This is Fred Gregory's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Fred Gregory's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Fred Gregory
Recent Activity
Well, ain't this the definition of insanity. Deja vu all over again Jorge Cornell , a leader of the Almighty Latin King and Queen gang , came of the scene in Greensboro , preaching he could reach out to the community and help bring peace. At last a savior . https://www.greensboro.com/editorial/columnists/one-story-about-gangs-and-peace-ends-in-la-another/article_79edc7b7-878e-53c3-b35c-8b8d4ff87056.html Cornell eventually ran for a seat on City Council . That didn't work out . Then he was indicted and convicted in federal court on conspiracy and racketeering charges. He was sentenced to 28 years. TC: You hit a home run with this post . A lot to chew on especially the complex and incestuous nature of Greensboro's politics, Thank you Ah .. our virtuous city slogging away in the muck and mire.
9-18-97 Letter to the editor GORE'S BIG QUESTION: IS HE A MAN OR A TREE? Your fragile apologia for the sleazy, illegal, no restraint fund-raising of Al Gore was, of course, predictable and disgustingly kind. (``The system victimizes a respectable politician,' Sept. 9). Gore is a dangerous environmental extremist. He favors expansion of government. He is a hypocrite regarding tobacco. His book damns the automobile as a ``moral threat.' Now he degrades the high office he holds. Gore got caught dialing for dollars. His "no controlling legal authority" press conference was laughable. First he claimed that ``on a few occasions' he made fund-raising calls from the White House for ``soft money.' Upon closer examination, ``a few' turned out to be 46. Then it was disclosed by The Washington Post that he knew, or should have known, that some of the bucks he extorted were to be used by the Clinton-Gore election effort. Hello, Janet Reno. The press asked the questions, dug up the answers and viola...the attorney general finally triggered the long overdue process to name an independent counsel to investigate this sordid mess.The editorial's attempt to excuse Gore's felonies by blaming reckless staff work is so much guano. First, they called the April 1996 Buddhist Temple affair, ``community outreach.' You ignore the fact that Gore's own e-mail refers to the upcoming event as a fund raiser. I guess the devil made him do it. Betcha can't wait to endorse Gore for president in 2000, that is if you are able to determine...is he a man or a tree? Fred H. Gregory Greensboro
TAINT LINGERS OVER JUSTICE DEPARTMENT, GORE There is nothing new or surprising in U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno's stubborn refusal to name an independent counsel to probe Vice President Al Gore's fund-raising role in the 1996 campaign and possible charges of false statements under oath. Reno is in the tank for Gore as she has been for President Bill Clinton. This latest dodge was explained at her Aug. 23 press conference in narrow hypertechnical legalisms. Gore himself contemptuously answered questions from investigators by stating he did not know he was attending a fund-raiser at the Hsi Lai Buddhist temple in Los Angeles even when confronted with his own e-mail to an aide in which he refers to the event as a ``fund-raiser.' Then, in a rare truthful slip, the vice president called it a fund-raiser, only to be abruptly corrected by his defense attorney, at which point Gore asked to amend his testimony.Robert J. Conrad, selected by Reno from the U.S. attorney's office in Charlotte to head the four-years overdue task-force examination of these matters, recently recommended that Reno appoint an outside prosecutor. Two other unnamed Justice Department attorneys agreed with Conrad. All three individuals will no doubt become radioactive in the department for daring to say honestly, ``The king doesn't have any clothes on.' Reno's loyalty to her bosses is steadfast, but her stalling undermines the rule of law. On two prior occasions she has decided that special counsels were not warranted to look into separate fact situations where Gore may have violated the law. These ``judgments' were contrary to the advice and recommendation of FBI Director Louis Freeh and her handpicked prosecutor, Charles LaBella from San Diego, both career law enforcement officials of unquestioned integrity. Excuse me! So what we have here is a vice president who has been nominated by his party to run for president, and the best we can say for him is that he is not indictable. Let us now turn back the pages of history to 1988, when then-Attorney General Edwin Meese III had just undergone an exhaustive 14-month investigation into his public and private life by Independent Counsel James McKay. The 814-page report issued by McKay stated that no indictment was warranted. The self-styled citizens group, Common Cause, was not satisfied and called for an internal Justice inquisition of Meese to determine if he had violated the code of conduct for government employees. Then our editors at the News & Record meanly reproached Meese (``Meese misses point,' July 25, 1988). ``Though prosecution was not advised by McKay, his report hardly amounts to exoneration. Yet Meese continues to claim that if he is not criminally charged, he has acted responsibly. He blithely forgets that his office demands more than just staying out of jail. ... Just because the special counsel's investigation did not deem Meese to be criminally indictable does not mean that the attorney general's hands are clean. The taint lingers on.' Well said, I suppose, but only if you juxtapose the cases of Edwin Meese and Al Gore and hold the vice president to the same rigid standard. Meese was clumsy but not venal. I think after any objective comparison one could conclude that Al Gore is not fit for the position he now holds or the higher office that he seeks. Yes, the taint lingers on. A powerful miasma hangs over the U.S. Justice Department and is causing some career employees to retch. Let's hope the voters will rid us of that foul odor this fall. Fred Gregory
9-28-00 Letter to the editor EARTH TO VICE PRESIDENT: IT'S THE FACTS, STUPID Al Gore and George Bush have uttered more than a few malapropisms (letter, Sept. 19), but their fumbling misuse of words shouldn't be an issue with the undecided voter. What matters is the candidates' respect for the truth. Gore shows outright contempt for it. He is an inveterate liar. He evasively dissembles in sworn testimony. He panders to polls and special-interest groups. He compulsively exaggerates. He fudges the facts. In his convention speech he falsely claimed that the Bush tax plan would only give the average American family an extra Diet Coke per day. When Gore's lie was exposed, his staff had to admit that the Bush proposal would in fact let this family keep $1,600 more of their own money each year. It is clear that he will say anything to get elected. Remember, it was Gore who first used the infamous Willie Horton against a fellow Democrat. Surprisingly, on Sept. 20, even the Washington Post took an editorial swipe at the VP: ``In lashing out at big oil, big pharmaceutical firms and big HMO's, Gore is playing the demagogue, and he himself must know it.' The Post concludes: ``Mr. Gore seems more intent upon telling us that he's for the people, not the powerful. Given his history, the slogan seems about as sincere as it is useful.' Now that has the ring of truth. Nothing Gore says is worthy of belief except his embrace of the Democratic platform, which will require even further expansion of government. Fred Gregory Greensboro
6-28-00 Letter to the editor THE $1 MILLION QUESTION: WHO IS BIG OIL'S FRIEND? I noticed in our newspaper that Al Gore is portraying his rival, George Bush, as a puppet of big oil. This wire service article was negatively slanted against Bush with bare mention of Gore's oil industry connections. Well, here is the rest of the story. In 1997, with the assistance of ``Honest Tony' Coelho, Gore helped Occidental Petroleum buy the publicly owned Elk Hills oil field in California. The sale of this strategic national treasure was the largest privatization in American history, and benefited Occidental by tripling its oil reserves.This deal was a curious reversal of prior Clinton-Gore policy wherein they had repeatedly declared private lands public for political purposes. Such was the federal grab of two million acres in Utah, rich with clean burning coal, which conveniently left important Democratic contributor James Riady (Lippo Group) with a virtual monopoly on this scarce commodity. Gore's ties to Occidental go back decades when ``fellow traveler' and oilman Armand Hammer bought himself a congressman named Albert Gore Sr. Today Occidental continues to pay Gore $20,000 annually for mineral rights on his Tennessee estate. Gore controls $500,000 in Occidental stock and Occidental has given a half million in soft money to the Democrats since Gore has been vice president. For $1 million: Who is big oil's best friend? My final answer....Al Gore. Since we now have the higher gas prices called for in his goofy book perhaps ``Slum Lord' Gore can use the excess profits to repair the toilet in his tenant's hovel. Fred H. Gregory
The choice in this race is a no-brainer
Toggle Commented Aug 11, 2018 on Is Budd Deteriorating Already? at Triad Conservative
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujnemrrqtpM Good explanation of 2nd A.
Toggle Commented Aug 10, 2018 on Gun Control is Unlawful at Triad Conservative
When Ginsburg was confirmed the GOP held 44 seats in the Senate, enough to filibuster the nomination by Bill Clinton. ( originally nominated to the federal bench by president peanut.) Jesse Helms was one of 3 votes against her.
"Further, Peters said women should not have to explain why they are seeking an abortion.' I presume she is ok with gender selection abortion Good grief !
