Archive for the ‘Obama’ Category

This article talks about how what NFL end zones will look like for the future. It says “The end zones at NFL stadiums will be stenciled with a pair of messages calling for an end to systemic racism throughout the 2020 season, Commissioner Roger Goodell revealed during a Tuesday conference call. The phrases ‘End racism’ and ‘It takes all of us’ will be seen in the 10-yard scoring areas at either end of the field, Goodell said.”

When it comes to PR stupidity, you can’t much worse than the NFL. The NFL, you’ll remember, is the pro sports league that thought that suspending Ray Rice for 2 games was sufficient after he assaulted his then-fiance coming out of an Atlantic City casino elevator. This year, the spineless ‘leaders’ of the NFL folded like a cheap suit when the players decided that they’d support the BLM organization. Had the NFL had a spine, they would’ve told the players they wouldn’t support terrorists like BLM. If you have a problem with the word terrorists, watch these videos, then tell me that word doesn’t fit:


BLM’s co-founders are admitted “trained Marxists.” Further, BLM stands for the destruction of the nuclear family. Why would the NFL want to connect with BLM? People are figuring out who BLM is and what they represent. This isn’t a winning situation for the NFL. If the NFL had someone smart running their PR operations, that person would’ve told them that it’s most important to not alienate anyone. When people tune out, which will happen this fall, revenues drop. The PR person should’ve asked the players what’s most important — to keep the fat paychecks coming or to establish a relationship with a radical activist organization?

The NFL and society would be farther better off if the players focused on fixing problems rather than starting a conversation. Anyone can start a conversation. Thus far, only President Trump has fixed any problems. When someone says that they’d like to start a conversation about race, it sounds like President Obama prepping for a beer summit. The Beer Summit didn’t do any harm but it didn’t fix anything, either.

This article in Harper’s Bazaar is a stirring account of how Kim Kardashian used her celebrity connections to help Alice Marie Johnson out of the most difficult situation in Alice Johnson’s life. If you haven’t read the article, I can’t recommend it strongly enough.

First, Alice Marie Johnson deserves tons of credit for accepting responsibility for what she’d done. Unlike some politicians who make excuses (think Hillary Clinton after the 2016 election and Nancy Pelosi after the salon), Alice Johnson humbled herself, admitted that she’d made mistakes, then turned to the Lord for redemption. I’m certain that Alice’s humility and contrition got God’s attention, Who then put it on Kim Kardashian’s heart to find Alice. After getting to know Alice, the forever bond was forged. Shortly thereafter, Kim posted this tweet:


This videotaped interview is golden:

About 6:00 into the interview, Kardashian-West said “There were people around who said ‘are you sure you should go to the White House? Maybe you shouldn’t go.’ To me, this has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with people.”

Think of how much better off the US would be if more people had that attitude. This will sound a little pollyannish but I’ll say it anyway. Doing the right thing is always smart politically.

During their first face-to-face meeting, Alice told Kim that she prays for Kim and Kanye daily. That day, her prayer was based on Psalm 105:14-15, which says “He permitted no one to do them wrong; Yes, He rebuked kings for their sakes, Saying, “Do not touch My anointed ones, And do My prophets no harm.”

Kardashian-West spoke first with Ivanka Trump, who then arranged a meeting with President Trump. Kardashian-West wasn’t worried about resistance or who got credit. She only cared about doing the right thing. President Trump entered their meeting with the same attitude. As a result of that attitude, they got Alice Johnson’s sentence commuted and laid the groundwork for criminal justice reform.

President Obama pardoned 231 individuals in December 2016, “many of whom had similar drug-related charges,” Mic reports, but Johnson was not one of them. According to BBC News, Johnson “fit all of the criteria” for the former president’s clemency project, but was rejected just days before Obama’s term ended. The reason why is unclear. Johnson told Mic, “When the criteria came out for clemency, I thought for sure—in fact, I was certain that I’d met and exceeded all of the criteria.”

It will be difficult for Biden to explain that away. It’s one thing to admit that the didn’t commute Alice Johnson’s sentence. It’s another thing to say ‘we commuted these sentences but didn’t work on criminal justice reform.’

Michelle Obama’s speech at the Democrat National Convention was both bizarre and disgusting. She started by saying that she loves this country with all her heart and that it pains her to “see so many people hurting. I’ve met so many of you. I’ve heard your stories and, through you, I have seen this country’s promise.” So much BS, so little time to go through all of it.

First, there’s 18 minutes of my life that I won’t get back. Next, here’s a golden oldie that suggests Mrs. Obama isn’t being honest with us:

Twelve years ago, Mrs. Obama said “For the first time in my life, I am proud of America.” It’s impossible to love America with all of one’s heart when you weren’t proud of it the first 40 years of one’s life. I don’t doubt that Democrats bought that BS hook, line and sinker. I’m confident that most thinking people detected a bunch of BS in that part of Mrs. Obama’s speech.

Later in her speech, Mrs. Obama said that a president’s words “have the power to move markets. They can start wars or broker peace.” President Obama’s decisions brought an unstable region to the brink of war. President Trump’s diplomatic team have worked tirelessly to walk us back from that precipice. Then they went to work to undo the JCPOA that threatened the Middle East. Next, President Trump’s diplomats built a bridge between Israel and the UAE.

President Obama’s ‘experts’ said getting out of the JCPOA would destabilize the region. We were told that establishing relations with Iran would start building a framework for peace. By throwing Israel under his bus, President Obama destabilized the Middle East while unintentionally driving Israel and the Saudis into a partnership.

This morning, President Trump critiqued Mrs. Obama’s speech:

Trump responded Tuesday morning to the first keynote speaker, former first lady Michelle Obama, by launching more Twitter broadsides against former President Barack Obama. “Somebody please explain to @MichelleObama that Donald J. Trump would not be here, in the beautiful White House, if it weren’t for the job done by your husband, Barack Obama,” Trump wrote.

In her speech, Mrs. Obama said this:

“Whenever we look to this White House for some leadership, or consolation, or any semblance of steadiness, what we get instead is chaos, division, and a total and utter lack of empathy.”

Let’s clarify something, Mrs. Obama. President Obama exceled at creating divisions. The first act of dividing the country came when he rejected all of their ideas for his stimulus plan. Another act of division was when he was asked about a police arrest of a college professor. President Obama said “I don’t know what happened. I just know that the police acted stupidly.” Mrs. Obama, does that sound like a man of empathy to you? It doesn’t sound like it to me. It sounds like a man stoking the fires of racial tension.

When it comes to increasing racial tensions, President Obama was skilled at throwing gas on raging racial fires. That’s what he did in Ferguson. He bought the “Hands up, don’t shoot” BS hook, line and sinker. Racial tensions didn’t start during the Trump administration. They started with Cambridge, then got stoked with Ferguson, then Baltimore.

Mrs. Obama said that President Trump is in over his head. That’s an outright lie. Here’s President Trump’s Twitter reply to that statement:

After Thursday’s funeral for Rep. John Lewis, it’s clear that President Obama can’t resist playing the role of the Democrats’ Divider-In-Chief. Anyone accusing President Trump of being the most divisive president in US history hasn’t paid attention to the nasty things President Obama has said.

Yesterday, President Obama literally used the pulpit to say “George Wallace may be gone. But we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.” Jeffrey Lord noted in his commentary of President Obama’s eulogy that “Fifty-seven years ago, the newly sworn-in Democrat governor of Alabama, George Wallace, delivered those words [“And I say … segregation today … segregation tomorrow … segregation forever.”] in his inaugural address. In other words: George Wallace, who was a product of a political party that built its political power by supporting every imaginable policy that divided Americans by race, was at it again. Using the momentary pulpit that was a governor’s inaugural to play the race card — again.”

Here’s what President Obama said:

George Wallace may be gone. But we can witness our federal government sending agents to use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators. We may no longer have to guess the number of jellybeans in a jar in order to cast a ballot, but even as we sit here, there are those in power, who are doing their darndest to discourage people from voting by closing polling locations and targeting minorities and students with restrictive ID laws and attacking our voting rights with surgical precision, even undermining the postal service in the run-up to an election that’s going to be dependent on mail-in ballots so people don’t get sick.

Democrats should be punished for President Obama’s racist eulogy:

In another part of his eulogy, Obama advocated for “ending some of the partisan gerrymandering so that all voters have the right to choose their politicians, not the other way around. And if all this takes eliminating the filibuster, another Jim Crow relic, in order to secure the God-given rights of every American, then that’s what we should do.” What President Obama omitted is the fact that the Jim Crow laws were written by Democrats. George Wallace was a Democrat, too. This shouldn’t be ignored:

What is particularly despicable here is that the race card was played at a funeral for a man whose famous moment of heroism was protesting … racism. Not to be forgotten here is that the state troopers involved that day in Selma when John Lewis had his skull cracked were in the employ of Democrat Gov. George Wallace.

Democrat President Clinton signed the 1994 Crime Bill into law that started mass incarceration. Republican President Trump signed the First Step Act into law to fix the damage done by the Democrats’ 1994 Crime Bill.

President Obama’s appearance was part eulogy, part political speech. All of President Obama’s post-presidential political speeches have been intentionally divisive. They’re usually dishonest, filled with strawman arguments and outright lies. For instance, he said that “our federal government” sent in “agents to tear gas” peaceful protesters. That’s BS and he knows it. Just reading Andy Ngo’s or Julio Rosas’s twitter feeds proves President Obama full of BS.

While Democrat leftists caterwaul about “Gestapo activities” in Portland, these Democrat leftists ignore the fact that businesses are permanently closing their doors. Apparently, Democrats don’t care about the guys who run places like Old Town Pizza & Brewing. Old Town Pizza & Brewing recently finished the day “with just $18.75 in sales.”

It’s just another sad story in a series of sad stories radiating out from Democrat-run cities. Adam Milne, the owner of Old Town Pizza & Brewing, recently said “I think all restaurants are really hurting and struggling, but I’m not sure if the city and state officials realize that to be a restaurant and to be in downtown Portland right now is a double blow. Not only are we suffering from the pandemic, but we have an area of the state that everyone is avoiding eating and drinking.”

Thanks to Antifa’s and BLM’s nightly riots, only an idiot would venture into downtown Portland. Meanwhile, Democrat House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn said this on CNN:


Rep. Clyburn should be thrown out of the House for uttering that type of BS. Instead of challenging him on making such an incendiary statement, CNN just let it go. This isn’t some back-bench bomb-thrower. This is the third-ranking Democrat in the House. Further, he’s the guy that helped Joe Biden win the Democrats’ presidential nomination. Without Clyburn’s nomination right before the South Carolina Primary, Bernie would be the Democrats’ nominee.

Speaking of Mr. Biden, here’s what he said in an ad about uniting the country:

First, Biden hasn’t criticized Portland’s violence with the exception of him criticizing federal law enforcement:

Former Vice President Joe Biden said Tuesday that the Trump administration was deploying Department of Homeland Security officers in Portland without clearly defined goals, even as department officials defended their efforts to eliminate violent protests. “We have a president who is determined to sow chaos and division,” said Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee to challenge President Donald Trump on Nov. 3. “To make matters worse instead of better.”

I guess that’s Biden’s way of uniting the nation. Criticizing law enforcement officers who are protecting a federal courthouse isn’t uniting people. It’s being a loud-mouthed jerk, then pretending to be a uniter.

The question is whether Americans will admit that they see what’s happening. Joe Biden isn’t pro-law enforcement. He’s for whatever keeps Democrats together. In his minute-long ad, Biden talked about representing all Americans, whether they voted for him or not. What we’ve heard from, though, are the words of a divider, the words of a hate-filled man.

Joe Biden won’t challenge Ted Wheeler, Portland’s mayor. He won’t stop the rioting, either. Frankly, Joe Biden doesn’t know how to challenge Democrats. Whatever they want to do is fine with him. Portland is proof of that.

FOOTNOTE: When Barack Obama was president and Biden was his vice president, they were openly hostile to the police. Read about what they did in Ferguson. Remember that they didn’t lift a finger to stop Chicago’s violence, either. If you want more of the same, vote Biden. If you want safe streets, vote Trump. It’s that simple.

Gen. Flynn won a major victory in court today. On the other hand, this was a difficult day for Joe Biden. Peter Strzok’s note is particularly troublesome:

Attending the meeting were Susan Rice, the National Security Adviser, Jim Comey, the FBI Director, President Obama, Vice President Biden and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates. TRANSLATION: Susan Rice = NSA; Obama = P; Biden = VP; Comey = D & Yates = DAG

Remember that Biden was asked about what he knew about Gen. Flynn by George Stephanopoulos in this interview:

Stephanopoulos: I do want to ask you about Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser to President Trump and the move by the Justice Department to dismiss the case against him for lying to the FBI. The President said yesterday that the move was justified because President Obama targeted Flynn. He called it, quote, the biggest political crime in US history. Your former Senate colleague Charles Grassley has added that Flynn was entrapped and asked on the Senate floor “What did Obama and Biden know? When did they know it?” So what did you know about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn and was there anything improper done?
BIDEN: I know nothing about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn, number one, and number two, this is all about diversion. This is the game this guy plays all the time. The country is in a crisis. We’re in an economic crisis, a health crisis.

That’s about 2 minutes into the interview. After Biden’s full-throated denial, Stephanopoulos returned to the subject:

I want to press that. You say you didn’t know anything about but you were reported to be at a January 5, 2017 meeting where you and the President were briefed on the FBI’s plan to question Michael Flynn over those conversations he had with the Russian Ambassador Kislyak.
Biden: No, I thought you asked me about whether I had anything to do with him being prosecuted. I’m sorry. I was aware that they asked for an investigation but that’s all I know about it and nothing else.

I’ll bet most people didn’t notice the fatal flaw in Biden’s reply. Biden said “I thought you asked me whether I had anything to do with him getting prosecuted.” The FBI interview with Gen. Flynn didn’t happen until January 24, 2017, 4 full days after Biden became formerVice President Biden. As a private citizen, he wouldn’t have had any influence to get Flynn prosecuted. Further, Biden’s denial, which was categorical, was a lie. He knew much more about the investigation. According to Strzok’s note, he’s the person who brought up the Logan Act at the January 5, 2017 meeting as a way of investigating Gen. Flynn. Don’t forget that FBI field officers with the DC Bureau had interviewed Gen. Flynn and wanted to drop Operation Crossfire Razor, the FBI code name for the Flynn investigation:

On Jan. 4, 2017, two weeks before the Trump inauguration, FBI agents at a lower level, where the real work is done, prudently tried to close the Flynn investigation, citing the absence of any derogatory information or other facts that would enable the bureau to keep the case open.

Before the now-infamous January 5 meeting, FBI field agents tried closing the Flynn investigation. That investigation was kept open by “the 7th floor”, which is where then-FBI Director Jim Comey’s office was.

Thanks to the investigation into the investigators, Jim Comey refused to renew his security clearance. He allegedly did that to avoid getting asked questions about classified information.

Vice President Biden’s problem isn’t that a hard-nosed reporter will ask him about his dishonesty. It’s difficult to picture Biden’s campaign staff letting him get within a mile of a hard-nosed reporter. That’s if such a reporter exists outside of a handful of national security correspondents. Biden’s problem is that he’ll get pelted with this information by the Trump campaign in ads, by Trump-supporting PACs and by Trump himself during the presidential debates.

Biden can hide in his basement a little while longer but he’ll have to do real campaigning sooner rather than later. Last weekend, the MSM criticized the Trump campaign for only having 6,000 people in the arena. The story that they didn’t tell is that 7,700,000 people watched the rally on Fox and another 5,000,000 watched on C-SPAN. That’s before factoring in the people who watched the livestreaming via YouTube. Trump’s message is getting out and, as Charlie Hurt said this weekend, there’s nobody better at putting people on the defensive than President Trump.

It’s obvious that Gen. Jim Mattis was upset. It’s equally obvious that he wasn’t in touch with reality. In an op-ed, which I won’t link to, Gen. Mattis wrote “I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values—our values as people and our values as a nation. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

What’s disgusting is that the police are protecting the protesters’ right to protest. Where politicians let them, the police have protected civilians, businesses and property. When idiots like Bill de Blasio, Andrew Cuomo, Jacob Frey and Tom Wolf have tied law enforcement’s hands, rioters have controlled this nation’s major cities after sunset.

Police officers were run over, shot in the head or murdered by rioters. Private property was demolished by the insurrectionists/terrorists. Minority businesses were burned to the ground after they were looted. Does Gen. Mattis think that we’d be better off letting these local officials make decisions that destroy minority neighborhoods while the liberal politicians give rioters room to riot?

Let’s not overlook Gen. Mattis’ statement about “those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.” Sending in military troops is constitutional. Article IV of he Constitution gives the commander-in-chief that authority. That isn’t making a “mockery of our Constitution.” That’s obeying the Constitution.

Mattis also wrote this:

Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.

