In Search of Common Sense

In Search Of: Common Sense     by Mustang

Over the past several weeks, all of us have been subjected to a growing list of women who claim they are victims of improper sexual behavior by prominent men.  By ‘prominent men,’ I mean very rich and influential people in the government, media, and in the television and film industry.  By ‘industry,’ I do not mean to suggest that they produce anything worthwhile.  Equally prominent women have united around the hash tag ‘me too.’

In any case, the allegations are disturbing.  From news reporting and social media, one might assume that every other man one happens to meet on the street is a rapist.  No doubt such do men exist; I only wonder if the problem is as prevalent as the media would have us believe.  Moreover, I have to question whether the problem is as one-sided as the women (and Gloria Allred) would like for us to believe.

The accusations, by the way, at least so far, include actresses in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia —and one White House intern.  Recently, Hollywood actress Ashley Judd stated that masher Harvey Weinstein gave her this option: succumb to my advances, or I’ll rape you.  Judd, being an astute business woman, negotiated.  She decided to have sex with this man in exchange for opportunities to earn millions in the film industry.  If this account is true, then Weinstein was behaving like a pig —and if true, then what should we conclude about the behavior of Ms. Judd?

Yes, it is true that men behave poorly, but women behave badly as well.  Whatever happened to the option of refusing such advances? In other words, saying ‘no.’  Would Judd’s career have suffered?  Perhaps, but then these women ought to know that beyond a three-digit emergency number, there are hundreds of starving attorneys who would love to litigate such allegations —especially when the accusation involves massively wealthy and enormously influential men.

And then, of course, we have a woman who was paid to discredit the victims of sexual assault by Harvey Weinstein.  According to press reports, Attorney Lisa Bloom was paid by Weinstein to question the veracity of his accusers, often failing to reveal that she was on Weinstein’s payroll.  Who is Lisa Bloom?  She’s the daughter of Gloria Allred.

There is no excuse for men like Weinstein, but I ponder … perhaps actresses have been saying ‘yes’ for far too many years.  It could also be true that some women actually encourage or enable piggish behavior.  To me, solving this problem is no more than a matter of common sense, or in the case of women like Ashley Judd, skill as a negotiator and a willingness to acknowledge their own character flaws.

Advertisements

AG Sessions says he will not prosecute Clinton or any deep state criminals

 

I can’t say that this news comes as any great surprise. It was getting abundantly clear that Sessions was now part of the swamp. Chaffetz in an interview with Judge Pirro confirms our worse fears, Sessions wanted this job oh so badly and claims it was a job of a lifetime. Yet no one has been more dangerous to Trump than this man. It was he, and he alone that caused this whole ridiculous investigation by recusing himself over a couple of trivial meetings with some Russians. A patriot would disband the whole lot of Mueller et al.

Jason Chaffetz, former House of Representatives member and Chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform was on Justice with Judge Janine Pirro Saturday night and he again dropped a BOMBSHELL about Attorney General Jeff Sessions:

Judge Janine: …What can you do?

Chaffetz: Yeah, the State Department has been holding tens of thousands of documents on a case that they claim is closed.  And when I met with Attorney General Sessions much like Ron DeSantis did, I basically got a stiff arm.  I got an Attorney General that said he would not comply, he wasn’t going to do any sort of prosecutions and it’s such a huge difference.  When he was a Senator he would have never put up with that.

Judge Janine went on to ask if Sessions was afraid of them (i.e. deep state)?  She also asked if they all (Congress and Washington politicians) had so many skeletons?  The Judge then correctly stated that this is driving Americans crazy and the American people have had it!

When asked whether Jeff Sessions should be out, Chaffetz correctly responded, “Well I don’t know what the case is to keep him!”

More at Gateway Pundit

Sunday Respite – Happy Halloween, All Soul’s Night, Samhain

The origins of Samhain, better known as Halloween, happens this week on October 31. A bit of history and how the ancients celebrated this day. The Wheel moves on. Have a wondeful day.

Jeb Bush – ‘I would kill for my Dad’

Here is Saturday’s special “Thought for the Day.” Just think, he could have been President what with his big war chest.

Bill Clinton’s Multi-Million Dollar Communist Uranium Deal – Circa 2008

Note the date of the Post: Clinton’s Multi Million-Dollar Communist Uranium Deal  JANUARY 31, 2008. But we aren’t talking about Hillary, no, this Uranium thing started with Bill. And what do you know. The dirty cast of characters sound very familiar. One in the name of Frank Giustra.  In yesterday’s post Seven Facts to know about Uranium One – Hillary Clinton responds

  1. The Clinton Foundation Took Big Bucks from Uranium Investors
    According to theTimes, The Clinton Foundation received $2.35 million in donations from Ian Telfer, a mining investor who was also the chairman of Uranium One when Rosatom acquired it. It also received $31.3 million and a pledge for $100 million more from Frank Giustra, the Canadian mining financier whose company merged with Uranium One.

But I digressed. Keep your eyes open for Frank as I return to the chilling days of yesteryear:

Bill Clinton advocated for an oppressive communist leader known for human rights violations, corruption and election fraud to help a Vancouver businessman get uranium and, in return, the millionaire cut a hefty check to the former president’s foundation.

Clinton proudly used his clout to seal the sort of deal that would otherwise be impossible between an unknown uranium mining entrepreneur and the communist dictator of a former Soviet Republic (Kazakhstan), who happens to own one-fifth of the world’s uranium reserves.

With the help of his good buddy Clinton, Vancouver mining mogul Frank Giustra secured tens of millions of dollars worth of uranium to fuel nuclear reactors worldwide. The thank you note included a $31.3 million donation to the William J. Clinton Foundation as well as a future pledge of $100 million. (Seems like this is the going rate for Hillary as well.)

All Clinton had to do was endorse the election-rigging, communist human rights violator (Nursultan Nazarbayev) to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe). The former president’s endorsement defied the U.S. government and even his senator wife, who had previously signed a State Department letter detailing Nazarbayev’s serious corruption, canceled elections and government control of the news media.

Yet Clinton flew to meet the Nazarbayev and actually congratulated him for opening up his country’s social and political life to help seal the uranium deal. Incidentally, Clinton lied to the American public when he took the 2005 trip to the former Soviet Republic, saying the visit was to announce a Clinton Foundation agreement with that country to buy discounted AIDS drugs.

The Clinton’s have helped many wealthy donors secure lucrative deals with foreign governments and their ties to the communist Chinese have been well documented. In the 1990s Clinton and his Democratic party accepted massive campaign contributions from the Chinese in exchange for highly secret missile technology and his administration sold coveted commerce department seats in exchange for donations.  H/T: Judicial Watch

Christopher Wilson digs a little deeper into the Canadian connection. He does a nice job of putting the pieces together.

I give you a tweet from yesterday:

No Evidence the GOP Donor or Campaign ever involved in Russian Dossier

 

While everyone is placing bets as to which GOPer got the ball rolling over at Fusion GPS, an important misinformation factoid is being pushed by a few brave Hillary sycophants.  No doubt called upon by Hillary to walk the plank if they wished to stay on the Clinton payroll. Unfortunately, the story was broken by the Washington Post and alas is behind a firewall. So I will have to take it on faith that the conclusions that the Federalist came to merit consideration. The GOP had nothing to do with the funding of the Dossier. If true, then the waters must not be muddied. Opposition research is one thing, creating this bizarre dossier another matter. Here tis:

Here Are The 10 Most Important Reported Claims About The Steele Dossier On Russia

There’s a lot of misinformation swirling about that shoddy dossier on Trump and Russia compiled by Christopher Steele. Here’s what’s actually been reported on the matter.

2) No, the Russian dossier was not initially funded by Republicans

When the news broke that the Clinton campaign and the DNC were admitting partial responsibility for the Russia dossier, journalists acted like they’d presented it as a Clinton campaign operation all along. They also claimed it was initially funded by a Republican.

 

Incorrect. And Tapper took the tweet down when the error was pointed out. There is no evidence that a Republican donor or Republican campaign was ever involved with the Russian dossier. Fusion GPS claimed to reporters (though they did not provide evidence) that a Republican funded separate opposition research on Trump, dealing with his business interests. But as the Washington Post itself reports, the dossier did not exist until after the Democrats hired Fusion GPS:

Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.

After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Full story at the The Federalist with the nine other reported claims.

Clinton Foundation slush fund – less than 15 percent goes to charitable grants

Let’s just have a little refresher today. Before Hilary starts her next spin of all of the “good works” of the Clinton foundation, take a look at reality.When you hear about all the AIDS drugs given out in Africa and other marvelous endeavors, know that charity begins at home.  I will give you a few of my links to the Foundation posts. Yep. Just 5.7 percent in 2014 went to charitable grants. Later year report got it to 15 percent. Here are the earliest years below. The other point?

For Hillary, Charity begins with the Clinton Foundation 

A number of Clinton Foundation Board of Directors charged or convicted of crime 

In fact, the Clinton Foundation is so unlike a real charity that even charity watchdog group Charity Navigator refuses to rate the Clinton Foundation because of its “atypical business model.”

One of those problems is the fact that the Clintons put big donors and close pals on the board for reasons that are hard to fathom. In fact, at least four of these “board members” have either been charged or convicted of serious financial irregularities, crimes including bribery and fraud.

So if Jeff Sessions can tear himself away from the gang bangers, I am willing to give him just a few more links so he can “catch up” on the Foundation news. Next time, the Clinton Global Initiative. Back to my post:

Just 5.7 percent of the Clinton Foundation’s massive 2014 budget actually went to charitable grants, according to the tax-exempt organization’s IRS filings. The rest went to salaries and employee benefits, fundraising and “other expenses.”

The Clinton Foundation spent a hair under $91.3 million in 2014, the organization’s IRS filings show. But less than $5.2 million of that went to charitable grants.

That number pales in comparison to the $34.8 million the foundation spent on salaries,

compensation and employee benefits.

Another $50.4 million was marked as “other expenses,” while the remaining almost $851K was marked as “professional fundraising expenses.”Daily Caller

(RELATED: Clinton Foundation Deceived IRS On Tax Exemption From The Start)

Doug Band reveals Clinton Foundation Inc ‘For Profit’ activity  

Clinton Foundation affiliated charities failed to file financial information 

Clinton Foundation refiling its tax returns, look for other ‘errors 

Haitian President ‘Clinton tried to bribe me,’ reveals the Clinton Foundation  

FBI US Attorney investigation underway of Clinton Foundation 

Clinton Foundation placed on charity ‘Watch list’ 

Clinton Foundation spends only 15 percent giving grants 

%d bloggers like this: