11/30/15, "Daniel Scavino Jr.
..............
Monday, November 30, 2015
On the way to Macon, Georgia, watching Bret Baier discuss polls-Scavino twitter
11/30/15, "Daniel Scavino Jr.
..............
Trump takes the stage at Macon Coliseum, Macon, Georgia, Nov. 30, 2015
11/30/15, "Joe Kovac Jr.
................
Trump supporters cheer him in Sarasota, Florida, Nov. 28, 2015
11/28/15, "Supporters of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump cheer during a campaign rally Saturday, Nov. 28, in Sarasota, Fla. (AP Photo/Steve Nesius)," via Forbes
11/30/15, "The Media Is Obsessed With Donald Trump's Outrageousness. How That Misses The Point." Forbes, John McQuaid
................
Arctic Sea Ice Extent, higher than 30% ice concentration, November 30, 2015, DMI
11/30/15, "Arctic Sea Ice Extent," Higher than 30% ice concentration, Danish Meteorological Institute
"Current Sea Ice extent"
"Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere since 2005. The ice extent values are calculated from the ice type data from the Ocean and Sea Ice, Satellite Application Facility (OSISAF), where areas with ice concentration higher than 30% are classified as ice.
The total area of sea ice is the sum of First Year Ice (FYI), Multi Year Ice (MYI) and the area of ambiguous ice types, from the OSISAF ice type product. However, the total estimated ice area is underestimated due to unclassified coastal regions where mixed land/sea pixels confuse the applied ice type algorithm. The shown sea ice extent values are therefore recommended be used qualitatively in relation to ice extent values from other years shown in the figure....
Please notice, that the sea ice extent in this plot is calculated with the coastal zones masked out. To see the absolute extent, go to this page."...
....................
"Current Sea Ice extent"
"Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere since 2005. The ice extent values are calculated from the ice type data from the Ocean and Sea Ice, Satellite Application Facility (OSISAF), where areas with ice concentration higher than 30% are classified as ice.
The total area of sea ice is the sum of First Year Ice (FYI), Multi Year Ice (MYI) and the area of ambiguous ice types, from the OSISAF ice type product. However, the total estimated ice area is underestimated due to unclassified coastal regions where mixed land/sea pixels confuse the applied ice type algorithm. The shown sea ice extent values are therefore recommended be used qualitatively in relation to ice extent values from other years shown in the figure....
Please notice, that the sea ice extent in this plot is calculated with the coastal zones masked out. To see the absolute extent, go to this page."...
....................
Sunday, November 29, 2015
George Bush #1 deserves a loud shout out from Paris for creating the imaginary global climate danger cash cow from scratch. Obama is merely following his lead
George Bush #1 deserves a loud shout out in Paris. Obama is merely following his lead:
The "global climate danger industry" was established in 1990 by George Bush #1. Henceforth, precious US taxpayer dollars that might otherwise help the poor and needy would flow to "climate" cronies. George Bush #1 never gets credit he deserves for financing this imaginary industry. His 1990 Executive mandate, Global Change Research Act (also known as USGCRP) declared general global environmental crises, ordered 13 federal agencies to attend to them, and bound US taxpayers to finance them in perpetuity. Bush #1 actually created today's $2 billion a day imaginary climate danger cash cow from scratch. The US political class knows that continuing success of this cash cow requires permanent demonization and degradation of innocent Americans. This fits the definition of genocide.
"Global Change Research Act of 1990"
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-104/pdf/STATUTE-104-Pg3096.pdf
3/6/15, "Causes and consequences of the climate science boom," William Butos and Thomas McQuade
"Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around."
"2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science Rand D as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch and the various agencies that fall within its purview."...
More from the paper:
"1. The Government’s Role in Climate Science Funding...[is] embedded in scores of agencies and programs scattered throughout the Executive Branch of the US government. While such agency activities related to climate science have received funding for many years as components of their mission statements, the pursuit of an integrated national agenda to study climate change and implement policy initiatives took a critical step with passage of the Global Change Research Act of 1990. This Act established institutional structures operating out of the White House to develop and oversee the implementation of a National Global Change Research Plan and created the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) to coordinate the climate change research activities of Executive Departments and agencies.[33] As of 2014, the coordination of climate change-related activities resides largely in the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, which houses several separate offices, including the offices of Environment and Energy, Polar Sciences, Ocean Sciences, Clean Energy and Materials R&D, Climate Adaptation and Ecosystems, National Climate Assessment, and others. The Office of the President also maintains the National Science and Technology Council, which oversees the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability and its Subcommittee on Climate Change Research. The Subcommittee is charged with the responsibility of planning and coordinating with the interagency USGCRP. Also, the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy is housed within the President’s Domestic Policy Council. While Congress authorizes Executive branch budgets, the priorities these departments and agencies follow are set by the White House. As expressed in various agency and Executive Branch strategic plans, these efforts have been recently organized around four components comprising (1) climate change research and education, (2) emissions reduction through “clean” energy technologies and investments, (3) adaptation to climate change, and (4) international climate change leadership.[36]....By any of these measures, the scale of climate science R&D has increased substantially since 2001. Perhaps, though, the largest funding increases have occurred in developing new technologies and tax subsidies. As can be seen from Table 1, federal dollars to develop and implement “clean energy technologies” have increased from $1.7 billion in 2001 to $5.8 billion in 2013, while energy tax subsidies have increased from zero in 2001 and 2002 to $13 billion in 2013, with the largest increases happening since 2010. The impact on scientific research of government funding is not just a matter of the amounts but also of the concentration of research monies that arises from the focus a single source can bring to bear on particular kinds of scientific research. Government is that single source and has Big Player effects because it has access to a deep pool of taxpayer (and, indeed, borrowed and created) funds combined with regulatory and enforcement powers which necessarily place it on a different footing from other players and institutions. Notwithstanding the interplay of rival interests within the government and the separation of powers among the different branches, there is an important sense in which government’s inherent need to act produces a particular set of decisions that fall within a relatively narrow corridor of ends to which it can concentrate substantial resources.
2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science RandD as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch and the various agencies that fall within its purview.[40] To put its magnitude into some context, the $9.3 billion funding requested for climate science R&D in 2013 is about one-third of the total amount appropriated for all 27 National Institutes of Health in the same year,[41] yet it is more than enough to sustain a science boom. Its directional characteristic, concentrated as it has been on R&D premised on the controversial issue of the actual sensitivity of climate to human-caused emissions, has gone hand in hand with the IPCC’s expressions of increasing confidence in the AGW hypothesis and increasingly shrill claims of impending disaster.
