Skip to content

Remembering my friend, Don Ohlmeyer-Rush Limbaugh, 9/11/2017

9/11/17, Remembering My Friend Don Ohlmeyer, Rush Limbaugh

“RUSH: I got a phone call. Oh, gosh, I don’t know when. It was during the football game last night, so 6 or 6:30.

I looked at the number; didn’t recognize the number. It was a local number here. I didn’t recognize it, and so I didn’t accept the call, because talking on the phone is a hearing challenge. And within seconds I got a message from whoever it was that had called, It was just a shocking thing, so I called back, and it was from one of Don Ohlmeyer’s sons. Don Ohlmeyer had passed away at 5:30 Pacific Time yesterday afternoon. You know, Ohlmeyer was a beast in the television business. He was with ABC during the inception of Monday Night Football.

And though he didn’t make Howard Cosell because nobody made Howard Cosell, Ohlmeyer was instrumental in letting Cosell be Cosell. For those of you that are too young to know, Howard Cosell…For those of us in broadcasting, the thing about Howard Cosell was that he was one of the first high-profile TV personalities that wasn’t technically in news who had freedom to say, do what he wanted to do. Management was unable to clock him, so to speak, and he became the envy of many people in media for this.

Ohlmeyer was instrumental in protecting Cosell from efforts to tame him or moderate him or whatever. And he then after leaving ABC after many years there, went to NBC and became the president’s NBC’s prime time division West Coast. And it was under his leadership that they came up with this killer lineup of comedies and shows that just owned, for example, Thursday nights. It had Seinfeld and just any number of other shows that he, after seeing, purchased and arranged for them to air on NBC. And he had Ohlmeyer Communications.

It was Don Ohlmeyer who invented the Skins Game, golf, that always aired on Thanksgiving weekend. Four or five professionals would play in a tournament over the weekend, call it the Skins Game, and now everybody plays “Skins” in golf. I never knew Don Ohlmeyer during all this. I knew of him, I knew his reputation, but I never knew him during all this. When ABC/ESPN lost the rights to Monday Night Football to NBC, they hired Ohlmeyer to produce the first year, to executive produce….

He was actually in the truck, produced the first year, and they were looking for somebody to pair with Al Michaels. So I offered myself. I thought, “This is something I would love to do, and I would be great at it,” and I had Cosell in my mind. “I would love to do this.” So I’m on the air making comments about how much I would love to do this, and at the time there was a man named Howard Katz who’s now with the NFL who actually is the chief of the unit in the NFL that does the schedule every year. But at the time Howard Katz was an NBC Sports executive.

And he called Ohlmeyer and said, “I think this Limbaugh guy is serious. Why don’t you talk to him? So Ohlmeyer was in Ft. Lauderdale for a friend’s wedding and called and said, “Why don’t you come down; let’s talk about this.

I never thought this would happen. I mean, I’m just bloviating about it on the air, but I never thought it would… I was serious in wanting to do it, but I never thought it would happen. I never made a call to anybody at NBC saying I was serious. I just did it all on the air.

So I drove down. I’m listening to Mambo Number 5 by Lou Bega all the way down to Ft. Lauderdale. It’s about… From my house it was about an hour, and I was gonna play golf at Pine Tree on my way back from the meeting with Ohlmeyer, and I got down to the hotel he was staying [at]… and his partner L.J. approached me and said, “Don will be down in a moment.” I said, “Wow, this is cool. This is big.” So Ohlmeyer came down and we had a chat about it and talked about it.

He said, “Look, why don’t you come out; let’s do an audition.” I said, “Really?” “Yeah. You come out and we’ll get a tape. I’m not gonna tell you which… I will tell you the game. I’ll tell you the game. We’ll get a tape.” It was the Music City Miracle game. It was the Titans and Buffalo Bills. He said, We’ll replay the tape of that game, and you and Al can pretend it’s live, and we’ll just see you do. And I said, “Really?” He said, “Yeah.” So I went out and did that. He picked me up at the airport when I arrived.

I think I flew into Burbank. He picked me up. Now, I didn’t learn a lot about Ohlmeyer in the Ft. Lauderdale meeting other than I liked him, but it wasn’t an interview or anything like that. So I’m thinking, “NBC West Coast chairman, ABC. This guy’s got to be a typical media liberal. Just has to.” So I figure my chances here are nil, but I’m gonna have fun with it. So we’re in the car, and we’re driving to the hotel. He’s gonna drop me off the hotel and have dinner, and the next day do the audition.

And on the way to the hotel, he starts ripping the media just like I do, and I thought, “I’m being set up here. He’s settin’ me up. I’m supposed to be say, ‘Yeah, you’re right,’ and I’m supposed to launch,” ’cause I figured he’s gotta be part of the liberal leftist media establishment. So I was standoff. I was very cool in the car and I didn’t go, “Yeah, man, you’re right,” and offer my own examples. None of that. I just nodded and I said, “Yeah, I can’t argue with that. Can’t argue.”

So he dropped me off, we had dinner that night, then next day did the audition. It went well, and he was shocked and Al Michaels was pleasantly surprised and all that. I knew Al, but I’d never met Ohlmeyer. Anyway, that’s the year they chose Dennis Miller. But the point is through all of this, Don Ohlmeyer became a really, really close friend. And he was a really, really good guy. Do you remember, those of you been here a long time, I’ve told the story of how I was with friends at a golf club down in the desert in Palm Springs, Indian Wells?

