc around the world—most recently tweeting about James Comey’s testimony, or feeding into the crisis over Qatar—it’s reasonable to ask who can be bothered to gripe about Hillary Clinton. But I can. One makes the time. Or maybe one doesn’t, but in a two-party system there’s only one alternative to the party of Trump, and the role of Clinton in that party is therefore important. Lately, it has been increasing. Hillary has been making high-profile public appearances and started talking frankly about her distaste for Trump and her dismay over the people and things that cost her the election. She has even founded a PAC called Onward Together, a 501(c)(4) that will “advance progressive values.” Whether we like it or not, the Clintons are back in the game. It’s up to the rest of us to figure out if we approve. Just about everything we do lends itself to a generous or hostile interpretation. Our friends think we feed the poor because we have genuine compassion, and our enemies think we do so because we want to look good. The benign take on motives isn’t always closest to the truth, but it’s the better bet. (On the occasions that I’ve had an inside view of something in the glare of the press, those with the darkest take on it have usually been wrong.) I’ve been tough on Chelsea Clinton—hard not to be—but Hillary Clinton has a much higher accomplishment-to-self-regard ratio. So why not start generously? To read rest of article visit VanityFair. The Clinton Blame Game: Hillary Needs to Accept Responsibility for Loss No compatible source was found for this video. By Brian Brinker; OpsLens: Now that Hillary Clinton is making her way back into the public spotlight, we’re starting to hear a lot more about who’s to blame for her loss. Of course, President Trump is at the top of her list. So too are members of her campaign staff, pollsters, The New York Times, supporters who didn’t show up at the polls, James Comey, Putin and the Russians, and various others. You know whose name you’re not going to find? Hillary Clinton’s own. Save perhaps for President Trump, no one else is singularly so responsible for her loss than Hillary herself. Yet, she has so far proven unwilling to take any of the blame. As Hillary stated in a recent interview, “I take responsibility for every decision I make—but that’s not why I lost.” In other words, the blame doesn’t fall on Hillary’s shoulders, at least in her mind. However, as the nominee and candidate for president, no one else should have to shoulder as much blame as Hillary. And I say this as someone who does believe that sexism and other “unfair” factors played a role. Still, it wasn’t sexism that inspired Hillary to ignore voters in Michigan and Wisconsin and to jet set out to California to meet with rich donors. And it wasn’t sexism that inspired a largely negative campaign that focused on why people should vote against Donald Trump, rather than why they should vote for Hillary Clinton. Turns out that her campaign didn’t inspire a lot of people to the polls. Sexism may have been a factor in Hillary’s inability to connect with voters, especially working and middle class voters. But there were many other factors as well. Hillary has a tendency of coming off as an elitist. She can’t pour a beer, she hasn’t driven a car in years, and she always seemed to struggle to relate to people directly. Her campaign, meanwhile, was mostly tone deaf. After winning the DNC nomination, she largely blew off Michigan and Wisconsin. The problem is that if you want midwestern voters, you have to meet with them and respect them. You can’t ignore them and skip off to sunny California to eat triple-digit meals and hob knob with celebrities and millionaires instead. To read rest of article visit OpsLens.


General Issam Zahreddine in Deir Ezzor BEIRUT, LEBANON (4:50 P.M.) – The battle for Al-Mayadeen proved to be a decisive victory for the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) and their allies, as they were able to successfully uproot the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) from this large city in the Deir Ezzor Governorate. For ISIS, their defeat at Al-Mayadeen could not come at a worse time, as their battlefield woes in Al-Raqqa and central Syria have handicapped their remaining forces inside the country. On Sunday, Syrian news channels posted several videos showing the aftermath of the Al-Mayadeen battle and the recently liberated areas surrounding the city. The footage showed scores of dead ISIS terrorists and a large number of armored vehicles that were destroyed by the Syrian Arab Army during their one week long offensive. Gone. With Al-Mayadeen liberated, the Syrian Army will now turn their attention to the provincial capital and Al-‘Umar Oil Fields in order to expel the Islamic Sate from more areas in Syria.


