Skip to content

State of Wisconsin is cyber targeted up to 60,000 times on an average day. Even if “Russia” were 100 of them, it wouldn’t be news. Wisconsin is already the most double-checked state having completed a full recount of its 3 million votes-AP…(Why is Trump DHS still flitting around Wisconsin talking about scary “Russian hacking”?)

Trump DHS on 9/22/17 told Wisconsin that the Russian government “tried to hack” its election system. Four days later, 9/26/17, Trump DHS said they made a mistake, Wisconsin wasn’t “targeted” by Russia after all. The State of Wisconsin receives up to 60,000 attempted hacks daily, so even if Russia was 100 of them it’s not news.Wisconsin has already been the most carefully double-checked state, having recounted all 3 million of its votes and finding no evidence of hacking. Trump gained 131 votes in the recount.

On 9/22/17, Trump DHS told Wisconsin that “Russian government cyber actors” “tried to hack” its election system:

9/22/17, Russians tried to hack election systems of 21 states in 2016, officials say, USA Today Network, Patrick Marley, Jason Stein, Journal Sentinel


Trump DHS backtracks about Wisconsin and Russia: Two AP articles, 9/26/17 (Bauer) and 9/28/17 (Day):

9/26/17, Homeland Security now says Wisconsin election wasn’t targeted by Russians, AP, Scott Bauer

“The U.S. Department of Homeland Security reversed course Tuesday and told Wisconsin officials that the Russian government did not scan the state’s voter registration system.

Homeland Security told state elections officials on Friday (9/22/17) that Wisconsin was one of 21 states targeted by the Russians, raising concerns about the safety and security of the state’s election systems even though no data had been compromised. But in an email to the state’s deputy elections administrator that was provided to reporters at the Wisconsin Elections Commission meeting on Tuesday, Homeland Security said that initial notice was in error.”…


Second AP article: 

Trump DHS says: Even if Russians didn’t “scan” Wisconsin computers,it doesn’t mean they weren’t looking to break into them.” 

9/28/17, DHS: Hackers targeted other systems to find weak spots, AP, Chad Day 

(Obama holdover Scott) McConnell said the department stands by its initial assessment that 21 states were targeted by “Russian government cyber actorslooking for vulnerabilities in and access to election infrastructure. He noted that some of the intelligence used to make that determination cannot be shared publicly…..

The Department of Homeland Security on Thursday sought to clear up confusion over its assessment that 21 states had their election systems targeted by Russian government hackers, saying just because the hackers in some states didn’t directly scan election systems, it doesn’t mean they weren’t looking to break into them.”…


Added: 60,000 attempts to “scan,” “hack,” or “target” Wisconsin state computers take place every day. Even if “Russia” were 100 of them, it wouldn’t be news. Why is Trump DHS selling attempted “scans” as something scary and close to an act of war? Wisconsin could reduce cyber interest in its elections by conducting voter registration by mail and keeping all records off computers.

Source for 60,000 attempts: 

The State of Wisconsin gets up to 60,000 attempts every day from entities “looking to” access holes in its computer system: “On a typical day over the past two years, the state (Wisconsin) has logged fewer than 60,000 of these alerts, which attempt to find holes in state systems.” 9/26/17, In reversal, feds proclaim Russians did not seek to hack Wisconsin’s election system,Journal Sentinel, Patrick Marley 


Wisconsin has already been the most carefully double-checked state. In Dec. 2016 it completed a recount of its 3 million votes. Trump not only won Wisconsin again, he gained 131 votes. “Wisconsin Elections Commission Chairman Mark Thomsen says the recount revealed no evidence of any hacking. 

12/12/2016, “The Latest: Trump celebrates adding 131 votes in Wisconsin,AP, Madison, Wisc. 

Putin endorsed Obama for president on RT in 2012, and no one said RT should register as a foreign agent

Should we demand, moreover, that the tiny Russian-owned media outlet RT register as a foreign agent–as the Atlantic Council has insisted, and as the [Trump] Justice Department is now demanding–but not require the same of the BBC and CBC, which are financed by the British and Canadian governments respectively? What about the Atlantic Council itself, which, receives much of its funding from foreign nations that seek to strengthen NATO?” 


Putin endorsed Obama for president on RT in 2012, said Obama would provide favorable resolution to missile defense, that Romney would widen rift over anti-missile shield US is deploying in Europe. Putin gushed that Obama is “an honest person who really wants to change much for the better”-Reuters, 9/6/2012

9/6/2012, “UPDATE 1-Russia’s Putin defiant on Syria, says Romney “mistaken”,” Reuters, Moscow

“Putin held out hope for an end to a dispute with Washington on missile defence if President Barack Obama were re-elected in November, telling Russia’s RT television he was an honest person who really wants to change much for the better”. 