With all due respect, Gen. Mattis, you’re relying on faulty intel. President Trump didn’t divide this nation. Antifa, Occupy Wall Street and other Democrat-aligned organizations have been dividing this nation for over 10 years. That’s a verified fact. According to this article, Antifa doesn’t hide its disgust for governance:

We spoke to secret Antifa groups in Oregon. They said they come from a variety of political backgrounds but they were united in their opposition to fascism, and they have an anti-government streak. They said they see creeping authoritarianism in the current American administration that they are looking to build “a movement that really insulates us from the policies of Donald Trump”.

That’s what division sounds like. Antifa/anarchist organizations have existed since the 1920s. That’s before President Trump was born.

It isn’t difficult to make the argument that the Obama administration abused the Constitution far more than the Trump administration has. Lois Lerner used the IRS to prevent TEA Party organizations from fully participating in the 2012 election. Lerner’s actions stripped these citizens of their First Amendment rights. The Obama FBI lied to the FISA Court to spy on Carter Page, thereby denying Page the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment rights.

In his op-ed, Gen. Mattis wrote this:

I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens—much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.

That’s sour grapes. Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution says “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” President Trump isn’t overstepping his constitutional authorities. He’s thinking about exercising his constitutional authorities. To date, he hasn’t utilized the authority of Article IV, nor has he used the authority of the Insurrection Act of 1807.

President Trump let Gen. Mattis have it in this statement:

It’s time for Gen. Mattis to fully retire. It’s apparent that he isn’t a constitutional scholar. It’s apparent, too, that he didn’t figure it out that the commander-in-chief has an affirmative responsibility to protect the people of this nation.

Finally, would Gen. Mattis utilize the tactics and strategies that civilian Mattis is advocating for? I wouldn’t bet on it.

This article is proof that the Agenda Media isn’t interested in digging into stories to figure out what’s actually happening. The article essentially opens both barrels at President Trump without digging into the story it’s purportedly covering. Here’s what I’m talking about:

It turns out President Donald Trump’s status as the most accessible person to ever hold the office is more a curse than a blessing. Day after day, he fills the air with the ack-ack of disinformation and misdirection, needlessly alarming the public and sending reporters on wild goose chases to either confirm or disprove his allegations. On Thursday, in an interview with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo, Trump repeated his newest figment that Joe Biden and Barack Obama are guilty of some unnamed crimes for which they are deserving of “50-year sentences.”

Strong meat! The heinous crimes—to which he has applied the “Obamagate” moniker and calls “the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR”—is a relatively new creation of the Trump Disinformation Laboratory. He only started talking about it on May 10 and has yet to specify exactly what Obamagate is aside from telling reporters in a press conference that it’s “obvious” and that he wants Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to investigate it.

I know Mr. Schaefer isn’t that stupid. At least, I hope he isn’t. Obamagate refers to the fact that President Obama knew about the Obama administration’s FBI and Obama administration’s DOJ entrapped Michael Flynn in an attempt to get him to turn on then President-Elect Trump. What’s with this foolishness then?

Despite a lack of interest from his minions in Congress (Graham has said he has no plans to grill Obama), Trump’s foggy demagoguery has mobilized the entire press corps to determine what the hell Trump is talking about. Explainers from Reuters, the Washington Post, the Guardian, CNN, and elsewhere struggle to decipher Trump’s vague but strident accusations with little success. We can say this much with certainty. It appears linked to the counterintelligence operation against Gen. Michael Flynn in late 2016, and the requests from Obama administration officials that his identity be “unmasked” from intelligence reports so they could understand who, exactly, was talking to the Russian ambassador. Flynn lied to the FBI about speaking to the ambassador about sanctions and later pled guilty to lying to the FBI about those conversations. (Unmasking, by the way, is a routine, not nefarious thing, which the Trump administration has requested thousands of times.) But until Trump uses his words to make his charges about Obama more specific, we can only guess at what the actual crime might be.

First, if Mr. Schaefer was the least bit interested in covering the story, he’d know that everyone from then-VP Biden to then-DNI Clapper to then-UN Ambassador Power to the then-Ambassador to Micronesia requested this unmasking. If Mr. Schaefer was a legitimate journalist, he’d ask why the US ambassador to Micronesia needed to know who was talking to Russian Ambassador Kislyak.

Next, unmasking is routine for intelligence analysts. It isn’t routine for ambassadors, whether they’re the ambassador to the UN or to Micronesia.

