Khizr Khan’s writings discovered subordinating US Constitution to sharia law

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

He was presented to the nation as a Constitution-loving (he carries a pocket copy, dontcha know!) immigrant who just happens to be from Pakistan, but it turns out that Khizr Khan is a recognized scholar on sharia law. And in his published writings, he seems to approve of subordinating the Constitution to Allah’s own sharia. Paul Sperry reports at Breitbart:

Khizr M. Khan has published papers supporting the supremacy of Islamic law over “man-made” Western law — including the very Constitution he championed in his Democratic National Convention speech attacking GOP presidential nod Donald Trump.

In 1983, for example, Khan wrote a glowing review of a book compiled from a seminar held in Kuwait called “Human Rights In Islam” in which he singles out for praise the keynote address of fellow Pakistani Allah K. Brohi, a pro-jihad Islamic jurist who was one of the closest advisers to late Pakistani dictator Gen. Zia ul-Haq, the father of the Taliban movement.

Khan speaks admiringly of Brohi’s interpretation of human rights, even though it included the right to kill and mutilate those who violate Islamic laws and even the right of men to “beat” wives who act “unseemly.”

Khan touted the supremacy of sharia:

Khan provides his own advocacy for Sharia law in a separate academic paper titled “Juristic Classification of Islamic Law,” which he also wrote in 1983, while studying in Saudi Arabia.

“The invariable and basic rules of Islamic law are only those prescribed in the Shari’ah,” Khan writes. “All other juridical works… must always be subordinated to the Shari’ah.”

He explains that Sharia is derived from the Quran and Sunnah, and that the Quran “is the absolute authority from which springs the very conception of legality and every legal obligation.”

What if sharia happens to conflict with the U.S. Constitution? I’d like to see if Khan has addressed that point in further detail.

Well, questioning Khan by the Drive-By Media (i.e. Democrat Operatives with Bylines) isn't gonna happen anytime soon.

MSNBC host melts down over Hillary’s emails

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

Even by the standards of MSNBC, Sunday morning’s shout-down of a guest for daring to mention the blackmail potential in the 33,000 deleted emails was unusually embarrassing. As Nicholas Fondacaro of Newsbusters reported:

AM Joy Sunday as host Joy Reid shouted down Amy Kremer, former Chair of Tea Party Express, for daring to mention there are roughly 30,000 missing e-mails from Hillary Clinton’s personal server. “You just invented it an entire thing,” Reid shouted, “There’s no 33,000 e-mails that are going to harm our national security.” From there Reid refused to let Kremer speak anymore. And when Kremer asked to finish her point, “Not if you’re going to invent things,” Reid reprimanded her.

Reid is an embarrassing ignoramus. She was unable to distinguish between the DNC hack of about 20,000 emails and the 33,000 emails that Hiullary deleted from her home-brew server.

Well Reid does work for MS-NBC.

Virginia Supreme Court squashes Clinton-McAuliffe plan to win with felons’ votes

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe, a longtime member of the Clinton Machine, tried to swing Virginia into semi-permanent blue status with sweeping executive orders that would have allowed hundreds of thousands of felons to vote in the November election. Felons are among the most loyal demographic slices of the citizenry for the Democratic Party. Far too little attention is given to the nature of that attraction, revolving around the notion of getting money and “stuff” without having to work for it, and to pay for it, taking money away from the people who earned it, at the point of a gun if necessary.

The state Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that McAuliffe exceeded his authority.

Another Clinton hack trying to steal the election.

Comey’s game

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

I think it is possible that Comey was grudgingly complying with the reality that he learned in the wake of the covert meeting between Bill Clinton and A.G. Lynch (that became public only because a Phoenix TV station was doing a story on VIP arrivals at Sky Harbor Airport). I suspect that he learned, directly or indirectly, that no case would be brought against Hillary Clinton. As Karin McQuillan noted today, he provided a “tell” when he said:

We … engage in productive conversations with prosecutors about what resolution may be appropriate.

This would leave him with a decision to respond the hard way or the easy way.  I have no idea what the hard way would involve, whether it involved losing positive inducements to cooperate and be a good team member or whether something decidedly unpleasant might happen to him or his loved ones, as has happened to so many people inconvenient to the Clintons, by sheer coincidence, of course. The easy way would be no recommendation for prosecution, allowing A.G. Lynch to keep her promise to follow whatever the FBI recommended. That would call off the dogs.

So did Director Comey cooperate the way American prisoners of war did, when forced to read statements praising their captors, by in effect blinking Morse code? He gave exactly what he was supposed to. But he did it in a way calculated to do political damage to Hillary Clinton.

Then there is the small matter of the ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation, and potential quid-pro-quo corruption lining the actions of the secretary of state to donations to the foundation.  Comey let us know that quite a few deleted emails were recovered from Hillary’s servers but said absolutely nothing about the other investigation.

One can only hope for something.

Obama’s Orlando funeral dilemma

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

What will President Obama do about the memorial service that is certain to follow the awful carnage in Orlando this morning? He has a clear pattern, but this incident does not fit in very well.

In Charleston, SC, the decision was easy. The victims were black and the perpetrator was a white racist. Two check marks, so a presidential visit was assured.

In San Bernardino, the perpetrators were Islamic, and the victims were of multiple ethnicities, including protected classes. A mixed signal, but because the perps were of a group that must be shielded from any public perception of collective responsibility, a presidentisl visit was out of the question.

But now in Orlando, we have a Muslim perp, but the victims are another highly favored group that collectively is a bedrock constituency of the Democrats: gays.

What’s Obama to do?

If he snubs the memorial service, he risks offending gays. But if he goes, he risks highlighting Islamic hostility to gays, as well as the threat of global jihad.

If I had to bet, I’d say he plays golf.

Seems about right!

Orlando gay nightclub shooter was a registered Democrat

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

The shooter who killed 20 and wounded 42 at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Omar Mir Siddique Mateen, was a registered Democrat who has voted in at least 3 recent general elections, according to voters.findthedata.com. He registered to vote on July, 19,2006, but skipped the election that November. But he voted by absentee ballot in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, presumably for his party’s candidate, Barack Obama. He even voted in the off year 2014 general election, this time showing up at the polls to vote, perhaps a sign of increasing political enthusiasm.

Why bother noting this? Becuase if he had been a Christian Republican, you can bet everything you own that the media would be trumpeting it from the rooftops. And if he had owned any Trump paraphenalia, it would be the biggest story in the world.

Just as ABC News jump on the Aurora movie shooter, the Media was hoooping it was a trump supporter and not a radical jahadi.

Ooops!

Outrage compounded -- San Jose mayor blames Trump for violence committed against his followers

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

The riot last night in San Jose, California was outrageous on its face – political violence committed with ethnic animus. The San Jose police largely stood by as Trump supporters were violently assaulted. But the mayor of San Jose made it even worse, blaming the victims and raising suspicions about the orders that were issued to police.

“Our police officers have done an extremely courageous and professional job so far,” San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo told the Associated Press by phone. “We’re all still holding our breath to see the outcome of this dangerous and explosive situation.”

Another example of liberals BLAMING the victim!!!

State Department Inspector General’s report demolishes Hillary’s excuses about her private email server

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

The 83-page State Department inspector general’s report on Hillary Clinton’s private email server puts the lie to many of Hillary Clinton’s repeated claims about her unprecedented private email server. No, it was not permitted, and she never asked. And if she had asked, she would have been told it was not permitted. Even the Washington Post editorial board is appalled, publishing a collective rebuke titled “Clinton’s inexcusable, willful disregard for the rules.”

The “rules” she disregarded were adopted to implement federal law, the Federal Records Act, so in effect she was violating the law, even though the I.G.’s report deliberately avoids saying so. So Hillary’s repeated claims that her use of the private email system was permitted is a blatant lie.

So, too, is her claim that she has cooperated with investigators. She and her top aides all declined to be interviewed by the I.G. investigators.

Time for the FBI to give a set of polish nickel bracelets.

Hilarious -- Hillary’s tweet bungles the concept of a Venn Diagram

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

There’s nothing more embarrasing than trying to look smart and demonstrating ignorance. A tweet purportedly from Hillary Clinton herself demonstrates that nobody on her campaign seems to understand what a Venn diagram is. The concept is not hard at all – using circles to illustrate where two groups overlap – but seems beyond the mental capacity of the woman who used to be regarded as so brilliant, she was capable of redesigning the entire American health care system.

Here’s the ridiculous tweet:

Dear Congress,

Let's get this done.

Thanks,

The vast majority of Americans pic.twitter.com/23ND36tFFm

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) May 20, 2016

From the smartest woman in the world.

At last! Senate GOP playing SCOTUS confirmation battle by Democrat rules

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

Ever since the disgraceful treatment of Robert Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court by Democrats, the GOP has played a sucker’s game. That has finally changed with the vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The Senate Judiciary Committee is playing by Democrat rules:
....................

We have videotape of Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Barack Obama all taking the position that the Senate should not vote to confirm a Republican in the lame-duck era of a president’s term. They only convict themselves of hypocrisy with this stance. Read this Washington Examiner account of the ways in which the Dems have doomed themselves.

It's take 25 years for karma to boomerang back on Biden, Schumer, Obama, et al.

Valerie Jarrett is the Poster Girl for Chicago’s Pension Crisis

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

The City of Chicago is being fiscally devoured by pension obligations run up by politicians buying votes. Even with a record $543 million property tax increase, the city’s $20 billion debt to its pension funds will continue to grow for at least a decade. Pension costs overwhelm the city’s ability to deliver any actual services, and the tax increases necessary to pay for both services and pensions predictably could drive away businesses and residents, leaving behind another Detroit.
.......................

Wait a minute, how about Valerie Jarrett, President Obama’s Supreme Consigliere, and, many believe, the de facto President of the United States, while the nominal POTUS plays golf, watches televised sports, and stays current with the latest TV shows and rap music.

Chris Fusco and Patrick Rehkamp report in the Chicago Sun-Times:

Jarrett was appointed CTA [Chicago Transit Authority] board chairman in 1995 by then-Mayor Richard M. Daley. She left the $50,000-a-year part-time post in 2003 and began collecting her $35,660-a-year pension three years later, at 50 — the minimum age at which former board members can take their pensions.

Now 59, Jarrett had collected a total of $306,080 in pension payouts as of last summer, records show. That’s more than 27 times the $11,132 that she paid toward her board pension through payroll deductions from her CTA paychecks.

Besides her CTA pension, she makes $173,922 a year in her role as Obama’s senior adviser — a job she has held since his first term in the White House in 2009.

Nice gig, if you can get it!

Obama’s SCOTUS confirmation petard

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

There’s a lot of hoisting ahead for President Obama, the Senate Democrats, and their media allies when they try to force confirmation of a justice to replace the late Antonin Scalia. Courtesy of Scott Ott, we have this video of Senator Barack Obama making the point that the Senate should examine more than the intellectual capability and moral character of a nominee. Examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record – that’s right: philosophy and ideology – is important for the Senate to apply.

Whoops! The Dear Leader has just given the Republicans the justification for doing the SAME thing to his appointments.

And now Jim Geraghty of National Review has dug up the New York Times’ editorial board arguing that when voters hand control of the Senate to an opposition party in a midterm election, they have every right to resist a presidential nomination to SCOTUS.

The President’s supporters insist vehemently that, having won the 1984 election, he has every right to try to change the Court’s direction. Yes, but the Democrats won the 1986 election, regaining control of the Senate, and they have every right to resist. This is not the same Senate that confirmed William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia as an associate justice last year.

As Geraghty dryly notes, “this is not the same Senate that confirmed Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan…”

Beginning the autopsy on Obama administration decision-making disasters

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

I hope to live long enough to see the Obama administration’s disastrous track record objectively evaluated. The overwhelming media support Obama has received, combined with his demographic characteristics, personal charm, winning smile, sense of humor, and comedy timing, has kept his level of public esteem far above the merits of his presidential decisions.

As his second term winds down, some truth-tellers are beginning to emerge and discuss the quality of decision-making they experienced. Among the first is Robert Gates. Aaron Kliegman reports in the Free Beacon:

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that President Obama thinks he is smarter than his advisers and that he surrounds himself with people who will not question his views. As a result, the White House has struggled to develop and implement effective strategy during the Obama administration, according to Gates.

“You know, the president is quoted as having said at one point to his staff, ‘I can do every one of your jobs better than you can,’” Gates said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

History will eventually downgrade his "intelligence" to such a low level that Reagan will look brilliant compared to him.

13 Hours and Counting to the end of Hillary's Candidacy

From Thomas Lifson at the The American Thinker:

There may still be a reasonable debate on whether or not Hillary Clinton has a conscience, but Sunday night’s Democratic presidential debate proves that she does have a subconscious. That part of her mind put words into her mouth that her conscious mind would rather not admit.

The critical six words: “No individual too big to jail.”

I think she'll look good in stripes.

Hillary's Paula Jones nightmare begins

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

Hillary Clinton has been counting on the GOP’s purported “war on women” theme to generate votes. The tacit assumption has always been that her husband’s pattern of sexual exploitation and even violence toward socially less advantaged females could be disregarded by the public, as it was during his impeachment ordeal of the 1990s.
...............

And now Paula Jones has begun a campaign to remind an older generation and inform a newer one about what Bill Clinton did to her, and how Hillary worked against her.
...............

It will be impossible for Hillary to dismiss Ms. Jones’s accusations as baseless, or laugh them off as the work of political enemies. John Hinderaker of Powerline explains why:

No doubt Hillary would like to call Jones a liar, but Bill paid Jones $850,000 to settle her sexual harassment suit. Can you imagine the fun Donald Trump, for one, would have with that? Plus, it was Bill Clinton, not Paula Jones, who was found by the presiding federal judge to have committed perjury.

I can't wait.

A couple of questions for Cruz-kids-as-monkeys cartoonist Ann Telnaes

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog: Too short to excerpt!

Hi Ann,

I saw your tweet in which you proclaimed, “Ted Cruz has put his children in a political ad- don't start screaming when editorial cartoonists draw them as well,” and I have a couple of of questions because Hillary Clinton put a picture of herself, her husband Bill, and their granddaughter, in a big political ad on her website.

So my questions for you are: [doesn't] this mean the grandkid is fair game for cartooning? So what animal would you use? If Hispanic kids are monkeys, and Hillary is pandering to Hispanics, what is appropriate here?

Oh. Keep in mind the other grandparents are Jewish. So many rich opportunities for ethic slurring. What does a Pulitzer Prize winner do?

Just wondering…. Th

omas Lifson

In Oval Office speech, Obama offers the same policies that have allowed ISIS to grow

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

President Obama served up nothingburgers to the nation in a Sunday evening address from the Oval Office. The only people who would be reassured by what he had to say are those who share the president’s evident belief that saying words like “relentlessly pursue” will magically change the real world.

As far as strategy to destroy ISIS, there was nothing new.
................

The president, as I predicted, tripled down on gun control, an excellent distraction to channel public discussion toward a contentious issue and away from his failures.

He obviously believes it's NOT hispolices that are the problem.

A second prominent WaPo liberal columnist bails on Obama

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

A week ago, it was ultra-liberal Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank who penned a column titled “Barack Obama, President Oh-Bummer.” Today, his WaPo colleague Richard Cohen, another lib, writes: “Obama, the president who lost his voice.”

The presidency has changed Barack Obama. His hair has gone gray, which is to be expected, and he looks older, which is also to be expected, but his eloquence has been replaced by petulance and he has lost the power to persuade, which is something of a surprise. You can speculate that if the Obama of today and not Winston Churchill had led Britain in World War II, the Old Vic theater would now be doing “Hamlet” in German.

Hmm...the world is once again facing a threat from a foe interested in a “final solution” for Jews, and with ambitions to take over the entire planet. And Cohen is strongly implying that Obama is not up to the challenge.

The president has lost his voice, that is certain. The numbers say so. Obama has the approval of only 44 percent of the American people. During his time in office, Congress and much of the nation have gone Republican — statehouse after statehouse, governor after governor (soon to be 32) — an astounding feat when you consider that the GOP has become the Know-Nothing Party in all its meanings.

Cohen favors the expression “lost his voice” as if the problem were somewhere in the presidential larynx, not a matter of vacuous rhetoric proving detached from reality, now that the reality check is obvious. But then he reverses course:

It’s not that Obama has lost his gift of eloquence. His problem is that he often has nothing to say.

Bingo!

The problem for Cohen is that aside from platitudes, Obama has never had anything to say.

After being rudely awaken by reality, the libs at the Washington (Com)Post realize the Dear Leader has no substance. This is so they can announce that Hillary will save us.

Right!

Hypocrite Obama ordered a 6-month pause in processing Muslim 'refugees' in 2011

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker:

Barack Obama is feigning outrage over the desire of governors and GOP presidential contenders to pause the inflow of Syrian refugees. In tweet from Manila, where he also verbally lambasted his political opponents, he wrote:

Slamming the door in the face of refugees would betray our deepest values. That's not who we are. And it's not what we're going to do.

But in 2011, by his own standards, Obama was betraying “our deepest values.” Sean Hannity reports:

The Obama administration actually stopped processing Iraqi refugee requests for six months after two Iraqi-refugees were arrested on terrorism charges in Bowling Green, Kentucky in 2011.

As TheFederalist.com points out, the U.S. State Department stopped processing the requests from Iraqi refugees in order to review and revamp security screening procedures.

The Federalist's Sean Davis asked the relevant question here:

If it wasn't evil when Obama paused that refugee program in 2011, why is it evil to do the exact same thing now?

Because the Dear Leader can do not wrong.

'Frog march' for Sid Blumenthal?

From Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker Blog:

During the Bush Derangement Syndrome era, a common fantasy on the left was that Karl Rove would be “frog marched out of the White House in handcuffs” for his alleged crime of revealing the name of CIA desk jockey Valerie Plame. Plame, and her husband Joe Wilson IV (author of the frog march fantasy) became glamorous icons of progs across America for their role in emphasizing the severity of punishment for violations of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.
..............................

In Trey Gowdy’s remarkable letter to Elijah Cummings, the former prosecutor called Blumenthal’s naming of the CIA source “some of the most protected information in our intelligence community.”

Recall that there is no love lost between Blumenthal and the Obama administration, which explicitly prohibited his employment at the State Department. So any Justice Department moves to prosecute the man widely known as “Sid Vicious” would not necessarily encounter political obstacles.

I would live it.