Author: Papa Giorgio

Trump-Russia Conspiracy Theories Obliterated (Glenn Greenwald)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Here are the areas (plus a little more) that Larry was reading from, via GLENN GREENWALD:

THE TWO-PRONGED CONSPIRACY THEORY that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin — was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.

The key fact is this: Mueller – contrary to weeks of false media claims – did not merely issue a narrow, cramped, legalistic finding that there was insufficient evidence to indict Trump associates for conspiring with Russia and then proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That would have been devastating enough to those who spent the last two years or more misleading people to believe that conspiracy convictions of Trump’s closest aides and family members were inevitable. But his mandate was much broader than that: to state what did or did not happen.

That’s precisely what he did: Mueller, in addition to concluding that evidence was insufficient to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election interference, also stated emphatically in numerous instances that there was no evidence – not merely that there was insufficient evidence to obtain a criminal conviction – that key prongs of this three-year-old conspiracy theory actually happened. As Mueller himself put it: “in some instances, the report points out the absence of evidence or conflicts in the evidence about a particular fact or event.”

[….]

All criminal investigations require a determination of a person’s intent, what they are thinking and what their goal is. When the question is whether a President sought to kill an Executive Branch investigation – as Trump clearly wanted to do here – the determinative issue is whether he did so because he genuinely believed the investigation to be an unfair persecution and scam, or whether he did it to corruptly conceal evidence of criminality.

That Mueller could not and did not establish any underlying crimes strongly suggests that Trump acted with the former rather than the latter motive, making it virtually impossible to find that he criminally obstructed the investigation.

THE NATURE OF OUR POLITICAL DISCOURSE is that nobody ever needs to admit error because it is easy to confine oneself to strictly partisan precincts where people are far more interested in hearing what advances their agenda or affirms their beliefs than they are hearing the truth. For that reason, I doubt that anyone who spent the last three years pushing utterly concocted conspiracy theories will own up to it, let alone confront any accountability or consequences for it.

But certain facts will never go away no matter how much denial they embrace. The sweeping Mueller investigation ended with zero indictments of zero Americans for conspiring with Russia over the 2016 election. Both Donald Trump, Jr. and Jared Kushner – the key participants in the Trump Tower meeting – testified for hours and hours yet were never charged for perjury, lying or obstruction, even though Mueller proved how easily he would indict anyone who lied as part of the investigation. And this massive investigation simply did not establish any of the conspiracy theories that huge parts of the Democratic Party, the intelligence community and the U.S. media spent years encouraging the public to believe.

Those responsible for this can refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing. They can even claim vindication if they want and will likely be cheered for doing so.

But the contempt in which the media and political class is held by so much of the U.S. population – undoubtedly a leading factor that led to Trump’s election in the first place – will only continue to grow as a result, and deservedly so. People know they were scammed, that their politics was drowned for years by a hoax. And none of that will go away no matter how insulated media and political elites in Washington, northern Virginia, Brooklyn, and large West Coast cities keep themselves, and thus hear only in-group affirmation while blocking out all of that well-earned scorn.

 

“Fancy Lawyer” Drop Kicks MSNBC Hosts On Obstruction/Collusion

Published by Papa Giorgio

Jay Sekulow, President Trump’s personal attorney, tells Ari Melber and Nicolle Wallace that he received an early version of the Mueller report on Tuesday, confirming that AG Barr provided a version of the report to both the White House and The President’s defense attorney days before providing anything to Congress.

More from the DAILY CALLER (hat-tip DAN BONGINO):

“My first question, I’m afraid, is going to verge on plain English,” Williams began. “Where did the attorney general get off with that characterization this morning, including four mentions that there was no collusion? What document was he reading, compared to the one we’re left with?”

Sekulow responded, “Well, page two of the document says, ‘The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian government in its election of interference activities.’ So it’s right from the document itself.”

“Have you read part one?” Williams retorted.

“I have read part one and part two,” Sekulow added.

Williams shot back, “Do you find good news in here for the president and the administration?”

