Judge Andrew Napolitano: Did Trump change his mind on domestic spying?

Late last week, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, repeated his public observations that members of the intelligence community -- particularly the CIA, the NSA and the intelligence division of the FBI -- are not trustworthy with the nation’s intelligence secrets. Because he has a security clearance at the "top secret" level and knows how others who have access to secrets have used and abused them, his allegations are extraordinary.

He pointed to the high-ranking members of the Obama administration who engaged in unmasking the names of some people whose communications had been captured by the country’s domestic spies and the revelation of those names for political purposes. The most notable victim of this lawlessness is retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, a transcript of whose surveilled conversation with then-Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak found its way into print in The Washington Post.

During the George W. Bush and Barack Obama years, captured communications -- digital recordings of telephone conversations and copies of emails and text messages -- did not bear the names of those who sent or received them. Those names were stored in a secret file. The revelation of those names is called unmasking.
Nunes also condemned the overt pro-Hillary Clinton bias and anti-Trump prejudice manifested by former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former FBI Director James Comey and their agents in the field, some of whose texts and emails we have seen. The secrets that he argued were used for political purposes had been obtained by the National Security Agency pursuant to warrants issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Yet Nunes voted to enhance federal bulk surveillance powers.
Bulk surveillance -- which is prohibited by the Constitution -- is the acquisition of digital versions of telephone, email and text communications based not on suspicion or probable cause but rather on geography or customer status. As I have written before, one publicly available bulk surveillance warrant was for all Verizon customers in the United States; that’s 115 million people, many of whom have more than one phone and at least one computer. And it is surveillance of Americans, not foreigners as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act contemplates.
How did this happen?
It happened in the dark. The NSA has persuaded the FISC, which meets in secret and only hears the government’s arguments, to permit it to spy on any American it wishes on the theory that all Americans know someone who knows someone else who knows someone who could have spoken to a foreign person working for a foreign government that could wish us ill.
This is the so-called judicial logic used to justify the search warrant on all of Verizon’s customers. This is what happens when judges hear only one side of a dispute and do so in secret.
The FISA amendments for which Nunes and other House members voted, which are likely to pass in the Senate, would purport to make bulk surveillance on all Americans lawful. At present, it is lawful only because the FISC has authorized it. The FISA amendments would write this into federal legislation for the next six years.
And these amendments would permit the FBI and any American prosecutor or law enforcement agency -- federal, state or local -- to sweep into the NSA’s databases, ostensibly looking for evidence of crime. If this were to become law, there would no longer be any unmasking scandals, because the stored data contains the names of the participants in the communications and would be readily available for harassment, blackmail or political use.
It would also mean that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution -- which guarantees privacy in our persons, houses, papers and effects -- would have been gutted by the very officeholders who swore an oath to preserve, protect and defend it.
Does the American public know this? Does the president?
Last week, I made an impassioned plea on Fox News Channel directly to the president. I reminded him that he personally has been victimized by unlawful surveillance and the political use of sensitive surveillance-captured data; that the Constitution requires warrants for surveillance and they must specifically describe the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized; that warrants must be based on probable cause of individual behavior, not an area code or customer list; that the purpose of these requirements is to preserve personal privacy and prohibit bulk surveillance; and that he took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
About an hour later, the president issued a tweet blasting bulk surveillance and unmasking. Two hours after that, he issued another tweet supporting the enactment of the FISA amendments.
What’s going on here?
I suspect that leaders in the intelligence community hurriedly convinced the president that if he sets aside his personal unhappy experiences with them and any constitutional qualms, they will use the carte blanche in the FISA amendments to keep us safe. This is a sad state of affairs. It means that Donald Trump changed his mind 180 degrees on the primacy of personal liberty in our once-free society.
The elites in the federal government and the deep state -- the parts of the government that are unauthorized by the Constitution and that operate in the dark, what candidate Trump called “the swamp” -- have formed a consensus that marches the might of the government toward total Orwellian surveillance.
This is a march that will be nearly impossible to stop. This is the permanent destruction of the right to privacy. This is the exaltation of safety over liberty, and it will lead to neither. This is the undoing of limited government, right before our eyes.

President Trump reveals winners of his ‘Fake News’ awards

President Trump revealed the winners of his self-proclaimed ‘Fake News’ awards Wednesday night on Twitter -- with The New York Times topping the list.

CNN also came out as a “winner,” with the left-leaning news network making the list four times.

