Sunday, June 25, 2017

CLIMATE CHANGE...massively overblown claims of immediate and impending disaster.

My Reasons For Doubting Global Warming Theory
By Politics Alabama
Part 5: In Conclusion
This is part 5 of a 5-part series. Read the Introduction, Part 2, Part 3, and Part 4 here.

The theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, which has since been renamed Climate Change, attempts to prove that human actions are driving dramatic increases in temperature, with all of the associated side-effects of melting ice caps, rising ocean levels, and more, all leading to a world-changing conclusion.
But the climate of this planet has been changing since the planet itself was first created, and has been both hotter and colder than it is today. The “Little Ice Age” ended in the mid-1800’s, so why are we surprised by a period of warming? That’s sort of what logically comes next, right?
The plethora of climate computer models are a joke, seeming to be more of an attempt to “prove” an already determined outcome than accurately reflect how the climate functions. Because they want to show that man has a dramatic upwards effect on temperatures, that’s what the computer models show. Reality, however, doesn’t agree, and most computer models consistently overshoot what actually happens.
Climate Change scientists exist in a quasi-incestual relationship with government. Government funds the research into climate change, which they then use to justify new programs and increased power over “the environment”… and us. Where does the dog end and the tail begin? It’s hard to tell, but it is clear that the practical effect is to promote pro-global warming research and inhibit any contrary research. Global Warming scientists themselves have tilted the playing field further through the peer review process, and then claim the lack of publication proves that “the science is settled.” Somewhere in the middle of all of this, the actual science sort of gets lost behind the hype.

And then there are the constant, never-ending, and massively overblown claims of immediate and impending disaster. Predictions of future destruction are gleefully shared in order to justify more funding or passage of specific measures, but somehow the predictions never come true. There are no roving bands of climate refugees. The sea level hasn’t risen to the point that coastal areas are flooding. The arctic ice caps haven’t turned into a few scattered ice cubes floating in a sea of boiling saltwater. All this panic doesn’t make me more likely to believe what you’re saying… quite the reverse.

I still remember the year that “scientists” proclaimed that global warming would cause super-hurricanes of incredible strength, and more of them than ever. I admit I chuckled when the year ended with almost historically low hurricane activity. After that, the ridiculous claims died down to… well, more reasonable levels.

The claims are legion, but consistently false. Have you heard that the polar bear populations are declining at an alarming rate? I’m sure you have, as it’s a favorite and easy target. But it isn’t true, as polar bear populations are pretty stable, stymying past predictions of their demise. Of course, the truth isn’t stopping new forecasts of dying polar bears.

So, what DO I believe? To put it simply, I believe that yes, man’s presence on the planet does affect the climate, but not to anything like a great degree. Slightly. We are not heading for a disaster, civilization is not going to drown with a gurgle, and polar bears are not going to disappear. No great catastrophe is looming, so dramatic and expensive government action is unwarranted. We shouldn’t tax coal into extinction, we shouldn’t run gasoline prices up to European levels in order to inspire a switch to electric cars, and we shouldn’t abandon our power gird in favor of solar and wind power. No, we shouldn't place such rigorous requirements on emissions that businesses and power plants are forced to close. The danger isn’t real, the extreme, doomsday claims aren’t accurate.

What drives the global temperatures to a much greater extent are the sun and natural processes such as volcanoes. Mankind contributes a very small fraction of the greenhouse gasses introduced into the atmosphere each year, after all. The climate changes naturally, and human activity hasn’t changed that.

Do I believe in global warming?

If, by global warming, you mean that the planet has gotten warmer since the Little Ice Age, I can agree with that. If, on the other hand, you mean that human activity is forcing global temperatures higher and higher to the point that one catastrophe or another will occur, there we part company.

Global warming is real, but it’s nothing to upend human civilization about.

Now, after finishing this long series of posts, I’m hungry. Anybody know where I can score a polar bear steak?

Friday, June 16, 2017

It also means that...we are not realistic. - Read full text here ↓

Provided by Norman E. Hooben

Realism and Islam

Our leaders cannot comprehend what is going on, either when a whole Western civilization
loses its faith and moral standards or when Islam reawakens to the implications of its own faith and its vision of world conquest.
Political realism, long associated with Augustine, constrains us to consider what Machiavelli later recommended to us—namely, to look at what men “do” do and not at what they “ought” to do. This advice would be more persuasive if, in fact, some men did not do what they ought to do or others do what they ought not to do. Both sides usually persuade themselves that they ought to follow their convictions. Machiavelli thought that if men did what they “ought” to do they would not survive the onslaughts and cunning of those who did what they had power to do whatever they could do. However, Augustinian realism did not, as in the case of Machiavelli, justify this careful look at what men “do” do as a reason to deny the distinction between good and evil so that any means could be used to accomplish their purposes.

The “realistic” look was “realistic” for Augustine precisely because good and evil were included in the look itself, in the reality as seen. To see and act on the reality of good or evil is to see reality in its fullest dimensions. Practical truth, in terms of acting according to an accurate description of what is there, is the first principle of realism as well as of political action. Thus, Maritain could rightly maintain in the Augustinian tradition that “justice, brains, and strength” need not be separated. They belong together. Or, to refer obliquely to Lord Acton, the lack of power can also corrupt absolutely. Not to possess and use responsible power in defense of what is right is itself an evil, cowardice.

With this background in mind, we recall recent events from “9/11”, the bombings in Spain, England, Mumbai, Bali, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, twice in Paris, Lahore, and Brussels, not to mention the persecutions and beheadings in Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Libya, Somalia, Chad, Syria, and the Sunni/Shiite inner-Muslim battles. What is the most plausible way to judge such continuing violence and its origins? To make this assessment, we have to acknowledge that Islam, in principle, is actually and potentially violent throughout its entire history. The basic reason for this method is obedience to the Law of Allah, not love for violence itself.

On the basis of evidence and theory, we cannot conclude from the fact that Islam is a “religion” that therefore it is not “violent” or is so only by abuse of its own founding. It is possible to be a religion and to espouse violence. (Were this not so, we would have to exclude many key passages on the Old Testament itself.) We cannot obscure what is there and affirmed to be there by Muslims themselves. Realism means that we can and should call what happens by its proper name. It also means that, if we cannot or will not make this proper naming, we are not realistic. We will inevitably suffer the consequences of our failure to state the truth of what is there.

