The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!

Friday, October 21, AD 2016


The Democrats are attempting to divert attention from the interesting WikiLeaks revelations by claiming this is all Russian interference in our election, and that Russian hackers are behind this.  Let us assume for the sake of this post that this is all true.  I don’t like an unfriendly power attempting to interfere in our electoral process.  However, there is an aspect of this situation that most people aren’t getting.  Security is so lousy in the Obama administration and the Democrat party that Russian hackers have had a field day.  I assume that they aren’t showing us the juiciest stuff, or the most damaging to our security, because they don’t want to reveal their methods. Stumbling into this happy hunting ground for enemy hackers, the candidate for the Democrat party, Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State, insisted upon using unsecure civilian e-mail servers in order to protect her ongoing business of selling influence and access for cash through the Clinton Foundation and her speech giving “hubbie”.  According to the FBI she was using these servers on the soil of unfriendly powers.  The stupidity and obliviousness is shocking.  That alone makes her unfit to be President, WikiLeaks revelations be hanged.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!

  • But there’s a bigger comedy to this that hasn’t really been pointed out yet. For 99 years we have heard from the Democrat Party that we have nothing to fear from Russia. That includes a spectacularly overplayed moment in the 2012 presidential debates. Now, with the Soviet Union gone, the Russian economy mostly in shambles, the Russian people disintegrating as a population, the threat according to the entire establishment has never been greater. I’m exhausted just from whiplash.

  • Interesting clip from a good movie. Makes you glad that the Anti-Federals insisted upon the Second Amendment among others. This scene could be played out sooner than we think. And maybe not with Russian soldiers but American?

  • A segment from Fox news with Judge N. mentioned that HC’s mishandling of her communique’s have jeopardised the CIA, via names of operatives.

    How he would know this, or weather this is just speculation is anyone’s guess, but if she was privy to that information and sloppily disclosed it without proper safeguards, I wouldn’t doubt her former intelligence agents might want her to loose the election more than any Ruskie, including Vlad.

    She is hazardous waste!

  • Bullies be damned. Senator Harrison Williams went to federal prison for two years for influence peddling in ABSCAM. Hillary Clinton gets to be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States with Christopher Stevens, murdered in Benghazi after Hillary Clinton betrayed his whereabouts, as one of her constituents. Hillary has promised to eradicate the First and Second Amendments and later the Ninth.
    The Democratic platform refuses to acknowledge God, our “Creator”. Can unalienable rights endowed by our “Creator” to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness be far behind?

  • Focusing on the Russians as the alleged source of the leaks reminds me of a kid yelling at her parents for “spying on her” when she gets caught doing something wrong. Clearly an admission that she has done something wrong, only regretting she has been exposed. When Clinton demanded Trump denounce the Russians for hacking her emails and interfering in our election, I would have told her “Lady, if exposing your corruption, cheating and lies is interfering in our election, I would not denounce them; I’d award them the Presidential Medal of Freedom.”

  • Revealing that Russia is the source of the hacking is inexcusable from an intelligence standpoint. It is like “Special Intelligence.” The very fact that we know is a highly guarded secret. We should have played dumb. Then we could have fed the Russians disinformation, and protected our real secrets. To confirm Russian intelligence just lets Russians say, “Okay. That avenue has been compromised. Time to go to plan B.” Also Trump seems to have an instinctive understanding that perceptions among world leaders matter. Hillary seems wonkish and – I worry – liable to make a misstep out of a perception that she needs to be “tough.”

  • The Russians didn’t do this (at least not the government), it’s more likely the Clinton campaign using proxies to draw attention away from Wikileaks’ validity.

  • With regard to Russian interference in our electoral process, I don’t think Wikileaks is the biggest threat. The biggest threats IMO are: 1) potential or actual hacking that could interfere with tabulation of election results, or expose the personal information of registered voters, and 2) the “troll army” that floods the internet, particularly Twitter, with fake/sockpuppet identities spewing propaganda, threats, and false or distorted information.

    The threat of hacking serves to call electoral results into question and, if voter databases become subject to hacking, could discourage people from registering to vote; the “troll army”, meanwhile, aims to discourage real discussion of issues by more or less shouting down everyone who disagrees or intimidating them into silence. In both cases the ultimate aim is to exacerbate the divisions among the American people and thereby weaken the nation.

  • In normal times I’d agree, Bear, but they’re being “80s movie villain” level obvious– Russian intel is going to be trying to figure out if she actually knows it’s Russia (not being official and all) or if she’s guess guessing from them being so dang obvious, or if she’s trying to scare his supporters, or if she’s playing into the archetype (it’s in bleeping TV commercials, All Hackers Are Russian) ….
    I’m with Elaine in being more worried about actual interference, rather than attempts to influence.
    Our system is…well, there are areas that give the appearance of being designed to make it easy to commit voter fraud. Says the woman whos area keeps having boxes of ballots appear every time there’s a close election, and they always favor the same side.

  • Funny thing is, I think that Russia actually does not want Trump to win. For all that Trump seems to have a man-crush on Putin, I think he only admires the similarities. That won’t be as useful for Putin as having a woman who actively hates the military and alienates those working for her.

  • Those pesky Russkies – are they back under the bed?
    Where’s McCarthy when you need him?

  • FWIW, here’s Garry Kasparov, former world chess champ turned pro-democracy advocate, explaining why he believes Putin wants to mess with the U.S. election:

    “Putin wants… global chaos. He needs it, because as a dictator who wants to use foreign policy, his aggressive foreign policy, as a staple for domestic propaganda, he needs to weaken the European Union, NATO, and of course, you know, the biggest prize of all is the United States.

    “If Putin can demonstrate to Russians and the rest of the world that elections in America are rigged, (that) there will be riots, even violence… that will justify everything he did against democratic institutions in Russia. And Trump is a perfect agent of of the chaos…”

    And speaking of the troll army:

    “I’m reading (the) Russian press. You know, Putin-controlled press. I’m attacked by Russian trolls, those in English and Russian on Facebook, and I can see these unanimity of the arguments. Proving that American election is rigged, and America will be swamped with this civil unrest. That’s the biggest prize for Vladimir Putin.”

  • And let’s not forget this blast from the past:

    The consensus at the time seemed to be that this “expert” who predicted a breakup of the U.S. into at least 6 separate nations that would fall under the influence of, or be absorbed by, other countries (with Alaska, of course, returning to Mother Russia) was projecting his experience of the dissolution of the Soviet Union onto American politics. Of course this didn’t happen, but there are probably a lot of people in Putin’s inner circle who think it’s still possible and are doing everything they can to foment it.

  • Let’s not forget that Snowden has been and is in Russia. There seems to have been a run on traitors these past couple of years, unfortunately. Then there’s Herself providing classified emails. I’m with the Bruin, some things are better, safer left unsaid.

  • If Russia is such a problem, why did Hiklary sell them 20% of our American uranium?

  • Thanks Elaine.

    Extremely interesting synopsis of Putin possibilities. It is interesting in that the climate is perfect for full scale infiltration; civil unrest is already near boiling point, unsatisfactory presidential candidate’s, E-mail debacle, Military weak…to a certain degree…
    most incredible paradigm.

Democrat Attempts to Control the Church

Wednesday, October 12, AD 2016




Hattip to commenter Hmmm.  Latest from WikiLeaks:


Re: opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing . . .


Continue reading...

3 Responses to Democrat Attempts to Control the Church

  • They must really be frightened by the power of conservative Catholic prayer.

  • Many have been the people in power who tried to control the Church, ranging from evil Popes to evil Emperors. They are all dead and the current crop will follow (your cue, Jorge and Barack). The Church will still be here even if on Her knees till Christ returns in the Parousia.

  • “Attempt,” is the significant word in this title.

    Today is the 99th anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun in Fatima Portugal. Saturday we will pray in unison ( respective time zones) around the world for an end to progressive liberalism and all that it manifests. From Noon to 1pm… Saturday the 15th.

    Donna Ann is completely correct.
    They must be frightened of conservative Catholic prayer. Why?
    Because the Truth doesn’t change to fit the fashion of the world.

    Pray with us Saturday.
    Go to
    Public Square Rosary.

    Our goal this year was 15,000 cities.
    We’re over 16,200 thus far.
    Liberial Catholics take note!
    Same sex marriage and abortion are disordered conduct, not to be supported by any Catholic in good standing.
    We will continue on as long as it takes.
    20,000-50,000 cities…until each city around the world stands in the public square and prays for an end to these disordered behaviors. As always, loving the sinner, but never supporting the sin nor promoting it.

Wikileaks: US Never Expected Ratzinger Elected as Pope

Tuesday, November 30, AD 2010

[Updated Below]

Wikileaks information has been disclosed by Rome Reports that the U.S. intelligence services were completely caught off guard and surprised at the election of then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.

[Found another YouTube video that works]

Updated as of 10:40am Central time, 11-30-2010 AD:

U.S. intelligence was expecting a Latin American as the next pope, and predicted that then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger would have lost in the first round voting.

The rest from Father Zuhlsdorf:

Before the election the staff of the US embassy to the Holy See sent speculations to Washington about the one to be elected.

“The first factor will be age, the cardinals will seek someone who is neither too young nor too old, because they don’t want to have another funeral and conclave quickly” but “they also want to avoid having a long pontificate like that of John Paul II.”  Furthermore, “it will be a person in reasonably good health”.  Another element will be “linguistic ability” and he will have to know Italian.

Continue reading...

16 Responses to Wikileaks: US Never Expected Ratzinger Elected as Pope

  • I wonder who they did expect.

  • One good thing about Wikileaks: It will demonstrate the incoherency (faintly perceptible in Fr. Z’s remarks) of those who are rightfully critical of domestic bureaucracies but who still seem to believe that the State Department and/or the Pentagon could be any less bureucratic or incompetent. Fr. Z seems almost *surprised* at the incompetency of the intelligence. But the State Department and Military *are* largely incompetent. They are no different from the post office or the DMV, just more dangerous.

  • But the State Department and Military *are* largely incompetent. They are no different from the post office or the DMV, just more dangerous.

    Largely ‘incompetant’ by whose standards at what? Dangerous to whom? You can compare the Postal Service to UPS and FedEx as a standard of performance. To what are you comparing the United States Military?

  • “Incompetent”: OED 2.a: “Of inadequate ability or fitness; not having the requisite capacity or qualification; incapable. Const. to, to do something.”

    The concept does not require a comparison with another entity to be made intellegible. What are the final ends or goals of the State Department and of the Pentagon? Do the actions of these entities achieve these ends or fail to?

  • Well, Cardinal Alfonso López Trujillo (Pontifical Council for the Family) had been on my short list. I suppose it was good that he was not elected because he died three years later (at the young age of 72).

  • What are the final ends or goals of the State Department and of the Pentagon? Do the actions of these entities achieve these ends or fail to?

    You never defined any goals, nor offered a concept of what counts as an achievable goal. (And no, the question of who can do the U.S. Military’s job better than the U.S. Military is not irrelevant to your remarks).

  • Pingback: TUESDAY AFTERNOON EDITION | The Pulpit
  • EXCEPT it was not that much of a SHOCK. See my post “Contrary To Wikileaks Reports U.S Government Had Strong Indications Ratzinger Would Be Pope ”

  • Looks like the Internet police have struck.

  • Art Deco,

    What are the end goals of *any* State Department and Military?

  • It is curious that our government would find the election of the Pope curious. Do they also do intelligence on the elections of the Archbisop of Cantebury?

  • Popes matter globally, unlike the Archbishops of Canterbury who do not even matter in the UK.

    I would take these wikileaks with a large boulder of salt. One of the curses of government is the huge amount of useless paper generated. Intelligence agencies are especially prone to this type of bloat, and often the opinions aren’t any better than you could find on blogs, except that the taxpayers pay us zip for doing this. However, if the CIA is ever eager to have a Catholic blog all its own… 🙂

  • What are the end goals of *any* State Department and Military?

    Costa Rica’s or ours?

  • “On the day of the election itself, there was a cable to Washington which pooh-poohed the possible election of Ratzinger. Apparently the election shocked them.”

    I wonder what President Bush’s reaction was? As I’ve noted before, on the very day, and at the very hour, Pope Benedict’s election was announced, Bush was in Springfield for the dedication of the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum. I remember hearing both events reported live on my car radio while driving between newspaper assignments….

    Also, isn’t there a rumor, persistent allegation, or whatever to the effect that when Pope Paul VI was elected in 1963, Cardinal Spellman secretly transmitted the result to a CIA operative in Rome with some kind of hidden two-way radio? Not saying it’s true but I just wonder if anyone else has heard this. If true (and that’s a HUGE “if”) then it would seem to indicate that the CIA cultivated some, shall we say, much more reliable contacts within the Vatican in those days.

  • Meanwhile, via Catholic Vote/American Papist, we learn that more than 800 of the Wikileaks documents still slated for publication involve communications with the Vatican: