Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Donald Trump’

Trump Needs to Fire Thousands of Deep State Government Employees NOW!


Authored By Warner Todd Huston March 8, 2017

Trump vs the Deep State Obama

Over the last two months we have seen more leaks coming out of the deep state, left-wing, money wasting federal government than we’ve ever seen in American history and it’s all aimed at destroying Trump and preventing him from cutting down the un-American administrative state. If it wasn’t clear before it is now; the federal government needs to be slashed to the bone.

Why are these deep state government employees doing this? For no other reason than to protect their undeserved jobs, their unelected power, and their rich pensions all at the expense of you and me, the U.S. taxpayer. Like thieves, they want to make sure they can continue their grift to our detriment.

As conservatives, we are used to advocating to “vote them all out of office.” We are also fond of saying we want that agency or this agency to be closed down. But in all the years that conservatives have been espousing this goal, there has never been any real movement in that direction. Until, that is, Donald J. Trump entered the White House.

Not only do we have a president who is used to the logical business practice of firing people who aren’t performing to expectations, but we also have advising him Stephen Bannon, a man whose stated goal has for years been to disempower the administrative state that oppresses this nation.

So, we live in an exciting time for small government conservatism. As conservatives we should now be taking up the call to fire every government worker from the smallest village receptionist or sewer worker to the staffers of the highest Senator and every menial clerk and recalcitrant paper shuffler in between.

I recognize that we won’t get that out come and that we do need some government workers, granted. But we need to drive the discussion to the most desired end instead of hedging for “reasonable” cuts. Why? Because in Washington, “reasonable” cuts are never cuts at all.

Donald Trump knows well the art of the deal. As a movement, we need to learn it too. Come to the table with your dearest wishes right up front and negotiate from there. Don’t come to the table with 1/4 of a loaf to be “reasonable” and then negotiate half of that away just to “get a deal.”

I am not just railing at the famously lazy government worker here. It’s also not just that many government workers are better paid than just about any real American in the private sector — whether they deserve it or not. It’s not because they are often impossible to fire, nor is it because they get a better pension and more comprehensive health care than anyone who really contributes to society… our campaign to fire every government worker is all that, yes, but it is far, far more.

One example of how pernicious government employment has become is reflected in an editorial once published by Investor’s Business Daily titled “The New Beltway Babylon.” This piece reported that Washington D.C. had replaced Silicon Valley and even New York as the center of affluence in the U.S.A.

How can the seat of government in a capitalist society double as its seat of wealth? The late Milton Friedman, who warned about the growing mix of government in the U.S. economy, must be turning in his grave.

According to the Census Bureau, the nation’s three richest counties — and half the top 10 — are now all located near Washington, where they gorge on the tax dollars you send there.

This is no less than an affront to true American principles.

At the time IBD pegged this rise in affluence in the area surrounding D.C. to government contracts created by defense and Homeland Security programs bringing in people to fulfill those needs. But, it is surely a larger problem than just the temporary need for Homeland security programs. The problem is more widespread than that.

To start with, government workers make up the single biggest segment of unionized labor in the U.S. As the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, “The union membership rate for government workers (36.2 percent) was substantially higher than for private industry workers (7.4 percent). Within the public sector, local government workers had the highest union membership rate, 41.9 percent.” The National Center for Policy Analysis finds those stats alarming. “The nation’s 16 million state and local government workers form a large, growing, and well-compensated class in society,” the report found before going on to say, “State and local workers earned $36 per hour in wages and benefits in 2005, on average, compared to $24 per hour for U.S. private-sector workers…”

It is disgusting that these government leeches make more on average than a private sector worker. It is also unsustainable.

Not only is it unsustainable, these workers are unaccountable. These people, regardless of how well or how badly they do their jobs — regardless of whether their jobs are even necessary — are too often unable to be fired due to their ironclad union contracts the tax payers are duped into paying for. Worse, these people’s retirement at such cushy levels that are far and away better than that of the private sector are endemic. To compound that, the courts often back these backstabbing union thugs over what is best for the American people.

As USA Today reported in 2007, “Retired government workers are twice as likely to get a pension as their counterparts in the private sector, and the typical benefit is far more generous. The nation’s 6 million retired civil servants … received a median benefit of $17,640 in 2005… Eleven million private-sector retirees covered by traditional pensions got $7,692.”

Naturally, we can’t begrudge benefits to certain government workers worthy of receiving them. Teachers, Policemen, Firemen, and Military personnel deserve benefits as they provide a professional, sometimes dangerous and necessary service — As with everything there are exceptions that prove the rule.

But, why should a perfunctory paper pusher at the State Department get a better pension than anyone in the private sector? Worse, how can we stand by and allow government workers to retire at much younger ages than those in the private sector, forcing tax payers to pay their exorbitant health care benefits and cushy, undeserved pensions for many more years than private sector workers ever get theirs?

And how can we be so stupid as to allow government workers to become a larger force every year adding insult to injury?

Even when we vote out a member of Congress, for instance, we are not cleaning house. Staffers often stay on from one Senator or House member to another because of their so-called “expertise” in the inner workings of government. This adds to government inertia. After all, what staffer is going to do much that would annoy the go-along-to-get-along backroom workings that might upset their apple cart. This also adds to the cost of government.

The fact that government workers have the best jobs, the safest jobs, the highest paying jobs, and the best retirement plans is all so thoroughly un-American. In fact, the founders worried about this very thing befalling their new nation.

During the Constitutional Convention, several of the founders talked* about what they then called “pensioners and placemen” — how government workers were described at the time. These “placemen” were hangers on, people that were leaching off the people’s taxes. These placemen were a feature of the British system, too, and they were inveighed against as evidence of the corruption of the British system. These placemen were something that the founders wanted to avoid in the United States of America.

This subject was a matter of much worry by James Madison as he criticized Alexander Hamilton. Hamilton, you see, was keen to replicate the British system here in America (it should be remembered that the founders initially insisted that they were being more British than the British by more closely following Britishness). Madison, on the other hand, was just as keen to avoid the sort of ministerial corruption that heavily invested government workers could wreck on America. Madison thought that public pensioners, placemen, dealers in public funds, and influence peddlers would doom this country to rule by regulators and bureaucrats.

Madison was exactly right. It may have taken more than 200 years to prove his prescient warning correct but it has been proven, nonetheless.

So, let’s do something about this. No government worker should ever qualify for a pension or post employment health care. Their unions are unconstitutional anyway, so let’s get rid of those, too. I include all elected members of government under that umbrella, by the way. We need to make government jobs less desirable than they now are, not the plum positions of the entire American work force. It is a crime that, in a supposedly capitalist society, working for the government is more lucrative than working for the private sector.

All this, though, is the result of creating the Frankenstein’s monster of a bloated, big government, nanny state. We have allowed it to grow beyond control and some efforts to curb it must be taken before it overwhelms us. With Trump we have a meaningful chance to do this. We should push to fulfill that promise.

Lastly, Mr. government worker, before you get into your high dudgeon, before you warm that computer up to write me to ask if I think it’s fair that you should have your benefits cut, let me assure you of something. I am not just asking you to suffer a cut in your benefits… I want you to lose both your job AND your benefits. I want you out of government never to return. And I want your jobs entirely eliminated.

I am saying you are a problem, not a solution. So, please, for the sake of our country, go find a real job and get out of government, you lazy slob.

* This discussion can be found in James Madison’s Journal of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 in conversations between Oliver Ellsworth and Elbridge Gerry.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

WikiLeaks Exposes CIA’s Covert Global Hacking Program


Authored by Photo of Chuck Ross Chuck Ross | Reporter | 10:18 AM 03/07/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/07/wikileaks-exposes-cias-covert-global-hacking-program/

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange gestures during a news conference at the Ecuadorian embassy in central London August 18, 2014. Assange, who has spent over two years inside Ecuador’s London embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden, said on Monday he planned to leave the building “soon”, without giving further details. REUTERS/John Stillwell.

WikiLeaks has released nearly 9,000 pages of files it says exposes a covert global hacking program operated by the CIA. The document dump, which WikiLeaks is calling “Vault 7,” is the largest publication of documents stolen from the CIA, says the group, which was founded by Julian Assange. The veracity of the documents has not been verified and it is not yet clear whether the release marks a major breach of the CIA.

According to an explainer released by WikiLeaks, the 8,761 documents had been maintained in a high-security network at CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence in Langley, Va. But the group says that the CIA “lost control” of the documents after they began circulating among a 5,000-person network of former U.S. government hackers and contractors. One of those individuals is WikiLeaks’ source, the group claims.

The documents, which include more than 70,000 redactions, show how CIA hackers use malware, trojan viruses and other tools to convert electronics, including phones and smart TVs, into covert microphones used for spying. The group also says there are documents showing that the CIA uses the U.S. consulate in Frankfurt as a covert hacker base for its European operations.

Among the most salacious revelations in the WikiLeaks release come from documents showing how CIA developed techniques to hack Samsung smart TVs with British intelligence services. The malware, called Weeping Angel, records audio while the target of the hack believes the TV is turned off.

One of the documents released on Tuesday purportedly shows that the CIA was working on a program as of Oct. 2014 that would infect the vehicle control systems of certain cars and trucks.

“The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations,” WikiLeaks asserts.

 

The group also claims that the documents show that the CIA has developed techniques that allow it to bypass encryption used by secret text messaging programs like WhatsApp, Signal, and Confide.

In its explainer, WikiLeaks attempts to capitalize on the recent debate about whether President Obama spied on President Trump prior to the election. Trump made the unfounded claim on Twitter on Saturday. The group claims that CIA malware can be used to “penetrate, infest and control” Android and iPhone software “that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts.” Trump is well known for using Twitter to comment on the day’s news or make announcements about his administration.

Assange issued a rambling statement along with the release of the files.

“There is an extreme proliferation risk in the development of cyber ‘weapons.’ Comparisons can be drawn between the uncontrolled proliferation of such ‘weapons,’ which results from the inability to contain them combined with their high market value, and the global arms trade,” he said.

“But the significance of ‘Year Zero’ goes well beyond the choice between cyberwar and cyberpeace. The disclosure is also exceptional from a political, legal and forensic perspective.”

It remains to be seen how the Trump administration will respond to the WikiLeaks dump. Trump praised the group during the campaign because it was leaking emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton campaign.

Follow Chuck on Twitter

Conservative radio host: ‘Evidence is overwhelming’ of Obama spying


Authored

A conservative radio talk show host slammed the Obama administration on Sunday over claims of spying and wiretapping, saying, “the evidence is overwhelming.” Mark Levin, who is also a constitutional lawyer, told “Fox & Friends” that the focus should not be on President Donald Trump’s tweets alleging the wiretapping, it should be about the Obama administration overreaching with its spy program.

“The evidence is overwhelming. This is not about President Trump’s tweeting. This is about the Obama administration spying, and the question is not whether it spied,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The question is who they did spy on and the extent of the spying that is the Trump campaign, the Trump transition, Trump surrogates.” 

Levin listed his reasoning and offered evidence, including saying his sources tell him “the FBI sought and was granted a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court” order. “This is spying.”

Levin charged that the Obama administration began investigating Trump in October because of, or under the umbrella of, his connection to Russia. Levin also suggested that private emails were given to the Obama administration to review. “Quote,The Guardian has learned the FBI applied for a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in court in order to monitor four members of the Trump team,’” Levin read from an article, adding, “Keep in mind, this is during presidential election.”

Levin then suggested six agencies — including the FBI, CIA, NSA and Justice Department — knew about the Trump-Russia investigation that happened before the election. “The FBI and five law enforcement intelligent agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation in Russian attempts to influence the November election. … Are you telling me Barack Obama didn’t know it was going on in six agencies?” Levin asked. He continued that the media is “confused about their own reporting,” citing contradictory reports about intercepted communications between the Trump and Russia.

Levin called for an investigation, saying there is enough evidence to get a FISA court order. Levin said Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats participated in this “cover-up activity.”

“For the Republicans in Congress, who control the majority, if the Democrats do not want to assist and they won’t because I’m starting to think Chuck Schumer and the others are participating in all of this cover-up activity, then plow ahead without them. But this is important to the country. We cannot have a sitting presidential administration unleashing six federal agencies,” on a candidate, Levin said.

The Dems are proud of the ‘dignity’ they showed during Trump’s address to Congress?


waving flag disclaimer

Authored |  March 2, 2017

Shows you how different impressions of the same event can be. I didn’t leave the room once during the president’s address to a joint session of Congress Tuesday. But if I had to assess the behavior of the Democrats in attendance based on the available evidence, which was the occasional cutaway to the audience, the word I would use to describe it would be petulant.

Apparently I’m not alone in that perception. The Wall Street Journal’s James Freeman made this observation:

[House Minority Leader Nancy] Pelosi and her colleagues obviously decided before the event that they would provide television cameras with reaction shots expressing their disapproval or even contempt for the President. He caught them off guard by delivering a big-hearted, moving and gracious address, but they seemed unable to react in real time. The pantsuit caucus and their equally grumpy male Democratic colleagues continued to sit, frown and offer tepid applause or none at all even for lines that would be objectionable.

For those who might beg to differ, Freeman provides a tweet by Pelosi several hours before the speech indicating that the wearing of white was intended as a thumb in Donald Trump’s eye:

Nevertheless, there are those who saw the Democrats’ behavior differently. One commentator went so far as to describe their deportment as dignified. That would be “conservative” TV host Joe Scarborough, who had Pelosi on as a guest yesterday. Maybe he planted the seed but when it was Pelosi’s turn to speak again, she picked up on the dignity meme:

What I was concerned is, people might boo, because, for all of the dignity that we wanted to bring to the address of the president, the fact is, I had no idea he was going to make an assault on public education, that he was going to have nothing positive to say about immigration, that he’s going to blow up the deficit. [Emphasis added]special-kind-of-retard

I will grant that the Democrats stopped short of giving Donald Trump a Bronx cheer, but raising their arms to make their thumbs-down gestures more visible comes pretty close.

Klan members present at last night's address the president (Image: YouTube screen grab via CNN)

Klan members present at last night’s address the president (Image: YouTube screen grab via CNN)

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Howard Portnoy

Howard Portnoy has written for The Blaze, HotAir, NewsBusters, Weasel Zippers, Conservative Firing Line, RedCounty, and New York’s Daily News. He has one published novel, Hot Rain, (G. P. Putnam’s Sons), and has been a guest on Radio Vice Online with Jim Vicevich, The Alana Burke Show, Smart Life with Dr. Gina, and The George Espenlaub Show.

The American Sniper’s Widow Sounds Off on Liberal Attacks of Trump Honoring Fallen Navy SEAL


waving flag disclaimerAuthored By Onan Coca | March 2, 2017

Carryn Owens President’s Speech

Taya Kyle, the widow of American Sniper Chris Kyle, appeared on Fox News Wednesday evening to decry the liberal attacks on Carryn Owens, the widow of U.S. Navy SEAL William “Ryan” Owens, who was killed in Yemen in January.

During President Trump’s speech to the joint session of Congress, the President honored Owens and his family for the sacrifices they have made for their nation. In a heartfelt and touching display, the President praised the fallen soldier and promised his wife that her husband would never be forgotten.

Sadly, in the aftermath of those comments, unhinged liberals across the media spectrum have been attacking and demeaning both the President and the Owens family. They claim that the President was simply using the fallen hero as a “prop” and they’ve denigrated Carryn Owens for being too naïve to realize she was being used.marxist-socialist-leftist-tyranny-hate-groups

For example, Democrat activist Dan Grilo immediately tweeted, “Sorry, Owens’ wife, you’re not helping yourself or your husband’s memory by standing there and clapping like an idiot. Trump just used you.”more-words

But it wasn’t just Grilo saying ridiculous and disgusting things; the same kind of commentary could be heard coming from the talking heads at MSNBC.

Hopefully MSNBC and their stable of ignorant and unfeeling liberals will face the ire of the American consumer for their horrible comments about Trump’s decision to honor Owens and his family.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Onan Coca

Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Liberty Alliance media group. He’s also the managing editor at Eaglerising.com, Constitution.com and the managing partner at iPatriot.com. Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.

Mexican Presidential Candidate Holds Anti-Trump Rally in L.A.


waving flagAuthored by Warner Todd Huston | 16 Feb 2017 | Los Angeles, CA

“I think the wall and the demagoguery of patriotism are no match for the dignity and humanity of the American people,” López Obrador said during his rally.picture12

The Mexican politician went on to praise California as “a refuge and blessing for immigrants,” and exclaimed “long live California,” to the cheers of the crowd. gag me

The candidate added that Trump is “stirring up” Americans against Mexicans, according to a version of his speech published on his website.

“Donald Trump and his advisors have gained from stirring up members in certain sectors of U.S. society against immigrants and, particularly, those of Mexican nationality,” he said.

“When they want to build a wall to segregate populations, or when the word ‘foreigner’ is used to insult, denigrate and discriminate against our fellow human beings, it goes against humanity, it goes against intelligence and against history,” López Obrador told the crowd. words-of-a-leftist-propagandist

Lopez Obrador also whipped up the crowd by insisting that he would spearhead a move in the United Nations to file human rights violations against the United States.REALLY

The candidate ended his speech by slamming Trump’s campaign phrase, “Make American Great Again.”

“Neither the United States nor the American continent come first. What comes first is to build here on this earth the kingdom of justice and universal brotherhood,” López Obrador concluded. liberal-propaganda-hogwash

Photo: File

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

WSJ Editor Tells Reporters Who Don’t Like Objective Trump Coverage To Leave The Paper


waving flagAuthored by Rachel Stoltzfoos Photo of Rachel Stoltzfoos | Reporter | 7:28 PM 02/13/2017

A woman looks on as she takes part in a protest against President-elect Donald Trump in front of Trump Tower in New York on November 10, 2016.        (KENA BETANCUR/AFP/Getty Images)

  A woman looks on as she takes part in a protest against President-elect Donald Trump in front of Trump Tower in New York on November 10, 2016. (KENA BETANCUR/AFP/Getty Images)   

Wall Street Journal editor in chief Gerard Baker told his reporters Monday the paper would not abandon objectivity in its coverage of President Donald Trump, and directed them to find work somewhere else if they want to adopt a more oppositional tone.

It’s a little irritating when I read that we have been soft on Donald Trump,” he told his reporters and editors, a source at the newsroom meeting told The New York Times. Baker held the meeting ostensibly to have a casual conversation on the editorial direction of the paper, but it was held on the heels of reports the newsroom is in turmoil over the Trump coverage.

The Trump coverage is “neutral to the point of being absurd,” one source inside the newsroom recently told Politico. Criticism peaked when Baker sent a memo to staff instructing reporters and editors to tone down the use of “loaded” language in coverage of Trump’s immigration ban. (RELATED: WSJ Reporters Complain The Paper Won’t Join In Trump Circus)

Baker strongly defended his paper’s coverage as objective in the meeting, going so far as to read from a list of past WSJ headlines compiled to refute the criticism. He suggested it is other outlets such as The New York Times that have abandoned fair reporting standards and objectivity — not The Wall Street Journal — and that those standards aren’t going anywhere. ATTA BOY

Reporters who don’t like that, he said, might want to find work somewhere else.

Some journalists at other outlets have openly criticized the idea of treating Trump and his former Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton equally in the press. In an amazing justification of this kind of blatant bias, New York Times columnist Jim Rutenberg described the thinking behind this new “norm” of objectivity.

“If you view a Trump presidency as something that’s potentially dangerous, then your reporting is going to reflect that,” he wrote. “You would move closer than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.”words-of-a-leftist-propagandist

Follow Rachel on Twitter

Send tips to rachel@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

 

propaganda machine

Democrats Demanding that Immigration Officials Stop Deporting Illegals Convicted of Violent Crimes


waving flagBy Warner Todd Huston February 13, 2017

Illegal Immigration raids Police ICE

illegalalienvoters-300x300Democrats are so in the tank for open borders and the importation of illegal aliens that they are even working themselves into a froth to protest the deportation of illegals convicted of violent crimes against Americans.

Left-wingers are furious this week over the recent increase in deportations initiated by the newly ensconced Donald J. Trump administration. They were mollified somewhat over the last four years by Obama’s increasingly lower number of deported illegal aliens, but now that Trump is in charge, more attention is being brought (properly so) to the job of deportation being ignored by the Immigration department through most of Obama’s 8-year reign of terror on the nation.

First some numbers. While it is difficult to get hard and fast numbers a CNN report from 2015 said there are nearly 75,000 people in U.S. prisons who are not legal citizens. Also at that time authorities had issued detainer requests for over a million illegals (these are requests issued to hold an illegal for deportation). And during Obama’s reign from 2010 to 2014 at least 121 illegals were released from immigration only to end up arrested for murdering a U.S. citizen. Ten years ago, another report found that 12 Americans are murdered by an illegal alien every day.picture2

As you can see from these numbers, it would seem Americans are in far more danger from illegal aliens than from Muslim terrorists. Despite this obvious danger to Americans, in his last term in office President Obama refused to deport a whopping 820,000 criminally convicted illegal aliens and simply released them right back into the U.S. population to prey on all of us. Of that 820,000 illegals, fully 690,000 had serious convictions such as drunk driving, drug dealing, rape, and murder.illegal-immigration-giant

Thanks to Obama’s hands off, open door policy, Jessica Vaughan, the policy director for the Center for Immigration Studies, testified that, “Established gangs have been able to transfer an unknown number of experienced foot soldiers from Central America to help colonize new criminal territory in the United States.”

Now we have the age of Trump just fairly beginning and our immigration officials are finally not being held back by Obama’s anti-American edicts. One of the first things Trump did was dump Obama’s very unpopular U.S. Border Patrol Chief Mark Morgan. Members of the border patrol hated this guy because he repeatedly said he supported amnesty (then later denied it) and was 100 percent in favor of Obama’s destructive immigration policies. Only days after he took the oath of office, Trump told Morgan to resign.

Not long after Morgan left his post, Trump also fired Daniel Ragsdale, Obama’s director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. On January 30 the ICE director was replaced by Trump appointee Thomas D. Homan. By the second week of February, the number of deportations began to move upward instead of downward as they have been for the last five years… and the liberals are screaming bloody murder.

This weekend a mass protest against Trump’s new deportation policy sprung up in New York City. For a change the New York Police Department didn’t treat these un-American disruptors with kid gloves and the ones blocking the road ways were slammed to the ground and arrested. One protester said Trump’s new deportation regimen is meant as a “fear tactic.”any-more-questions

Ask Kate Steinle’s family where the fear is coming from after she was murdered by an illegal alien in “sanctuary city” San Francisco.

Naturally there were violent, hate-filled signs — many professionally printed to prove the protest is not a spontaneous, true reflection of sentiment — to go along with this anti-American protest…

The Trump administration, of course, rightfully notes that deporting these criminal aliens saves lives.

According to the Washington Examiner, Stephen Miller, the president’s policy director, said, “the cases that I’m familiar with…have to do with removing criminal aliens, individuals who have criminal charges or convictions against them. And that’s what’s been taking place all across the country. And the effect of that is going to be saving many American lives, American property and American safety.”

“The bottom line is this: in the calculation between open borders and saving American lives, it is the easiest choice we will ever have to make,” Miller added on Face the Nation on Sunday.

Meanwhile, Trump’s policies are also finding favor among the law enforcement community and the wild, unsupportable claims by liberals are being lampooned. Recently sheriffs from around the country voiced ridicule of claims by Democrats that these illegal, lawbreaking “sanctuary cities” actually help illegals feel comfortable enough to report crimes to local police. Many sheriffs find the claim absurd.

“National Sheriffs’ Association executive director Jonathan Thompson, who represents a wide geographical range of law enforcement officers, said he has never seen any statistics indicating that illegal immigrants are a significant source of information for police,” the Washington Examiner reported.

“I’ve not even seen anecdotal evidence,” Thompson insisted. “The sad thing is that [the Democratic claim] suggests that people here are aware of criminal activity and are not reporting it. We have to give them specific dispensation so that they’re reporting crimes? … I find the irony thicker than anything I can cut with a knife, that somebody here illegally is going to report a crime.”

“It’s a whisper campaign. You tell a lie once it goes around the world in 20 seconds,” Thompson concluded. “I think it makes a nice soundbite. It’s nice for some in law enforcement who want to believe that all criminal aliens want to support local law enforcement. That may be true, but I don’t know of any statistics … that suggest that this is a wealth or reserve ocean of confidential informants.”

The Examiner found several other sheriffs who thought the left’s claims were absurd, as well.

We are seeing the federal government swing back in the favor of making America great again. Let us hope liberals prove unable to put a hitch in this drive.

 ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Chuck Schumer in 2013: The President “deserves his choices”


waving flagPosted by    Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 7:00am | 2/9/2017 – 7:00am

https://youtu.be/C0o-UaXgjJgDemocrats are doing everything they can to obstruct the confirmation of Trump’s team. It’s not doing much good considering the fact that Betsy DeVos and Jeff Sessions have been confirmed in the last few days. Their strategy is simple. If they can’t stop Trump’s nominees, they’ll just try to damage them as much as possible.

Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer had a different attitude about this a few years ago, however.

Philip Wegmann reports at the Washington Examiner:

Did Chuck Schumer think we’d just forget about 2013?

Thanks to Google, there’s no such thing as the memory hole. Just about everything is neatly archived on the Internet forever, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s hypocritical political record on presidential nominees.

Schumer might insist Democrats are just acting as a constitutional check on the administration by slowing executive nominees. But a quick search shows he once decried what he’s now embracing.

Four years ago, Obama had just won a second term, Democrats controlled the Senate, and Schumer was getting annoyed with Republicans. “Just about everyone in America—Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative—believe that once you elect a president,” Schumer said, “he deserves his choices to run the executive branch.”

Because the minority wouldn’t sign off, Schumer accused them of holding the government hostage. Republicans were, he argued, “trying to “paralyze the executive branch the way they’ve paralyzed the legislative branches because they really don’t want the government to function.”Leftist Propagandist

Here’s the video of Schumer making those remarks:

Twitchy has collected some reactions to this:

Democrats: Everything is different when we do it.

Featured image via YouTube.

Two New Shocking Polls Prove the Democrats are ALL Wrong


waving flagAuthored By Onan Coca February 8, 2017

Dueling polls released by CBS and UC Berkeley should be all the proof that Americans need to understand just how out-of-touch the Democrat Party is with the rest of America.

First, a new poll from the liberals at University of California Berkeley is sending shockwaves throughout the state of California. The pollster asked if California residents would like to see the state BAN so-called “Sanctuary Cities” and found that roughly 74% of Californians wished that the state would end “Sanctuary” practices! Remember California easily sided with Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump in the most recent election, but still the vast majority of the state’s voters want to see Sanctuary Cities outlawed. The poll found that 82% of Republicans want the ban, 74% of Democrats, 70% of Independents, and, most surprisingly, 65% of Hispanics!

As if this poll from UC Berkeley weren’t shocking enough, CBS has another poll which is just as shocking but far more disheartening. According to a new poll released from CBS only one out of seven (roughly 15%) Democrats believes that Islam is more “violent” than Christianity. Comparatively about 60% of Republicans believe that Islam is more violent. This poll is shocking in that it unmasks the utter delusion that most Democrats must be living under. Thankfully, the folks at the Daily Wire have offered 7 pieces of evidence to prove that Islam is far more violent than Christianity.

  1. Islamic countries and Muslim-majority countries are far more violent and intolerant than any of the two Christian countries on earth or better yet, any of the Christian-majority countries.
  1. Islamic religious apologists are selectively blind to the macabre history of Islam.
  1. A far larger percentage of Muslims are biblical literalists compared to Christians.
  1. Currently, Islam treats Jews far worse than Christianity does. How a majority religion treats the Jews is a litmus test for its level of civility.
  1. When Jesus is mocked, Christians take to social media. When Muhammad is drawn, even in the gentlest light, Muslims burn down embassies and slaughter cartoonists in cold blood.
  2. The world is being torn apart by Islamic terrorists.
  1.  Islam hasn’t had a reformation. Christianity has.

Some of these arguments are more convincing than others, but for me the ones which carry the most weight point to the difference in history and theology. Throughout Muslim history, the Muslim world has ALWAYS been embroiled in religious warfare. Literally, from day one, some portion of the Muslim world has been fighting to expand its borders. While this may have been an issue at certain points in Christian history, the days when Christianity was spread through war ended more than 500 years ago.

Theologically, the teachings of orthodox Christianity are incompatible with acts of violence not perpetrated in self-defense. Meanwhile, violence is a feature of the Islamic faith. Where Christianity teaches the aggrieved to “turn the other cheek,” Islam demands physical punishment in recompense for offense. While Christianity teaches that forgiveness and grace are beautiful virtues to be practiced liberally, Islam focuses its energy on physical manifestations of justice and retribution. While Christianity leaves justice, vengeance, judgment in the hands of the Almighty (and for a future date), Islam demands these things… NOW.

One of the Daily Wire’s arguments does strike me as compelling though – the one dealing with how we treat Israel. Israeli Jews are banned from entering 16 of the world’s Muslim nations; can you think of one “Christian” nation banning Jews? There is none.

Wake up, America. Christianity is the true “religion of peace,” and while it might be politically correct to equate the two great Universal world religions, any cursory examination proves this comparison to be ridiculous. There is no comparison, Islam is by far the more violent religion.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Onan Coca

Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Liberty Alliance media group. He’s also the managing editor at Eaglerising.com, Constitution.com and the managing partner at iPatriot.com. Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.

Democrats May Be On The Verge Of Becoming A ‘Permanent Minority’ Party


waving flagAuthored by Photo of Stewart LawrenceStewart Lawrence | Contributor | 2:20 PM 02/06/2017

Remember when Democrats predicted the imminent decline of the GOP? The theory was that Republicans were so out of touch with women and ethnic minorities that they would soon be relegated to the status of a “permanent minority” — supported only by Southern white men and incapable of recapturing the White House.

Donald Trump’s victory has put an end to this fantasy. Now it’s the Democrats who are facing their own “doomsday” scenario.

A recent analysis conducted by Third Way — a self-described “centrist” think tank — argues that Democrats are evolving into a “coastal” party. They have strong bases in California, New York and Massachusetts but are slowly ceding the rest of the country to Republicans.

Third Way compared 2016 election results in the two areas and found an astounding asymmetry:

In California, New York and Massachusetts, home to roughly 24 million voters, voters chose Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by a large margin, 65% to 35%.

But in the remaining 47 states, home to 105 million voters, voters broke for Trump by a decisive 52% to 48% margin.

The geographic concentration of the pro-Hillary vote is one reason Clinton’s supposed popular vote “victory” rings so hollow. Clinton ran up the score in a liberal state like California, where she bested Trump by some 4.3 million votes. But that single-state advantage is simply not reflective of the broader national pattern, which favored Trump, Third Way found.

Recent voting patterns in Congress point to another disastrous trend for Democrats: They are fast becoming a “two-region” party. Democrats have a 3-1 lead over the GOP in California, New York and Massachusetts and a 3-1 lead over Republicans in the Pacific Northwest and the Mid-Atlantic (also known as the “Acela Corridor”). However, those regions account for less than 20% of the total numbers of House members.

By contrast, if you focus on the American South, the Heartland, and the Southwest — about 80% of the country — the GOP leads Democrats by more than 2-1. Overall, that translates into a decisive GOP advantage in the House of Representatives — one that is not likely to shift anytime soon.

There are other powerful signs that the Democrats are losing their grip on power.

The vast majority of state legislatures — 32, a record — are in GOP hands, as are a majority of the state houses. And Democrats face enormous challenges in the U.S. Senate in 2018 because they must defend at least 10 seats in states that Trump won in 2016 — while the GOP occupies virtually none that are considered vulnerable to reversal.

One bellwether contest will be the battle of liberal Sen. Elizabeth Warren for re-election in Massachusetts. A recent statewide poll found that 46% of voters would support someone else for her seat — her weakest showing yet.Happy Happy Joy Joy

Other vulnerable Senate Democrats include party stalwarts like North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, Missouri’s Claire MCCaskill, Montana’s Jon Tester, and even Clinton’s running mate, Tim Kaine, in Virginia. One top Democratic strategist recently told Politico Magazine“It’s going to be a disaster.”

Another major quandary for Democrats is their national leadership. Without Obama at the helm, the party has fallen prey to fierce ideological, gender and ethnic divisions. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) managed to impose herself as party leader yet again, beating back a powerful challenge from Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH), who blamed Pelosi and her ardent followers, many of them dependent on her fundraising support, for leading Democrats astray.

Since then, the party has found itself increasingly divided over the nomination of Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) to become Democratic National Committee chair. Former presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and more recently, former vice-president Joe Biden have joined the fray, but each supports a different candidate, further complicating the dispute. It’s becoming a race to the bottom. Ellison and his emerging rival Tom Perez, Obama’s former labor secretary, are virtual unknowns outside the party. Sanders and Biden, who might have fared better against Trump than Clinton, are too old to lead the Democrats moving forward. Warren herself will be 71 in 2024.

The party could well find itself without a viable White House challenger to Trump in 2020.Happy Happy Joy Joy

And then there’s the Supreme Court. Trump has just announced his candidate to replace Judge Antonin Scalia, Neil Gorsuch. A staunch conservative who once clerked for Anthony Kennedy, the leading “swing” vote on the Court, he’s hard to pigeon-hole politically. And despite threats to block Gorsuch, the Democrats have become victims of their own hubris. Under Obama, they altered the rules so that only 51 Senate votes were needed to confirm a judicial appointee. The Republicans now have 52, making Gorsuch a shoo-in.

For the GOP, regaining a 5-4 majority in the Supreme Court would amount to a political crown jewel: The party will dominate every branch and level of government for the first time in modern history. For Democrats, who’ve grown accustomed to having their way in national politics, it’s like staring into the abyss.Happy Happy Joy Joy

Dem Congresswoman Forced To Face Her Own Voting History After Calling Trump’s Travel Ban ‘Horrifying’


waving flagAuthored by Phillip Stucky | 10:16 PM |  01/30/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/30/dem-congresswoman-forced-to-face-her-own-voting-history-after-calling-trumps-travel-ban-horrifying/

Democratic Rep. Elizabeth Esty from Connecticut launched a tweetstorm Monday afternoon against President Donald Trump’s travel ban, but quickly backtracked after followers confronted her on her visa-related voting history. Esty co-sponsored H.B. 158 on Dec. 3 2015, a bi-partisan bill that enabled the executive branch led by the the Department of Homeland Security to severely limit or curtail visas from countries like Iran and Iraq.

Trump’s list of seven countries came primarily from the text of H.B. 158, but the executive order allows Trump to place a travel ban from any resident of those countries, excluding those with current green cards or legal residents of the United States.

esty01 esty02

Esty’s followers on Twitter were quick to remind the congresswoman about her voting history, going so far as to call her a “liar.”

esty03Esty responded quickly, citing a Vox story that didn’t even mention the bill in question.

esty04Esty’s press office told The Daily Caller News Foundation the congresswoman didn’t mean to assert that she didn’t co-sponsor the bill, but rather the bill didn’t do the same thing as Trump’s executive order. The office added that Trump’s order is unique because it constitutes a blanket ban, while the bill that she co-sponsored only sought to reduce the number of visas issued from the same seven countries.more-leftist-propaganda

Esty’s co-sponsored Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 prevented members of 38 countries to enter the U.S. for less than 90 days. The law prevented anyone from obtaining a visa into the country if they had visited any of the countries on the list within the last five years.

The American Civil Liberties Union opposed the measure before it was signed into law.

Other followers on Twitter weren’t having any of her response. One user posted a screenshot of the bill, along with a picture of her name on the co-sponsor page.

TownHall reported that President Barack Obama actually restricted travel based on country of origin several times — the first of which occurred because Obama continued a rule under former President George W. Bush that heavily restricted travel from 36 nations, primarily in the Middle East. Obama also signed an executive order that severely limited intake of refugees from Iraq, stalling any further influx for six months.strategy

Follow Phillip On Twitter

FLASHBACK: Democrats Tried To Block Thousands Of Vietnam War Refugees, Including Orphans


waving flagAuthored by Photo of Richard Pollock Richard Pollock | Reporter | 9:21 PM 01/29/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/29/flashback-when-liberal-democrats-opposed-refugees-and-even-orphans/#ixzz4XI4m1LFf

The group, led by California’s Gov. Jerry Brown, included such liberal luminaries as Delaware’s Democratic Sen. Joe Biden, former presidential “peace candidate” George McGovern, and New York Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman.

The Los Angeles Times reported Brown even attempted to prevent planes carrying Vietnamese refugees from landing at Travis Air Force Base outside San Francisco. About 500 people were arriving each day and eventually 131,000 arrived in the United States between 1975 and 1977. These people arrived despite protests from liberal Democrats. In 2015, the Los Angeles Times recounted Brown’s ugly attitude, reporting, “Brown has his own checkered history of demagoguery about refugees.”

Back in 1975, millions of South Vietnamese who worked for or supported the U.S. found themselves trapped behind the lines when the communists took over the country. Vietnamese emigre Tung Vu, writing in Northwest Asian Weekly, recalled the hardships the Vietnamese faced in 1975 as they tried to escape the communists.

