British Police have named Saman Abedi as the Terrorist suicide bomber caused  the mass murder of Children in England after an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester and it’s reported that another person has been detained in connection to the attack.

As I watch the usual suspects are sounding the same, the phrases “Lone Wolf”,  Islamophobia , love vs hate, and doing all it can to take the Islam out of the latest example of Islamic Terror.

Of course England has done its part to purge the Islam from Islamic Terror, by banning Pam Geller who today noted about the attacker in Manchester:

Just like the neighbors of San Bernadino jihad mass murderers, neighbors noticed strange goings-on at the house of the jihadis, but didn’t alert authorities for fear of being labeled racist-islamophobic-anti-Muslim-bigots.

and Robert Spencer who wrote this on Manchester:

UK: Manchester jihad mass murderer known to authorities but “not thought to pose immediate threat”

They thought wrong. Why? Because they don’t have the first foggiest clue about what motivates these people, and what their goals are. So how can they possibly evaluate who is an “immediate threat” and who isn’t? They have to discount so much evidence that someone may be an “immediate threat” because to acknowledge the importance of that evidence would be “Islamophobic,” they’re left with nothing to go on.

While their exclusion from England, Ironically promulgated by the current prime minister Theresa May when she was home secretary, along with others like Michael Savage has drawn the approval of many media and cultural elites has been effective in preventing people from hearing their warning concerning Islamic Terror has been less than effective at preventing people from being killed by it.

Mark Steyn notes the contrast in tactics and results in England vs elsewhere

Poland and Hungary and Slovakia do not have Islamic terrorism because they have very little Islam. France and Germany and Belgium admit more and more Islam, and thus more and more terrorism. Yet the subject of immigration has been all but entirely absent from the current UK election campaign. Thirty years ago, in the interests of stopping IRA terrorism, the British state was not above preventing the internal movement within its borders of unconvicted, uncharged, unarrested Republican sympathizers seeking to take a ferry from Belfast to Liverpool. Today it declares it can do nothing to prevent the movement of large numbers of the Muslim world from thousands of miles away to the heart of the United Kingdom. It’s just a fact of life – like being blown up when you go to a pop concert.

But while Britian’s current tactics might not be generating fear in the hearts of potential terrorists as evidenced by this announcement:

British police arrested someone in connection with last night’s attack. Now they have intelligence that a second attack may be impending, pushing the terror threat level to “critical” for the first time in 10 years. How big is this cell?

The practical effect of raising the threat level is that the British military will be deployed to support the police in guarding “key sites” around the country. That’s not going to make libertarians happy, but luckily for Theresa May there aren’t many of those left in the UK.

it has successfully put the fear of being considered “Islamophobic” in the minds and hearts of the potential victims of said terror.

Alas what I wrote in 2011 continues to remain true:

Pam and those who warn of Radical Islam are Fiver calling for help for those caught in a snare. Her detractors are Cowslip the head of the snared warren. To oppose radical Islam requires a courage they don’t have and to openly admit appeasement acknowledges a cowardice they can’t bear. Much easier to not talk about it and preserve their illusion of dignity.

Pam and those like her bring up uncomfortable truths and for that they will be forever hated.

Or to put it another way.  The end of Islamic Terror will be in sight when we love our children more than we fear being called “Islamophobic”.


If you like a site that will tell uncomfortable truths that the MSM does not and if you think this site and our writers are worthwhile goal consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

Vietnam acknowledged Ho Chi Minh’s birthday in an oddly low-key way during my visit even in his boyhood home in Hue.

The media myths surrounding the Vietnam War continue to shape U.S. policy in Asia and throughout the world.

As I recently wandered through Vietnam, particularly the area near the DMZ, or the demilitarized zone that separated North and South Vietnam, I couldn’t help but think how media narratives had changed the course of the war and Vietnam’s history. Here are some important facts that must be understood.

First, the 1968 Tet Offensive was a huge military defeat for the Communists.

Second, CBS anchor Walter Cronkite had little to do with the decisions to wind down U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Third, the “napalm girl”—a memorable photograph during the war–had nothing to do with U.S. forces.

Finally, after more than 40 years of Communist rule, the people of Vietnam are not better off.

Vietnam veteran James Willbanks, a noted military historian, provides an interesting analysis of the Tet Offensive, particularly in Hue, the former royal capital of Vietnam.

Tet, the lunar New Year began on Jan. 31, 1968, when Communist forces attacked multiple locales, including Hue, which was geographically situated in South Vietnam but close to the border with North Vietnam. By the time the battle of Hue ended a month later, more than 40 percent of the buildings were damaged and more than 100,000 people were homeless. More important, the North Vietnamese had lost the battle but had executed nearly 3,000 people with ties to the South Vietnamese government. For more background, see http://www.historynet.com/tet-what-really-happened-at-hue.htm

All told, the Tet Offensive was a massive failure for the Communists. The change from guerrilla tactics to frontal assaults against the U.S. and South Vietnamese military, resulted in only minimal gains. Moreover, the Communists lost nearly a quarter of its battle-ready troops.

What happened, however, was an onslaught of news reports and photos that showed, among other things, the U.S. embassy in Saigon under assault. It made little difference that the Marines had successfully fought back, and the U.S. military recaptured all the territory and more.

The Communists were described as despondent because of the failure of Tet. But the PR started to roll in that the Communists had effectively taken the battle to the Americans and the South Vietnamese Army. Then the so-called “Cronkite moment” happened. CBS anchor Cronkite said during a news broadcast on February 27, 1968, that “we have been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington, to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds.” He added, “We are mired in a stalemate that could only be ended by negotiation, not victory.”

As my friend and colleague, W. Joseph Campbell, notes in his excellent book, “Getting It Wrong,” Cronkite had little influence on Johnson’s thinking. “In the days and weeks after the Cronkite program, Johnson was adamant in defending his Vietnam policy. On multiple occasions during that time, the president in effect brushed aside Cronkite’s downbeat assessment and sought to rally support for the war effort. At a time when Cronkite’s views should have been most potent, the president remained openly and tenaciously hawkish on the war.” For more, see https://mediamythalert.wordpress.com/2017/02/23/after-cronkite-moment-lbj-doubled-down-on-viet-policy/

But the Communists had won the PR battle–often based on media myths–as Americans turned against the war, and LBJ’s confidantes followed the public’s view.

Campbell also makes short shrift of the claim that the U.S. military was responsible for the “napalm girl” attack. Associated Press photographer Nick Ut took one of the most memorable photographs of the Vietnam War — the image of a 9-year-old girl screaming in terror as she fled from a misdirected napalm attack. The AP said the famous photo, taken June 8, 1972, “communicated the horrors of the Vietnam War in a way words could never describe, helping to end one of the most divisive wars in American history.”

The famous “napalm girl” photo did not involve the U.S. military.

But the plane was from the South Vietnam military and flown by a South Vietnamese pilot.

By referring to “American planes” in an article, The New York Times insinuated that U.S. forces were responsible for the napalm attack that preceded Ut’s photograph, Campbell writes. He tried to get DaTimes to correct the information but got nowhere. For more, see https://mediamythalert.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/40-years-on-the-napalm-girl-photo-and-its-associated-errors/

Some excellent reporting occurred during the Vietnam War, but what seems to stick in the American psyche about Tet, Cronkite and the napalm photo are mostly wrong—media myths like many we see today.

Finally, Vietnam is a mess. When your currency is valued at 22,000 dong to the dollar, you’ve got problems. People openly complain about the lack of full-time jobs except in the government. In 2011, Nguyen Phu Trong was appointed secretary general of the Communist Party. He served as the party’s chief ideologue before. That doesn’t bode well for solving the problems of the country.