A famous media person that you would all know joined us for dinner and my friend just lacerated this guy on the subject of illegal immigration? It was Ohlmeyer. And I’m not gonna tell you who the famous media guest was, but you would know who it is. I never… I also never identified Ohlmeyer, always protected his privacy. But Ohlmeyer was one of the funniest… He and Roger Ailes were some of the most naturally funny people. But when Don got going on this stuff (laughing), it was just marvelous to sit back and listen to it.

And he had this poor TV star backwards and forwards and pretzeled inside out. The TV star was reduced to, “Well, look, if poor people around the world would have come to my country and improve their lot in life, I’m not going to say no!” And Don said, “Well, what happens if the guy jumps your back fence and wants to date your daughter?” “Well, that would never happen, and I’m not…” Anyway, we played a lot of golf together, and we had a lot of good times.

I would host a thing at my house every spring I called the Spring Fling. He was just somebody I never expected to meet, and when I did meet him, I never expected him to be the kind of guy he was. 

He was the most unassuming, for the things that he had done in life, the things that he had accomplished. It was just a cool thing to get to know him and to have he and L.J. become friends of ours, become part of our life. I was just shocked when I found out that he had passed away. His son Kemper is who called me. He had four sons. And the text message said, “Don died at 5:30.”

I didn’t even know that he was sick. And it turns out that it had to be a late discovery of cancer that had metastasized, so I gathered this was all really, really sudden, I mean, like, days. And like a blow to the stomach, first Roger Ailes passes away this year and now Don. It was just a shock and sadness, disappointment. I didn’t even know. I hadn’t seen him in a while. This is a crazy thing, but when the iPhone six plus came out, the big one, the five-and-a-half-inch screen, I had an extra one and I said,

“Hey, Don, do you want an iPhone six plus?

He said, “Yeah!” So I FedExed him the six plus, and L.J. said, “This is the greatest toy anybody’s ever given him. He won’t stop playing with it.” It made my day. So when the new ones came, 6S Plus, I sent him one, “You want an upgrade?”

“Well, if you’ve got one hanging around.”

So I sent him that one. He was a great golfer. He hit the ball straight. By that I mean wherever it was aimed is where it went. The envy of everybody. He didn’t bomb it, it didn’t go a long way, but if the guy didn’t break 80, it was a bad day. So just a sad, sad turn of events. And, you know, with Roger Ailes passing away, now Vince Flynn and his movie, screening that this afternoon.

And all this happening within the time framework of the hurricane, you know, it just really reinforces, folks, that you shouldn’t take anything for granted, particularly with the people in your life that you love. You should always try to stay in touch and don’t let any kind of momentary disagreement you had with people cause distance. It’s just silly because anything can happen at any time that changes everything.

He’s one of these people that you wish everybody could meet him and get to know him. He was that charismatic and welcoming and very confident — love hanging around confident people. And he was that. He loved L.J. He often said, “You know, I decided there’s nobody in the world I’d rather talk to than her. So excuse me for not playing golf today.” Okay, that’s cool. So Don Ohlmeyer is 72 years old, same age that my mother and father both passed away at.” Image from RushLimbaugh.com

=============

Rush Limbaugh “Related link” 

Los Angeles Times: Don Ohlmeyer, ‘Monday Night Football’ Producer and Originator of  ‘Must See TV,’ Dies at 72 

Since global warming ‘pause’ is widely accepted by scientists, it’s vital to ask if government will ‘pause’ its expensive use of taxpayer dollars to ‘cure’ it until picture becomes clearer-BBC News program, Andrew Neil, July 2013

This is a vital policy issue since the strategy of this government and the previous Labour government to decarbonise the economy involves multi-billion pound spending decisions paid for by consumers and taxpayers, which might not have been taken (at least to the same degree or with the same haste) if global warming was not quite the imminent threat it has been depicted.” 


7/22/2013, Andrew Neil on Ed Davey climate change interview critics, BBC, Andrew Neil  [Ed Davey was then UK “Energy and Climate Change Sec.”]


The main purpose of the interview as to establish if the government thought the recent and continuing pause in global temperatures meant it should re-think its policies in response to global warming….

This is a vital policy issue since the strategy of this government and the previous Labour government to decarbonise the economy involves multi-billion pound spending decisions paid for by consumers and taxpayers, which might not have been taken (at least to the same degree or with the same haste) if global warming was not quite the imminent threat it has been depicted.


It might also be argued that challenging interviews on matters in which there is an overwhelming consensus in Westminster [and Washington, DC] – but not necessarily among voters who pay for both the licence fee and the government’s energy policies – is a particularly legitimate purpose of public-service broadcasting.

No consensus

The recent standstill in global temperatures is a puzzle. Experts do not know why it is occurring or how long it will last.

Climate scientists have proffered a variety of possible explanations. But there is no consensus.

Extensive peer-reviewed literature regards it as established yet unexplained. It is widely accepted that the main climate models which inform government policy did not predict it (which raises interesting issues of the models’ predictions about the future course of temperatures).

For many climate scientists the plateau – which may or may not have long-term significance – has come as something of a surprise.

Recently Nature, which has published extensively on global warming, called it one of climate science’s greatest mysteries.

[July 10, 2013, Climate change: The forecast for 2018 is cloudy with record heat,” Nature.com.Lost heat: why has the warming slowed?Jeff Tollefson It is one of the biggest mysteries in climate science: humans are pumping more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere today than ever before, yet global temperatures have not risen much in more than a decade.“] 

 

(continuing): “So it is legitimate to ask if the government takes the pause seriously and if it has any implications for policy, ie, if there is a pause in warming, is there a case for the government to pause or slowdown its expensive efforts to decarbonise the economy until the picture becomes clearer?…

Some have detected a slight decline in temperatures since circa 2004 but we did not dwell on that since it is statistically insignificant….

The plateau has made some climate scientists wonder about the efficacy of the IPCC central forecast, which has been seminal in informing official policy, and some are re-considering the IPCC’s measurement of climate sensitivity i.e. the extent to which temperatures rise in response to any given amount of C02 emissions….

At the Sunday Politics we are also used to public figures who try to change the metric when the one they’ve put their faith in does not behave as expected. We try not to let that happen.

Moreover, the purpose of the interview was not to question all aspects of climate science, just the one metric that has commanded most attention. Other possible indicators of climate change – ice melt, ocean temperatures and extreme weather events – are a matter of widespread debate in which the science most certainly is not “settled.”…

At no stage in the interview was it ever claimed that global warming is not real or that it is not man-made. It is not for the Sunday Politics to take such positions.

Our focus was on a global temperature plateau which could be a challenge to the forecasts of climate models
which have determined government policy. The plateau could continue for the foreseeable future or melt away as temperatures resume their upward trajectory.

The Sunday Politics has no views on such matters. We have put the existence of this plateau into the broader public domain. It is for others to determine its significance.” 

…………………….

Added: Wouldn’t $10 million US taxpayer dollars per day be more than enough for the climate industry? Why does the US political class insist on $115.6 million a day, 365 days a year?

Dozens if not all US federal agencies engaged in climate spending in 2016. From just 8 agencies in 2016,  $115,616,438 million US taxpayer dollars daily went out the door to the weather and climate industry every day, $42.2 billion for the year, per aaas.org:

Weather and Climate in the FY 2016 Budget, aaas.org (Am. Assn. for Advancement of Science), Paul A.T. Higgins, Shalini Mohleji, American Meteorological Society 

“2016 climate and weather budget”

subhead: “PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENTS, AND AGENCIES”

From Table 1: Weather and climate-related R and D in the Federal Budget

NOAA $5.9 billion

NASA $18.5 billion

NSF $1.3 billion


Dept. of Energy $5.3 billion

Dept. of Interior, USGS $1.2 billion

USDA (Agric. Research Service) $1.4 billion 


EPA $8.6 billion”

(Added: During Obama’s 8 years, regular annual budgets weren’t used. “Requested” monies were allocated in other ways, and everyone was fine with it. In 2012, for example, no one had a problem giving $6 billion US taxpayer dollars for ‘clean energy’ to the Sultan of Brunei who owns 5000+ cars. The $6 billion would be shared with Pres. of Indonesia for “renewables and cleaner energy.” The Sultan of Brunei of course carries out Islamic punishments of limb dismemberment and stoning to death. As to Indonesia, it’s so corrupt even the World Bank says crime adds 20% to costs.)
————

Added: “Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around….[32]” (item #11):

2015 paper: The explosion of global climate science spending was traced to the United States Executive branch in 1990 and Bush #1’s USGCRP mandate. The continuing decades-long “boom” in global climate science spending was merely theft of US taxpayer dollars by the US political class:

Fall 2015, Causes and Consequences of the Climate Science Boom,” independent.org, Butos and McQuade

“2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science Rand D as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch.”…1. The Government’s Role in Climate Science Funding…took a critical step with passage of the Global Change Research Act of 1990.  

The Act established institutional structures operating out of the White House.”...

Chart below, page 4, pdf, is an underestimate, doesn’t include congressional appropriations:

 

“Note and Sources: The data shown here are funding disbursements by the White House U.S. Global Change Research Program and its predecessor, the National Climate Program, available at NCP 1988, 43; Climate Science Watch 2007; and Leggett, Lattanzio, and Bruner 2013. These data, however, do not represent congressional climate science funding appropriations to other government agencies. As we show later in a more detailed assessment of U.S. government climate science funding, the numbers here, especially those for more recent years, greatly underestimate the actual level of funding.” pdf p. 4

……………….

Added:

“99.9 percent of climate science is funded by the government.

…………………………..

