Infidel Dog

I can show it to you clearer with the link Shady posted. This is critical race theory as it gets preached "systemically".

Afraid to click it, eh? No problem. I'll give you his answer to what critical race theory is. "Yeah, critical race theory is the academic formulation that contends that the kind of social structures including the Constitution, the Declaration, and inherited laws are all really not objective formulations or neutral and not even necessarily good in themselves but are actually cover for a kind of white supremacy power structure for racial imbalances and oppression, Critical race theory questions objectivity. It question meritocracy. It questions...really the kind of foundational values, principles and structures of the United States. And it's something that has been circulating in the Academic world for many year. Really kind of started to take off in the 1990s, but then all of a sudden, out of nowhere has become really ubiquitous in our public discourse and the kind of left leaning policies...in HR departments, and even in trainings of the federal government."

You're confusing racism with the delusion of "systemic" racism. Racism exists. No reasonable person says it doesn't. Systemic Racism however is today a fantasy born out of the neo-marxist gobbledy-gook of "Critical Race Theory." Don't know what that is? No problem. I'm here to help.

God Damnit. I can't stop clicking quote because that's where the edit link used to be. Took me a week to find it hidden up on the top right and I still forget and post duplicates. It's starting to piss me off but I guess I need to be mad at me.

I tried to read the Washington Post article but there's a paygate. Went to your link to the hard Left British newspaper, The Guardian. It's clips from the thousand page Senate report giving a completely deceptive idea of what the report was about. They've clipped out he-said/she-said stuff and what somebody believed that somebody else believed and such like that to suggest this is the evidenced fact from the report and it all says Trump was involved. It becomes tinfoil hat stuff. They even try to resurrect the salacious "Trump peed on Russian hookers" lie with innuendo. In truth the report was simply to investigate if or how Russia interfered with the last election. It wasn't about Trump. There is some unevidenced innuendo that maybe Trump might have been thinking or doing such and such. As I said though The Guardian found that and it's there for the tinfoil crowd if they want it. I glanced at the Politico article. Apparently Adam Schiff believes something or other. Shifty Schiff lied daily for 3 years that he had hard evidence of Trump colluding with Russia. He never produced it. Mueller never produced it. It didn't exist. Then he embarked on that hopeless, clown show of prevarication that was the Impeachment hearings. He's a joke. He wouldn't know the truth if it bit him in the ass. At some point one has to say 'that's enough of that' as far as what Adam Schiff claims to believe. Wikipedia? If it's a political post I wouldn't waste my time. The founder of Wikipedia agrees with me as far as tainted partisan political posts in Wikipedia. Wikipedia has gone to the dark side when it comes to politics. I'm going to call shenigans on all that deceptive, crap. But I'll give you the same opportunity, Moonlight and invite others to investigate what Fox news says that report was actually about: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/senate-intel-russia-report-fourth-volume

Anyway... https://nypost.com/2018/04/16/michael-cohens-mystery-3rd-client-revealed-sean-hannity/ So Bubber says Hannity was Cohen's client and Hannity says he wasn't. I don't see why it should matter myself but if it does I'm thinking Hannity might have the inside track on what Hannity did. As I understand it the judge made Cohen list his clients in a private list and Hannity's name leaked out from there as a third (yes I said third) client. So what, is what I say. Hannity got some legal advice from Cohen. That's the thing about nothing-burgers though. The Left's appetite for them seems insatiable.

Ben Shapiro makes some good points. At one time there was systemic racism. You knew it because you could point at the racist laws and regulations within the system then see the results in the public and on the streets. When you convince the weak minded institutional racism exists without offering evidence of its existence however you get a whole new kind of ugly.

Happy Al-Quds day.

Yeah it will be tough. I'm not sure if he's cut the funding to universities that push it yet but a week ago or so he did cut the funding to organizations that were pushing what's called "critical race theory' to government workers. Race Hustlers like Tubby in the vid above are no longer allowed to push their hateful BS to the public sector. Trump chucked em' out. Federally at least.

But it's the Right with all the conspiracy theories, right? Even if both those claims were true and they were the whole truth how would that make Hannity Satan? "OMG, Hannity had the same lawyer as Trump at some time for some thing! " "Somebody told me that somebody told Sean Hannity something one time and it wasn't true. Quick, we must run and tell the king! " Thanks for the yuks.

And didn't he announce yesterday he was pulling over 2,000 troops out of Iraq?

And hey, check this out: Trump Announces Another Historic Middle East Peace Deal, With Israel And Bahrain And I heard the new flights from UAE to Israel are allowed to fly over Saudi Arabia. I imagine Hamas and Iran are pissed but what else is new.

I got lost here... What does any of this have to do with Trump being nominated for a Nobel peace price? He brought Israel and the UAE together and that's good right? More peace rather than less, don't you think? I guess you might think it a problem that some of the Arab states are starting to fear Iran more than they hate Israel and that might be what's really relaxing the tensions between some Arab states and Israel but it still feels like a net positive to me.

It's worth adding that when the Jews took control of Jerusalem in the 6 day wore they could have leveled the Mohammedan holy sites like what was once done to theirs. They didn't. They allowed the Mohammadens control even though the area is also considered sacred to Jews. And yeah the sacred nature of the mount to Islam is supposedly based on the idea that one night Mohammed jumped on the back of some sort of flying mule with a woman's head and flew to the mosque at the farthest end of the world. After the Mohammadans conquered Jerusalem they decided that was where Mohammed took his night flight. They leveled the Jewish holy sites and built their own on top of them.

Yes the existence of neo and anarcho Marxists is a fact. That was my point. Somebody was interpreting factual beliefs by the right in a hysterical hyperbolic manner but the facts of the claims could be disputed rationally. For example the problem with hyping up the conspiratorial aspect of observations of a "deep state" then demanding outrageous expectations of it is such requirements are birthed from a false premise. Noticing the deep state only requires 'light of day' observations of colluding between cliques embedded in the upper levels of government. It's a way of explaining blatant, underhanded activities by government elite and putting a name to it. It's not 'grassy knoll,' stuff.

Here's a shorter clip of Kayleigh addressing just the clipped quote:

I'd have to hear the whole Tucker Carlson piece and not just the bit cut out by the RINO, TDSers at the Lincoln Project. But all they seem to be upset about is Tucker saying Lindsey Graham set up the Bob Woodward interview with Trump. Unless you're saying that didn't happen I'm not sure what they're whining about. But speaking of the ol' trick of trying to make hay out of, out-of-context, partial clips and quotes Kayleigh McEnenany addresses the lie that Trump lied about Covid. There was more to that quote in the Woodward interview too.

Go here for the map legend of how much of what part of the wall is under construction or has been completed: https://www.trumpwall.construction/ https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/18/donald-trump-border-wall-nears-300-mile-mark/

Trump and Kelly have been at odds since long before the election so close that the lying media resurrected old lies. Here's a question right back at you. Why now, then? Why not back when it happened?

Well, that's a lie.

John Kelly's adviser at the time however, will go on the record on what he personally observed and he will not confirm, in fact he outright denie,s parts of the Atlantic's fiction. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/miles-taylor-john-kelly-trump-atlantic-military

Here's some better context on that one: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sethcohen/2020/09/05/general-john-kelly-knows-what-trump-said-about-veterans---this-is-why-is-he-cant-remain-silent/#343149a730c1

So this thread started getting derailed here: The problem was hyperbole. All he was really saying was many on the right in America believe there is a problem with what is called "the Deep state." They believe neo and anarcho Marxists are causing problems. They believe the Progressive or as some call it, "regressive" leftist infection has even spread into our Canadian system. They believe this segment of the political left is self-destructive. Remove all the hyperbole and there's no real argument with that. Although we on the rational right would be happy to have it. No need to derail.

Nancy Antoinette.