A personal note: As the only American on board a trip to the DMZ, I tried to counter the propaganda of the guide, a committed Communist, about the information she was providing. But the other members of the tour–Brits, Canadians, French and Vietnamese–had already embraced the myths even though most of them were in their 20s and 30s.

Moreover, I had a wonderful time seeing the historic sites of Hue and Hoi An, a lovely town south of Danang, in central Vietnam. I met many courteous and friendly people during my visit. The attitude toward me as an American was mostly curiosity and certainly not condemnation. I stopped by a Catholic church—the religion that remains that of an estimated 20 percent of the population–and the members greeted me with enthusiasm. I wish the people, not the government, well.

There’s no hole on Earth deep enough for me to hide from the shame my former profession has brought me.

Other than a short stint in public relations, I spent 34 years as a newspaper reporter and editor. For the last 25 years of my career, I worked at a mid-size daily, where we did an admirable job covering the stories of the day: the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion, the fall of Communism, the start of the Gulf War, Bill Clinton’s Balkan conflicts and the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

On Sept. 11, 2001, we published our first edition, as usual, at 9 a.m. By 3:30 p.m. — hours after our shift normally ended — we put out our 11th and last edition of the day. Knowing that our readers depended on us for deeper coverage than TV or the young Internet could supply, we updated the paper constantly as developments occurred. I was as gut-punched as any other American after the towers fell, but it was the proudest day in my career.

That’s why I got into journalism. Not to “educate” readers. Not to push an angle. Not to weave a narrative. My goal was to tell people what was happening in their community, their state, the country and the world.

Unfortunately, I soon found out not all of my peers shared my intentions.

As far back as high school, my dream was to work for a newspaper. Well, I actually dreamed of becoming a bestselling author, but I realized early that I’d never be a productive writer unless I faced a hard deadline. And no deadlines are more rigid than at a newspaper, where the consequences are drastic if the presses don’t start on time.

I was already a journalism major when the Watergate break-in occurred in 1972 and was working at my hometown weekly when the burglary grew into the scandal that destroyed Richard Nixon’s presidency. Like most of my friends, I despised Nixon, but my loathing was based on reasons very different than theirs.

The Left had been after Nixon since the late 1940s, when he led the charge to take down Alger Hiss, the Democrats’ favorite Soviet spy. (Read your history, kids.) Meanwhile I was disgusted by Nixon’s first term, when he expanded Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society program instead of dismantling it, and dismayed that the uproar over the stupid break-in was tarring the conservative cause.

In any case, Watergate was a turning point in American journalism. Reporters traditionally have been left of center, but now the media was credited with tossing a president out of the White House. Such power! It’s no wonder lefties of all stripes descended on journalism schools like flies on a pile of manure.

Ever since, j-schools have been churning out a stream of Ahabs hoping to harpoon every Great White Republican Male Whale that crosses their paths. In collaboration with their Democrat allies, the mainstream media have devoted a good portion of their attention to undermining GOP leaders.

While it seemed like the media went off the rails when reporters, editors and TV news personalities became afflicted with Bush Derangement Syndrome in W’s second term, we hadn’t seen or heard anything yet.

Now comes Donald Trump. On a scale of 1 to 10, the media have been operating at 15 since the start of the presidential campaign when it comes to Trump. Since his surprise victory, reporters have trashed the principles they claim to hold dear in order in order to smear and pound a man they consider unfit for office.

All the so-called “news” stories based on unnamed sources, speculation and innuendo embarrass me to no end. Instead of destroying Trump, the media are acting like suicide bombers. Their credibility in the minds of half the nation’s people has been in shreds for years; now it’s on its way to the compost heap.

I know you hate the media, but this is bad for everyone. Without fair and honest reporting, the public will wallow in ignorance and rely on rumors and half-truths for information. Even worse is the political polarization that will only increase when conservatives and progressive depend on entirely separate news sources.

It’s hard to believe — and I have my own doubts — but the media crisis could be corrected. I operated in the belly of the beast for most of my career and emerged unscathed. As an editor, I made sure unbalanced and unfair stories were fixed before they appeared in print.

And I wasn’t alone. Believe it or not, other conservatives were in the newsroom, and even liberal editors would throw up their hands over articles that tilted too far to the left. Then again, we weren’t the New York Times or Washington Post; we were just a bunch of simple Midwesterners serving a working-class readership. Maybe the elite operations are beyond redemption.

In any case, if you still have a hometown paper, give it as much support as you can. If it’s on the wrong track editorially, gather some friends, meet with the boss and share your concerns. If you get a cold reception, the paper might be a lost cause and deserve your wrath. But you might be pleasantly surprised.

By John Ruberry

I hate to interrupt your day by veering away from such issues, well, issues to some, such as the Donald Trump campaign’s alleged collusion with Russia or that nation’s reputed hacking of the 2016 presidential election, but there is something more important that the mainstream media is only nibbling at the edges of: the Great American Pension Swindle.

What is it?

Underfunded pension plans in blue states, well mostly blue states.

Here are some media headlines from just this month:

I could go on and on.

As for that last one, many bond firms rate Chicago Public Schools’ bonds as junk. The collateral for its latest loan, and that’s a generous use of the term, is money owed to CPS by the state of Illinois, the Puerto Rico of the Midwest. Illinois’ public-worker pension plans are just 29 percent funded. Chicago’s pensions are worse–at 25 percent funded, the worst among 15 large cities surveyed.

I don’t have Schadenfreude over this situation. On a personal level the spouse of a friend of mine and one of my cousins are collecting Illinois State Police pensions. They were promised these retirement plans and they didn’t pay into Social Security when they worked for the state. There was no opt-out option for them in regards to these pensions. And their union, unlike AFSCME, wasn’t showering Illinois politicians, mostly Democrats, with copious campaign contributions while the state was shortchanging and even skipping payments into pension funds.

Now what?

John “Lee” Ruberry of Da Tech Guy’s Magnificent Seven

I suspect bankruptcies in all but name, which I wrote about earlier this month in this space, are coming to Illinois and other states who see pensions as a reward system for political sponsors such as AFSCME. Here’s another possibility: run-of-the-mill taxpayers, many of whom are just getting by financially and have no pensions of their own, nor the ability to retire in their 50s, will have to cough up even more in taxes to bail out public worker retirement funds.

This tragedy is not the fault of the Russians. Vladimir Putin didn’t hack the pension funds.  But too bad that’s not what happened. Then perhaps MSNBC, CNN, the Washington Post, and the New York Times might devote more time to the Great American Pension Swindle.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

There are many things amazing about the left/democrat/media’s full court press against this administration.

The disregard for their reputation with half of the population, the willingness to throw out anything resembling journalistic standards, the determined effort to legitimize and downplay violence against anyone who dares question them.

But the most amazing thing about what I’ve seen so far has been the complete willingness of establishment GOP types to go along with and aid and abet their enemies in the press in this effort.

Forgotten are all the tactics used by this same left to marginalize them, ignored are the loaded questions they faced when questioned about any subject, minimized is the history of carrying water for their opponents at every opportunity and discarded is any recollection of the lengths these same leftists in the press went in order to bring them down in the past.

All of it pushed out of their minds, not to be acknowledged in the hopes of bringing down the presidency of Donald Trump.

Even more amazing is their smug dismissal of those unwilling to go along with their agenda as if those of us who remember who have not forgotten that the left and the press have been the enemy for decades are less noble than them.

It’s reached a point where reason is not going to convince them otherwise so let me ask the question that all my posts of this week have been leading to, the question that while obvious to me and many others simply doesn’t seem to occur to these so called “conservatives”.

