HARLOW: You’re seeing the Mueller team. You’re separating the two here?
CALLAN: Well, I think they all kind of merge together, ultimately, because if we talk about the McCabe situation, he’s the deputy director of the FBI, or at least was the deputy director of the FBI. And he — his wife was running for a Senate seat in Virginia and she took $700,000 in contributions from Terry McAuliffe and passed control by him to support her in that campaign. And he then is in the chain of command of the Hillary e-mail investigation.
Now, that would be like if the FBI, let’s say they were investigating a bank and, do you think they’d let an agent investigate a bank if his wife was taking a $700,000 loan from the bank? No! They’d pull the agent from that investigation.
HARLOW: Let me ask you. So you know the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein testified before Congress just a few weeks ago. He was asked and really hammered on questions over political bias within the agency. Here’s one of his answers. He said, quote, “It’s important to recognize that when we talk about political affiliation,” he went on to say, “The issue of bias is something different.” So, what he’s saying is there can be a line there. These are humans who can have beliefs, et cetera. That does not translate into bias. Where is that line in your opinion? And is there anything that clearly, do you think clearly outlines that?
CALLAN: I think there’s a clear line and it’s a common sense line. If your wife is taking $700,000 from the Democrats, maybe you shouldn’t be handling the investigation of who’s going to be the next president of the United States. That’s a clear line, in my view. There’s even a federal law, the Hatch Act, by the way, while a federal employee can be registered and vote with a particular party, he can’t be active with a particular party under the Hatch Act.
Now, that doesn’t apply to his wife, but common sense would say, if a wife is taking a lot of money from a Democratic Party or a Republican Party, anybody who’s under investigation, it may be best to put a different agent in the case. Now the FBI didn’t do that. As a matter of fact, this is the person in charge of making these sensitive decisions, and he’s — he doesn’t have the common sense to see that he’s in a conflict situation, himself. So I think there’s legitimate criticism of the FBI here. I’m talking about the leadership, not the field agents.
The pressure for happiness or to ‘be happy’ can be overwhelming in today’s social media driven society. Yet our quest to experience this emotion at every moment has an unintended consequence, making us feel worse rather than better. As human beings, we’ve been gifted with a wide range of emotions, all of which serve us in different ways and work as fantastic guides to which areas of our lives need the most attention. We may not fully know our true purpose for being here on this planet, but it’s likely that our soul has entered Earth in the hopes of learning more about ourselves and bettering our connections with other people. The human experience is perfect for this, and while it may seem hard at times, we are gifted daily with many opportunities to further our growth.
Within the human experience we’re tested, especially in this era of deceit, where images are being shoved in our faces of emotions we desire to feel; love, passion, acceptance, and happiness, to name a few. At the core of our existence lies a simple expression of who we are, which is Love, and many believe this translates into never ending happiness and bliss. Corporations recognize this desire and use it to their marketing advantage. If we’re told we can feel good, at least for a day, we’re likely to (quite literally) buy into that dream because we have forgotten that our daily emotions, both good and bad, are necessary for our personal growth.
You’re likely familiar with the works of Steve Cutts, a London-based illustrator who aptly depicts our daily grievances and society’s many shocking truths that we absurdly accept as normal. In his most recent animation short titled “Happiness,” Steve uses rats to symbolize the rat race we’re all so familiar with.
You’ll soon see other startling similarities — a clearly depressed, overcrowded society surrounded by ads guaranteeing happiness via cologne, clothes, film, and drugs. You may watch this and recognize these behaviours in others, but consider whether you have fallen victim to them as well. “Feeling down? Nothing a glass of red wine won’t fix.” When we search for happiness in external things, we soon have a real problem that nothing material or external can fix. See, all that is ever offered to us are ‘quick fixes’ to problems that have been festering for years. Steve accurately portrays our need for feeling happy and shows we will do and buy practically anything to ensure we can feel that emotion all the time — a futile struggle that leaves us depleted and miserable.
Happiness can be attained every day, and there is no need to spend money trying to feel it. Spend time with family and friends, read a good book, try something new, meditate, journal — these all bring true happiness, and may help you discover why you seek to escape your other feelings through material goods.
Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.
With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.
Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Collective-evolution/~3/ZPS5AGhmHnw/
Detmold, Germany – An 89-year-old German woman was sentenced to 14 months in prison for incitement of racial hatred after losing an appeal on a prior conviction.
Ursula Haverbeck, often referred to in the German press as the “Nazi Grandma,” is known for extremist views that have run afoul of German hate speech laws in the past—with courts having previously given her fines and another suspended sedition sentence, according to Fox News.
In Germany, anyone who publicly denies, endorses or plays down the extermination of Jews during Adolf Hitler’s regime can be sentenced to a maximum of five years in jail for incitement of racial hatred.
Wikipedia explains German hate speech laws as:
Volksverhetzung, in English “incitement of the masses”, “instigation of the people”, is a concept in German criminal law that refers to incitement to hatred against segments of the population and refers to calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them, including assaults against the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning, or defaming segments of the population. It is often applied to, though not limited to, trials relating to Holocaust denial in Germany.
According to a report by German state-run broadcaster, Deutsche Welle (DW):
A German court in Detmold has sentenced Holocaust denier Ursula Haverbeck to 14 months in prison, after the 89-year-old woman lost her appeal to a prior conviction on Tuesday. However, four months were shaved off her original conviction of 18 months. Prosecutors wanted the sentence upheld, Haverbeck’s lawyers were seeking exoneration.
The Detmold court had initially sentenced Haverbeck to eight months imprisonment in September 2016, after she sent a letter to the town’s mayor, Rainer Heller, claiming that Auschwitz was not a concentration camp.
Following the trial, the octogenarian handed out pamphlets to journalists, as well as the judge and prosecutor, entitled “Only the truth will set you free,” in which she once again denied the Nazi atrocities. Haverbeck was handed an additional 10-month sentence for the stunt.
In the United States, incitement of violence is criminal but “assaults against human dignity of others by insulting, malicious maligning, or defaming segments of the population” are considered an exercise of free speech, and thus protected under the First Amendment.
Essentially, German law has criminalized speech as a means of controlling political discourse—meaning the government will tell you what is acceptable to say, and who is fair game to malign, and what groups and classes are protected.
While some speech may be extreme and repulsive, the prohibition on certain ideas, even the most repugnant, being put into the public marketplace of thought is a fast track to totalitarian governmental control—essentially legitimizing the “thought police.”
According to DW:
Haverbeck and her late husband Werner Georg Haverbeck, who was an active member of the Nazi party in the run-up to and during the Second World War, founded a right-wing education center called Collegium Humanum, which has been banned since 2008. She has also written for the right-wing magazine Stimme des Reiches (Voice of the Empire), which she also used to express her views that the Holocaust never took place.
Haverbeck has been sentenced on similar charges on five other occasions but has not yet served any jail time as she appeals the cases.
In October, she was sentenced to six months in prison by a Berlin court after being found guilty of inciting racial hatred for claiming the gas chambers at Auschwitz concentration camp “were not real.”
Prior to that, in August, she was given a two-year prison sentence by a regional court in Lower Saxony, according to DW.
The 89-year-old has appealed the rulings passed down against her in each case and claims she has been merely been repeating an opinion.
The most recent appeal verdict is not final, either, as Haverbeck’s attorneys plan to take the case to the Higher Regional Court in Hamm – which will serve as the final opportunity to challenge the prison sentence.
As Hall wrote in The Friends of Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Source Article from http://thefreethoughtproject.com/89-year-old-nazi-grandma-prison-speech/
CNN Tonight with Don Lemon
August 23, 2017
10:04 p.m. Eastern
DON LEMON: So Nia, he says there is no place for bigotry or hate on Monday, then he uses dog whistles and goes on attack by Tuesday and today he is back on teleprompter calling for unity. He is all over the place.
10:07 p.m. Eastern
LEMON: What did you think of the former director of national intelligence coming out and saying that, David?
DAVID ROHDE: Well, startling, frightening and everything else. He used another phrase, though, that — I don’t — I don’t like the whole that he’s crazy argument. I think he knows exactly what he’s doing. He’s being incredibly divisive for political reasons but something that Clapper said was that he’s —
LEMON: Listen, listen. Before you go there, he did clarify and said he didn’t mean crazy meaning mentally but he was just saying fit for office in his actions and whether he was prepared to do the job.
10:11 p.m. Eastern
LEMON: Let’s talk about this new Quinnipiac University poll, Nia. 68% of voters say the president is not level headed. Does that number surprise you? What do you think? What does that mean?
10:13 p.m. Eastern
LEMON [TO ROHDE]: 68 percent of voters say that the President is not level headed and people are now saying it on camera. Not as many people as who say it off camera, especially Republicans who say they worry about the President’s fitness. I mean, you heard there was a recording between, you know, two lawmakers. I think it was Susan Collins and I forget who is the second lawmaker was, saying that they were — you know, saying things I would not repeat. What do you think of that poll?
10:15 p.m. Eastern
LEMON: Garrett, I want to ask you about this because this was startling last night when you hear the former top Intel official like James Clapper voicing concerns about the President’s fitness and access codes to nuclear codes and his access to nuclear codes. None of this is theoretical when you consider North Korea if he wanted to launch a strike, how would this work? Can he unilaterally do this? Can he act unilaterally?
GARRETT GRAFF: Not only can he, it’s actually the way that the system is supposed to work. This is a Cold War system that was designed to respond to having tens of thousands of nuclear weapons between the Soviet Union and the United States on a hair trigger alert.
10:29 p.m. Eastern
MIKE MURPHY: I don’t believe the crazy Trump theory. I believe he’s a narcissist. I believe he has an impulse control problem and I think he’s most insecure person I’ve ever seen in public life which is something that attracts a lot of insecure people. So, he’s a record setter
LEMON: Yeah, but you know, when someone says unfit or —
MURPHY: — but it’s his crazy rhetoric has been worse than his actions which have been more rational.
LEMON: But that’s what you — you’re smart. You know that when someone says — when people say unfit they don’t necessarily mean crazy. They just mean unfit for the job.
MURPHY: Exactly. Yeah, Look, I’ve said unqualified by temperament, knowledge, or character to be president of the United States. I’ve said it publicly — I’ve said it for a long time. I believe that. But that — you know, it’s — it’s easy to get down the slippery slide into the nuclear madman stuff and everything. I’m not sure that is accurate but he is unfit because he does not understand the role of the President is not only to be the head of government in our system but head of state which means you have a responsibility to be kind of a reference clock for proper behavior in defending American values and either he doesn’t understand that or doesn’t care. So, that’s why we have this insult comic communication added with total disregard for the truth that has become such a toxic stain on this presidency.
LEMON: Well —
LEMON: Go ahead.
JAMES FALLOWS: Yeah. Just to take that point one step further here is a specific example of what fitness for office means. There’s a skill that you have as a live performer which Donald Trump really has which is knowing the pulse of a crowd, the mood of the crowd and he plays to it really well. We saw that last night. He was working the crowd for cheers. Fitness for being President involves being aware that every single second of your life, every utterance you put out, every word you say or don’t say, every phrase has consequences around the world and in this country and so, his entire inability to even imagine that, I think that is a kind of fitness that he’s not getting better at.
LEMON: Yeah and I think that, you know, when — when people criticize and say, oh, they are questioning the President’s sanity and all that, they know better. They’re just — they’re doing it just, you know, just because to make a political point of some sort.