“After the fall of Saigon, many Vietnamese chose to leave by any means possible, often in small boats. Those who managed to escape pirates, typhoons, and starvation sought safety and a new life in refugee camps,” Tung wrote.

Ironically, Republicans led by former President Gerald Ford were the political figures who fought for the refugees to enter the United States.republicans-not-democrats

Julia Taft, who in 1975 headed up Ford’s Inter-agency Task Force on Indochinese refugee resettlement, told author Larry Engelmann in his book, “Tears Before the Rain: An Oral History of the Fall of South Vietnam,” “The new governor of California, Jerry Brown, was very concerned about refugees settling in his state.”

National Public Radio host Debbie Elliott retraced Brown’s refusal to accept any refugees in a January 2007 interview with Taft. According to a transcript, which was aired on its flagship program, “All Things Considered,” Taft said, “our biggest problem came from California due to Brown.” She called his rejection of Vietnamese refugees “a moral blow.”democrats-not-republicans

“I remember at the time we had thousands and thousands of requests from military families in San Diego, for instance, who had worked in Vietnam, who knew some of these people,” she told NPR.

Taft recalled another dark reason the liberals opposed the refugees: “They said they had too many Hispanics, too many people on welfare, they didn’t want these people.”democrats-not-republicans

“They didn’t want any of these refugees, because they had also unemployment,” she told NPR. “They had already a large number of foreign-born people there. They had – they said they had too many Hispanics, too many people on welfare, they didn’t want these people.”democrats-not-republicans

Brown echoed his isolationist theme throughout his first term. As recounted by author Larry Clinton Thompson in his book, “Refugee Workers in the Indochina Exodus,” Brown said, “We can’t be looking 5,000 miles away and at the same time neglecting people who live here.” At the same time as Brown was fighting Washington, Democrats waged an anti-refugee campaign inside the nation’s capital.democrats-not-republicans

Ford appealed to Congress to quickly help the refugees, who included thousands of Cambodians fleeing a genocidal campaign perpetrated by the communist Cambodian Pol Pot regime. But in Washington, Ford found himself thwarted by many high-profile Democrats.democrats-not-republicans

A review of the congressional debate at the time and recounted by CQ Almanac shows New York’s Elizabeth Holtzman – who was one of the House’s most visible liberal congresswomen — opposed helping the refugees. Like Brown, she tried to pit her constituents against the refugees. She said, according to CQ Almanac, “some of her constituents felt that the same assistance and compassion was not being shown to the elderly, unemployed and poor in this country.”REALLY

Rep. Donald Riegle, a liberal representative from Michigan who later would serve as its senator, offered an amendment that would have barred funds for the refugees unless similar assistance was given to Americans. The amendment was rejected by the House, 346 to 71, according to the Almanac.democrats-not-republicans

Another House Democrat even tried to slow down the airlift of Vietnamese orphans. The Almanac reported that Rep. Joshua Eilberg, the Democratic chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and International Law, accused the Ford administration of having acted “with unnecessary haste” in the evacuation of the orphans.democrats-not-republicans

The emergency rescue mission, called “Operation Babylift,” was activated by the United States, Australia, France and Canada after urgent appeals were issued by humanitarian relief organizations in Vietnam. The evacuation faced tragedy on its maiden flight when a C-5A cargo plane carrying the orphans crashed after takeoff, killing 78 children along with 35 U.S. government workers and diplomats.

The Library of Congress also reported liberal congressmen tried to stall the refugee legislation, indicating “they would rather wait for the administration to formulate a plan for the care and evacuation of refugees before approving the humanitarian aid.”democrats-not-republicans

Then-Sen. Joe Biden tried to slow down the refugee bill in the Senate, complaining that he needed more details about the quickly unfolding refugee problem before he would support it. He said the White House “had not informed Congress adequately about the number of refugees,” according to the Library of Congress history of the legislation.

Quang X. Pham, who was born in Saigon and later served as a Marine pilot in the Persian Gulf War, later criticized Biden in an op-ed published by the Washington Post on December 30, 2006. Quang wrote, Biden “charged that the [Ford] Administration had not informed Congress adequately about the number of refugees — as if anyone actually knew during the chaotic evacuation.”

Peace candidate Sen. George McGovern, who had lost in a landslide to former President Richard Nixon in the 1972 presidential election, appeared the most heartless senator when he introduced a bill to assist those who wished to return to South Vietnam.democrats-not-republicans

McGovern said he thought 90 percent of the Vietnamese arrivals “would be better off going back to their own land,” according to the Library of Congress. His amendment died in a House-Senate conference.

In the end, most of the Democrat complaints appeared to center on the fact that the refugees were escaping communism, which many liberals did not find that objectionable.

“One of the justifications that Ford gave was related to communism. He said these people are all fleeing communism, which was the same criteria that had been used for the Cubans, the Hungarians, other refugee groups that had been processed in the past,” Taft explained

Follow Richard on Twitter

partyof-deceit-spin-and-lies

Obama issues final round of sentence commutations


waving flagAuthored

URL of the original posting site: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/315107-obama-issues-final-round-of-sentence-commutations

Obama issues final round of sentence commutations

President Obama on Thursday commuted the sentences of 330 inmates on his final full day in office, the White House announced. Obama has set a record with his aggressive use of clemency power. The 1,715 commutations granted during his eight years in office are more than any president in the nation’s history. Of those, 568 were sentenced to life in prison.

“You have been granted a second chance because the president sees the potential in you,” White House counsel Neil Eggleston wrote in a blog post. “The president concluded that you have taken substantial steps to remedy your past mistakes and that you are deserving of a second chance.” More Liberal Gibberish

This latest round comes just two days after Obama doled out 209 commutations and 64 pardons, including a shorter prison stay for former Army soldier Chelsea Manning. Obama received blowback from Republicans and some Democrats on Capitol Hill over the decision to set Manning’s release for May 17, 2017.

ADVERTISEMENT

The former army private, who is transgender, received a 35-year sentence for leaking classified information about U.S. national security activities that were later disclosed by WikiLeaks – the longest sentence anyone’s ever received for a leak conviction.

Retired Gen. James Cartwright was also given a second chance. The former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was accused of lying to the FBI about his conversations with reporters regarding U.S. efforts to cripple Iran’s nuclear program was among those pardoned this week.
But Thursday’s batch did not contain those types of names or other well-known political figures who have typically received clemency from past presidents during their final days. For example, Obama faced pressure to offer commutations or pardons to former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl and former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D).  Instead, the list was made up of non-violent drug offenders on whom Obama has focused his attention during the past two-plus years.
Obama started a clemency initiative in 2014 designed to shorten drug sentences he views as unjust.
In many cases, the sentences were handed down under federal mandatory minimum guidelines that have since been rolled back by Congress.  But conservatives have been critical of the unprecedented rate at which Obama has granted clemency.
“People say, well why should we change the sentencing rules in criminal justice reform if the president can just do it with a flick of his pen?” Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) said earlier this week.
Clemency advocates praised Obama for his action Thursday, calling it a “last act of mercy.” “With this last act of mercy, President Obama has closed out a historic effort to restore some balance and fairness to a federal prison system that has caused needless destruction of thousands of lives and families,” Jessica Jackson Sloan, #Cut50’s national director, said in a statement. The group, which is working to cut the prison population in half, called on President-elect Donald Trump to pick up where Obama left off.
“Clemency can and should continue to play an important role in ensuring that justice is administered smartly and equally,” Sloan said. “We hope President Trump will continue granting mercy to families desperately seeking to be reunited with their loved ones.”picture1
More than half of all federal prisoners are serving time for drug convictions, and #Cut50 said the vast majority had no prior criminal history.

– Updated at 3:29 p.m.

More Evidence

Trump Meets With Leading Supreme Court Contender


waving flagAuthored by Photo of Kevin Daley Kevin Daley / Legal Affairs Reporter / 01/15/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/15/trump-meets-with-a-leading-supreme-court-contender/

President-elect Donald Trump met with Judge William Pryor of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a lead contender for his first appointment to the Supreme Court, at Trump Tower late Saturday.

Above the Law’s David Lat broke news of the Pryor meeting.

Judge William Pryor speaks to a Federalist Society chapter. YouTube screen grab: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIsCetOnzdc

Judge William Pryor speaks to a Federalist Society chapter. YouTube screen grab: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIsCetOnzdc

 

Trump told reporters Wednesday that he expects to name a nominee to the high court in late January, during the second week of his administration. He also confirmed he has met with a number of candidates from the list of potential nominees he released during the campaign. Given that timeframe, and the fact Pryor is widely considered a frontrunner for the appointment, the Saturday meeting suggests Trump is in the final stages of the selection process.

Pryor’s strident conservatism made his appointment to the bench by President George W. Bush a years-long battle. During his career in Alabama politics, Pryor referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade as an “abomination,” and authored an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to affirm the constitutionality of a Texas anti-sodomy law in Lawrence v. Texas. Senate Democrats successfully blocked a floor vote on his nomination until he was installed to the 11th Circuit by recess appointment in 2004. The full Senate voted to confirm him in 2005. (RELATED: Trump Could Dramatically Reshape The Federal Courts)

The 53-45 vote saw several Republicans defect and vote against his confirmation, including GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who is still serving in the Senate. As Collins’ 2005 “no” vote may preclude her from supporting Pryor now, the White House will have a slim majority to work with, assuming they are unable to solicit support from Democrats for his confirmation.

Lat also reports Trump was prepared to offer the seat to Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a former Supreme Court clerk who argued 10 cases at the high court during his tenure as Texas Solicitor General. Cruz declined the appointment.

Follow Kevin on Twitter

Marie Osmond Offers To Perform at Trump Inauguration To Help “Unite” America


waving flagAuthored by: Kim Smith on January 12, 2017

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/marie-osmond-risks-career-to/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=rightalertsemail&utm_content=2017-01-13&utm_campaign=can

Advertisement – story continues below

Singer Marie Osmond made a surprising offer that could alienate her from the liberal elite in Hollywood, all for the sake of unity. She said she would be willing to perform at President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration if asked.

“I think when it comes to our country we need to unite,” Osmond recently said in an interview with Yahoo Finance“I think we should all support our president whether we’re happy or sad. This is America.”

Osmond, 57, has eight children of her own, and she said they all have different political beliefs. She added that she would never want them to feel division over politics.

“We should come together, and I think an Inauguration should be a time to unite, it really should,” the singer concluded.

Osmond and her brother, Donny, performed at President Ronald Reagan’s inauguration in 1981. She’s right that it’s time for the country to come together and let Trump do what the people elected him to do.

While Osmond confirmed that she would be on vacation during the event, we assume that she would have changed those plans had she been invited to perform.  That’s a big risk, considering the amount of venom most of Hollywood has been spewing against Trump since he announced he would run for office. There’s no doubt Democrats and liberal news outlets will trash Osmond for making the offer, but that’s exactly the kind of hate we’ve come to expect from the left.partyof-deceit-spin-and-lies

Yahoo reported that those who are scheduled to perform at the event included the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, the Radio City Rockets, the Talladega (Alabama) College Marching Tornadoes and “America’s Got Talent” star Jackie Evancho, who will sing the national anthem.

H/T U.K. Daily Mail

Mattis’s views on women in combat takes center stage


Gen. Mattis’s views on women in combat takes center stage / © Getty Images

Retired Marine Gen. James Mattis’s stance on women in combat and LGBT troops will be thrust into the spotlight Thursday when he faces senators for his confirmation hearing to be the next secretary of Defense. The man whom Mattis is in line to replace, Defense Secretary Ash Carter, opened all combat jobs to women with no exceptions in late 2015 over the objection of the Marine Corps. This summer, Carter also lifted the ban on transgender troops serving openly.

Supporters of the changes have been worried since Election Day that President-elect Donald Trump‘s administration will roll them back.  Mattis has expressed skepticism in the past about whether women are suited for what he called “intimate killing” and has blasted civilian leaders with a “progressive agenda” pushing “social change” on the military.

ADVERTISEMENT

Though Mattis is highly respected for his military service and is expected to be confirmed, wary senators will likely push Mattis to answer for his past comments when he faces the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“I would have a concern if he wasn’t committed to supporting the policy going forward,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a member of the committee. Death of a nation

In a 2014 speech at the Marines’ Memorial Club in San Francisco, Mattis questioned whether women can handle the “atavistic primitive world” of the infantry. “The idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success,” he said. “It would only be someone who never crossed the line of departure into close quarters fighting that would ever even promote such an idea.”

He stressed that his concerns were not about individual women’s ability to meet physical requirements. The point, he said, was mixing “Eros,” the Greek god of love, with the trenches.

“Some of us aren’t so old that we’ve forgotten that at times it was like heaven on earth just to hold a certain girl’s hand,” he said, to laughter and applause from the audience.

In a 2016 book Mattis co-edited with Hoover Institution colleague Kori Schake, the pair warned about the dangers of imposing social issues on the military, such as female combat troops and openly LGBT service members.

“We fear that an uninformed public is permitting political leaders to impose an accretion of social conventions that are diminishing the combat power of our military,” they wrote.

It’s a sentiment Mattis reiterated in a September interview with the Military Times.

“We have to be very careful that we do not undercut the military battlefield effectiveness with shortsighted social programs,” he said.AMEN

Concerns about Mattis’s statements are compounded by Trump’s own comments on the campaign trail. Trump blasted “political correctness” when asked during an October town hall about “social engineering” in the military. In September, he said he wanted to crack down on the “massive problem” of military sexual assault, but defended a 2013 tweet that blamed mixing men and women for the issue.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he expects Mattis to echo what many Republicans have said about the issue of women in combat roles.

“I haven’t asked him about it, but I’m sure he will say that he supports the role of women in combat as long as we don’t lower standards,” McCain said. “That’s my view, and that I think is the majority of the committee’s view.”

But Democrats aren’t so sure. Asked if she has concerns about Mattis’s views on women in combat and transgender troops, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), a committee member, firmly said, “Yes,” without elaborating.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), a vocal advocate of women in the military, said she plans to ask Mattis for clarity on his views at the hearing. Gillibrand has already said she opposes Mattis for an unrelated issue: He needs a waiver from Congress to bypass a law that says Defense secretaries must be out of uniform for at least seven years.

“I do have concerns about women in the military and how sexual assault in the military is being addressed,” she said after meeting Mattis last week. “I’ll ask those questions specifically in the hearing so he can answer them for the record.”

Kate Germano, chief operating officer of the Women’s Service Action Network, said even if Mattis doesn’t outright reverse the decision to open all combat jobs to women, he could allow the Marines to slow-roll implementation, which she has accused them of doing already.

“I think this could absolutely exacerbate that,” said Germano, a recently retired Marine Corps officer. “The fact is that for women who want to pursue those jobs, that’s a letdown for them.” 

Having a leader who doesn’t support women in combat could also hinder other efforts to fight gender bias, Germano added, such as integrating male and female Marines’ basic training and improving the military’s family policies.Leftist Propagandist

As of Monday, her group had met with all but one member of the Senate Armed Services Committee to talk about Mattis, she said. Germano said she’s worried that Gillibrand’s concerns about Mattis are being overshadowed by her opposition to his waiver. She also added that staffers for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who joined the Armed Services Committee this year, have told the group she has concerns about Mattis’s positions as well.

Warren’s office did not return requests for comment.

Germano additionally highlighted Mattis’s close working relationship with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, who as commandant of the Marines recommended Carter keep some jobs closed. Asked this week whether he expects the women in combat policy to stay the same in the next administration, Dunford said he “can’t comment on anything that might happen in the future.”

The Palm Center, an independent think tank that researches issues of gender and sexuality and has been active on the military’s LGBT policies, has also been reaching out to senators ahead of Thursday’s hearing. The group has been circulating a sheet of questions for senators to ask Mattis, including whether he supports the existing Pentagon policies, directives and implementation guidelines regarding open service by LGBT troops, what a reversal of the policy would consist of and what effect a reversal would have readiness, unit cohesion and morale.

“I expect Gen. Mattis, if he is confirmed, to take aim at LGBT troops and women and to politicize military personnel policy on the basis of outdated moral beliefs,” said Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center.engineering

Republicans mostly did not support the transgender policy, saying the Pentagon did not provide adequate evidence that readiness would not be affected by allowing troops to transition in-service.

A RAND Corp. study commissioned by the Pentagon estimated about 65 troops per year would seek to transition and anticipated “minimal impact” on readiness.Leftist Propagandist

Republicans were more divided on allowing women in combat, with some outright opposing any change, some upset Carter overruled the Marines’ request to keep some jobs closed and others supportive of the idea so long as standards aren’t lowered to ensure women make it into the newly opened jobs. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), a member of the committee and a combat veteran of the Iraq War, supported the change with the caveat about standards. When asked whether she’s looking for something specific from Mattis on the issue, she demurred.

I just look forward to having a great conversation with him about it on Thursday during the hearing,” she said.

Trump’s frustration with press, intelligence community explodes


waving flagAuthored

NEW YORK — Long-simmering tensions between Donald Trump, the press and the intelligence community exploded into the open on Wednesday at the president-elect’s first press conference in six months. About 300 reporters jammed into the narrow, gilded atrium at Trump Tower to hear him reject media reports about intelligence officials investigating whether the Russian government has compromising personal and financial information that it could use against him.

Trump also denied reports alleging that the nation’s top national security officials and some members of Congress are looking into whether key figures in the president-elect’s orbit were in touch with Moscow during the presidential campaign about how to defeat Hillary Clinton and get Trump into the White House.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump’s fury over the reports reached a boiling point about 50 minutes into the hour long press conference, when he compared the leaks to something you would expect to see in “Nazi Germany” — an attack he’d previously made on Twitter. “It’s all fake news, it’s phony stuff, it didn’t happen and it was gotten by opponents of ours and many of the other people, a group of opponents that got together, sick people,” Trump said. “It should never have been released and it’s a disgrace. I think it’s an absolute disgrace.”Ten of the 17 questions at the press conference — Trump’s first since winning the election — were about the disputed reports, his relationship with Russia, the news media or the nation’s intelligence agencies. Trump fielded the questions from behind a lectern next to a table stacked with documents in manila folders that he said were evidence of the legal work he’s undertaking to separate himself from conflicts of interest stemming from his businesses. He was flanked by more than a dozen top aides and allies, including Vice President-elect Mike Pence, incoming press secretary Sean Spicer, senior advisers Stephen Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, longtime confidante Rudy Giuliani and his two adult sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, who clapped and cheered him on as he vented frustration about the leaks he claimed were coming from top intelligence officials.

“It would be a tremendous blot on their record,” Trump said of the intelligence agencies. “A tremendous blot, because it never should have been written, had or released.”

Trump and his top aides are also furious with Buzzfeed and CNN for publishing the reports. At one point, Trump called Buzzfeed a “failing pile of garbage,” and he later shut down a question from a CNN reporter, accusing him of dealing in “fake news.” The two reports in CNN and Buzzfeed were markedly different.

CNN reported on Tuesday that U.S. officials briefed Trump and President Obama on allegations that the Russian government has compromising personal and financial information about him.  It declined to include any details on the specific allegations, which were uncorroborated and came from a former British intelligence agent hired by Trump’s political opponents, who put together a 35-page dossier detailing the allegations.partyof-deceit-spin-and-lies

Buzzfeed published a story that included the specifics from the 35-page dossier, coming under criticism from many in the media in the process. That led Spicer to begin the press conference with a fierce diatribe against both Buzzfeed and CNN. “The fact Buzzfeed and CNN made the decision to run with this unsubstantiated claim is a sad, pathetic attempt to get clicks,” Spicer said. “For all of the talk about fake news, this political witch hunt by some in the media is based on flimsy reporting and is frankly shameful and disgraceful.”typical

After being shut down by Trump at the press conference, CNN reporter Jim Acosta said that Spicer threatened to throw him out of the press conference if he continued to try asking questions.

Pence followed Spicer at the press conference with another direct attack on the news media. “The irresponsible decision of a few news organizations to run with a false and unsubstantiated report when most news organizations resisted the temptation to propagate this fake news can only be attributed to media bias and an attempt to demean the president-elect and his incoming administration, and the American people are sick and tired of it,” Pence said.trump-derangement-mental-disorder

Trump addressed some of the allegations directly.

Trump said he has no business deals in Russia, no deals in the works, and no debt with the nation. He said he reviewed the passport of his lawyer, Michael Cohen, who was said in the report to have travelled to Prague last year. Cohen never made the trip, Trump said.

And Trump addressed some of the report’s more salacious aspects, saying that they couldn’t be true because he always behaves as if he’s secretly being filmed when he’s travelling abroad and that he has a phobia of germs.

Trump also went out of his way to thank the news organizations that he said showed restraint by refusing to run the story or publish the disputed report.

“I want to thank a lot of the news organizations, some of which have not treated me fairly over the years, that came out strongly against that fake news and the fact it was written by primarily one group and one television station,” Trump said. “I have great respect for the news and freedom of the press, but some news organizations were so professional and have just gone up a notch as to what I think.”

Trump has long clashed with the news media, but his issues with the intelligence community have been picking up steam in recent weeks and appear to be coming to a head. Before his classified briefing last Friday, Trump refused to embrace the intelligence community’s assessment that Russia had interfered in the U.S. election by hacking the Democratic National Committee. Trump says that he doesn’t accept the intelligence reports as they’re relayed to him, but rather draws his own conclusions based on raw data he gets at the briefings.

On Wednesday, Trump erupted over what he described as an intelligence community that is leaking damaging information about him in an attempt to undermine his administration. “These meetings are confidential and classified, and it’s a disgrace that information would be let out,” he said.

Sessions pledges to recuse himself from Clinton investigations


waving flagAuthored

Sessions pledges to recuse himself from Clinton investigations / © Greg Nash

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said Tuesday he would recuse himself from any possible investigations related to Hillary Clinton if he is confirmed as President-elect Donald Trump‘s attorney general.

Sessions said during a confirmation hearing the politically charged comments he made about the Clintons during the presidential campaign would give the appearance he is not impartial in potential probes of the private email server she used while secretary of State or of the Clinton Foundation.

“I do believe that that could place my objectivity in question,” Sessions told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). “I believe the proper thing for me to do would be for me to recuse myself.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Republicans in Congress have vowed to continue an investigation into Clinton’s private email setup.republicans-not-democratsSessions’s comments are designed to assuage critics who believe the Justice Department could be politicized under Trump. The Alabama senator was a vocal campaign supporter of Trump, who suggested that Clinton should be imprisoned for her private email setup.

Sessions said he would refuse an order from the president to name a special prosecutor to go after Clinton, a move Trump called for during the campaign. “I believe that would be the best approach for the country because we can never have a political dispute turn into a criminal dispute,” Sessions said. “This country does not punish its political enemies. What this country ensures [is] that no one is above the law.”republicans-not-democrats

But it’s unclear whether Trump wants to continue with such a probe as president. If an investigation does go forward, it would likely be overseen by Sessions’s deputy if he is confirmed.

Law enforcement sees Sessions as ‘police-first’ AG


waving flagAuthored

URL of the original posting site: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/313337-law-enforcement-see-sessions-as-police-first-ag-pick

Police and law enforcement officials are backing Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) as Donald Trump‘s pick to lead the Department of Justice. Law enforcement groups view Sessions as someone who will bring a “police-first” mentality to Justice that they say was absent during President Obama’s eight years in office.  In Sessions, they see a traditional law-and-order style enforcer who they believe will repair the relationship between the feds and local police that has grown frosty in the Obama administration.

Sessions is backed by key figures from within several prominent police groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the nation’s largest police union; the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association; the National Association of Police Organizations; and the National Sheriffs Association.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We have about a 20-year relationship with Jeff Sessions from his time in the Senate on the Judiciary Committee and our members in Alabama who worked with him, both as state attorney general and a U.S. attorney, and the best way to sum it up is that we don’t have anything bad to say about Jeff Sessions,” FOP executive director Jim Pasco told The Hill.

“He has extraordinary insight into the demands and stresses of a police officer’s life and also has a real reverence for the rule of law. It sounds corny but it’s true, and that’s what our members pray for in a prosecutor.”

Obama’s attorneys general, Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, prioritized investigations into police practices,

call-911

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

particularly in minority communities. That focus and growing nationwide attention to potential police abuses led to several high-profile Justice Department investigations into police departments in Cleveland, Baltimore, Ferguson, Mo., and elsewhere.  Some law enforcement officials believe those investigations have produced onerous new restrictions and an intrusive level of oversight that they say has stripped the police of their ability to react instinctively to potentially dangerous encounters.

And they say public criticism and the intense focus from Obama’s White House and the Justice Department have undermined law enforcement authority at the local level by demonizing police.  Those tensions exploded into the open just months into the Obama administration in July 2009, when police Sgt. James Crowley, who is white, arrested black Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. at his home for “disorderly conduct” after responding to a call about an alleged break-in.  That incident sparked a national debate on race, which Obama inflamed after saying the police officer had “acted stupidly.”

