Even CNN Agrees: IG Report On Lyin’ McCabe Is Terrible And He Had To Go

Leave a comment

H/T Town Hall.

Even the hacks at the Communist News Network understands Andrew McCabe is a lying scumbag.

Andrew McCabe needs to be prosecuted for lying and lose his pension.

On Friday, the Department of Justice Inspector General’s report on ex-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe was released. It was scathing. It was damning. It was what we all expected it to be. McCabe was fired for lying to investigators and signing off on an unauthorized media leak to The Wall Street Journal about the tension between DOJ and FBI over the Clinton Foundation probe. It was warranted. This was not a Trump White House recommendation either. The Office of Professional Responsibility also recommended that McCabe be given the axe, which he did hours before he was about to retire and claim a multi-million dollar pension.

Let’s just say this. For once, CNN was able to agree that what Andrew McCabe did was terrible, lying under oath (three times), and he should be fired. Former FBI Supervisory Special Agent James Gagliano took McCabe to the woodshed over his lies, saying he deserved to be fired. From probationary agents out of Quantico to the Deputy Director and beyond within the agency, there has to be the same standard. If you lie, you’re gone. Period. Gagliano also noted that a nonpartisan Obama-appointed IG, who unlike his colleagues did not make his decisions based on politics, conducted this investigation.

Another thing this IG report re-confirmed (again) was that the Clinton Foundation was, indeed, under investigation.

Here’s a partial thread of the IG report:


1. I’m taking my time reading the McCabe report from @JusticeOIG and so far I’m floored. This is a 30+ page report on misconduct by fired Dep Dir McCabe; I intend this thread to be a work in progress as I make my way through it & will suppliment work done by others.


7. This follows Barrett’s Oct 23, ’16 WSJ article revealing McCabes wife received almost $700,000 from Terry McCauliffe for her senate run at a time McCabe was over seeing TWO Clinton investigations & mcauliffe was under FBI probe.


8. This led to great panic on the part of McCabe who within days ordered his Aide Lisa Page & AD/OPA Kortan to meet w Barrett. They communicated w him several times about this ultimately revealing that DOJ wanted the Clinton Foundation case stopped.


9. McCabe took a call Aug 12, ’16 from Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General at DOJ who was the point person for DOJ on that case. It was heated & McCabe allegedly (his words) asked point blank if DOJ was asking FBI to kill a valid case.


10. What happened next is Page & Kortan at McCabes order leak this fact to Barrett who then publishes it on Oct 30, ’16.


11. From pages 6-11 the report details the aftermath: the Justice Dept was fit to be tied. @tracybeanz thread details this in depth. First McCabe lied and pointed suspicion both internally at FBI & at DOJ blaming WashDC & NYC Field Offices. (WFO & NYFO).


12. This is a crucial. McCabe knowingly used his aide & FBI Public Affairs to leak unauthorized to the WSJ to cover up his own conflicts of interest that may signal other more egregious felonies he has committed at the Bureau.see @The_War_Economy teeets about McCabe addresses


13. McCabe goes so far as to tell the Asst Dir In Charge, WFO (ADIC-WFO) to quote: ‘get your house in order’. He called him incompetent w full knowledge he was blaming the man for his own crime. Yes, it is a felony.


14. Circle back: McCabe has now accused ADIC-NYFO & ADIC-WFO of the leak he knowingly perpetrated to hide his own misdeeds. This triggers an FBI Inspection Division mole hunt that targets the entire Counter Intelligence division who had access to both Clinton cases: email & Fdtn.


Pardon Me, President Trump, But Don’t Forget Dinesh D’Souza

1 Comment

H/T Town Hall.

Dinesh D’Souza should be pardoned because he has done nothing wrong.

Presidential pardons have fallen under renewed scrutiny. Critics contend that President Trump is helping friends and fellow conservatives. He pardoned Sheriff Joe Arpaio following his conviction at the hand of a liberal federal judge. Trump also pardoned Kristian Saucier, convicted of federal crimes for taking photos in a submarine. Ultimately, the public is hearing heavy condemnation about these pardons only because of the media’s deranged anti-Trump hatred. Perhaps Trump should issue a blanket pardon for press agents like Jim Acosta, Rachel Maddow, and their illiberal ilk. They have engaged in massive corporate fraud and deception for decades.

Trump’s latest pardon to invite press/establishment calumny features Irving Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the former chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney and then assistant to President George W. Bush. Libby’s nefarious crimes? Obstruction of justice, perjury, giving false statement, and much of a result of overzealous prosecution, all of it connected to leaks over former CIA Agent Valerie Plame.

Is President Trump going too far with his pardons? Should the presidency still retain the power to pardon? Founding Father Alexander Hamilton had argued for this provision in order to secure the peace among competing combatants following domestic insurrections. The Framers were prescient beyond their years. Toward the end of the Civil War, President Lincoln intended to issue full pardons to every Confederate soldier who would repledge allegiance to the United States. “What is the best way to defeat an enemy? Make him your friend.” His successor, Democrat Andrew Johnson, issued a blanket pardon on Christmas Day 1868, despite (or perhaps because of) the animus between Executive Branch and the “Radical” Republican Congress.

