• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

Christopher Steele Agrees to Turn State’s Evidence on Democrats’ and Hillary’s Russian Hoax Crimes

Looks like Christopher Steele has cut a deal and will turn state’s evidence on Russia Hoax prosecutions


I don’t think it is a coincidence that just as President Trump is in the U.K., we suddenly learn that “dossier” author Christopher Steele has agreed to be questioned by U.S. authorities.  Chuck Ross of The Daily Caller reports:

Former British spy Christopher Steele has agreed to meet in London with U.S. officials regarding the dossier, The Times of London is reporting.

Steele’s decision is an apparent about-face from his reported refusal to meet with U.S. investigators regarding his infamous report.

Reuters reported in May that Steele was unwilling to meet with a federal prosecutor who Attorney General William Barr tapped to lead an investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. And Politico reported on April 17 that Steele was refusing to meet with the Justice Department’s office of the inspector general, which is looking into the FBI’s use of the dossier to obtain surveillance warrants against Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser.

I have all along believed that part of President Trump’s mission in the U.K. was winning over British support for fully outing the role of its intelligence services in the Russia Hoax.  He would have to guarantee that the overall relationship will remain sound even if highly embarrassing facts come to light.  While speaking with outgoing P.M. May was necessary, she will soon be replaced.  I do not discount the importance of his 90-minute private conversation with Queen Elizabeth.  The next P.M. cannot take office without going to her for permission, and in that conversation she is fully capable of laying out her expectations that this affair be made public to the extent that President Trump demands.  The serene continuation of the Special Relationship with the U.S. is precisely the sort of institutional matter of utmost importance that a British monarch has a legitimate and important voice on.

YouTube screen grab (cropped).

Steele must have learned that the offer to speak with U.S. authorities was one he couldn’t refuse.  Her Majesty’s government would not support any efforts to resist extradition if he were to refuse cooperation and be indicted.  They might even provide documentation that would lead to his conviction.

Joe DiGenova sees that this is really big news:

Attorney General William Barr’s investigators are hot on the trail of former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and others who played a role in concocting the conspiracy to take down our duly elected president.

If investigators conclude that Comey, Clapper and others engaged in a criminal conspiracy — as seems increasingly likely — then Christopher Steele could easily be named as a co-defendant, which would trigger an extradition request that Britain would almost certainly honor.

Steele obviously doesn’t want that to happen, which is probably why he declined a previous request for cooperation from U.S. Attorney John Durham, one of Barr’s top investigators looking into the FISA warrants scandal.

We don’t yet know which investigators will be interviewing Steele in the coming weeks, but it’s a pretty safe bet that they’ve offered him some form of immunity in exchange for his candor. That should terrify the Democrats who enlisted him in their attempts to execute a Deep State coup against Trump.

If Steele spills the beans on his former handlers, the resulting prosecutions of former high-level federal officials would make Watergate seem trivial by comparison.

In addition to Comey, Clapper and Brennan, it’s entirely possible that Steele’s testimony will yield new insights that could eventually help to implicate even higher-ranking officials in the Obama administration.

Watch, as on Hannity last night, Joe says walls are beginning to close in:



The Mass of Dem Presidential Contenders ARE More Fascistic Than Anything American!

Trump isn’t the biggest threat to the Constitution. Democrats are.

Who is the biggest threat to our constitutional order? It is not President Trump.

Ever since Trump took office, Democrats have been telling us he is an authoritarian who threatens our system of government. Well, today it is Democrats who are declaring war on the Constitution. Leading Democrats are promising that, if elected in 2020, they will abolish the electoral college and might also pack the Supreme Court with liberal justices — allowing them to marginalize Americans who do not support their increasingly radical agenda and impose it on an unwilling nation.

The purpose of the electoral college is to protect us from what James Madison called the “tyranny of the majority.” Each state gets to cast electoral votes equal to the combined number of its U.S. representatives (determined by population) and its senators (two regardless of population). The goal was to make sure even the smallest states have a say in electing the president and prevent those with large, big-city populations from dictating to the less populous rural ones.

No wonder Democrats don’t like it. Today, they have become the party of big-city elites, while their support is declining in less populous states of Middle America. Just look at a county-by-county map of the 2016 election — you can actually drive from coast to coast without driving through a single county that voted for Hillary Clinton. Clinton lost in 2016 because millions of once-reliable Democratic working-class voters in the American heartland switched their allegiance to Trump.

Thanks to the electoral college, Democrats have no choice but to try to win at least some of those voters back if they want to win the presidency. But if we got rid of the electoral college, Democrats could write off voters in “fly-over” country and focus on turning out large numbers of their supporters in big cities and populous liberal states such as New York and California. Unburdened by the need to moderate their platform to appeal to centrist voters, they would be free to pursue full socialism without constraint. If voters in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania oppose spending tens of trillions on a Green New Deal and a government take-over of the health-care, energy and transportation sectors of the economy, tough luck.

The electoral college protects us from this kind of unconstrained radicalism, by forcing the political parties to broaden their appeal — which is precisely why more and more Democrats want to get rid of it. Fortunately, the framers of the Constitution required supermajorities for amendments — another wise protection against the tyranny of the majority.

But Democrats would have no such obstacles in dealing with another impediment to their radical agenda: the Supreme Court. Thanks to Trump’s electoral college victory, Republicans have been able confirm two Supreme Court justices and secure a conservative majority. Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for their judicial predicament. They were the ones who announced that they would not confirm a Supreme Court justice during George W. Bush’s final year in office, setting the precedent for Republicans to block President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. And they were the ones who eliminated the filibuster for federal circuit courts judges — setting the precedent for Republicans to eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court justices.

Democrats have miscalculated at every turn, and now their solution is to break precedent yet again — by packing the Supreme Court. There have been nine justices on the Supreme Court for the past 150 years. No matter, Democratic candidates including Beto O’Rourke; South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg; and Sens. Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), Kamala D. Harris (Calif.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.) have all said that, as president, they would consider adding justices to the Supreme Court to secure a left-wing majority. The last president who tried this, Franklin D. Roosevelt, was stopped only because members of his own party rebelled. The Senate Judiciary Committee, then controlled by the Democrats, correctly declaredhis plan “an invasion of judicial power such as has never before been attempted in this country.”

It seems unlikely a Democratic president would face such a rebellion today. But unless Democrats win not only the presidency but also a 60-vote Senate majority, they would have to eliminate another minority protection — the legislative filibuster — to pass a court-packing bill. I suspect they would not hesitate to do so.

Taken together, the Democrats are proposing what amounts to a systemic assault on the foundations of our federal system. Democrats are freely pursuing a tyranny of the majority. We’ll see how it plays in Middle America. But if they do, then spare us the overwrought complaints about Trump. You can’t defend the Constitution while trying to tear it up at the same time.

Read more from Marc Thiessen’s archivefollow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.


Fascist Dem Left Now Controlling American Newsprint and NewsTelevision!!?

The Media at Their Lowest

by R. Quinn Kennedy  at  American Thinker:


When Joe Biden claimed this week on The View (see it here) that the Obama administration “had not a whisper of scandal” during eight years in the White House, the audience cheered wildly.  And why wouldn’t it?  It’s a partisan crowd that overwhelmingly leans left.

Those of us on quite the other side of the aisle didn’t bother falling out of our chairs at such an absurd claim.  We know how the game is played: make sure that statements such as this from Democrats are played in front of a partisan audience on a biased show that isn’t about to challenge the assertion.

As a reminder for candidate Biden, let’s review a partial list of the dozens of scandals and all the corruption during the Obama administration:

  • IRS targeting of conservative 501(c)(3) nonprofits
  • The $500-million Solyndra scam admitted to by secretary of energy Steven Chu
  • Attorney General Eric Holder held in contempt for lying to Congress
  • Mass domestic spying by the NSA
  • Illegal DOJ investigations of journalists
  • Complete mismanagement of the war in Syria
  • Transferring $1.7 billion in cash to Iran
  • The Benghazi cover-up
  • Operation Fast & Furious
  • Secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s pay-for-play scam with foreign governments
  • Falsified Veterans Administration documents after patients died waiting to be seen

The above list could easily be three times as long.  It could specifically include Joe Biden, as vice president, pressuring Ukraine into firing its top prosecutor, who, at the time, was investigating illegal activity by his own son, Hunter Biden (which Ukraine On what other grounds would Joe Biden even care?

When presented with a list of these scandals, the Left scoffs and passes them off as right-wing conspiracy theories.  Yet every scandal and instance of corruption cited is amply documented.

How is it, then, that Joe Biden can make such a claim without being held accountable?  You and I know the answer.  It’s because shows like The View and the national mainstream media aren’t about to hold Biden or any other Democratic candidate accountable.  Rather, they want such falsehoods to resonate as believable.  (With inserted loud claps of approval to validate them.)

Unfortunately, we are at a point in our nation’s history where freedom of the press has reached its lowest point.  Not only do the national mainstream media immorally sweep such contradictory statements under the rug, but they are, as President Trump has stated, “an arm of the Democratic Party.”  Rather than being impartial in news-reporting, their narrative clearly promotes the Democratic Party’s agenda and is hypercritical of Republican Party policies and social stances.  Can any mainstream reporter deny this with a straight face?

The devious relationship between one party and its willing accomplices in the media has moved beyond the point of eye-rolls and shoulder-shrugs.  It has reached a tipping point for our nation.  Joseph Goebbels famously stated, “Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine.”  This has become the incestuous relationship the Left lustfully pursues with increasing reliability.  Through decades of permeation, the media have been given over to the Left, and for leftists, our society has become the herd of swine.

Not surprisingly, the playbook isn’t limited to the national mainstream media.  Media technology group AllSides published a report that Google News results lean heavily toward media outlets with a “left” bias.  The author of the study, John Gable, stated that the bias is a result of “most news outlets and most news consumption online being from a left perspective.”  The purveyors of Google News are well aware of this egregious bias, but because Google’s corporate culture sways heavily left, we can hardly expect the company to create an algorithm that provides a fair and balanced narrative.

Indoctrination of the masses by the Left used to come in the form of opinion pieces.  During the Reagan administration, White House network reporters certainly reported the news.  However, they steadily began introducing the technique of ending each report with strongly worded opposing viewpoints from critics of the administration.  Who were these unnamed critics?  The ones holding the microphone.

Thus began the stepped up infiltration of political views into national news.  Subsequently, what began as infiltration has become full-on partisanship.  The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, NBC, CBS, ABC, and various other “news” outlets used to portray themselves as impartial.  Reading an opinion piece masquerading as a news story in a national news publication no longer seems brazen.  It has become the new normal.

On any number of subjects, building a wall between Mexico and the United States being a current topic of the day, there are literally dozens of video recordings of Democrats contradicting themselves from the position they took even a decade ago.  Joe Biden once pounded the pulpit demanding that we build a wall.  With Joe Biden as the Democratic frontrunner for U.S. president, you’ve seen that contradiction reported all over the national mainstream media, haven’t you?

Contrast that with anything and everything Donald Trump says.  The media are quick to pull any quote, any tweet out of context or bend it out of shape to promote the narrative that the president is an unhinged liar.  With very few exceptions, how can one not be entirely cynical of our news sources and online media?

Remember the Joe Biden interview on The View and the clapping throngs responding to his claim?  In a 2017 article by leftist Slate.com (find it here), the subtitle reads, “The Nazi propaganda machine exploited ordinary Germans by encouraging them to be co-producers of a false reality.”

Not a whisper of scandal, indeed.

R. Quinn Kennedy is a conservative activist and writer in Colorado.



Sleaze at Washington Post Regarding Its False Reporting of Assault upon Covington School Students at the Lincoln Memorial Continues

Washington Post Publishes ‘Editor’s Note’ About Covington Catholic Story

First of all, a hat tip to Mollie Hemingway who was the first to notice this, just a few minutes after it was published.

View image on Twitter



In a Friday night update in the midst of a massive lawsuit, Washington Post tries to quietly acknowledge, and downplay, its layers of false and defamatory reporting on the Covington High School boys who attended the March for Life.

FACT CHECK:   Phillips was never deployed to Vietnam.  There is no evidence he ever FOUGHT for his country.

Washington Post:

Correction: Earlier versions of this story incorrectly said that Native American activist Nathan Phillips fought in the Vietnam War. Phillips said he served in the U.S. Marines but was never deployed to Vietnam.

New York Times:

Correction: Jan. 22, 2019

An earlier version of this article, using information from the Indigenous Peoples Movement, gave an incorrect description of Mr. Phillips’s military service. While Mr. Phillips said he served in the military during the Vietnam era, he told The Times after publication that he was not deployed in Vietnam. The Times has requested his service record from the Pentagon.