3. The recent pattern of federal climate science funding, moving toward emphasis on the development of technologies and their subsidization through the tax system, suggests that climate change funding has become more tightly connected to agencies like the Department of Energy, NASA, the Department of Commerce (NOAA), EPA, and cross-cutting projects and programs involving multiple agencies under integrating and coordinating agencies, like the USGCRP, lodged within the Executive branch. The allocations of budgets within these agencies are more directly determined and implemented by Administration priorities and policies. We note that the traditional role of NSF in supporting basic science based on a system of merit awards provided (despite some clear imperfections) certain advantages with regard to generating impartial science. In contrast, even a casual perusal of current agency documents, such as The National Science and Technology Council’s The National Global Change Research Plan 2012-2021, shows that those driving this movement make no pretense as to their premises and starting points.[39]
4. To be sure, the very opaqueness of these allocations and their actual use only provides for “ball park” estimates. However, we believe that the results presented in Table 3 come closer to a useful accounting than what previously has been provided. We have combined data from Leggett et al. (2013) and the AAAS Reports for Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013 (the only years for which the AAAS provides detailed budgetary data for climate science R&D and climate-related funding). This constrains Table 3 to including data only from 2010 through 2013. We have adjusted budgetary data and categorized it in light of discussion points 1-5 above. Note that the estimated aggregate expenditures for climate science and climate-related funding (excluding tax subsidies) from 2010-2013 in Table 3 are about twice that of the Leggett findings.
5.5 Funds administered by the Treasury Department in Table 2 are credit lines and loans channeled through the World Bank earmarked for international organizations to finance clean technologies and sustainable practices; consequently such funds would also more accurately be considered as climate-related sustainability and adaptation....
8. This summary and the detail in Table 1, however, do not capture the full scale of federal funding for climate science R&D. Two complications must be considered to capture a more accurate estimate. First, the entries in the first row of Table 1 for climate science only refer to monies administered by the Executive branch via the office of the USGCRP and does not include all climate-related R&D in the federal budget. For example, the entry in Table 1 for the USGCRP in 2011 is just under $2.5 billion; yet the actual budget expenditures for climate science-related R&D as calculated by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) total about $16.1 billion.[38] In addition, since USGCRP funding is comprised of monies contributed from the authorized budgets of the 13 participating departments and agencies, a more accurate estimate of climate-related R&D requires deducting USGCRP funding from the aggregated budgets of those 13, most of which are included in Table 2.
9. Leggett et al. (2013) of the Congressional Research Service provides a recent account of climate change funding based on data provided by the White House Office of Management and Budget (see Table 1, below). Total expenditures for federal funded climate change programs from 2001-2013 were $110.9 billion in current dollars and $120.2 billion in 2012 dollars. “Total budgetary impact” includes various tax provisions and subsidies related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions (which are treated as “tax expenditures”) and shows total climate change expenditures from 2001-2013 to be $145.3 billion in current dollars and $155.4 billion in 2012 dollars.[37]
10. The USGCRP operates as a confederacy of the research components of thirteen participating government agencies, each of which independently designates funds in accordance with the objectives of the USGCRP; these monies comprise the program budget of the USGCRP to fund agency cross-cutting climate science R&D.[34] The departments and agencies whose activities comprise the bulk of such funding include independent agencies such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, Environmental Protection Agency, US Agency for International Development, the quasi-official Smithsonian Institute, and Executive Departments that include Agriculture, Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology), Energy, Interior (the US Geological Survey and conservation initiatives), State, and Treasury.[35]
11. The past 15 years have seen a sustained program of funding, largely from government or quasi-government entities.[31] The funding efforts are spread across a bewildering array of sources and buried in a labyrinth of programs, agency initiatives, interagency activities, and Presidential Offices, but what they seem to have in common is an adherence to the assumption that human activity is primarily responsible for the warming observed in the latter part of the 20th century. Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around. And the extent of this funding appears not to have been heretofore fully documented.[32]"...
.
=========================
The "global climate danger industry" was established in 1990 by George Bush #1. Henceforth, precious US taxpayer dollars that might otherwise help the poor and needy would flow to "climate" cronies. George Bush #1 never gets credit he deserves for financing this imaginary industry. His 1990 Executive mandate, Global Change Research Act (also known as USGCRP) declared general global environmental crises, ordered 13 federal agencies to attend to them, and bound US taxpayers to finance them in perpetuity. Bush #1 actually created today's $2 billion a day imaginary climate danger cash cow from scratch. The US political class knows that continuing success of this cash cow requires permanent demonization and degradation of innocent Americans. This fits the definition of genocide.
"Global Change Research Act of 1990"
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-104/pdf/STATUTE-104-Pg3096.pdf
3/6/15, "Causes and consequences of the climate science boom," William Butos and Thomas McQuade
"Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around."
"2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science Rand D as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch and the various agencies that fall within its purview."...
More from the paper:
"1. The Government’s Role in Climate Science Funding...[is] embedded in scores of agencies and programs scattered throughout the Executive Branch of the US government. While such agency activities related to climate science have received funding for many years as components of their mission statements, the pursuit of an integrated national agenda to study climate change and implement policy initiatives took a critical step with passage of the Global Change Research Act of 1990. This Act established institutional structures operating out of the White House to develop and oversee the implementation of a National Global Change Research Plan and created the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) to coordinate the climate change research activities of Executive Departments and agencies.[33] As of 2014, the coordination of climate change-related activities resides largely in the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, which houses several separate offices, including the offices of Environment and Energy, Polar Sciences, Ocean Sciences, Clean Energy and Materials R&D, Climate Adaptation and Ecosystems, National Climate Assessment, and others. The Office of the President also maintains the National Science and Technology Council, which oversees the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Sustainability and its Subcommittee on Climate Change Research. The Subcommittee is charged with the responsibility of planning and coordinating with the interagency USGCRP. Also, the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy is housed within the President’s Domestic Policy Council. While Congress authorizes Executive branch budgets, the priorities these departments and agencies follow are set by the White House. As expressed in various agency and Executive Branch strategic plans, these efforts have been recently organized around four components comprising (1) climate change research and education, (2) emissions reduction through “clean” energy technologies and investments, (3) adaptation to climate change, and (4) international climate change leadership.[36]....By any of these measures, the scale of climate science R&D has increased substantially since 2001. Perhaps, though, the largest funding increases have occurred in developing new technologies and tax subsidies. As can be seen from Table 1, federal dollars to develop and implement “clean energy technologies” have increased from $1.7 billion in 2001 to $5.8 billion in 2013, while energy tax subsidies have increased from zero in 2001 and 2002 to $13 billion in 2013, with the largest increases happening since 2010. The impact on scientific research of government funding is not just a matter of the amounts but also of the concentration of research monies that arises from the focus a single source can bring to bear on particular kinds of scientific research. Government is that single source and has Big Player effects because it has access to a deep pool of taxpayer (and, indeed, borrowed and created) funds combined with regulatory and enforcement powers which necessarily place it on a different footing from other players and institutions. Notwithstanding the interplay of rival interests within the government and the separation of powers among the different branches, there is an important sense in which government’s inherent need to act produces a particular set of decisions that fall within a relatively narrow corridor of ends to which it can concentrate substantial resources.
2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science RandD as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch and the various agencies that fall within its purview.[40] To put its magnitude into some context, the $9.3 billion funding requested for climate science R&D in 2013 is about one-third of the total amount appropriated for all 27 National Institutes of Health in the same year,[41] yet it is more than enough to sustain a science boom. Its directional characteristic, concentrated as it has been on R&D premised on the controversial issue of the actual sensitivity of climate to human-caused emissions, has gone hand in hand with the IPCC’s expressions of increasing confidence in the AGW hypothesis and increasingly shrill claims of impending disaster.
3. The recent pattern of federal climate science funding, moving toward emphasis on the development of technologies and their subsidization through the tax system, suggests that climate change funding has become more tightly connected to agencies like the Department of Energy, NASA, the Department of Commerce (NOAA), EPA, and cross-cutting projects and programs involving multiple agencies under integrating and coordinating agencies, like the USGCRP, lodged within the Executive branch. The allocations of budgets within these agencies are more directly determined and implemented by Administration priorities and policies. We note that the traditional role of NSF in supporting basic science based on a system of merit awards provided (despite some clear imperfections) certain advantages with regard to generating impartial science. In contrast, even a casual perusal of current agency documents, such as The National Science and Technology Council’s The National Global Change Research Plan 2012-2021, shows that those driving this movement make no pretense as to their premises and starting points.[39]
4. To be sure, the very opaqueness of these allocations and their actual use only provides for “ball park” estimates. However, we believe that the results presented in Table 3 come closer to a useful accounting than what previously has been provided. We have combined data from Leggett et al. (2013) and the AAAS Reports for Fiscal Years 2012 and 2013 (the only years for which the AAAS provides detailed budgetary data for climate science R&D and climate-related funding). This constrains Table 3 to including data only from 2010 through 2013. We have adjusted budgetary data and categorized it in light of discussion points 1-5 above. Note that the estimated aggregate expenditures for climate science and climate-related funding (excluding tax subsidies) from 2010-2013 in Table 3 are about twice that of the Leggett findings.
5.5 Funds administered by the Treasury Department in Table 2 are credit lines and loans channeled through the World Bank earmarked for international organizations to finance clean technologies and sustainable practices; consequently such funds would also more accurately be considered as climate-related sustainability and adaptation....
8. This summary and the detail in Table 1, however, do not capture the full scale of federal funding for climate science R&D. Two complications must be considered to capture a more accurate estimate. First, the entries in the first row of Table 1 for climate science only refer to monies administered by the Executive branch via the office of the USGCRP and does not include all climate-related R&D in the federal budget. For example, the entry in Table 1 for the USGCRP in 2011 is just under $2.5 billion; yet the actual budget expenditures for climate science-related R&D as calculated by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) total about $16.1 billion.[38] In addition, since USGCRP funding is comprised of monies contributed from the authorized budgets of the 13 participating departments and agencies, a more accurate estimate of climate-related R&D requires deducting USGCRP funding from the aggregated budgets of those 13, most of which are included in Table 2.
9. Leggett et al. (2013) of the Congressional Research Service provides a recent account of climate change funding based on data provided by the White House Office of Management and Budget (see Table 1, below). Total expenditures for federal funded climate change programs from 2001-2013 were $110.9 billion in current dollars and $120.2 billion in 2012 dollars. “Total budgetary impact” includes various tax provisions and subsidies related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions (which are treated as “tax expenditures”) and shows total climate change expenditures from 2001-2013 to be $145.3 billion in current dollars and $155.4 billion in 2012 dollars.[37]
10. The USGCRP operates as a confederacy of the research components of thirteen participating government agencies, each of which independently designates funds in accordance with the objectives of the USGCRP; these monies comprise the program budget of the USGCRP to fund agency cross-cutting climate science R&D.[34] The departments and agencies whose activities comprise the bulk of such funding include independent agencies such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Science Foundation, Environmental Protection Agency, US Agency for International Development, the quasi-official Smithsonian Institute, and Executive Departments that include Agriculture, Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Institute of Standards and Technology), Energy, Interior (the US Geological Survey and conservation initiatives), State, and Treasury.[35]
11. The past 15 years have seen a sustained program of funding, largely from government or quasi-government entities.[31] The funding efforts are spread across a bewildering array of sources and buried in a labyrinth of programs, agency initiatives, interagency activities, and Presidential Offices, but what they seem to have in common is an adherence to the assumption that human activity is primarily responsible for the warming observed in the latter part of the 20th century. Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around. And the extent of this funding appears not to have been heretofore fully documented.[32]"...
.
=========================
1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef told US officials, 'Next time we'll bring them both down,' closing scene as re-enacted in HBO 1997 docu-drama about 1993 World Trade Center bombing, 'Path to Paradise'
1993 World Trade Center bomber cheers as he drives van into WTC garage on 2/26/1993 as reenacted in 1997 HBO docu-drama, "Path to Paradise:"
===================
1997 NY Times review of 1997 HBO docu-drama about Feb. 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing notes Yousef's closing prediction: ''Next time, we'll bring them both down.'' The Times described the statement as "presumably apocryphal."
===================
1997 NY Times review of 1997 HBO docu-drama about Feb. 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing notes Yousef's closing prediction: ''Next time, we'll bring them both down.'' The Times described the statement as "presumably apocryphal."