As for deep state corruption, one criminal case comes to mind for which Trump needs to issue a pardon: Dinesh D’Souza. The case may have faded from public memory, so here’s a brief recap. In 2014, the young conservative writer and speaker was arraigned in a Manhattan federal court for a $20,000 campaign violation, as he had exceeding arbitrary limits. How? After reaching his own limit, D’Souza asked a friend to donate to a friend, then D’Souza paid back her friend. Honestly, why is this a crime to begin with? This case highlights how criminal law has lots its basis in mens rea, or criminal intent. People are going to jail for breaking laws they know nothing about!

On top of that, this case showcased the aggressive, selective enforcement of the Obama Administration and his coven of left-wing U.S. attorneys. Other people had skirted campaign finance laws and spent more money, but they got a slap on the wrist and paid a fine.

D’Souza was prosecuted in a very public manner, then convicted of a felony. His otherwise liberal attorney was flabbergasted at the outrageous conduct of the federal judge presiding over the case. There was no reason for D’Souza to be sent up the river like that. None. Four years later, Congressional investigations have discovered a criminal dossier on D’Souza, which included special directions for the FBI to go after him because he was a frequent critic of the president.

D’Souza’s conviction and confinement in a halfway house had their benefits. He found time and resources to report on the replete corruption of the Democratic Party, their determination to “steal America.” In spite of the attempted moral stain of a felony, the polished and erudite conservative intellect has not stayed from the political and academic fray. In fact, the unjust trial and conviction gave the former Reagan adviser more street cred.

Still, it’s absolutely ridiculous that he was damned so arbitrarily for something so minor, and the political machinations behind should horrify all of us. This power play by the Obama Administration showcases another example of overzealous persecution and the weaponization of the federal judiciary. These abuses must be confronted, condemned, and closed down. Trump can accomplish all of these goals with a fully justifiable pardon for Dinesh D’Souza. After all, former U.S. Senator and presidential candidate John Edwards faced unconscionable indictments for purported campaign finance crimes, but was acquitted. The most outspoken conservatives recognized that the trial was heavy-handed in that case.

It certainly was for Dinesh. Pardon me, Mr. Trump, but you need to pardon Dinesh D’Souza!

The Time New Jersey Took New York to the Supreme Court to Lay Claim to Ellis Island

Leave a comment

H/T Mental  Floss.

A look at the squabble between New Jersey and New York over Ellis Island through the years.

It is ironic that the part of Ellis Island that is in major disrepair belongs to New Jersey.

Ellis Island, the gateway to the U.S. for millions of immigrants in the early 20th century, is often considered a part of New York. After all, we rarely hear immigrant tales of sailing across the Atlantic in the early 1900s bound for … New Jersey. The Titanic wasn’t setting sail for New Jersey. But the island is, in fact, closer to the Garden State than it is to Manhattan. While you can only access the island from New York by boat, Ellis Island is connected to New Jersey’s Liberty State Park by a bridge that measures only 1100 feet long (though it’s only open to authorized personnel). So who does it belong to, really? The answer is so contentious that in the 1990s, New Jersey went straight to the Supreme Court about it.

For centuries, due to the extremely vague wording of a 17th century land grant, the two states have both laid claim to Ellis Island. The 1998 Supreme Court case that finally settled the matter, was, improbably, sparked by a severed leg, as The New York Times recently explored in its F.Y.I. column

New Jersey was formed by a land grant from the English Duke of York in 1664, establishing an English colony situated between the Delaware River, the Hudson River, and the Atlantic Ocean. The grant established New Jersey’s border as “bounded on the east part by the main sea, and part by Hudson’s river.” The key word being part.

To New Jersey officials, that seemed to mean the state was entitled to the western half of the Hudson River, which would include Ellis Island. New York, on the other hand, took it to mean New Jersey ended where the water began. In 1833, as part of a compromise over the boundary between the two states, New Jersey acknowledged that New York owned the islands in the Hudson, including Ellis Island, but stipulated that it owned the land underwater up to the island’s edge [PDF].

The federal government, however, was the one actually using the island at the time. In the early 1800s, the state of New York ceded the rights to the island over to the U.S. government to use as a military base, and later, an immigration station. The immigration center opened in 1892, operating up until 1954, when it closed and the island became surplus government property.

A few decades later, an accident would force the issue of who really owned Ellis Island. In 1986, tragedy struck during the construction of the immigration museum that now operates on the island. A worker from the National Park Service lost his leg due to an accident with a stump grinder on the landfill portion of the island, which had been built out into the Hudson River by the government when the island was still an immigration center. He sued the company that manufactured the grinder, and in turn, the manufacturer sued the federal government to share in the liability for the accident.