The list, published on GOP.com, noted that “studies have shown that over 90% of the media’s coverage of President Trump is negative.” It went on to call 2017 “a year of unrelenting bias, unfair news coverage and even downright fake news.”
Coming in first place was The New York Times’ Paul Krugman for his prediction that the stock markets would never recover from Trump’s election.
In a bit of irony, the Dow Jones industrial average closed above 26,000 for the first time on Wednesday.
The Times was followed by ABC News’ Brian Ross for his botched report that Trump advised former National Security advisor Michael Flynn to make contact with Russian officials during the 2016 campaign.
The list pointed to a false CNN report that Trump had early access to “hacked documents” from Wikileaks, a video that suggested Trump overfed fish in a visit with the Japanese prime minister and a report that former FBI Director James Comey would deny saying Trump was told he was not under investigation.
The Times appeared on the list again for a false report that the Trump administration hid a report on climate change.
Newsweek sent a tweet out Wednesday evening acknowledging its “award.”
The final “winner” on the list, as Trump described it: “And last, but not least: 'RUSSIA COLLUSION!' Russian collusion is perhaps the greatest hoax perpetrated on the American people. THERE IS NO COLLUSION!”
The website carrying the results of the “Fake News Awards” crashed because it was flooded with visitors after Trump tweeted out the link.
Without naming anyone, Trump also tweeted out his praise for the “many great reporters.”
He continued, “Despite some very corrupt and dishonest media coverage, there are many great reporters I respect and lots of GOOD NEWS for the American people to be proud of!”
Below is the full list of winners of the 2017 Fake News Awards.
1)     The New York Times’ Paul Krugman claiming markets would ‘never’ recover from a Trump presidency
2)     ABC News' Brian Ross’ bungled report on former national security adviser Michael Flynn
3)     CNN falsely reporting the Trump campaign had early access to hacked documents from WikiLeaks
4)     TIME report that Trump removed a bust of Martin Luther King, Jr. from the Oval Office
5)     The Washington Post’s Dave Weigel tweeting that Trump’s December rally in Pensacola, Florida, wasn’t packed with supporters
6)     CNN’s video suggesting Trump overfed fish during a visit with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
7)     CNN’s retracted report claiming Anthony Scaramucci-Russia ties
8)     Newsweek report that Polish First Lady Agata Kornhauser-Duda did not shake Trump’s hand
9)     CNN report that former FBI Director James Comey would dispute President Trump’s claim he was told he was not under investigation
10)  The New York Times report that the Trump administration had hidden a climate-change study
11)  In Trump’s words, "‘RUSSIA COLLUSION!’ Russian collusion is perhaps the greatest hoax perpetrated on the American people. THERE IS NO COLLUSION!”

California Illegal Alien Cartoons

ICE plans major sweep in California, report says

Trump has repeatedly clashed with California over sanctuary laws, which he argues inhibit his ability to restrict immigration.

Federal officials are planning a major sweep of the Bay Area and other Northern California areas in the coming weeks as part of an operation to target more than 1,500 undocumented immigrants in the area, The San Francisco Chronicle reported, citing a source familiar with the matter.

The source told The Chronicle that the sweep is expected to be the largest of its kind since President Trump took office.ICE officials declined to comment on the operation, the paper reported.

Upon hearing about the planned the operation Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., accused the Trump administration of trying to make a political point.
California has clashed with law enforcement over immigration enforcement for a number of years. In October, California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB54 into law, which effectively limits local police from cooperating with federal authorities.
Trump has repeatedly expressed frustration that such laws encourage immigrants to not cooperate with local law enforcement and inhibit his goal of enforcing immigration laws.
In October, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed SB54 into law, which effectively limits local police from cooperating with federal authorities.
One of the stipulations of the law is that it denies federal officials the ability to detain illegal immigrants who have been placed in local jails.
ICE officials have warned that such standards would force the agency to arrest undocumented immigrants in the communities that hold such policies.
Thomas Homan, the acting ICE director, maintained that SB54 “threatened public safety,” and that under such circumstances, the federal government would be forced to conduct massive arrests in the communities that hold such policies.  

DOJ to appeal San Fran DACA ruling, will ask Supreme Court to end program

The Justice Department on Tuesday said it plans to appeal a lower-court ruling that blocked the Trump administration from ending an Obama-era program aimed at shielding immigrants brought to the U.S. illegally as children from deportation.

In a separate release, the Justice Department said it will also seek a review by the U.S. Supreme Court –even before a ruling from the appeals court.

Last week, a San Francisco-based federal judge blocked the Trump administration from reversing the Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals program, which has shielded more than 700,000 people from deportation since its inception.
“It defies both law and common sense for DACA—an entirely discretionary non-enforcement policy that was implemented unilaterally by the last administration after Congress rejected similar legislative proposals and courts invalidated the similar DAPA policy – to somehow be mandated nationwide by a single district court in San Francisco,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in a statement Tuesday.
Sessions added that the Justice Department would also be “taking the rare step of requesting review on the merits of this injunction by the Supreme Court so that this issue may be resolved quickly and fairly for all the parties involved.”
The president has been vocal on the San Francisco ruling, tweeting just hours after the announcement that America’s court system is “broken” and “unfair.”
“It just shows everyone how broken and unfair our Court system is when the opposing side in a case (such as DACA) always runs to the 9^th Circuit and almost always wins before being reversed by higher courts,” President Trump tweeted.
In September, Trump ended DACA, which had been in place since 2012.
The president is currently negotiating with lawmakers over comprehensive immigration reform, which would include his campaign promise of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, while Democrats are pushing to protect immigrants under DACA.

Trump cites federal report on foreign-born terrorists to urge immigration reform

President Donald Trump on Tuesday used a new report from the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security — revealing that nearly three out of four individuals convicted on international terrorism charges in the U.S. were foreign-born — to call for immigration reform.

The DHS and DOJ released the report  to “be more transparent with the American people,” abiding by the guidelines of Trump’s March 6 executive order, more commonly known as the travel ban. 

According to the report, at least 549 people were convicted of international terrorism-related charges in the U.S. between September 11, 2001 and December 31, 2016. Of those convicted, 254 were not U.S. citizens, 148 were foreign-born and received citizenship and 147 were citizens by birth.
It also noted that the DHS in 2017 denied U.S. entry to 2,554 people on the terror watch list.
Trump reacted to the report by tweeting: “We have submitted to Congress a list of resources and reforms we need to keep America safe, including moving away from a random chain migration and lottery system, to one that is merit-based.”

....we need to keep America safe, including moving away from a random chain migration and lottery system, to one that is merit-based. https://t.co/7PtoSFK1n2

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 16, 2018

The president has made it clear in recent meetings on immigration with lawmakers from both parties that he wants to end the visa lottery program, aimed at increasing immigrant diversity, and chain migration, when immigrants enter the U.S. through sponsorship from family members already settled in the country.

I am calling on Congress to TERMINATE the diversity visa lottery program that presents significant vulnerabilities to our national security. pic.twitter.com/tW4wOlI4vu

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 2, 2017

The report also found that from October 1, 2011 to September 30, 355,345 non-U.S. citizens were arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for the purpose of deportation after being convicted of an “aggravated felony” or two or more felony offenses. In addition, 370,098 non-U.S. citizens were deported for the same offenses during that time period.
A senior administration official said Tuesday that the report “is part of the administration’s efforts to illuminate basic statistics that should be at the hands of the American people to inform public discourse on the issue,” The Hill reported.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions reacted to the report on Fox News' "Tucker Carlson Tonight" Tuesday.
"We have immigration, we want immigration, but we want to vet these people," Sessions said. "We want to know who they are and make sure they're going to be productive people, people who will flourish in America, who are going to not be terrorists, not be criminals and that’s exactly correct for America."
Sessions added that the U.S. should "tighten up on our admission of people from dangerous areas of the globe, where we can’t vet, where we have high numbers of terrorists that live in those areas. We should certainly be more careful and limit that kind of immigration."

Arrested ex-CIA officer suspected of compromising US informants in China: report

The former CIA officer arrested Monday for unlawfully retaining classified information may have helped China execute or imprison several U.S. informants, according to The Wall Street Journal, citing U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

Jerry Chun Shing Lee, 53, unlawfully possessed top secret information whose disclosure could cause “exceptionally grave damage to the National Security of the United States,” the FBI wrote in the affidavit supporting his arrest.

Lee, whose security clearance was terminated when he left the CIA in 2007, improperly retained books containing “true names and phone numbers of assets and covert CIA employees,” the affidavit read.
The New York Times was the first to report that U.S. officials believe that Lee may have played a key role in outing US informants working in China, who started to go dark in 2010.
One of those officials was shot to death in front of coworkers in the courtyard of a Chinese government building, as a clear warning to other potential traitors, according to sources cited by The Times.
The paper cited sources who said Lee, who began working for the CIA in 1994, left because he was unhappy at his career progression there.
Between 18 and 20 key CIA sources in China were systematically jailed or killed from 2010 to 2012, in what US officials described as one of the worst intelligence failures in decades, according to the Times.
The losses were reportedly reminiscent of the significant damage caused by rogue agents Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, who became Russian spies.
The FBI said that its inquiry, which began in 2012, involved luring Lee back to the U.S. and searching his hotel rooms in Hawaii and Virginia.
As evidence mounted, the FBI interviewed Lee several times in 2013.
Lee never mentioned possessing classified information during those interviews, according to the arrest affidavit.
It is unclear whether Lee will be charged in the informants' deaths.

Fake News Cartoons

French Pres. Calls for Law Against Fake News, Spurs Free Speech Fears

France’s President Emmanuel Macron is ordering a law to foil efforts to disseminate false information during electoral campaigns.
In a New Years speech to journalists, Macron said he is ordering a new “legal arsenal” whereby news outlets must reveal their owners and where their money comes from.
The new law could see a cap on money to produce content, and allow emergency actions to block websites.
French regulators could suspend media controlled or influenced by foreign powers.
Russian outlets like RT and Sputnik, whose coverage was seen as favoring Conservative candidate Marine Le Pen, could be censored.
Media freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders is also watching.

Secretary General of Reporters without Borders Christophe Deloire talks to the Associated Press in Paris, Tuesday, Jan. 9, 2018. French President Emmanuel Macron’s plan for a law against false information around election campaigns is drawing criticism from media advocates, tech experts and others. They say it’s impossible to enforce and smacks of methods used by authoritarians, not democracies. (AP Photo/Francois Mori)

“We are not opposed to the principle of a law against fake news, but the point is to be able to write a law without endangering the freedom to reveal things about political, social, and economical life,” said Christophe Deloire, Secretary General for Reporters Without Borders.
Some fear banning fake news will backfire on human rights grounds, because there is no legal definition on the term.
Government shutdowns of websites may also have unintended effects, such as satirists and journalists being accidentally targeted.

North Korea Fires Back After South Korean President Thanks U.S.

North Korea suggested it may not be sending athletes to compete in the Winter Olympics after all.
Last week, there was a sign of optimism amid the North Korean nuclear crisis after much anticipated talks between the north and south.

In this photo provided by South Korea Unification Ministry, the head of South Korean delegation Lee Woo-sung, right, and the head of North Korean delegation Kwon Hyok Bong, left, exchange documents at the North side of Panmunjom in North Korea, Monday, Jan. 15, 2018. North Korea’s delegation to the Winter Olympics in South Korea will include a 140-member orchestra, the two sides agreed Monday, while discussions continue over fielding a joint women’s hockey team. (South Korea Unification Ministry via AP)

“I think President Trump deserves big credit for bringing the inter-Korean talks,” stated South Korea President Moon Jae-in.
However, following the comments thanking President Trump for bringing the north to the negotiating table, the rogue regime is now back on the attack.
Through its state-run news outlet, North Korea called Moon’s ‘thank you’ a sordid act, adding it casts doubt on the future relationship between the two countries.
The broadcaster went on to threaten the regime’s exit from the Olympics, saying the train destined to carry the country’s delegation to the games hasn’t yet departed.
The two sides had earlier released a joint statement promising to hold a new round of talks, and officials were hopeful on the progress being made.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in answers reporters’ question during his New Year news conference at the Presidential Blue House in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 10, 2018. Moon said Wednesday he’s open to meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un if certain conditions are met, as he vowed to push for more talks with the North to resolve the nuclear standoff. (Kim Hong-Ji/Pool Photo via AP)

President Trump was also optimistic after speaking on the phone with President Moon last week.
North Korea’s leader Kim Jong Un has yet to speak out on the latest controversy surrounding his regime.

Bannon faces grilling on Russia

Former White House chief strategist and ex-Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon will testify before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday as part of its Russia probe, in what will be his first appearance on Capitol Hill since the Michael Wolff book firestorm.

Bannon, who stepped down as executive chairman of Breitbart News last week following a dramatic falling out with the president over Wolff’s anti-Trump book, “Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House,” will be interviewed behind closed doors by congressional investigators probing Russian meddling and potential collusion with Trump campaign associates during the 2016 presidential election.

A source close to the committee told Fox News that Bannon would likely be questioned over information in Wolff’s book.
In the book, Bannon slams the president’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., son-in-law Jared Kushner and campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Bannon called their infamous June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya during the campaign “treasonous” and “unpatriotic.”

Former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon will testify behind closed doors Tuesday as part of the House Intelligence Committee's Russia probe.  (AP)

RUSSIAN LOBBYIST, UNNAMED TRANSLATOR ATTENDED TRUMP TOWER MEETING WITH RUSSIAN LAWYER
“Even if you thought that was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad s**t, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately,” Bannon said in the book.
Bannon also said Trump Jr. would “crack like an egg” in any possible public testimony about the situation.
RUSSIAN LAWYER WHO MET TRUMP JR.: 'I WOULD HAVE' CONTACTED CLINTON, TOO, IF SHE COULD HELP 
Trump Jr. fired back on Twitter, calling Bannon an “opportunist” who brought “a nightmare of backstabbing, harassing, leaking [and] lying” to the White House.
Bannon, who left his post at the White House in August, was a dominant figure in the novel -- which enraged the president enough to have his personal attorneys demand the publisher halt the book’s publication -- a request that was ultimately rejected. The lawyers also sent a “cease and desist” notice to Bannon, arguing he violated a non-disclosure agreement signed during the campaign by disclosing confidential information in speaking to the media about the campaign, and disparaging members of the Trump family.
The president issued a multi-paragraph blistering takedown of “sloppy Steve” Bannon, after excerpts released early revealed the information in the Wolff book.
“Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency,” Trump said in the statement. “When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.”
STEVE BANNON STEPS DOWN AS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN OF BREITBART NEWS 
Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski also is expected to testify this week before the House Intelligence Committee.

Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski is expected to testify before the House Intelligence Committee mid-week.  (Reuters)

“I have nothing to hide. I didn’t collude or cooperate or coordinate with any Russian, Russian agency, Russian government or anybody else, to try and impact this election,” Lewandowski said on WABC’s “The Rita Cosby Show.” “I’ll be happy to come out and set the record straight about my lack of involvement with any type of foreign entity.”
Lewandowski was replaced by Manafort in June 2016 ahead of the Republican National Convention. Manafort has been indicted on money laundering charges as part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.
The former top Trump campaign officials are testifying before the committee, as Democrats, like committee Ranking Member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., claimed that Republicans would prematurely “shut down” the investigation.
“It appears Republicans want to conduct just enough interviews to give the impression of a serious investigation,” Schiff said last month.
A source close to the committee’s majority told Fox News that it was “funny” that Schiff has accused Republicans of “prematurely ending the investigation at the behest of Trump and Bannon.”
“New witnesses are still being interviewed,” the source told Fox News Monday. “It’s almost as if Schiff prematurely launched this critique, whose purpose is to provide an excuse for why Democrats, after a full year of investigating, can’t prove any of the collusion allegations they’ve been making.”
Schiff has called for at least a dozen more witnesses to testify before the committee, including Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner.

Is DACA deal headed for disaster?

Will there be a DACA deal?

My sense is that both sides want one—but the chances are increasingly slim.

The Democrats may be less inclined to cooperate now that President Trump is on the defensive after global media criticism that he assailed "s---hole countries"—although the Washington Post, National Review’s Rich Lowry and others say aides are now insisting that the president said "s---house countries." Hole or house is a distinction without a difference, in my view.
The uproar prompted the president to tell reporters Sunday that "nah, I'm not a racist. I'm the least racist person you have ever interviewed, that I can tell you."
Trump also played down the notion of a DACA compromise, saying, "Honestly, I don't think the Democrats want to make a deal."
Democratic lawmakers want to save nearly 800,000 dreamers from deportation, but they’re not wild about pouring billions into Trump's border wall and taking other steps he's demanding on immigration.
Given the rhetoric from Dick Durbin and others that Trump was espousing racist views when he said he didn't want more immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador and Africa as opposed to Norway, the Democrats are less inclined to give ground. (Yes, this has gotten tied up with Friday’s government-shutdown deadline, but nobody thinks that will actually happen.)
And Trump got strong blowback from his base, before the "s" hit the fan, for his willingness to cut a deal on the dreamers. Conservative commentators, led by Ann Coulter, called his stance a betrayal and complained about "amnesty."
The White House initially chose not to deny the Washington Post report that Trump had said "s---hole." The president later said he had used "tough" language but not that exact word, and now the administration has moved to a more forceful denial. Durbin says Trump used the word several times, Republican lawmakers either dispute it or say they didn't hear it, but Lindsey Graham did admonish the president for his wording during the White House meeting.
Trump yesterday tweeted a whack at the Senate Democratic whip, who earned a dimunitive nickname:
"Senator Dicky Durbin totally misrepresented what was said at the DACA meeting. Deals can't get made when there is no trust! Durbin blew DACA and is hurting our Military."
Any immigration compromise was always going to be tough, given the raw emotions surrounding the issue. That's why both George W. Bush and Barack Obama failed to pass immigration reform, leading to Obama's executive order shielding the dreamers.
As Rand Paul said on "Meet the Press": "Both sides now are destroying the setting in which anything meaningful can happen."
We seem to be back at Washington's default setting, where gridlock rules and compromise is eternally elusive. The essence of a political deal is that each side accepts something it doesn't want—tougher border security and immigration limits versus leniency for those brought here illegally as kids—to obtain important benefits.
But emotions are running so high—against Trump, against Democratic leaders, about immigration itself—that the good will needed to do such deals seems to be evaporating.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author of five books and is based in Washington. Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz. 

NFL Kneeling Cartoons

What if NBC and the NFL had the guts to be honest about anthem protests at the Super Bowl?

NBC Sports executive producer Fred Gaudelli says NBC’s cameras will show any players who chose to kneel during the “The Star-Spangled Banner” when the network airs Super Bowl LII on Feb. 4.

“The Super Bowl is a live event, just like ‘Sunday Night Football.’ When you’re covering a live event, you’re covering what’s happening,” said Gaudelli. “So if there are players that choose to kneel, they will be shown live.”

That at first feels like a defendable point of view. They are taking the journalist’s free pass as observers, not participants. The problem is that stance is a lie.
The Super Bowl is American theatre. It is perhaps the most orchestrated live event that takes place in the U.S. today. It is designed, carefully framed, its halftime show meticulously planned and the placement of its ads, which have become key accouterments to the show, are choreographed down to the second. All that surrounds the game is such a pre-written play that even the “fans” who cheer the bands on the field at halftime all have the same wave, the same color clothes or whatever fits the performance.
The Super Bowl is not just some live event journalists are watching. It is a composed affair designed to make us feel a certain way, even to buy certain products—the central product being the NFL.
And that brand has been tarnished. Not simply harmed by the protest Colin Kaepernick began and the NFL players after him who’ve kneeled during our national anthem have continued, but fundamentally damaged by a lack of honesty from the NFL and from many of the networks that broadcast NFL games.

With no check on the players who disrespect the flag, the players who kneel are treated as civil-rights activists—heroes in our culture. Meanwhile, the point of view that the good, ol’ red, white and blue is a symbol of what is best in America, not something to protest, isn’t given a voice.

If NBC focuses a camera in on players who choose not to respect the flag and all it stands for before the big game then they aren’t just showing what happens at a live event, but are making the protest a part of their choreographed show. Might they also, during the anthem, show a group of fans holding signs saying “God Bless America”?
This is at the heart of why fans are turning away from the NFL. It isn’t really because a few players are making this game political. It is rather because in today’s political climate the NFL nor the broadcasters have the guts to challenge these players and to ask them to explain what they are protesting. The NFL and NBC refuse to publicly question if this is really the proper way to protest.
With no check on the players who disrespect the flag, and all it stands for, the players who opt to kneel are instead treated as civil-rights activists—heroes in our culture. Meanwhile, the point of view that the good, ol’ red, white and blue is a symbol of what is best in America, not something to protest, isn’t given a voice.
This is what sportscaster Al Michaels did during a panel at the Television Critics Association winter press tour when he addressed the point that attendance at games has suffered as a result when he said, “There are a lot of empty seats, especially in the beginning of the second half. Most of the seats in most of the stadiums have been sold, but you go to Atlanta, where they just opened up a new stadium. They have behind the lower bowl a 100 yard almost mall. You’ve got stores, you’ve got bars, you’ve got restaurants, you’ve got games for the kids.”
The NFL also attempted to avoid an honest debate when they tried to crassly buy off the controversy by saying they would donate millions of dollars to the United Negro College Fund and Dream Corps.
The NFL is a private organization that can put its money where it wants, but donations aren’t a real answer.
Gaudelli said that if some players kneel during the anthem that the commentators Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth would probably identify the players, say a little about the protests “and then get on with the game.”
That would be a whitewash, which isn’t fair to the players kneeling or standing or the millions and millions of fans. This discussion should honestly take place on news broadcasts where the players and others can talk openly about this as they have their opinions challenged. Trying to do this with a few sentences before the big game is out of Michaels’ and Collinsworth’s expertise and has no place in what is supposed to be a nonpartisan event designed to bring us all together.
The game should be above politics.
Frank Miniter is author of "The Future of the Gun" & "The Ultimate Man’s Survival Guide". His latest book is, is "Kill Big Brother", a cyber-thriller that shows how to balance freedom with security without diminishing the U.S. Bill of Rights.

Pelosi slams company bonuses as 'crumbs' despite once praising $40 tax cut

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday slammed President Trump’s tax reform that led to companies giving as large as $2,000 bonuses as “crumbs,” despite praising Obama-era $40 tax cut to workers as a “victory for America” in 2011.

Following the passage of sweeping tax cuts, including lowering the corporate tax from 35 percent to 21 percent, multiple companies have given out bonuses and pay rises for its workers amid anticipating tax savings.

Companies such as AT&T have given $1,000 bonuses to 200,000 employees while at least 60,000 workers at Fiat/ Chrysler received bonuses worth up to $2,000.
“In terms of the bonus that corporate America received versus the crumbs that they are giving to workers to kind of put the schmooze on — it’s so pathetic,” she told reporters Thursday. “I think it’s insignificant.”
Back in 2011, however, Pelosi was singing a different tune – praising a $40 payroll tax cut passed by President Obama as “a victory for all Americans” that will “make a difference.”
“The American people spoke out clearly and, thanks to President Obama’s leadership, 160 million Americans will continue to receive their payroll tax cut – nearly $40 per paycheck in the pockets of the average family,” she said at the time. “I salute the work of the unified House Democratic caucus on behalf of the American people.”
According to Saving.org’s inflation calculator, $40 in 2011 is equal to $44.06 in today’s dollars.
At least two million U.S. workers received bonuses, pay rises and other perks from at least 130 companies, The Washington Times reported. Most of these companies point to the Trump tax plan as the impetus.

Judge's DACA ruling seen by some legal scholars as problematic, report says

The judge who barred the Trump administration from turning back the Obama-era DACA program last week has some legal scholars concerned that the ruling could damage the notion of an impartial bench.

The New York Times reported Sunday that Judge William Alsup, the federal judge from the Northern District of California, used a local case before issuing the nationwide stop.

“How can a single judge decide a question for the whole country?” Samuel Bray, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, asked the paper.
Bray wrote a recent article where he spoke out against federal judges issuing nationwide injunctions, the paper reported.
“Increasingly, legal scholars are concerned about the way national injunctions are transforming the relationship between the courts and the political branches,” he said.
Alsup wrote that it is “plausible” that President Trump ended the program for racial reasons, Politico reported.
"Circumstantial evidence of intent, including statements by a decisionmaker, may be considered in evaluating whether government action was motivated by a discriminatory purpose," Alsup wrote on Friday. "These statements were not about the rescission (which came later) but they still have relevance to show racial animus against people south of our border."
DACA, or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, has protected about 800,000 people who were brought to the U.S. illegally as children or came with families who overstayed visas. The program includes hundreds of thousands of college-age students.
White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement Wednesday that the ruling was “outrageous, especially in light of the president’s successful bipartisan meeting with House and Senate members at the White House on the same day.”
The Times' report said the U.S. Supreme Court might address the issue of these injunctions.
Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston, told the paper, “The justices don’t like the district courts changing national policy overnight.”

Flake's upcoming speech compares Trump's criticism of media to Stalin, report says

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., will make a speech scheduled for Wednesday where he will compare President Trump’s concerns of media objectivity to similar comments made by communist dictator Joseph Stalin.

Flake, a fervent critic of the Trump administration, is set to give the speech the same day Trump is expected to announce the winners of the so-called “fake news” awards.

The senator will use his speech to condemn Trump’s attacks on the press and for calling it “the enemy of the American people.”
In the draft of the speech, obtained by The Washington Post, Flake will then compare Trump’s comments to statements made by Stalin, who is responsible for the murder of millions.
“It is a testament to the condition of our democracy that our own president uses words infamously spoken by Josef Stalin to describe his enemies,” the senator is expected to say, according to the excerpts published by the Post.
“It bears noting that so fraught with malice was the phrase ‘enemy of the people,’ that even Nikita Khrushchev forbade its use, telling the Soviet Communist Party that the phrase had been introduced by Stalin for the purpose of ‘annihilating such individuals’ who disagreed with the supreme leader.”
According to the outgoing senator’s speech excerpts, Trump “has it precisely backward — despotism is the enemy of the people,” adding that “When a figure in power reflexively calls any press that doesn’t suit him ‘fake news,’ it is that person who should be the figure of suspicion, not the press.”
The relationship between Flake and Trump has been soured from the start. During the 2016 presidential election, Trump said Flake is “a very weak and ineffective Senator.” Last summer, the commander-in-chief praised his Republican challenger Kelli Ward, adding that the Arizona senator “is weak on borders, crime and a non-factor in Senate. He's toxic!”
Flake announced his resignation in October with a scathing attack on the president, calling his behavior “reckless, outrageous, and undignified."
He also criticized the Republican Party that, in his view, had “given in or given up on the core principles in favor of a more viscerally satisfying anger and resentment,” adding that “anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy."

Federal Communication Commission Cartoons

Hawaii false alarm prompts plans for FCC investigation

Saturday's errant ballistic-missile alert to cellphones, televisions and radio stations in Hawaii has officials in Washington planning to find out what went wrong.

Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai announced plans for a probe via Twitter.

“The @FCC is launching a full investigation into the false emergency alert that was sent to residents of Hawaii,” Pai tweeted later Saturday.

The @FCC is launching a full investigation into the false emergency alert that was sent to residents of Hawaii.

— Ajit Pai (@AjitPaiFCC) January 13, 2018

U.S. Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, praised Pai's decision to address an error that sent many Hawaii residents into a panic for about 40 minutes.
"This system failed miserably and we need to start over," Schatz tweeted.

Just got off the phone w @AjitPaiFCC and glad they are going to work with us on developing best practices on the communications side for states and municipalities to make sure this never happens again. This system failed miserably and we need to start over.

— Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) January 13, 2018

Local officials and the U.S. Pacific Command quickly recognized that the alert was a false alarm, but the system took about 40 minutes to send a corrective message to Hawaii residents, the Washington Examiner reported.
The FCC has regulated the nation's wireless emergency alert system since 2012. But critics have pointed out a number of perceived flaws, such as messages being delivered to too wide a swath rather than the people most affected by an emergency, Reuters reported.
In December, officials from Harris County, Texas, told members of the FCC about problems they experienced in directing alerts to people most affected by Hurricane Harvey, the New York Times reported.
In October, U.S. Sens. Kamala Harris and Dianne Feinstein, both D-Calif., wrote to Pai, saying that inefficient location-targeting had deprived some residents of receiving alerts, as wildfires raged across Northern California, the Times reported.
“These emergency services are caught in a bind between notifying individuals in imminent danger and risking mass panic,” the senators wrote.
Just last week Pai proposed that service providers “deliver these alerts to match the geographic area specified by the officials sending the alert with no more overshoot than one-tenth of a mile.”
The FCC plans to vote this month on a plan to improve the emergency alert system so it better targets the people most affected by a given situation.
Under such a proposed sytem, Pai said, Americans will “take more seriously the alerts they receive on their mobile devices.”

Who is Sean Penn to lecture Trump about compassion?

Piece of S**t Actor Sean Penn.

It is utterly astounding that Time magazine published an op-ed by clueless actor Sean Penn, lecturing President Trump on compassion and justice in Latin America and the Caribbean. Who is Sean Penn to lecture anyone about compassion?

After all, it is Sean Penn who enabled and befriended the repressive and ruthless Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, using his Hollywood clout to lend credibility to Chavez and to spread lies about the “successes” of Chavez’s disastrous socialist revolution.

Of course, Penn was not alone. Actor Danny Glover and filmmaker Michael Moore also lavished Chavez and his successor, Nicholas Maduro, with praise and support as Venezuela spiraled into chaos and poverty.
So did Democratic Socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Sanders’ website once stated  that the American Dream was dead and more likely to be found in Venezuela than the U.S. He has since quietly removed this passage from the site.

What has Sean Penn said about the horrible indignities and abuses suffered by the Venezuelan people? Nothing. Where is his “compassionate” op-ed to show concern for the victims of Venezuelan socialism and repression?

Under Chavez and Maduro, Venezuela went from being the economic envy of Latin America – rich in oil and with a vibrant economy – to being one of its poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.
Today, thanks to the nationalization of oil production and government-imposed price controls, Venezuela is a country of hunger, deprivation, food shortages and humiliations that proud Venezuelans never thought they would be forced to endure. As a result of terrible food shortages, 75 percent of Venezuelans lost an average of 19 pounds last year.
The Miami Herald, in one of the saddest articles I have ever read, chronicled the plight of Venezuelan mothers with degrees in medicine and engineering prostituting themselves in neighboring Columbia to afford groceries for their families. Others are eating their pets or have to give away children they can no longer feed.
The political repression in Venezuela is equally alarming. Hundreds of dissidents have been imprisoned, including Maduro’s most threatening competitor – the handsome, young and courageous former mayor of Caracas, Leopoldo Lopez. Lopez was sentenced to 14 years in prison on trumped up charges, though he is currently under house arrest due to health concerns.
On top of all this, Venezuela’s brave citizens risk being attacked or killed by their own government when they protest against elections and institutions rigged by the regime.
So what has Sean Penn said about these horrible indignities and abuses suffered by the Venezuelan people? Nothing. Where is his “compassionate” op-ed to show concern for the victims of Venezuelan socialism and repression? Silence.
Meanwhile, President Trump – whom Penn calls “an enemy of compassion” over his reported use of vulgar language to describe some parts of the world in a closed-door Oval Office meeting – has been unequivocal in voicing his support for the Venezuelan people.
President Trump has condemned Venezuela’s socialist oppressors and made the quest of the Venezuelan people for freedom and prosperity one of his top three international concerns, behind North Korea and Iran.
I do agree with Penn on one thing. Immigrants and refugees who have escaped the corrupt, dysfunctional, crime-ridden, socialist and communist regimes of Latin America are precisely the kind of hard-working and grateful people we should be welcoming to the U.S. They truly appreciate the blessings that Penn takes for granted.
Unlike Penn, these immigrants understand that it is democracy and American free-enterprise that have made our country the best and most prosperous in the history of the world. They know that nothing has lifted more people out of poverty than entrepreneurial capitalism. And they resent the ignorant complicity of members of the Hollywood elite, like Sean Penn, in the destruction of their country and the misery and poverty it has wrought.
A few months ago I attended the graduation ceremony of a group of Latin Americans who had attended an English language course sponsored by the LIBRE Initiative, a nonprofit that educates Hispanics about how to achieve the American Dream.
A Venezuelan man stood up. He told us he was one of the lucky ones who was able to leave that nation. He expressed deep gratitude to America and to the LIBRE Initiative, which was empowering him with language skills to succeed in his new home.
Holding a small American flag in one hand and a Venezuelan flag in the other, he addressed this small group of immigrants gathered inside of a cramped Honduran restaurant. He didn’t mince words.
“We need to educate our children to be wary of those who promise us ‘free’ things,” the man said. “I don’t care if it’s a bag of rice or a washing machine. Nothing is worth your freedom. It’s priceless.”
This new immigrant knows more about America, freedom, and the fruits of free enterprise than Sean Penn and socialist Hollywood pals will ever know.
Rachel Campos-Duffy is a FOX News Contributor and a mother of eight. Her debut children’s book – inspired by real life events - is a story about a little girl’s adventure inside the US Capitol where she learns lessons about patriotism, courage and her immigrant father’s journey to citizenship. It will be released by Regnery Kids in Spring 2018.

What's really behind the furious efforts by Democrats' to spin the Trump dossier

kimberley strassel wall street journal

Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberley Strassel says Mueller, the Justice Department and the FBI aren't helping the lawmakers' probe of Fusion GPS and the infamous Trump dossier. #Tucker
There’s no such thing as a coincidence in Washington, so why the sudden, furious effort by Democrats and the media to give cover to the Steele dossier? As in, the sudden, furious effort that happens to coincide with congressional investigators’ finally being given access to FBI records about the Trump-Russia probe.
This scandal’s pivotal day was Jan. 3. That’s the deadline House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes gave the Federal Bureau of Investigation to turn over documents it had been holding for months. Speaker Paul Ryan backed Mr. Nunes’s threat to cite officials for contempt of Congress. Everyone who played a part in encouraging the FBI’s colonoscopy of the Trump campaign—congressional Democrats, FBI and Justice Department senior career staff, the Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama political mobs, dossier commissioner Fusion GPS, the press corps—knew about the deadline and clearly had been tipped to the likelihood that the FBI would have to comply. Thus the dossier rehabilitation campaign.
Weeks before, the same crew had taken a desperate shot at running away from the dossier, with a New York Times special that attempted to play down its significance in the FBI probe. You can see why. In the year since BuzzFeed published the salacious dossier, we’ve discovered it was a work product of the Clinton campaign, commissioned by an oppo-research firm (Fusion), compiled by a British ex-spook on the basis of anonymous sources, and rolled out to the media in the runup to the election. Oh, and it appears to continue to be almost entirely false. When the best you’ve got is that a campaign orbiter made a public trip to Russia, you haven’t got much.
But with Congress about to obtain documents that show the dossier did matter, it was time for a new line. And so the day before the Nunes deadline, Fusion co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch broke their public silence to explain in a New York Times op-ed that what really matters was their noble intention—to highlight Donald Trump’s misdeeds. The duo took credit for alerting the “national security community” to a Russian “attack.”
Keep reading Kimberley Strassel's column in the Wall Street Journal.
Kimberley Strassel writes the Potomac Watch column for the Wall Street Journal where she is a member of the editorial board. Her latest book is "The Intimidation Game: How the Left Is Silencing Free Speech" (Twelve, 2016).  Follow her on Twitter @KimStrassel.