Correction: This video states that Nathan Phillips is a Vietnam veteran. Phillips told CNN he is a “Vietnam-era veteran.” Phillips told the New York Times that though he did serve in the military during the Vietnam War, he was not deployed to Vietnam. CNN requested his service records from the Pentagon but was told those records are part of an archive not easily accessible during the government shutdown.



Article from June, 2016 when Our Donald Was Still Campaigning for the Presidency


by John Hinderaker  at PowerLine:      June 28, 2016

You no doubt have heard about the ABC News/Washington Post poll that came out on Sunday. It showed Hillary Clinton pulling out to a 12-point lead over Donald Trump among registered voters, and therefore got a lot of play in the press. The poll is an outlier, and in any event, it is way too early to be losing sleep over presidential polls.

One thing is worth pointing out, however: even in this outlier poll, Trump holds a ten-point lead among white voters, 50%-40% (down from 57%-33% in May!). It is remarkable that even at his low ebb, Trump wins by a near landslide margin among white voters, a majority of the electorate. Not many years ago, that would have assured him of victory.

This is why Democrats are so anxious to “fundamentally transform” the United States through mass immigration from Third World countries. Only by building up the minority population do they have a chance to stay competitive. But that still wouldn’t be enough, even if the Democrats got most of the votes cast by minorities, if minorities voted in anything like a normal pattern. In order to win, the Democrats need to roll up ridiculous margins, like the 90%-8% lead that Clinton holds with blacks in the ABC/WaPo poll.

This is why the Democrats seek every opportunity to stir up racial conflict. They need to keep minority voters constantly riled up and fearful of a phantom “racism.” The Democrats’ strategy, founded on a cynical exploitation of identity politics, explains the sharp decline in race relations now taking place in the U.S. Racial conflict suits the Democrats. In fact, they need it to have a chance of remaining competitive. This is the sad truth that, more than anything else, has brought our contemporary politics to such a low level.

But, Canada Is Already A Fascistic, One Party Government, Education, Communications, & Political World

…..and one of its neighbors across its southern border,  Minnesota,  isn’t too far behind..

Dennis Prager doesn’t live very close to fascistic Canada.  He’s lucky.   He’s got Oregon sitting north of his fascistic home state, California and Washington state “polarwise” beyond that.   It’s still woodsy and mountainous there in BC.

Canadians have British Columbia as their California:   one of their leading fascistic provinces  dictating  wrong from right,  night from day,  fascism from freedom.   Unlike Manitoba, it’s an up-to-date province from the leftist prospective throughout our continent.

Dennis turned to British Columbia for a while  during his radio show this Friday morning.  (British Columbia is that large Pacific Coast Province of Canada that politically behaves a lot like fascistic Seattle, Washington, only leftier, apparently.)

A 14 year old girl wanted to be a boy, because she “felt” like it.   She apparently challenged, or had a lawyer  challenge her parents who had shamed her with a girl’s name, because the body of the little being was a girl’s body fourteen years ago……and has remained so for all of these years.  The Girl-boy, or Boy-girl won her case, because the screwball leftist Judge said so.   He warned that her  parents better pay attention to their 14 year old’s feelings or pay a hefty price for not doing as the STATE DICTATES!

More than that, the Judge lawed down the rule that the parents of the parents of the  boy-girl  would be committing a British Columbia crime if they didn’t refer to  her with  a male name as their “child” had demanded.  (Perhaps something  very butch “Tarzan” perhaps?)

The CBC is a  programmed fascistic-left feminized gang of intellectual thieves of all lefty ranges who spread their FEELINGS to their public…. all somewhat soprano  to contralto in their aural thinkings.  After all, the majority of human females really don’t give a damn about TRUTH.   Their FEELINGS DICTATE.    It is NOT in their province to PROBLEM SOLVE!! Why bother….that’s what guys do…. THE HUMAN FEMALE ANIMAL  SEEKS SECURITY whether Nazi, Soviet, or Hillaryites ABOVE ALL….it’s in her “blood”.

(Be sure to review the CBC “report” of the 2016 American Presidential Election.   Could it be that human female animal is born to be LEFTISTS who prefer feelings over reality’s (God’s) Truth?


Do Fascists Already Control American Communications and Schools? ……PROBABLY!

Tucker Carlson: Why the left so desperately wanted to believe in Jussie, and not in America

When TV star Jussie Smollett claimed to be the victim of a racist anti-gay attack at the hands of two Trump supporters, virtually the entire news media and a parade of politicians immediately believed him and demanded the rest of us do so as well.

Now, that story is coming completely apart, with police sources saying Smollett likely orchestrated the entire attack himself. But while we wait for the facts to come to light, it is worth remembering that almost 3,000 people were shot in the City of Chicago last year — women, small children — sometimes alone and sometimes in groups. Many hundreds of them died, and not a single one received anything like the attention the media has lavished on a relatively minor assault alleged by Smollett.

On the other hand, none of Chicago’s 3,000 shootings were even half as useful as Smollett’s story.


The Smollett story had everything for a national media that long ago gave up the pretense of gathering news.  Journalism is now explicitly a political job, the point of which is to enforce cultural orthodoxies and punish enemies.

Jussie Smollett was the perfect vehicle for both of those things.

Journalists pretended to be horrified as they recounted what he said happened to him, but secretly, they were thrilled.

“There are many indications of a hate crime here. They are looking for two suspects who were wearing apparently wearing “Make America Great Again” hats though that has not yet been officially confirmed,” said MSNBC National Correspondent Miguel Almaguer.

Liz Plank, host of Vox Media’s “Consider It,” just knew President Trump had something to do with the attack.

“We don’t know what happened to Jussie, but what we do know is that racism is alive and well in this country,” Plank said. “There is real evidence of people who have done these crimes, who cite that the President has inspired them.”

Jonathan Capehart, of the Washington Post, agreed with Plank. President Trump was most certainly to blame.

“The fact that [the attackers] reportedly said, ‘This is MAGA country,’ adds to sort of the atmosphere of menace that African-Americans in particular and people of color in general have felt since the advent of the Trump administration,” Capehart mused.


Finally, there was this observation from CNN’s Brooke Baldwin: “He said his attackers hurled racial and homophobic slurs at him. This is America in 2019.”

Oh, and if you had questions, much less doubts, the elites were poised to attack you.

“And the media has really cast so much doubt on his story which I find so personally offensive that a gay black man is targeted and then suddenly he becomes the victim of people’s disbelief,” said actress Sara Gilbert. “It is so outrageous to me.”

To the national media, Smollett’s story was the perfect metaphor for the Trump era. It was also pretty clearly a total crock. Smollett’s account began to fall apart within hours after a series of leaks from the obviously skeptical Chicago Police Department.

His handlers paired him with a network anchor they could rely on, with a 16-minute interview with Robin Roberts of “Good Morning, America.”  Roberts surely knew there was ample evidence that Smollett was lying, but she decided to ignore that. Instead, Roberts colluded with him.

She nodded empathetically as Smollett wept on camera. She asked no significant follow-up questions.  The two parted like old friends. Both Smollett and Roberts turned out to be talented actors. Check out their performance on YouTube before it is scrubbed. You will never watch ABC News again. Virtually every word they utter is dishonest.

“If I had said it was a Muslim or a Mexican or someone black, I feel like the doubters would have supported me a lot much more, a lot more, and that says a lot about the place that we are in our country right now,” Smollett told Roberts. “The fact that we have these fear mongers, these people that are trying to separate us and it is just not okay.”

Who is dividing us? And who exactly is the victim in all of this? While Smollett claims that he is the victim, he tells us that he represents the most despised and unfashionable groups in America, that is why bigots doubt his story. The rest of us nod as if this was true because we are required to do that.  That is how dishonest our society has become.  Everyone must lie all the time.  We know the rules, we have no choice.

The fact is, the much-hyped epidemic of hate crimes we have heard so much about essentially is made up. The premise is absurd. America is not a hateful country, it is the most welcoming place on Earth that is why even as our children learn from their teachers what a bigoted country this is, millions continue to stream in from Africa and Latin America for a better life here.

So why does the left insist on inventing bigoted bogeymen waiting around every dark corner? Maybe because stoking race hatred ensures continued power for the Democratic Party. Divided populations are easier to manipulate and rule. There would be no Democratic coalition without racial animosity. It is what holds their constituencies together. That is the point of identity politics.  It is why they are forever reopening the wound.

But the cost to the country has been high. Hate hoaxes make ethnic groups fear and distrust each other.  That is a dangerous thing to do in a country that is becoming more diverse by the day.

Adapted from Tucker Carlson’s monologue on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” Feb. 18, 2019