These things are said not to promote counter violence against Muslims or to justify Muslim violence against others. Rather it is to respect Islam’s insistence that all those inside and outside of its enclosure be subject to the law of the Prophet. Whether we like it or not, this vision of world rule that is proper to Islam can only be called “religious” in nature. It is rooted in and promoted as a worship of the god called Allah. Not to take this wording seriously is unrealistic. The Muslims who claim that they can read their religious texts as if such violence is not advocated and justified may be applauded for trying to mitigate the historic record. But the fact is that those who see this violence as essential to the religion have the better side of the argument and are the better witnesses to what historic Islam stands for.


What is argued here, then, is not to be unfairly “critical” of Islam. On the contrary, it is written with considerable admiration for the zeal, consistency, and effectiveness displayed over the centuries by Islamic armies and law. And while it may be politically incorrect to state these things, they need to be stated and are in fact the truth—things that both Muslims and non-Muslims need to hear and consider. The designated and determined goal of the conquest of the world for Allah has been reinvigorated again and again in world history from the time of Mohammed in the seventh century. These revivals and expansions, which have only been temporarily halted by superior counterforce, have roots in the Qur’an itself and in its commentaries.

What we witness today, much to our surprise, is but another step in the historic world mission that Islam envisions for itself as the will of Allah, a goal that inspires the real and recurrent vigor that is found in its history. The reason we do not call it what it is lies not in Islam but in our own very different concepts of philosophy, religion, and law. In this sense, it is our own culture that often prevents us from being ourselves political realists.

Many believing Muslims, likely more than we are willing to admit, are tired and frustrated at having their religion’s principles denied. Outside observers are unwilling to believe or imagine that what Muslim advocates say about themselves, both in their founding texts and in their historic actions, is true. World conquest over time is what they hold must be achieved.

In other words, whether they be Muslim or otherwise, many people refuse to acknowledge that violence is proposed and carried out in the name of Islam. Outside Islam, it is called by the peculiar word “terrorism”. It is rarely called what it is, namely, a religious endeavor to conquer the world as an act of piety. Muslims, in this central tradition, are not “terrorists” just for the fun of it. That is insulting and resented. They practice what we call “terror” because they see themselves carrying out the will of Allah, even sometimes to their own death in doing so. Those who, in the process, kill “infidels”—that is, any non-Muslim or Muslim who does not accept true Islam—is considered to be a “martyr” to the cause of Islam. Only if Islam is not true can these ritual killings be seen as the objective evil that they are.

A subtle philosophic theory (called “voluntarism”) purports to justify this usage of what we call terror for religious purposes. The principle of contradiction cannot hold in a “revelation” that contains, in its texts, contradictory commands, as does the Qur’an. Allah then must become pure will, not bound by Logos or reason. Hence Allah is not limited by any distinction of good and evil. The Muslim blasphemy laws that threaten with death anyone who violates this claim arise from this source.

Allah’s mandate to Islam is progressively to subject the world to his will and to the law based on it. Terror will end and true “peace” will result only when all are submissive to Allah and live under Muslim law in all its details. What we outside of Islam call acts of violence are considered within it to be the carrying out of Allah’s will. Gruesome beheadings of Christians, however innocent, are seen as acts of justice. They are acts of “virtue” in this sense. The people who cannot understand this religious charge given to Islam, whether they be themselves Muslim or not, are themselves both unrealistic and dangerous. Their own presuppositions prevent them from recognizing and judging the real issue. They also prevents them from doing anything effective to hinder this expansion of Islam into Europe, Asia, Africa, and America.


Back in 1975, I wrote an essay in the Modern Age entitled “On the Teaching of Ancient and Medieval Political Theory”. The gist of this essay was that unless we understand the content and history of religions—their truth claims and aberrations—we will be unable to see the actual forces that swirl through the political world. An education that lacks a proper and accurate study of the theology and theologies peculiar to each different religion is not really an education. It could not prepare anyone to deal with a world in which religions, in their differences, are a reality. Both in Europe and America in the last half century or longer, this sanitized education is what decades of students have been given. With it, most citizens are simply not equipped to face the forces now reappearing in the world. Indeed, even to propose a realistic look at Islam, as is proposed here, is almost everywhere forbidden and excluded from any consideration, however valid the analysis.

This neglect of or hostility to religion has come back to haunt us. We have lumped all “religions” together as illusions or myths. They are to be defanged and wholly subject to state power. Our political, academic, and cultural leaders cannot comprehend what is going on, either when a whole Western civilization loses its faith and moral standards or when Islam reawakens to the implications of its own faith and its vision of world conquest. The two—the loss of faith and the rise of Islam—are connected. The decline of the birth rate and civil undermining of the family in the West is one thing. Muslim immigration or invasion has engulfed this same area. Muslims, especially young males, did not seek power and prosperity in other adjoining Muslim lands. The expansion of Islam was justified also by its charge of moral decadence against the West.

We see well-equipped modern armies, with inept and not seeing political leadership and with little motivation of forces, out-fought by young armed zealots in pick-up trucks who can, with their followers, threaten every train station and public building in Europe, Africa, Asia, and America. As they planned, they have managed to turn the whole world into a battleground of fear. The cry “Allah be praised!” is heard after every act of destruction. It is quite clear by now, or should be, that no cultural artifacts—be they books, buildings, statues, or paintings—will be allowed to exist. They are seen to be contrary to Allah’s will, no matter what they are or when created. In this sense, the Pyramids, the Buddhist statues, the library in Timbuktu, the Vatican, and the monasteries in the deserts, Canterbury, the towers in New York, the kosher markets in Paris, and the airports in Brussels are equally subject to destruction. Everything must be protected because everything is now threatened.

Not only are individual Christians eradicated but so are the statues of their saints. The reason for this destruction is “religious”. Such things ought not to exist. We have here a literal application of the belief that nothing should be allowed public or private space that does not correspond with strict Muslim beliefs. Provisional tolerance of Christians and Jews if they accept second class citizenship and pay heavy fines is merely temporary until the conquest is complete. Such zealous destruction to do the will of Allah, in other words, is considered to be an act of piety. If someone is going to oppose such acts, it cannot be done on the grounds of opposition to “terror” or that it is unreasonable. Ultimately, it depends, as Augustine learned with the Donatists, on a conversion and rejection of the theology that justifies it.


Whether Islam, in its origins, is a rereading of Jewish, Nestorian, and Christian texts (as it probably is) can be disputed. First, Islam claims to be a literal revelation of what is in the mind or being of Allah. In this sense, what is in the text must always remain in the text. It cannot be changed or “reinterpreted” to leave out those multiple passages that propose and justify violence in the name of the expansion of this religion. This advocacy of violence, which has been practiced in Islam from its seventh century beginning, has a purpose. This purpose is, ultimately, religious and pious. Whether the Muslim notion of “heaven,” where its martyrs go, is primarily this-worldly or transcendent, can also be disputed. In any case, the concept of heaven is very earthy sounding. This picture is not, as such, an argument against its truth.

The message contained in the Qur’an is that the world should bow in submissive worship to Allah. This purpose abides and recurs over the centuries because it is there in the text. Men may temporarily neglect its zealous pursuit, but the text itself always contains the mission for others to find and pursue. There will always be those who realize that the mission of world conquest in the name of Allah is not complete. This realization is why, so long as it exists unrefuted, the Qur’an will always produce what we call “terrorists”. What we see now is little different from what has been seen throughout the centuries wherever Islam is found.

In this view, the world is divided into an area of peace and an area of war. The former is where the law of Allah rules politically, religiously, and culturally, where no other philosophy or faith has any right to be present. All signs of alien religion, art, artifact, and people are eliminated through forced conversion or death. Sometimes, Christians and Jews can be allowed to stay alive provided that they accept second class citizenship and pay taxes. This situation, in practice, is the basic constitutional rule in all existing Muslim states, even in those that reject ISIS or other approaches to eventual conquest of the world. Once Islam has conquered, it has always followed the same principles. In its history, certain famous battles have turned back Muslim conquests for a time, sometimes for centuries. But this relative inertness is only on the surface. As long as the book exists, its goals will again and again inflame prophets, imams, politicians, and the young men to recommence the conquest of the rest of the world.

In conclusion, what is argued here in terms of political realism is that we must understand the religious nature of Islamic expansion and the methods used to achieve it. By trying to abstract these motivation from the soul of this particular religion, which is, on this score, unlike most others, only makes it impossible to describe what in fact is going on in the mind of the adversary that is Islam. Wars are first fought in minds—and this is a war. It is not World War III; rather, it is an extension of the wars that Mohammed first launched against Byzantium, Persia, Syria, eventually North Africa, even to India, Spain, the and Balkans.

The Muslim protagonists of today realize how close they were several times in the past to conquering Europe as the next step in world conquest. What they see today is a very realistic opportunity to succeed where their ancestors failed. They, though also idealists, are (often unlike ourselves) realists. That is, they see what our minds really hold. And they see that they are largely empty of what really counts in this world: a true conception of God. Their only fault is that of choosing a false understanding of the real God. Aside from this “small” issue, one cannot help but admire, and fear, a blind faith that so abides over time and place without the real presence of the Logos whose incarnate presence in the world is explicitly denied.


THE BLACK RACE IN THE UNITED STATES IS IN TROUBLE because our so-called warriors are too busy running around like a bunch of dogs in heat. ~ Edward Cage

Unhyphenated American: Edward Cage-Uncaged
By Leslie Brown - October 30, 2014

“Once I was able to read past a third grade level with comprehension I never voted Democratic again, I ran with my wife and kids off the plantation to freedom.”

Wow!  Such honesty, and candor in an age of deceit.  A friend sent me a link on Edward, and I realized he would be a great role model for our site.

We’re kinda “radical” here at UA, because we ascribe to that whole, “judging on the content of character, not the color of skin” thingie like M.L.K. Jr. preached, oh, say FIFTY YEARS AGO!

Edward Cage has been an eloquent and powerful advocate for conservatism, recognizing that the false story line told by the left and propagandized by the media only serves to keep America’s minorities “on the plantation.” He joins us from Missouri to share his tactics for opening the eyes of those who are still enchained by the leftist lies, and for bringing them to see the light of truth.

Edward Cage was born in St. Louis, Missouri. Raised on the city’s North side, he was faced with countless challenges, each of which he overcame. Edward’s teen years were full of pain and confusion, including running with a gang and becoming a father at the age of sixteen.

He dropped out of high school and began to sell drugs, but when so many of his old school mates were killed or locked up, Edward decided to make a change and got a job at a sandwich shop. While working there he learned a great truth: he couldn’t read or write. Mad at the world generally and white people specifically, he turned to Islam.

But as he taught himself to read and write, he started to see life in Black America differently. He stopped feeling sorry for himself, and walked away from Islam. This journey has taken him from liberalism to being a God-fearing, strong-minded, thought-provoking, in-your-face Christian Conservative with an attitude. As Edward says, “Once I was able to read past a third grade level with comprehension I never voted Democratic again, I ran with my wife and kids off the plantation to freedom.”

Edward, thank you for your work in calling people “out”, telling the Truth and spreading the Word. 
Thank you to:

Thursday, June 15, 2017

I think the biggest environmental hazard is the EPA ~ Norman E. Hooben

"And one gentleman from Maryland was talking about an 18-mile road.  And he brought with him some of the approvals that they’ve gotten and paid for.  They spent $29 million for an environmental report, weighing 70 pounds and costing $24,000 per page." ...full text below ↓
Above depiction by Norman E. Hooben

The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release

Remarks by President Trump on Regulatory Relief

Department of Transportation
Washington, D.C.
11:40 A.M. EDT
THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you, Secretary Chao.  Thank you, everybody.  This is very nice, by the way.  Beautiful.  I want to really thank you.  You have been so amazing as the leader of this department, and the progress is being made so quickly.  Leaders and officials gathered here from across the country have all praised the work that the Secretary is doing to create a safe, modern and reliable transportation system for the United States and for its great, great, great people.
I also want to thank Secretary Zinke for the fantastic job he’s doing at the Department of the Interior to clear the way for new infrastructure and economic development.
Both Secretary Chao and Zinke joined us at the White House yesterday for a meeting with state and local leaders to develop plans to replace America’s decaying infrastructure and construct new roads, rails, pipelines, tunnels, and bridges all across our nation.
We are here today to focus on solving one of the biggest obstacles to creating this new and desperately needed infrastructure, and that is the painfully slow, costly, and time-consuming process of getting permits and approvals to build.  And I also knew that from the private sector.  It is a long, slow, unnecessarily burdensome process.
My administration is committed to ending these terrible delays once and for all.  The excruciating wait time for permitting has inflicted enormous financial pain to cities and states all throughout our nation and has blocked many important projects from ever getting off the ground.  Many, many projects are long gone because they couldn’t get permits and there was no reason for it.
We’ve already taken historic steps to speed up the approvals, including the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline -- which was very quickly approved.  They were sitting there for a long time saying, well, that project is dead.  Then I came into office and, all of the sudden, a miracle.  And I guarantee you, the consultants went over to the heads of the company and told them what a great job they did.  They asked for a lot of money, most likely.  But we got it approved.  And we got it approved fast.
I’m also very proud to say that the Dakota Access Pipeline is now officially open for business.  It was dead 120 days ago, and now it officially just opened for business. Very proud of that.  Hi, Bill.
We’re also excited to be joined by representatives from our labor unions, including the North America Building Trades Union, which I know well, and the Laborers International Union of North America.  You will play a -- go ahead, fellas, take a little credit.  Come on, fellas. You will play a central role in rebuilding America.  Very important.
We’re also joined, as well, by many distinguished members of Congress who share our total passion and desire to repair and restore America’s highways, railways, and waterways.  In the audience is Chairman Bill Shuster of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.  Stand up, Bill. Thank you, Bill, great job -- who is working very closely with us, including on our proposal to dramatically reduce airport delays by reforming air traffic control.
We have an obsolete system.  And I have to say, before Elaine got here, they had spent close to $7 billion on the system.  Boom -- a waste.  All wasted.  But we’re going to have a great system -- great new system.  A top of the line -- it will be the best in the world.  Right now, we’re at the lowest part of the pack.  It will be the best in the world, for a lot less money than they’ve been wasting for years.
For too long, America has poured trillions and trillions of dollars into rebuilding foreign countries while allowing our own country -- the country that we love -- and its infrastructure to fall into a state of total disrepair.  We have structurally deficient bridges, clogged roads, crumbling dams and locks.  Our rivers are in trouble.  Our railways are aging.  And chronic traffic that slows commerce and diminishes our citizens' quality of life.  Other than that, we’re doing very well.
Instead of rebuilding our country, Washington has spent decades building a dense thicket of rules, regulations and red tape.  It took only four years to build the Golden Gate Bridge and five years to build the Hoover Dam and less than one year to build the Empire State Building.  People don’t believe that.  It took less than one year.  But today, it can take 10 years and far more than that just to get the approvals and permits needed to build a major infrastructure project.
These charts beside me are actually a simplified version of our highway permitting process.  It includes 16 different approvals involving 10 different federal agencies being governed by 26 different statutes.
As one example -- and this happened just 30 minutes ago -- I was sitting with a great group of people responsible for their state’s economic development and roadways.  All of you are in the room now.  And one gentleman from Maryland was talking about an 18-mile road.  And he brought with him some of the approvals that they’ve gotten and paid for.  They spent $29 million for an environmental report, weighing 70 pounds and costing $24,000 per page.
And I said, do me a favor.  I’m going to make a speech in a little while.  Do you mind if I take that and show it?  So I’m going to show it.  So they spent millions and millions of dollars.  When I said, how long has this short roadway been talked about, the gentleman said, well, if you say 20 years, you’re safe.  I said, yeah, don’t say anymore because I have to be -- you know, I have to be exactly accurate with these people.  I was off by like two months -- it’s a major front-page story.
But these binders on the stage could be replaced by just a few simple pages, and it would be just as good.  It was actually be much better.  Because these binders also make you do unnecessary things that cost billions and billions of dollars and they actually make it worse.
As another example, the 23 -- if you look at it, in Ohio, the Ohio River Bridge -- $2.3 billion.  The project amassed a 150,000-page administrative record -- 150,000 pages is a five-story-tall building.  Think of it.  If you put the paper together, it’s a five-story building.
How can a country prosper under this kind of nonsense?  And I know it.  I know it so well, being in the private sector.  But you know, in the private sector you move, and you wheel, and you deal, and you hope, and you pray.  And maybe it goes a little faster, but it’s a horrible thing in the private sector also.  And we’re talking about reducing that for the private sector likewise.
Why should we continue to accept what is so clearly unacceptable?  Oftentimes, the consultants -- that are making a fortune because you can’t doing anything without hiring them, paying them a tremendous amount of money, having them write up this nonsense -- you can’t get approvals.  And they’re in, in the case of New York, Albany -- they go to Albany, the state capital or, here, they go to Washington for federal.  And they want to make it really tough because that way, you have to hire them.  It's a terrible thing.  It's a group of people -- probably nobody has ever heard anybody talk about it because -- I know it because I'm a business guy, I understand that.  They work really hard to make it difficult.  And some are believers, but most aren't.  Most want to make a lot of money.  So they make a very, very simple roadway or whatever you want to be building a very complicated subject, and they make it very much more expensive and they make it worse.  It's not as good as it would have been.
I was not elected to continue a failed system.  I was elected to change it.  All of us in government service were elected to solve the problems that have plagued our nation.  We are here to think big, to act boldly, and to rise above the petty partisan squabbling of Washington D.C.  We are here to take action.  It’s time to start building in our country, with American workers and with American iron, and aluminum and steel. It’s time to put up soaring new infrastructure that inspires pride in our people and our towns.
When I approved the Keystone Pipeline I said, where was the pipe made?  Unfortunately, they had purchased a lot of it, but I put a little clause at the bottom -- you want to build a pipeline in this country, buy American steel and let it be fabricated here. Very simple little clause written in hand, but it does the trick.
It is time, at last, to put America First.  Americans deserve the best infrastructure anywhere in the world.  They deserve roads and bridges that are safe to travel, and pipes that deliver clean water into their homes.  Not like what happened in Flint, Michigan.  They deserve lanes of commerce that get people and products where they need to go on time.  Most of all, Americans deserve a system of infrastructure that is looked upon not with pity -- the world, in many cases, is so far advanced that they look at our infrastructure as being sad.  We want them to look at us with envy -- a system worthy of our magnificent country.
No longer can we allow these rules and regulations to tie down our economy, chain up our prosperity, and sap our great American spirit.  That is why we will lift these restrictions and unleash the full potential of the United States of America.
To all our state and local leaders, I appreciate you being here today.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you, Bill.  I want you to know that help is finally -- after many, many decades -- on its way.  We are giving control back to the cities and the states.  You know best how to plan your communities, analyze your projects, and protect your local environment.
We will get rid of the redundancy and duplication that wastes your time and your money.  Our goal is to give you one point of contact to deliver one decision -- yes or no -- for the entire federal government, and to deliver that decision quickly, whether it's a road, whether it's a highway, a bridge, a dam.
To do this, we are setting up a new council to help project managers navigate the bureaucratic maze.  This council will also improve transparency by creating a new online dashboard allowing everyone to easily track major projects through every stage of the approval process.  This council will make sure that every federal agency that is consistently delaying projects by missing deadlines will face tough, new penalties.  I know it won't happen with these two.  We don't have to worry about them.  We will hold the bureaucracy accountable.
We are also creating a new office in the Council of Environmental Quality to root out inefficiency, clarify lines of authority, and streamline federal and state and local procedures so that communities can modernize their aging infrastructure without fear of outdated federal rules getting in their way.
This massive permit reform -- and that's what it is; it's a permit reform -- doesn’t sound glamorous.  They won't write stories about it.  They won't even talk about it.  But it's so important.  But it's only the first step in renewing America’s roads, rails, runways and rivers.
As I discussed in Ohio recently, my new vision for American infrastructure will generate $1 trillion in infrastructure investment -- which we desperately need.  We've spent, as of a few months ago, $6 trillion in the Middle East.  Think of it -- $6 trillion in the Middle East.  And it's worse than it was 15 years ago by a factor of 10.  And yet, if you want to build a little road in one of your communities in Pennsylvania or Ohio, or in Iowa, or in North Carolina, or in Florida, you can't get the money.
State and local leaders will have more power to decide which projects get built, when they start and how they are funded.  And investors will have a much more predictable environment that encourages them to invest billions of dollars in capital that is currently stuck on the sidelines.
Together, we will build projects to inspire our youth, employ our workers, and create true prosperity for our people.  We will pour new concrete, lay new brick, and watch new sparks light our factories as we forge metal from the furnaces of our Rust Belt and our beloved heartland -- which has been forgotten. It's not forgotten anymore.
We will put new American steel into the spine of our country.  American workers will construct gleaming new lanes of commerce across our landscape.  They will build these monuments from coast to coast, and from city to city.  And with these new roads, bridges, airports and seaports, we will embark on a wonderful new journey into a bright and glorious future.  We will build again.  We will grow again.  We will thrive again.  And we will Make America Great Again.
Thank you.  God bless you.  I appreciate it.  Thank you very much. Thank you.
12:05 P.M.

Friday, June 9, 2017

Sooner or later America will wake up to this...

Quotable Quotes
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”
~  Marcus Tullius Cicero  ~
Provided by Norman E. Hooben

Global Warming Predictions... How accurate are they?

Source: Politics Alabama

Part 3: Failed Predictions of the Coming Apocalypse
This is part 3 of a 5 part series. You can read the Introduction and Part 2 here.

One thing we get from Global Warming scientists and activists is predictions. They LOVE to tell us what is going to happen… and more than that, they love to paint pictures of all the catastrophes that will occur if we don’t enact [name of favorite law or regulation here].

The problem is, their accuracy stinks. And the more doomsday-ish the scenario, the less likely it is to come true.

Now, I could spend DAYS posting lists of failed predictions… I mean that literally. Failed predictions of wrack and ruin ABOUND, and I hardly have to work to find list after list of them. And I will post some, just to make the point.

In fact, here are a few of the failed predictions made in the cause of “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”.

Most recently, of course, is PresTrump's withdrawal of the US from the Paris Climate Accord. In response to that, we saw wild, panicky claims that the world will end. Literally. CNN ran with the headline, "Trump to planet: Drop Dead", and the New York Daily News followed suit. Various journalists and magazine editors said we should "blow a kiss goodbye to nature", that we will "all die", that “Trump just committed a crime against humanity”, as well as having “expanded his predatory acts to the entire planet.” None of that is overreaction to a voluntary withdrawal from a non-binding agreement in which we set our own goals and aren't even legally obligated to meet them... right?

In a 1972 speech, author of “The Population Bomb” argued that overpopulation and pollution would have a severe impact on the world:
“By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people.” He added, “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.”

The IPCC (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), which is considered by activists one of the most prestigious and accurate of the organizations making these pronouncements, has predicted that “milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms” (2001), and that the Antarctic ice caps were shrinking and “contributing 0.2 ± 0.35 mm yr - 1 to sea level rise over the period 1993 to 2003” (2007).

And what really happened? Winter snowfall rates are actually up a little, on average. And in a report released October 2016, NASA admitted that that ice across Antarctica has been growing rapidly for decades.
“Rather than melting ice in the southern hemisphere contributing to sea-level rise, as claimed by the UN, ice in Antarctica is expanding, and the growing ice is responsible for reducing sea levels by about 0.23 millimeters annually. According to the NASA study, published in the Journal of Glaciology, satellite data shows the Antarctic ice sheet featured a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001 — more than a trillion tons of ice in less than a decade. Between 2003 and 2008, Antarctica gained some 82 billion tons of ice annually.”

Al Gore went even further, claiming in 2007 that, “The North Polar ice cap is falling off a cliff. It could be completely gone in summer in as little as seven years. Seven years from now.” That would be 2013, but satellite pictures from that year show arctic ice volume had actually increased by 50%.


But the failures don’t seem to stop these doomsday predictions from not only being issued, but also being taken seriously by global warming activists and the media. The formula seems to be, parrot any dire claim on the environment, beat us over the head with this “obvious truth”, and then ignore the failure when it doesn’t come true.

On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press ran an article headlined: “UN Official Predicts Disaster, Says Greenhouse Effect Could Wipe Some Nations Off Map.” In the piece, the director of the UN Environment Programme’s (UNEP) New York office was quoted as claiming that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” He also predicted “coastal flooding and crop failures” that “would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.” Of course, 2000 came and went, and none of those things actually happened. But that didn’t stop the warnings.

In 2005, the UNEP warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by AGW would lead to massive population disruptions. In a handy map, the organization highlighted areas that were supposed to be producing the most “climate refugees.” Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas. The 2005 UNEP predictions claimed that, by 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be fleeing those areas. However, not only did the areas in question fail to produce a single “climate refugee,” by 2010, population levels for those regions were still soaring. In many cases, the areas that were supposed to be producing waves of “climate refugees” and becoming uninhabitable turned out to be some of the fastest-growing places on Earth.

The more dire, the more extreme the prediction, the less likely it is to be true. Much as the climate activists WANT the climate to behave as they wish, the truth is that the climate is much less fragile and sensitive to airborn pollution than most of them think. That’s why the dire, doomsday predictions don’t come true… because the science isn’t settled, and they know less than they want us to believe they do.

I bring to your attention now the old story of the boy who cried wolf. It is a story that “Climate Change” activists and scientists are living right now. Every time they insist the science is settled, that man is driving climate change, and that this will result in [insert favorite disaster scenario here] by [date comfortably in future], we are treated to them crying wolf. This happens over and over and over again, with most or all of the dire predictions failing to materialize.

Remember that, 11 years ago, Al Gore predicted that without “drastic measures” the world would reach a “point of no return” in ten years, saying that it would be a true, planetary emergency. Last time I popped my head out the window, that hadn’t happened… and the “drastic measures” proposed in the US have all been opposed and stopped, to the best of my knowledge. So what went wrong? Al Gore went wrong.

How many times are we content to believe them because they claim the mantle of “science”, especially when we see their track record on accuracy? We are left to wonder why we should pay attention to more self-serving pronouncements of doom that will also fail to come true.

Why, indeed.

Read Part 4 and Part 5 when they are published.

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

"Hook-em' Horns" ...back by popular demand.

The Funniest True Story You'll Ever Read
Originally posted on FaceBook
Regarding the ‘hook-em’ horns gesture displayed by the fans at the University of Texas football game...s.
I suppose I could get right to the story but I like to present a little background information to make it more interesting. As you know, gestures are made by various people as an expression that has meaning in and of itself without saying a word, whereas the verbal equivalent may be to vulgar for some to utter aloud. Although all gestures are not necessarily negative such as the ‘OK’ sign represented by forming a circle with the index finger and thumb…or the ‘thumbs-up’ gesture which means all is good. But let’s get on to my story.
Some years ago while stationed on the island of Okinawa one soon learned that driving in another country was not the same as we experienced in the good ole U. S. of A. The island was overcrowded with cars so traffic was a big headache especially during commute hours. Local taxi drivers didn’t make pleasant gestures at you as they constantly cut in an out of traffic making a nuisance of themselves…more like irritating the hell out of other drivers obeying the driving rules.
Well after a year or so I finally asked our Okinawan secretary what we could do to irritate the taxi drivers. “Simple.”, she said, “Okinawans do not like being called ‘stupid dogs’.” So with the Japanese translation of ‘baka enu’ I was prepared for my next encounter. Sure enough on the way home that very day, I was cut off on three occasions by the same taxi driver. Wanting to let him know my displeasure I hollered out the window, “Baka enu!”… probably not enough room here to explain just how that affected the driver, but for brevity sake, he went bonkers!
Now fast forward ten years later… Here I find myself on another island only this one is in the Mediterranean. The island of Sicily is mountainous with scattered small towns with narrow streets. I lived up at the base of Mount Etna in a town called Belpasso. The main street heading down (or up) was narrow and in some places the buildings occupied the corner (no sidewalks) making it difficult to see on-coming cross traffic. Up and down traffic has the right of way…if you’re obeying the rules. Well some Sicilian drivers are worse than Okinawan taxi drivers. (Another story I won’t get into here…Sicilian drivers have been known to have a family re-union in the middle of the street!).
Like my Okinawan experience, I inquired what one could do to irritate the local insane drivers. I was quickly informed that I should just throw them the ‘hook-em’ horns gesture. Now the meaning in Sicilian (Italian) may not be as enthusiastic as a University of Texas football fan but I decided to go with it none the less.
Lo and behold, shortly thereafter I was headed home up the hill to my residence in Belpasso when a car suddenly came veering out of nowhere, around one of those blind corners, and if the car had another coat of paint, it would have careened into me. Now’s my chance! I said, and I threw the driver of the reckless car a healthy ‘hook-em’ horns as the driver sped away from me. Apparently seeing my gesture in his rearview mirror, he slammed on his breaks, spun around and proceeded to chase me down. Not wanting to let him have the privilege of the chase, I stopped and waited for him. Pulling up behind me, he jumped out of his car and came running toward me yelling something I’ve never heard any Italian ever scream, shout or mumble…they must be the curse words we are taught as a child to cover your ears when you hear them; no doubt, the guy was angry! Well I got out of my vehicle and as I did, the guy backed off, but continued with his barrage of verbal expletives (Apparently when he saw that I was almost twice his size, the opportunity for him to thrash the living daylights out of me subsided.).
The next day I had to inquire from the source of my newly found gesture; I asked him, “What the hell does that mean to a Sicilian?” He replied, “It’s telling him that you just made love to his mother and girlfriend and he doesn’t have the guts to do anything about it.

Monday, June 5, 2017

Climate Change..."We're right, they're wrong and that's the end of the story."

Climate Change ~ Norman E. Hooben

Why this is still an issue is mind boggling to say the least; you would think that after awhile the hoodwinked crowd would wake up and go quietly about their business for fear of being totally embarrassed to the nth degree.   There must be millions upon millions of us who knew it was a hoax by the globalists to rip us off financially as country and as an individual to be controlled by the politic elite.  So Trump gets us out of the Paris Climate Agreement (it was never a treaty) and everyone on the left starts screaming and hollering that the very act of getting out is going to cause people to die.  What a crock !!!  I should leave it there because we (I and millions of us have already said what needs to be said) but let me add one more thing.
Andrew Wilkow over at Satellite Radio (Channel 125) uses a maxim (a saying, an adage... whatever it's called) after many of his explanations that goes like this, "We're right, they're wrong and that's the end of the story."  And I dare anyone to prove Andrew wrong whenever he states the preceding which is now becoming somewhat of a trade-mark of his.  (On a side note, I personally think Andrew has the best radio talk-show out there...check 'em out sometime.)  When you read the following commentary I hope you're ready to join the chorus of millions and sing out loud, "We're right, they're wrong and that's the end of the story."

