Sunday, October 23, 2016


BarkGrowlBite | October 23, 2016

The damaging emails released by Wikileaks should have torpedoed the Hillary campaign to the same extent the pussygate video and those groping allegations have torpedoed the Trump campaign. But those damaging emails have been overshadowed by claims that the hacking was done by the Russians on orders of that evil Putin.

The FBI, the CIA, NSA and Homeland Security all say there is evidence the hacking originated in the Kremlin. Oh! Those are all government agencies and each is headed by an Obama appointee.

We know how trustworthy the FBI is when Director James Comey found Hillary guilty only of carelessness in her private email server scandal. And we know how trustworthy the CIA is at intelligence gathering when it was so sure that Saddam Hussain had weapons of mass destruction, which he did not have. So why should we believe these agencies now, especially when Obama is fighting hard to keep Trump from getting elected?

Even if the Russians are behind the leaked emails … to quote Hillary … “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

At this point, when Trump’s presidential campaign is barely treading water, those leaked emails could have been a lifeline. But by injecting the Russians into this controversy, the government, Hillary and the pro-Hillary media have very cleverly overshadowed those damaging emails and allowed the Hildebeast’s campaign to dodge a destructive torpedo.

The media onslaught against Trump continues with more sexual assault allegations, but what you hear mostly about Hillary’s emails is ‘the Russians did it.’


By Bob Walsh

There was an (alleged) drive-by shooting in a decent neighborhood in north Stockton, CA. a couple of days ago. The victim is an 11-year old boy who is in critical condition due to a gunshot wound to the head. His elder brother, 18, asserts the kid was the victim of a drive-by. The cops don't think so and I don't blame them.

The shooting went down on Thursday just after 5 p.m. When the cops arrived they found nobody (except the brother) that said anything that would lead them to believe the shooting was a drive-by. No shouting, no peeling-out of a getaway car. Just the one gun shot. And when the cops showed up they found a handgun that had recently been fired underneath the 11-year old.

The cops are pretty sure the gun they found under the kid was the gun that shot him. They are dong various forensic things that will tell them if that was the gun that injured the child and if the child had GSR on his hands or clothes. They don't know who owns the gun. In CA a person under 21 can not legally own a handgun so, at least legally, it didn't belong to the 18-year old brother.

The brother was questioned and released. So far.

The 11-year old s at U. C. Davis Hospital and is, according to unofficial information, unlikely to survive.

So, what really happened. Was the kid playing with the gun in the front yard and accidentally shoot himself? Did the brother shoot him? Was there somebody else there that we don't know about yet? The 18-year old was tested for GSR, the results of that test have yet to be released.

It is even possible the older brother heard a shot and was not present and actually believes that there was a drive-by. That, however, is not where I would put my money.


How can “people of Jewish faith back the Democratic party which over the last 50 years has been so clearly anti-Israel, so clearly anti-Jewish Israel?”

BarkGrowlBite | October 23, 2016

Former Red Sox Pitcher Curt Schilling is seriously considering challenging Elizabeth Warren in 2018 for her seat in the U.S. Senate.

During a recent interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper, the former pitcher and presumptive senate candidate asked:

I would like to ask you something as a person who is practicing the Jewish faith and has since you were young.

I don't understand - and maybe this is the amateur non-politician in me - I don't understand how people of Jewish faith can back the Democratic party which over the last 50 years has been so clearly anti-Israel, so clearly anti-Jewish Israel.

I don't know what else would need to be done, said or happen for people to understand that they don't… the Democratic is only aligned with Israel because we have agreements in place that make them have to be.

Curt asked a good question, one for which I’m sure he will be accused of anti-Semitism by liberal Jews.

Schilling had been a longtime ESPN baseball analyst, but earlier this year he got fired for making comments on Facebook opposing the right of transgenders to use the restrooms of their choice.

There’s nothing anti-Semitic about Curt’s question. I myself cannot understand why America’s Jews continuously vote overwhelmingly Democratic. The only reason I can think of is because, having been persecuted throughout history, Jews feel obligated to support the party that purports to protect and support minorities.


Arizona settlers and U.S. soldiers set out to kill all Apaches, women and children included, similar to how the Poles and their Nazi conquers set out to exterminate Poland’s Jews

BarkGrowlBite | October 23, 2016

As a refugee from Nazi Germany who came to this glorious country in 1936, I have been a strong supporter of Israel, the last refuge for Jewish people who are persecuted and not wanted in other countries of the world.

I do not believe Israel should return the West Bank and East Jerusalem to the Palestinians, lands that they captured after repelling an attack on the Jewish state by the combined armies of Arab countries.

The Arabs, the Europeans and the United States are demanding that Israel relinquish the captured territories. Whoa there! After WW2, Poland kept about 25 percent of pre-war Germany. Nobody is hollering for Poland to return that territory back to Germany. But not so with Israel. Fuck the damn Jews!

If you ask me, Poland did not deserve to get one square inch of Germany. Once Hitler’s army conquered Poland, the Poles eagerly helped the Nazis find and round up Polish Jews for shipment to the extermination camps, all of which were built in Poland. The Poles were happy to have the hated Jews gassed and cremated, thereby finally getting rid of them.

And the U.S. should be the last nation to demand that Israel give up territory it captured from invading armies. What about the land stolen from America’s Indians? Almost every bit of American land was taken from the Indians who were treated horribly by the government and settlers. Nobody is hollering for us to give the Indians their land back. But not so with Israel. Fuck the damn Jews!

Our treatment of the Indians was deplorable. Here is an example of how the members of just one tribe, the Apaches, were treated:

From the book “Shadows at Dawn” by Karl Jacoby

After the U.S. acquired the territory that is now Arizona through the Gadsden Purchase and the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, U.S. soldiers and settlers began to populate those lands. The Apaches had roamed those lands for centuries and at first greeted these new arrivals peacefully. But as more came and threatened their sustenance, they reacted with savagery. The Americans responded with equal and astonishing savagery, including the killing of infants:

"By the 1860s, the majority of settlers in the territory had adopted a policy of killing all Apaches they encountered: '[I]t was the rigid rule all over the country to shoot these savages upon sight.' In the minds of many Arizonians, the elusive character of the Apache justified such actions. ... On [one] occasion, after several Anglo miners ambushed a party of Indians, one of the participants cut the heads off five of the Apaches slain in the encounter and used their brains to tan a deerhide -- behavior that unnerved some Anglo onlookers and brought peals of laughter from others.

"A similar blending of Apache killing and spectacle was engaged in by King Woolsey, an Arizona rancher who would receive a 'resolution of thanks' from the territory's Legislative Assembly in 1865 for leading several scouts of 'civilian volunteers' against the Apache, including the one Allyn recorded in which the raiders slew thirty or so Apaches during a parley. In 1861, Woolsey killed the leader of an Apache band with a shotgun blast. '[D]etermined to make a conspicuous mark of the dead chief,' he dragged the man's body to a nearby mesquite tree and hung the corpse by the neck. The body dangled in this spot for several years for all to see. 'One of the feet and both hands had been cut off or torn away by the coyotes,' reported a visitor. 'The head was thrown back, and the eye-sockets glared in the sun.' ...

"The shared code of violence between civilians and the military emerged even more clearly when Conner and his compatriots met with the Apache leader 'Mangus' under a flag of truce. During their parley, Conner's party seized Mangus, whom they then turned over to a U.S. Army unit. That evening, Conner saw the sol¬diers guarding Mangus heat their bayonets in a campfire and apply the red-hot blades to the chiefs legs and feet. When Mangus told the sentinels in Spanish chat he was 'no child to be playing with,' the soldiers shot and killed him on the excuse that he was trying to escape. One of the guards, borrowing a knife from the unit's cook, then scalped Mangus. A few days later, soldiers dug up his body and mutilated it further, decapitating the Apache leader and boiling his head. ...

"In ... campaigns [against the Apache], parties of Americans, typically led by a Pima, Papago, or Mexican scout, tried to surprise the Apache in their rancherias [settlements], ideally striking just before daybreak when the Indians were least prepared. Such a strategy inevitably meant that the attackers not only encoun¬tered potential raiders -- healthy young Apache men -- but women, children, and the elderly. For some Americans, such distinctions mattered little: they killed all the Indians they could, often justifying the dispatching of women with the claim that they were especially ruthless in torturing prisoners. The civilian scout leader Woolsey, for example, [wrote] ... 'It sir is next to impossible to prevent killing squaws in jumping a rancheria even were we disposed to save them. For my part I am frank to say that I fight on the broad platform of extermination.' ...

"On those occasions when children were seized, they were often treated more like orphans than prisoners of war. ... In contrast, the conscious targeting of children generated far more unease, as revealed in a series of incidents involving a settler known as 'Sugarfoot Jack.' In the course of yet another campaign against the Apache, a band of American civilians, having found a rancheria, proceeded to burn the wick¬iups and other supplies to prevent any surviving Apaches from reclaiming them. In his search of the camp, Sugarfoot Jack happened upon an Apache infant, whom he tossed into one of the fires and watched burn alive. Revolted at Sugarfoot's behavior, several other Americans attempted to reclaim 'the little, black, crisped body' from the flames. But 'the skin peeling off every time it was touched made the "boys" sick,' and they left the dead child in the still-smoldering ashes. Meanwhile, Sugarfoot Jack located yet another Apache infant. Soon he could be seen to 'dance it upon his knee and tickle it under the chin and handle the babe in the manner of a playful mother.' When he tired of this game, Sugarfoot drew his pistol, a heavy dragoon revolver. Plac¬ing his weapon against the child's head, he pulled the trigger, 'bespatter[ing] his clothes and face with infant brains.' "

Saturday, October 22, 2016



Hillary looks unstoppable but there are still 20 reasons I dread the day she walks into the White House (and free sex from Madonna is just one of them)

by Piers Morgan

Daily Mail | October 21, 2016

Hillary Clinton is now red-hot favourite to become the first female President of the United States.

Virtually every poll has her with a commanding lead over Donald Trump.

Of course, it’s not over yet

The polls might be as hopelessly wrong as they were about Trump’s chances of winning the Republican nomination.

(The world’s No1 electoral prediction expert Nate Silver gave the tycoon a 2% chance of achieving that target..)

There might well be a large number of people in the bowels of Middle America preparing to vote for him whilst pretending not to when asked.

We saw this phenomenon recently with the EU Referendum in Britain where nobody thought we would actually BREXIT from Europe until we woke up on June 24 and discovered we had.

This has been a highly erratic and unpredictable race and with 18 days left to go, anything could still happen to change the dynamic and result.

As the former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan once said when asked what he feared most in politics: ‘Events, dear boy, events.’

So yes, Trump could still pull off one of the biggest shocks in American political history. He has, after all, spent the past 16 months confounding all logic about US presidential elections.

But let’s assume for a moment that Hillary is going to win.

I’ve made it clear that whilst Trump’s a friend of mine, I wouldn’t vote for, or endorse him even if I could, which I can’t. I simply don’t agree with him about too many issues from guns and Muslim bans to climate change.

However, I wouldn’t vote for, or endorse Hillary either.

I think she’s a dreadful candidate, a sentiment clearly shared by many others as she has attracted the worst approval ratings of any major-party presidential nominee in history – rivalled only by Trump.

Here are 20 reasons why I think Hillary Rodham Clinton would make a terrible President.

1) I don’t trust her. The email scandal just about summed up her complete inability to tell the truth. An expert lawyer who became Secretary of State with multiple BlackBerries but didn’t have a clue how emails or servers work or what constitutes classified material? Oh pur-lease, Madam Pinocchio, do you think we’re all completely stupid?

2) She’s greedy. I mean properly, outrageously, snout-in-the-trough avaricious. A woman who for decades has exploited her political status to fill her boots with tens of millions of dollars, fuelled by $200k-a-pop speeches from her Wall Street chums like Goldman Sachs.

3) Hillary’s a rank hypocrite. She bangs on ad nauseam about women’s rights but sucks up to and solicits cash for the Clinton Foundation from draconian regimes like Saudi Arabia that stone women to death and refuse to let them even drive cars.

4) She’s a dangerous war-mongerer. The Iraq War was an unmitigated fiasco that led to turmoil throughout the Middle East and spurred the rise of ISIS. It was the biggest foreign policy disaster since Vietnam and Hillary voted for it. She was also heavily responsible for the dismal Libya invasion. When people say they don’t trust Trump with his finger on the nuclear trigger, I suggest Hillary the Hawk is far more likely to press it.

5) She’s a flip-flopper extraordinaire. On endless issues from Iraq to gay marriage, Israel to TPP and the Keystone Pipeline, Hillary will say one thing but think nothing of saying the complete opposite later if it’s politically expedient.

6) She has a chronic superiority complex. Never was this more vividly exposed than with her disgraceful comment that half of Trump’s supporters were ‘a basket of deplorables’. That’s tens of millions of fellow Americans she was insulting, many of them honest, hard-working people.

7) She’s an embellisher of stories to make herself look better. We all remember her heroic tale of having to flee sniper fire in Bosnia with her daughter Chelsea in 1996. There was just one problem – she didn’t.

8) She’s held lots of jobs but performed none of them particularly well. As Secretary of State she was widely considered inefficient, ineffectual and complacent - sometimes to lethal consequence as we saw with the Benghazi fiasco that cost the lives of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans. Hillary’s undeniably very experienced, but how valuable is all that experience if you’ve never excelled at anything you’ve done?

9) She’s oddly charmless. I’ve watched her speaking at the debates and various rallies, and indeed at last night’s Al Smith dinner, and she exudes the warmth and wit of a sour-faced Pit Bull terrier. As for that perpetual creepy Jack Nicholson ‘Shining’ smirk she does.. UGH.

10)Her health remains a major concern. That video of her keeling over after leaving a 9/11 memorial service was deeply troubling. Particularly when we know she had a serious head injury after passing out in 2012. Hillary is 69 next week and doesn’t exude good health, fitness or vitality, which are fairly essential components of being a modern day President. Trump’s 70 but has extraordinarily impressive energy.

11)She carries with her a dripping sense of entitlement based on her gender that is deeply irritating. Hillary may as well have two tattoos on her forehead proclaiming: ‘Born to be First Female President’ and ‘Vote for me – I’m a woman!’

12)She wouldn’t inspire me to open a cookie jar, and I normally need no encouragement to do that. Contrast her oratory style with someone like Michelle Obama – whose fire and passion has electrified this race in recent weeks. Hillary’s a dull, lifeless, robotic speaker by comparison.

13)She’s not Bill, one of the smartest, most brilliantly charismatic politicians America has ever seen. There’s a sense with Hillary that she’s riding on the coattails of her husband’s huge popularity. Would she be anywhere near winning the presidency if many Americans weren’t thinking this was a way of getting Bill back to the White House too? I don’t think so.

14)I fear that beneath the constant, smug, apple-cheeked smirk lies a fairly unpleasant piece of work. Former Secret Service agents have painted a picture of a vengeful, mistrustful, abusive, angry, sarcastic, demanding, disorganised, unpunctual boss.

15)She would push for a new cold war with Russia in an effort to prove her toughness with Vladimir Putin. You can tell this by the hateful rhetoric which spews from her mouth every time she mentions his name. This is a very worrying thing for the world.

16)Republicans hate her even more than they hate President Obama. This will be a massive issue if she wins. Obama’s woeful inability to do business with the opposition rendered him incapable of even passing a single new gun law after Sandy Hook. What hope for Hillary, with all her Washington enemy-making over the past 40 years, to achieve any meaningful deals?

17)Her baggage is horrendous. From Whitewater to Vince Foster, Hillary’s past is scandalously dubious and troublesome. Does this matter? Yes. It goes to the heart of her character. She’s dodgy, period.

18)The way she attacked Bill’s lovers in the past leaves an unedifying taste in the mouth given all her lofty moral pronouncements about the way Trump treats women. Hillary didn’t just stand by her philandering man, she trashed the women he bedded. Very unfortunate for the self-styled Emmeline Pankhurst of US politics.

19)She’s chillingly ambitious to the expense of anything else in her life. It seeps from every pore. This is a career politician who has repeatedly shown she will trample over anyone and anything that gets in her way, and who conveniently overlooks moral and ethical issues if they don’t suit her agenda or progression to power.

20) Madonna has offered to perform free oral sex for anyone who votes for Hillary. I literally cannot think of a single more compelling reason not to vote for her.

EDITOR’S NOTE: A blow job from Madonna is the only reason I can think of that would possibly make me vote for the Hildebeast.


Woman Beaten in River Oaks Parking Lot Over Alleged Affair With High-Profile Divorce Lawyer, Guard Says

by Zach Despart | Houston Press | October 20, 2016

Houston police say they are continuing to investigate an assault that occurred at a high-profile River Oaks attorney’s office building Saturday night, sending a woman to the hospital with lacerations and possible broken ribs.

Although the security guard at the offices says the victim told him her attacker was the wife of prominent divorce attorney Bobby Newman, police have yet to make any arrests and Newman himself declined to comment on the altercation. Police say the victim hasn't identified her attacker to them.

“At this point in time, it's incumbent on her to talk to investigators if she would like to pursue this further,” Houston Police Department spokesman Kese Smith said.

Rigoberto Haroldson, a security guard at 3355 West Alabama, said he was sitting at his desk in the lobby of the building around 9 p.m. Saturday when he saw a woman exit the lobby and walk outside, just as a vehicle pulled in. Moments later, he said he heard a woman screaming and ran outside to investigate.

In the parking area, Haroldson said he saw a woman beating the woman he had just seen leave the building.

“The attacker's back was towards me and I saw the victim on the [ground], curled up in a ball, and the assailant was kicking her in the back, towards the rib area,” Haroldson said.

As the woman continued the assault, Haroldson said he heard her yelling.

“She was screaming about an affair between the victim and her husband,” Haroldson said.

The guard said when he asked what was going on, the attacker got in her car and fled the scene – but not before threatening to kill the victim. Haroldson said he called 911 and helped the victim into the lobby. He said she appeared dazed, had a laceration on her forehead and sustained injuries to her ribs.

Haroldson said while police were en route, the woman told him not to tell anyone about the attack and said repeatedly that she needed to call “Bobby Newman.” Newman's law firm, Lilly, Newman and Van Ness, is located on the fourth floor of 3355 West Alabama. Newman has worked high-profile divorce cases including that of Houston Astros owner Jim Crane.

After a friend of the victim, police and medical personnel from the Houston Fire Department arrived and began asking questions, Haroldson said the victim disclosed who beat her.

“When the police asked her who it was who attacked her, I was present – her friend, the medical team and police were present – when we all heard her say the name Lily Newman.”

Lillian Newman is the wife of Bobby Newman, Harris County marriage records state. Multiple attempts to reach Lillian Newman were unsuccessful. Reached at his office Tuesday afternoon, Bobby Newman said, “I'm aware of an altercation that took place, but I'm really not wanting to comment on any of this.”

Smith, the police department spokesman, confirmed that officers responded to an assault at the address on Saturday evening. Smith said the report officers wrote states the victim told a witness who her assailant was, but declined to tell police who attacked her.

Smith said firefighters transported the victim to the hospital with possible broken ribs, and detectives have reached out to the victim for additional information about the beating.

Haroldson said his company has given security camera footage, which he believes should have captured the assault, to the police.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Looks like Lillian Newman did the Texas two-step dance on Bobby’s mistress.

I think I see a divorce lawyer getting dragged into divorce court shortly.