The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

HUGE: Former Top Spy Admits Obama Ordered Investigation of Trump Campaign

Posted on | October 8, 2019 | Comments Off on HUGE: Former Top Spy Admits Obama Ordered Investigation of Trump Campaign

 

James Clapper, who was Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the Obama administrations, was on CNN yesterday and was asked, “Are you concerned that Barr or Durham’s investigation will find wrongdoing and seek to punish former intelligence officials like you?”

The message I’m getting from all this is, apparently what we were supposed to have done was to ignore the Russian interference, ignore the Russian meddling and the threat that it poses to us, and oh, by the way, blown off what the then commander in chief, President Obama, told us to do, which was to assemble all the reporting that we could that we had available to us and put it in one report that the president could pass on to the Congress and to the next administration. And while we’re at it, declassify as much as we possibly could to make it public, and that’s what we did. It’s kind of disconcerting now to be investigated for, you know having done our duty and done what we were told to do by the president.

 

Rush Limbaugh went off on this yesterday, because what we now know about the “Russian interference” — an illusion of “collusion” created as a pretext to spy on the Trump campaign — exposes Clapper’s investigation as part of political hit-job orchestrated by Democrats. For Clapper to twice say this was done on Obama’s orders is huge.



 

Category: Barack Obama, Corruption, Donald Trump, Russia

Professor Chikaodinaka Nwankpa

Posted on | October 8, 2019 | 1 Comment

 

How do you pronounce that name? The answer is worth $200,000:

A university professor from Philadelphia blew nearly $200,000 of federal research dollars at strip clubs in the City of Brotherly Love — and now his former employer is stuck with the bill, a report said Monday.
Drexel University settled with federal prosecutors for $190,000 on Monday to avoid a potential lawsuit from the Justice Department, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported.
The settlement was an effort to recoup funds that the former head of Drexel’s electrical engineering department, Chikaodinaka Nwankpa, squandered at topless bars including Club Risque and Cheerleaders in South Philly, according to the report.
The bills racked up by Nwankpa were spent on dancers for “goods and services” at the clubs over a decade from 2007 to 2017, federal prosecutors alleged.

Hey, what’s a couple hundred thousand bucks in entertainment expenses, when you’re bringing in millions of dollars in federal grants?

[Nwankpa] spent 27 years teaching in Drexel’s electrical and computer engineering department, chairing it from 2015 until he left.
During that time, he was among the university’s top attractors of research grant funds, boasting in his faculty bio that he had landed more than $10 million in research money throughout his career.

Insert “Higher Education Bubble” reference here.

(Hat-tip: Kirby McCain on Twitter.)



 

Category: Crime, Education

The Ivy League Is Decadent and Depraved: Yale Is Now America’s Rape Capital?

Posted on | October 8, 2019 | Comments Off on The Ivy League Is Decadent and Depraved: Yale Is Now America’s Rape Capital?

 

Nowhere in America are women more likely to be sexually assaulted than on the campus of Yale University. At least, that’s what Yale officials claim in their latest annual report from the campus Title IX office, which “indicates an extraordinarily dangerous campus . . . with a much higher violent crime rate than any of the nation’s most dangerous cities,” as K.C. Johnson observes. In other words, according to this official Yale document, parents are paying $72,100 a year (including room and board) to send their daughters to a university campus where they’re more likely to be raped than in West Baltimore or East Saint Louis.

Why is Yale proclaiming itself Rape City, U.S.A.?

This is the work of Dr. Stephanie Spangler, who has headed Yale’s Title IX office since 2011. Dr. Spangler apparently considers it her duty to report the maximum number of sexual assaults, and has established a system that encourages students to make accusations. Another innovative way of promoting Yale’s reputation as a dangerous place for women is Dr. Spangler’s use of “a more expansive definition of sexual assault” than that offered in state or federal law,” as Johnson explains:

She has never provided an explanation as to why Yale has chosen to redefine a commonly-understood term, but the broader definition allows figures that create a greater sense of crisis. Second, the latest Spangler report (repeating a change that debuted in her spring 2019 report) contains a chart of all reports at Yale since the implementation of the new Title IX regime in 2011 — culminating in a remarkable 169 Title IX complaints between January 1 and June 30, 2019.

What’s really happening at Yale, of course, is that feminists have taken over the campus and incited anti-male hatred among female students, resulting in a dramatic increase in accusations, which have doubled in the past three years. A majority of the claims (52%) were for “sexual harassment,” which is not rape or assault, of course, but gets lumped into the category “sexual misconduct” to create a larger statistic because more is better, you see. If Yale is going to spent hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for a Title IX witch-hunt, Dr. Spangler in her role as the witch-hunter-in-chief had better find a lot of witches. The more Dr. Spangler does to increase the “rape culture” hysteria on campus, the more every freshman girl at Yale gets the message that if a boy so much as speaks to her, she’s a victim of “sexual harassment” and — ZOOM! — the number of “misconduct” reports has doubled in the three years.

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.)

UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! If you’ve read my book Sex Trouble, you know that 21st-century feminism is an anti-male hate movement, and if you’ve followed my blog, you know how toxic the climate has become on America’s university campuses, as I wrote in May:

Is heterosexuality even legal at Yale University anymore? . . .
[A Yale senior] got suspended just a few weeks before he was scheduled to graduate because this girl decides retroactively that this brief moment when the condom came off during a 90-minute sexual encounter constituted “assault,” and Yale’s administration just goes along with this? If you’ll read the entire 66-page complaint you’ll find a lot of other reasons not to believe the accuser, including the fact that she claims to have been sexually assaulted more than once before she hooked up with John Doe, suggesting perhaps she has a victimhood mentality. But the larger point is, how can any guy at Yale know he won’t be the next “John Doe,” denied due process and expelled on the basis of a flimsy accusation?
The only safe course is NEVER HAVE SEX WITH A YALE GIRL.

Just tell your sons to avoid New Haven entirely.



 

Category: Sex Trouble, The Ivy League Is Depraved and Decadent

Rule 5 Monday: Chris Noel

Posted on | October 8, 2019 | 2 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Well, this week’s appetizer literally came out of nowhere. I was browsing Twitter and came across a piece on forgotten pinup girls from the Vietnam War, one of whom was Chris Noel. A star of beach movies in the 1960, Chris became famous to Vietnam Vets as hostess of the Armed Forces Radio & TV Network show “A Date With Chris”. She made frequent visits to the troops (twice as part of the Bob Hope tours) and was shot down twice. She went back to acting after the war, with roles in both movies and television. She’s also remained active in veterans’ causes: in 1993, she opened a small shelter for homeless veterans in Boynton beach, Florida.

Here she is in one of her pin-up shots.

Ninety Miles From Tyranny begins this week’s post with Hot Pick Of The Late Night, The 90 Miles Mystery Box Episode #762, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns. At Animal Magnetism, there’s Rule Five Climate Hypocrite Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon.

EBL’s herd this week includes Neo Luddites, Kill the Irishman, Halloween Is Coming, Diahann Carroll, The First Bond Girl, and Zazie Beetz.

A View From The Beach brings us Alice Braga, Queen of the South, Dolphins at Home in the Potomac Again, Fish Pic Friday – Alysha Aratari, Tanlines Thursday, Need a First Aid Kit?, Gone Fishin’, Tattoos for Tuesday,  Monday Morning Eyeful and Palm Sunday.

Last but not least, Proof Positive’s Vintage Babe is Barbara Eden.

Thanks to everyone for the luscious linkagery!

Amazon Warehouse Deals
Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Shop Sex & Sensuality Gifts




Category: Rule 5

In The Mailbox: 10.07.19

Posted on | October 7, 2019 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 10.07.19

— compiled by Wombat-socho

Rule 5 Monday will be posted later this evening.
One regrets the delay.

OVER THE TRANSOM
357 Magnum: Paris Knife Attack & Radical Islam
Knowledge Buffet: Socialism Is All About Sex, Death, & Power
Locomotive Breath: Days That End In “Y”
EBL: Democrats, Spare Me Your Crocodile Tears Over Kurdistan
Twitchy: Media’s Insane Obsession With Destroying Joker Has Reached A Fever Pitch
Louder With Crowder: Transgender “Detransitioning” On The Rise, And The LGBTQ Community Isn’t Helping

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: The Totalitarian Church Of Gay, also, Men & Women Have Always Been Equal
American Greatness: ICIG Atkinson Refuses To Tell Congress Why Changes To Whistleblower Rules Were Backdated
American Power: James Bond Nostalgia
American Thinker: Many American Jews Need To Atone For Their Sins Against Donald Trump, also, Brennan Hears Barr’s “Chilling” Footsteps
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday
Babalu Blog: Bolivia’s Socialist Ruler Evo Morales Triples His Wealth & Has Private Jet – Blames The Rich For Damaging Environment
BattleSwarm: Joe Rogan – Transwomen “Beat The Shit” Out Of Real Women, also, Democratic Presidential Clown Car Update
Camp of the Saints: Hong Kong & America’s Dilemma
Cafe Hayek: Government Policy Is Not Carried Out By God-Like Creatures
CDR Salamander: Larger Navy? How About A Better Coast Guard? – on Midrats
Da Tech Guy: I Did Some Reporting On The Big Stuff, also, Tlaib Gets Pass For Bigoted Statement, Blackhawks Announcer Pilloried For Innocent Remark
Don Surber: Kick Mittens Out Of The Republican Caucus
First Street Journal: Once Again The NYT Comes Out Against First Amendment Protections For Wrongthinkers
The Geller Report: All Meat In Dearborn Schools Must Now Be Halal, also, 19 Muslims Face Assault, Riot & Terroristic Threat Charges At St. Cloud MN High School Fight
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post of The Day, also, NGC 1300
Hollywood In Toto: Did The Media’s War On Joker and Todd Phillips Backfire?
JustOneMinute: Ready For Some Football!
Legal Insurrection: Fauxcahontas Caught Lying Again, also, Democrats Building Impeachment Star Chamber Of Whistleblowers & Leakers
The PanAm Post: No, Slavery Did Not Make America Rich, also, Elections In Argentina & Bolivia – Another Socialist Disaster
Power Line: The Ad That CNN Wouldn’t Run, also, Dilbert’s Rules Of Reading
Shark Tank: Rep. Brian Mast Challenged By “Another Progressive Swamp Creature”
Shot In The Dark: Know How You Can Tell That The Economy’s Doing Well Under A Republican President?
The Political Hat: News Of The Week
This Ain’t Hell: Another Ten Return, also, Admiral Says Hundreds Of Russian Mercenaries In Venezuela
Victory Girls: Gun Sales Up Thanks To Democrats, also, South Park Trolls Beijing, NBA Over Censorship
Volokh Conspiracy: District Judge Rules Against Blue State Lawsuit Challenging Cap On SALT Deductions
Weasel Zippers: Audio, Email Evidence Shows DNC Colluded With Ukraine To Boost Clinton by Harming Trump, also, Dem Congresswoman Booed At Town Hall In Michigan When She Comes Out For Impeaching Trump
Mark Steyn: Baby Food For Thought, also, Pussies Galore

Amazon Warehouse Deals




Category: Linkagery

Ilhan Omar Is Divorcing Her Husband (The One Who’s Not Her Brother)

Posted on | October 7, 2019 | Comments Off on Ilhan Omar Is Divorcing Her Husband (The One Who’s Not Her Brother)

 

Democrats are such high-quality people:

Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar filed for divorce Friday, just over a month after she denied to a local TV reporter that she was separated.
Omar sat for an on-camera interview with WCCO reporter Esme Murphy on Aug. 27, who asked “Are you separated from your husband? Are you dating someone?”
Omar replied: “No, I am not. And like I said yesterday, I have no interest in allowing the conversation about my personal life to continue.”
The question came the same day that the wife of Tim Mynett, her campaign consultant, filed for divorce in Washington, D.C., saying that Mynett told her he was having an affair with the congresswoman and was leaving her for Omar.
Five weeks later, Omar filed for divorce from her husband, Ahmed Hirsi, in Minnesota.
An anonymous source told the New York Post in early September that Hirsi and Omar had allegedly been living apart since March.
In the interview with Murphy, Omar also declined to answer questions about her brief marriage to another man, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, which occurred while she already had children with Hirsi and while she allegedly continued to live with Hirsi, according to public records. . . .
In 2015, Minnesota blogs began publishing extensive Instagram and Facebook posts by Omar, her family and her alleged family that indicate Ahmed Nur Said is her brother, but the posts were deleted.

Every word Ilhan Omar says is a lie. She is pervasively dishonest, which of course is why she’s a Democrat.



 

Category: Democrats, Islam, Minnesota

Our ‘Objective’ Media

Posted on | October 7, 2019 | Comments Off on Our ‘Objective’ Media

 

Is it necessary to remind readers that George Stephanopoulos is a partisan political operative, a former Clinton staffer?

On Sunday’s broadcast of “This Week,” host George Stephanopoulos opened his show with a report proclaiming a second “whistleblower.”
Stephanopoulos said, “Good morning. Welcome to ‘This Week,’ a week of head-snapping developments. The first key witness testimony to Congress. the first release of text messages from administration officials confirming the pressure campaign or Ukraine outlined in the original whistleblower complaint. That public request from President Trump calling on China to investigate Joe Biden. A new request for documents from Vice President Pence. This morning more breaking news. ABC News has learned that the legal team representing the first whistle-blower is now representing a second whistleblower. Attorney Mark Zaid said he is a member of the intelligence community with firsthand information on some of the allegations at issue.”

The truth about this “second whistleblower” trick:

Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who changed the rules governing “whistleblowing” to accommodate this hearsay gossip, will rue the day he did this. He said he was unaware that the “whistleblower,” reportedly a CIA functionary assigned to the White House years ago where he worked with anti-Trump Ukrainians to stop Trump and who has not worked there for two or three years, had first talked to congressional staff. He was unaware of it, perhaps because the whistleblower complaint form asks if he had previously told anyone, including congressional staff, about this and lied about that, subjecting himself to possible felony charges. Moreover, allowing in such unsubstantiated gossip by a liar who had no firsthand knowledge of the substance of the complaint will only unleash a flood of these baseless charges, tying up more government resources on nonsense.

It’s all a big psyops scheme, a partisan propaganda campaign, an orchestrated collusion between media, Democrats and “deep state” hacks.

(Hat-tip: Instapundit.)



 

Category: Corruption, Media Bias, Ukraine

The Eternal White Guilt Trip

Posted on | October 6, 2019 | Comments Off on The Eternal White Guilt Trip

Mark Bauerlein in American Greatness:

“The deliberate national penance that most Germans take for granted offers a striking contrast with the ways American have confronted their own national crimes.”
That’s a line from an article last month in The Atlantic. The article focuses on a supposedly sad divergence: while Germans have fully acknowledged their responsibility for the Holocaust and accepted their guilt, Americans have failed to do the same with their history of slavery and Jim Crow.
The comparison is the kind of stretch that only a pampered, liberal, Ivy-League educated professor who has spent lots of time in Europe could make. In truth, there is little evidence in the Atlantic essay that the author knows more about the antebellum and post-Reconstruction periods than one would acquire in a freshman U.S. history course. (She is a philosophy professor who now heads a center in Potsdam.) Nor does she acknowledge the relentless focus on African American history in high schools and colleges, among national book award winners, and by Hollywood. She seems to regard American slavery, too, as a perverse and unique condition, even though in 1800 slavery existed on every continent and had existed forever before, and that the Arab and South American slave trades dwarfed the North American market.
But when you’re voicing common liberal wisdom, you needn’t bother with historical particulars. Generalizations pass without scrutiny. Among the professors, you see, American guilt is a bien pensant basic. People have built successful careers rehearsing it over and over. . . .

You can read the whole thing, but before I say anything else, let me say this: Nothing is analogous to the Holocaust.

There have been other totalitarian regimes in modern history, but Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich were sui generis. Every attempt to condemn someone or something — anyone or anything — by comparing them to Hitler and the Nazis is an insult to historical memory. That the author of the Atlantic article, Susan Neiman, is herself a Jew does not give her license to make such a false and insulting analogy.

As Mark Bauerlein points out, slavery in the United States was not without historical precedent. If the institution of slavery in America differed from slavery in Cuba, Brazil or other nations in the Western hemisphere, the difference does not support an anti-American interpretation. Certainly slavery was not worse in the United States than in Latin American countries; in particular, slavery in the Caribbean sugar plantations was a deadly business, mainly due to the tropical climate. African slavery, which had long been established among the Arabs of North Africa, was imported to the New World to remedy a labor shortage in the European colonies. Every colonial power — Spain, Portugal, France, the Netherlands, England — resorted to slavery, and only anti-American prejudice could explain why the history of slavery is used to condemn the United States in a way it is never used to condemn any other nation. And as for Jim Crow, it ought not be forgotten that it was a segregated America that defeated Nazi Germany in World War II, which makes no sense if Jim Crow was analogous to the Holocaust.

In my lifetime — today is my 60th birthday — I’ve seen the history of slavery employed two different ways, equally dishonest. First, slavery (and racism generally) was portrayed as an evil unique to the South. This was just a way for liberal Yankees to put down Southerners, to smear the population of an entire region as morally inferior. Being a student of history, I was always willing to defend my homeland against such insults, because the fact is that the North was by no means innocent in regard to racism, or slavery for that matter. Go to Providence, Rhode Island, and look at those fine colonial mansions — how do you suppose the commercial shippers of Providence made their fortunes? What cargo might have been so lucrative as to have made such handsome profits possible? Widespread ignorance about the North’s role in slavery is, of course, a legacy of the North’s victory in the Civil War. “The winners write the history books,” as they say, and so anti-Southern propaganda (which had done so much to foment the crisis that led to the war) was smuggled into history, branding the South with a hateful stigma. To this day, many Yankees are utterly ignorant about the true facts. “Slavery’s hidden history in the mid-Hudson Valley coming to light,” was a headline last year in the Poughkeepsie (N.Y.) Journal, where most local residents had no idea that slaves once worked the farmlands of the region.

