PATRIOT OR TRAITOR | Tag

Elizabeth Lynne Cheney

Posted on February 3, 2021 by Patriot or Traitor

Elizabeth Lynne Cheney is a traitor.

Elizabeth Cheney is a treasonous politician serving as the U.S. Representative for Wyoming’s at-large congressional district since 2017. Cheney is the House Republican Conference Chair, the third-highest position in the House Republican leadership.

In voting to impeach President Trump, Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney violated the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution by declaring him guilty before due process.

Regarding the mob violence at the U. S. Capitol building, Rep. Cheney stated that the president “lit the flame of this attack.” To be sure, he enflamed the marchers to the Capitol, but he did not incite to a riot. The mob itself chose to do that.

The Constitution does not protect speech that incites a riot. Trump did not tell the marchers to march to the Capitol and engage in violence.

In fact, he stated to them, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

Rep. Cheney declared, “Everything that followed” at the Capitol “was his doing.” No, it was not his doing; it was the doing itself of many of the mob. She makes a faulty leap of post hoc, ergo propter hoc: after his comments, therefore because of his comments. The law and the Constitution don’t work that way. Nowhere did the president state or imply that the marchers should next march to the Capitol for violent insurrection.

Rep. Cheney then charges the president with “betrayal… of his oath to the Constitution.” In unwitting irony, it is Cheney who betrays her oath to the Constitution by declaring guilt before due process.

She should have taken the route that Sen. Mitch McConnell carefully did: Wait to see what the evidence says — which implements due process.

On January 17, 2021 the Republican Party Central Committee in Carbon County, Wyoming voted unanimously with 45 votes to censure Cheney for her vote to impeach President Trump.

The Committee declared that “she voted in favor of the Democrats’ rushed impeachment article, denying President Trump due process.” The Committee was accurate in its charge.

It is understandable that one week later State Senator Anthony Boucher tossed his hat into the ring in the Republican primary against Rep. Cheney.

I want to relate a true story that explains the distinction between enflaming people and inciting a riot. These are constitutionally two entirely different things.

In the late ‘60s when I was a college professor at a mid-sized Michigan university, nearly every campus in America was protesting the country’s involvement in the Vietnam war.

One well-known and revered professor at my university decided in a Hyde Park manner to protest the war. He set up a PA system in the center of campus and blasted his protests of the war.

After dark, student mobs destroyed the campus. The destruction got so violent and widespread that military helicopters were flown in to tear-gas the entire campus, dispersing the students.

Was this the professor’s constitutional right to engage in free speech on a public, not private, campus, or did he incite a riot? He enflamed students, but he did not instruct or suggest that they should violently destroy much of the campus.

I take this as the professor’s constitutional right to free speech on a public campus — much as I take President Trump’s right to protest to his followers, even enflame them, but not incite them to mob violence and destruction.

I’ve always liked Liz Cheney’s politics and wish she would have made the critical distinction between Trump’s enflaming comments and incitement to riot.

With unanimous censure by her party leaders in Wyoming, she could lose her seat.

Brian J. Smith

Posted on February 3, 2021 by Patriot or Traitor

Brian J. Smith is a traitor.

Brian J. Smith is a traitor to our Nation byway of using his position as president and chief operating officer of The Coca-Cola Company. In this role, he is responsible for leading the company’s global field operations into an unconstitutional new world of diversity, inclusion and equity, the acronym DIE aptly applies. In other words, thanks to Brian J. Smith, the Coca-Cola Company has now been forced to adopt this socialist form of left-wing ideology.

Consequently, Coca-Cola has sent out notices to law firms demanding that the company will “require diversity among law firms who bill it for work in the United States and reduce payments if they do not comply.”

Because of pressure from the Marxist, anti-American Black Lives Matter, many Fortune 500 companies have pledged to address alleged racial inequality more aggressively.

In fact, there is almost a competition among firms to see who gets the highest score of diversity and inclusion. How is this accomplished?

To determine the Best Workplaces for Diversity, Fortune partnered with Great Place to Work® to analyze anonymous survey feedback representing more than 4.8 million US employees.

The Best Workplaces for Diversity list focuses on the experiences of women, people of color, LGBTQ people, employees who are Boomers or older, and people who have disabilities. The ranking is based on what these employees themselves report in a 60-question Trust Index© survey about the trust, pride and camaraderie they experience in their workplace, and how those experiences compare to their colleagues’ reports of the same workplaces. Great Place to Work also consider[s] employees’ daily experiences of innovation, the company’s values, and the effectiveness of their leaders, to ensure they’re consistently experienced, as well.

The remaining 15 percent of the rank is based on the diversity of the company’s overall workforce and its management, senior leadership and board, taking into account industry trends.

Lori George Billingsley.is a traitor.

Coca Cola Company’s Chief Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Officer, Lori George Billingsley, explains how Coca-Cola is creating a culture of diversity and inclusion.

The company that once touted “Red, White, and You,” has come a long way to now being a leading proponent of the racism that is the underbelly of diversity.

Thus, Coca-Cola’s general counsel is urging law firms to “effect real systemic change” by adhering to new requirements that [mandate that] outside counsel allocate a portion of work to diverse attorneys — specifically Black lawyers — or risk losing money or even future legal business.”

Dare I call this blackmail? Dare I call it racist?

In essence, “Coke said it will require quarterly reporting about the makeup of legal teams that do work for it and self identify as American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian, Black, women, Hispanic/Latinx, LGBTQ, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander or persons with disabilities. For those working on new matters for Coke, ‘at least 30 percent of each of billed associate and partner time will be from diverse attorneys, and of such amounts at least half will be from Black attorneys.'”

It said the percentages, which are roughly equal to those of the U.S. population overall, will be adjusted over time to eventually hit at least 50 percent of billed time coming from diverse attorneys, with half from Black attorneys.

Firms that fail to meet the targets will be docked 30 percent of their fees, and those who continue to come up short may no longer be considered for Coke work.

Apparently like everything that is radically left-wing, merit does not matter. This is identity politics on steroids.

The fact that there are fewer Black lawyers must be, according to Leftist group think, because of racism. It could never be because fewer Black people choose to enter the legal profession or that because of another brainchild of left-wing philosophy, affirmative action, fewer Blacks succeed in the field.

America already has many protections against discrimination, i.e., the EEOC, and yet the legal profession is now being told it must break the law so that Coca Cola can have the final say in its virtue signaling and its adherence to Black Lives Matter demands.

Of course, the natural result of this is many more people will suddenly self-identify as American Indian, Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic, LGBTQ+, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander or a person with disabilities.”

Heck, I should now claim Hispanic heritage because probably an ancestor of mine was one of the Spanish conversos who were exiled or murdered during the Spanish Inquisition!

Another result will be the deep resentment among different groups because one group is being promoted not based on merit but because of identity politics.

This is just another embodiment of Marxist class warfare now redefined.

This, of course, is always the aim of the Left. They will mouth diversity, inclusion, and equity. But anyone who sees through this will note that “equity is not equality. It is a substitute for equal rights. Equity requires the authorities to determine who gets what according to the race, the ethnicity or other status of the beneficiaries. It is updated Marxist claptrap in which race replaces class.”

This is because the purveyors of this racist ideology couched in alleged empathy and compassion believe that a “lower than population percentage of blacks in any desirable category must be the result of systemic racism.”

What Coca Cola is touting is Critical Race Theory, which is now rampant in schools and businesses in America. Trump banned the use of Critical Race Theory but Biden reinstated it on the first day he issued his slew of executive orders.

We are now in the throes of a hideous left-wing takeover of this country. The term ‘diversity’ now excludes white straight males. Thus, to achieve equity, you first have to take away equality for individuals who were born in the wrong identity group. Merit has no bearing on anything any longer in this country. Consider that 85% of Biden’s new political appointees to the Office of Personnel Management identify as people of color, women or LGBTQ.

It is ironic that businesses, the mainstay of our economic engine, have now taken on the face of tyranny.

I would hope that Americans decide that Coca-Cola is no longer their choice of drink. I would request that these now-designated groups perceive that they are being held to the soft bigotry of low expectations. That to gain a foothold because of something they had no control over such as their race is an abiding insult that lowers self-esteem and pride and worth.

I pray that the legal minds push back hard on Coca-Cola and their dictatorial edicts . I would appeal to the lawyers to stand up and proclaim that such demands are completely contrary to the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and are merely more tools in the leftist arsenal to weaken, eviscerate and eventually destroy America.

Additional Information

Maybe Coke Should Be Cancelled for Its Nazi Past. . .

Woke Coke seems less concerned with selling sugar water these days than selling Americans on the idea that whites are not worthy of respect or equal protection under the law. A few weeks ago, a whistleblower revealed Coca-Cola’s discriminatory employee training program equating racism with “whiteness.” In a series of online work assignments, Coke goes so far as to instruct its white employees to, “try to be less white.” How does one “be less white”? Coke answers that explicitly: by being less “oppressive,” “arrogant,” “certain,” “defensive,” and “ignorant,” and being more “humble” and “break[ing] with white solidarity.” For Coke, judging people based on the color of their skin is not only tolerated but also company policy.

If the company’s “de-whitening” efforts weren’t sufficient proof that Coca-Cola prioritizes a person’s skin color over a person’s talents and individual character, it drove the point home with a letter sent to its outside legal counsel demanding that law firms assign attorneys representing the Coca-Cola Company based, not upon the quality of lawyers’ work, but rather upon lawyers’ racial classification. Going forward, Coke will penalize and reduce its fees to law firms unable to hit certain racial quotas.

Now Coca-Cola’s CEO is joining other race hucksters to claim that sensible voter ID laws meant to curb fraud in Georgia’s elections should be seen as nothing short of white Americans’ attempt to disenfranchise black voters — a loaded accusation not based in reason or analysis of the law’s merits but rather in raw emotionalism intended to pit one group of Americans against another.

Surely a company that regurgitates nasty racial stereotypes against whites so effortlessly while seeking to eliminate them from its workforce doesn’t really believe white people can ever scrub all that icky whiteness away for good, no matter how many rounds of re-education they are forced to endure. As Coca-Cola’s training materials suggest, racism is just part of whites’ DNA. Perhaps the company could have saved future employees a lot of trouble by simply hanging a sign on its front door reading, “No Uppity Whites Allowed.”

Racial stereotypes, racial classifications and quotas, explicitly racist indoctrination — why is Coca-Cola so obsessed with discriminating against people based on the color of their skin rather than evaluating all of the individual characteristics that make each person a unique member of the human race? Perhaps racism is in the company’s own DNA, not at all different from the way the beverage company judges white Americans as racists for historical injustices in which they claimed no part.

Did you know that Nazi Germany was one of Coca-Cola’s biggest markets? Have you ever seen an official Coca-Cola advertisement promoting the company’s partnership with the Nazis during the 1936 Olympics under a jingoistic tagline — “One people, one country, one drink, Coke is it” — that must of made Adolf Hitler proud?

Does Coca-Cola not highlight its financial history with Nazi Germany when crowing about its racial purity tests today? Or the fact that Germany’s inconvenient declaration of war against the United States made it sufficiently difficult for Coca-Cola to maintain its prominent reputation within the Reich that the company’s German representatives repurposed the operations of hundreds of bottling plants toward the production of a new drink called Fanta to serve thirsty German soldiers throughout the war? Does the Coca-Cola Company not brag about Fanta’s wartime genesis as a Nazi beverage? How strange.

One would think that a company so dedicated to rooting out “white supremacy” that it forces its white employees into racial re-education training seminars would first want to take a hard look at its own rather awkward historical relationship with actual white supremacists intent on building a world-dominating “master race.” That’s what “racial justice” requires, right — the punishment of one generation of Americans for the sins of generations past? So why should Coca-Cola’s questionable corporate history be off-limits when it goes out of its way to demonize white Americans for no other reason than the color of their skin?

On the other hand, everything about Coca-Cola’s racial indoctrination program today sounds as if it could be ripped right from the pages of Nazi Germany’s own race laws, with Jews and other “undesirables” being crossed out and “whites” scribbled in their place. All the racial animosity that nearly destroyed humanity last century is back in “woke” form, and some of the same companies that underestimated the Nazi threat then are underestimating the evil intent of the new racialist agendas that are taking over the corporate world today. Isn’t that, after all, why Critical Race Theory exists — so that pretend intellectuals can repackage discredited race-based theories from the past into academic language that can be used once again to justify outright racism? If so, 2021 Coke and 1936 Coke still have much in common. The only thing really differentiating the symbolism of a Nazi swastika and a Black Lives Matter clenched fist, after all, is which racial group is being targeted and which racial group is doing the targeting.

There is nothing new under the sun. Perhaps if Coca-Cola were capable of seeing the similarity between the racial grievances of its old Nazi partners and those of its new “woke” ones, it wouldn’t be so enthusiastic to repeat history all over. And maybe if Coke remains so intent on “cancelling” white Americans for the problems it sees in America’s history, then Americans should cancel Coke for the problems it overlooked in Nazi Germany’s.

Additional Information

What Was More American than Coke and Baseball?

Until very recently, it would have been hard to imagine anything more iconic of American life than Coca-Cola and baseball. Today both remind me of Benito Mussolini’s corporatist – aka, fascist — game of merging of state and corporate power. The CEOs of these operations should hang their heads in shame and fire their public-relations teams. So should the CEOs of Delta and American Airlines, Black Rock, Cisco, American Express, and American Airlines, who have promoted President Biden’s false assertions that tightening election procedures to bring them back into line — and in accord with those of civilized Western governments elsewhere — is racist voter suppression. I’m fed up with this never-ending sham: partisan power grabs to weaken the most important features of American life being cloaked in virtuous anti-racism.

The immediate target of these corporate actions was efforts by Georgia and Texas to revise their election laws, laws which in many states have resulted in widespread disbelief that the 2020 elections were conducted on the up and up. When people believe election procedures are untrustworthy, it shatters voluntary acceptance of the election results. Under pressure from racist propagandists of the left and using COVID as an excuse, jurisdictions in several states so loosened the election rules that widespread fraud was made easier. One state in particular was Georgia, where asleep at the switch (or corrupt — your choice) officials permitted the sloppy, untrustworthy, opaque, and disputed election procedures.

In an effort to prevent a repeat, Georgia enacted a new election law. (In pdf form it’s 104 pages, and that makes it unlikely to me that any of the corporate bleating about it was made with knowledge of its contents.) Their response was certainly occasioned by a weak-kneed response to a small but loud group‘s pressure. In Tom Wolfe’s words, they successfully mau-maued the companies’ flak catchers.

Almost immediately upon its passage, President Biden attacked it as “Jim Crow in the 21st Century” and “a blatant attack on the Constitution.”

“Instead of celebrating the rights of all Georgians to vote or winning campaigns on the merits of their ideas, Republicans in the state instead rushed through an un-American law to deny people the right to vote.”

He added: “This law, like so many others being pursued by Republicans in statehouses across the country, is a blatant attack on the Constitution and good conscience.”

One of the key provisions of the new law ensures ID requirements for requesting mail-in ballots. Seems to me this is a rather basic rule if votes from only eligible voters are to be counted. Race baiters love loose election procedures which make fraud almost certain and regularly (contra the evidence) target ID requirements, arguing absurdly that this suppresses the black vote. It’s a preposterous argument which ignores the fact that obtaining an ID is easy everywhere and a necessity for things like COVID vaccinations, drivers’ licenses, gun purchases, welfare benefits, medical treatments, air travel, and more.

Rasmussen Reports asked, “Should voters be required to show photo identification such as a driver’s license before being allowed to vote”? The answer should put paid to the claim that its unduly burdensome:

White – 74%

Black – 69%

Other Non-White – 82%

All Voters – 75%

Georgia is not the only state shocked into writing more transparent, enforceable, and sensible laws to limit election fraud. Iowa has done so and per the BBC:

“There are currently 253 similar bills in 43 states, according to the left-leaning Brennan Center for Justice think tank.”

James Quincey Chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Company is a traitor.

Following Biden’s lead, the CEO of Coca Cola (a company already in the spotlight for its advice to its workers to “be less white”) James Quincey chimed in with this pablum:

Voting is a foundational right in America, and we have long championed efforts to make it easier to vote.

We want to be crystal clear and state unambiguously that we are disappointed in the outcome of the Georgia voting legislation. Throughout Georgia’s legislative session we provided feedback to members of both legislative chambers and political parties, opposing measures in the bills that would diminish or deter access to voting.

Our approach has always been to work with stakeholders to advocate for positive change, and we will continue to engage with legislators, advocacy groups, business leaders and others to work towards ensuring broad access to voting is available to every eligible voter in our home state.

Additionally, our focus is now on supporting federal legislation that protects voting access and addresses voter suppression across the country. We all have a duty to protect everyone’s right to vote, and we will continue to stand up for what is right in Georgia and across the U.S.

As an aside, I abhor the corporate use of the term “stakeholders” to cover the reality of partisan pressure. Corporate officials are by law required to consider the interests of shareholders and it seems to me they are not doing so in this case.

He was not alone. Ed Bastian, the CEO of Delta Airlines, like Coke, headquartered in Atlanta, joined in covering their weakness in an unsubstantiated moral claim about a law he probably had not read:

Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian said in a memo to employees Wednesday that the law was “unacceptable” and “based on a lie” of widespread fraud in last November’s election.

Governor Brian Kemp was having none to it:

Georgia’s Kemp shot back on Wednesday.

“At no point did Delta share any opposition to expanding early voting, strengthening voter ID measures, increasing the use of secure drop boxes statewide, and making it easier for local election officials to administer elections — which is exactly what this bill does.

“The last time I flew Delta, I had to present my photo ID,” Kemp said in a statement. “Today’s statement by Delta CEO Ed Bastian stands in stark contrast to our conversations with the company, ignores the content of the new law, and unfortunately continues to spread the same false attacks being repeated by partisan activists.”

Delta declined to comment further or specify which parts of the bill it tried to change. Maybe, instead of just running with these statements, reporters should demand that Quincey and Bastian specify their complaints. (Who am I kidding?)

The shuffling parade of weak corporate leaders continued.

There was American Express CEO Steve Squeri, who announced his company stands “against any efforts to suppress voting.” Black Rock’s Larry Fink, expressed concern about efforts that could limit access to the ballot.” And Cisco’s CEO Chuck Robbins: “Governments should be working to make it easier to vote, not harder.” None of these corporate wizards points to anything in the law that suppresses voting or makes it harder to vote. Indeed, they couldn’t because it doesn’t. What the law does try to do is strengthen accountability to make certain only eligible voters can vote and that their votes are securely kept and honestly counted.

This reminds me so much of the self-congratulatory, meaningless, signs that appeared on lawn signs in my wealthy neighborhood last year, announcing. “Hate has no home here.” As if it does in the rest of the neighborhood, which lack such signaling. As if the signs don’t express contempt for and claim moral superiority over those of us who don’t dot our lawn with vapid signs like this.

The corporate kneeling to BLM and Stacey Abrams, who never accepted her election defeat, continued with Major League Baseball, which announced it’ll move the All-star Game and draft out of Atlanta because it opposed the election law. I don’t know where they plan to hold it, but it certainly must not be in New York, which provides for fewer days of permissible early voting than Georgia. Nor can it be in Delaware (Biden’s home state) which doesn’t permit no-excuse absentee ballots like Georgia’s does.

The corporatist ninnies at American Airlines also are attacking Texas’s new election law, and they should know not to mess with Texas.

Texas Lt. Governor Dan Patrick slammed American Airlines on Thursday evening after the airline called out the state’s new security measures to protect elections [snip] “Earlier this morning, the Texas State Senate passed legislation with provisions that limit voting access,” American Airlines said in a statement that echoed remarks made by leftists who have attacked recent measures to secure elections across the country. “To make American’s stance clear: We are strongly opposed to this bill and others like it.” [snip] As Lt. Governor of Texas, I am stunned that American Airlines would put out a statement saying ‘we are strongly opposed to this bill’ [Senate Bill 7] just minutes after their government relations representative called my office and admitted that neither he nor the American Airlines CEO had actually read the legislation,” Patrick said. “We heard these same outcries claiming voter suppression in 2011 when Texas passed the photo voter ID bill. In fact, just the opposite occurred. Voter turnout in Texas soared from 7,993,851 in 2012 to 11,144,040 in 2020, a 39 percent increase. Gubernatorial election voter turnout has increased by 76 percent since photo voter ID was passed.”

Brian Kemp was just as dismissive of Major League Baseball’s decision to move its all-star game and draft out of Atlanta.

As MLB caves to themes of the woke left, the public should know how Georgia’s voting laws stack up against New York’s — where Major League Baseball is headquartered. In New York there are only 10 days of early voting under the Election Integrity Act. Georgia now has 17 days of mandatory early voting, with the option of two additional Sundays. New York requires an excuse for absentee voting. Georgia does not. And while New York just enacted automatic voter registration in December, Georgia has had it in place for years. Let’s be clear: MLB’s decision is not about access to voting. It’s about a lack of courage to stand up to the lies of a radical mob hellbent on distorting the truth for political gain. If MLB is worried about access to the ballot box, they should check their own backyard. They may be afraid of Jos Biden and Stacey Abrams, but I’m not.

Punch back twice as hard, like Kemp and Patrick, against efforts to undercut stronger election integrity. I’d skip the MLB’s All-Star game, switch to another beverage, and check my stock portfolio to be sure the CEOs of the companies I invest in were smarter, stronger, and more honest than these guys are.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Posted on January 21, 2019 by Patriot or Traitor

Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a traitor.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s has a secular progressive and anti-Constitution philosophy. . .

The basis of her sex is used to hide the facts behind the treasonous overt acts that live within Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Her actions are far from a heroic fight for women’s rights, it’s a bizarre concoction of radical feminist angst and ideology that ignores originalist interpretations of the Constitution in favor of reliance on international law, foreign court decisions, and a flagrantly political agenda.

We need only look at her 230-page book, called Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, published in 1977 by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, to see elements of her radical philosophy:

The purpose of this book was to show how the proposed Equal Rights Amendment (for which she was an aggressive advocate) would change federal laws to make them sex-neutral and “eliminate sex-discriminatory provisions.”

Ginsburg called for the sex-integration of prisons and reformatories so that conditions of imprisonment, security and housing could be equal. She explained, “If the grand design of such institutions is to prepare inmates for return to the community as persons equipped to benefit from and contribute to civil society, then perpetuation of single-sex institutions should be rejected.” (Page 101)[.] …

Ginsburg called for reducing the age of consent for sexual acts to people who are “less than 12 years old.” (Page 102)

She asserted that laws against “bigamists, persons cohabiting with more than one woman, and women cohabiting with a bigamist” are unconstitutional. (Page 195)

She objected to laws against prostitution because “prostitution, as a consensual act between adults, is arguably within the zone of privacy protected by recent constitutional decisions.” (Page 97) …

Ginsburg wrote that the Mann Act (which punishes those who engage in interstate sex traffic of women and girls) is “offensive.” Such acts should be considered “within the zone of privacy.” (Page 98)

Ginsburg is no fan of President Trump, which is why she refuses to retire, but is a fan of bypassing the U.S. Constitution. If we needed another reminder of why it matters who is elected president and who gets to pick not only the replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg reminds us. In statements to CNN and the New York Times during the 2016 presidential election, Ginsburg called the presumptive GOP presidential nominee a “faker” and warned of the danger of a Trump administration to SCOTUS and the country. As ABC News reported:

“He is a faker,” Ginsburg said of Trump on Monday on CNN. “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego[.] … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”

She also told the New York Times that a Trump presidency would be unimaginable for the country and the Supreme Court.