The following from: Independent Sentinel
EU Won’t Renegotiate Paris Treaty Proving It Was Never About Climate
The European Union has rejected Donald Trump’s offer to renegotiate the Paris Treaty, proving it was always about bleeding the U.S. dry and appointing globalists as our governing bodies.

The Paris climate agreement is written so as to be an endless drain on the U.S. economy. If they cared about the climate, they’d work with us. It doesn’t help that we have traitors within our own country.

The leftists in this country will be not be dissuaded.  A corrupt deal has been worked out with U.S. states and major corporations who will betray the President of the United States.

New York state and New York city, Pittsburgh, California, Washington, and Silicon Valley, among others have vowed to abide by the treaty that was never legally implemented by Barack Obama. The three states that signed up so far account for 25% of the U.S. GDP.

If the Paris treaty signatories can accept some of our states and municipalities, why can’t it be renegotiated? I guess it can be after all.

The treaty – which is recognized as a treaty by every other signatory – was never ratified by 2/3rds of the Senate. Former dictator Barack Obama ignored the Senate and simply called it an accord with the help of a complicit U.N.

The guardian reported that Angela Merkel, who is destroying her country’s sovereignty, said “nothing will stop us”; France’s Macron said he “respects this decision” but he thinks Trump made a “mistake for the U.S. and the planet”; and Theresa May of Britain is disappointed.

While 195 nations say they support the agreement, not all have signed and most, if not all will not abide by it if history is precedent. Most nations don’t have to do a thing for more than a decade. The U.S. bore the burden and now our own countrymen will betray us to the globalists.

The non-binding climate pact called for voluntary compliance which most, probably all nations won’t carry through.

The Paris signatories believe Trump will be ousted in 2020 and this is only a bump in the road. They will hold out until then as they wait for the ultimate goal of having the U.S. to transfer the wealth and resources earned and developed by Americans.

The Paris agreement included the Green Climate fund which is, as President Trump described, one of the scams that demanded an immediate $100 billion from the U.S. and would increase over time. That is in addition to the billions we already send overseas.

The treaty even has an Orwellian International Tribunal for Climate Justice which would quickly run roughshod over our Constitution.

Rachel Kyte, a leader in the financing of the global climate change initiative and an avowed leftist, spoke honestly last year at a Soros-Podesta funded conference at the New Republic, an extremely far-left online publication. She is planning for global governance by the U.N. members, governance which will be funded with hundreds of billions of dollars from the U.S. with side agreements to keep the money flowing in perpetuity, and finally, this new global government will manage the world’s economy and land use in the United States.

---Note: That last paragraph should be enough to scare the pants of Benjamin Franklin (One of America's first weathermen... he got the shock of a lifetime when he tried playing with the weather.) ~ Norm

Saturday, June 3, 2017

...its time they fought back !

Opening Statement by Norman E. Hooben
I think that by this point in time we could all agree that when the word 'Leftist' is used in any political narrative that the term is synonymous with 'Democrats'.  And in the minds of anyone on the right both terms denote a negative reflection of the discussion; if there is one!  Many, if not all, democrats lose sight of rational thought the longer a tête-à-tête or open discussion lingers on and they are the most persistent and loudest in the discourse...they never give in to reality (For example, they can never agree on the climate change issue; the climate has been changing since day one and will continue to change for ever and ever and anthropogenic causes are nil on the broader scale. See video for Climate Change skeptics at bottom of this page)  "The truth of the matter." quote is never considered...rather the lie is always promoted (see Lloyd Marcus' commentary below).  So as not to be biased in favor of Republicans I should point out that they too also lie especially in the leadership positions.  Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan gave former President Obama everything he asked for whereas he should have started impeachment proceedings on day one.  Now if you're wondering where I'm going with all this (Sometimes I wonder myself. LOL) I disassociate with Marcus' opening line that includes the words, "my fellow Republicans".  "Conservatives" ?, Yeah that's OK.   I would rather it be a nation of Americans with one political mindset and that is a Republican form of government as outlined in the Constitution 'For' the United States.  The political party known as 'Republicans' do not at this point in history subscribe to that ideal.  I stand by President John Adams when he said, " There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."
Whether you associate with Democrats or Republicans if you have not discovered that you are now the greatest political evil under our Constitution maybe it's time you woke up to reality...Conservatives on the other hand comes closest to Adams ideology and its time they fought back.