The anti-Southern version of slavery’s history, however, has more recently given way to the anti-white interpretation of slavery. This is leftist identity-politics grievance-mongering, a deliberately divisive libel intended to inflame racial resentment, justifying a “social justice” belief system borrowed from Marxist-Leninist ideology. Even white people whose ancestors did not even arrive in the United States until after the Civil War are expected to feel guilty about an institution in which they are not implicated, and the collective grievance of black people is extended even to people whose ancestors were never slaves in this country. For example, neither Barack Obama nor Kamala Harris are descended from African-American slaves, and yet are permitted to leverage racial identity politics to their advantage, without any critical scrutiny.

You are a “racist” is you object to this, however. That’s the permanent tactic of the modern Left — everything and everybody is racist, and if you don’t agree, your disagreement proves how racist you are. And here is Susan Neiman virtue-signalling in the Atlantic:

Like most white Americans, I was taught a history that was both comforting and triumphant. I wasn’t, of course, entirely ignorant of the ways in which the country failed to live up to the ideals on which it was founded, but those failures remained peripheral, and part of a narrative that sloped upward toward progress. Slavery was a crime, but we’d fought a war to outlaw it; segregation was unjust, but the civil-rights movement had overcome it. Barack Obama’s presidency seemed the natural coda to this hopeful story. Few people believed that the election of an African American president could end racism entirely, but no one expected the backlash we are witnessing now. If there’s a silver lining to a White House that — in its public statements, policy choices, and political strategy — regularly signals its support for white nationalism, it’s that white Americans have been forced to publicly examine their country’s history as never before.
Just a few years ago, major national media had to patiently explain that the monuments valorizing Confederate soldiers were not innocent tributes to recently fallen ancestors, but the deliberate attempt of organizations like the Daughters of the Confederacy to promote a false account of the Civil War that buttressed white-supremacist ideology. For those of us who are not professional historians, the years between the Emancipation Proclamation and the Montgomery bus boycott were largely blank.

Really? You have to be a “professional historian” to know anything about American race relations between 1865 and 1955? But it is false to smear the United Daughters of the Confederacy as propagators of “white-supremacist ideology”; they were concerned with preserving the memory of their ancestors, as anyone should be. The cause of Southern independence was not coterminous with “white supremacy,” especially when one considers the white-supremacist statements of Abraham Lincoln and other pro-Union/anti-slavery Northerners. It is foolish to imagine that every leader of the North in the Civil War was motivated by humanitarian sympathy toward black people.

The history of crises that produced the Civil War is a subject I’ve studied in depth, and the simple fact is that it originated in the New England states, which had resented their loss of political influence dating back at least as far as the administration of James Madison. Go back and study the War of 1812 and the Hartford Convention, where representatives of the New England states considered secession in opposition to the “War Hawks” whom they blamed for a needless conflict with England. Virginia’s 24-year control of the presidency — Jefferson, Madison, and James Monroe — was insulting to the pride of ambitious New Englanders, and the single unpopular term of John Quincy Adams was followed by the presidency of the frontier hero Andrew Jackson. The subsequent addition of new Western territories in the Mexican War further aggrieved the New Englanders, who thereafter began to embrace abolitionism as a means of dividing the alliance of the South and West that had excluded them from power. This was the underlying political and economic cause of the repeated crises of the 1850s.

We need not “take sides” in the Civil War to see that the end of slavery could have been obtained by peaceable measures, and that it was not the avowed purpose of the North, at the outset, to wage a war to end slavery. So a nuanced and realistic view of this history does not impugn the Confederates, who saw themselves as defending basic principles that they believed had been abrogated by the North. Nor does a realistic view of that history make the end of slavery a reason for animosity, either between North and South, or between black and white Americans. Let any fair-minded person examine the history — Stanley Horn’s The Robert E. Lee Reader is a fascinating volume I recommend — and decide whether Susan Neiman’s interpretation of Southern heritage is correct.

Here we are in 2019, however, and this ancient history is being exploited by the Left to foster conflict for the sake of politics. When Susan Neiman speaks of “the backlash we are witnessing now,” she means that Trump’s presidency is an expression of “white-supremacist ideology,” when in fact it is simply a rejection of the Left’s policy agenda. To do so by comparing the Confederacy to Nazi Germany is an insult, and one I take personally, but my personal feelings as a Southerner are less important than the realization that the leftist ideology Neiman expresses is dangerous. Her dishonest smear of my ancestors is coincidental to her larger project, i.e., the destruction of our constitutional republic and its replacement with socialist tyranny. Never trust anyone who speaks ill of Robert E. Lee.



 

Category: History
« go back — keep looking »