“I can’t imagine what this place would be – I can’t imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president,” she told the Times. “For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be – I don’t even want to contemplate that.”

She jokingly added that she would move to New Zealand if he were to win the election in November.

She is entitled to her own political views. She is entitled even to use them in forming her court decisions. She is not entitled to use her lifetime appointment to attempt to sway Americans in an election. Her remarks show how far liberals on the Supreme Court and in lower courts have gone beyond interpreting the intent of the Founders in writing the Constitution to using the Supreme Court to advance a political and social agenda. To them, the Constitution is a “living document” written in the sand, not carved into the bedrock of American democracy.

She is one of the justices who advocates incorporating foreign law and foreign constitutions into SCOTUS decisions:

At the beginning of February, Ruth Bader Ginsburg traveled to South Africa, where she gave a public address on “The Value of a Comparative Perspective in Constitutional Adjudication.” She defended the Supreme Court’s recent practice of taking guidance from foreign law when interpreting the U.S. Constitution. She acknowledged that the practice has been criticized. She expressed concern at bills before Congress condemning the practice.

In that speech in South Africa, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued that if judges can consult law review articles and such in the U.S., “why not the analysis of a question similar to the one we confront contained in an opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada, the Constitutional Court of South Africa, the German Constitutional Court, or the European Court of Human Rights?”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in a concurring opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger, affirmed the use of racial preferences in university admissions, citing the fact that the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination temporarily allows for the “maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups.” Separate but equal?

Justice Ginsburg shares the view that the Supreme Court is a tool – not for ruling on the law and the Constitution, as the Founders intended, but for social engineering, incorporating foreign laws and opinions. She is a globalist who believes that “we the people” includes the people of Zimbabwe and Sri Lanka. She believes in a “living Constitution” as an Etch-a-Sketch document that can mean, as in Alice in Wonderland, whatever she chooses it to mean.

She is the poster child for judicial activism and legislating from the bench. Therein, she is a traitor.

Prescott Sheldon Bush

Posted on December 3, 2018 by Patriot or Traitor

Prescott Sheldon Bush is a traitor.

The Bush political family dynasty began with Prescott Sheldon Bush Sr. who helped Hitler’s rise to power. Prescott also became the Director of Union Banking Corporation when it was suspected of concealing Nazi gold during the Second World War. Both Prescott’s son, George Herbert Walker Bush, and grandson, George Walker Bush, became the 41st and 43rd Presidents of the United States, respectively, who both initiated wars with Iraq that profited companies with Bush family ties, such as Halliburton and KBR.

George Bush’s grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

His business dealings, which continued until his company’s assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz.

The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator’s action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The debate over Prescott Bush’s behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the “Bush/Nazi” connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the documents, many of which are now declassified, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis’ plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler’s rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.

Remarkably, little of Bush’s dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush’s business history an uncomfortable issue for many within the Bush family.

While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. Evidence shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen’s US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.

Bush was also on the board of at least one of the companies that formed part of a multinational network of front companies to allow Thyssen to move assets around the world.

Thyssen owned the largest steel and coal company in Germany and grew rich from Hitler’s efforts to re-arm between the two world wars. One of the pillars in Thyssen’s international corporate web, UBC, worked exclusively for, and was owned by, a Thyssen-controlled bank in the Netherlands. More tantalising are Bush’s links to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border. During the war, the company made use of Nazi slave labour from the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. The ownership of CSSC changed hands several times in the 1930s, but documents from the US National Archive declassified last year link Bush to CSSC, although it is not clear if he and UBC were still involved in the company when Thyssen’s American assets were seized in 1942.

Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush’s involvement. All three are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.

The first set of files, the Harriman papers in the Library of Congress, show that Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of a number of companies involved with Thyssen.

The second set of papers, which are in the National Archives, are contained in vesting order number 248 which records the seizure of the company assets. What these files show is that on October 20 1942 the alien property custodian seized the assets of the UBC, of which Prescott Bush was a director. Having gone through the books of the bank, further seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. By November, the Silesian-American Company, another of Prescott Bush’s ventures, had also been seized.

The third set of documents, also at the National Archives, are contained in the files on IG Farben, who was prosecuted for war crimes.

A report issued by the Office of Alien Property Custodian in 1942 stated of the companies that “since 1939, these (steel and mining) properties have been in possession of and have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been of considerable assistance to that country’s war effort”.

Prescott Bush, a 6ft 4in charmer with a rich singing voice, was the founder of the Bush political dynasty and was once considered a potential presidential candidate himself. Like his son, George, and grandson, George W, he went to Yale where he was, again like his descendants, a member of the secretive and influential Skull and Bones student society. He was an artillery captain in the first world war and married Dorothy Walker, the daughter of George Herbert Walker, in 1921.

In 1924, his father-in-law, a well-known St Louis investment banker, helped set him up in business in New York with Averill Harriman, the wealthy son of railroad magnate E H Harriman in New York, who had gone into banking.

One of the first jobs Walker gave Bush was to manage UBC. Bush was a founding member of the bank and the incorporation documents, which list him as one of seven directors, show he owned one share in UBC worth $125.

The bank was set up by Harriman and Bush’s father-in-law to provide a US bank for the Thyssens, Germany’s most powerful industrial family.

August Thyssen, the founder of the dynasty had been a major contributor to Germany’s first world war effort and in the 1920s, he and his sons Fritz and Heinrich established a network of overseas banks and companies so their assets and money could be whisked offshore if threatened again.

By the time Fritz Thyssen inherited the business empire in 1926, Germany’s economic recovery was faltering. After hearing Adolf Hitler speak, Thyssen became mesmerised by the young firebrand. He joined the Nazi party in December 1931 and admits backing Hitler in his autobiography, I Paid Hitler, when the National Socialists were still a radical fringe party. He stepped in several times to bail out the struggling party: in 1928 Thyssen had bought the Barlow Palace on Briennerstrasse, in Munich, which Hitler converted into the Brown House, the headquarters of the Nazi party. The money came from another Thyssen overseas institution, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvarrt in Rotterdam.

By the late 1930s, Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world’s largest private investment bank, and UBC had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal and US treasury bonds to Germany, both feeding and financing Hitler’s build-up to war.

Between 1931 and 1933 UBC bought more than $8m worth of gold, of which $3m was shipped abroad. According to documents seen by the Guardian, after UBC was set up it transferred $2m to BBH accounts and between 1924 and 1940 the assets of UBC hovered around $3m, dropping to $1m only on a few occasions.

In 1941, Thyssen fled Germany after falling out with Hitler but he was captured in France and detained for the remainder of the war.

There was nothing illegal in doing business with the Thyssens throughout the 1930s and many of America’s best-known business names invested heavily in the German economic recovery. However, everything changed after Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Even then it could be argued that BBH was within its rights continuing business relations with the Thyssens until the end of 1941 as the US was still technically neutral until the attack on Pearl Harbor. The trouble started on July 30 1942 when the New York Herald-Tribune ran an article entitled “Hitler’s Angel Has $3m in US Bank”. UBC’s huge gold purchases had raised suspicions that the bank was in fact a “secret nest egg” hidden in New York for Thyssen and other Nazi bigwigs. The Alien Property Commission (APC) launched an investigation.

There is no dispute over the fact that the US government seized a string of assets controlled by BBH – including UBC and SAC – in the autumn of 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy act. What is in dispute is if Harriman, Walker and Bush did more than own these companies on paper.

Erwin May, a treasury attache and officer for the department of investigation in the APC, was assigned to look into UBC’s business. The first fact to emerge was that Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush and the other directors didn’t actually own their shares in UBC but merely held them on behalf of Bank voor Handel. Strangely, no one seemed to know who owned the Rotterdam-based bank, including UBC’s president.

May wrote in his report of August 16 1941: “Union Banking Corporation, incorporated August 4 1924, is wholly owned by the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. My investigation has produced no evidence as to the ownership of the Dutch bank. Mr Cornelis [sic] Lievense, president of UBC, claims no knowledge as to the ownership of the Bank voor Handel but believes it possible that Baron Heinrich Thyssen, brother of Fritz Thyssen, may own a substantial interest.”

May cleared the bank of holding a golden nest egg for the Nazi leaders but went on to describe a network of companies spreading out from UBC across Europe, America and Canada, and how money from voor Handel travelled to these companies through UBC.

By September May had traced the origins of the non-American board members and found that Dutchman HJ Kouwenhoven – who met with Harriman in 1924 to set up UBC – had several other jobs: in addition to being the managing director of voor Handel he was also the director of the August Thyssen bank in Berlin and a director of Fritz Thyssen’s Union Steel Works, the holding company that controlled Thyssen’s steel and coal mine empire in Germany.

Within a few weeks, Homer Jones, the chief of the APC investigation and research division sent a memo to the executive committee of APC recommending the US government vest UBC and its assets. Jones named the directors of the bank in the memo, including Prescott Bush’s name, and wrote: “Said stock is held by the above named individuals, however, solely as nominees for the Bank voor Handel, Rotterdam, Holland, which is owned by one or more of the Thyssen family, nationals of Germany and Hungary. The 4,000 shares hereinbefore set out are therefore beneficially owned and help for the interests of enemy nationals, and are vestible by the APC,” according to the memo from the National Archives seen by the Guardian.

Jones recommended that the assets be liquidated for the benefit of the government, but instead UBC was maintained intact and eventually returned to the American shareholders after the war. Some claim that Bush sold his share in UBC after the war for $1.5m – a huge amount of money at the time – but there is no documentary evidence to support this claim. No further action was ever taken nor was the investigation continued, despite the fact UBC was caught red-handed operating a American shell company for the Thyssen family eight months after America had entered the war and that this was the bank that had partly financed Hitler’s rise to power.

The most tantalising part of the story remains shrouded in mystery: the connection, if any, between Prescott Bush, Thyssen, Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC) and Auschwitz.

Thyssen’s partner in United Steel Works, which had coal mines and steel plants across the region, was Friedrich Flick, another steel magnate who also owned part of IG Farben, the powerful German chemical company.

Flick’s plants in Poland made heavy use of slave labour from the concentration camps in Poland. According to a New York Times article published in March 18 1934 Flick owned two-thirds of CSSC while “American interests” held the rest.

The US National Archive documents show that BBH’s involvement with CSSC was more than simply holding the shares in the mid-1930s. Bush’s friend and fellow “bonesman” Knight Woolley, another partner at BBH, wrote to Averill Harriman in January 1933 warning of problems with CSSC after the Poles started their drive to nationalise the plant. “The Consolidated Silesian Steel Company situation has become increasingly complicated, and I have accordingly brought in Sullivan and Cromwell, in order to be sure that our interests are protected,” wrote Knight. “After studying the situation Foster Dulles is insisting that their man in Berlin get into the picture and obtain the information which the directors here should have. You will recall that Foster is a director and he is particularly anxious to be certain that there is no liability attaching to the American directors.”

But the ownership of the CSSC between 1939 when the Germans invaded Poland and 1942 when the US government vested UBC and SAC is not clear.

“SAC held coal mines and definitely owned CSSC between 1934 and 1935, but when SAC was vested there was no trace of CSSC. All concrete evidence of its ownership disappears after 1935 and there are only a few traces in 1938 and 1939,” says Eva Schweitzer, the journalist and author whose book, America and the Holocaust, is published next month.

Silesia was quickly made part of the German Reich after the invasion, but while Polish factories were seized by the Nazis, those belonging to the still neutral Americans (and some other nationals) were treated more carefully as Hitler was still hoping to persuade the US to at least sit out the war as a neutral country. Schweitzer says American interests were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The Nazis bought some out, but not others.

The two Holocaust survivors suing the US government and the Bush family for a total of $40bn in compensation claim both materially benefited from Auschwitz slave labour during the second world war.

Kurt Julius Goldstein, 87, and Peter Gingold, 85, began a class action in America in 2001, but the case was thrown out by Judge Rosemary Collier on the grounds that the government cannot be held liable under the principle of “state sovereignty”.

Jan Lissmann, one of the lawyers for the survivors, said: “President Bush withdrew President Bill Clinton’s signature from the treaty [that founded the court] not only to protect Americans, but also to protect himself and his family.”

Lissmann argues that genocide-related cases are covered by international law, which does hold governments accountable for their actions. He claims the ruling was invalid as no hearing took place.

In their claims, Mr Goldstein and Mr Gingold, honorary chairman of the League of Anti-fascists, suggest the Americans were aware of what was happening at Auschwitz and should have bombed the camp.

The lawyers also filed a motion in The Hague asking for an opinion on whether state sovereignty is a valid reason for refusing to hear their case. A ruling is expected within a month.

The petition to The Hague states: “From April 1944 on, the American Air Force could have destroyed the camp with air raids, as well as the railway bridges and railway lines from Hungary to Auschwitz. The murder of about 400,000 Hungarian Holocaust victims could have been prevented.”

The case is built around a January 22 1944 executive order signed by President Franklin Roosevelt calling on the government to take all measures to rescue the European Jews. The lawyers claim the order was ignored because of pressure brought by a group of big American companies, including BBH, where Prescott Bush was a director.

Lissmann said: “If we have a positive ruling from the court it will cause [president] Bush huge problems and make him personally liable to pay compensation.”

The US government and the Bush family deny all the claims against them.

In addition to Eva Schweitzer’s book, two other books are about to be published that raise the subject of Prescott Bush’s business history. The author of the second book, to be published next year, John Loftus, is a former US attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the 70s. Now living in St Petersburg, Florida and earning his living as a security commentator for Fox News and ABC radio, Loftus is working on a novel which uses some of the material he has uncovered on Bush. Loftus stressed that what Prescott Bush was involved in was just what many other American and British businessmen were doing at the time.

“You can’t blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did – bought Nazi stocks – but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today?” he said.

“This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich’s defence industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted,” said Loftus, who is vice-chairman of the Holocaust Museum in St Petersburg.

“The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen,” said Loftus. “At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn’t until the Nazis took over Holland that they realised that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely bely that, it’s absolute horseshit. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were.”

“There is no one left alive who could be prosecuted but they did get away with it,” said Loftus. “As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averill Harriman [to be prosecuted] for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany.”

Loftus said Prescott Bush must have been aware of what was happening in Germany at the time. “My take on him was that he was a not terribly successful in-law who did what Herbert Walker told him to. Walker and Harriman were the two evil geniuses, they didn’t care about the Nazis any more than they cared about their investments with the Bolsheviks.”

What is also at issue is how much money Bush made from his involvement. His supporters suggest that he had one token share. Loftus disputes this, citing sources in “the banking and intelligence communities” and suggesting that the Bush family, through George Herbert Walker and Prescott, got $1.5m out of the involvement. There is, however, no paper trail to this sum.

The third person going into print on the subject is John Buchanan, 54, a Miami-based magazine journalist who started examining the files while working on a screenplay. Last year, Buchanan published his findings in the venerable but small-circulation New Hampshire Gazette under the headline “Documents in National Archives Prove George Bush’s Grandfather Traded With the Nazis – Even After Pearl Harbor”. He expands on this in his book to be published next month – Fixing America: Breaking the Stranglehold of Corporate Rule, Big Media and the Religious Right.

In the article, Buchanan, who has worked mainly in the trade and music press with a spell as a muckraking reporter in Miami, claimed that “the essential facts have appeared on the internet and in relatively obscure books but were dismissed by the media and Bush family as undocumented diatribes”.

Buchanan suffers from hypermania, a form of manic depression, and when he found himself rebuffed in his initial efforts to interest the media, he responded with a series of threats against the journalists and media outlets that had spurned him. The threats, contained in e-mails, suggested that he would expose the journalists as “traitors to the truth”.

Unsurprisingly, he soon had difficulty getting his calls returned. Most seriously, he faced aggravated stalking charges in Miami, in connection with a man with whom he had fallen out over the best way to publicise his findings. The charges were dropped last month.

Buchanan said he regretted his behaviour had damaged his credibility but his main aim was to secure publicity for the story. Both Loftus and Schweitzer say Buchanan has come up with previously undisclosed documentation.

The Bush family have largely responded with no comment to any reference to Prescott Bush. Brown Brothers Harriman also declined to comment.

The Bush family recently approved a flattering biography of Prescott Bush entitled Duty, Honour, Country by Mickey Herskowitz. The publishers, Rutledge Hill Press, promised the book would “deal honestly with Prescott Bush’s alleged business relationships with Nazi industrialists and other accusations”.

In fact, the allegations are dealt with in less than two pages. The book refers to the Herald-Tribune story by saying that “a person of less established ethics would have panicked … Bush and his partners at Brown Brothers Harriman informed the government regulators that the account, opened in the late 1930s, was ‘an unpaid courtesy for a client’ … Prescott Bush acted quickly and openly on behalf of the firm, served well by a reputation that had never been compromised. He made available all records and all documents. Viewed six decades later in the era of serial corporate scandals and shattered careers, he received what can be viewed as the ultimate clean bill.”

The Prescott Bush story has been condemned by both conservatives and some liberals. It has also been suggested that Prescott Bush had little to do with Averill Harriman and that the two men opposed each other politically.

However, documents from the Harriman papers include a flattering wartime profile of Harriman in the New York Journal American and next to it in the files is a letter to the financial editor of that paper from Prescott Bush congratulating the paper for running the profile. He added that Harriman’s “performance and his whole attitude has been a source of inspiration and pride to his partners and his friends”.

The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that “rumours about the alleged Nazi ‘ties’ of the late Prescott Bush … have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated … Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser.”

However, one of the country’s oldest Jewish publications, the Jewish Advocate, has aired the controversy in detail.

More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson was facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business.

Additional Information

CLICK HERE to read about his treasonous son George Herbert Walker Bush.

CLICK HERE to read about his treasonous grandson George Walker Bush.

George Herbert Walker Bush

Posted on December 2, 2018 by Patriot or Traitor

George Herbert Walker Bush is a traitor.

On Friday November 30th, the former treasonous President George H.W. Bush passed away at the age of ninety four.

While the establishment celebrates the life of the former president and Americans line up to mourn their fallen leader, the facts that are being reported in the mainstream media are far different than the legacy he is leaving behind.

The Early Years

George Herbert Walker Bush was born on June 12, 1924 in Massachusetts to Prescott Sheldon Bush and Dorothy (Walker) Bush. Shortly after his birth, the family moved to Connecticut where he began his formal education at Greenwich Country Day School. At the age of eighteen, Bush joined the U.S. Navy.

During his tenure in the Navy, Bush was stationed with Torpedo Squadron 51 aboard the USS San Jacinto. On August 1, 1944 his unit launched an operation against the Japanese in the Bonin Islands. On September 2, 1944, Bush’s aircraft was downed leading to the death of eight Navy airmen, leaving Bush as the lone survivor. The episode later became known as the Chichijima incident and led to the future president being hailed as a war hero.

Political Career

Upon graduating from Yale, Bush began his career in politics and was elected chairman of the Harris County, Texas Republican Party in 1963. Three years later, Bush was elected to the US House of Representatives, marking the beginning of a meteoric rise which resulted in him being named director of the Central Intelligence Agency in 1976.

As Director of the CIA, Bush was responsible for overseeing the payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars to Panamanian leader and suspected cocaine trafficker, Manuel Noriega. Although Bush claimed he wasn’t aware of Noriega’s illicit activities until 1988, the CIA’s involvement in Latin America would eventually in a national controversy during the Reagan administration, in what became known as the Iran-Contra scandal.

While Bush served less than a year as the head of the CIA, he was also caught destroying evidence of US war crimes. As reported by MuckRock,

“Declassified records recently unearthed in CREST show the CIA waffled on a promise to obey the law in destroying records of Agency’s illegal activities and wrongdoing.”

Four years after serving as the director of the CIA, George H.W. Bush was elected Vice President of the United States. Serving under former President Ronald Reagan, Bush kept a low profile and avoided making any key policy decisions or criticisms of the Reagan administration, but attended a large number of ceremonies and public events.

In 1988, Bush was elected president defeating Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts. Within his first year in office, Bush’s approval ratings began to slip due to his inability to deal with Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega. Bush responded by deciding to invade Panama, and on December 20,1989 he deployed 25,000 troops to the tiny nation. Bush justified the invasion— code named operation just cause— on the grounds of national security. The president mislead the country by claiming Noriega had threatened the US, a claim which turned out to be untrue. After two weeks the conflict ended, resulting in the deaths of twenty American soldiers and as many as 2,000 Panamanians.

Less than a year after the invasion of Panama, Bush once again found himself responding to another foreign policy debacle. On August 2, 1990 Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein began an invasion of nearby Kuwait. In response, President Bush and the American media used the testimony of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti girl, known only by her first name of Nayirah to justify US intervention in Kuwait. However, Nayirah was later discovered to be the daughter of a U.S. ambassador, who was being coaxed by military psychological operations specialists.

In 1991, Bush gave his infamous ‘New World Order’ speech, which many people believe signaled the beginning of the PNAC plan also known as the Project For a New American Century. In other words, Bush outright rejected his nation for the preeminence of the United Nations.

Life After Politics

After leaving office in 1993, George H.W. Bush retired with his wife Barbara and built a home in a community near Houston, Texas. Though retired, the former president would still face controversy.

In 1999, Former Brigadier General Russell S. Bowen published a book entitled, “The Immaculate Deception — The Bush Crime Family Exposed.” In the book General Bowen details the Government’s alleged role in covering up Bush’s role in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Last year, during the height of the #MeToo movement, at least five women women claimed they were abused by the former president. In an interview with Time Magazine, a woman named Roslyn Corrigan claimed Bush sexually assaulted her in 2003 when she was only 16-years-old. At least five more women have accused Bush of sexual assault, including an unnamed Michigan woman who came forward claiming the former president groped her in 1992 at a campaign event. Actress Heather Lind also stated, in a now deleted Instagram post, that Bush groped her during a photo-op in 2014.

Perhaps, instead of blindly praising a documented criminal, Americans should consider asking themselves what other crimes the US government and the media are covering up for the former president.

Additional Information

The Bush family had a long history at Yale, with both George Senior and George W. Bush being part of the Skull and Bones society. The Bush senior was the second president to be elected with a “Bonesman” history, with the younger Bush the third President.

Skull and Bones Members, including George Herbert Walker Bush.

Skull and Bones Member – George Herbert Walker Bush.

George Herbert Walker Bush was also as a member and Director of the Central Intelligence Agency that is known to commit government cover-ups, drug smuggling and the assassinations of american citizens. He is also famous as the president who started the Gulf War bombing of Iraq. A war that his treasonous son George Walker Bush continued by lying to the American people about its dictator Saddam Hussein supposedly having weapons of mass destruction.

Additional Information

The Bush political dynasty began with Prescott Sheldon Bush Sr. who helped Hitler’s rise to power. Prescott also became the Director of Union Banking Corporation when it was suspected of concealing Nazi gold during the Second World War. Both Prescott’s son, George Herbert Walker Bush, and grandson, George Walker Bush, became the 41st and 43rd Presidents of the United States, respectively, who both initiated wars with Iraq that profited companies with Bush family ties, such as Halliburton and KBR.

CLICK HERE to read about the traitor Prescott Sheldon Bush.

CLICK HERE to read about the traitor George Walker Bush.