Putin took aim at Obama’s Republican rival Mitt Romney, calling his criticism of Russia “mistaken” campaign rhetoric and suggesting a Romney presidency would widen the rift over the anti-missile shield the United States is deploying in Europe.“…


Added: Excerpt from source at top of post:

9/29/17, Russia-gate’s Shaky Foundation, Daniel Herman, Consortium News

Should we demand, moreover, that the tiny Russian-owned media outlet RT register as a foreign agentas the Atlantic Council has insisted, and as the [Trump] Justice Department is now demanding but not require the same of the BBC and CBC, which are financed by the British and Canadian governments respectively? 

What about the Atlantic Council itself, which, receives much of its funding from foreign nations that seek to strengthen NATO? 

Should the Atlantic Council be required to register as a foreign agent? Does anyone seriously think the Atlantic Council doesn’t propagandize for NATO and for hawkish policies more generally?

Or what about the hawkish Brookings Institution, or a host of other think tanks that welcome money from foreign powers?”…(subhead, “Silencing Dissent”)


Russia Foreign Minister Lavrov says Obama administration spoiled US-Russia relations. Lavrov at UN news conference said Obama “put this time bomb in US-Russia relations, I didn’t expect that from a Nobel Peace Prize winner.” As to alleged Russian meddling in 2016 election, Lavrov said after a year of inquiries, “we did not see a single fact,” asked Rex Tillerson for evidence, but pathetic Tillerson told Lavrov it was “confidential.” Lavrov dismissed that, considering volume of leaks-NY Times, 9/22/17

9/22/2017, Russia Says ‘Small-Hearted’ Obama Administration Spoiled Ties, NY Times, Somini Sengupta, United Nations

Russia’s top diplomat said Friday that the Obama administration had been “small-hearted” and vindictive toward his country, spoiling relations and jeopardizing cooperation on critical issues including the Syria conflict.

The remarks, by Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov, came during a news conference he held on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly.
U.S.-Russia relations are suffering not from the fact that there are conflicts but rather because the previous U.S. administration was small-hearted and they were revengeful, Mr. Lavrov said. “They put this time bomb in U.S.-Russia relations. I didn’t expect that from a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for former President Barack Obama, did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

Mr. Lavrov was referring to the steep slide in relations between Washington and the Kremlin over a variety of issues, including the imposition of sanctions on Russia in connection with Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula in Ukraine. 

He said he had never bargained with his Western counterparts about the lifting of sanctions. He also dismissed allegations of Russian meddling in the 2016 American presidential election to tilt the outcome in favor of Donald J. Trump instead of Hillary Clinton.

Even after a year of inquiries, Mr. Lavrov said, “we did not see a single fact.
Mr. Lavrov said he had asked his American counterpart, Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, for evidence of Russian meddling in the election and was told it was confidential.
Mr. Lavrov dismissed that contention as well.
You know I cannot believe that,” he said. “Information is leaking all the time.
Especially in an investigation that involves so many people, he went on, “it cannot be so that not a single fact is leaked. It would have been leaked.
There are still large gaps between the Russian and American positions on a number of matters, from the question of what to do about Iran to how to handle the North Korean nuclear crisis.
On Iran, Mr. Lavrov said he agreed with European diplomats who this week rejected American demands to reopen the 2015 nuclear agreement. The deal has been endorsed by the United Nations Security Council, Mr. Lavrov said, and if there are other concerns about Iran, such as its ballistic missiles program or its role in Syria, they should be addressed separately.
“Bringing together apples and oranges would be wrong, especially in such a complicated issue as the Iran nuke deal,” Mr. Lavrov said.
On North Korea, he said it was time to “calm down the hotheads” and consider offers of mediation, including one by Secretary General António Guterres of the United Nations. Mr. Lavrov advocated what he called a “reasonable” approach to resolving the standoff, “instead of kindergarten fights between children.””


Remembering my friend, Don Ohlmeyer-Rush Limbaugh, 9/11/2017

9/11/17, Remembering My Friend Don Ohlmeyer, Rush Limbaugh

“RUSH: I got a phone call. Oh, gosh, I don’t know when. It was during the football game last night, so 6 or 6:30.

I looked at the number; didn’t recognize the number. It was a local number here. I didn’t recognize it, and so I didn’t accept the call, because talking on the phone is a hearing challenge. And within seconds I got a message from whoever it was that had called, It was just a shocking thing, so I called back, and it was from one of Don Ohlmeyer’s sons. Don Ohlmeyer had passed away at 5:30 Pacific Time yesterday afternoon. You know, Ohlmeyer was a beast in the television business. He was with ABC during the inception of Monday Night Football.

And though he didn’t make Howard Cosell because nobody made Howard Cosell, Ohlmeyer was instrumental in letting Cosell be Cosell. For those of you that are too young to know, Howard Cosell…For those of us in broadcasting, the thing about Howard Cosell was that he was one of the first high-profile TV personalities that wasn’t technically in news who had freedom to say, do what he wanted to do. Management was unable to clock him, so to speak, and he became the envy of many people in media for this.

Ohlmeyer was instrumental in protecting Cosell from efforts to tame him or moderate him or whatever. And he then after leaving ABC after many years there, went to NBC and became the president’s NBC’s prime time division West Coast. And it was under his leadership that they came up with this killer lineup of comedies and shows that just owned, for example, Thursday nights. It had Seinfeld and just any number of other shows that he, after seeing, purchased and arranged for them to air on NBC. And he had Ohlmeyer Communications.

It was Don Ohlmeyer who invented the Skins Game, golf, that always aired on Thanksgiving weekend. Four or five professionals would play in a tournament over the weekend, call it the Skins Game, and now everybody plays “Skins” in golf. I never knew Don Ohlmeyer during all this. I knew of him, I knew his reputation, but I never knew him during all this. When ABC/ESPN lost the rights to Monday Night Football to NBC, they hired Ohlmeyer to produce the first year, to executive produce….

He was actually in the truck, produced the first year, and they were looking for somebody to pair with Al Michaels. So I offered myself. I thought, “This is something I would love to do, and I would be great at it,” and I had Cosell in my mind. “I would love to do this.” So I’m on the air making comments about how much I would love to do this, and at the time there was a man named Howard Katz who’s now with the NFL who actually is the chief of the unit in the NFL that does the schedule every year. But at the time Howard Katz was an NBC Sports executive.

And he called Ohlmeyer and said, “I think this Limbaugh guy is serious. Why don’t you talk to him? So Ohlmeyer was in Ft. Lauderdale for a friend’s wedding and called and said, “Why don’t you come down; let’s talk about this.

I never thought this would happen. I mean, I’m just bloviating about it on the air, but I never thought it would… I was serious in wanting to do it, but I never thought it would happen. I never made a call to anybody at NBC saying I was serious. I just did it all on the air.

So I drove down. I’m listening to Mambo Number 5 by Lou Bega all the way down to Ft. Lauderdale. It’s about… From my house it was about an hour, and I was gonna play golf at Pine Tree on my way back from the meeting with Ohlmeyer, and I got down to the hotel he was staying [at]… and his partner L.J. approached me and said, “Don will be down in a moment.” I said, “Wow, this is cool. This is big.” So Ohlmeyer came down and we had a chat about it and talked about it.

He said, “Look, why don’t you come out; let’s do an audition.” I said, “Really?” “Yeah. You come out and we’ll get a tape. I’m not gonna tell you which… I will tell you the game. I’ll tell you the game. We’ll get a tape.” It was the Music City Miracle game. It was the Titans and Buffalo Bills. He said, We’ll replay the tape of that game, and you and Al can pretend it’s live, and we’ll just see you do. And I said, “Really?” He said, “Yeah.” So I went out and did that. He picked me up at the airport when I arrived.

I think I flew into Burbank. He picked me up. Now, I didn’t learn a lot about Ohlmeyer in the Ft. Lauderdale meeting other than I liked him, but it wasn’t an interview or anything like that. So I’m thinking, “NBC West Coast chairman, ABC. This guy’s got to be a typical media liberal. Just has to.” So I figure my chances here are nil, but I’m gonna have fun with it. So we’re in the car, and we’re driving to the hotel. He’s gonna drop me off the hotel and have dinner, and the next day do the audition.

And on the way to the hotel, he starts ripping the media just like I do, and I thought, “I’m being set up here. He’s settin’ me up. I’m supposed to be say, ‘Yeah, you’re right,’ and I’m supposed to launch,” ’cause I figured he’s gotta be part of the liberal leftist media establishment. So I was standoff. I was very cool in the car and I didn’t go, “Yeah, man, you’re right,” and offer my own examples. None of that. I just nodded and I said, “Yeah, I can’t argue with that. Can’t argue.”

So he dropped me off, we had dinner that night, then next day did the audition. It went well, and he was shocked and Al Michaels was pleasantly surprised and all that. I knew Al, but I’d never met Ohlmeyer. Anyway, that’s the year they chose Dennis Miller. But the point is through all of this, Don Ohlmeyer became a really, really close friend. And he was a really, really good guy. Do you remember, those of you been here a long time, I’ve told the story of how I was with friends at a golf club down in the desert in Palm Springs, Indian Wells?

A famous media person that you would all know joined us for dinner and my friend just lacerated this guy on the subject of illegal immigration? It was Ohlmeyer. And I’m not gonna tell you who the famous media guest was, but you would know who it is. I never… I also never identified Ohlmeyer, always protected his privacy. But Ohlmeyer was one of the funniest… He and Roger Ailes were some of the most naturally funny people. But when Don got going on this stuff (laughing), it was just marvelous to sit back and listen to it.

And he had this poor TV star backwards and forwards and pretzeled inside out. The TV star was reduced to, “Well, look, if poor people around the world would have come to my country and improve their lot in life, I’m not going to say no!” And Don said, “Well, what happens if the guy jumps your back fence and wants to date your daughter?” “Well, that would never happen, and I’m not…” Anyway, we played a lot of golf together, and we had a lot of good times.

