nChrist
|
 |
« on: September 22, 2016, 07:48:16 PM » |
|
________________________________________ The Patriot Post Digest 9-20-2016 From The Federalist Patriot Free Email Subscription ________________________________________
Mid-Day Digest
Sep. 20, 2016
THE FOUNDATION
“A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy.” —Samuel Adams (1779)
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
DHS Bureaucratic Failure1
It was unveiled on Monday that the Department of Homeland Security had mistakenly granted U.S. citizenship to over 800 immigrants from “special interest countries” who had been scheduled for deportation. This alarming revelation in light of this past weekend’s bombings perpetrated by a naturalized citizen from Afghanistan has generated numerous questions from lawmakers as to how DHS allowed such a serious security breach to happen.
DHS Inspector General John Roth’s explanation was that old paper files of fingerprint records had not yet been fully added to the digital database due to a lack of funding. Homeland Security officials had been ordered by Congress in 2012 to report how much it would cost for everything to be digitalized. DHS never commented on whether this report was given. Of the 858 individuals mistakenly granted citizenship, roughly 120 were identified by the department as worthy of being prosecuted for fraud and, to date, only two cases have been accepted by the Justice Department and another 26 cases have been refused. Upon learning of the DHS blunder, Republican Sen. Ben Sasse commented, “This is a picture of total incompetence. A bureaucracy that blunders so badly is one that doesn’t take our national security seriously.”
Hours after bombing suspect Ahmad Khan Rahami was apprehended, Donald Trump stated, “The safety and security of the homeland must be the overriding objective of our leaders when it comes to our immigration policy.” Bureaucratic blunders like this further prove that Donald Trump’s immigration concerns are well-founded.
A Battle of Narratives?2
On Sunday, while the search for bombing suspect Ahmad Khan Rahami was unfolding, CNN had Barack Obama spokesman Josh Earnest in the studio for an interview. Earnest made a point to stress that the U.S. battle against Islamic terror was a “battle of narratives.” He said, “What I am telling you is that we are, when it comes to ISIL, we are in a fight — a narrative fight with them, a narrative battle, and what ISIL wants to do is they want to project that they are an organization that is representing Islam in a fight and a war against the West and a war against the United States.”
However, it appears that the real battle over narratives is not primarily between the U.S. and ISIL but between leftists and conservatives. Consider how CNN reported on Donald Trump’s remarks after the bombings. A CNN headline read: “Trump Says ‘Racial Profiling’ Will Stop Terror.” The problem is that Trump never said “racial” in his comments on the need for better vetting of immigrants. CNN simply injected the word into its coverage. Clearly, CNN wants to promote a false image of Trump being a racist.
Then there was MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. He tweeted: “We’re also very very lucky that the attackers tried to use explosives rather than guns.” Clearly, Hayes' seeking to make some anti-gun point comes across as completely out of touch with regard to the actual issue at hand. This kind of unabashed exploitation of a horrific event in order to further some unconnected social agenda has become increasingly common for the Leftmedia. On a side note, to counter Hayes' foolish comment, it was a citizen armed with a handgun who stopped the knife-wielding attacker in Minnesota.
Back to Earnest’s comments on a “battle of narratives,” the Democrat leadership and specifically Hillary Clinton, who was the secretary of state at the time of ISIL’s rise, and current Secretary of State John Kerry are responsible for framing this as a battle of narratives rather than what it truly is — a war against American values. To deny the radical Islamic ideological motivation for these terrorist attacks and boil them down to merely a “battle of narratives” is to deny reality.
Iran: Obama’s Proliferating BIG Lie3
There’s no shortage of spurious claims promulgated by the Obama administration. But when it comes to Iran, the consequences of getting it wrong are exceptionally dangerous. And every new development only reaffirms that Obama is conjuring up narratives faster than Iran can chant “Death to America.” A new report4 reveals that in July 2015 and April 2016 the U.S. government sent Iran a total of around $10 million to close the books on two separate arrangements. It’s not necessarily the subject of those arrangements but the means of how the money got to the mullahs that’s drawing attention.
The funds, the Treasury Department recently conceded, were electronically wired — an admission that entirely subverts Obama’s August assertion regarding how the highly contentious ransom payment to Iran was crafted earlier this year: “The reason that we had to give them cash is precisely because we are so strict in maintaining sanctions and we do not have a banking relationship with Iran, that we couldn’t send them a check and we could not wire the money.” On the contrary, the July transaction is particularly noteworthy because sanctions were still in full effect.
According to Sen. James Lankford, “I don’t have any question that Iran wants the money in cash because they wanted it faster than what a wire transfer would be and it’s fungible. They announced pretty quickly afterward that they were expanding their defense and their military budget by $1.7 billion dollars, an exact amount that we had just sent over to them. So I don’t think that was accidental. But when you give cash, we can’t track. Did that go to Hezbollah? Did that go to the Russians? Did that go to the coup in Yemen? There’s no way to be able to track that.” What we do know without question is that Obama’s placating Iran — in a shroud of secrecy, no less — has severely undermined our national security.
Don’t Miss Patriot Humor
Check out A Sign of Illness5.
If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here6.
BEST OF RIGHT OPINION
Rich Lowry: Is Trump a Traitor?7 Stephen Moore: No Thank You, Obama8 Dennis Prager: Did the Famous Sailor Sexually Assault the Famous Nurse?9
For more, visit Right Opinion10.
TOP HEADLINES
Ceasefire in Syria Completely Unravels11 Merkel May Back Down From Open-Door Refugee Policy12 Clinton Email Sweeper Asked Reddit for Tips13
For more, visit Patriot Headline Report14.
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS After Eight Years, Obama’s Energy Secretary Visits West Virginia15
By James Shott
Those who lived in or near the southern West Virginia and/or southwest Virginia coalfields during the peak of the coal business in the 1950s and ‘60s know that state and local economies thrived because of the tens of thousands of people employed by mining companies and the dozens of companies that supported the industry.
The Norfolk and Western Railway yard in Bluefield, WV, was always filled with coal cars — many of them full of the world’s most widely used fossil fuel — that were bound for the port in Norfolk, VA, or ready to be unloaded into trucks for delivery. The rest were empty, heading back into the coalfields to be refilled and brought back for distribution.
They remember the bustling downtown that was the financial, shopping and recreational center of the region’s coalfields and Bluefield’s population of well over 20,000 residents during the time of peak coal. These are valued memories of the good times.
Today’s population is half that size, and the rail yard is often empty. To those who have seen firsthand the decline of the industry and its effects on local communities, the industry’s decline is a very real and painful thing.
The decline began with natural technological advances, as mechanization gradually began putting hundreds of miners out of work. Over time other forces developed that affected the industry, including the very recent rise of cheap natural gas. Through all of that, there was always a market for coal.
|