web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Featured Story" (Page 23)

State Dept Concludes Investigation Into Clinton Server, Finds Almost 600 Security Violations

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-im-not-running State Dept Concludes Investigation Into Clinton Server, Finds Almost 600 Security Violations State Dept State Department Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post FBI Cybersecurity clinton emails Classified Emails Allow Media Exception

Screengrab from https://youtu.be/Lp41DKd5w5g

You may not have known, but there was still an investigation going on into Hillary Clinton’s emails.

The State Department was conducting their own review of what was done with Clinton’s private email server and their Bureau of Diplomatic Security has now concluded that there were 588 security violations of the Department’s policy.

Clinton sent or received more than 60,000 emails on her private server. While the FBI and James Comey found that she had in fact sent and/or received classified information, including top secret information, among those emails, he declined to prosecute her, instead simply calling her “extremely careless.”

Indeed. That’s one way of putting it.

According to the Daily Caller, after reviewing all the emails, getting hundreds of statements and doing dozens of interviews, the State Department investigation concluded that the use of the server to do State Department business “represented an increased risk of unauthorized disclosure” and that it “added an increased degree of risk of compromise as a private system lacks the network monitoring and intrusion detection capabilities of State Department networks.”

The report found that 38 individuals were responsible for 91 of the security violations. But for 497 of the violations they did not assign culpability because of the duration of the investigation and many of the subjects having left the State Department.

So what does that leave us with?

Thousands of hours of investigation, another finding that shows wrongdoing, but does that mean anyone at all will be punished?

Obviously for 497 violations, waiting too long means those folks don’t get punished.

But even for the 91 they did pin on someone, they haven’t named those people in the report, or even identified what if any punishment those folks will be receiving for their security violations. Or whether there should be criminal actions recommended for any of those instances.

This was typical for so many scandals of the Obama administration. Clear evidence of wrongdoing. Yet never any punishment, which allows them to try to spin to this day “we had no scandals.” No, what you had were lots of scandals, just never any punishment for any of them.

Media and those on the left are already giving the kindest spin to it.

Yes, the report does say it wasn’t “systemic mishandling of classified information” but obviously that’s an incredibly generous gift in a situation where they also find hundreds of security violations. But that’s the hook media needs to dismiss it as the responses to Bloomberg reporter Jennifer Epstein’s tweet show.

Apparently doing State Department business completely on a private server exposing it to compromise with hundreds of violations, sending and receiving classified information isn’t a “systemic” mishandling. Please.

The post State Dept Concludes Investigation Into Clinton Server, Finds Almost 600 Security Violations appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group hillary-clinton-im-not-running-300x170 State Dept Concludes Investigation Into Clinton Server, Finds Almost 600 Security Violations State Dept State Department Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post FBI Cybersecurity clinton emails Classified Emails Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hillary Plops Out Another: She was Robbed of Her Rightful Presidency by Hacking 10-Year-Old Children

Westlake Legal Group HillaryClintonAPimage-620x317 Hillary Plops Out Another: She was Robbed of Her Rightful Presidency by Hacking 10-Year-Old Children Uncategorized Hillary Clinton hacking Government Front Page Stories Florida Featured Story fake news democrats David Plouffe Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2016

Hillary Clinton speaks during the TIME 100 Summit, in New York, Tuesday, April 23, 2019. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)

 

 

I don’t recall any other presidential election where the loser continued on for months and months and months claiming to not really have lost.

The reason I don’t remember could be that my memory is bad or that I’m not old enough. Another possible culprit: The fact that it would be incredibly foolish to do so, so no one does.

Hillary Clinton went her own way.

And she’s still going. Only one year away from the end of the term, she’s still expending time, effort, and the energy of her thoughts on her loss. What she doesn’t seem to understand is it only means she’s continuing to lose: Rather than doing something new and winning, she’s stuck failing in the past.

And I mean that, not critically, but empathetically.

It’s tough to watch.

And speaking of winceworthiness, Hillary recently sat down on the Campaign HQ with David Plouffe podcast to push out more explanation as to why she’s not president, none of which will likely ever be “America voted.”

And a really big one topped the pile.

As it turns out, a reason she was robbed of her rightful place at the head of the nation’s table was stinking kids.

Ten-year-olds, to be exact.

They’ve been hacking our elections.

And, apparently, fourth graders are big Trump supporters.

#ItTakesAVillain

Here’s Hil:

“You know, we don’t really know to what extent the election was interfered in because nobody will look for it. We do know that in Florida a lot more happened than has been admitted publicly.”

And on we go…

“We know we’re really vulnerable.”

Get ready for it…

“Every, you know, every Hackathon that happens, you know, 10-year-olds are hacking our voting systems and the networks that connect them.”

And the federal government likes all the elections being stolen:

“So we have four big problems, and we don’t have a government that is interested in protecting our elections.”

Well there ya go.

Oh, I just thought of this — if you want to know if that’s actually true, it ain’t.

The Daily Wire explains:

Clinton’s claim comes from an August 2018 story about a Florida hacking competition, during which a [11-year-old] boy hacked into a replica election system. The story was widely shared in the media as evidence of America’s vulnerability to hackers.

However, even Politifact rated the vote hacking claim “mostly false” after Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard repeated a similar claim over the summer.

Here’s Politifact:

First, there wasn’t hacking into a replica of the election system — but rather a website made to look like Florida’s Secretary of State website that reports preliminary election results. In other words, not the system that receives and counts actual votes.

And second, what was hacked into was not even a replica — as in an exact copy of the website — because it did not contain the proprietary security features that the Secretary of State website has.

Furthermore, this statement came from Florida’s National Association of Secretaries of State:

“While it is undeniable websites are vulnerable to hackers, election-night reporting websites are only used to publish preliminary, unofficial results for the public and the media. The sites are not connected to vote counting equipment and could never change actual election results.”

But if you’re prone to conspiracy subscription, and if Hillary’s loss is really stuck in your craw, then you should take action.

The little mongrels are probably holing up with swiped Macbooks, unbeknownst to mom or dad. They’re so small at that age — maybe they’re hiding in the cabinet while they steal all the elections.

Trump’s evil must’ve lured them away from their parents. We’ve got to shout down the devil.

If you wanna make a difference, the next time you see a decade-old dude or chick — at a restaurant, at a school, at the mall, at church, or anywhere else, confront that little deplorable.

And give ’em a little bit o’ What For.

And tell ’em Maxine sent ya:



-ALEX

 

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

The post Hillary Plops Out Another: She was Robbed of Her Rightful Presidency by Hacking 10-Year-Old Children appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group HillaryClintonAPimage-300x153 Hillary Plops Out Another: She was Robbed of Her Rightful Presidency by Hacking 10-Year-Old Children Uncategorized Hillary Clinton hacking Government Front Page Stories Florida Featured Story fake news democrats David Plouffe Campaigns Allow Media Exception 2016   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

The Left’s Reaction to Mark Zuckerberg’s Comments on Political Speech Shows Their True Agenda Is to Silence Their Opponents

Yesterday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was scheduled to give a speech on the future of free speech and free expression at Georgetown University. It was an interesting speech from a number of points of view.

He outlines some of the threats faced by free speech and expression on the internet. While he deserves credit for doing what Google will not do, that is, refuse to cooperate with the Chinese government in developing tools to enforce political conformity on a large population, he backhandedly admits that his own company has a huge issue with free speech and imagines that it has a role as a gatekeeper to keep free speech with acceptable boundaries.

(Read the whole speech)

To me, the contrast between Zuckerberg’s professed respect for free speech and the way Facebook actually operates is simply not reconcilable. In fact, Zuckerberg’s idea of free speech policed by a regime of contracted and highly partisan fact checkers enforcing ambiguous “hate speech” rules is clearly out of Noam Chomsky’s playbook (The Common Good, pg. 43):

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum—even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.

That is exactly what has been created. While Zuckerberg may have refused to be co-opted by the Chinese, he has created his very own little fascist empire in which there is free speech so long as you agree with the worldview and opinions of the vicious corps of SJW net-nannies that he has chosen to employ. The way the pro-life group Live Action was squashed because Facebook allowed pro-aborts to classify videos as having false information when they were true (there is literally no medical reason for an abortion) but strayed outside the pro-abort orthodoxy required by Facebook shows just how meaningless Zuckerberg’s statements are if they are not read through the lens of Chomsky.

I’ve made no secret of my hope that a brigade of vicious spiteful anti-trust lawyers who are compensated solely on the basis of the damage they inflict shows up at Facebook headquarters with a SWAT team and a 18-wheeler load of subpoenas and blank, signed arrest warrants. So I was taken a bit aback when the major criticism of Zuckerberg came from the left, the people who are net beneficiaries of his scheme.

Oddly enough, of all the problematic concepts that he touts as smoothly as any NewSpeak speech by Big Brother, the one that got the hormones flowing on the left was this:

We recently clarified our policies to ensure people can see primary source speech from political figures that shapes civic discourse. Political advertising is more transparent on Facebook than anywhere else — we keep all political and issue ads in an archive so everyone can scrutinize them, and no TV or print does that. We don’t fact-check political ads. We don’t do this to help politicians, but because we think people should be able to see for themselves what politicians are saying. And if content is newsworthy, we also won’t take it down even if it would otherwise conflict with many of our standards.

I know many people disagree, but, in general, I don’t think it’s right for a private company to censor politicians or the news in a democracy. And we’re not an outlier here. The other major internet platforms and the vast majority of media also run these same ads.

This apparently is a new development because in 2018, Facebook censored campaign videos by Elizabeth Heng which referred to her family’s escape from the kind of repressive dictatorship the Democrats are well on their way to establishing in California, see Facebook Blocks Republican Candidate Ad For Daring To Show Horrors Of Communism.

For instance, this is some of the criticism:

In a way this is a stunning level of dumbf***ery. Federal law currently makes it illegal for a broadcast station to alter or censor (that word, ‘censor,’ is in the law, so you libertarians who keep claiming that private business can’t censor, take a seat and be quiet) any ad by a political candidate. So long as the speech in the candidate ad is not illegal, per se, it is required to be run. The very idea that Facebook ever had any authority to police candidate ads is simply balderdash and it is quite an indictment of Department of Justice that they sat idly by and let this go on. The idea that any society, much less an ostensibly free one, should tolerate a corporation with a track record of lying to the public and constructing extremely opaque practices to punish WrongThink to control the speech of candidates for election in abhorrent.

It also gives away the real game. The fascists of the totalitarian left have given up on trying to convince people based on arguments, now they are going straight on to silencing ideas they can’t stand. Even Zuckerberg recognizes this impulse.

Increasingly, we’re seeing people try to define more speech as dangerous because it may lead to political outcomes they see as unacceptable. Some hold the view that since the stakes are so high, they can no longer trust their fellow citizens with the power to communicate and decide what to believe for themselves.

Make no mistake about it, I think that at its core, Facebook is at least as hostile to American values as China but in a different way. I also think the sooner the federal government acts to demolish Facebook the safer our freedoms will be. I also think that Zuckerberg’s change of direction on federal candidate ads is driven by fear of federal government action rather than his love of free speech because I think he’s as much of a SJW as any that he employs. As they say, a fish rots from the head down. What is illustrative about this is that the left is actually showing its true colors. It holds free speech and freedom of religion at least in as much disdain as it does the Second Amendment and the Electoral College and any other part of the Constitution that restricts their ability to impose their worldview on the rest of us.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post The Left’s Reaction to Mark Zuckerberg’s Comments on Political Speech Shows Their True Agenda Is to Silence Their Opponents appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group mark-zuckerberg-georgetown-300x153 The Left’s Reaction to Mark Zuckerberg’s Comments on Political Speech Shows Their True Agenda Is to Silence Their Opponents Social Media Politics political speech Mark Zuckerberg Internet Censorship Front Page Stories freedom of speech Featured Story facebook democrats Culture Censorship Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Joe Learned From Hillary

Westlake Legal Group Lyin-Joe-Biden-two Joe Learned From Hillary Politics Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story biden Allow Media Exception
When I read the statement made by Joe Biden last week, “I left the White House as one of the poorest men in government” it seemed eerily similar to the statement Hillary made in 2014. So I had to draw a cartoon about it.

The post Joe Learned From Hillary appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Lyin-Joe-Biden-preview-2-300x155 Joe Learned From Hillary Politics Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story biden Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process

Westlake Legal Group LizCheneyScreenGrab-620x391 Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process Wyoming washington D.C. Social Media schiff republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Liz Cheney Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff

Screen grab via C-SPAN.

When it comes to questioning the secretive nature of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s and House Intel Chair Adam Schiff’s so-called “impeachment inquiry” process, Rep. Liz Cheney has not been shy about speaking her mind.

Cheney, who is the GOP Conference Chair, asked Pelosi earlier this month what she knew and when she knew it regarding the Trump/Zelensky call transcript from July. Cheney’s question came in response to comments Pelosi made during a 60 Minutes interview where she stated she knew what was in the transcript before it was okayed for release by the White House.

“This is starting to seem like a political set up,” tweeted Cheney at the time:

As Democrats continue to bang the impeachment drum and top Republicans in the House have gotten louder on questioning why they are being excluded from large parts of the process, Cheney provided a timely reminder for Pelosi and Schiff earlier this week as to an important part of the process they were deliberately overlooking. Here’s what she said:

“I think one of the really important things to recognize about the impeachment effort is the extent to which the materials are being kept in secret not just from the public, but kept in secret from other members.

So, we have had members go down and attempt to read the transcripts, for example Kurt Volker’s testimony and they were denied access.

The Constitution of the United States does not say that the power of impeachment resides with Speaker Pelosi, doesn’t say it resides with the Speaker of the House, doesn’t say that it resides with the Chairman of the Intel Committee. It says it resides with the House of Representatives.

And it is really a shameful miscarriage of their responsibilities and their duties for them to be conducting this exercise in which they will not even share information with members of Congress beyond the select few who they have identified.”

Watch Cheney’s remarks below:

Over to you, Madame Speaker.

——-
— Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter. –

The post Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group LizCheneyScreenGrab-300x189 Video: Liz Cheney Reminds Pelosi, Schiff of One Important Thing They’re Forgetting About Impeachment Process Wyoming washington D.C. Social Media schiff republicans Politics North Carolina Nancy Pelosi Liz Cheney Impeachment of President Trump impeachment Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Culture Congress California Allow Media Exception adam schiff   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Pelosi Attacks Trump on Syria, But Her Troubling Remark Reveals How Ignorant She Is

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-3.17.37-PM Pelosi Attacks Trump on Syria, But Her Troubling Remark Reveals How Ignorant She Is Syria Russia putin Front Page Stories Front Page Foreign Policy Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception

Screenshot from this video

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) gave a press conference where she chastised President Donald Trump for pulling about 50 Special Forces operators from near the Syrian border.

But in her attempt to attack Trump, she revealed just how dangerously ignorant she is of what’s going on in the region.

“I also pointed out to the president I had concerns that all roads seemed to lead to Putin,” she said. “The Russians have been trying to get a foothold in the Middle East unsuccessfully, and now the President has given them an opportunity.”

Um, Madam Speaker?

Russia has had a naval base in Syria since 1971. They’ve been providing military support in the Syrian civil war on behalf of the Assad government since 2015, when they came in after Barack Obama’s many “red line” threats against the Assad regime using chemical weapons amounted to nothing. The Russians proclaimed subsequently that they were making their presence permanent.

That’s not even talking about Russia’s involvement elsewhere in the Middle East such as with Iran.

Odd and pretty troubling that the Speaker doesn’t recall or seem to understand that. But it’s not surprising, considering why.

Doubtless she forgets how, unlike the Obama administration, the Trump administration actually dropped bombs, quite literally, on the Russians in February 2018, killing as many as 300 Russians, after Russian military contractors helping the Assad government fired on a US position in Syria.

From Business Insider:

The February battle was reportedly incredibly one-sided, as a massive column of mostly-Russian pro-Syrian regime forces approached an established US position in Syria and fired on the location.

The US responded with a massive wave of airstrikes that crippled the force before it could retreat, and then cleaned up the remaining combatants with strafing runs from Apache helicopters.

Phone calls intercepted by a US-funded news organization allegedly captured Russian military contractors detailing the humiliating defeat. “We got our f— asses beat rough, my men called me … They’re there drinking now … many have gone missing … it’s a total f— up,” one Russian paramilitary chief said, according to Polygraph.info, the US-funded fact-checking website.

Clearly not as “flexible” as the prior president.

But Pelosi would rather forget the facts while stoking the debunked Russia collusion hoax.

Let’s re-up this picture of the Speaker.

The post Pelosi Attacks Trump on Syria, But Her Troubling Remark Reveals How Ignorant She Is appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-3.17.37-PM-300x185 Pelosi Attacks Trump on Syria, But Her Troubling Remark Reveals How Ignorant She Is Syria Russia putin Front Page Stories Front Page Foreign Policy Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Congress Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Kira Davis: Hell Yes, We Need That Border Wall

Westlake Legal Group 32e42215-fb1a-48af-8fa6-fba15e8949d3 Kira Davis: Hell Yes, We Need That Border Wall war zone Trump national defense immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story El Chapo Drug Cartels Border wall

A shockingly massive gunfight erupted Thursday between drug cartel forces and the Mexican military in the Pacific coastal state of Sinaloa. The battle broke out when Mexican authorities attempted to arrest the son of the infamous drug lord known as El Chapo. It spilled into the streets of the city of Culiacán. The video footage is a terrifying and sober reminder of what is happening just south of our border.

The time for petty politics has long since passed. We need that wall.

Mexicans are not “straight, white males” and for that reason and none other we are having this insane argument about whether or not America has the right to protect her borders. In reality, race/ethnicity is completely irrelevant to this conversation. We are talking about the most powerful, prosperous and freest nation on earth living right next door to a war zone. Of course there are good people who want to get the hell out of there as fast as possible. Wouldn’t you? There are also very bad people who have already expanded their war zones into the United States, literally using the private lands of unprotected American ranchers as their battlefields.

Our government is not responsible for the good people of Mexico. You can make yourself responsible for those good people yourself if that’s what you so choose. In fact, that’s really how it should work. You should not depend on a faceless government to do good things for people. You should be doing good things for people out of your own volition and pocket. My church travels across the border frequently to build orphanages, churches, community facilities and support local charity leaders working in their own communities. We cannot bring every single person back with us. Nearly every other nation in the world is a sucky place to live. We don’t have the ability to house every oppressed person or even most of them. The world is a terrible and cruel place. This is why we should be so very grateful to live in America.

If we want to see the lives of others improve, we should be working with them to improve their own communities and their nations. It’s lazy – both physically and intellectually – to tell everyone to just come here and let the American taxpayer support them. Few Americans are willing to leave the comforts of their own lives to go improve the lives of those in other countries. Are we just supposed to empty out Mexico and Somalia and Guatemala and *insert 3rd world country here* and relocate every single person to America? It makes no sense, particularly morally because what we are saying when we support that idea is that those cultures are not good enough to deserve preservation in their own land.

We need that wall. A border wall is neither controversial nor a new idea and I have always found the arguments against it perplexing.

“A wall is cruel and racist”…well, it will have several doors and anyone who wants to can knock on them. Am I to believe that unless my door to my home is wide open 24/7 that I’m a hateful bigot?

“It costs too much”…since when did people on the Left start worrying about what anything costs? Since when did people on the Right start worrying about what a robust national defense costs?

“It won’t work”…can’t we even try it just in case it does work? My walls at home work pretty well. It seems like what works on a small scale is acceptable to at least attempt on a wider scale.

“People can climb it…see this video of a child easily scaling Trump’s stupid design”…great, shouldn’t that make you happy then? If you’re opposed to a wall, and we’re getting a wall anyway this seems like the type of design you should support.

“This is not who we are”…what in the hell does that even mean? If the wall has a door then this is exactly who we are – a sovereign nation that is extraordinarily hospitable if you simply ring the doorbell first.

Watching the bizarre political flip-flops on the Syria situation I can only surmise that the outraged opposition to a border wall is only about Trump and nothing else. To support one seems like support for the President and there are too many weak-minded and weak-willed people out there who don’t know how to separate themselves from the judgement of people they don’t even know.

We needed a wall before Trump and at this rate it looks like we’re still going to need one after him. This isn’t about Trump and this isn’t about race. This is about a literal war zone mere miles from the border of the most powerful nation on earth. A nation – by the way – that is constantly and endlessly asked (begged) to intervene in international conflicts in order to protect innocents. How can we be expected to do that when we are not even allowed to protect our own border from invading forces?

This is all utterly ridiculous and childish. Build the damn wall and let’s move on from this. If you’re feeling morally conflicted, go help your neighbors south of the border. It’s free to cross and they need you. Don’t be lazy.

 

 

The post Kira Davis: Hell Yes, We Need That Border Wall appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group media.townhall-1-2-300x153 Kira Davis: Hell Yes, We Need That Border Wall war zone Trump national defense immigration Front Page Stories Featured Story El Chapo Drug Cartels Border wall   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Oregon American Federation of Teachers Loses Third of Membership After Janus

The Oregon chapter of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) has experienced monumental membership and financial losses in just the first year after the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Janus v. AFSCME, which affirmed the right of public employees to stop paying union dues.

The release this month of AFT’s most recent LM-2 report continues an alarming trend for the leaders of Oregon’s public employee unions. The Department of Labor filling shows that just in the past year, AFT has lost 4,133 members and agency fee-payers.

That translates to a decline of 35 percent of its total membership, taking with them $1 million in revenue from the previous year.

This revelation comes on the heels of the release of AFT National’s annual report showing a 4 percent decline in membership across the country.

The stark difference between the national decline compared to the decline in Oregon’s chapter is almost entirely attributable to the work of the Freedom Foundation.

AFT members in Oregon have been inundated with door-to-door visits, direct mail, email, texts, billboards and even radio and tv ads — all driving home the message of their newly affirmed rights to leave their union.

Oregon’s AFT joins the ranks with the Oregon School Employees Association (OSEA), who experienced a 36 percent decline in membership over the past year.

When public employees are informed of their rights to leave their union, separate themselves from extremist partisan politics, and keep hundreds of dollars a year in their pocket, they can’t opt out fast enough.

The post Oregon American Federation of Teachers Loses Third of Membership After Janus appeared first on RedState.

Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Mitt Romney’s Attack on President Trump’s Withdrawal From Syria Reeks of Political Opportunism

Westlake Legal Group mitt-romney-looking-heavenward-620x317 Mitt Romney’s Attack on President Trump’s Withdrawal From Syria Reeks of Political Opportunism utah Turkey Syria republicans Politics Mitt Romney Kurds Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump Allow Media Exception

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, waits to participate in a mock swearing-in ceremony in the Old Senate Chamber on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 3, 2019, as the 116th Congress begins. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

 

Yesterday, Mitt Romney gave a floor speech in the Senate on the situation in Syria. Perhaps to the surprise of no one, Romney used the opportunity to lambaste President Trump.

(Read the full speech)

I’m going to take the key elements and address them.

Let me briefly recount what’s happened in the past seven days since the U.S. announced our withdrawal. The Kurds, suffering loss of life and property, have allied with Assad. Russia has assumed control of our previous military positions, and the U.S. has been forced in many cases to bomb some of our own facilities to prevent their appropriation by Russia and Turkey.

This misrepresents the entire situation. The Kurds in question, those affiliated with PKK/YPG, are not uniquely allied to the United States. They have been allied with Assad and Russia and Iran since the very beginning. Why? Because fighting ISIS lets them build up brownie points with the Damascus regime, whatever that ultimately ends up being, in attempting to gain some degree of autonomy within the borders of Syria. The people being lambasted in the media as “Turkish backed militias” are actually the Free Syrian Army who are also armed and supported by us. The bases we’re evacuating are not “our bases.” They aren’t covered by a Status of Forces Agreement or any kind of treaty or executive agreement. They are combat outposts in an area where, not very long ago, most of Congress agreed we had no legal authority to be.

Further, the ceasefire does not change the fact that America has abandoned an ally. Adding insult to dishonor, the Administration speaks cavalierly, even flippantly—even as our ally has suffered death and casualty, their homes have been burned, and their families have been torn apart.

We know the truth about our Kurd allies. They lost 11,000 combatants in our joint effort to defeat ISIS. We dropped bombs from the air and provided intelligence and logistics behind the lines. The Kurds lost thousands of lives. Eighty-six brave Americans also lost their lives so tragically.

These Kurds voluntarily entered into the fight against ISIS on their own behalf. They are patriots in their own eyes, the are not American hirelings. The question that is begged here is why we decided to expend blood and treasure, but particularly blood, in a conflict that not only has no national interest but, arguably, is actually working against our national interests. No one will claim that ISIS were good guys but look at their enemies: Russia, Syria, Iran, al-Qaeda.

So, too, is the principle that we stand by our allies, that we do not abandon our friends. The decision to abandon the Kurds violates one of our most sacred duties. It strikes at American honor.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Turkey is actually our ally in this mess. We have a mutual defense pact with them. The Kurdish forces they are fighting are either PKK (a US-designated terrorist group) or their open allies. How was our honor upheld by agreeing to this in the first place? Why does honor demand that we throw more blood and treasure into an effort to prop up a group we are at the same time pledged to eradicate?

Some have argued that Syria is simply a mess, with warring groups and sub groups, friends and allies shifting from one side to the other, and thus we had to exit because there was no reasonable path for us to go forward. Are we incapable of understanding and shaping complex situations? Russia seems to have figured it out. Are we less adept than they? And are our principles to be jettisoned when we find things get messy?

Just a reminder that the Russians stood aside and let the Turks kick-ass on these same people in 2018 and were also accused of abandoning their allies…and now the Russians are strategic geniuses for doing what Romney thinks is dumb today. Romney should consider that we jettisoned our principles when we chose to ally ourselves with a terrorist organization against a NATO ally.

I simply do not understand why the Administration did not explain in advance to Erdogan that it is unacceptable for Turkey to attack an American ally. Could we not insist that together we develop a transition plan that protects the Kurds, secures the ISIS prisoners, and meets the legitimate concerns of Turkey as well? Was there no chance for diplomacy? Are we so weak, and so inept diplomatically that Turkey forced the hand of the United States of America? Turkey?

Throughout this hogwash, Romney manages to ignore some salient facts. First, Turkey has legitimate interests in what happens in northern Syria because the PKK has used that area as a safe haven from which to run operations into Turkey. And they’ve done this with the assistance of Syrian intelligence. There are only about two thousand US troops in Syrian Kurdistan and they are resupplied from…Turkey. While it is hugely impressive to bloviate about telling Turkey what is unacceptable, one would think they also have the right to do the same. And we are weak in this particular situation because what is at stake is something that Turkey sees as critical to its national security where pan-Kurdish nationalism represents an existential threat to it. Our involvement there, on the other, hand is at best a double-edged sword and most likely it is a decided negative as it embroils us in what is becoming a regional civil war and makes us into allies of an international terrorist group. To further confuse matters, we are also “allies” of the Kurdistan Regional Government which considers the PKK/YPG as hostile.

That Kurdish nationalism is a destabilizing influence in the region is not news. In fact, back in 2007 a candidate to be the GOP nominee for president made just that observation:

Today, the nation’s attention is focused on Iraq. All Americans want U.S. troops to come home as soon as possible. But walking away now or dividing Iraq up into parts and walking away later would present grave risks to the United States and the world. Iran could seize the Shiite south, al Qaeda could dominate the Sunni west, and Kurdish nationalism could destabilize the border with Turkey. A regional conflict could ensue, perhaps even requiring the return of U.S. troops under far worse circumstances.

The author was Mitt Romney.

It is really hard to take Romney’s speech as much more than an attempt to raise his own personal profile. To what end, I have no idea. But we have been told that Romney is trying to put together a donor network to fund a primary challenge to President Trump.

I’d be the last person to say the situation we face in the region is easy, it isn’t. President Trump inherited a foreign policy that for eight years had focused on granting political and territorial concessions to Iran as a way to try to create a regional counterweight to radical Sunni Islam. To that end, Iraq was abandoned. We also embarked on a program of trying to replace Arab dictators with Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated groups. We did that in Libya and Egypt. We tried to do it in Syria and failed. The conflagration we set off on that misadventure is what has created the current mess. President Trump had the choice of doubling down on a policy that not only had failed but as to which no one could even describe what a success would look like…or washing his hands of it. He made the right decision. Mitt Romney, I think knows that. Because 2019 Mitt Romney knows that 2007 Mitt would never have allowed us to get involved in this crap.

The post Mitt Romney’s Attack on President Trump’s Withdrawal From Syria Reeks of Political Opportunism appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group mitt-romney-looking-heavenward-300x153 Mitt Romney’s Attack on President Trump’s Withdrawal From Syria Reeks of Political Opportunism utah Turkey Syria republicans Politics Mitt Romney Kurds Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump vs. Beto Rallies in Dallas: Who Prevailed in Numbers?

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-1.18.10-PM Trump vs. Beto Rallies in Dallas: Who Prevailed in Numbers? rally Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Campaigns Beto O Rourke Allow Media Exception 2020 candidates 2020

Screenshot from this video

Let’s face it, Texas is still a pretty red state, despite the effort by Democrats to turn it blue. Trump carried the state by nine points in 2016.

But Democrats keep thinking they’re going to flip it and Robert Francis O’Rourke is from Texas.

So when O’Rourke said he would throw a counter-rally to President Donald Trump’s rally in Dallas on Thursday, who came out ahead in the rally numbers?

Well, in the lead up to the two events, it wasn’t even close.

As is typical with Trump rally events, people started lining up far in advance of the event because it’s first come, first get in.

According to the local news, people started lining up on Tuesday, two days before and thousands camped out before the event.

Here’s a shot of the line and folks camping out.

Here’s O’Rourke’s line beforehand on Thursday afternoon.

But O’Rourke’s attendance did pick up closer to the event, although they didn’t look particularly enthusiastic. They were definitely not into the woman with the bell trying to start a “Beto” chant.

Of course, Trump’s lines picked up too.

O’Rourke termed his event, a “Rally against Fear.” Not sure what this was a sample of the entertainment captured by Tom Elliott of Grabien is supposed to be showing. Warning for offensive language.

According to multiple accounts there were 5,532 people at O’Rourke’s rally.

But at the Trump rally, the American Airlines arena was packed, at 20,000 capacity with thousands more outside in overflow areas. Pretty massive crowd.

It wasn’t even close.

HT: Daily Caller, Twitchy

The post Trump vs. Beto Rallies in Dallas: Who Prevailed in Numbers? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Screen-Shot-2019-10-18-at-1.18.10-PM-300x248 Trump vs. Beto Rallies in Dallas: Who Prevailed in Numbers? rally Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post donald trump democrats Campaigns Beto O Rourke Allow Media Exception 2020 candidates 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com