Dozens of protesters gathered Saturday at Lawyers Mall in Annapolis to talk about President Donald Trump. This time, they were in support of him. About 50 people of diverse background who turned out for the Making America Great Again, Already! rally wore Trump T-shirts and hats, posed for pictures with Trump signs and waved Trump flags to show their support for the president’s agenda. It is the same site where numerous rallies have been held with speakers who have been critical of the president. Trump “has people against him … from within the party, from the media. We are here to support and endorse what he has been doing for the military and the economy,” said Sajid Tarar, a Muslim immigrant from Pakistan and founder of Muslim Americans for Trump. The rally comes at a time of intense controversy for the president. An ABC Post poll from this month showed 66 percent of Americans said Trump has done more to divide the country than unite it. He recently criticized NFL players taking a knee during the national anthem to protest police brutality against African-Americans. And the rally was held the same day as marches with speakers expected to be critical of the president were staged across the country in support of racial justice. Another is planned Sunday at Lawyers Mall. But Saturday, the crowd outside the State House had a different message. The rally, co-sponsored by Muslim Americans for Trump and Sikh Americans for Trump, was intended to bring together minority communities not typically associated with Trump’s largely white base and demonstrate support for Trump’s ideas. Tarar has been a vocal Trump supporter from early on; he prayed onstage at the Republican National Convention and spoke favor of the then-candidate. Trump’s statements about Muslims and Islam are not directed at the faith as a whole, Tarar said, nor at every Muslim American. It would be impossible, Tarar said, to cast blame on every person belonging to the world’s second-largest religion. “As a Muslim, I saw him as a relief. I saw him as the person who can fight the terrorism,” Tarar said. He said Trump’s travel ban, which originally blocked immigrants from Iran, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen and Sudan, isn’t a ban at all but a pause, to ensure thorough vetting of the people from these countries. The original restriction on travel from these six countries has expired and been replaced with an order that bans varying degrees of immigration from Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen. Tarar and Sikh Americans for Trump founder Jesse Singh both immigrated to the U.S. — “legally,” Singh told the crowd. Like Tarar, he attended the president’s inauguration. Singh said when he first arrived in Dulles International Airport in Virginia, he saw a futuristic marvel in the sleek terminals and busses that whisked passengers to and fro. But the bus that dropped him off in 1986 is the bus that he is still taking today, adding that the more impressive airports are now the ones in his home country of India. “Last year I went to India, and that airport I left is now looking futuristic,” Singh said. “When I came to Dulles Airport, the same 30-year-old bus with loose doors and torn carpet came to receive me. So, when Donald Trump says our infrastructure has gone down, he’s totally right.” Other speakers, including Republican strategist and commentator Ivan Garcia-Hidalgo, praised the president’s crackdown on illegal immigration and promise to build a border wall. At one point, a “Build that wall!” chant briefly broke out among the rallygoers. Garcia-Hidalgo spoke of a booming economy, a low unemployment rate and a strong stock market, and defended Trump’s response to the devastation to Puerto Rico following Hurricane Maria. Michael Cohen, who serves as Trump’s personal lawyer, also spoke at the rally via phone and thanked those gathered for their support. Congress has not yet approved funding for the border wall, but the Trump administration has announced companies that are building prototypes. Additionally, Congress has not passed any economic legislation, but the administration introduced a tax reform plan Wednesday. Maryland is a predominantly blue state. More than 60 percent of state voters cast ballots for Hillary Clinton in the last presidential election, and she edged Trump by 6,016 votes in Anne Arundel County. But Marcus Anthony, a Fairfax County, Virginia, resident, said he attended the rally to “preserve the other side.” “We live in a highly liberal area,” Marcus said. “As it is today, a lot of our side is continuously oppressed … It’s our responsibility to retain our perspectives.” All minorities are not against the president, Singh said. “Minorities have the same agenda as any other Americans,” he said. “We want America to be great again.”


