Merrick Garland is dangerous--he hates the Constitution

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has taken a law hastily passed over 20 years ago after 9/11 to stop foreign terrorists (Patriot act) and is using it against parents concerned about the health and education of their children. He is arresting, with Joe Biden's approval and lip smacking grin, people protesting killing the unborn, i.e., American citizens using their constitutional rights under the first amendment. He's using government surveillance illegally to stop journalists who report the truth about use of fetal body parts distributed after abortions. It would seem that Garland does not have the best interests of the USA in mind because he has something against the children of our future.

At the same time, Democrats (and a few Republicans like Cheney) in Congress and in the Media are calling Americans "Nazis" and "Terrorists" for using their First Amendment rights, which is the exact opposite of what they charge. They get hysterical when citizens object to green taxes and coercion. They prove to be thickheaded simpletons who don't know world history of the 1930s and 40s or why American blood was shed in WWII. They demean and insult the millions who died under that regime. National Socialism (aka Nazi) is just one of the many offspring and grandchildren of Marx, Nietzsche, and more recently Foucault that have morphed into BLM and CRT. It's alive and well in our leftist politicians. That doesn't describe our patriots and citizens who want children to live and thrive in freedom.

And although I'm so thankful Garland didn't get his chance at SCOTUS having been blocked by Republicans when Obama nominated him, I do think he's trying to punish half the nation for that 2016 "insult." He was unfit then, and a disaster now.

God and Jerusalem weren’t the only items deleted

Short memory--the paranoid conspiracies of the right, never the left

Thomas Frank at the Tilting Yard in the WSJ today displays a very short memory. The only paranoid conspiracies and talkers he can think of are all appearing on Fox News. He's forgotten Rosie and the Dixie Chicks; Carville and Dean; Carter and Gore; Rahm and Dunn; Moore and Soros. I guess he got the Obama memo on denigrating Fox. Next he’ll be touting volunteerism and green tips. He apparently doesn’t remember the Hollywood stars and talkers who bought into the conspiracy theories about 9/11, accusing George Bush of plotting the whole thing; or the Katrina Hurricane when an entire state and city firmly in control of Democrats managed to blame President Bush for years of their neglect, Corps of Engineers, environmental EPA decisions, etc.; nor does he remember all the Democrats who pounded the podiums about WMD in the late 90s when they thought Al Gore was going to be President; or how the Republicans were accused of stealing not only the 2000 election but the 2004; and who can forget the Patriot Act conspiratists? And have you read Janet Napolitano's latest dictionary of terrorism words? I mean before it got pulled for really, really bad press. Wow. Talk about paranoid. It's her middle name! And who could be kookier than the global warmists? They make the birthers look absolutely reasonable, but with less evidence. Yes, Mr. Frank, Mr. Pseudo-journalist, you ought to see a doctor--your short term memory is really slipping.

Fancy Nancy and her memory problems

162 Democrats in Congress voted to go to war in 2003--after months of study, debate, building international alliances and proclaiming the build up of WMD during the years of Bill Clinton. But unfortunately, these are the same folks who didn't read the bail out numbers and passed it anyway proclaiming the sky is falling (and now they've proved it). So I'm guessing those still left, like John Kerry, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Hilliary Clinton, Jack Murtha, Joe Lieberman, etc. will follow Nancy Peloser and swear they have no memory of being briefed about anything, especially not interrogation techniques. For pity's sake, they thought we used water guns and gossip to find out the enemies' secrets. Doesn't everyone? It was those evil Bushies who brainwashed them (without waterboarding) into believing there was a global terrorist threat after 9/11.

Not too long ago librarians, university faculty and other ACLU-an and Hollywood types got the vapors at the thought Wal-Mart was using RFID tags to track pallets, because citizens would be next, and there was that awful Patriot Act (also voted for by Democrats) which allowed the government, with a warrant, to listen in on terrorists in the US contacting those abroad. But they are certainly silent about violation of First Amendment rights at peaceful demonstrations called Tea Parties. In fact, they are joining a chorus of ridiculers and paranoid Obama protectors who go on national TV to proclaim our Constitutional protections are dangerous because not everyone voted for the messiah.

Isn't funny how politics changes your viewpoint on privacy and terrorism with just a stroke of midnight, January 19, 2009.

Intelligence Community Legal Reference Book

Sometimes I can't help myself. Not only am I addicted to reference books, I swoon over serendipity in the stacks. Yesterday I pulled off Intelligence Community Legal Reference Book, 680+ pages of unclassified documents about CIA, Homeland Security, counterintelligence, Patriot Act, detainee treatment, how to share information about terrorists, and information sharing, etc. Another thing that overwhelms me--how much Obama has to learn, if this is just the unclassified, imagine what else he's trying to take in. No wonder he's tracking to the middle, with all the Clintonistas standing around him like that TV ad for cell phone support.

Don't laugh. Have you ever read the National Security Act of 1947? You know, you go through life thinking you read, write and speak American standard English. . . and then you read a government document.

"Notwithstanding any provision of law identified in section 904, the President may stay the imposition of an economic, cultural, diplomatic, or other sanction or related action by the United States Government concerning a foreign country, organization, or person when the President determines and reports to Congress in accordance with section 903 that to proceed without delay would seriously risk the compromise of an ongoing criminal investigation directly related to the related to the activities giving rise to the sanction. Any such stay shall be effective for a period of time specified by the President, which period may not exceed 120 days, unless such period is extended in accordance with section 902."

Proud to stand

with Dodd and Feingold on FISA in February (aka Patriot Act). Backing Bush in June. Yes, he was for sure against amending FISA to allow the government to monitor more communications without a warrant. But then political expediency (he wasn't actually there for the vote--surprise, surprise!) starts to dawn on him. He might actually get to the White House after defeating Hillary in the primaries, and these powers of surveillance might be very useful, so he flipped on a clear promise to his supporters, stabbing his leftist buddies in the back (although they're loving him for it now).

"Given the legitimate threats we face, providing effective intelligence collection tools with appropriate safeguards is too important to delay. So I support the compromise, but do so with a firm pledge that as president, I will carefully monitor the program," Obama said in a statement hours after the House approved the legislation 293-129. [WaPo account]

Democrats hated FISA under Bush (1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act under Carter), but they've already learned to love it. Especially our Ohio Democratic administration. They are practicing to be good ObamaToms. So ripping through Joe the Plumber's records in Ohio (standard procedure we were told when someone's name appears in the news) is just a foretaste of what's to come with President Obama and the new, improved FISA. The fact that asking a question about taxes hardly makes one a national security threat, unless questioning Obama is perceived not only as racism, but a security threat.

HT Larry Johnson