I would host a thing at my house every spring I called the Spring Fling. He was just somebody I never expected to meet, and when I did meet him, I never expected him to be the kind of guy he was. 

He was the most unassuming, for the things that he had done in life, the things that he had accomplished. It was just a cool thing to get to know him and to have he and L.J. become friends of ours, become part of our life. I was just shocked when I found out that he had passed away. His son Kemper is who called me. He had four sons. And the text message said, “Don died at 5:30.”

I didn’t even know that he was sick. And it turns out that it had to be a late discovery of cancer that had metastasized, so I gathered this was all really, really sudden, I mean, like, days. And like a blow to the stomach, first Roger Ailes passes away this year and now Don. It was just a shock and sadness, disappointment. I didn’t even know. I hadn’t seen him in a while. This is a crazy thing, but when the iPhone six plus came out, the big one, the five-and-a-half-inch screen, I had an extra one and I said,

“Hey, Don, do you want an iPhone six plus?

He said, “Yeah!” So I FedExed him the six plus, and L.J. said, “This is the greatest toy anybody’s ever given him. He won’t stop playing with it.” It made my day. So when the new ones came, 6S Plus, I sent him one, “You want an upgrade?”

“Well, if you’ve got one hanging around.”

So I sent him that one. He was a great golfer. He hit the ball straight. By that I mean wherever it was aimed is where it went. The envy of everybody. He didn’t bomb it, it didn’t go a long way, but if the guy didn’t break 80, it was a bad day. So just a sad, sad turn of events. And, you know, with Roger Ailes passing away, now Vince Flynn and his movie, screening that this afternoon.

And all this happening within the time framework of the hurricane, you know, it just really reinforces, folks, that you shouldn’t take anything for granted, particularly with the people in your life that you love. You should always try to stay in touch and don’t let any kind of momentary disagreement you had with people cause distance. It’s just silly because anything can happen at any time that changes everything.

He’s one of these people that you wish everybody could meet him and get to know him. He was that charismatic and welcoming and very confident — love hanging around confident people. And he was that. He loved L.J. He often said, “You know, I decided there’s nobody in the world I’d rather talk to than her. So excuse me for not playing golf today.” Okay, that’s cool. So Don Ohlmeyer is 72 years old, same age that my mother and father both passed away at.” Image from


Rush Limbaugh “Related link” 

Los Angeles Times: Don Ohlmeyer, ‘Monday Night Football’ Producer and Originator of  ‘Must See TV,’ Dies at 72 

Since global warming ‘pause’ is widely accepted by scientists, it’s vital to ask if government will ‘pause’ its expensive use of taxpayer dollars to ‘cure’ it until picture becomes clearer-BBC News program, Andrew Neil, July 2013

This is a vital policy issue since the strategy of this government and the previous Labour government to decarbonise the economy involves multi-billion pound spending decisions paid for by consumers and taxpayers, which might not have been taken (at least to the same degree or with the same haste) if global warming was not quite the imminent threat it has been depicted.” 

7/22/2013, Andrew Neil on Ed Davey climate change interview critics, BBC, Andrew Neil  [Ed Davey was then UK “Energy and Climate Change Sec.”]

The main purpose of the interview as to establish if the government thought the recent and continuing pause in global temperatures meant it should re-think its policies in response to global warming….

This is a vital policy issue since the strategy of this government and the previous Labour government to decarbonise the economy involves multi-billion pound spending decisions paid for by consumers and taxpayers, which might not have been taken (at least to the same degree or with the same haste) if global warming was not quite the imminent threat it has been depicted.

It might also be argued that challenging interviews on matters in which there is an overwhelming consensus in Westminster [and Washington, DC] – but not necessarily among voters who pay for both the licence fee and the government’s energy policies – is a particularly legitimate purpose of public-service broadcasting.

No consensus

The recent standstill in global temperatures is a puzzle. Experts do not know why it is occurring or how long it will last.

Climate scientists have proffered a variety of possible explanations. But there is no consensus.

Extensive peer-reviewed literature regards it as established yet unexplained. It is widely accepted that the main climate models which inform government policy did not predict it (which raises interesting issues of the models’ predictions about the future course of temperatures).

For many climate scientists the plateau – which may or may not have long-term significance – has come as something of a surprise.

Recently Nature, which has published extensively on global warming, called it one of climate science’s greatest mysteries.

[July 10, 2013, Climate change: The forecast for 2018 is cloudy with record heat,” heat: why has the warming slowed?Jeff Tollefson It is one of the biggest mysteries in climate science: humans are pumping more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere today than ever before, yet global temperatures have not risen much in more than a decade.“] 


(continuing): “So it is legitimate to ask if the government takes the pause seriously and if it has any implications for policy, ie, if there is a pause in warming, is there a case for the government to pause or slowdown its expensive efforts to decarbonise the economy until the picture becomes clearer?…

Some have detected a slight decline in temperatures since circa 2004 but we did not dwell on that since it is statistically insignificant….

The plateau has made some climate scientists wonder about the efficacy of the IPCC central forecast, which has been seminal in informing official policy, and some are re-considering the IPCC’s measurement of climate sensitivity i.e. the extent to which temperatures rise in response to any given amount of C02 emissions….

At the Sunday Politics we are also used to public figures who try to change the metric when the one they’ve put their faith in does not behave as expected. We try not to let that happen.

Moreover, the purpose of the interview was not to question all aspects of climate science, just the one metric that has commanded most attention. Other possible indicators of climate change – ice melt, ocean temperatures and extreme weather events – are a matter of widespread debate in which the science most certainly is not “settled.”…

At no stage in the interview was it ever claimed that global warming is not real or that it is not man-made. It is not for the Sunday Politics to take such positions.

Our focus was on a global temperature plateau which could be a challenge to the forecasts of climate models
which have determined government policy. The plateau could continue for the foreseeable future or melt away as temperatures resume their upward trajectory.

The Sunday Politics has no views on such matters. We have put the existence of this plateau into the broader public domain. It is for others to determine its significance.” 


Added: Wouldn’t $10 million US taxpayer dollars per day be more than enough for the climate industry? Why does the US political class insist on $115.6 million a day, 365 days a year?

Dozens if not all US federal agencies engaged in climate spending in 2016. From just 8 agencies in 2016,  $115,616,438 million US taxpayer dollars daily went out the door to the weather and climate industry every day, $42.2 billion for the year, per

Weather and Climate in the FY 2016 Budget, (Am. Assn. for Advancement of Science), Paul A.T. Higgins, Shalini Mohleji, American Meteorological Society 

“2016 climate and weather budget”


From Table 1: Weather and climate-related R and D in the Federal Budget

NOAA $5.9 billion

NASA $18.5 billion

NSF $1.3 billion

Dept. of Energy $5.3 billion

Dept. of Interior, USGS $1.2 billion

USDA (Agric. Research Service) $1.4 billion 

EPA $8.6 billion”

(Added: During Obama’s 8 years, regular annual budgets weren’t used. “Requested” monies were allocated in other ways, and everyone was fine with it. In 2012, for example, no one had a problem giving $6 billion US taxpayer dollars for ‘clean energy’ to the Sultan of Brunei who owns 5000+ cars. The $6 billion would be shared with Pres. of Indonesia for “renewables and cleaner energy.” The Sultan of Brunei of course carries out Islamic punishments of limb dismemberment and stoning to death. As to Indonesia, it’s so corrupt even the World Bank says crime adds 20% to costs.)

Added: “Funding appears to be driving the science rather than the other way around….[32]” (item #11):

2015 paper: The explosion of global climate science spending was traced to the United States Executive branch in 1990 and Bush #1’s USGCRP mandate. The continuing decades-long “boom” in global climate science spending was merely theft of US taxpayer dollars by the US political class:

Fall 2015, Causes and Consequences of the Climate Science Boom,”, Butos and McQuade

“2. By any standards, what we have documented here is a massive funding drive, highlighting the patterns of climate science Rand D as funded and directed only by the Executive Branch.”…1. The Government’s Role in Climate Science Funding…took a critical step with passage of the Global Change Research Act of 1990.  

The Act established institutional structures operating out of the White House.”...

Chart below, page 4, pdf, is an underestimate, doesn’t include congressional appropriations:


“Note and Sources: The data shown here are funding disbursements by the White House U.S. Global Change Research Program and its predecessor, the National Climate Program, available at NCP 1988, 43; Climate Science Watch 2007; and Leggett, Lattanzio, and Bruner 2013. These data, however, do not represent congressional climate science funding appropriations to other government agencies. As we show later in a more detailed assessment of U.S. government climate science funding, the numbers here, especially those for more recent years, greatly underestimate the actual level of funding.” pdf p. 4



“99.9 percent of climate science is funded by the government.


Added: UN IPCC: US temperatures cooled from 1950-2011:

2012 UN IPCC report,Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (582 pages):

UN IPCC states central North America” temperatures cooled between 1950 and 2011. Citations on pages 121, 134, and 135 reference “central North America” cooling. (Scientific American says UN IPCC is “the world’s premier scientific body on the climate.) ………………

UN IPCC: US temperatures cooled from 1950-2011:

2012 UN IPCC report,Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, (582 pages):

UN IPCC states central North America” temperatures cooled between 1950 and 2011. Citations on pages 121, 134, and 135 reference “central North America” cooling. (Scientific American says UN IPCC is “the world’s premier scientific body on the climate.) ………………

3 citations for “central North America” cooling temperatures from 1950-2011,” per 2012 UN IPCC report, Chapter 3, Changes in Climate Extremes and their Impacts on the Natural Physical Environment,” begins p. 109:

First citation, p. 121:

p. 121, Subhead 3.1.6: “
Changes in Extremes and Their Relationship to Changes in Regional and Global Mean Climate:”

(Right column, near end of page): Parts of central North America [otherwise known as the US] and the eastern United States present cooling trends in mean temperature and some temperature extremes in the spring to summer season in recent decades (Section 3.3.1).”…


Comment: Tax dollars that otherwise could’ve gone to the poor and needy, education, or infrastructure, have instead for decades been funneled to climate fat cats.