“The investigation—page 181—the investigation did not establish the Contacts described in volume one—that’s the Russian contacts—amounted to an agreement to commit any violation of federal criminal law, including foreign influence and campaign finance laws,” Sekulow followed up. “Yes, I think it’s very good win.”……

 

Hebrew Poetry and Verb Counts

Published by Papa Giorgio

This is part of a paper I did for a friend’s class — ENJOY (it is suppose to be a 500-word essay and was for a “multi-cultural children’s literature” class at a secular university):

Jewish poetry is about mankind’s nature, its attempts to reach the heavens and its failure to do just that. This poetry has a rich history and can be found in the religious books of the Old Testament, which give plenty of examples making the connection between selfish and selfless attempts to reach either God or the people. “There is nothing new under the sun” (NIV, 1996, Ecclesiastes 1:9) is such a great insight into man’s surroundings and his* boundaries to act due to his natural surroundings.

“We can learn from history how past generations thought and acted, how they responded to the demands of their time and how they solved their problems. We can learn by analogy, not by example, for our circumstances will always be different than theirs were. The main thing history can teach us is that human actions have consequences and that certain choices, once made, cannot be undone. They foreclose the possibility of making other choices and thus they determine future events” (Gerda et al, 1998, p. 117).

This is what much of Jewish poetry contributes to man, except a caveat is introduced, forgiveness. Whenever either Israel or a specific person made a detrimental choice, repentance and forgiveness was close behind. Children need forgiveness, and Psalms is an exemplary example for the educator to use. When they make choices that once are irreversible or harmful, it is important to show these choices can be made into learning experiences as well as a time to allow those who love them, well, to love them. The above is a mixture of classifications – e.g., hymns, laments songs of trust, and the like (Norton et al, 2001, p. 258) – that show the reader that the truly horrible consequence isn’t falling down, it failing to get up!

Another aspect that has Ancient Jewish poetry in the throes of modern culture is that of the Genesis debate… is it historical narrative or poetry. In other words, is the creation story merely Jewish poetry, or is it considered to be a narrative. Dr. Boyd, professor of Hebrew at Masters College, has put together a statistical model that shows by the use of finite verbs in a particular text if it is or isn’t poetry. There are four finite verb forms in Hebrew: preterite, imperfect, perfect, and waw-perfect (DeYoung et al, 2005, p.160). Compiling these verbs and comparing them to Jewish scripture one can see (see fig. 2 [ed. Vardiman, Snelling, Chaffin, et. al. 2005, p. 653]) which of the verbs are used in classic examples of both poetry and narrative traditions.

While this discussion has no immediate bearing on the scientific community, it does add a tool that can now be tweaked and refined to give a graphic view of what constitutes poetry and narrative in both scripture and ancient Yiddish traditions. Genesis stands out with the above model as more narrative than poetic, the literal interpretation of Genesis is an in house debate within the Jewish and Christian communities (see fig. 9 [ed. Vardiman, Snelling, Chaffin 2005, p.667]).

Another view of this poetic versus narrative tradition imbedded within Jewish culture is viewed side-by-side (see fig. 8 [ed. Vardiman, Snelling, Chaffin 2005, p.662]).

The above graphs are a great way to connect ancient Jewish culture and traditions with today’s youth. It is modern man and his tools looking at ancient man, both history and poetry walking hand-in-hand.

REFERENCES

DeYoung, Don (2005). Thousands… Not Billions: Challenging an Icon of Evolution. Green Forest, AZ: Master Books.

Gerda, Lerner 1998. Why History Matters. New York, NY: Oxford University Press (Reprint edition).

NIV (1996). The Holy Bible: New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Norton, Donna E. (2001). Multicultural Children’s Literature: Through the Eyes of many Children. Upper Sadle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.

Vardiman, Larry; Snelling, Andrew; Chaffin, Eugene (2005), editors. Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative. Volumn II. El Cajon, CA: Institute for Creation research; Chino Valley, AZ: Creation Research Society.

Andrew McCarthy On Shady Obama

Published by Papa Giorgio

Andrew McCarhty was on Dennis Prager’s show today to discuss the investigations still going on regarding FBI/DOJ misuse of power. After these reports come in we will most likely see a Grand Jury conveigned and criminal cases started. But Andrew and Prager walk through the machinations that got us to this point as described in Andrew McCarthy’s peice in the NEW YORK POST: “Behind The Obama Administration’s Shady Plan To Spy On The Trump Campaign” (https://tinyurl.com/y6ms7h6r). Enjoy the conversation:

Preferred Pronouns or Prison (Totalitarianism)

Published by Papa Giorgio

“He.” “She.” “They.” Have you ever given a moment’s thought to your everyday use of these pronouns? It has probably never occurred to you that those words could be misused. Or that doing so could cost you your business or your job – or even your freedom. Journalist Abigail Shrier explains how this happened and why it’s become a major free speech issue.

Ben Shapiro | Larry Elder

Published by Papa Giorgio

I was looking for this video (posted first below), but came across the interview with Ben Shapiro, thought it was worth posting (obviously). The original search was meant to post the video where Media Matters got a headline to make it’s supporters happy, but thast was divorced from reality: “Fox & Friends Guest [Larry Elder]: Black Families Were Better Off As Slaves” >> (You can watch the identical video at MEDIA MATTERS):

Larry is masterful. Fox and Friends should know that about one or two questions is all they will be able to ask this machine!

RELATED: Larry Elder rips Media Matters for ‘fake headline’ on slavery comments: ‘I said no such thing!’ (WASHINGTON TIMES)

Here is the MORE IMPORTANT interview. “Larry Elder, radio host, commentator, and author of ‘Dear Father, Dear Son’ joins Ben to discuss race relations, politics, and the how Donald Trump has handled the presidency in his first two years.”

Cory Booker Admitted Sanctuary Cities Make Us Less Safe

Published by Papa Giorgio

MARC THIESSEN: This is probably never going to happen but I think it is pure genius and I can’t understand why Democrats are upset about this. Two sets of facts, number one, it is the position of the Democratic Party that illegal aliens held by ICE should be released into the country, into our communities. During negotiations during the government shutdown, Democrats’ official negotiating position was we should limit amount the amount of beds ICE has to 35,000 and they expressly said for the purpose of forcing the Trump administration to release noncriminal aliens into the community. So they’re for releasing them into the community, periods. Secondly, they created sanctuary cities and this is their policy for the purpose of giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. NYC Mayor de Blasio wants to offer them free healthcare. Stacy Abrams wants them to vote in local elections. Governor Newsom wants to make the entire state a sanctuary, so how can you be upset about President Trump offering to do exactly what you say you want to do?

“Winning!” Here is a link to a YOUTUBE version if wanted.

Wow. Academic Hoax (Part 2 Added)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Three people conducted what they call a ‘grievance studies’ experiment. They wrote fake papers on ridiculous subjects and submitted them to prominent academic journals in fields that study gender, race, and sexuality….

…CONTINUING THE DESCRIPTION FROM ABOVE…

They did this to “expose a political corruption that has taken hold of the universities,” say the hoaxers in a video which documented the process.

John Stossel interviewed James Lindsay and Peter Boghossian, who along with Helen Pluckrose, sent so-called research papers to 20 journals.

They were surprised when seven papers were accepted. One claimed that “dog humping incidents at dog parks” can be taken as “evidence of rape culture.” It was honored as “excellent scholarship.”

Another paper rewrote a section of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as intersectional feminism.

Stossel assumed that the journals would apologize for publishing nonsense and question the quality of their scholarship. But instead they criticized the the hoaxers, complaining that they “engaged in flawed and unethical research.”

Of course, that was the point of the hoax.

Boghossian is unapologetic, telling Stossel the hoax shows “scholarship in these disciplines is utterly corrupted … they have placed an agenda before the truth.”

When Stossel suggests, “maybe you are just conservative hacks looking to defend your white privilege.” Lindsay replied “I’ve never voted for a republican in my life.” Boghossian added, “Nor have I.”

Stossel says what upsets him is that after the hoax “no university said ‘we’re not gonna use these journals’ and no editor publicly said, ‘we have to raise our standards.’”

Instead, Portland State University began disciplinary procedures against Boghossian.


OLDER PEER REVIEW ISSUES:

PART TWO

Seven academic journals recently published papers that were actually hoaxes designed to show the absurdity of academic fields like gender studies, race studies, queer studies, etc.

MORE…

The hoaxers intentionally submitted papers that were ridiculous; one included gibberish about rape culture in dog parks. Another was a section of Hitler’s Mein Kampf re-written with feminist buzzwords. John Stossel covered the hoax here: https://youtu.be/As8h2ZCfIPs

Six journal editors would not talk to Stossel, but one — Roberto Refinetti, editor in chief of “Sexuality and Culture” — agreed to an interview.

He condemns what the hoaxers did: “You’re deceiving people without much of a reason.”

He complains, “If you’re going to do your research with people, you have to propose your research, submit to a body called an Institutional Review Board.” 

One of the hoaxers, Peter Boghossian, was found guilty by his employer (Portland State University) of violating their rules requiring him to get approval for the hoax.

Of course, since the Institutional Review Board would have insisted that the researchers inform the journals that they were being tested, the test wouldn’t have worked.

Stossel says he thinks the hoaxers had good reason not to go to the review board first. “Their hoax woke us up to the fact that some academic journals publish nonsense,” he says.

Refinetti’s journal, for instance, published the hoax paper titled, “Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria, Transhysteria, and Transphobia Through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use.”

The paper touted “encouraging male anal eroticism with sex toys” because it would help make men more feminist.

“Sexuality and Culture” published that paper after its reviewers praised it glowingly. One called it, “an incredibly rich and exciting contribution… timely, and worthy of publication.”

Refinetti defends his journal, saying that it publishes mind-expanding questions.

“What is the problem with [the subject of the paper]? I don’t see a problem… It’s nothing really absurd or unusual,” Refinetti says.

He also says: “Let’s question our assumptions, because maybe we’re making assumptions that we shouldn’t be making… When homosexuality was considered a mental illness. People pushed, the psychiatrists got together, and said… ‘it’s a perfectly fine thing to choose and not to call it mental illness.’ So that’s the type of thing that a journal in sexuality and culture does, is discuss.”

Discussion is good, Stossel agrees. But in journals today, it seems that only certain conclusions are permitted. The hoaxers complain that in many university fields: “A culture has developed in which only certain conclusions are allowed, like those that make whiteness and masculinity problematic.”

“I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that in some places that is correct,” Refinetti agrees.

“Is that a problem?” asks Stossel.

Refinetti replies: “How big of a problem is it? Is it worse than hunger? Is it worse than people shooting each other?”

But a lack of diversity of ideas does make it harder to find truth — and more likely for ridiculous ideas to thrive. Today’s colleges have an extreme lack of diversity — A National Association of Scholars report found that professors at top liberal arts colleges are ten times more likely to be Democrats than Republicans.

Refinetti says that’s not surprising.

“I think it’s very reasonable  — because what is the job of learning?… being more open to new ideas, which is what being a liberal is,” he says.

Stossel pushes back: “This is your left leaning definition; it’s conservatives that proposed changes like school vouchers… privatizing air traffic control.”

“That’s an interesting point,” Refinetti responds. “Then the hypothesis is shut down. See, that’s how things work. You show the idea, you discuss the idea, and get it.”

Refinetti says his journal publishes multiple viewpoints. It has published articles that question feminist orthodoxy.

Stossel says he’s grateful that Refinetti was willing to have a conversation — but he still cheers the hoaxers for revealing that much of what passes for scholarship at colleges is bunk.

Professor Wilfred Reilly Interviewed By 870AM Radio Hosts

Published by Papa Giorgio

The discussion revolved around Professor Reilly’s book,

  • Hate Crime Hoax: How the Left is Selling a Fake Race War (AMAZON).

Larry Elder Interviews Professor Wilfred Reilly

Michael Medved Interviews Professor Wilfred Reilly

Mark Davis Interviews Professor Wilfred Reilly

Reparations Are Not the Answer (Thomas Sowell)

Published by Papa Giorgio

Slavery has been a universal institution for thousands of years, as far back as you can trace human history. But the situation is portrayed as if slavery is something that happened to one race of people in one country, when in fact the spread of it was worldwide and included people from all ethnicities in almost every country on Earth.

  • “The number of whites who were enslaved in North Africa by the Barbary pirates exceeded the number of Africans enslaved in the United States and in the American colonies before that put together.” — Thomas Sowell

Dinesh D’Souza’s Top 5 Campus Moments from Fall 2018

Published by Papa Giorgio

In the last semester alone, Dinesh D’Souza has taken his Young America’s Foundation #FakeHistory Debunked tour to campuses all over America and faced off with students, protestors, and professors, revealing the truth about the Left’s cozy relationship with fascism and racism. On campuses with little to no intellectual diversity, many students heard the truth about the Left’s big lies for the first time in D’Souza’s lectures. #FakeHistory doesn’t stand a chance when the truth comes to light. We can’t wait to see what 2019 has to offer!

BONUS  MATERIAL