Finally, Conservatives Are Fighting Back!
Submitted by
By: Lloyd Marcus

For years, I have been extremely frustrated with my fellow Republicans and Conservatives allowing Leftists/Democrats to dictate how we’re allowed to fight for our ideas. Meanwhile, Leftists/Democrats can promote whatever violence inciting lie they deem necessary. Remarkably, despite overwhelming evidence proving otherwise, Leftists are still promoting the lie that black criminal Michael Brown was gunned down by a white racist cop while surrendering with his hands up.
Leftists can say and do disgusting things publicly in front of innocent children outrageously decreed by fake news media to have the moral high ground.
Here are just a few examples of what I am talking about. On Trump’s Inauguration Day at the anti-Trump Women’s March in DC, thousands wore what they crudely called p***y hats. From the podium, in a gross way, Ashley Judd spoke of menstrual blood and women’s private issues. My late mom would have been shocked and extremely embarrassed. Madonna boldly proclaimed her desire to blow up the White House. Fakes news media would have demanded the immediate prosecution of a tea party person saying the same.
In 2010, over a million Tea Party Americans gathered in Washington DC to oppose Obamacare. The peaceful polite crowd left the place cleaner than they found it. Fake news media despicably told our country it was a mob of haters against their black president. Leftists routinely trash the cites of their rallies.
Democrats countered the Tea Party with their own fake spontaneous movement called Occupy Wall Street. The assorted groups of anti-American fruits and nuts in attendance were highly praised by Democrats and fake news media. They were allowed to break the law; leaving mountains of trash and committing crimes which included rapes. Occupy Wall Street operatives disgustingly dumped a bucket of feces into the lobby of a public building.
With no rebuke from fake news media, Black Lives Matter protesters marched down a New York street chanting. “What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want them? Now!!!”
Recently, the California Democrat Chair instructed his audience, “All together now, f*ck Donald Trump!”
As a black Tea Party activist who has participated in over 500 Tea Party rallies, never have I witnessed such language toward President Obama.
Rush Limbaugh created a fake news media firestorm and was deemed a traitor when he courageously said because he loves his country he hoped Obama’s mission to transform America failed. And yet, fake news media celebrates the Democrats’ “Resistance Summer” movement against Trump. Is it a stretch to say that Leftists openly attempting to block Trump’s efforts to make America great again is an act of treason?
Vile Leftist activist Kathy Griffin published a disgusting photo of her holding the bloody beheaded head of President Trump. Imagine the tsunami of fake news media outrage had a Tea Party person published such a photo holding Obama’s bloody head.
Rabid Leftist Trump hater and TV host Bill Maher made mean-spirited incest jokes about Donald and Ivanka Trump. Again, imagine the furious anger and dire consequences had a conservative made such jokes about Obama and his daughters.
Do you see the pattern folks? Leftists lay down all kinds of rules for us, while they are allowed to behave without laws or rules of human decency.
Leftists’ ultimate goal is to silence all opposition to their mission to transform America. Emboldened by their successful removal of big-fish Bill O’Reilly from Fox News, Leftists are going after powerful conservative TV and radio host Sean Hannity.
Thank God, finally, conservatives are waking up and fighting back. Brian Maloney and Melanie Morgan have declared it time to stop the scalpings, launching “Operation Fight Fire With Fire.” I love it! Atop their list of extreme Leftists to push back against their lies is Rachel Maddow. Folks, I know you join me in thinking, “It’s about time!”
Candidly, I am still basking in the after glow of Trump’s election, thanking and praising God for delivering us from the edge of losing our country had Hillary won. But, we must stay engaged in the battle to preserve our victory. Freedom ain’t free folks. Enraged Leftists have cranked up their no-holds-barred opposition to Trump setting us free from Obama’s legacy to unprecedented levels. Even treason against their country is deemed an acceptable tactic to remove Trump from office to resume Obama’s transformation of America.
As God gives me strength, that ain’t happenin’ on my watch.
Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American
Author: “Confessions of a Black Conservative: How the Left has shattered the dreams of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Black America.”
Singer/Songwriter and Conservative Activist

I'm so glad I  found the following video...
Many of my friends and associates had reservations about my assertions (By the way, I said this over ten years ago!) that busloads of protestors are bussed in from other locations by the globalist billionaires such as George Soros.  I also stated that these buses are used to transfer interstate voters such as the voters that voted for Hillary Clinton multiple times...but that's another story.  Note also that this video was made while Obama was still in the White House.

Another great find...
Would you give up your political affiliation if you knew the truth?  Click on the following link.
The following is for Climate Change skeptics:

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Why isn't Hillary Clinton in jail? ...don't expect an answer here!

In light of all the talk about Russian interference with the American election process there's altogether too much evidence that Hillary Clinton is guilty on a number of counts and most, if not all, of the accusations against the Trump Administration are elements of the crimes committed by the Obama Administration...a reverse psychology if you will (Inject/replace an Alinskyism here!).  Now any self-respecting advocate of Hillary Clinton will most likely not have read this far for they have a one-track mindset and couldn't care less if Hillary is guilty or was simply her turn and she is a woman thus she deserved to be president whereas any ordinary citizen would deserve jail.  Aside from all the evidence depicted in the following video that should have convicted Hillary Clinton it says volumes about the corrupt nature of the entire Obama Administration including FBI Director Comey... Does he make a fool of himself ?  Rational thought would be in the affirmative; he's not only a fool but a criminal to boot!  Now I didn't put this video up for a two-minute 'look-see', it should be watched/listened to in its entirety and if you're honest with yourself regardless of political affiliation any rational person would slam the guilty gavel through the wood...just don't damage my desk. ~ Norman E. Hooben



Wednesday, May 31, 2017

Elizabeth Warren exposes her difficulty in answering simple questions...

Apparently the words, "Yes" and "No" are not in her vocabulary. If she can't answer a simple question God forgive she gets asked a difficult question like, "Shall you use the nuclear option, yes or no? 

Monday, May 29, 2017

The "real" Soviet informant(s)

The "real" Soviet informant(s) ...
If you ask me it's Obama and company.  I've always thought Brennan was a traitor from the first time I laid eyes on him.  Over the years I've been proven 99.9% correct. ~ Norman E. Hooben

Above provided by Norman E. Hooben
Pretty accurate description if you ask me!
WATCH: Obama’s CIA Chief Says It’s 'Routine' for USA and Russia to Share Intel
posted by Staff

Obama’s former CIA chief continued to douse cold water on liberals determined to find evidence of collusion between the White House and the Kremlin, telling lawmakers that the USA and Russia routinely share intelligence.
Speaking to the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, John Brennan told disappointed democrats that intelligence agencies in the United States and Russia commonly share security information and intel; particularly regarding terrorism.
“First point I’d like to make is that I shared classified information with the Russians while I was director of the CIA. The CIA on a routine basis shares classified information with Russians on terrorism matters,” he told Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff.
“It doesn’t mean that it becomes unclassified, it means that it retains the classification but it is releasable then to Russia and other partners. So that in itself is not unprecedented," he added.
Democrats and liberals are hoping Brennan’s testimony to Congress will reveal a ‘smoking gun’ that ties the President to the Russian government; so far it has not gone according to plan.
Earlier in the day, the former CIA chief squashed leftist accusations that the President pressured members of the intelligence community to “drop” their investigation of Michael Flynn. When asked if he had any knowledge of the allegations made against President Trump, he firmly responded, “No Sir.”
Related Article: WATCH: Former CIA Chief Squashes Accusations Trump Tried to Shut Down Investigation