PHOTO: AP "I can't believe that I'm saying that a candidate for president of the United States has bragged about sexually assaulting women." And so First Lady Michelle Obama captured the sentiments of a majority of Americans during an emotional stump speech for Hillary Clinton on Thursday afternoon that lambasted Republican nominee Donald Trump's repeated demeaning and derogatory treatment of women. Speaking before a crowd in Manchester, New Hampshire, Mrs. Obama stated that the leaked Access Hollywood video of Trump bragging about groping, kissing, and trying to have sex with women has "shaken [her] to [her] core." "It would be dishonest and disingenuous to move on to the next thing like this was all just a bad dream," the first lady said. "We can't sweep this under the rug as another sad footnote in a disturbing election season. This was a powerful individual speaking freely and openly about sexually predatory behavior." Refusing to call Trump by name—only referring to him as Hillary Clinton's "opponent"—Mrs. Obama denounced the Republican candidate's defense of his past remarks as simple "locker room talk" while explaining how personal these comments felt to her—and for all women. For Trump, the 2005 Access Hollywood appearance was not an isolated incident. He has gone on record numerous times to comment on women in, typically, one of two ways: As objects of his own sexual gratification or as threats that should be wholly diminished for their intellect, ambition, or appearance. Though Trump has repeatedly claimed the "locker room talk" defense since the tape leaked last Friday, numerous women have since come forward to report their own sexual assaults at the hands of Donald Trump—meaning that this wasn't just talk, it was predatory action. Like millions of Americans, Mrs. Obama, felt shock and outrage over Trump's behavior, and could not believe that there are still people in this country who view women with such little regard, let alone the fact that one of them is trying to become the next president of the United States. "This is not normal. This not politics as usual. This is disgraceful," Mrs. Obama said. "It doesn't matter what party you belong to—Democrat, Republican, Independent—no woman deserves to be treated this way." Asserting that Trump is in no way qualified for the executive branch or be a role model for children who look up to the president, the first lady then praised Hillary Clinton for her longstanding commitment to public service (even saying that she has more experience than both "Barack or Bill"), before declaring that the former secretary of state would be the only candidate who could unite the country and guide the American public with strength and compassion. Making a call to undecided voters, Mrs. Obama urged them not to cast a protest vote or sit the election out entirely, saying that doing so would only help clear a path for Trump to the White House. She referenced the 2012 election, in which President Obama won New Hampshire by 4,0 votes. Though that figure might have seemed like a definitive win for the incumbent president, it broke down to a total of just 66 votes per precinct—or, dozens of votes that could make or break a candidate's victory. She additionally cited the power of women voters in this election, and the influence they can have in choosing the next president. A recent report from Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight election forecast suggested that if only women voted, Hillary Clinton would win by an overwhelming majority (which, horrifyingly, prompted a #Repealthe19th social media campaign among Trump supporters). Mrs. Obama invited all women to take this power seriously and use it to elect a candidate who has not only been a pillar of support for women, but would teach America's children that any kind of degrading, hateful rhetoric is wholly unacceptable. "We, as women, have all the power we need to determine the outcome of this election," Mrs. Obama said. "We have the knowledge, we have a voice, we have a vote. And on November 8, we as women, we as Americans, we as decent human beings, can declare that enough is enough and we do not tolerate this kind of behavior."


WASHINGTON — Former undercover CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson is looking to crowdfund enough money to buy Twitter so President Donald Trump can’t use it. Wilson launched the fundraiser last week, tweeting: “If @Twitter executives won’t shut down Trump’s violence and hate, then it’s up to us. #BuyTwitter #BanTrump.” The GoFundMe page for the fundraiser says Trump’s tweets “damage the country and put people in harm’s way.” As of Wednesday morning, she had raised less than $6,0 of the billion-dollar goal. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders calls the fundraiser a “ridiculous attempt” to shut down the president’s First Amendment rights. Wilson’s identity as a CIA operative was leaked by an official in former President George W. Bush’s administration in 2003. She left the agency in 2005. If @Twitter executives won’t shut down Trump’s violence and hate, then it’s up to us. #BuyTwitter #BanTrump — Valerie Plame Wilson (@ValeriePlame) August 18, 2017


The FBI is advising people to hang up if they receive a call from a woman screaming for help. A decades-old virtual kidnapping scam is placing more U.S. residents at risk of becoming potential victims, the FBI warned on its website. The scheme takes many forms, but basically callers trick victims into paying ransoms to free family or friends who have been “kidnapped.” The virtual abductors coerce victims to pay a ransom before victims can find out that no one has been kidnapped. The FBI had been tracking virtual kidnapping calls primarily from prisons in Mexico between 2013 and 2015. The callers targeted individuals who spoke Spanish, the FBI said. Most of the victims were from the Los Angeles and Houston areas. Today's top news by email The local news you need to start your day Recaptcha requires verification. protected by reCAPTCHA Privacy - Terms Privacy - Terms The FBI issued the warning because kidnappers have widened their pool of potential victims by no longer targeting only specific individuals and Spanish speakers. The callers also are cold-calling numbers in various cities. In a recent investigation, the FBI found that more than 80 people have fallen victim to the new tactics in California, Minnesota, Idaho and Texas. Those victims paid more than $87,0 in ransom. An FBI spokeswoman for the Kansas City offices said she was not aware of any instances that have occurred in Kansas or Missouri where the FBI was involved. The scam works this way: The potential victim answers a call and hears a woman screaming, “Help me!” The victim might blurt out a name, like Mary, asking her if she’s OK. At that point, the caller will tell the victim that Mary has been kidnapped and she will be harmed if ransom isn’t paid quickly. The scam is successful when victims don’t know the whereabouts of their loved ones. The scammers typically demand that the ransoms are wired to Mexico. The amount is typically less than $2,0 because of legal restrictions for wiring larger amounts across the border, the FBI said. However, two victims in Houston were coerced to pay larger ransoms by making money drops. A federal grand jury charged a 34-year-old Houston woman in July with 10 counts, including wire fraud and money laundering, for her involvement in the scam. The charges are the first federal indictment in a virtual kidnapping case, the FBI said. Robert A. Cronkleton: 816-234-4261, @cronkb How to avoid falling victim If you receive a call from someone demanding ransom for an alleged kidnap victim, the FBI suggests: Hang up the phone. Don’t call out your loved one’s name if you do respond to call. Request to speak with the alleged victim. Ask questions only the alleged victim would know. Listen to the voice of the alleged victim if they do speak. Try to contact the alleged victim on the phone, text or social media. Don’t agree to pay a ransom. If you believe a real kidnapping has taken place, call 911. Source: FBI


A remarkable thing happened recently. You might have missed it, because while it happened in plain sight, it also happened in increments. You had to put the pieces together to appreciate the magnitude of it. You see, America repudiated its president. This, of course, was in response to that pathetic performance in the wake of the tragedy in Charlottesville, Va., when he suggested moral equivalence between white supremacists and those who protest them. In response, America — a pretty broad swath of it, at least — has condemned him. The reference is not to the shellacking he took from pundits or the reprovals of GOP leaders Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan. These things were to be expected. But you did not expect the Chairman and CEO of Merck to quit the president’s American Manufacturing Council. And Ken Frazier’s departure, which he framed as “a matter of personal conscience,” was just the opening salvo. He was followed through the door by members of that panel and others. By week’s end, two presidential business advisory groups had ceased to exist and plans for a third had been scrapped. Members of the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities also resigned en masse. Meantime, Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s club and de facto presidential getaway in Florida, saw a rash of charities canceling their fundraising events. The Washington Post listed the Salvation Army, the American Red Cross, Susan G. Komen and the American Cancer Society among those who have chosen to hold their galas elsewhere. And there is yet more. Bob Corker, a respected Republican senator who has heretofore sought to engage with the president, raised sharp questions not just about Trump’s competence, but also his “stability,” and called for “radical changes” in the White House. Five military chiefs also spoke out against the bigotry in Charlottesville, in a striking reproach of their commander. Graduates of Liberty University called on fellow alumni to return their diplomas to protest LU president Jerry Falwell Jr.’s support for Trump. And it was announced that the president would not be attending the Kennedy Center Honors in December, nor host the traditional White House reception for the five honorees after three of them had spoken of boycotting the event. And really: How toxic are you when Lionel Richie doesn’t want to shake your hand? It seems that a great many Americans reached a moment of decision and reacted as you would have hoped. Trump and his apologists and enablers should take note, because this does not bode well for them. For all its powers of law making, war making, budget drafting, and diplomacy, the presidency also embodies the power of moral suasion. A president uses what Theodore Roosevelt called “the bully pulpit” — the honor and prestige of his office — to stand for what is right and remind us to do likewise. Problematically, that office is occupied now by a man with no moral compass, a man whose only true North is self. So what happened was sadly predictable. What was not predictable was this chorus of castigation from such a wide spectrum of American life. The stunning rebuke offers heartening evidence that we have not yet completely abandoned who and what we are supposed to be. Again, this is a moment of decision. Those who chose to separate themselves from Trump declared their values — and character. Those who supported him did, too.


Unable to play video. HTML5 is not supported! After the violent protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, over a Confederate monument, internet companies are making it difficult for white supremacist groups to organize online. Neo-Nazi website the Daily Stormer was booted from web host GoDaddy after the rally. GoDaddy tweeted the site violated its terms of service. The Daily Stormer then tried to move to Google and then a Russian domain, but both hosts rejected the site. Twitter and LinkedIn also canceled Daily Stormer-related accounts, and YouTube has cracked down on accounts associated with alt-right figures. SEE MORE: Phoenix's Mayor Wants President Trump To Delay A Rally In The City White supremacists aren't being allowed to express themselves through song, either. Spotify is purging white supremacist music from its archives. And Pandora said it's making sure there's nothing like that on its service. This was a trend before the "Unite the Right" rally even started. Airbnb deleted accounts of users it suspected were trying to book rooms in Charlottesville before the event. White supremacists aren't just being blocked from posting on the internet. They're also being blocked from profiting from it. Crowd-funding sites like Patreon and GoFundMe blocked the accounts of alt-right figures and groups, forcing some to use a knockoff called Hatreon. Trending stories at Newsy.com


The Veterans Recognition Foundation built Veterans Park in Longview, Texas to serve as a thank you for the work of veterans in all branches of the military and as a reminder of their sacrifice. Unfortunately, something happened earlier this week in the park that has deeply upset many veterans and visitors. The Longview News-Journal reports that the statue of the Unknown Solider has been destroyed. Air Force veteran David Applewhite posted a photo to Facebook saying, “One of the statues guarding the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier monument has been pushed over by vandals at the Veterans Plaza in Longview! Was not young children who did this!” Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be any news on who could have ruined the statue, nor if this was definitely an act of vandalism. Some are speculating that it could have been the result of a structural failure in a weak part of the sculpture. Several Longview residents are expressing their anger on social media, calling for all kinds of punishments for the vandals. Others are just hoping to see the statue repaired as quickly as possible. The Veterans Plaza website has a “ support” page where they accept donations to rebuild what was lost.


Republicans knew what they were getting when they overwhelmingly voted for Bruce Rauner. He made no secret of his support for abortion. In 2014, his wife, Diana Rauner, went so far as to take out an ad assuring pro-choice Democrats of her husband's stance. Despite what you've been reading about the far right's consternation with Bruce Rauner over his ostensible support for abortion in Illinois, I think it's been a pretty good month for the governor. The union-busting Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees case that he initiated has made it to the Supreme Court. And he's got liberal groups like Planned Parenthood praising him for his stance on reproductive rights. It looks like he may be able to put together the band of rabid right-wingers and abortion-rights moderates who helped elect him in the first place. I know that sounds like the oddest of coalitions—but it just goes to show you what a clever politician can buy with his billions. The Republican right-to-lifers are furious that Rauner flip-flopped and signed HB 40, the reproductive rights bill that expanded Medicaid funding for some abortions and eliminated the controversial "trigger provision" from state law. (The trigger language would've made abortions illegal in Illinois should Roe v. Wade be overturned.) And many, including Steve Bannon, are talking about recruiting someone to mount a primary challenge against Rauner. But I think it's mostly bluster. In fact, I can't understand why they're so outraged. They knew what they were getting when they overwhelmingly voted for Rauner back in 2014. Rauner made no secret of his support for abortion. In 2014, his wife, Diana Rauner, went so far as to take out an ad assuring pro-choice Democrats that when it came to abortion rights her husband would be no different than his opponent, former governor Pat Quinn. Backed by many pro-choice moderates in DuPage County, the North Shore, and the Gold Coast, Rauner edged out Quinn and promptly went to work bankrupting public education by vetoing the budget. Earlier this year, the governor panicked when it looked as though he might be losing support among downstate Republicans. So he assured right-to-life legislators he would veto HB40. That enraged pro-choice voters, who claimed he was betraying his lifelong commitment to their cause. Rauner found himself in a jam. He had to decide which group he could least afford to alienate on the eve of next year's election: Gold Coast and North Shore moderates or rabid Republicans. Obviously, he went with the former, at least partly because, if push came to shove, they might actually vote for a Democrat. As for the rabid right, he probably figured he'd give 'em a tax break and they'd follow him off a cliff. Of course, Rauner was slick about it. Over the summer he made a real show of inviting various pro-choice women to his office to explain to him how important it was to pass HB40. And then on September 28, he signed it, making a big deal about it, like he was King Solomon making a wrenching decision as opposed to a lifelong abortion supporter doing what he'd promised to do four years ago. In any case, it seems to have worked. Key players in the pro-choice movement fell for it. When Rauner signed HB40, Planned Parenthood of Illinois sent an e-mail calling on members to "thank Governor Rauner." Puh-lease! A more accurate response would've been "Thanks for nothing, Bruce!" Even if the strategy fails and he doesn't win reelection, Rauner's in a perfect position to achieve his great dream of damaging, if not destroying, public unions in Illinois thanks to the Janus case. Mark Janus is a state employee who argues that his First Amendment rights are being violated because state law requires him to contribute a "fair share" portion of his paycheck to the union that represents him—in this case, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. In particular, he doesn't think he should have to donate money to a union with which he disagrees politically. It's called a fair-share contribution because the money guarantees that workers share the cost of financing a union that represents them in bargaining and grievance hearings. On February 9, 2015, a few weeks after he took office, Rauner issued an executive order halting automatic fair-share deductions from paychecks. Several unions and attorney general Lisa Madigan sued and Rauner's executive order was overturned. Rauner also filed a suit in federal court seeking to stop automatic fair-share contributions on First Amendment grounds. In 2016, a federal judge ruled against Rauner, decreeing that the governor didn't have standing in the case. By then Janus had joined the case—as a state employee, he clearly has standing. Janus is being represented by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, a union-busting outfit that's financially supported by the Koch brothers, the Walton Family Foundation, and other stalwarts of the far right. On September 28, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Janus's case. The suit is similar to one filed by Rebecca Friedrichs, a teacher in California, who lost when the Supreme Court was deadlocked 4-4. Since then President Trump and the Senate have put conservative Neil Gorsuch on the court. So unless another judge flips—c'mon Justice Kennedy, you can do it!—it looks like SCOTUS will issue a bruising blow against unions, which will have to scramble to keep up their funding. This is a cruel irony on many levels. For one thing, government employees such as Janus will be relatively defenseless without unions if they're fired or harassed by a powerful politician like Rauner. Good luck getting the National Right to Work Foundation to help them with that. As for Rauner's friends at Planned Parenthood—well, with a drop in membership, unions will be less able to help elect Democrats. So really the assault on unions is an attempt to cripple the Democratic Party. You don't think the Koch brothers actually give a hoot about workers like Mark Janus, do you? If Democrats can't beat Republicans, they can't enact liberal-minded measures, like—oh, just to pick one—reproductive rights. Think about this, Planned Parenthood. Your good friend, Bruce, is throwing you under the bus once again. Only this time he's got a more roundabout way of doing it. v