The federal government really wanted that piece of landfill to belong to New Jersey, since it had a better chance of dodging the lawsuit under New Jersey law. So it tried to give the land to New Jersey. Both the Federal District Court in Manhattan and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals begged to differ. In 1992, the appeals court reaffirmed that the property belonged to New York, since the 1833 agreement didn’t say anything about the island’s size.

New Jersey wasn’t pleased. In 1993, the state went straight to the Supreme Court over where the border line fell. The move was prompted by more than just one worker’s lawsuit. According to The New York Times’s 1996 write-up of the pre-trial hearing of the case, tax revenue played a major role. So did pure ego:

At issue is who can maintain bragging rights over a symbol of the immigration that helped forge the United States. (More than 4 out of 10 Americans trace their ancestry to immigrants who passed through the island.) More important, the case would help settle the question of who could collect taxes on the island should plans be realized to convert the crumbling buildings into a hotel or convention center.

According to the newspaper, the trial was a doozy. “Bile oozed across the lectern,” reporter Neil MacFarquhar wrote, “as each side mustered 200 years of accumulated skirmishing for the trial, expected to last a month and to include a field trip to the famous rock itself, with dueling experts as guides.”

In 1998, the Supreme Court settled the case [PDF]. The court ruled that the landfill belonged to New Jersey, as the state owned the part of the river leading up to the island, including the land underneath it. Since the landfill had been built on top of New Jersey’s territory, it owned the more than 20 acres of landfill on Ellis Island. The state of New York, meanwhile, could keep its claim to the original island as it existed before the federal government got there.

New York ended up with about 17 percent of the island, a mere 4.68 acres, including the land on which the Ellis Island museum stands. But most of the other buildings—which stand in a state of “arrested decay”—belong to New Jersey. Some of the buildings even stand on top of the border, meaning they’re half in New York, half in New Jersey. The museum within the main immigration building largely belongs to New York, for instance, but the laundry and kitchen in the building (which are off-limits to the public unless they take a hard hat tour) are technically part of New Jersey.

But, as the Times notes, this debate only matters when it comes down to the sales tax revenue from concessions purchased by tourists. Otherwise, it’s merely a matter of state pride.

[h/t The New York Times]

Dick’s Sporting Goods Is Doing WHAT With Its Unsold ‘Assault Style’ Rifles?


H/T Bearing Arms.

What will destroying the Assault style rifles do to Dick’s Sporting Goods bottom line?

Following the Parkland, Florida mass shooting, some companies decided that they would no longer sell semi-automatic rifles, like the AR-15, and high-capacity magazines. Among them was Dick’s Sporting Goods. Not only did Dick’s state that it would no longer sell “assault-style” rifles or the “high-capacity” magazines, but it decided it would no longer sell any firearms to anyone under the age of 21. But what is the sporting goods store going to do with its inventory of “assault-style” weapons? Well, the public now has the answer.

As reported by the Associated Press:

In February, national retail chain Dick’s Sporting Goods announced it would stop sales of assault-style rifles and high capacity magazines at all of its stores and ban the sale of all guns to anyone under 21 years old.

The announcement came Feb. 28, just two weeks after the school massacre in Parkland, Florida.

But recently the sporting goods chain also said it was destroying all the assault-style guns pulled from shelves as well as the accessories.

“We are destroying the firearms in accordance with federal guidelines and regulations,” a spokeswoman told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

What a waste, and what a strange business model.

The store is already taking a hit due to its involvement in the gun control debate, as Tom wrote about here. Those troubles may continue with this news. According to the report, the Parkland shooter didn’t even purchase the firearm used in the massacre from one of the company’s stores. However, Dick’s Sporting Goods’ Chairman and CEO did say that the shooter had bought a shotgun from the store the year before.

…the gunman who killed 17 people in Florida, mostly students, had purchased a shotgun at a Dick’s store in November 2017, Stack said.

“It was not the gun, nor type of gun, he used in the shooting,” Chairman and CEO Edward Stack wrote. “But it could have been. Clearly, this indicates on so many levels that the systems in place are not effective to protect our kids and our citizens.”

Contrary to what Stack believes, the systems that are in place are sufficient if all the parts of the system do the job each is intended to do. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System didn’t fail here as the shooter had no criminal record on file and was, therefore, able to clear a background check (more than one, in fact). What failed, sadly, was law enforcement. The FBI received tips on more than one occasion that the shooter was planning his attack and people who knew him were concerned. The Broward Sheriff’s Officer went to the shooter’s home numerous times and still did not act to charge the shooter with a crime or figure out a way to restrict him from keeping firearms in his possession.

Dick’s Sporting Goods’ decision isn’t focusing on the actual problem. It’s almost like it wants to go out of business.

New Jersey Man Indicted For Manufacturing, Selling ‘Ghost Guns’

Leave a comment

H/T Bearing Arms.

The accused George Carleton was also in possession of 14 firearms with their serial numbers were removed.

In January, law enforcement arrested 56-year-old New Jersey man George Carleton for selling a ghost gun in Hammonton, NJ. When police raided his home, they found an arsenal of illegal weapons. In total, law enforcement discovered 17 more ghost guns, over a dozen unregistered firearms, and the tools necessary for Carleton to manufacture even more weapons for sale.

Now, an Atlantic County Grand Jury has given a 22 count indictment.

From Press of Atlantic City:

On April 10, Atlantic County Grand Jury returned a 22-count indictment against Gregory Carleton, 56, of Evesham Township, for unlawfully manufacturing and selling “ghost guns” which are illegally-manufactured guns with no serial number.

Carleton was charged with second-degree unlawful possession of a handgun without a permit, fourth-degree unlawful manufacture of a gun or other weapon and fourth-degree sale of a gun or other weapon. Following the search of the vehicle, Carleton was charged with an additional four counts: two counts of second-degree unlawful possession of a handgun without a permit and two counts of fourth-degree unlawful manufacture of a gun or other weapon.

Following the April 10 indictment, Carleton is being held in the Atlantic County Justice Facility.

Bearing Arms has covered stories concerning ghost guns in the past, as Democratic politicians in various states look to restrict access to them. Former U.S. Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) called for the removal of two websites that teach people how to manufacture the weapons and provide the necessary materials to do so. And a Philadelphia television station freaked out when they learned people can build their own firearms. In November, Bearing Arms also wrote about the concerns of law enforcement that an increase in gun regulations could lead to more criminals making firearms.

The problem, in this case, wasn’t that Carleton was making ghost guns, it was that he was selling them and was in possession of 14 other firearms that had the serial numbers removed.

According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, one needs a license for “sale or distribution.”

…a license is not required to make a firearm solely for personal use. However, a license is required to manufacture firearms for sale or distribution. The law prohibits a person from assembling a non–sporting semiautomatic rifle or shotgun from 10 or more imported parts, as well as firearms that cannot be detected by metal detectors or x-ray machines. In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF.

While the report does not state whether the gun sold went to an officer in an undercover sting or was found to have gone to a convicted felon, one would think that, because Carleton was already breaking the law, he didn’t care who purchased the weapons he had made. Though law-abiding gun owners making ghost guns isn’t a problem, some states require gun owners to meet specific requirements when they do so. Unfortunately, there are people out there willing to abuse their ability to create a weapon of self-defense by selling it to others who should not be in possession of a firearm. If this were to become the new norm, one could fully expect a crackdown on ghost guns and the private manufacturing of weapons by politicians at the state and federal level. The question remains, though: what action will lawmakers have to take?

The article was updated with information from the ATF detailing the law as it pertains to privately manufacturing firearms.

Beloved ‘Night Court’ Actor Harry Anderson Dies at Age 65

1 Comment

H/T Breitbarts Big Hollywood.

R.I.P. Judge Harry T. Stone aka Harry Anderson October 14, 1952 – April 16, 2018


Warner Bros. Television

Harry Anderson, the actor best known for playing an off-the-wall judge working the night shift of a Manhattan court room in the television comedy series “Night Court,” was found dead in his North Carolina home Monday.

Anderson was 65.

A statement from the Asheville Police Department said officers responded to a call from Anderson’s home early Monday and found him dead. The statement said foul play is not suspected.

On “Night Court,” Anderson played Judge Harry T. Stone, a young jurist who professed his love for singer Mel Torme, actress Jean Harlow, magic tricks and his collection of art-deco ties.

He also starred in the series “Dave’s World” and appeared on “Cheers” as con man Harry “The Hat” Gittes.

Anderson prided himself on being a magician as well as actor.

“I got into magic when I was a child,” he told The Associated Press in 1987. “Unlike most kids, I stayed with it. My high school teachers were always asking me what I was going to do. It made me what I am today — available for weekend employment, parties and bar mitzvahs.”

Anderson, was born in Newport, Rhode Island, on Oct. 14, 1952. He grew up in New York and moved to Oregon when he was a teenager and said that’s where he became a hippie.

“The Shakespeare Festival at Ashland, Oregon, seemed like a good place to open a magic store,” he said. “At 18, I was ready for retirement. It didn’t last long, but I was established as the magician. I worked the streets in San Francisco and I did magic and special effects at the festival.”

Anderson learned the ropes as a street performer in San Francisco, New Orleans, and Austin, Texas, among other cities. When he made his first appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” he was right off the street.

“‘Cheers’ was my first acting job, but it was basically the character I had developed on the street,” he said. “That’s how I made my living, hustling drinks in bars and quarters on the street.”

“Night Court” ran on NBC from 1984 until 1992, and Anderson received three lead comedy actor Emmy nominations for his role. After the show ended, he was cast in the lead role in the CBS sitcom “Dave’s World,” which was based on the life of Pulitzer Prize-winning humor columnist Dave Barry. That series ran from 1993 until 1997.

A People magazine story in 2002 said Anderson disappeared from Hollywood and resurfaced as the owner of a New Orleans magic shop.

“I am richer than Davy Crockett,” Anderson said in the story. “I can settle back and do what I want to do. And what I want to do is card tricks and magic.′ That includes magic shows for corporate clients (“Fifty-five minutes with applause,” says Anderson) at $20,000 a pop.

According to the story, Anderson was disenchanted by the prospect of chasing acting roles into middle age. “I don’t understand why guys have that Don Knotts syndrome of having to be out there.” He sold his home in Pasadena, California, and moved back to New Orleans, where he had lived in the 1970s.

Following the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, he moved to Asheville.

Anderson had two children from his first marriage to Leslie Pollack. His second wife, Elizabeth Morgan, is among his survivors. There was no immediate word on funeral arrangements Monday night.

Don’t Be Fooled: Here’s What Gun Grabbers Really Want

Leave a comment

H/T Clash Daily.

It is time for gun owners to draw a line in the sand and say “We will not stand for anymore restrictions on gun ownership.”

To begin, I have a definite stance on the Second Amendment, and it’s this: Don’t weaken it in any way. Far too many people in this country do not, or cannot, understand the reason for the Second Amendment (2A). At the time when the British Crown was the law in the colonies, its representatives did pretty much whatever they wanted to, and in, the colonies. Aside from the taxation, without proper representation, there were other irksome things that the colonists were forced to endure. One of the most irritating was the fact that British soldiers could be housed (they called it quartered) in private homes and the owners of those homes had no say-so in the matter.

Another item that might have contributed to the 2A was the fact that the colonists were virtual slaves to the Crown. They had no freedom to express their beliefs, no way to get redress from the Crown and with no voice in the matter they had to yield the majority of whatever goods or services to the Crown. Times were tough…but the Founding Fathers were just as tough. “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” See? It wasn’t JUST the “stamps” or the “Tea Tax” …it was a lot of things that eventually grew to the point where the colonists decided enough was too much.

2A is short and to the point. There are people that will tell you that you don’t need, and shouldn’t have, certain kinds of firearms. They will tell you all sorts of dumb reasons for you not to have them…but, in reality, they are blowing smoke up your you-know-where because they have an agenda that does not include an armed population. There are SO many people that are so eager to tell you that they’re not coming after your guns that they probably could fill a hundred stadiums. Whatever they tell you, it’s a lie. They ARE coming for your guns. Their reasons, their groups, their emotional dissertations are all for one reason…to disarm you.

The beginning of this month, April 2018, a suburb of Chicago, Deerfield Village, issued an ordinance that is in direct contradiction of 2A. It gave the gun-owners of that village 60 days to get rid of “assault” weapons and “high” capacity magazines. Empowering the police chief to confiscate them from those who refuse to give them up. Deerfield previously allowed ownership of such firearms and magazines but had strict storage requirements in place for them. Now, the firearms and magazines will be illegal to possess in one’s home, even if properly stored.

The ordinance warns that stock “assault weapons” are “customizable to become even more dangerous weapons of mass casualties and destruction.” Section 15-91 of the ordinance states, “The Chief of Police or his or her designee shall have the power to confiscate any assault weapon of any person charged with a violation under this article. The Chief of Police shall cause to be destroyed each Assault Weapon or Large Capacity Magazine surrendered or confiscated pursuant to this Article.”

The ordinance does not state whether police will regularly knock on doors and enter homes to check in closets and under beds for “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines. If you want to know what it covers, here’s the link to it:

Now, here’s “Part 2” of “We’re Not Taking Your Guns” — From the Crime Prevention Research Center, March 27th, and the question is: Do states with stricter gun control laws have fewer gun deaths? No. Do they have fewer homicides and suicides? Definitely not.One of the classic comparisons is the homicide rates between the US and the UK. People will point out that the UK has strict gun control laws, few legally owned guns, and a low homicide rate. But the homicide rate in the UK has always been low, even before they had any gun control law. Indeed, when they banned handguns in January 1997 their homicide rates rose dramatically, up 45% over the next eight years and only came back down after a large increase in the number of police.

Lumping all the different gun control numbers into one number is pretty arbitrary. Not only is there the issue of what gun control laws to include, there is also the issue of how to weight them. Is a three-day waiting period on buying guns the same as background checks on private transfers or a ban on open carrying of guns? Just adding up the number of laws in a state assumes that all the laws have the same importance. There is also the question of how many different ways that one divides up an existing law. For example, the Boston University dataset separately counts whether there is a background required to get a concealed handgun permit and also separately whether a background check is needed to renew the permit, but not whether training is required to get a permit (or the varying lengths of training) or the large differences in permit fees.

Parting shot: 2A was written to protect the people from the government, that’s a fact. “Scary” when applied to a firearm is just plain BS, and you KNOW that.

Image: Excerpted from: John Trumbull – Courtesy of Yale University Art Gallery [1], Public Domain,



Leave a comment

H/T Barbwire.

Isaiah 5:20 King James Version (KJV)

20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

An old friend asked if I thought he was evil. A provocative question. I answered, “Do you do evil things? Do you encourage evil things? Do you endorse evil things?”

This is a political column about good and evil. It is a sad commentary in itself that there are those who think the subject of good and evil is unfit for political discourse. We can blame that on the fact that some political players have redefined good and evil in their own image, you might say. For example, if something is not politically correct, it often is deemed to be evil.

The Bible speaks a lot about evil. It refers to those who commit evil acts as evil-doers. As every Christian is aware, we all are sinners because each of us falls short of God’s standard of perfection.

What is a sinner? One who commits sins is a sinner. We all sin. There is no denying it.

“If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us,” the Apostle John wrote.

Sin and evil are synonymous. You can’t commit one without committing the other. Moreover, as Jesus’ brother James wrote, to commit the smallest sin is to qualify as a sinner: “For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.” Or, as the colloquialism puts it, “In for an inch, in for a mile.” There is no halfway. There is no neutrality.

The Apostle Luke concurred by quoting Jesus Himself: “…he who is unrighteous in a very little thing is unrighteous also in much.”

How do we know when we sin and become evil-doers? Whenever we put ourselves or anything else above God; whenever we exhibit devotion to anything that conflicts with what God would have us do.

As Jesus explained, “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other.” As an example, Jesus provided this: “You cannot serve God and wealth.”

But as the Bible makes crystal clear, men fashion a multitude of idols to worship above God, not just wealth. Men can be creative in devising faux “good things” to exalt. As John Calvin commented, men are veritable idol factories, constantly churning out false gods to devote themselves to. Politics is fertile ground for manufacturing false gods.

Given this understanding, we fallen sinners can properly understand ourselves to be evil-doers. It is, in the most fundamental way, a curse over all mankind.

The good news is that repentance and faith in Jesus Christ is the remedy to this curse. Again, the Apostle John: “…If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Just being aware of our sinfulness doesn’t help much. Actually, it doesn’t help at all other than potentially to serve as motivation for us to repent.

But what of those who are aware of their sinfulness yet refuse to repent? And what of those who deny their sinfulness?

One of mankind’s creative end-runs to avoid confession and repentance is to imagine that he is the measure of good and evil, rather than God. Indeed, every sinner does this when he serves his own desires rather than God’s. It’s the oldest self-deception.

The apostle also spoke to this: “If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar…” “Him,” of course, being God.

Commonly we see this when men hoist up false idols to devote themselves to, pretending them to be good things, rather than the sin they actually represent. God has explained how He feels about that:
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.”

We see a lot of that today, don’t we? Particularly in political matters.

For example, abortion, the purposeful killing of an innocent baby, is made all the more horrific because it is done with the mother’s consent, as if the sin of murder is something good. A lot of rationalization is done to justify this heinous act, at least in the mind of the mother and those who urge her on. But as biology tells us, abortion stops a heartbeat. It doesn’t merely remove “a blob of cells.” It kills a living person.

As one contemporary Christian apologist explained, when killing something, it’s prudent to ask what it is that’s being killed. A mosquito is one thing. A defenseless child is quite another.

Science tells us that heartbeats are detected in babies in the womb at six weeks after conception, up to 160 beats per minute. Most abortions are performed after that, according to the government. But even prior to that, the child has developed multiple characteristics of personhood, including “five weeks after conception, your baby’s brain and face are growing,” says the Mayo Clinic. In fact, the heart beats but too softly to be noticed 22 days after conception.

There may not be a more obvious sin that meets God’s admonition of, “Woe to those who call evil good.”

This is but one example of a political issue that has been twisted to justify sin in the mind of the sinner. Whenever man does this, whether it is by encouraging lawlessness or praising depravity, he commits similar sins. Whenever he does this and excuses it as a good thing, he doubles down on his sin.

In our pluralistic culture it has become so widely accepted to tolerate such behavior that we are now told that to disagree with this perverse thinking is in fact to be wrong. Even judgmental, perish the thought. Not only have blatant sins been advanced as if they are good things to do, people who object are ridiculed, even persecuted and in some cases prosecuted for opposing the inverted morality that pretends what is evil is instead good.

There are many intelligent, thoughtful and well-intentioned people who have bought into the world’s idolatry that lifts up evil as good, and condemns good as if it were evil. They can be creative in rationalizing what they do. Often, they will seek a high moral ground by saying who are they to judge the behavior of another. Other times, they pretend that depravity is in the eye of the sinner; that everything is relative and what may not be good for one person may be good for another.

Most ludicrously, they sometimes argue that it is wrong to “impose” any morality on others by passing laws. This is the most laughable attempt to justify doing evil because every law is someone’s concept of what is good or what is bad. That is the definition of morality.

What these people really object to is a particular morality, God’s morality, and do so by invoking a false morality in its place.

The political realm is where today’s morality play is played out. But just as it’s always been, it’s a battle between God’s standard of what is good and evil versus fallen unrepentant men’s standard that they would establish in its place.

What to do?

For starters, be wary of those who claim to do good when what they do harms another, whether it’s by forcibly taking someone’s money to redistribute to others they consider more deserving of it, or by legislating sinful acts, as if by passing a law they can make evil good.

It’s the extremely rare institutionalized sin that openly announces it intends to make evil into something good. Rather, it’s always couched as if the sin to be established as the norm already is something good, despite its clear conflict with God’s law.

As mentioned earlier, the solution is that willful sinners can be forgiven. All it takes is to repent of their sin, which means recognizing it as the evil act it is then abstaining from it, and having faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

This is the encouraging good news of the Gospel. As for how encouraging it is for overcoming the fallen condition of our pluralistic, morally relativistic society, the good news is tempered by Jesus’ own admonition:

“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”

20 Examples of Liberals vs. Also Liberals

Leave a comment

H/T Town Hall.

Below are twenty examples of liberal illogic.

1) Liberals: Conservatives are so paranoid! No one wants to take your guns.

Also liberals: Repeal the 2nd Amendment! No one needs AR-15s! Gun owners are murderers and terrorists!

2) Liberals: College kids need to be protected from hurtful words with safe spaces because they’re so fragile and the poor dears need to be able to stay on their parents’ insurance until 26!

Also liberals: 16 year-olds should be able to vote!

3) Liberals: You can’t criticize Islam! We must be respectful to all religions!

Also liberals: Of course, there’s nothing wrong with using your tax dollars to build a life-size nativity scene made out of pig sh*t!

4) Liberals: We absolutely should not put armed guards in schools to stop shooters! It won’t work! Terrible idea!

Also liberals: There’s a school shooter! Quick, call someone with a gun to save the kids!

5) Liberals: Love trumps hate! When they go low, we go high! Hate has no home here!

Also liberals: You don’t agree with me? BIGOT! RACIST! FASCIST! WHY ARE YOU SO HATEFUL?

6) Liberals: Romney is such an idiot for thinking Russia is our biggest geopolitical threat. Get back in your time machine so you can get back to the Cold War, Grandpa! Ha, hah, ha!

7) Liberals: We need to do whatever it takes to curb global warming!

Also liberals: Let’s all fly overseas in private jets and ride in SUVS to an opulent conference so we can discuss global warming.

8) Liberals: My baby can decide his own gender!

Also liberals: Spanking your child? That’s child abuse!

9) Liberals: We’re a rape culture! Women are under a constant threat of sexual assault from men!

Also liberals: Women should be able to carry guns for protection? That’s insane!

10) Liberals: Diversity is a strength!

Also liberals: No conservatives should be allowed to work for liberal publications, act in Hollywood or teach in schools!

11) Liberals: Donald Trump is another Hitler and the police are racists who are murdering young black men for no reason.

Also liberals: Only the government and police should have guns!

12) Liberals: It’s my body, my choice!

Also liberals: You should be fined by the government if you don’t want to buy health insurance!

13) Liberals: We’re the party of science!

Also liberals: Unborn children aren’t people and you can pick your own gender!

14) Liberals: The death penalty is morally wrong! You can’t do that to another human being, even if he’s a serial killer!

Also liberals: Not even the father of the child has the right to keep a woman from aborting her baby.

15) Liberals: School choice? Vouchers! Those are bad for children! Children should have to go to public schools!

 Also (rich) liberals: Of course my kids are going to private school! It’s only the best for my children!

16) Liberals: You don’t want to give more of what you earned to the government? You’re SELFISH!

Also liberals: You want welfare, school lunches and housing you didn’t earn? Don’t be ashamed! There’s nothing wrong with taking it!

17) Liberals: The law is your fist when you’re dealing with Nazis! They deserve it!

Also liberals: Everyone who disagrees with me is a Nazi!

18) Liberals: Conservatives are sexists who don’t respect women!

Also liberals: Give me a second; I just called Dana Loesch the c-word on Twitter and I have to like it with all 8 of my fake accounts.

19) Liberals: There is no reason to oppose tearing down Confederate statues other than racism!

Also liberals: The Jefferson Memorial? He was a slave owner; so it should go. William McKinley wasn’t nice enough to the Indians. He has to go! Oh, and let’s destroy Mount Rushmore while we’re at it!

20) Liberals: We need more women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics!

Also liberal women in college: I’m majoring in women’s studies!

Fight on – the Story of an Australian Sailor Who Went down with the Ship While Firing His AA Gun from Underwater

1 Comment

H/T War History OnLine.

R.I.P. Seaman  Edward “Teddy” Sheean  Royal Australian Navy   December 28, 1923 – December 1, 1942.

Personal sacrifice has always been the pinnacle of heroic acts in war. When a man is ready to give his own life in order to save the lives of his brothers-in-arms, it is a sight to admire and pay great respect to. One out of many such endeavors which happened during WWII is most definitely the valorous act of an Australian seaman, Edward “Teddy” Sheean.

Sheean was born into a family of fourteen children in Lower Barrington, Tasmania, in 1923. In 1941, he joined the Australian Navy. Five of his brothers had already enlisted in the Armed Forces and Teddy wanted to follow in their footsteps, as the country was facing its worst time of peril.

He was stationed on the Bathurst-class corvette HMAS Armidale as an Oerlikon anti-aircraft gun loader when his wartime adventure began. Little did he know that he would be the man whose courage and sacrifice saved the lives of his fellow sailors.

The first year of the war went rather dully for Teddy Sheean, as HMAS Armidale was bestowed upon routine escort duties just off the coast of Australia and rarely encountered the Japanese. But in November 1942, all of that was about to change.

Teddy Sheean c.1941

At that time, a small Australian commando unit was stationed on Timor, a Pacific island under the colonial rule of both the Dutch and the Portuguese, located just north of the Australian coast. The island was under threat of Japanese invasion and HMAS Armidale, along with ships Kuru and Castlemaine, was sent to evacuate the Aussie troops, together with some 150 Portuguese settlers and 190 Dutch soldiers who were stationed on the island.

The invasion of the island was a direct threat to the Australian mainland and the operation was of utmost importance for securing the Indonesian archipelago.

The garrison was to be replaced with 50 Dutch guerrilla fighters who would engage in sabotage operations against the Japanese invaders until a counter-attack could be organized. Armidale and Castlemaine were sailing together and were supposed to meet up with Kuru in order to proceed towards Timor.

Due to bad weather, Kuru’s arrival at the port of Betano on Timor was delayed for three hours. Armidale and Castlemaine failed to meet up with the third ship and were in the meantime harassed by Japanese aircraft. First, a single fighter started strafing and bombing the corvettes. The commanding officers of both Armidale and Castlemaine agreed that the attacks were about to become more frequent and, since they had failed to meet up with Kuru, they decided to apply evasive maneuvers.

HMAS Armidale in Port Moresby harbour c. September 1942.

Their predictions quickly became very true ― a squadron of Japanese bombers was already on their tails. Two more attacks soon followed, bombing and strafing the ships with machine guns. Strangely enough, both vessels came through with minor damage and without casualties.

In the meantime, Kuru had already reached Betano, collecting 77 of the Portuguese refugees and one critically wounded Australian commando. The ship set sail for Darwin, realizing that they had failed to accomplish the rendezvous with the other two corvettes. By a stroke of luck, they managed to spot the ships on their way back and exchanged a portion of Portuguese passengers with HMAS Castlemaine.

HMAS Armidale and HMAS Castlemaine received orders to continue the operation on their own. Then suddenly, the Japanese bomber squadron was inbound. The ships went their separate ways and the Japanese pilots decided to follow Armidale. The corvette proved to be easy prey for the Imperial bombers, who dispatched two aerial torpedoes and achieved a direct hit.

The situation aboard Armidale was clear ― abandon ship. In the midst of the growing panic and confusion, Ordinary Sailor Teddy Sheean was assisting the evacuation, selflessly running back and forth in order to save as many as his fellow sailors he could. During this action, he was shot twice with 7.7×56mm bullets coming from a Japanese fighter’s machine gun.

Members of the Sheean family c.1941. L to R, back row: Edward (Teddy); Frederick. Front row: James (father); Mary (mother); William.

He was badly wounded, receiving a shot in the back and one in the chest. Sheean decided to go down with the ship. Strapping himself into the aft Oerlikon 20 mm cannon, he fired away, shooting a Japanese bomber down and relentlessly gunning the harassing aircraft as his comrades-in-arms were loading the rescue rafts.

One sailor’s testimony put his actions into words, which later served for his posthumous decorations:

“During the attack, a plane had been brought down and for this, the credit went to Ordinary Seaman Teddy Sheean. Teddy died, but none of us who survived, I am sure, will ever forget his gallant deed … When the order ‘Abandon ship’ was given, he made for the side, only to be hit twice by the bullets of an attacking Zero. None of us will ever know what made him do it, but he went back to his gun, strapped himself in, and brought down a Jap plane, still firing as he disappeared beneath the waves.”

Sailors reported that they could still see tracer bullets raging up towards the air even when the ship was well underwater. Sheean kept firing until he drowned, his stiff dead finger still holding the trigger.

The Royal Australian Navy Collins-class submarine HMAS Sheean (SSG 77) arrives at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii (USA), after participating in Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) Exercise 2014.

Armidale‘s commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander David Richards, made a posthumous mention in dispatches about the “bravery and devotion when HMAS Armidalewas lost,” dedicated to Teddy Sheean.

The story of Sheean’s valor and sacrifice remains legendary within the ranks of the Australian Navy. A Collins-class submarine was named after him ― HMAS Teddy Sheean ― adopting the motto which best illustrates his determination that shines as an example for others ― “Fight on!”

Older Entries Newer Entries

%d bloggers like this: