Saturday, May 27, 2017
A Federalist 57 Website
D. R. ZUKERMAN, proprietor

If the Left, including Senate Democratic Leader Charles E. Schumer, Were Committed to the Rule of Law…


May 5, 2017 --

…wouldn’t it demand that the FBI investigate and unmask those who feloniously unmasked Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn? Could it be that the left is not interested in the rule of law, but, rather, is simply intent on rigging the 2016 presidential election, after-the-fact, with the aim of regaining political power?

BTW -- according to Paul Sperry, in the New York Post, May 12, former FBI Director James Comey was fired because he was not investigating the “illegal leaks of classified information” by aides to President Obama, “leaks aimed at undermining the Trump administration.”

Kimberly A. Strassel discussed Comey’s apparent lack of interest in “Unmasking-gate” in her April 7, 2017 Wall Street Journal column. According to Ms. Strassel, “[S]ources tell me that Mr. Comey is willfully obstructing Congress’s own investigation into the leaks.” She added this ominous notion: “After all, it is possible Mr. Comey’s staff are among the leaders.” Ms. Strassel indicated that Congress has oversight responsibility for the intelligence agencies and pointed out: “Mr. Comey should not have the power to stymie an outside investigation into his own agency’s practices.”

Republicans in Congress would do well to consider Sperry’s interesting observation: “The 10-month-old Russia probe remain an investigation in search of a crime…. “L]eaking classifed information…is a crime in search of an investigation.

And concerning Mr. Comey, bear in mind the lead story in The New York Times, January 13, 2017 (when President Obama was still in office) reporting ”a broad investigation” the inspector general of the Justice Department “into how the F.B.I. director handled the case over Hillary Clinton’s emails, including his decision to discuss it at a news conference and to disclose 11 days before the election that he had new information that could lead him to reopen it.” The probe of Comey remains pending.

So fas as LPR knows, there has been no consideration from Times columnists or editorial writers that Comey has been pressured, by this probe, to participate in the undermining of the Trump presidency.

LPR asks the new FBI director to open an investigation into what Prof. Stephen F. Cohen, appearing on the John Batchelor radio show, calls “Intelgate,” –“shadowy [intelligence] operations designed to link Trump t0 Putin’s Kremlin” for the purpose of “thwart[ing] steps toward the necessary détente with Moscow….”

LPR makes this request notwithstanding the likely possibility that it will reveal that it is not V. Putin who seeks to undermine American democracy, but the old order -- resisting, as Machiavelli warned, the “innovator” intent on bringing a brighter, new day to the people, even to the point of “Making America Great Again.


Please take the LPR poll …
… found on the right-hand column on this page

Red Line

"Massacre" Fakery at
The New York Times

May 19, 2017 --

When The New York Times prints a column called "The Massacre That Wasn't, and a Turning Point for 'Fake News,'"  the column is not questioning use of the term Saturday Night Massacre --surrounded, or not, with quotation marks.  

The February 6, 2017  Times column by Jim Rutenberg carried that headline with reference to a comment from Kellyanne Conway about a "'Bowling Green Massacre.'"  Rutenberg pointed out  that "there was no massacre" at Bowling Green.  He continued, "No one died. No one even stubbed a toe."    

Mr. Rutenberg explained that "Bowling Green Massacre" referred to the arrest and conviction of  two refugees from Iraq "for plotting to send money and weapons to Al Qaeda in Iraq from their new homes in Bowling Green [Kentucky]."

Mr. Rutenberg remarked, in part, "The Bowling Green episode made such a splash because it played directly into concerns that the Trump administration would use untrue assertions to rally support for its agenda while denigrating as 'dishonest' all the valid reporting pointing out the falsehoods." 

I have never seen a  New York Times column that criticizes the term Saturday Night Massacre which re-appeared in the May 10 Times -- with and without quotation marks -- on the front page, in a page A19 headline,  and in the last paragraph of the lead editorial, "The Firing of James Comey" as follows:  "The obvious historic parallel to Mr. Trump's action was the so-called Saturday Night Massacre in October 1973, when President Richard Nixon ordered the firing of the special prosecutor investigating Watergate, prompting the principled resignations of the attorney general and his deputy."

Clearly, the The New  York Times, in its May 10 edition, did not apply the Rutenberg test -- inquiring if anyone stubbed a toe, much less died, of an October 1973 night in Washington, D.C. -- to Peter Baker's front-page "News Analysis, to  the Matthew Haag news story on page A19, "A Flashback to a Director's Firing in 1993, and to the Saturday Night Massacre in 1973," or to its lead editorial on the Comey dismissal.  Why not?

Why is it perfectly acceptable to apply the term Saturday NIght Massacre to the resignations of Elliot Richardson and William D. Ruckelshaus and the dismissal of Archibald Cox -- and, now, to dredge up the term against President Donald J. Trump? Apparently, as applied by the left  to a Republican president, the word massacre can never have an invidious connotation, carrying  the intent to rally support  for early  termination of  a Republican president's constitutional term in office.

This is to recommend that Republican members of Congress, before they  fall for the leftist agenda and agree to name a prosecutor to railroad the end of the Trump presidency,  answer two questions suggested by Jim Rutenberg:  Who died in the Saturday Night Massacre?  Who, on that occasion, even stubbed a toe?  If  their answer is "'No one died. No one even stubbed a toe.'"  -- they should reject the left's anti-Trump propaganda  and resume consideration of the  Trump agenda.



Red Line

Reflections on the Hispanic
Vote for President

May 19, 2017 --

LPR recalls predictions that Donald Trump would not win the presidency because he alientated Hispanic voters. According according to Pew Research, however, Trump got 28% of this vote, compared to Mitt Romney’s 27% in 2012 – and Hillary Clinton received 66% percent of the Hispanic vote compared to the 71% that went to President Obama in 2012.

Two thoughts come to mind: 1) The left will begin to blame Comey/Putin for Trump’s one percent gain in the Hispanic vote, over Romney, and Clinton’s five percent drop in this group, below Obama; 2) the left will warn Republicans that they cannot win the presidency in 2020 without 30 percent of the Hispanic vote.


Red Line

Fleshing Out Some Political Analysis at The New York Times

May 19, 2017 --

Charlie Savage, in the May 12 New York Times, discussed a series of questions on the impact of President Trump’s dismissal of FBI director James Comey. The last question was: “What about impeachment?” The Savage answer ended with this observation: “Because Mr. Trump’s fellow Republicans control both chambers of Congress, as things stand, he is exceedingly unlikely to be impeached for firing Mr. Comey.”

LPR would not be surprised had the answer continued: “On the other hand, if the left continues to press its campaign to smear Donald J. Trump as a Russian agent, and congressional Republicans, forced to their knees by this pressure, accept a special prosecutor, and the special prosecutor is given maximum attention by the monolithic media, the cowardly Republicans, fearing congressional losses in November 2018, will join the left and support the impeachment and conviction of Donald J. Trump.

Following his removal from the presidency, Trump will not be convicted in federal court of being a Russian agent – because, of course, he is no such thing, but he will be convicted of promoting political hate speech and will forfeit all his business holdings. And in 2018, the Democrats will regain their House and Senate majorities and, thereupon, will impeach Trump’s successor, President Mike Pence.”


Red Line

If Vladimir Putin Were a Commie

May 19, 2017 --

Leftist Katha Pollitt, writing in The Nation, April 21, argues that Russia, under Putin, “is not a communist country; it is a capitalist kleptocracy run by an autocrat and an enemy of human rights.”

This has got LPR to thinking – how would Ms. Pollitt react – indeed how would the U.S. left react-- if V. Putin were the communist leader of a communist Russia?

LPR has a hunch that if Russia were communist, today, the left would oppose the eastward encroachment of NATO to the borders of Russia, would oppose the Polish hardline on Russia as “revanchist,” would support Russia against a Ukraine ‘controlled by “neo-fascists,” and certainly would object sanctions as causing unjust harm to the Russian economy.

"A vote that represents free will is never wasted"
-- David Zukerman

Red Line

LPR Photo Observations

May 5, 2017 --

Looking towards New Jersey.

The Whitehall, Bronx NY.
A country lane in The Bronx.


This website is updated regularly and previous articles are stored for reference. You are invited to read any of these past articles under the Archives section, by clicking on the "ARCHIVES" button on the right. (Editor's Note:  If you don't find the LPR article you are looking for in Archives by title, try searching in Observations.) If you would like to see enlargements of any of the photographs used on this website, please click on each photo. We thank you for visiting the Lonely Pamphleteer Review, and hope you come back again!

May 19, 2017 --

A Brief Mideast Memo to President Trump . . .

LPR strongly advises that on the occasion of your May 22 visit to the State of Israel you disregard the “land for peace” formula as a diplomatic nullity because it implies that Israel gets peace and the Arabs get land. Don’t the Arabs also get peace? Peace that applies symmetrically to all the parties will take into account all the realities since the Arabs rejected the 1947 United Nations Partition for Palestine and went to war to prevent the establishment of the Jewish State. The conflict did not begin in June 1967.

Political party cover-up . . .

The New York Times reported, May 12 on a criminal conviction in Florida that began:“Corrine Brown, a fmrer long-time Unied States representative from Florida, was convicted on Thursday of taking for herself thousands of dollars in donations that were mean to fund student scholarships.” The news account consisted of more than ten paragraphs, and included the details of the former congresswoman’s conviction for fraud and conspiracy. Readers were not, however, given Ms. Brown’s political affiliation. Anyone think the Times would have omitted mentioning the political party had this former Democrat congresswoman been a Republican?

Concerning the Clinton complaints . . .

The New York Times, its lead story June 3, 2016 reported that the “core argument” of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign would be that Donald Trump was “unfit” to be president. LPR further recalls that Ms. Clinton’s other significant campaign promises included her vow to overturn the “Citizens United” Supreme Court decision, and her promise to provide free college tuition.

Are we now to believe that Ms. Clinton was duped either by James Comey or V. Putin into running a presidential campaign so distant from the concerns of ordinary Americans (known to Ms. Clinton as “deplorables”)?


Support cooperative
free enterprise.

Predatory free enterprise
is bad for our
economic health.


If we don't speak out against economic bullying by Oil, Credit Cards, Municipalities, WHO WILL?

The Next Issue of LPR
will be online on or around

June 5, 2017

Check out the following links -
Jackson Simon Review
Manhattan Short Film Festival
Veltis Harrattan
Christmas Village, Torrington, CT.

5/19/2017 -- LPR invites you to participate in our latest poll. We would like your opinion on the following:
1) If Republicans accept a special prosecutor on "Comeygate," it will be the death knell for the Trump presidency and prospects for economic revival of Middle America.
Show Results

LPR invites business faculty and media to join our regular clicksters for its view of the economy, among other places, as witnessed deep in the grass roots, and its advocacy of the principles of Federalist Paper No. 57, including the caution that the common good is not served when the self-serving few seek great economic sacrifices from the many.

Do you like this website and want to share it with a friend?

Want to know about the latest LPR updates and happenings? Then sign up for our mailing list today!

710168 Readers Throughout The World!

© 2017 Lonely Pamphleteer Review

LPR's Website is
In Memory Of …

Shana Zukerman
1989 - 2006