Did you know? The Patriot Post is funded 100% by its readers — avoiding the influence advertisers and special interest groups impose on other publications. Help us stay front and center in the fight for Liberty and support the 2019 Year-End Campaign.

Mid-Day Digest

May 2, 2019


“It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. Subject opinion to coercion: whom will you make your inquisitors?” —Thomas Jefferson (1781)

Comment | Share



Dems Lower the Barr

Just when one may have thought Democrats couldn’t possibly get any more obtuse, they decided to go after Attorney General William Barr, claiming he “hid” information from Robert Mueller’s investigation report after he has literally done the opposite. Recall that Barr, in an unprecedented move due to the high level of interest for full transparency, released to the public Mueller’s entire 400-page report, minimally redacted to comply with rules regarding privacy and national security.

The release of Mueller’s report came only a few weeks after Barr’s four-page summary of it in which he correctly concluded that Mueller’s team found no evidence that the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia (the whole impetus for the creation of the special counsel in the first place) and that Mueller left undecided the question as to whether President Donald Trump had engaged in obstruction of justice. Barr determined that there was not sufficient evidence to support a charge of obstruction and therefore declared the case closed. These are the facts, but it is apparent that those afflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome reject the facts if they don’t support their feelings.

This reality was on full display even before Barr appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, with The Washington Post conveniently obtaining a “leaked” letter from the Mueller team advancing the narrative that Barr was engaged in a “coverup.” The assertion was asinine on its face, as it ignored the fact that Barr had released the full Mueller report. Furthermore, an unredacted version of the report was made available to senior members of Congress, but thus far only three have bothered to read it, and all three are Republicans. In other words, for all their squawking about a nonexistent “coverup” and lack of transparency, not a single Democrat has taken the opportunity to examine the unredacted report.

Following the five-hour hearing in which Barr handled himself ably and professionally, answering quite sufficiently all questions put to him, Democrats called for his resignation and even suggested his impeachment. Why? We all know the answer by now — Trump Derangement Syndrome. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi declared, “He lied to Congress. If anybody else did that, it would be considered a crime. Nobody is above the law.”

The truth is, since Barr followed the facts rather than the anti-Trump narrative, he must be rejected. But what has gotten the Democrats and their Leftmedia cohorts most up in arms was Barr’s effective undercutting of the obstruction narrative.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) demanded to know why Barr didn’t find Trump guilty of obstruction over his instructions to former White House Counsel Don McGahn to get rid of Mueller. Barr noted the context of the situation: “There is a distinction between saying to someone, ‘Go fire him. Go fire Mueller,’ and saying, ‘Have him removed based on conflict.’” Feinstein, seemingly confused, asked what the difference was. Barr answered, “If you remove someone for a conflict of interest, there would presumably be another person [brought in as special counsel].”

Barr then deftly debunked the Democrats’ entire obstruction narrative, stating, “If the president is being falsely accused, which the evidence now suggests, the accusations against him were false and he knew they were false, and he felt that this investigation was unfair, propelled by his political opponents, and was hampering his ability to govern. … That is not a corrupt motive for replacing an independent counsel.” Exactly. But that won’t stop Democrats from churning this for another 18 months.

Comment | Share

Sports Illustrated — Irony in a Burkini

The Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue has a long history of providing a platform for beautiful young women to flaunt their bodies so that men of all ages can objectify them. Thus, we find great irony in the latest issue featuring a Somali-American model in poses that would be sexy except that her so-called “burkini” and hijab cover up all but her face, hands, and feet.

Make no mistake: We’re not complaining about the lack of skin. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Mark Alexander wrote last year about his friend Jenny Baker, who “has devoted much of her adult life to educating women about the terrible burden of distorted female images propagated by the media — particularly the suffering this creates for adolescent girls.” The impetus for that article was Sports Illustrated’s “Me Too” swimsuit issue, complete with strategically covered nude models “tattooed” with “empowering” feminist slogans. This, we suppose, was to teach the millions of men ogling at women to look but don’t touch.

The irony, of course, is that now SI is so “woke” and “inclusive” that it’s including a Muslim woman in the latest issue. That young model, Halima Aden, said, “I wanted people to see that you could still be really cute and modest at the same time.”

First, the whole point of a burka is to hide a woman’s body from roving male eyes, so it defies reason to make that a sex symbol. (It may defy marketing too — we’ll see how many men buy the magazine.) Second, Islam is very often exploitative of women. Not only are women second-class citizens in most of the Islamic world, but they suffer “justified” domestic violence, genital mutilation, and “honor killings” — including for not wearing a burka. We suppose Muslim men just take after Muhammad himself.

In short, Sports Illustrated has serious problems that a sprinkling of diversity isn’t going to solve.

Comment | Share


Don’t Miss Alexander’s Column

Read Joe Biden and the Collective Constituencies Strategy. Field a lot of candidates, raise a lot of money, and fold each candidate’s constituents into an amalgam of general-election voters.

If you’d like to receive Alexander’s Column by email every Wednesday, update your subscription here.


For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.


  • BARR SAYS NO THANKS: “Attorney General William Barr will not appear before the House Judiciary Committee [today] to answer questions about special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation as previously planned, the Department of Justice announced Wednesday evening. Citing the ‘unprecedented and unnecessary’ conditions placed on Barr’s planned testimony by Congressional Democrats, a Department of Justice spokeswoman announced the attorney general would not return to Capitol Hill on Thursday to further explain his handling of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s findings.” (National Review)
  • MUELLER TO TAKE THE STAND: “The Democratic chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee said on Wednesday an agreement had been reached to have Special Counsel Robert Mueller testify to Congress on his probe into Russian election interference and possible attempts by the President Donald Trump to impede the probe. Representative Jerry Nadler told reporters the agreement was for Mueller to testify sometime in May, but that a specific date had yet to be agreed upon.” (Reuters)
  • GENDER IDENTITY HEADS TO COURT: “In 2013, several years after he was first hired, a male employee told his employer, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes, he wanted to dress as a woman at work. The funeral home owner, Thomas Rost, refused to comply with this wish, insisting it was not ‘in the best interest of grieving families.’ … The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled that the federal government can force R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes and its owner to allow a male employee who identifies as female to dress in women’s clothing at work. This essentially redefines ‘sex’ as referred to in Title VII in a way that is different than when it was interpreted when enacted in 1964. Now the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case and see if the EEOC and federal judges have the power to bypass Congress and redefine ‘sex.’” (Washington Examiner)
  • GOP TAKES BUDGET LEAD: “Weeks after Democratic leadership decided to shelve their budget resolution for fiscal year 2020, a group of House Republicans has released a detailed budget it hopes will serve as a ‘playbook’ for how to govern should they regain the majority. The Republican Study Committee, chaired by Rep. Mike Johnson (R., La.), called it an abdication of responsibility by Democrats to fail to present a budget, but said it was ‘ready and willing to fill that vacuum of leadership’ with its own budget.” (The Washington Free Beacon)
  • TRUMP SOLICITS EMERGENCY BORDER FUNDS: “The White House sent Congress a $4.5 billion emergency spending request on Wednesday, citing an unfolding ‘humanitarian and security crisis’ at the U.S.-Mexico border as record numbers of Central American families and children seek entrance to the United States. The request includes $3.3 billion for humanitarian assistance and $1.1 billion for border operations.” (The Washington Post)
  • HISTORIC MIGRANT BUST: “U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) agents arrested 424 migrants attempting to cross the southern border on Tuesday in the ‘largest’ collective arrest in the agency’s history. CBP agents encountered and ultimately apprehended ‘a group of what seemed to be over 400 illegal aliens’ early Tuesday morning near the border town of Sunland Park, N.M., according to an agency press release.” (National Review)
  • NANNY STATE UPDATE: According to the Associated Press, “Maine has banned single-use food and drink containers made from polystyrene foam, commonly known as Styrofoam, becoming the first state to do so. Democratic Gov. Janet Mills signed the bill, which takes effect in 2021, into law Tuesday.” On the flip side, Fox News reports that “Florida lawmakers on Tuesday passed a bill stating local governments could not enforce plastic straw bans over the next five years.”
  • GILLIBRAND’S TERRIBLE, NO-GOOD IDEA: “In her first major policy proposal of the 2020 presidential election, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–NY) — a long shot candidate for the Democratic nomination — is suggesting that every voter be given $600 to donate to federal election campaigns. Affectionately named ‘Democracy Dollars,’ she says the taxpayer-funded venture will clean up elections and "attack the corrupting influence of money at its core.” (Reason)
  • SANDMANN MARCHES ON: “On Wednesday, attorneys for Nicholas Sandmann, the Covington Catholic High School student who was targeted by the media after his encounter with Native American activist Nathan Phillips at the Lincoln Memorial on January 18, announced they are filing a $275 million lawsuit against NBCUniversal, alleging ‘NBCUniversal created a false narrative by portraying the "confrontation” as a “hate crime” committed by Nicholas.’ … Sandmann’s attorneys have already filed a $250 million suit against the Washington Post and another suit against CNN for $275 million.“ (The Daily Wire)
  • HUMOR: Democrats call for "infinite” investigation into Trump (NPC Daily)
  • POLICY: Military intervention in Venezuela? It’s not that easy (Washington Examiner)
  • POLICY: California’s high-speed train makes Solyndra look like a bargain (Foundation for Economic Education)