Really nice gesture. Both men are great Americans
Toggle Commented Aug 1, 2018 on Trump Calls Rush at Triad Conservative
My sincerest condolences on the loss of your cousin. An extraordinary individual born for greatness. Your omaggio to him was special and beautiful. Riposi in pace, Guy Molinari
Here is a comment I made on Jordan Green's Facebook page: I am replying to Kathy Clark's comment that Trump should be tried for treason. Kathy you display a profound ignorance of the law or strong, but misguided, belief in what you said about the application of the law. Treason is a death penalty statue which can only be used in a time where congress has declared war. On the other hand you may just be obsessed by this president and taking your talking points from some of the over the top rants by mainstream media sources. Here is an article which examines the divide on Trump by leftists. https://original.antiwar.com/.../trump-derangement.../ That the American left is morally and intellectually bankrupt is hardly breaking news, at least to my longtime readers: I reported it way back in 1999, when “leftists” were cheering on the bombing of Serbia. I updated this critique when our vaunted “progressives” attacked Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald for exposing the depredations of the Surveillance State during the reign of Barack Obama. Of course, there have been – and continue to be – exceptions. Yet the old-style liberals, of the sort exemplified by, say, Alexander Cockburn, who never waffle when it comes to questions of war and civil liberties, are few and far between. With Cockburn’s death, in 2012, the species became as rare as an albino redwood – and, yet, not quite extinct. The “Russia-gate” hoax now being perpetrated by the anti-Trump “Resistance,” in league with elements of what we call the intelligence “community,” has given fresh impetus to the ongoing degeneration of the American left – while highlighting the fact that pockets of healthy dissent remain. Consumed by hatred for President Trump, most of what passes for the “left” today has rushed to embrace the story – concocted by former CIA director John Brennan and a gaggle of still-serving intelligence officials – that the Trump campaign colluded with Russian intelligence to “steal” the 2016 election from Hillary Rodham Clinton. This was done, they claim, by “hacking” the Democratic National Committee’s email system and exposing the profound corruption at the heart of the Clinton campaign. Ancillary to this operation was a concerted effort by the Russians to broadcast “fake news” denigrating Hillary and promoting Trump. All this was done, according to the official intelligence reports and the liberal media, on direct orders from none other than Vladimir Putin himself. The problem with this narrative is that there’s no evidence for it. The two reports made public by our spooks are laughably bereft of any proof, forensic or otherwise, consisting mainly of bare assertions. The actual evidence, we are told, is classified top super-duper secret, and we’re given the old we-must-protect-sources-and-methods run-around. In short, the intelligence community that told us Saddam Hussein most certainly had weapons of mass destruction ready to launch is now telling us that we just have to trust them. And while a disturbing proportion of self-avowed liberals and “progressives” are doing just that, this phenomenon is not universal. Over at The Nation, Russia scholar Stephen Cohen has been warning about the dangers of the new Russophobia, and James Carden has been asking why the CIA narrative about the alleged “hacking” of the DNC is being taken at face value. Now a new study by cyber-war experts has challenged the forensics – or lack of them – behind the official narrative: the investigation is conducted by a group of independent researchers and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). I covered their findings here, but to reiterate I quote the VIPs report: “There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year – not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak – a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer. “Forensic investigations of documents made public two weeks prior to the July 5 leak by the person or entity known as Guccifer 2.0 show that they were fraudulent: Before Guccifer posted them they were adulterated by cutting and pasting them into a blank template that had Russian as its default language. Guccifer took responsibility on June 15 for an intrusion the DNC reported on June 14 and professed to be a WikiLeaks source – claims essential to the official narrative implicating Russia in what was soon cast as an extensive hacking operation. To put the point simply, forensic science now devastates this narrative.”
Marc is an excellent candidate. Well informed on the issues and can articulate them as well. Lets hope for a big turnout.
Maybe Zack could use a " liquor-cycle" ( Moped ) to move around the streets of Greensboro if his OL has been suspended. It used to be the preferred method of transportation for habitual drunks with no drivers license . Laws may have changed . I don't know.
Any Metropolitan city would be seen as a controversial choice by the anti-fata , What the hell, let's make a stand. To hell with the pussies. Bring it on . Let's have a convention and let MSNBC report the disturbances that they fomented. Pass the popcorn. MAGA !!
We are voting for Budd over the socialist Manning
It is still criminal... Murder.. Roe v. Wade be damned
TC: Do you realize what a Hillary Presidency would have done to free speech ? http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/campaign/294665-overturning-citizens-united-would-be-a-disaster-for-free-speech "It's true that Citizens United led to billions more in political spending. But all of it was spent to produce speech promoting political views. From the standpoint of free speech, that's a good result, not a bad one. True, much of that money is spent by people who want to feed from the public trough. But freedom to spend money on political speech is not the cause of cronyism any more than freedom of the press is the cause of libel. Overturning Citizens United won't eliminate government corruption. But it will allow government to limit our speech — and with it, our right to affect the course of our government"
Did SCOTUs get it right in Citizens United v FEC ? I tend to think so. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/01/16/citizens-united-gives-freedom-of-speech-back-to-the-people/ Thoughts
Ben Shapiro weighs in on selection ; [youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmiGjCvrSW8]
Got a push telephone poll tonite. Voted for BUDD !!
As you suggested I read Brinson,s piece. What a maze. OMG it is a crap shoot out there or better yet Russian Roulette
Marc Thiessen had a good column today on this important issue. https://patriotpost.us/opinion/56962?mailing_id=3613&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3613&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body Democrats Are Powerless to Block Trump's Supreme Court Nominee And they have no one to blame but themselves. In conclusion he says : "Democrats are accusing Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) of hypocrisy moving forward with a Supreme Court nominee during an election year. But McConnell never said he would not confirm nominees before midterm elections in the second year of a presidency. Three sitting justices were confirmed in midterm election years: Elena Kagan (August 2010), Samuel A. Alito Jr. (January 2006) and Stephen G. Breyer (August 1994) — as were retired Justice David Souter (October 1990) and Scalia (September 1986). Trump is going to do exactly what Presidents Obama, Bill Clinton and both Bushes did before him: He will nominate a qualified candidate to fill the High Court vacancy, and Senate Republicans will confirm his nominee. There is nothing the Left can do about it. If Democrats are upset, too bad. They should have confirmed Miguel Estrada."
TC: Drove by your house today. You are right the antenna is hardy noticeable. Do you get Channel 40.. Fox News ?
I am not certain of anything