Edward Kett Mullen, born in Brooklyn on September 27, 1922, died on August 24, 2017 at his home in New Jersey. He is survived by his wife of 69 years, Joanne, 5 children, 10 grandchildren, and one great grandchild

During World War II, Ed Mullen was a US Air Force pilot in the Pacific. Here he’s training with a Stearman biplane.

Ed Mullen in the 1940s in his Air Force uniform. He said it was considered an Army uniform at the time. They didn’t start calling it the Air Force until after WWII.

Here’s Ed on Mother’s Day, 2012. He died a month before his 95th birthday. Thanks for everything, Dad.

This portrait of Ed hangs over the fireplace at his New Jersey home.

If the US fails it won’t be because of Democrats or even the seditious media. It will be those diguised today as Republicans, such as Newt Gingrich, who’ll gleefully drive the final nail-‘The Enemy Within,’ Peggy Ryan, 8/23/17

A President who could get things done would expose them as the irrelevant creatures they truly are….Jealousy is also seriously at work here. Trump is inspiring and exciting a broad spectrum of the country” like Gingrich et al. never have and never will. 1/22/2016, National Review just handed Donald Trump the Election,Republican Newswatch, by Doug Ibendahl. Doug Ibendahl, a Chicago Attorney, is a former General Counsel of the Illinois Republican Party.

8/23/17, The Enemy Within, Peggy Ryan, Canada Free Press

“If this mutinous cabal succeeds in destroying democracy it won’t be because of the Democrats, it won’t even be the seditious media. No, it will be the left-wing activists in Republican guise, GOP turncoats who will gleefully drive the final nail.”

“In a recent interview, Sean Hannity asked Newt Gingrich about Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell’s inability to lead, the Senate’s failure to pass an Obamacare repeal. Newt danced around McConnell’s role, its “we” he said, the President’s not a bystander, he shares the blame. 

After a few moments of castigating the President for Congress’s failures, Gingrich said we have to be effective, look at the long game.  We have a couple of weak Republicans so we need to add to our majority in 2018 to make up for them, get to 56 or 58 seats.

Ha! I might have been born at night, Newt, but it wasn’t last night.  This Lucy with the football thing got old back when we gave Republicans the House yet they couldn’t use the power of the purse to even slow Obamacare.

It got crazy when we gave Republicans the House and Senate yet the poor babies still couldn’t repeal or constrain Obamacare because they couldn’t get past the bully Democrat President.

Now its downright stupid when Republicans whine that even with the White House, Senate, and House, their slim majorities fall short, they need more, more, more.

Then Newt really struck a nerve, went off on the Republican base. At some point, he preached, we have to deal with the fact that we were three votes short for the repeal. The way to fix that is not a civil war, not to attack ourselves.”…

[Ed. note: “The way to fix that is not a civil war?The “civil war” happened in 2016 when Trump stunningly defeated your pals in the GOP Establishment. Even the NY Times Editorial Board on May 3, 2016 said, “It’s Donald Trump’s Party Now.” Gingrich, like others, is pretending 2016 didn’t happen, knowing Hannity will let him say whatever he wants]

(continuing): “Poor Newt’s worried because there’s huge primary battles brewing for Jeff Flake in AZ and Dean Heller in NV.  He sneered that the base thinks they’re “going to teach these guys a lesson but it’s suicidal, we could lose those seats. Besides, he pointed out, both those guys voted for the repeal.

So let’s dissect Newt’s rant from the bottom up:

First of all, scrap the notion that three Senators killed the bill, that’s a crock. These were the three chosen to fall on their sword.  They were picked because they’re in “safe seats”.

  1. Susan Collins of Maine – reelection 2020
  2. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska – reelection 2022
  3. John McCain of Arizona – reelection 2022

Collins, Murkowski and McCain are more in line with the usual Senate games, just elected they have 5 1/2 years left to screw their voters before they have to answer for their betrayal. And when Judgment Day looms, the party will give them symbolic votes to make-up, roses for their base after they beat the living crap out of them for years.

These three senators were the no votes because they don’t have to face voters but trust me, there’s plenty of traitors warming up in the bull pen if needed. In fact, Dean Heller voiced a no vote back in June. He couldn’t follow through because his constituents raised millions to expose his treachery.  But it’s the thought that counts, right?

The sad fact is, Obamacare was never in danger of repeal.

Republicans have no intention of setting us free from government healthcare, never did.

Onto Newt’s point about infighting, that we’re taking a huge chance fighting the GOP establishment (GOPe), we could lose those seats.”…

[Ed. note: “Infighting?” “We’re taking a huge chance fighting the GOP Establishment? Who is “we?” Establishment errand boy Gingrich has it backwards. Establishment lost a massive fight in stunning and historic fashion in 2016. Trump is the only elected Republican with an army. The rest have next to nothing. Hannity is as bad as Gingrich because he gives him a forum to be a parasite and waste peoples’ time. The only solution is for Trump to  announce formation of a new party ASAP, and that he’ll head it. It will be an actual  second party to the combined Dem/GOP. Right now, half the electorate has no political party behind them.]

(continuing): “So Newt, you’re saying GOP voters have to have a familiar name on the ballot, an incumbent, to know which box to check?

Or are you saying the GOP won’t support challengers?  I get that, you people have fought conservatives for years, use the dollars sent to elect conservatives to defeat conservatives.

You went all out to defeat Christine O’Donnell in the 2010 DE Senate race, gave the seat to a Democrat because the establishment was pissed off over Rep. Mike Castle’s loss.  Where was the concern for losing the seat then, Newt?

Then there was the 2014 Mississippi Senate primary where the GOPe outright stole the Senate seat.  When Polls showed Chris McDaniel would win, the GOPe poured millions into false ads, made robocalls that accused McDaniel of racism, paid Democrats to go to the polls, and pushed ineligible voters to cast a ballot.  It was dirty and everyone knew it, it was unacceptable yet everyone accepted it.

No Newt, reelecting establishment candidates isn’t the answer, it’s the problem. Time after time these entrenched politicians use their power against the American people, not for us.  Paul Ryan’s omnibus; the Iran deal; the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP); or the Paris Agreement on climate. Republicans repeatedly put every other country ahead of America, vote against the people’s interests. 

But by far, the biggest danger from these Republican apostates is their subversion. They work with Democrats, media, and deep state to undo our election, to attack our President. They allow the illegal special counsel investigation and hold phony hearings on Russian collusion knowing there’s no crime. They jump to the nearest mic to condemn the President’s travel ban, to link the President to white supremacists, and to criticize every word out of the President’s mouth.

They unite to block any move by the President to stop Mueller’s political assassination, squeal when President Trump questions Attorney General Jeff Session’s back-stabbing recusal, warn the President of the United States not to fire his own Attorney General.  They vote to keep the President from firing special counsel Robert Mueller even though Mueller’s serving in that position in defiance of Department of Justice rules, not a whisper of the lawlessness of the investigation.

And yet, Newt, you ask us to reelect Jeff Flake, a never-Trumper who’s been itching to stick it to the President.  If Jeff gets another six-year term, guaranteed he’ll gleefully volunteer those no votes again and again, he’ll be the “safe seat”, one of the untouchable saboteurs for the party.

Or Dean Heller, disappointed he couldn’t personally torpedo the repeal this go-around but relieved it was successfully blocked.  If this recreant is this arrogant with his term about to expire, what would he do with a six-year cushion?

The sad truth is the American people didn’t win Congressional majorities. Republicans have merged with Democrats into a seditious bloc and we’re far outnumbered. No, it’s not every Republican but it’s a sizable number, Senators

McConnell, McCain, Graham, Flake, Heller, Collins, Murkowski, Rubio, Sasse,

need I go on? In the House, its Speaker Ryan, House leadership, an entire progressive caucus, and never-Trumpers, enough to impose their will over ours, enough to complete their coup d’tat and remove our President.

So please, Newt, save the spiel about electing the incumbent to save the seat. If the sitting Senator or House member is GOP establishment, then our only hope to “save” the seat, to save our country, is to defeat that incumbent.

If this mutinous cabal succeeds in destroying democracy it won’t be because of the Democrats, it won’t even be the seditious media.  No, it will be the left-wing activists in Republican guise, GOP turncoats who will gleefully drive the final nail in America’s coffin for their own greedy gain.

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.”—Marcus Tullius Cicero”


Above, banner of NY Times Editorial, posted Tuesday evening May 3, 2016 for Wed., May 4, 2016 print edition 

Even the NY Times Editorial Board was honest enough to admit that the 2016 Republican voters’ messageis testimony to how thoroughly they reject the Republican politicians who betrayed them.”…

May 3, 2016, By The NY Times Editorial Board: 

“Republican leaders have for years failed to think about much of anything beyond winning the next election. Year after year, the party’s candidates promised help for middle-class people who lost their homes, jobs and savings to recession, who lost limbs and well-being to war, and then did next to nothing. 

That Mr. Trump was able to enthrall voters by promising simply to “Make America Great Again” — but offering only xenophobic, isolationist or fantastical ideas — is testimony to how thoroughly they reject the politicians who betrayed them.”…



1/3/2017, “Trump utterly gutted the GOP in the primaries. That was the real landslide of 2016.”…CNBC, Jake Novak


Added: The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters,” Laura Ingraham, NY Times, July 16, 2016

7/16/2016,Donald Trump Forces G.O.P. to Choose Between Insularity and Outreach, NY Times, Alexander Burns, Jonathan Martin

Laura Ingraham, a conservative radio host supportive of Mr. Trump, said the party’s future base would have to be made up of “working-class nationalists,” who have been drawn to Mr. Trump and reject the Bush-era policies around immigration and trade. 

The next governing coalition that calls itself conservative will have to reflect the views of the pro-Trump voters,” she said.”…(8 parags. from end)



6/27/2016, “The elites of both parties are, as if by rote, extreme globalists.”

“He managed to prevail—to mount the most astonishingly successful insurgent campaign against a party establishment in our lifetimes….He won the GOP’s untapped residue of nationalist voters, in a system where the elites of both parties are, as if by rote, extreme globalists. He won the support of those who favored changing trade and immigration policies, which, it is increasingly obvious, do not favor the tangible interests of the average American.

He won the backing of those alarmed by a new surge of political correctness, an informal national speech code that seeks to render many legitimate political opinions unsayable. He won the support of white working-class voters whose social and economic position had been declining for a generation.6/27/16, Why Trump Wins,” “He knows border wars have replaced culture wars. The American Conservative, by Scott McConnell

Added: One year before Trump’s inauguration: Jan. 20, 2016, Rush Limbaugh:

“The Republican Party, for whatever reason, refuses to be an opposition party.

1/20/16,Understanding Trump’s Appeal,Rush Limbaugh

“The Republican Party, for whatever reason, refuses to be an opposition party. The Republican Party refuses to stand up and even make the pretense of trying to stop Barack Obama.  Out in the real world, Barack Obama and the Democrat Party are seen as destroying this country. And not just domestically; they’re destroying the military; they’re destroying foreign policy. They are nuking up Iran. They are behaving in ways that befriending our enemies and alienating our friends and allies — and people are at their wits’ end.

They [Republican voters] have voted, in large numbers, expecting there to be some opposition and push-back to this. That’s the standard, normal procedure in politics. Politics is at least two competing organizations, and the winning organization always faces opposition by the losing organization ’cause it wants to get back in power. Well, the people that vote for Republicans are not seeing any opposition.  They’re not seeing any push-back.  In fact, it’s even worse than that.  They’re seeing the Republican Party agree with the Democrats on something as key as open borders.

If there’s one thing that people in this country think is responsible for the direct hit on the economy and their future and their kids’ future, it’s illegal immigration and the willing importation of unskilled, uneducated, totally dependent people who are gonna be automatic voters for the Democrats, which means this never ends. So they’re expecting the Republican Party to stand up and say, “No!” They’re expecting the Republican Party to stand up and try to stop it. They’re not seeing it. They’re at their wits’ end.

They have voted.
They’ve donated.
They’ve given money when they could afford it.

They have campaigned. They’ve gotten out the vote. They have shown up as the Tea Party. They’ve gone to town meetings. They have gone neighborhood door-to-door. They’ve manned the phone banks. They’ve done all of that. They’ve got nothing to show for it except maybe they lose their job, maybe they’re cut back to 30 hours, maybe their neighborhood Walmart’s closing down.  Everything’s caving in on them! They’re the ones playing by the rules. They’re not cultural perverts. They’re not people breaking the law.

They’re doing everything they can to play by the rules, and they don’t think anybody is standing up for ’em or representing them.

They feel powerless.
They feel like they’re being targeted.

They think they’re being blamed for whatever’s gone wrong in this country that Obama and the Democrats don’t like. And they’re not to blame. They represent what’s great about this country, and they’re being winnowed out. Well, it only stands to reason that when somebody comes along and lets them know that he agrees with that — and these days are over and we’re gonna make this country great again and you’re gonna help me do it — and we’re together gonna make this country great, I guarantee you that is a magnet that no Republican, conservative, expert, think tank, whatever, can stop.

It’s not hard to understand this at all. Except the Republican Party I don’t think understands what is animating and motivating their base supporters. They’re not worried about the Republican Party future. They’re not worried about the image of the Republican Party, not worried about the media liking them.  They’re not worried about money being donated. They’re worried about their country. They oppose, stridently, the modern-day Democrat Party. They oppose the policies of Barack Hussein O. It isn’t personal.

They just don’t like what’s happening. They don’t like the out-of-control spending. They don’t like $4.5 trillion printed and given to Wall Street, and here’s Wall Street squandering it now! They don’t like any of this.  Somebody comes along and says, “I don’t either. You know what? We’re gonna work together, and we’re gonna make this country great again. We got stupid people running it.” Well, Trump’s not criticizing Democrats, Republicans, liberals, conservatives. He’s criticizing stupid people.”…


Rush Limbaugh “Related links'”