For more of today’s editors’ choice headlines, visit In Our Sights.

The Patriot Post is certified ad-free, unlike third-party commercial news sites linked on this page, which may also be pay-walled.

Comment | Share


Victor Davis Hanson: “Hillary Clinton recently editorialized about the second volume of special counsel Robert Mueller’s massive report. She concluded of the report’s assorted testimonies and inside White House gossip concerning President Trump’s words and actions that ‘any other person engaged in those acts would certainly have been indicted.’ Psychologists might call her claims ‘projection.’ That is the well-known psychological malady of attributing bad behavior to others as a means of exonerating one’s own similar, if not often even worse, sins. … For much of her professional life, Hillary Clinton had acted above and beyond the law on the assumption that as the wife of a governor, as first lady of the United States, as a senator from New York, as secretary of state and as a two-time candidate for the presidency, she could ignore the law without worry over the consequences. For Clinton now to project that the president should be indicted suggests she is worried about her own potential indictment. And she is rightly concerned that for the first time in 40 years, neither she nor her husband is serving in government or running for some office, and therefore could be held accountable.”


Hate has no home here? “This is not going to be the country of the xenophobics. This is not going to be the country of white people. This is not going to be the country of the few. This is the country of the many. This is the country that was founded on the history of Native American genocide and on the backs of black slaves, but also by immigrants.” —Rep. Ilhan Omar

Blame America First: “A lot of the policies that we have put in place has [sic] kind of helped lead [to] the devastation in Venezuela. And we’ve sort of set the stage for where we’re arriving today. This particular bullying and the use of sanctions to eventually intervene and make regime change really does not help the people of countries like Venezuela, and it certainly does not help and is not in the interest of the United States.” —Ilhan Omar

Unconscionable: “Some kids are unwanted, so you kill them now or you kill them later. You bring them in the world unwanted, unloved, you send them to the electric chair. So, you kill them now or you kill them later.” —Alabama State Rep. John Rogers (D) supporting abortion

Perpetual bitter taste: “Proximity to an amoral leader reveals something depressing. I think that’s at least part of what we’ve seen with Bill Barr and Rod Rosenstein. Accomplished people lacking inner strength can’t resist the compromises necessary to survive Mr. Trump and that adds up to something they will never recover from. It takes character like Mr. Mattis’s to avoid the damage, because Mr. Trump eats your soul in small bites.” —James Comey

The BIG Lie: “China is going to eat our lunch? Come on, man. … They’re not competition for us.” —Joe Biden

And last… “Good morning fellow socialists … I told you. AG Barr was shaking in his boots because he was scared to take questions from me (your boss). We all know that’s why he really backed out of the House hearing today.” —Twitter parody account @AOCpress

Comment | Share



For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.



For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.

Join our editors and staff in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. We also humbly ask prayer for your Patriot team, that our mission would seed and encourage the spirit of Liberty in the hearts and minds of our countrymen.

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

Nate Jackson, Managing Editor
Mark Alexander, Publisher

It's Right. It's Free.