One you’ve established this standard of behavior as acceptable against a duly elected GOP president, what makes you think, given that this same left portrayed Mitt Romney as a racist, bigot, sexist, gay hating warmonger who wanted to see people die, that the left/Democrats/media won’t use these very same tactics against you the moment Trump has been eliminated?

And secondly, having seen your willingness to go along with said tactics to thwart the choice of the electorate, what makes any of you think that once these leftists/Democrats/Media types turn on you that the rest of us are going to lift a finger to defend you at that time?

There is a reason why the GOP is called the stupid party.

I have met Robert Spencer briefly over the years in a variety of places across the U.S., and frequently read his blog, Jihad Watch, which I invite you to read.

Robert was poisoned during a trip to Iceland, after giving an anti-jihad lecture in Reykjavik.

Robert’s lecture was preceded by media reports which he describes as “a firestorm of abuse in the Icelandic press,” some downright libelous,

Perhaps most absurd of all, Icelandic media published the false claim that I incited the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik to kill. (Sigh. In a world of logical thinking, I’m as responsible for Breivik as the Beatles are for Charles Manson.) After the event, one article even featured a large photo of Breivik, yet it quoted nary a thing I said that evening.

Not one Icelandic media outlet contacted me for comment, much less for rebuttal to the charges they made against me.

In spite of the media demonizing, 500 people attended the lecture, following which Robert went out for dinner. It was then that someone slipped Ritalin mixed with MDMA (Ecstasy) in his drink. He was hospitalized for days.

Robert continues (emphasis added),

I learned my lesson. And the lesson I learned was that media demonization of those who dissent from the Leftist line is direct incitement to violence. By portraying me and others who raise legitimate questions about jihad terror and Sharia oppression as racist, bigoted “Islamophobes” without allowing us a fair hearing, they paint a huge target on the backs of those who dare to dissent.

Those who paint the targets, and those who shoot at them, think they’re doing something great. Not only does the Left fill those whom it brainwashes with hate, but it does so while portraying its enemies as the hatemongers, such that violent Leftists such as the young man who drugged me feel righteous as they victimize and brutalize for the crime of disagreement.

Mark Steyn, with whom I have also coincided at various venues, says “I don’t know how I’d stand up to a cocktail of Ritalin and Ecstasy.” I doubt that I’d fare as well as Robert.

Steyn notes the effect of poisonous social engineering (emphasis added),

The social-justice crowd are moving toward the same point as the Charlie Hebdo killers, and for the same reason: They’re too stupid to argue. For the Islamic imperialists, debate is a largely alien concept. For the left, it’s simply too much effort. As I said here many years ago, the great appeal of multiculturalism is that it absolves you from having to know anything about other cultures: If they’re all equally valid, what’s the point? Slap on the CO-EXIST bumper sticker and off you tootle. No need to worry whether the “C” might have a bit of a problem with some of the other letters, and that indeed, if not for the “C”, you wouldn’t need a bumper-sticker admonition to CO-EXIST in the first place. But, after two generations of social engineering, of the substitution of attitudes for education, it would require too much effort to equip yourself to argue against the difficult questions a man such as Robert Spencer raises. It’s literally easier to kill him.

Indeed, Robert gets it:

For years I have noted that the Left carries out relentless character assassination against those whom it hates, with the intention of discrediting us utterly, without debate or examination of our ideas. Now I see that the endpoint of this operation is not just that we be silenced, but that we be dead. Character assassination was first, and as my being poisoned in Iceland shows, now the Left is beginning to move on to the next level: actual assassination.

It’s not “only” a culture war. It never has been.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog.

The Child: [Invading the Doctor’s Mind] What is this ?  What Trick is this. All these places? You call them Seas, Oceans, Planets, Stars, Galaxies.  Am I God of all this? How can I be the God of all this?
6th Doctor: It’s the Universe
The Child: Nonsense this Castle is the Universe there is no other and I am God of it all!

Big Finish Doctor Who: The Holy Terror 2000

One of my favorite Big finish Doctor Who episodes is titled The Holy Terror (my post on back when I had time to review Big Finish Audios regularly is here) where the TARDIS lands in a closed universe run by a rather odd theocracy where the ruler is God to be worshiped and everyone follows the established order without question.

As I watch what is happening in Washington these days I can’t help but think I’m seeing the same thing.

For years upon end the left elites, both elected and media ruled the roost in support of their deep state.  The media while feigning to be apart from the elites acted as the support structure for the deep state in general and the Democrat left in particular.

One of the rules of these arrangement is that it didn’t matter to what office you were elected to, by how big a margin or even what the laws actually said or what people actually did.  If the media/left elite said something wasn’t a scandal (Fast and furious and the IRS) then it was something unworthy to be ignored and if something didn’t fit the narrative it didn’t matter.

Two of the masters of this system are (and were) Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.  The fact that Nancy Pelosi as minority leader in the house has very little power, if any to stop acts by the majority doesn’t matter, the media treats her as if she had power and expected the GOP majority to bend to it.

The media acted in a similar but opposite tack during Harry Reid’s time as Senate Majority leader.  It didn’t matter if  the House GOP house passed bill after bill Reid ignored them, never bringing them up and even ignoring the laws concerning budgets when it didn’t suit him.  The protestations of the GOP to this meant nothing, the reality was Reid knew what the rules are and the Media supported him in his power, ignoring or attacking any attempt of the GOP to challenge it, and then, when Reid was in the Minority, tacking again to amply and support the powers of the minority inherent in the Senate that he wielded.

And because they worked in the bubble the GOP always went along, only occasionally standing up when the cry of the people who elected them (despite all efforts of the media to divert or twist it) threatened their positions by exercising the power of the ballot.

But now the MSM is in a situation that they haven’t seen during the time of their power.  Not only are their enemies of the GOP in control of all the levers of government but the president is a person outside of the deep state who is not dependent on the media for his power or reputation.

This has been a source of absolute panic for the left and media who have reacted by continually proclaiming crisis and scandal and insisting that the GOP majority bow to their demands, acknowledge said scandals and operate and do their bidding, to wit:

and stories like this:

Exhausted Republicans Are Getting Fed Up With The Chaos Coming From The White House

And if this was 30 years ago when there were limited sources of both news and amusement it might be understandable if the GOP, despite having the power to do otherwise, gave into these demands.

But all of this is happening at a time when media power is more diluted than ever with many news organizations bleeding cash and employees. It’s happening at a time when the average american has literally hundreds of sources of news online and on air to choose from and furthermore has tens of thousands of TV channels and web sites for them to pay attention to rather than listening to the jibber jabber of either press or media.

Or put simply the GOP doesn’t have to rely on a media that hates them to advance themselves, there is a world outside of the bubble that doesn’t give a damn what the media says and it is that world that elected them.

The Democrats can scream all the like and the media can run one breathless story after the other about the Trump administration and how the GOP MUST oppose him for the sake of the country. If the republicans keep their nerve and look outside of the media bubble and the astroturf of the left will put before them, they will not only survive but thrive.

To be sure the Media and the left will not like it, the will react much like the child in the Doctor Who story when his absolute power is questioned screams:

No! It’s a lie, a dirty lie! You’re a dirty liar, the castle is the universe!

But if the GOP can keep it’s nerve and just press forward the press and the left will end up eating themselves while the majority that continues to live and work and function will carry on with the knowledge that all the rants and raves the left can produce can’t neither make up for the power they don’t have or will restore said power back to them.

Of course if the GOP chooses to ignore this advice, then they will neither retain the power they have nor will they deserve to and will be shocked to discover himself discarded by the left and media like in the true spirit of totalitarian discard useful idiots as soon as their use is done.

The latest pearl-clutching news cycle comes from the NYT: Comey Memo Says Trump Asked Him to End Flynn Investigation. The Gray Lady asserts on the third paragraph,

The documentation of Mr. Trump’s request is the clearest evidence that the president has tried to directly influence the Justice Department and F.B.I. investigation into links between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia.

Clearest evidence, they say? On paragraph six, the NYT declares they have not seen the memo at all,

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo, which is unclassified, but one of Mr. Comey’s associates read parts of it to a Times reporter.

Say again?

The New York Times has not viewed a copy of the memo,

They claim that this is “clearest evidence” that the President has tried to directly influence an investigation, but they haven’t even looked at it?

which is unclassified,

It’s unclassified because Comey wrote the memo to himself.

Comey is a lawyer. Lawyers routinely write memos to themselves on all sorts of subjects, including on ways to cover their butts. That does not make this memo (or its parts) as of itself a factual statement that would present “clearest evidence” of anything.

Not only that,

one of Mr. Comey’s associates

not Comey himself, who has been perfectly able to come forward anytime during the past three months (Michael Flynn was fired on February 13th) and present this “clearest evidence,” if it exists.

Why wait until after he was fired? Why not just quit in protest when it allegedly happened?

One thing Comey could have done short of quitting is inform the Senate Intelligence Committee of Trump’s alleged statement.

Comey didn’t make the call but instead had an unnamed associate, who

read parts of it

I’ve read whole articles over the phone when people asked me to. Just how long is this memo?

to a Times reporter.

Not to Michael Schmidt, who actually wrote the article, but to some unnamed person in the newsroom or somewhere.

So you get this,

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Not to pick on poor Rubin, but the pattern is a NYT-WaPo-CNN pearl-clutching circle over leaks provided by anonymous people over an investigation which has dragged on for several  months and has produced no evidence regarding Trump’s links to Russia.

In plain English: An unnamed person read parts of a note Comey wrote to himself (and kept in a drawer for three months), to an unnamed NYT employee.

The NYT calls it “clearest evidence;” the WaPo says it’s obstruction of justice.

Some are talking of impeachment over this – over some newspaper playing Mad Libs with stuff they haven’t actually seen.

Instead, I join with Charlie Martin in demanding, Show Me the Memos!

Here are some Tips For Reading Washington Post Stories About Trump Based On Anonymous Leaks. Pay special attention to #5, “Compare sources willing to put their name and reputation on the line.” Comey certainly hasn’t.

Likewise, John Podhoretz has valuable advice to Pres. Trump: STOP TALKING.

Fausta Rodríguez Wertz writes in U. S. and Latin America at Fausta’s blog.

One of the most important events of the year happened last weekend in Beijing, but few U.S. news organizations gave much notice.

President Xi Jinping and representatives of more than 100 other countries, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, got together to hash out how to spend nearly $1 trillion—that’s TRILLION—of China’s money. The United States’ delegation got an upgrade in the growing bromance between President Trump and Xi.

The project, now called “Belt and Road,” is arguably the most extensive and expensive rebuilding program since the Marshall Plan after World War II.


Following the old trading routes of the infamous Silk Road, the projects stretch across 65 countries in Asia, Africa and Europe via land and sea in a mixture of financial investments and foreign policy. Here is just a taste of some of the plans:

–China is financing more than a third of the $23.7 billion cost of the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant on the Somerset coast of southwest England. The project, in a major western economy, was added to the Belt and Road plan to give added prestige.

–China financed most of the $4 billion cost of Africa’s first transnational electric railway, which opened this year and runs for 466 miles from Djibouti to Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia.

–A deepwater port at Gwadar on the Arabian Sea will be linked by new roads and rail to western China’s Xinjiang region, creating a shortcut for trade with Europe. The port is part of $46 billion China says it is spending on infrastructure and power plants in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

–China is leading a $6 billion investment to build a 260-mile rail line from northern Laos to the capital, Vientiane. Mountainous terrain means bridges and tunnels will account for more than 60 percent of the line, and construction is further complicated by the need to clear unexploded land mines left from American bombing of the country during the Vietnam War.

This map shows the extent of the Chinese initiative in more than 60 countries.

Although most of the work will be done by Chinese companies, U.S. businesses like GE and Caterpillar are vying for some of the action.

The plan is not without its critics. India, for example, failed to show up for the weekend meeting because its leaders are not happy about a project that goes through Kashmir, land claimed by both India and Pakistan.

Whatever the case, the initiative will be the signature dish of President Xi—one that is likely to gain more than a few friends throughout the world.

Note: The Wall Street Journal has a funny piece about the PR campaigns for the plan at https://www.wsj.com/articles/coffee-classical-music-and-wrestling-celebrate-chinese-infrastructure-1494862432

By John Ruberry

Liberals and members of the mainstream media–okay, other than how they earn their paychecks there isn’t much difference between the two–have many intellectual flaws. But I’m going to zero in on just one here–their predilection to view all events through the sphere of the ’60s. For this discussion I’m going to bend time a bit–and call the ’60s as the years of 1964-1974, the period that covers Vietnam and the anti-war protests, the Civil Rights movement, and the Watergate Scandal. Richard M. Nixon, by the way, was elected to the presidency in 1968.

Older journalists looked back at the first and second Gulf Wars with nostalgia, especially when the anti-war protests broke out and during the pre-surge quagmire of 2005-2007. Younger journalists felt cheated by their absence from that first quagmire, Vietnam, and they didn’t want to miss out on what they saw as a second one.

Very few reporters who were on the job during Watergate are still working in journalism, the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward. who is 74, is a notable exception, so those in the biz now are hoping that President Donald Trump’s firing of embattled (yes, embattled) FBI Director James Comey is their Watergate, which of course crescendoed with Nixon’s resignation before his almost certain removal from office by the Senate.

Watergate was of course much more than the break-in at the Democratic Party headquarters at the Watergate Hotel, it was the cover up as well as the side scandals, such as the White House Plumbers, the dirty tricks, and the slush funds that made it America’s gravest political scandal.

Trump’s firing of Comey was ham-handed. If he had canned Comey shortly after being sworn-in, there would have been muted criticism from the left, as many Hillary Clinton supporters blamed Comey for her defeat last fall. Comey of course, in 2016’s October Surprise, reopened the investigation of Clinton’s reckless and illegal use of a home-brewed email server while she was Barack Obama’s secretary of state. Many prominent Democrats called for Comey’s resignation. When Trump did fire Comey last week, the White House didn’t know where to find him–Comey was in Los Angeles. And he learned of his dismissal from a television news report. And Trump, in an interview with NBC’s Lester Holt, contradicted the explanation from his deputy press secretary as to why he fired Comey. Finally, Trump’s hint that he may have taped one of his conversations with Comey doesn’t help the president’s case the public.

The media of course is drawing parallels to Comey’s firing to that of Richard Nixon forcing the dismissal of Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox in the “Saturday Night Massacre.” Yes, Trump cited “this Russia thing” as one of the reasons for getting rid of Comey, but what is this “Russian thing?” Collusion? Meanwhile James Clapper, Barack Obama’s director of national intelligence said only a few hours ago that there is no evidence of any Trump campaign collusion with Russia.

And who seriously believes that Russia hacked the presidential election?

Rather it appears “this Russia thing” was invented by sore losers within the Hillary Clinton campaign.

So repeat after me. “Russian collusion” is not Watergate. James Comey is not Archibald Cox. Donald Trump is not Richard Nixon. While we’re at it, Black Lives Matter is not the 1960s Civil Rights Movement and the regular anti-conservative riots at Berkeley are not the Free Speech Movement.

So what does Woodward, who along with Carl Bernstein broke the Watergate scandal for the Washington Post, think about the Comey controversy? While conceding on Fox News Sunday this morning that there are some questions on Russia that he wants answered, he also told host Chris Wallace, “This is not yet Watergate. Not a clear crime.”

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.