6/14/1997, "Bombing of the Trade Center, Simplified for a TV Audience," NY Times, Ralph Blumenthal
"The terrorists, are shown, accurately, as
beneficiaries of some staggering law enforcement bungling. Ramzi Ahmed
Yousef, accused of being the main bomb maker and plot mastermind,
arrives at Kennedy International Airport without a visa and is allowed
into the country on a promise to return for a hearing in three months.
Later captured and now awaiting trial, he is given
the sinister-and presumably apocryphal-last word: ''Next time,
we'll bring them both down.''" [end of article]
(Beginning of NY Times article): "More than four years after a car bomb erupted under
the World Trade Center, killing 6 people and injuring more than 1,000,
the attack that brought the nightmare of terrorism to American soil is
getting the full Hollywood treatment on HBO tonight.
The made-for-television movie, at 8 P.M., follows
the investigation through the eyes of a buddy team of F.B.I.
investigators as they battle a law enforcement bureaucracy almost as
bungle-prone as the terrorists themselves.
...........
As history, the film, ''Path to Paradise,'' tracks
much of the riveting story as it emerged in the investigations and
trials that followed the attack on Feb. 26, 1993. It even uses some of
the words of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and other conspirators-as they
were later proved to be-from secret tape recordings...............
..........
''Path to Paradise'' drew controversy this week with
complaints by the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee in
Washington that the movie prejudicially portrays Muslims as a menace to
American society. The group called every Arab or Muslim character in the
movie ''an ugly stereotype'' and said that the film would be given the
group's ''Intolerance Award.''
HBO defended the film and said it would broadcast a
statement that the movie was not intended to reflect the views of most
Muslims and Arabs.
It was unclear who actually wrote the screenplay for
the television movie. HBO's publicity material on the film does not
mention the writer, and the on-screen credits list Ned Curren, a name
that HBO officials said is a pseudonym. No reason was given for the use
of the pen name.
Scenes in the film accurately reflect the disarray
of law enforcement officials when it came to tracking potential
terrorists. But as the lead F.B.I. agent, John Anticev, played by the
actor Peter Gallagher, keeps reminding colleagues and viewers, it is a
free country unless you do something illegal. ''Great,'' Agent Anticev says at one point.
''Freedom of religion protects a bunch of murdering fanatics.''
The movie diverges from reality as it glosses over
the tangled relationship between the informer, Mr. Salem, and the F.B.I.
team of Mr. Anticev and Agent Nancy Floyd, played by Marcia Gay Harden....Also left undetailed is the way Mr. Salem secretly
taped Mr. Anticev and Ms. Floyd in backstage law enforcement
strategizing that embarrassed the F.B.I. when it became public....
Also coming in for a hit (not totally undeserved)
are reporters, who pop up just as the F.B.I. is about to carry out its
crucial arrest of Mohammed A. Salameh, the bungler who rented the
bomb-carrying van and later returned to the rental office so he could
get his money back.
The terrorists, are shown, accurately, as
beneficiaries of some staggering law enforcement bungling. Ramzi Ahmed
Yousef, accused of being the main bomb maker and plot mastermind,
arrives at Kennedy International Airport without a visa and is allowed
into the country on a promise to return for a hearing in three months.
Later captured and now awaiting trial, he is given
the sinister -and presumably apocryphal-last word: ''Next time,
we'll bring them both down.''"
"Photos: Ned Eisenberg, left, portrays F.B.I.
informer Emad Salem, above, who double-crossed agents by taping their
conversations, in the HBO movie ''Path to Paradise.'' (HBO); Andreas
Katsulas, plays Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, whose taped words are used in
the film. (HBO)" [As of 11/29/15, the photo described doesn't appear with NYT article).
=================
Comment: "Path to Paradise" was released on VHS July 10, 2001. Commenters observe it hasn't been shown on HBO since Sept. 11, 2001, when Islamists easily finished the job they started on 2/26/1993.
"Path to Paradise-The Untold Story of the World Trade Center Bombing," [VHS] Rated: R" "VHS release date: July 10, 2001."
As of 11/29/15, the film is available on You Tube.
Among comments at Amazon: "A wakeup call unheeded"
"10 of 10 people found the following review helpful
Format: VHS Tape
Verified Purchase
"An HBO production, amazing actors, superb dialog. A bomb-making expert
from Iraq attempts entry to the U.S. without a visa. He states he's
leaving Iraq for political asylum in the U.S. The INS agent questions
him a bit, looks over his fishy looking passport. She approaches her
superior with the asylum application and urges that "he should be
detained". "Jails are full. You want to take him home?" her boss
retorts. The film shows just how these terrorists jumped through about
any and every loophole in the system under the guise of religious
freedom. Bomb-making right in the apartment. Operating right under the
nose of the FBI and other law enforcement agencies. Anti-American
propaganda tapes found in an apartment which, truth be told, is not
against the law. And of course there was the chilling prophetic line at
the end: "Next time we'll bring them both down." Absolutely worth
watching again and again." Image above from Amazon.com
Below, closing scenes from 1997 HBO film, Ramzi Yousef in helicopter with US officials saying, "Next time we'll bring them both down."
Below, closing scenes from 1997 HBO film, Ramzi Yousef in helicopter with US officials saying, "Next time we'll bring them both down."
Saturday, November 28, 2015
Snow continues to blanket Sierras in November 2015
11/25/15, LiveDoppler7HD Nothing but smiles and high fives in
..........
11/25/15, "Snow blankets Sierra in time for Thanksgiving holiday," abc7news.com, Laura Anthony, Truckee, Calif.
.......................
........
11/28/15, "California freeze: Minus-11 degrees in Sierra amid snow and ice," LA Times, Shelby Grad
"A deep freeze in California's Sierra is continuing, with one spot east of Redding recording minus-11 degrees.
According to the National Weather Service, the Bogard Rest Area in the Lassen National Forest recorded that frigid temperature between Friday night and Saturday morning. The rest area is north of Susanville.
A few other mountain areas posted below-zero temperatures overnight.
A series of winter storms have dumped large amounts of snow in the Sierra, with some places receiving more than 20 inches. The NWS said another storm could move in by Thursday.
A good blanket of snow is now sticking to the ground across the mountain range, according to the weather service. The cold temperatures are good news for ski resorts, which are off to a strong seasonal start after several years of drought conditions.
A freeze warning was in place in the Sacramento Valley for Sunday. Officials warned residents to protect outdoor plants and pipes."
..............
11/10/15, "Ski resorts open early as snow blankets the Sierra," AP, Kristin J. Bender
11/10/15, "Boreal Ski Resort was one of two Lake Tahoe area resorts open this early winter season....Ed Fletcher The Sacramento Bee"
...................
Trump in Sarasota, Florida gets big applause for his signature pledge, 'We're going to build a Great Wall,' Saturday, Nov. 28, 2015
11/28/15, Trump speaks to crowd in Sarasota, Florida, Robarts Arena, photo, Larry Bird, Sarasota Herald-Tribune
11/28/15, "LIVE UPDATES: Trump in Sarasota," Sarasota Herald-Tribune
"Trump gets big applause for his signature pledge "We're going to build a wall, it's going to be a big wall, a Great Wall""
"Crowd erupts in "na-na-na, na-na-na. Hey hey hey goodbye" as Trump heckler is escorted out of rally in Sarasota, FL," Sarasota Herald-Tribune
"Huge applause when Trump says leading in Florida, slams Bush for supporting Common Core," Sarasota Herald-Tribune
..............................
11/28/15, Trump makes third speech of day to crowd of 1000 waiting outside:
11/28/15, Below, crowd in Sarasota, Fla. lined up early to see Trump:
"Line is 5 BLOCKS LONG to see
..............................
#Kidz 4 Trump
11/28/15, "Crystal Clark
These kidz (intentional Z) are official! Fox 13 WTVT
"He drew a far larger crowd than most candidates can muster, and it included considerably more younger people than typical Sarasota rallies....
11/28/15, "Trump takes on rivals Rubio, Bush in Florida rally," Tampa Bay Times, Adam C. Smith, via Miami Herald
.........
"He drew a far larger crowd than most candidates can muster, and it included considerably more younger people than typical Sarasota rallies....
“He’s honest, he tells it the way it is. He’s going to close the border, which is very, very important. He’s using his own money. He’s got so many things going for him,” gushed Nancy Blemaster, a retiree from Venice, who gave a thumbs-down sign when asked about Bush and Rubio.
“I just don’t like them. They’re part of the Republican establishment, and the establishment is as crooked as the Democrats,” she said....
The average of recent Florida polls compiled by RealClearPolitics.com shows Trump comfortably ahead among Republican voters with 32 percent support, followed by Ben Carson with 18 percent, Rubio with 17 percent, Ted Cruz with 11 percent and Bush with 9 percent....
“He’s got some guts and he tells it like it is.” Sarasota retiree Joanne DeFrusco likes the strength Trump projects.
“That’s the one thing we need today — a strong candidate, somebody that can stand up to all the adversities that we’re presented with,” she said. “And so many of the candidates don’t have the stuff to do the job that needs to be done.”"...
11/28/15, "Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump arrives by helicopter to speak with supporters at a campaign rally Saturday, Nov. 28, 2015 at Robarts Arena in Sarasota, Fla. Steve Nesius AP"
11/28/15, "Young fans of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump attend a campaign rally Saturday, Nov. 28, 2015 outside of Robarts Arena in Sarasota, Fla. Steve Nesius AP
.............
====================
............
"The Sarasota Fairgrounds estimated 4,500 people attended the event inside the arena, and thousands more were lined up outside the venue."
11/28/15, "Donald Trump unveils more diplomatic side in ejecting rally protestor," CNN,
"The Sarasota Fairgrounds estimated 4,500 people attended the event inside the arena, and thousands more were lined up outside the venue, some of whom he spoke with after he landed his helicopter and before he took off.
While those outside listened to audio of his speech, children were given helicopter rides."..(subhead, "Embracing controversy")
..................................
Friday, November 27, 2015
Dutch high court upholds government right to withhold food and shelter from rejected asylum seekers who refuse to be repatriated-Reuters
11/26/15, "Dutch court rules that migrants' right to food, shelter not unconditional," Reuters, Amsterdam
"A Dutch high court on Thursday upheld a government policy of withholding food and shelter to rejected asylum-seekers who refuse to be repatriated, giving legal backing to one of Europe's toughest immigration policies.
The Raad van State or Council of State, which reviews the legality of government decisions, found that the new policy of conservative Prime Minister Mark Rutte does not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights.
A rejected asylum seeker does not have the right to appeal to the European Social Charter, it said.
The Dutch government "has the right, when providing shelter in so-called locations of limited freedom, to require failed asylum-seekers to cooperate with their departure from the Netherlands," a summary of the ruling said.
As the Netherlands toughened its stance on newcomers in recent years, Dutch policy toward asylum-seekers and immigrants has been criticized by NGOs and the United Nations as overly strict.
Thursday's ruling counters an August report by the U.N.'s Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which told the Dutch they should meet migrants' basic needs unconditionally.
"As long as they are in The Netherlands, they have to enjoy minimum standards of living," co-author Ion Diaconu, wrote at the time.
The EU's leading human rights forum, the 47-nation Council of Europe admonished the Netherlands in 2014 for placing asylum seekers in administrative detention and leaving many "irregular immigrants" in legal limbo and destitution.
Europe's worst migrant and refugee crisis since World War Two has led to a surge in support for far right Dutch leader Geert Wilders, who wants to close the borders.
"A Dutch high court on Thursday upheld a government policy of withholding food and shelter to rejected asylum-seekers who refuse to be repatriated, giving legal backing to one of Europe's toughest immigration policies.
The Raad van State or Council of State, which reviews the legality of government decisions, found that the new policy of conservative Prime Minister Mark Rutte does not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights.
A rejected asylum seeker does not have the right to appeal to the European Social Charter, it said.
The Dutch government "has the right, when providing shelter in so-called locations of limited freedom, to require failed asylum-seekers to cooperate with their departure from the Netherlands," a summary of the ruling said.
As the Netherlands toughened its stance on newcomers in recent years, Dutch policy toward asylum-seekers and immigrants has been criticized by NGOs and the United Nations as overly strict.
Thursday's ruling counters an August report by the U.N.'s Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which told the Dutch they should meet migrants' basic needs unconditionally.
"As long as they are in The Netherlands, they have to enjoy minimum standards of living," co-author Ion Diaconu, wrote at the time.
The EU's leading human rights forum, the 47-nation Council of Europe admonished the Netherlands in 2014 for placing asylum seekers in administrative detention and leaving many "irregular immigrants" in legal limbo and destitution.
Europe's worst migrant and refugee crisis since World War Two has led to a surge in support for far right Dutch leader Geert Wilders, who wants to close the borders.
The Netherlands is
the eighth-largest destination for asylum seekers in the European Union,
accounting for 4 percent of total arrivals in 2014. Total applications
last year rose 87 percent to 24,535."
.....................
We're thankful for Trump vs The Establishment: GOP E left themselves exposed-Sundance, The Conservative Treehouse
11/26/15, "Trump VS the “Establishment”–He’s Got ’em Right Where He Want’s ’em–Stammering, Stuttering and Lost…," sundance, The Conservative Treehouse
"The Washington Post writes about how the traditional influenciers of all things republican are choosing to back away from prior plans to attack Donald Trump.
"… […] The political network backed by the billionaire Koch brothers has no plans to take on Trump. American Crossroads, the super PAC co-founded by strategist Karl Rove, is steering clear and fixated on Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton instead. Right to Rise, the super PAC backing Jeb Bush, is not gearing up to attack Trump either. And major Republican donors, such as hedge-fund manager Paul Singer and the Ricketts family, have shown no interest in supporting the few organizations trying to undercut him. (link)"...
Doug Ross also writes about how Thankful he is for the GOPe to have exposed themselves in this election cycle.
"… […] Today I also give thanks to the Republican Party, its leaders, and its media. I give thanks to the party’s agenda — in the wake of the Mississippi Senate primary and numerous derogatory remarks — as it made clear it sought to wage war against us. It is a fact that the Republican establishment seeks to expel conservatives from the party. (read more)"
Ross makes a good point; essentially: were it not for the GOPe behavior a strong argument could be presented that Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or Scott Walker would be in much better shape. Heck, they might even be viable – go figure.
Alas that’s the problem with the cocktail party republicans, their own echo-chamber is so densely insulated, they can’t hear the general electorate laughing at their futile efforts from just the other side of the mahogany doors."...
==================
Among comments:
==================
"Teddi Urbo says: November 26, 2015 at 10:19 pm
..........................
More on 2014 Mississippi Republican Primary and runoff, referenced in post above:
.
Dr. Angelo Codevilla's recap of the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary including NY Times quoting a black Democrat paid to organize for Republican Cochran:
6/30/14, "The Ruling Class Went Down to Mississippi," Angelo M. Codevilla, Liberty Law
"The mass of GOP and independent voters, having come to see themselves
as disadvantaged and insulted by the ruling class, have increasingly
supported anti-establishment candidates to challenge it in Republican
primaries. Accurately, the Republican establishment sees this as a
greater threat to themselves than any Democrats could be.
In the Mississippi primary, Republican establishmentarians from around the country solicited votes from Democrats to defeat the insurgent challenge to Senator Thad Cochran. Their arguments were the same ones used by the bipartisan ruling class that has ruled America for a generation:
The role of government is to generate benefits for its clients,
and those who object are bad people.
They paid many Democrat voters (nearly all black) so called “walking around money” for their votes, and have refused in many counties to let McDaniel aides examine the voter roles to see whether these voters were eligible to cast ballots.
The retail corruption is much less remarkable than the acquiescence therein of the establishment’s leadership – such as Karl Rove and The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. This is very remarkable. Rove’s super-PAC, “Conservative Victory Project,” which played a leading role in recruiting Democrats for Cochran,
exists explicitly to defeat insurgent Republicans everywhere.
The Journal’s editorial page, whose editorials and featured columnists mobilized opinion against the Mississippi insurgency, had done the same throughout this and previous years’ primaries. Rove’s post election commentary glossed over the vote-buying as if it had not happened, while the Journal’s Jason Riley endorsed it cynically as “minority outreach.”
To Republican and independent voters who are dissatisfied with the direction of the country, the conflict between the pretenses and the actions of such as Rove and of the Journal added insult to injury. The Journal, for example, never loses an opportunity to declare itself the mortal enemy of “crony capitalism” as it decries the direction in which America has been headed, while the word “conservative” as part of the title of Rove’s super-PAC intentionally evokes the complex of sentiments of voters angry at the ruling class’s characterization of them as, well, the litany: “racist, greedy, stupid,” etc.
Indeed, the Republican Party’s very identity, the one, sole, argument it makes to persuade voters to vote Republican rather than Democrat,
is that it will take the country
in a direction different from the one in which it has been going.
But, in the Mississippi primary, the Republican Establishment’s campaign was by and for crony capitalism, and employed the classic themes by which the ruling class has beaten down the rest of America.
To Mississippians white and black, the establishment’s message was: All this Tea Party talk about dangerous deficits and the need to cut spending is a threat to responsible officials’ capacity to bring you the jobs and federal assistance on which your prosperity depends. Orchestrating that message was Haley Barbour, former governor of Mississippi, former national chairman of the Republican Party,
and arguably Washington’s biggest lobbyist.
Day to day operations were run by Stuart Stevens, formerly chief strategist in Mitt Romney’s 2012 national campaign, along with Henry and Austin Barbour, Haley’s nephews. There could be few better
personifications of crony capitalism.
To the blacks, who, according to The New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight.com provided some forty thousand votes, the message was:
"Don’t be intimidated by the Tea Party. . . . Mississippi cannot and will not return to the bygone era of intimidating black Mississippians from voting. We must rise up on Tuesday and have our voices heard on who will represent Mississippi in the U.S. Senate. VOTE THAD COCHRAN."
The Times reported the effect: Roger Smith, a black Democrat who said he was being paid to organize for Mr. Cochran, said, ‘I don’t know too much about [Cochran’s opponent] McDaniel other than what McDaniel is saying:
that he’s Tea Party, he’s against Obama, he don’t like black people.”
In short, those who oppose the way things are done in America are racists.
You ought to hate them as they hate you.
Why do such things? Cui bono? Clearly such behavior by the Republican establishment has nothing to do with the role it claims for itself of opposition to the direction on which America has been taken in recent decades,
never mind with anything “conservative.”
It has everything to do with maintaining its status,
and that of its clients, within the ruling class.
The Mississippi primary confirmed yet again that, if America is to go in a direction other than the one of which some three fourths of American disapprove, it is compelled to do so with a vehicle other than the Republican Party."
----------------------------
"Angelo M. Codevilla professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University. He served as a U.S. Senate Staff member dealing with oversight of the intelligence services. His new book Peace Among Ourselves and With All Nations was published by Hoover Institution Press." Photo above from Liberty Law site.
============================
http://patterico.com/2014/06/30/yes-there-were-flyers-and-robocalls-that-accused-the-tea-party-of-racism/
...........................................................
..................................
Added: From NY Times article linked in Codevilla piece, NY liberal billionaire Mike Bloomberg gave as much as $500,000 to support the GOP Establishment candidate in the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary:
6/24/14, "Cochran Holds Off Tea Party Challenger in Mississippi," NY Times, Jonathan Weisman
"Also sure to inflame the right: a center-right super PAC, Defending Main Street, which contributed over $150,000 to Mr. Cochran during the runoff, received $250,000 from Michael Bloomberg in the same period, according to a source close to the former New York City mayor.
Mr. Bloomberg also contributed $250,000 to Mr Cochran’s super PAC, Mississippi Conservatives, before the primary....
It was an extraordinary end to a wild campaign, with a Republican
standing up for the rights of black Democrats,
and with Tea Party groups from the North,
especially the Senate Conservatives Fund, crying foul."...
............
Karl Rove's "Conservative Victory Project" mentioned in Dr. Codevilla's article was financed at least in part by Rove's American Crossroads PAC:
"Conservative Victory Project," 2014 donors:
American Crossroads, $18,685, OpenSecrets.org
-------------------
"Conservative Victory Project," 2014 Expenditures:"
"Top Vendors/Recipient, American Crossroads"
"$17,160," Accountants, compliance, legal services, misc.
=================
In his 6/26/14 Wall St. Journal article Mr. Rove says he made three donations to the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary: one to the Cochran campaign, one to Mississippi Conservatives (Cochran's PAC) via Rove's super PAC American Crossroads, and one to the Mississippi GOP primary runoff. American Crossroads PAC also donated to Rove's "Conservative Victory Project."
Rove: "(Full disclosure: I donated to Mr. Cochran's campaign and the super PAC that I help, American Crossroads, donated to Mississippi Conservatives in the primary and runoff.)"...
...........
6/26/14, "National Tea Party Groups Take A Beating," WSJ, Karl Rove
"The six-term senator's victory was due to a strategy by his campaign...led by GOP national committeeman Henry Barbour and his uncle, the very popular former Gov. Haley Barbour."...
............
======================
===================
Per OpenSecrets.org, American Crossroads donated $210,000 to 2014 GOP primary PAC, "Mississippi Conservatives:"
("Bluegrass Cmte" above with $50,000 donation is a Mitch McConnell group).
About: "Mississippi Conservatives"
"This committee is a single-candidate super PAC in support of Thad Cochran (R)."
............
=====================
P.S. The headline, "National Tea Party Groups Take A Beating," was accurate and well deserved. Local Tea Party people with no money made history in 2010. On the other hand, so-called National Tea Party groups were co-opted and sold out to the Establishment on day one and are still raking in millions from unsuspecting seniors. These "national" TP groups are worse than the GOP E. In the 1949 movie, The Third Man, the Orson Welles character sold diluted vaccine to hospitals for babies. "National" TP groups are in effect selling diluted vaccine:
....................
Image above via TCTH
"The Washington Post writes about how the traditional influenciers of all things republican are choosing to back away from prior plans to attack Donald Trump.
"… […] The political network backed by the billionaire Koch brothers has no plans to take on Trump. American Crossroads, the super PAC co-founded by strategist Karl Rove, is steering clear and fixated on Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton instead. Right to Rise, the super PAC backing Jeb Bush, is not gearing up to attack Trump either. And major Republican donors, such as hedge-fund manager Paul Singer and the Ricketts family, have shown no interest in supporting the few organizations trying to undercut him. (link)"...
Doug Ross also writes about how Thankful he is for the GOPe to have exposed themselves in this election cycle.
"… […] Today I also give thanks to the Republican Party, its leaders, and its media. I give thanks to the party’s agenda — in the wake of the Mississippi Senate primary and numerous derogatory remarks — as it made clear it sought to wage war against us. It is a fact that the Republican establishment seeks to expel conservatives from the party. (read more)"
Ross makes a good point; essentially: were it not for the GOPe behavior a strong argument could be presented that Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio or Scott Walker would be in much better shape. Heck, they might even be viable – go figure.
Alas that’s the problem with the cocktail party republicans, their own echo-chamber is so densely insulated, they can’t hear the general electorate laughing at their futile efforts from just the other side of the mahogany doors."...
 |
| Donald Trump |
==================
Among comments:
==================
"Teddi Urbo says: November 26, 2015 at 10:19 pm
..........................
More on 2014 Mississippi Republican Primary and runoff, referenced in post above:
.
Dr. Angelo Codevilla's recap of the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary including NY Times quoting a black Democrat paid to organize for Republican Cochran:
6/30/14, "The Ruling Class Went Down to Mississippi," Angelo M. Codevilla, Liberty Law
In the Mississippi primary, Republican establishmentarians from around the country solicited votes from Democrats to defeat the insurgent challenge to Senator Thad Cochran. Their arguments were the same ones used by the bipartisan ruling class that has ruled America for a generation:
The role of government is to generate benefits for its clients,
and those who object are bad people.
They paid many Democrat voters (nearly all black) so called “walking around money” for their votes, and have refused in many counties to let McDaniel aides examine the voter roles to see whether these voters were eligible to cast ballots.
The retail corruption is much less remarkable than the acquiescence therein of the establishment’s leadership – such as Karl Rove and The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. This is very remarkable. Rove’s super-PAC, “Conservative Victory Project,” which played a leading role in recruiting Democrats for Cochran,
exists explicitly to defeat insurgent Republicans everywhere.
The Journal’s editorial page, whose editorials and featured columnists mobilized opinion against the Mississippi insurgency, had done the same throughout this and previous years’ primaries. Rove’s post election commentary glossed over the vote-buying as if it had not happened, while the Journal’s Jason Riley endorsed it cynically as “minority outreach.”
To Republican and independent voters who are dissatisfied with the direction of the country, the conflict between the pretenses and the actions of such as Rove and of the Journal added insult to injury. The Journal, for example, never loses an opportunity to declare itself the mortal enemy of “crony capitalism” as it decries the direction in which America has been headed, while the word “conservative” as part of the title of Rove’s super-PAC intentionally evokes the complex of sentiments of voters angry at the ruling class’s characterization of them as, well, the litany: “racist, greedy, stupid,” etc.
Indeed, the Republican Party’s very identity, the one, sole, argument it makes to persuade voters to vote Republican rather than Democrat,
is that it will take the country
in a direction different from the one in which it has been going.
But, in the Mississippi primary, the Republican Establishment’s campaign was by and for crony capitalism, and employed the classic themes by which the ruling class has beaten down the rest of America.
To Mississippians white and black, the establishment’s message was: All this Tea Party talk about dangerous deficits and the need to cut spending is a threat to responsible officials’ capacity to bring you the jobs and federal assistance on which your prosperity depends. Orchestrating that message was Haley Barbour, former governor of Mississippi, former national chairman of the Republican Party,
and arguably Washington’s biggest lobbyist.
Day to day operations were run by Stuart Stevens, formerly chief strategist in Mitt Romney’s 2012 national campaign, along with Henry and Austin Barbour, Haley’s nephews. There could be few better
personifications of crony capitalism.
To the blacks, who, according to The New York Times’ FiveThirtyEight.com provided some forty thousand votes, the message was:
"Don’t be intimidated by the Tea Party. . . . Mississippi cannot and will not return to the bygone era of intimidating black Mississippians from voting. We must rise up on Tuesday and have our voices heard on who will represent Mississippi in the U.S. Senate. VOTE THAD COCHRAN."
The Times reported the effect: Roger Smith, a black Democrat who said he was being paid to organize for Mr. Cochran, said, ‘I don’t know too much about [Cochran’s opponent] McDaniel other than what McDaniel is saying:
that he’s Tea Party, he’s against Obama, he don’t like black people.”
In short, those who oppose the way things are done in America are racists.
You ought to hate them as they hate you.
Why do such things? Cui bono? Clearly such behavior by the Republican establishment has nothing to do with the role it claims for itself of opposition to the direction on which America has been taken in recent decades,
never mind with anything “conservative.”
It has everything to do with maintaining its status,
and that of its clients, within the ruling class.
The Mississippi primary confirmed yet again that, if America is to go in a direction other than the one of which some three fourths of American disapprove, it is compelled to do so with a vehicle other than the Republican Party."
----------------------------
"Angelo M. Codevilla professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University. He served as a U.S. Senate Staff member dealing with oversight of the intelligence services. His new book Peace Among Ourselves and With All Nations was published by Hoover Institution Press." Photo above from Liberty Law site.
============================
6/30/2014, "Yes, There Were Flyers and Robocalls That Accused the Tea Party of Racism," Patterico
"John Fund asked if this was the flyer that got Thad Cochran elected:"...http://patterico.com/2014/06/30/yes-there-were-flyers-and-robocalls-that-accused-the-tea-party-of-racism/
...........................................................
..................................
Added: From NY Times article linked in Codevilla piece, NY liberal billionaire Mike Bloomberg gave as much as $500,000 to support the GOP Establishment candidate in the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary:
6/24/14, "Cochran Holds Off Tea Party Challenger in Mississippi," NY Times, Jonathan Weisman
"Also sure to inflame the right: a center-right super PAC, Defending Main Street, which contributed over $150,000 to Mr. Cochran during the runoff, received $250,000 from Michael Bloomberg in the same period, according to a source close to the former New York City mayor.
Mr. Bloomberg also contributed $250,000 to Mr Cochran’s super PAC, Mississippi Conservatives, before the primary....
It was an extraordinary end to a wild campaign, with a Republican
standing up for the rights of black Democrats,
and with Tea Party groups from the North,
especially the Senate Conservatives Fund, crying foul."...
............
================
............
............
Comment: "Inflame the right?" "Crying foul?" So what?
.............
========================
..............
.............
========================
..............
What it cost them to beat us in 2014 Mississippi GOP primary:
Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran campaign spending chart, OpenSecrets.org:
Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran campaign spending chart, OpenSecrets.org:
=============================
Karl Rove's "Conservative Victory Project" mentioned in Dr. Codevilla's article was financed at least in part by Rove's American Crossroads PAC:
"Conservative Victory Project," 2014 donors:
American Crossroads, $18,685, OpenSecrets.org
-------------------
"Conservative Victory Project," 2014 Expenditures:"
"Top Vendors/Recipient, American Crossroads"
"$17,160," Accountants, compliance, legal services, misc.
=================
In his 6/26/14 Wall St. Journal article Mr. Rove says he made three donations to the 2014 Mississippi GOP primary: one to the Cochran campaign, one to Mississippi Conservatives (Cochran's PAC) via Rove's super PAC American Crossroads, and one to the Mississippi GOP primary runoff. American Crossroads PAC also donated to Rove's "Conservative Victory Project."
Rove: "(Full disclosure: I donated to Mr. Cochran's campaign and the super PAC that I help, American Crossroads, donated to Mississippi Conservatives in the primary and runoff.)"...
...........
6/26/14, "National Tea Party Groups Take A Beating," WSJ, Karl Rove
"The six-term senator's victory was due to a strategy by his campaign...led by GOP national committeeman Henry Barbour and his uncle, the very popular former Gov. Haley Barbour."...
............
======================
===================
Per OpenSecrets.org, American Crossroads donated $210,000 to 2014 GOP primary PAC, "Mississippi Conservatives:"
("Bluegrass Cmte" above with $50,000 donation is a Mitch McConnell group).
About: "Mississippi Conservatives"
"This committee is a single-candidate super PAC in support of Thad Cochran (R)."
............
=====================
P.S. The headline, "National Tea Party Groups Take A Beating," was accurate and well deserved. Local Tea Party people with no money made history in 2010. On the other hand, so-called National Tea Party groups were co-opted and sold out to the Establishment on day one and are still raking in millions from unsuspecting seniors. These "national" TP groups are worse than the GOP E. In the 1949 movie, The Third Man, the Orson Welles character sold diluted vaccine to hospitals for babies. "National" TP groups are in effect selling diluted vaccine:
"Harry Lime was the leader of a gang that robbed penicillin from the
military hospital to adulterate and resell it, and has caused the death
and anomalies in many children."...
....................
Image above via TCTH
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
- susan
- I'm the daughter of a World War II Air Force pilot and outdoorsman who settled in New Jersey.
To me – Trump is having a blast kicking around the GOPe, Media, Dems/left and all of the “PC” crowd and it shows – people are picking up that vibe ) )) ))) ))))"
======================
11/25/15, "Plan A for GOP donors: Wait for Trump to fall. (There is no Plan B.)," Washington Post, Matea Gold, Robert Costa