Added: UN IPCC: US temperatures cooled from 1950-2011:

2012 UN IPCC report,Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (582 pages):

UN IPCC states central North America” temperatures cooled between 1950 and 2011. Citations on pages 121, 134, and 135 reference “central North America” cooling. (Scientific American says UN IPCC is “the world’s premier scientific body on the climate.) ………………

UN IPCC: US temperatures cooled from 1950-2011:

2012 UN IPCC report,Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (582 pages):

UN IPCC states central North America” temperatures cooled between 1950 and 2011. Citations on pages 121, 134, and 135 reference “central North America” cooling. (Scientific American says UN IPCC is “the world’s premier scientific body on the climate.) ………………

3 citations for “central North America” cooling temperatures from 1950-2011,” per 2012 UN IPCC report, Chapter 3, Changes in Climate Extremes and their Impacts on the Natural Physical Environment,” begins p. 109:

First citation, p. 121:


p. 121, Subhead 3.1.6: “
Changes in Extremes and Their Relationship to Changes in Regional and Global Mean Climate:”

(Right column, near end of page): Parts of central North America [otherwise known as the US] and the eastern United States present cooling trends in mean temperature and some temperature extremes in the spring to summer season in recent decades (Section 3.3.1).”…


http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/special-reports/srex/SREX_Full_Report.pdf

………………………………

Comment: Tax dollars that otherwise could’ve gone to the poor and needy, education, or infrastructure, have instead for decades been funneled to climate fat cats.

 

 

 

 

Edward Kett Mullen, born in Brooklyn on September 27, 1922, died on August 24, 2017 at his home in New Jersey. He is survived by his wife of 69 years, Joanne, 5 children, 10 grandchildren, and one great grandchild

 
During World War II, Ed Mullen was a US Air Force pilot in the Pacific. Here he’s training with a Stearman biplane.

Ed Mullen in the 1940s in his Air Force uniform. He said it was considered an Army uniform at the time. They didn’t start calling it the Air Force until after WWII.

Here’s Ed on Mother’s Day, 2012. He died a month before his 95th birthday. Thanks for everything, Dad.

This portrait of Ed hangs over the fireplace at his New Jersey home.

If the US fails it won’t be because of Democrats or even the seditious media. It will be those diguised today as Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich, who’ll gleefully drive the final nail-‘The Enemy Within,’ Peggy Ryan, 8/23/17

A President who could get things done would expose them as the irrelevant creatures they truly are….Jealousy is also seriously at work here. Trump is inspiring and exciting a broad spectrum of the country” like Gingrich et al. never have and never will. 1/22/2016, National Review just handed Donald Trump the Election,Republican Newswatch, by Doug Ibendahl. Doug Ibendahl, a Chicago Attorney, is a former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party.
………………… 

8/23/17, The Enemy Within, Peggy Ryan, Canada Free Press

“If this mutinous cabal succeeds in destroying democracy it won’t be because of the Democrats, it won’t even be the seditious media. No, it will be the left-wing activists in Republican guise, GOP turncoats who will gleefully drive the final nail.”

“In a recent interview, Sean Hannity asked Newt Gingrich about Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell’s inability to lead, the Senate’s failure to pass an Obamacare repeal. Newt danced around McConnell’s role, its “we” he said, the President’s not a bystander, he shares the blame. 

After a few moments of castigating the President for Congress’s failures, Gingrich said we have to be effective, look at the long game.  We have a couple of weak Republicans so we need to add to our majority in 2018 to make up for them, get to 56 or 58 seats.

Ha! I might have been born at night, Newt, but it wasn’t last night.  This Lucy with the football thing got old back when we gave Republicans the House yet they couldn’t use the power of the purse to even slow Obamacare.

It got crazy when we gave Republicans the House and Senate yet the poor babies still couldn’t repeal or constrain Obamacare because they couldn’t get past the bully Democrat President.

Now its downright stupid when Republicans whine that even with the White House, Senate, and House, their slim majorities fall short, they need more, more, more.

Then Newt really struck a nerve, went off on the Republican base. At some point, he preached, we have to deal with the fact that we were three votes short for the repeal. The way to fix that is not a civil war, not to attack ourselves.”…

[Ed. note: “The way to fix that is not a civil war?The “civil war” happened in 2016 when Trump stunningly defeated your pals in the GOP Establishment. Even the NY Times Editorial Board on May 3, 2016 said, “It’s Donald Trump’s Party Now.” Gingrich, like others, is pretending 2016 didn’t happen, knowing Hannity will let him say whatever he wants]

(continuing): “Poor Newt’s worried because there’s huge primary battles brewing for Jeff Flake in AZ and Dean Heller in NV.  He sneered that the base thinks they’re “going to teach these guys a lesson but it’s suicidal, we could lose those seats. Besides, he pointed out, both those guys voted for the repeal.

So let’s dissect Newt’s rant from the bottom up:

First of all, scrap the notion that three Senators killed the bill, that’s a crock. These were the three chosen to fall on their sword.  They were picked because they’re in “safe seats”.

  1. Susan Collins of Maine – reelection 2020
  2. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska – reelection 2022
  3. John McCain of Arizona – reelection 2022

Collins, Murkowski and McCain are more in line with the usual Senate games, just elected they have 5 1/2 years left to screw their voters before they have to answer for their betrayal. And when Judgment Day looms, the party will give them symbolic votes to make-up, roses for their base after they beat the living crap out of them for years.

These three senators were the no votes because they don’t have to face voters but trust me, there’s plenty of traitors warming up in the bull pen if needed. In fact, Dean Heller voiced a no vote back in June. He couldn’t follow through because his constituents raised millions to expose his treachery.  But it’s the thought that counts, right?

The sad fact is, Obamacare was never in danger of repeal.