The crime isn’t the unmasking. The crimes would likely come from illegally applying for FISA warrants to surveil Carter Page or from leaking classified information to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius. Though the DOJ hasn’t identified the unmasker that leaked, it’s a safe bet that one of the unmaskers leaked that information to Ignatius. Let’s be clear about this. It isn’t a crime to receive leaked information. It’s a crime to leak classified information. This is a lie:

Now it could be that Obama did commit the biggest political crime in the history of the USA. If there’s a shred of evidence, I want Obama investigated. If the investigation bears fruit, I want him to have a fair trial. If he’s found guilty, I want him punished. But show me that shred of evidence first or I’m going back to bed.

Mr. Schaefer doesn’t want President Obama punished. It’s just that he’s obligated to say that. Further, Schaefer’s complaints about President Trump point to the fact that the MSM hates digging into the Democrats’ misconduct. Tara Reade is just the latest example of the MSM’s disinterest.

John Solomon’s article goes a long ways towards explaining the difference between legitimate unmasking requests and illegitimate unmasking requests. By now, Washington, DC, is awash with the Democrats’ spin on why the Flynn unmasking wasn’t a big deal. It’s a new version of ‘no big deal, just keep moving.’ That isn’t the truth. This is a big deal.

For instance, Solomon explained that “If a Treasury official like Raskin or the U.N. ambassador requested the unmasking because they were trying to deal with a foreign official confused by U.S. policy during the transition, that likely would be deemed a lawful intelligence purpose. But if an official requested the information because they personally did not like the incoming Trump administration or wanted to thwart Flynn during the transition through leaking or other means, it could be deemed an act against a political adversary and a misuse of unmasking.”

According to this article, “The first request appears to have been made as part of a report on Nov. 30, 2016. Along with Biden, other Obama administration officials listed are Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.” That’s long before the Flynn-Kislyak call. The Flynn-Kislyak call happened in late December.

A final question for the investigators resides in the policy question about whether unmasking has become too easy to do and therefore infringes on Americans privacy, specifically the Constitution’s 4th Amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure. On that front, there are already troubling revelations. Power, whose name was invoked for hundreds of unmasking requests, testified to Congress she did not make most of those requests attributed to her. That suggests some dangerous looseness in the unmasking system.

The political people who requested these unmaskings haven’t earned the benefit of the doubt. They each have a history of dishonesty.

It’s worth noting that Solomon said that Flynn isn’t the only member of the Trump team that the Obama administration unmasked. I suspect that there’s a closet of shoes left to drop on this. It might not be an Imelda Marcos-sized shoe closet but it’s still a shoe closet.

Yesterday, President Obama said “The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn. And the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for somebody who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic, not just institutional norms, but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we’ve seen in other places.”

What President Obama intentionally omitted from that statement is that Eric Holder, his Attorney General, dropped the charges against the New Black Panther Party way back in July, 2010. That’s rather odd since the New Black Panther Party had pled guilty in 2008. Bartle Bull, a civil rights ally of JFK’s in the 1960s, summed things up perfectly, saying “Martin Luther King did not die to have people in jack boots with Billy clubs, block the doors of polling places.”

J. Christian Adams adds this:

“I mean we were told, ‘Drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party,'” Adams told Fox News, adding that political appointees Loretta King, acting head of the civil rights division, and Steve Rosenbaum, an attorney with the division since 2003, ordered the dismissal.

This morning, Maria Bartiromo interviewed Trey Gowdy on the subject. Gowdy said “I find that an amazing statement from President Obama. Where was his respect for the rule of law for the crime that Michael Flynn was the victim of? Remember that he was unmasked by somebody in Obama’s administration and then it was leaked, which is a 10-year felony, Maria.” The Gowdy interview starts at the 25:30 mark in this video:

It’s worth watching the entire interview. President Obama obviously has a big megaphone but it’s limited in this instance because he’s using it to spin his way out of a growing scandal. This isn’t going away anytime soon. Obama and the Democrats know it. As President Trump uses social media to highlight the things that Jim Clapper, Susan Rice, et al, said under oath about Gen. Flynn and the Trump campaign vs. what they said on TV, Democrats, starting with Schiff and Obama, won’t find a rock big enough to hide under.

Expect the media to counter with renditions of ‘But Flynn pled guilty’. Whenever the MSM play that stunt, adults in the room of all political persuasions should drive the MSM and other Democrats back to the things that Clapper, Comey, Strzok and others said in texts and transcripts.

In the end, the truth set Gen. Flynn free.