Republicans have no intention of setting us free from government healthcare, never did.

Onto Newt’s point about infighting, that we’re taking a huge chance fighting the GOP establishment (GOPe), we could lose those seats.”…

[Ed. note: “Infighting?” “We’re taking a huge chance fighting the GOP Establishment? Who is “we?” Establishment errand boy Gingrich has it backwards. Establishment lost a massive fight in stunning and historic fashion in 2016. Trump is the only elected Republican with an army. The rest have next to nothing. Hannity is as bad as Gingrich because he gives him a forum to be a parasite and waste peoples’ time. The only solution is for Trump to  announce formation of a new party ASAP, and that he’ll head it. It will be an actual  second party to the combined Dem/GOP. Right now, half the electorate has no political party behind them.]

(continuing): “So Newt, you’re saying GOP voters have to have a familiar name on the ballot, an incumbent, to know which box to check?

Or are you saying the GOP won’t support challengers?  I get that, you people have fought conservatives for years, use the dollars sent to elect conservatives to defeat conservatives.

You went all out to defeat Christine O’Donnell in the 2010 DE Senate race, gave the seat to a Democrat because the establishment was pissed off over Rep. Mike Castle’s loss.  Where was the concern for losing the seat then, Newt?

Then there was the 2014 Mississippi Senate primary where the GOPe outright stole the Senate seat.  When Polls showed Chris McDaniel would win, the GOPe poured millions into false ads, made robocalls that accused McDaniel of racism, paid Democrats to go to the polls, and pushed ineligible voters to cast a ballot.  It was dirty and everyone knew it, it was unacceptable yet everyone accepted it.

No Newt, reelecting establishment candidates isn’t the answer, it’s the problem. Time after time these entrenched politicians use their power against the American people, not for us.  Paul Ryan’s omnibus; the Iran deal; the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP); or the Paris Agreement on climate. Republicans repeatedly put every other country ahead of America, vote against the people’s interests. 

But by far, the biggest danger from these Republican apostates is their subversion. They work with Democrats, media, and deep state to undo our election, to attack our President. They allow the illegal special counsel investigation and hold phony hearings on Russian collusion knowing there’s no crime. They jump to the nearest mic to condemn the President’s travel ban, to link the President to white supremacists, and to criticize every word out of the President’s mouth.

They unite to block any move by the President to stop Mueller’s political assassination, squeal when President Trump questions Attorney General Jeff Session’s back-stabbing recusal, warn the President of the United States not to fire his own Attorney General.  They vote to keep the President from firing special counsel Robert Mueller even though Mueller’s serving in that position in defiance of Department of Justice rules, not a whisper of the lawlessness of the investigation.

And yet, Newt, you ask us to reelect Jeff Flake, a never-Trumper who’s been itching to stick it to the President.  If Jeff gets another six-year term, guaranteed he’ll gleefully volunteer those no votes again and again, he’ll be the “safe seat”, one of the untouchable saboteurs for the party.

Or Dean Heller, disappointed he couldn’t personally torpedo the repeal this go-around but relieved it was successfully blocked.  If this recreant is this arrogant with his term about to expire, what would he do with a six-year cushion?

The sad truth is the American people didn’t win Congressional majorities. Republicans have merged with Democrats into a seditious bloc and we’re far outnumbered. No, it’s not every Republican but it’s a sizable number, Senators

McConnell, McCain, Graham, Flake, Heller, Collins, Murkowski, Rubio, Sasse,

need I go on? In the House, its Speaker Ryan, House leadership, an entire progressive caucus, and never-Trumpers, enough to impose their will over ours, enough to complete their coup d’tat and remove our President.

So please, Newt, save the spiel about electing the incumbent to save the seat. If the sitting Senator or House member is GOP establishment, then our only hope to “save” the seat, to save our country, is to defeat that incumbent.

If this mutinous cabal succeeds in destroying democracy it won’t be because of the Democrats, it won’t even be the seditious media.  No, it will be the left-wing activists in Republican guise, GOP turncoats who will gleefully drive the final nail in America’s coffin for their own greedy gain.

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”

—————— 
Added:
……


Above, banner of NY Times Editorial, posted Tuesday evening May 3, 2016 for Wed., May 4, 2016 print edition 

Even the NY Times Editorial Board was honest enough to admit that the 2016 Republican voters’ messageis testimony to how thoroughly they reject the Republican politicians who betrayed them.”…

May 3, 2016, By The NY Times Editorial Board: 

“Republican leaders have for years failed to think about much of anything beyond winning the next election. Year after year, the party’s candidates promised help for middle-class people who lost their homes, jobs and savings to recession, who lost limbs and well-being to war, and then did next to nothing. 

That Mr. Trump was able to enthrall voters by promising simply to “Make America Great Again” — but offering only xenophobic, isolationist or fantastical ideas — is testimony to how thoroughly they reject the politicians who betrayed them.”…

=========

Added:

1/3/2017, “Trump utterly gutted the GOP in the primaries. That was the real landslide of 2016.”…CNBC, Jake Novak

……………………. 

Added: The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters,” Laura Ingraham, NY Times, July 16, 2016

7/16/2016,Donald Trump Forces G.O.P. to Choose Between Insularity and Outreach, NY Times, Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin

Laura Ingraham, a conservative radio host supportive of Mr. Trump, said the party’s future base would have to be made up of “working-class nationalists,” who have been drawn to Mr. Trump and reject the Bush-era policies around immigration and trade. 

The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters,” she said.”…(8 parags. from end)

………………………. 

Added:

6/27/2016, “The elites of both parties are, as if by rote, extreme globalists.”

“He managed to prevail—to mount the most astonishingly successful insurgent campaign against a party establishment in our lifetimes….He won the GOP’s untapped residue of nationalist voters, in a system where the elites of both parties are, as if by rote, extreme globalists. He won the support of those who favored changing trade and immigration policies, which, it is increasingly obvious, do not favor the tangible interests of the average American.

He won the backing of those alarmed by a new surge of political correctness, an informal national speech code that seeks to render many legitimate political opinions unsayable. He won the support of white working-class voters whose social and economic position had been declining for a generation.6/27/16, Why Trump Wins,” “He knows border wars have replaced culture wars. The American Conservative, by Scott McConnell

 
—————————–
Added: One year before Trump’s inauguration: Jan. 20, 2016, Rush Limbaugh:

“The Republican Party, for whatever reason, refuses to be an opposition party.

1/20/16,Understanding Trump’s Appeal,Rush Limbaugh

“The Republican Party, for whatever reason, refuses to be an opposition party. The Republican Party refuses to stand up and even make the pretense of trying to stop Barack Obama.  Out in the real world, Barack Obama and the Democrat Party are seen as destroying this country. And not just domestically; they’re destroying the military; they’re destroying foreign policy. They are nuking up Iran. They are behaving in ways that befriending our enemies and alienating our friends and allies — and people are at their wits’ end.

They [Republican voters] have voted, in large numbers, expecting there to be some opposition and push-back to this. That’s the standard, normal procedure in politics. Politics is at least two competing organizations, and the winning organization always faces opposition by the losing organization ’cause it wants to get back in power. Well, the people that vote for Republicans are not seeing any opposition.  They’re not seeing any push-back.  In fact, it’s even worse than that.  They’re seeing the Republican Party agree with the Democrats on something as key as open borders.

If there’s one thing that people in this country think is responsible for the direct hit on the economy and their future and their kids’ future, it’s illegal immigration and the willing importation of unskilled, uneducated, totally dependent people who are gonna be automatic voters for the Democrats, which means this never ends. So they’re expecting the Republican Party to stand up and say, “No!” They’re expecting the Republican Party to stand up and try to stop it. They’re not seeing it. They’re at their wits’ end.

They have voted.
They’ve donated.
They’ve given money when they could afford it.

They have campaigned. They’ve gotten out the vote. They have shown up as the Tea Party. They’ve gone to town meetings. They have gone neighborhood door-to-door. They’ve manned the phone banks. They’ve done all of that. They’ve got nothing to show for it except maybe they lose their job, maybe they’re cut back to 30 hours, maybe their neighborhood Walmart’s closing down.  Everything’s caving in on them! They’re the ones playing by the rules. They’re not cultural perverts. They’re not people breaking the law.

They’re doing everything they can to play by the rules, and they don’t think anybody is standing up for ’em or representing them.

They feel powerless.
They feel like they’re being targeted.

They think they’re being blamed for whatever’s gone wrong in this country that Obama and the Democrats don’t like. And they’re not to blame. They represent what’s great about this country, and they’re being winnowed out. Well, it only stands to reason that when somebody comes along and lets them know that he agrees with that — and these days are over and we’re gonna make this country great again and you’re gonna help me do it — and we’re together gonna make this country great, I guarantee you that is a magnet that no Republican, conservative, expert, think tank, whatever, can stop.

It’s not hard to understand this at all. Except the Republican Party I don’t think understands what is animating and motivating their base supporters. They’re not worried about the Republican Party future. They’re not worried about the image of the Republican Party, not worried about the media liking them.  They’re not worried about money being donated. They’re worried about their country. They oppose, stridently, the modern-day Democrat Party. They oppose the policies of Barack Hussein O. It isn’t personal.

They just don’t like what’s happening. They don’t like the out-of-control spending. They don’t like $4.5 trillion printed and given to Wall Street, and here’s Wall Street squandering it now! They don’t like any of this.  Somebody comes along and says, “I don’t either. You know what? We’re gonna work together, and we’re gonna make this country great again. We got stupid people running it.” Well, Trump’s not criticizing Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives. He’s criticizing stupid people.”…

END TRANSCRIPT

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/01/20/understanding_trump_s_appeal

Rush Limbaugh “Related links'”

‘I observed Trump supporters being spit on, objects thrown at them, punched, kicked, even robbed of their personal belongings. I observed victims running for their lives. It became inherently dangerous for anyone wearing a T-shirt or hat in support of Trump.’ Peaceful, unarmed Trump supporters were forced to ‘run for their lives’ trying to get to their cars after Trump rally, per San Jose Police report June 2016. One police officer was injured by rioter throwing metal barricade at him-Mercury News, 6/8/2016

San Jose Police “officers held back to avoid inciting more violence and having the crowd turn on officers....Due to the crowd size and volatility, officers (both uniform and plain clothes) were unable to help most victims.”

June 8, 2016,Trump supporters were ‘running for their lives’ after San Jose rally, police report says,” San Jose Mercury News, Mark Gomez, San Jose

6/2/2016, San Jose Ca., parking garage ambush, photo Merc. News

 Two undercover police officers at a Donald Trump rally last week said they saw Trump supporters “get punched, kicked and pushed” and “running for their lives,” according to a police report.

The plainclothes officers said they did not intervene for fear their own safety would be jeopardized as the estimated 400 protesters developed a “mob mentality.”

The officers’ observations were included in the arrest report of Antonio Moses Fernandez, 19, of San Jose, who is accused of throwing a metal barrier into a police skirmish line following the Trump rally June 2 outside the San Jose Convention Center. Fernandez made his first court appearance Tuesday and was charged with felony assault on a peace officer with a deadly weapon and misdemeanor resisting, delaying or obstructing an officer, according to court documents.

Fernandez hung up the phone Wednesday when reached by this newspaper. He could face a sentence of five years in prison if convicted on the felony assault with a deadly weapon charge, according to the prosecutors.

“When there’s an assault on a police officer, we don’t have any tolerance for that,” prosecutor Chris Boscia said.

So far Fernandez is the only person to be criminally charged stemming from the violence that erupted outside Trump’s rally last week. Three other people were also arrested the day of the rally, including Ahmed Abdirahman, 19, of Santa Clara, and Robert Trillo, 18, both on suspicion of felony assault with a deadly weapon, and Michael Kitaigorodsky, 19, of San Jose, on suspicion of refusal to disperse.

Three juveniles were also arrested, police said Wednesday. A 16-year-old and a 17-year-old, both of San Jose, were arrested for felony assault with a deadly weapon. A 16-year-old Milpitas resident was arrested for misdemeanor battery. Their names were not released because they are minors. The attacks were seen in television reports.

Details about what led to the other arrests have not been made public. Police on Wednesday afternoon released images of another assault suspect they are seeking.

The Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office said Wednesday morning it is reviewing case files in the arrests of Trillo and Kitaigorodsky. If charged, the two men may not make their first court appearance until Aug. 2. Prosecutors were still waiting Wednesday morning to receive the police report in the Abdirahman case.

One of the undercover officers wrote that he was “monitoring protesters from within the crowd” and estimated there were 250 protesters gathered behind barricades at 6 p.m., about one hour before Trump’s scheduled arrival. That number grew as the evening wore on.

As the crowd grew, the officer noted that “it became inherently dangerous for anyone wearing a T-shirt or hat in support of Trump. I observed Trump supporters being spit on, objects being thrown at them, punched, kicked and even robbed of their personal belongings.
.
In these instances, I observed victims running for their lives. 

A second undercover officer reported seeingseveral individuals wearing Trump articles of clothing get punched, kicked and pushed. Due to the crowd size and volatility, officers (both uniform and plain clothes) were unable to help most victims.”

Just after 8 p.m. police issued an order for the crown to disperse. At 9:10 p.m. the undercover officers witnessed Fernandez throw a metal barricade into officers dressed in full riot gear. One officer was injured after being hit by the barricade, according to the report.

The undercover officers say they witnessed Fernandez pick up a second barrier and then put it down. One witnessed Fernandez remove his shirt and use it to cover his face. One of the undercover officers eventually tackled Fernandez and held him down until uniformed officers arrived to make the arrest. During a police interview, Fernandez denied throwing the barrier into the police line.

In the face of critics who charge police did little to protect Trump supporters, Police Chief Eddie Garcia has defended his officers’ handling of the protest. Garcia insisted that it was more important for police to hold their “skirmish line” formations than to stop individual attacks.

“We are not an ‘occupying force’ and cannot reflect the chaotic tactics of the protesters,” Garcia told reporters. Unless a victim’s life was in peril or the violence was “spiraling out of control,” he said, officers held back to avoid inciting more violence and having the crowd turn on officers. He also said the 250 police weren’t enough to control about 400 protesters. 

Following the rally several videos appeared on various social media sites and captured some of the attacks.

A police task force is reviewing video evidence of the assaults and other possible crimes from the protest. Monday the police department announced more arrests were “imminent,” but so far no additional arrests have been announced.

San Jose police are asking anyone with information about physical assaults at the Trump rally or videos of the violence to contact their Assaults Unit at 408-277-4161 or leave a tip with Silicon Valley Crime Stoppers at 408-947-STOP (7867) or svcrimestoppers.org.” image from Mercury News

…………………

US supported weapons shipments to Syria sent via Saudi Arabia and Qatar go to hardcore Islamic terrorists. US says no way to vet groups getting weapons, groups temporarily modify their behavior to appeal to weapons providers-NY Times, Oct. 14, 2012

Oct. 2012, NY Times:

US provides intelligence and other support for weapons shipments to Syria from Qatar and Saudi Arabia that are going directly to Islamic terrorists. US is aware of this.

 

10/14/2012, Rebel Arms Flow Is Said to Benefit Jihadists in Syria, NY Times, David E. Sanger


Most of the arms shipped at the behest of Saudi Arabia and Qatar to supply Syrian rebel groups fighting the government of Bashar al-Assad are going to hard-line Islamic jihadists, and not the more secular opposition groups that the West wants to bolster, according to American officials and Middle Eastern diplomats.


That conclusion, of which President Obama and other senior officials are aware from classified assessments of the Syrian conflict that has now claimed more than 25,000 lives, casts into doubt whether the White House’s strategy of minimal and indirect intervention in the Syrian conflict is accomplishing its intended purpose of helping a democratic-minded opposition topple an oppressive government, or is instead sowing the seeds of future insurgencies hostile to the United States.


“The opposition groups that are receiving the most of the lethal aid are exactly the ones we don’t want to have it,” said one American official familiar with the outlines of those findings, commenting on an operation that in American eyes has increasingly gone awry.


The United States is not sending arms directly to the Syrian opposition. Instead, it is providing intelligence and other support for shipments of secondhand light weapons like rifles and grenades into Syria, mainly orchestrated from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The reports indicate that the shipments organized from Qatar, in particular, are largely going to hard-line Islamists….


American officials have been trying to understand why hard-line Islamists have received the lion’s share of the arms shipped to the Syrian opposition through the shadowy pipeline with roots in Qatar, and, to a lesser degree, Saudi Arabia. The officials, voicing frustration, say there is no central clearinghouse for the shipments, and no effective way of vetting the groups that ultimately receive them….


“We haven’t seen anyone step up to take a leadership role for what happens after Assad,” the diplomat said. “There’s not much of anything that’s encouraging. We should have lowered our expectations.”


The disorganization is strengthening the hand of Islamic extremist groups in Syria, some with ties or affiliations with Al Qaeda, he said: “The longer this goes on, the more likely those groups will gain strength.”…


Moreover, the rebels often adapt their language and appearance in ways they hope will appeal to those distributing weapons. For instance, many rebels have grown the long, scraggly beards favored by hard-line Salafi Muslims after hearing that

Qatar was more inclined to give weapons to Islamists.”…

============

CIA conducted electronic espionage on all major French political parties involved in 2012 French presidential election-WikiLeaks, Feb. 16, 2017

The CIA operation ran for ten months from 21 Nov 2011 to 29 Sep 2012, crossing the April-May 2012 French presidential election and several months into the formation of the new government.”

2/16/2017,CIA espionage orders for the 2012 French presidential election,Press Release, Wikileaks.org 

All major French political parties were targeted for infiltration by the CIA’s human (“HUMINT”) and electronic  (“SIGINT”) spies in the seven months leading up to France’s 2012 presidential election. The revelations are contained within three CIA tasking orders published today by WikiLeaks as context for its forth coming CIA Vault 7 series. Named specifically as targets are the French Socialist Party (PS), the National Front (FN) and Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) together with current President Francois Hollande, then President Nicolas Sarkozy, current round one presidential front runner Marine Le Pen, and former presidential candidates Martine Aubry and Dominique Strauss-Khan. 

The CIA assessed that President Sarkozy’s party was not assured re-election. Specific tasking concerning his party included obtaining the “Strategic Election Plans” of the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP); schisms or alliances developing in the UMP elite; private UMP reactions to Sarkozy’s campaign stratagies; discussions within the UMP on any “perceived vulnerabilities to maintaining power” after the election; efforts to change the party’s ideological mission; and discussions about Sarkozy’s support for the UMP and “the value he places on the continuation of the party’s dominance”. Specific instructions tasked CIA officers to discover Sarkozy’s private deliberations “on the other candidates” as well as how he interacted with his advisors. Sarkozy’s earlier self-identification as “Sarkozy the American” did not protect him from US espionage in the 2012 election or during his presidency.

The espionage order for “Non Ruling Political Parties and Candidates Strategic Election Plans” which targeted Francois Holland, Marine Le Pen and other opposition figures requires obtaining opposition parties’ strategies for the election; information on internal party dynamics and rising leaders; efforts to influence and implement political decisions; support from local government officials, government elites or business elites; views of the United States; efforts to reach out to other countries, including Germany, U.K., Libya, Israel, Palestine, Syria and Cote d’Ivoire; as well as information about party and candidate funding.

Significantly, two CIA opposition espionage tasks, “What policies do they promote to help boost France’s economic growth prospects?” and “What are their opinions on the German model of export-led growth?” resonate with a U.S. economic espionage order from the same year. That order requires obtaining details of every prospective French export contract or deal valued at $200m or more.

The opposition espionage order also places weight on obtaining the candidates’ attitudes to the E.U’s economic crisis, centering around their position on the Greek debt crisis; the role of France and Germany in the management of the Greek debt crisis; the vulnerability of French government and French banks to a Greek default; and “specific proposals and recommendations” to deal with “the euro-zone crisis”.

The CIA espionage orders published today are classified and restricted to U.S. eyes only (“NOFORN”) due to “Friends-on-Friends sensitivities”. The orders state that the collected information is to “support” the activities of the CIA, the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA)’s E.U section, and the U.S. State Department’s Intelligence and Research Branch. 

The CIA operation ran for ten months from 21 Nov 2011 to 29 Sep 2012, crossing the April-May 2012 French presidential election and several months into the formation of the new government.”

https://wikileaks.org/cia-france-elections-2012/