The president later backed away from those remarks, saying that both men could have responded differently to calm the situation. Obama eventually held a “beer summit” with Crowley and Gates at the White House, but the incident badly damaged his standing in the eyes of the police groups.

police-breathe

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

Law enforcement officials are optimistic there will be fewer explosive incidents like that under a Sessions Justice Department.  “Sessions presumes that law enforcement officials in the main are good folks,” said Bill Barr, an attorney general under President George H.W. Bush. “He’s not going to be afraid to go after rogue cops. But he’s also not looking to undermine police authority and effectiveness because he doesn’t work from the assumption that the police are inherently bad. That will be a break from the Obama years.”

Police are also hopeful that Sessions will levy fewer “consent decrees” — arrangements between the Justice Department and a city that stipulate new methods police must use to address DOJ investigations into their practices. Consent decrees also involve the placing of federal monitors inside the police departments to ensure compliance. Law enforcement officials believe that the moves, while well intentioned, lead to bad outcomes. They say the administration’s interest in local law enforcement means police officers go into the field feeling constrained or fearful that their next encounter could make them the target of a civil rights lawsuit.

They point to Seattle as a case study in “over-enforcement” gone wrong. The city has seen an uptick in violent crime in the wake of a DOJ investigation there that produced a massive overhaul in how the city is policed. The Justice Department concluded its investigation into Seattle’s police department in late 2011. Crime levels spiked in 2013 and have remained above 2012 levels in the years since, according to the Seattle Police Department.“The question is, have these DOJ practices improved safety in the areas where they’ve gone after the police departments? The answer is no,” said former attorney general Michael Mukasey, who served under President George W. Bush.  “There have been something like 20 or 25 different investigations into police departments across the country, usually with unhappy results. You see a place like Seattle, which gets federal oversight and then you see crime go through the roof. It’s an intrusion and in a lot of these instances, the police don’t have the resources or inclination to push back.”

Pasco, the FOP executive director, went further.  “Early on, particularly during Obama’s first four yeas supportwhen [now-Labor Secretary] Tom Perez was the assistant attorney general for civil rights, there was a virtual jihad against police departments and practices,” Pasco said.  “They imposed these unreasonable and draconian consent decrees to address real or perceived violations and the quote ‘remedies’ only exacerbated the rift with police. The bottom line is when Justice investigates, it’s supposed to produce a better result or product and improve the situation. Instead it seems to have exacerbated the problems and doomed some of these communities to failure.”

Still, Pasco funneled most of his anger at Perez, who is presently running to be chairman of the Democratic National Committee, rather than the Obama administration as a whole.

Not everyone in law enforcement has such a critical reading of the Obama administration’s legacy. Most are just eager to turn the page and see the relationship between police and the Justice Department start over.  “You can’t in all fairness say that Obama is anti-police,” said Larry Thompson, a former deputy attorney general under George W. Bush. “If you read his statements, they’re not anti-police. But I do think the department and the administration have been too quick to point an accusatory finger at the police when these incidents have happened. Whether that’s accurate, it’s a perception you have to deal with and I think it will change under Sessions.” 

Schumer: Dems Will Work With Trump Only ‘If He Moves Completely In Our Direction’ [VIDEO]


waving flagAuthored by Derek Hunter / Contributor / 01/04/2017

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/04/schumer-dems-will-work-with-trump-only-if-he-moves-completely-in-our-direction-video/

when-tolerance-becomes-a-one-way-street

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Democrats would work with President-elect Donald Trump only if he “moves completely in our direction and abandons his Republican colleagues.”

“The only way we’re going to work with him is if he moves completely in our direction and abandons his Republican colleagues,” Schumer told CNN Tuesday. “90-95 percent of the time we’ll be holding his feet to the fire and holding him accountable.”

Schumer added, “But we’re Democrats. We’re not just going to oppose things to oppose them.”more-words

His statement stands in contrast to his Senate floor speech when he said Democrats would work with Trump “if the president-elect proposes legislation on issues like infrastructure and trade and closing the carried interest loophole, for instance, we’ll work in good faith to perfect and potentially enact it.”

Cruz, DeSantis push for congressional term limits


waving flagAuthored

Cruz, DeSantis push for congressional term limits / © Getty Images

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) are pushing for an amendment to the Constitution to place term limits on lawmakers, arguing the move will help overhaul Washington.

“The American people resoundingly agreed on Election Day, and President-elect Donald Trump has committed to putting government back to work for the American people,” Cruz said in a statement on Tuesday. “It is well past time to put an end to the cronyism and deceit that has transformed Washington into a graveyard of good intentions.” 
 partyof-deceit-spin-and-lies
Under an amendment the two GOP lawmakers filed on Tuesday, House members would be allowed to serve three two-year terms and senators would be able to serve two six-year terms.
ADVERTISEMENT
DeSantis added that the measure would be a “first step toward reforming Capitol Hill.” 

GOP Sens. Deb Fischer (Neb.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Marco Rubio (Fla.), Mike Lee (Utah) and David Perdue (Ga.) are backing the proposal. Cruz and DeSantis previously pledged in a Washington Post op-ed to introduce the measure this year. stupid

According to the resolution, any congressional term before the amendment becomes law wouldn’t be taken into account when determining if a lawmaker can run for reelection or not. Trump backed term limits during his White House run, but the measure could face an uphill battle in Congress.

Neither House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who has said he supports term limits, nor Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has signaled it could come up for a vote. McConnell appeared to shut down Trump’s push after the election, telling reporters, “We have term limits — they’re called elections.”

In addition to clearing Congress, the Cruz-DeSantis proposal would also need to be ratified by three-fourths of state legislatures before going into effect.

Trump Announces Deal That Adds 8,000 US Jobs in Tech Industry


waving flag

Authored By Jason Devaney   |   Wednesday, 28 Dec 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/trump-deal-thousands-us/2016/12/28/id/765942/

Image: Trump Announces Deal That Adds 8,000 US Jobs in Tech Industry

President-elect Donald Trump announced Wednesday Sprint and a new company, One Web, will add 8,000 jobs in the United States. During brief remarks from his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla., Trump spoke about the news to assembled reporters.

“I was just called by the head people at Sprint. They are going to be bringing 5,000 jobs back to the United States,” Trump said. “They are taking them from other countries. They are bringing them back to the United States.

“Also, One Web, a new company, is going to be hiring 3,000 people. That’s very exciting.”

Trump also recently announced an American job-creating deal with SoftBank Corp., which owns Sprint. Trump said Wednesday that SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son helped broker the deal regarding Sprint.

“A terrific guy. We appreciate it,” Trump said of him.

Mediaite captured video of Trump’s remarks.

On the eve of a meeting between Trump and business leaders of the tech industry earlier this month, IBM announced plans to hire 25,000 people in the U.S. and invest $1 billion over the next four years.

Obama: “The U.S. Must Give Up Some Of Its Freedoms to the UN”


waving flagBy on December 27, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://joeforamerica.com/2016/12/obama-u-s-must-give-freedoms-un/

Many Americans are very excited to know Trump’s Inauguration Day is right around the corner. We’ve had enough of Obama’s policies which have weakened America and our military and made us look weak among nations around the world. Not that Obama could care. Afterall, Obama supported Obamacare and wanted a One World government, just like Hillary.

At one of Obama’s last gatherings with other world leaders at the UN, Obama said this:

H/T I Have The Truth:

“…but we have to put our money where our mouths are. And we can only realize the promise of this institution’s founding — to replace the ravages of war with cooperation — if powerful nations like my own accept constraints,” said Obama. “Sometimes I’m criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions.”

“But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security. And I think that’s not just true for us.”more-words

WTH!? The United Nations has one goal: Globalization. The UN’s only intention is to bring about new world and economic order and support an international system of governance. The UN doesn’t exist to help the world. We’ve already seen how on many occasions how the UN has failed to protect those that really need protections. It hasn’t stopped genocide or wars.

The UN is about global control. They just want to remove guns and disarm citizens, which is unconstitutional in America. America was founded on the Constitution. In America, citizens have the 2nd Amendment – the right to bear arms, but the UN doesn’t want that. They want “ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT” – no borders. Hence, Obama didn’t care about how many illegals he brought in. He just wanted more. The more the merrier; it makes our country weaker.

obama-clinton-400x225

Obama is a globalist and wanted Americans to surrender the US to the UN. He wanted America to give up our freedoms to achieve UN GOALS! Seriously!

The UN just wants America to dissolves its sovereignty to create a new world order. Obama wanted America to give up freedoms to become part of this ‘One World” government’!

Thank God! We are not heading down that path any longer! Hillary Clinton would have just continued down that same path to “One World” order and government.

One of our Founding Fathers said:

download-1

Aren’t we thankful Americans chose the path of freedom and Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton for President. Clinton would have continued America down Obama’s same path of destruction and “One World” order.  Donald Trump will lead us down the path of greatness and help “Make America Great Again”.

Thank you Americans for electing Donald Trump for our next president!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

merry-christmas

#MAGA

Half Of Detroit Could Be Ineligible For Election Recount Due To Discrepancies


waving flagAuthored by Ted Goodman / 12/05/2016

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2016/12/05/half-of-detroit-could-be-ineligible-for-election-recount/?utm_source=WhatCountsEmail&utm_medium=TheDC Morning&utm_campaign=TheDC Evening

Over half of Detroit’s 662 voting precincts may be ineligible for the ongoing Michigan recount, since the number of ballots in precinct poll books do not match those from voting machine printout reports. More than a third of precincts in Wayne County, Michigan’s largest county and home to Detroit, could be disqualified from the statewide recount because county officials, “couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month,” according to the Detroit News.picture2

Wayne County has over 1.7 million residents and voted overwhelmingly for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, at 95 percent. Krista Haroutunian, chair of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers, told the Detroit Free Press that the discrepancies could make 610 precincts across the county (including the 392 in Detroit), ineligible for recount. A final decision has not yet been made.Happy Happy Joy Joy

The Michigan Republican Party, President-elect Donald Trump and the state’s Republican attorney general all filed notice that they plan to appeal a U.S. District Court decision to start the recount Monday, arguing the effort should not be decided by the federal courts system. (RELATED: Michigan GOP Files Appeal To Stop Recount)

“This is a Michigan issue, and should be handled by the Michigan court system,” Michigan Republican Party Chairman Ronna Romney McDaniel said in a press release.

Attorneys for the Michigan GOP filed a Notice to Appeal with the Eastern District Court of Michigan Monday, with plans to eventually appeal the ruling with the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio, according to the Detroit Free Press.The Michigan Court of Appeals has scheduled oral arguments for Tuesday at 4 p.m., according to a press release from the Michigan GOP.

The recount effort is in a race against the clock, as state election officials scramble to complete a hand recount of over 4.8 million presidential ballots. The judge ruled in Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s favor, starting the recount at noon Monday. The largest recount effort in the state’s history could cost taxpayers up to $12 million, according to Fox News.

In Michigan, Trump officially received 2,279,543 votes, while Clinton received 2,268,839 votes after the Election Day tally. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson received 172,136 votes, while Stein hauled in 51,463 votes.

More Evidence

UNREAL: American College Literally Says No To Flying American Flag


waving flagAuthored By: John Falkenberg on November 23, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://conservativetribune.com/american-college-says-no-to-flag/

Hampshire College of Amherst, Massachusetts, has decided, in the face of the oh-so-scary victory by President-elect Donald Trump, to keep the American flag from flying on its campus, according to USA Today.

Hate-based violence accusations are sky-high, so college officials decided to fly the flag at half-staff. The flag was then burned by (presumably) a student. The community was understandably furious, so the same officials decided to remove the flag so no one became further upset.

The Facebook post by Hampshire College President Johnathan Lash said it all.

“Some months ago, the Hampshire College Board of Trustees adopted a policy of periodically flying the flag at half-staff to mourn deaths from violence around the world,” he wrote on Monday. “Last week, in the current environment of escalating hate-based violence, we made the decision to fly Hampshire’s U.S. flag at half-staff for a time while the community delved deeper into the meaning of the flag and its presence on our campus.”

“This was meant as an expression of grief over the violent deaths being suffered in this country and globally, including the many U.S. service members who have lost their lives,” he explained.Leftist Propagandist

A cynic might speculate that Lash added the bit about the fallen service members to appease the community that was so outraged about the flag’s lowering.

“Our intention was to create the space for meaningful and respectful dialogue across the many perspectives represented in our community,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, our efforts to inclusively convey respect and sorrow have had the opposite effect.”if-stupid-could-fly

Only someone who has become completely surrounded by liberalism would be surprised by this consequence. Seriously — what were they thinking?

Here’s what they learned:

“We have heard from many on our campus as well as from neighbors in the region that, by flying the flag at half-staff, we were actually causing hurt, distress and insult,” he wrote. “Our decision has been seen as disrespectful of the traditional expression of national mourning, and has been especially painful to our Hampshire campus colleagues who are veterans or families of veterans.”gag me

After hearing that some community members believed that lowering the flag was a commentary on the election, Lash expressly denied it. However, what Lash claimed removing the flag was all about was pretty telling.

“We hope (taking the flag down) will enable us in the near term to instead focus our efforts on addressing racist, misogynistic, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-Semitic and anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and behaviors.”

Now, who could that possibly be pointed toward?definetly

Trump’s National Security Adviser: “Islam is a Political Ideology… Hides behind this Notion of it being a Religion”!


waving flagAuthored By Onan Coca November 22, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/trumps-national-security-adviser-islam-political-ideology-hides-behind-notion-religion/

In a speech from August that is now making waves across the gen-michael-flynncountry, president-elect Trump’s National Security Adviser designate, Lt. General Michael Flynn (retired) told the Dallas chapter of ACT! For America that “Islam is a political ideology, it is a political ideology. It definitely hides behind this notion of it being a religion.”

The comments are sure to be brought back up when Flynn goes before the Senate to testify during his confirmation hearings. However, Flynn’s personality and his public persona lead me to believe that he’s not worried about facing tough questions from hostile Democrat Senators.Islam is NOT

In his speech Flynn further commented on the differences between Christianity and Islam before making some even more controversial comments about world Islam today.

“Islam is a political ideology, it is a political ideology. It definitely hides behind this notion of it being a religion. I have a very, very tough time because I don’t see a lot of people screaming ‘Jesus Christ’ with hatchets or machetes or rifles shooting up clubs or hatcheting, literally axing families on a train.

Or like they just killed a couple of police officers with a machete. I mean, it’s unbelievable.  So we have a problem.

It’s like cancer. I’ve gone through cancer in my own life. And so it’s like cancer, and it’s like a malignant cancer, though in this case that has metastasized.

It’s like I just said in the number of attacks in 22 countries in just the last 45 days. When I look back over the last 10 years or 15 years of my life and the things that I’ve seen and the things that I’ve witnessed against this very vicious threat.

Christian Persecution

Image edited and added by WhatDidYouSay.org

https://www.mrctv.org/embed/188631

The folks at MRC TV cut video of Flynn’s speech with an interview he gave to MSNBC where the topic of discussion was Russia. In the interview Flynn explains why the current liberal stance towards Russia is all wrong – while Russia may not be a “good guy” in the narrative, they’re certainly preferable to the Muslim terrorists that we’re both fighting against.

“We have to deal with Russia,” he said. “We cannot make Russia an enemy. Russia is a nation that is deeply involved in the Middle East. Right now, the Middle East is totally unstable. We have over 5,000 of our own troops there in Iraq trying to fight the rise of ISIS.”

“Russia’s directly involved,” he said. “So we have to figure out ways to work with them instead of making them an antagonist.”AMEN

Lt. Gen. (ret.) Michael T. Flynn is President-elect Trump’s designated National Security Adviser, according to The New York Times and numerous other media, citing an unnamed top official on the Trump transition team.

Flynn, 57, is from Rhode Island. He grew up in a family of nine. He and his wife, Lori Flynn, have been married for 30-plus years. They have two sons and several grandchildren. Flynn served in the U.S. Army from 1981 to 2014 and served in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Uphold Democracy and Operation Urgent Fury.

Lt. Gen. (ret.) Flynn was the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency from July 2012 to August 2014. His designated position in the Trump administration does not require Senate confirmation.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Onan Coca

Onan is the Editor-in-Chief at Liberty Alliance media group. He’s also the managing editor at Eaglerising.com, Constitution.com and the managing partner at iPatriot.com. Onan is a graduate of Liberty University (2003) and earned his M.Ed. at Western Governors University in 2012. Onan lives in Atlanta with his wife and their three wonderful children. You can find his writing all over the web.

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard builds image for bucking party


Gabbard builds image for bucking party / © Greg Nash

The Democratic lawmaker who met with President-elect Donald Trump on Monday is used to bucking her own party. A frequent presence on cable news, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), 35, has made a name for herself by criticizing the administration and her own party on foreign policy and national security.

She quit her post as a Democratic National Committee vice chair to act as a surrogate for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), the insurgent candidate challenging Hillary Clinton in the Democratic presidential primary. She has blasted the Obama administration for refusing to say the words “radical Islam” and voted in favor of requiring FBI background checks for Iraqi and Syrian refugees.

She also declined to back the majority of House Democrats in co-sponsoring a gun control bill this summer, instead backing a compromise bill that others in her party said didn’t go far enough.

Like Trump and Sanders, she is a vocal opponent of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. On Sunday, she participated in a rally at the Capitol against the agreement.

With that background, it’s no surprise that she’d catch the eye of Trump and his newly appointed White House adviser, Stephen Bannon.

“He loves Tulsi Gabbard. Loves her,” a source familiar with the Trump adviser’s thinking told The Hill. “She gets the foreign policy stuff, the Islamic terrorism stuff.”

Gabbard was not one of the 169 Democrats in the House who signed a letter condemning Bannon’s appointment.

“Let me be clear, I will never allow partisanship to undermine our national security when the lives of countless people lay in the balance,” she said in a statement Monday released after the meeting with Trump. It’s not clear how strong a possibility it is that Gabbard could join a Trump administration.

News reports suggest she could be up for anything from U.S. ambassador to the United Nations to secretary of State.

It’s just as possible that the meeting was a bit of optics for Trump that shows his willingness to meet with a broad spectrum of people. Trump has also met recently with Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee who was a fierce critic during this year’s campaign.

“It does show a willingness to reach across the aisle, and on top of that, a different wing of the Democratic Party,” said Alex Ward, a defense expert at the Atlantic Council.

In her own statement about the meeting, Gabbard emphasized the need for people with different political views to talk to one another — particularly over national security issues such as the Syrian civil war.

“While the rules of political expediency would say I should have refused to meet with President-elect Trump, I never have and never will play politics with American and Syrian lives,” she said.

The Army National Guard major and Iraq veteran also said she wanted to impress on Trump the need to avoid being dragged into another war.

“I felt it important to take the opportunity to meet with the President-elect now before the drumbeats of war that neocons have been beating drag us into an escalation of the war to overthrow the Syrian government,” she said.

Gabbard has criticized the Obama administration for not being aggressive enough against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, which the U.S. has been fighting since 2014. She also has been a staunch opponent of U.S. military action against the Syrian regime under President Bashar Assad, seeing it as a potential open-ended quagmire and a distraction from going after Islamic extremists.

In the meeting with Trump, Gabbard said she shared her “grave concerns that escalating the war in Syria by implementing a so-called no fly/safe zone would be disastrous for the Syrian people, our country, and the world.”

Trump has also voiced concern for getting involved in the Syrian civil war, saying it could lead to war with Russia and that the U.S. should focus on ISIS instead.

Outside observers said they could see a scenario where Gabbard could be a part of a Trump administration.

“Tulsi Gabbard has emerged as a somewhat prominent critic of the hawkish consensus,” said Cato Institute defense expert Benjamin Friedman.

He suggested she could be a better fit for Trump’s foreign policy than figures such as John Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton has also been mentioned for various posts in a Trump administration.

Former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway praised Gabbard after the meeting, saying the lawmaker and Trump found they had a great deal in common during the meeting. She also praised Gabbard for bucking her own party.

Jonathan Swan contributed to this report, which was updated at 8:54 a.m.

Following Trump’s election, CAIR leader calls for Arab Spring-type overthrow of U.S. government


waving flagAuthored November 14, 2016

Following Trump’s election, CAIR leader calls for Arab Spring-type overthrow of U.S. government

Hussam Ayloush. (Image: Screen grab of CNN video, YouTube)

Despite statements from both President Obama and vanquished Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton, liberals have been unable to accept the fact that Republican Donald J. Trump won Tuesday’s election and is set to become the 45th President of the United States.  Many have taken to the streets in violent protests, others have demanded Trump and his supporters be assassinated and still others are working to enact a coup d’état by encouraging the Electoral College to ignore the will of the voters.  Now comes word that a leader of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued a tweet advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government.

Early Wednesday morning, Hussam Ayloush, head of the Council on American Islamic Relations’ Los Angeles office, tweeted this:

cair

America Never ForgetDaniel Pipes explained:

That second line is Arabic (“الشعب يريد إسقاط النظام‎‎”) for “The people wants to bring down the regime.”

In other words, Ayloush unambiguously and directly called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.

Say what?

Not because we doubt Pipes, but because we wanted to see this for ourselves, we ran the Arabic through Google Translate and got this:

arabic-translate-cair

against America

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

Not exactly subtle, is it?

A post at Sean Hannity’s website notes:

The slogan was first used during the Tunisian Revolution which kicked off the Arab Spring. It was also used frequently during the Egyptian revolution in which the regime of Hosni Mubarak was overthrown.Islam is NOT

Pipes added:

Ayloush is not a marginal figure but someone with access to the heights of American power, including the White House. According to an Investigative Project on Terrorism analysis in 2012, he

WAS A DELEGATE TO THE 2012 DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION IN CHARLOTTE, N.C. [AND] … ATTENDED AT LEAST TWO WHITE HOUSE MEETINGS. THE LOGS SHOW AYLOUSH MET WITH PAUL MONTEIRO, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ON JULY 8, 2011 AND AMANDA BROWN, ASSISTANT TO THE WHITE HOUSE DIRECTOR OF POLITICAL AFFAIRS PATRICK GASPARD, ON JUNE 6, 2009. ACCORDING TO RELIABLE SOURCES, MONTEIRO WAS WHITE HOUSE LIAISON FOR SECRET CONTACTS WITH CAIR, ESPECIALLY WITH AYLOUSH.

Further, “IPT has learned that the White House logs curiously have omitted Ayloush’s three meetings with two other senior White House officials.”

Pipes also said that Ayloush would normally have kept this particular emotion “under wraps,” and “offered a rare, candid insight into the mind of one CAIR apparatchik.”

He also noted that advocating the overthrow of the government is a violation of federal law:

Whoever knowingly or willfully advocates, abets, advises, or teaches the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying the government of the United States … Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

But as we’ve learned over the last eight years, some are more equal than others.culture of deceit and lies

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Joe Newby

Joe Newby is an IT professional. He has written for Conservative Firing Line, Examiner, NewsBusters, and Spokane Faith and Values.

The Media Calls for Insurrection Over President Elect Donald Trump


waving flagAuthored By Warner Todd Huston November 11, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://constitution.com/media-calls-insurrection-president-elect-donald-trump/

media-bias-exposed-trump-633x450

As common, everyday liberals take to the streets to beat up those they disagree with, blockade streets, and destroy other people’s property because, you know, they are all so into “peaceful democracy,” their instigators in the left-wing media and entertainment biz are egging them on with one meltdown after another all because Donald J. Trump won the election for president.

In the week before Election Day when Hillary Clinton was perusing office furniture catalogs and measuring for Oval Office drapes, the whole of the media was slamming anyone center right who dared make noise as if they wouldn’t accept the results of the 2016 election. And Donald Trump himself was at the top of that list.

Admittedly some of the attacks on Trump for not automatically saying he’d accept the results of the election were his own fault. The controversy arose on October 19 in the last presidential debate when the moderator asked the real estate mogul if he would immediately accept the results of the election on November 8. Trump demurred saying only that he’d have to wait until it all came about before he’d decide whether it was a legitimate outcome. This is a logical stance to take, especially since he had spent about a year saying that we needed to be wary of Democrat vote fraud. But his reply was in-artful and guaranteed the media would attack him for it, and attack they did.

For days afterward members of the media slammed Trump as “destroying our democracy” by saying he wouldn’t accept the outcome of the election. For a typical take on this wild-eyed claim the Washington Post hyperbolically called Trump’s debate reply a “horrifying repudiation of U.S. democracy.”Leftist Propagandist

It was no such thing, of course. All Trump was saying is that the system had to take its course and he would not lock himself into accepting the vote if he thought it was fraudulent. Regardless the media went wild over Trump’s reticence to automatically accept the left’s voter fraud.want-us-to-forget

But by 2 AM on November 9, the morning the election was called for president elect Donald Trump, the tables were turned and it was the left-wing media caterwauling that the nation should not accept the outcome of the election.

By afternoon on the day after Election Day, liberals were already flooding the streets to protest the peaceful transfer of power and working to undermine President Donald Trump before he even takes office… or even before he is officially designated by Congress as the President Elect.

But even before ill-tempered and ill-informed millennials took to the streets, their goaders in the left-wing media were stoking the fires of dissent.

The inciting to violence kicked off before the last votes were even reported with a hate-filled rant by socialist CNN commentator Van Jones

We’ve talked about race — we’ve talked about everything but race tonight. … This was a whitelash. This was a whitelash against a changing country. It was a whitelash against a black president, in part. And that’s the part where the pain comes. And Donald Trump has a responsibility tonight to come out and reassure people that he is going to be the president of all the people who he insulted and offended and brushed aside. Yeah, when you say you want to take your country back, you’ve got a lot of people who feel that we’re not represented well either, but we don’t want to feel that someone has been elected by throwing away some of us to appeal more deeply to others. So, we — this is a deeply painful moment tonight. I know it’s not just about race. There’s more going on than that, but race is here too.Leftist Propagandist

If the media encourages you to feel the election is all about a racist America keeping you down, why would you accept the results? This same bomb throwing hate-monger went on the air the very next night and hinted that Muslims and Hispanics should fear that Trump is going to set up internment camps to imprison them. Jones is essentially validating the left’s hate and fears and giving them every reason to refuse to accept the results of our democratic system.

Then there is liberal commentator and media figure James Carville who drummed up fears in liberals that a Donald Trump presidency would signal the end of everything liberals have worked for.

Next we see two so-called “journalists” who Tweeted (then tried to delete) their hopes that Donald Trump would be murdered.

The two “journalists,” one who hoped for Trump’s assassination and another who said Trump’s coming to power was *just like* Nazi Germany, were the Guardian’s Monisha Rajes and Mark C. O’Flaherty from the Financial Times.

Tweets like the above by these “journalists” have been echoed by regular liberals…

Meanwhile, the left’s favorite “explainer” site, Vox.com, is 100 percent vested in the clam that Trump was elected because of raaaacism.

Other parts of the extreme liberal establishment are also doing their level best to make sure supporters refuse to allow the Trump presidency to start off without violence and intense hatred. Take the Southern Poverty Law Center, the group that claims to identify “hate groups,” which has decided that all Trump voters are “far-right extremists.”

Worse, we have a liberal judge turning the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court into a political podium instead of one of truth and the law with lefty justice Ginsburg wearing a “dissent collar” on the bench to protest the election of Donald Trump.

Or the college professor who was so fearful for the special snowflakes he “teaches” that he decided to cancel exams so the poor kiddies could grieve for the loss of their Hillary.

And of course we have the idiots in Hollywood unleashing their special brand of anti-Americanism.

We have vile rap “artist” Snoop Dogg claiming he is going to move to Canada because the U.S. is evil. Snoop Dogg isn’t alone, either. A whole list of celebrities are now out there urging their mind numbed followers to rise up in violence against the United States. As Fox News noted, many took their hate to Twitter.

mean01

mean02

mean03

And let’s not forget the vile little Miley Cyrus who had a total mental breakdown (not a long rod to travel, granted) on Election Night.

In the end, each and every one of these monstrous liberals who hate this country so much really don’t understand why they lost. In fact, it is all this bile that caused voters to turn against them in the first place.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Warner Todd Huston

Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com and BigJournalsim.com along with all Breitbart News sites, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, and many, many others. He has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs across the country to discuss his news stories and current events and has appeared on TV networks such as CNN, Fox News, Fox Business Network, and various Chicago-based news programs. He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the book “Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture” which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston or email the author at igcolonel@hotmail.com.

Julian Assange Releases Statement on U.S. Election


waving flagWritten by Philip Hodges

URL of the original posting site: http://eaglerising.com/38280/julian-assange-releases-statement-on-u-s-election/

assange

Depending on what political party you identify with, you’ll either love WikiLeaks or abhor them. And people’s opinions of the organization changes depending on which political leaders are getting exposed. If the Bush administration is getting exposed, then liberals champion the group and whistleblowers in general, and conservatives decry the group as a terrorist organization and label the whistleblowers “traitors.”

But if WikiLeaks exposes the Obama administration, or the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, it’s the other way around. All of a sudden the liberals who had previously championed the group, hate the group and want Assange “brought to justice” for crimes against humanity. And predictably, conservatives cheer his cause.

A lot of people don’t seem to understand that Assange doesn’t identify with any major U.S. political party. He’s not American. He’s an outsider. His goal has always been to expose top-level corruption, regardless of which countries or political parties are involved. And he’s had to pay a price for that.

As a publishing organization, they don’t hire hackers to steal other people’s computer documents and emails. WikiLeaks is a place for whistleblowers. They publish only what they’re given.

In other words, if someone inside the Trump campaign wanted to expose the campaign’s corruption and send a ton of emails to WikiLeaks, they would have published it. The only reason WikiLeaks published Podesta’s emails and the DNC emails was that someone felt the need to blow the whistle anonymously. So far, no one’s felt the need to do the same thing with the RNC or the Trump campaign. That doesn’t mean that Julian Assange must be pro-Trump. It just means that no one’s come forward seeking to out Trump.

It’s important to keep in mind that if our media networks truly were “fair and balanced” and objective and unbiased, there would be no need for a group like WikiLeaks.

Here’s a statement on the U.S. election released by Julian Assange:

In recent months, WikiLeaks and I personally have come under enormous pressure to stop publishing what the Clinton campaign says about itself to itself. That pressure has come from the campaign’s allies, including the Obama administration, and from liberals who are anxious about who will be elected US President.

On the eve of the election, it is important to restate why we have published what we have.

The right to receive and impart true information is the guiding principle of WikiLeaks – an organization that has a staff and organizational mission far beyond myself. Our organization defends the public’s right to be informed.

This is why, irrespective of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election, the real victor is the US public which is better informed as a result of our work.

The US public has thoroughly engaged with WikiLeaks’ election related publications which number more than one hundred thousand documents. Millions of Americans have pored over the leaks and passed on their citations to each other and to us. It is an open model of journalism that gatekeepers are uncomfortable with, but which is perfectly harmonious with the First Amendment.

We publish material given to us if it is of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical importance and which has not been published elsewhere. When we have material that fulfills this criteria, we publish. We had information that fit our editorial criteria which related to the Sanders and Clinton campaign (DNC Leaks) and the Clinton political campaign and Foundation (Podesta Emails). No-one disputes the public importance of these publications. It would be unconscionable for WikiLeaks to withhold such an archive from the public during an election.

At the same time, we cannot publish what we do not have. To date, we have not received information on Donald Trump’s campaign, or Jill Stein’s campaign, or Gary Johnson’s campaign or any of the other candidates that fulfills our stated editorial criteria. As a result of publishing Clinton’s cables and indexing her emails we are seen as domain experts on Clinton archives. So it is natural that Clinton sources come to us.

We publish as fast as our resources will allow and as fast as the public can absorb it.

That is our commitment to ourselves, to our sources, and to the public.

This is not due to a personal desire to influence the outcome of the election. The Democratic and Republican candidates have both expressed hostility towards whistleblowers. I spoke at the launch of the campaign for Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, because her platform addresses the need to protect them. This is an issue that is close to my heart because of the Obama administration’s inhuman and degrading treatment of one of our alleged sources, Chelsea Manning. But WikiLeaks publications are not an attempt to get Jill Stein elected or to take revenge over Ms Manning’s treatment either.

Publishing is what we do. To withhold the publication of such information until after the election would have been to favour one of the candidates above the public’s right to know.

This is after all what happened when the New York Times withheld evidence of illegal mass surveillance of the US population for a year until after the 2004 election, denying the public a critical understanding of the incumbent president George W Bush, which probably secured his reelection. The current editor of the New York Times has distanced himself from that decision and rightly so.

The US public defends free speech more passionately, but the First Amendment only truly lives through its repeated exercise. The First Amendment explicitly prevents the executive from attempting to restrict anyone’s ability to speak and publish freely. The First Amendment does not privilege old media, with its corporate advertisers and dependencies on incumbent power factions, over WikiLeaks’ model of scientific journalism or an individual’s decision to inform their friends on social media. The First Amendment unapologetically nurtures the democratization of knowledge. With the Internet, it has reached its full potential.

Yet, some weeks ago, in a tactic reminiscent of Senator McCarthy and the red scare, Wikileaks, Green Party candidate Stein, Glenn Greenwald and Clinton’s main opponent were painted with a broad, red brush. The Clinton campaign, when they were not spreading obvious untruths, pointed to unnamed sources or to speculative and vague statements from the intelligence community to suggest a nefarious allegiance with Russia. The campaign was unable to invoke evidence about our publications—because none exists.

In the end, those who have attempted to malign our groundbreaking work over the past four months seek to inhibit public understanding perhaps because it is embarrassing to them – a reason for censorship the First Amendment cannot tolerate. Only unsuccessfully do they try to claim that our publications are inaccurate.

WikiLeaks’ decade-long pristine record for authentication remains. Our key publications this round have even been proven through the cryptographic signatures of the companies they passed through, such as Google. It is not every day you can mathematically prove that your publications are perfect but this day is one of them.

We have endured intense criticism, primarily from Clinton supporters, for our publications. Many long-term supporters have been frustrated because we have not addressed this criticism in a systematic way or responded to a number of false narratives about Wikileaks’ motivation or sources. Ultimately, however, if WL reacted to every false claim, we would have to divert resources from our primary work.

WikiLeaks, like all publishers, is ultimately accountable to its funders. Those funders are you. Our resources are entirely made up of contributions from the public and our book sales. This allows us to be principled, independent and free in a way no other influential media organization is. But it also means that we do not have the resources of CNN, MSNBC or the Clinton campaign to constantly rebuff criticism.

Yet if the press obeys considerations above informing the public, we are no longer talking about a free press, and we are no longer talking about an informed public.

Wikileaks remains committed to publishing information that informs the public, even if many, especially those in power, would prefer not to see it. WikiLeaks must publish. It must publish and be damned.ATTA BOY

EARLY VOTING: Results Are Showing TRUMP Is Going To DECIMATE Hillary


waving flagPosted on November 7, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/early-voting-results-showing-trump-going-decimate-hillary/

Looks like early voters have been good to Trump. Trump communications advisor Jason Miller said Trump has thousands of more early votes than Mitt Romney did during this point in the 2012 election. An excellent boost heading into election day.

By Katie McHugh

“I want to give you a couple of early voting, absentee voting successes we’ve seen,” Miller told SiriusXM host Matthew Boyle. “We can talk about polls… But let me tell you about real votes coming in now in Florida. Republican numbers at this point are a combination of absentee voting and early voting. Republican numbers are up seven percent, and Democrat numbers are down ten percent. So, what does that mean?”

“Usually, the Democrats will come out of early voting, pre-election voting ahead, but right now, we’re at a pace to be 100,000 votes closer than where Mitt Romney was four years ago,” Miller said.

CNN reports that in Florida, nearly three million voters have already cast their ballots. So far, registered Republicans lead Democrats by approximately 13,545 votes.

Bounce up to North Carolina, where we just had our best day,” he said. “We had 79,000 people that showed up and voted on Friday for Mr. Trump, which is the best single day—well, Republicans showing up and voting, which I’ll assume are for Mr. Trump. Single individual best day of voting, even going back to 2012. We’ve narrowed the gap to where we’re 35,000 votes ahead of where the Republican ticket was four years ago.”

Republican voters coming home to Trump


waving flagAuthored By Niall Stanage and Jonathan Swan November 3, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/governor-races/304090-republican-voters-coming-home-to-trump

Getty

Republican voters are finally coming home to Donald Trump after months of flagging support threatened to put the White House out of reach.

Trump’s candidacy has been deeply divisive within Republican ranks, drawing fire from senior officeholders such as Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), past presidential nominees including Mitt Romney and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and numerous conservative pundits.

Now, as Republicans face up to the specter of a Hillary Clinton presidency, Trump’s numbers are on the rise. But polling experts caution that he is still a few points shy of where he needs to be.David Winston, a GOP pollster, noted that Romney in 2012 received 93 percent support from voters who identified as Republican, according to exit polls. In most current polls, Trump is a notch lower.

fight

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

“He was pretty consistently — up to a couple of weeks ago — clearly underperforming,” Winston said of Trump. “One of the things you’ve seen is that he has slowly got back to somewhere between 85 and 90 percent [of Republican voters]. But he’s still a bit short.” 

Winston said there had been several factors working in Trump’s favor of late. He said some party loyalists had finally completed the process of “working through the fact that they were unhappy he was the nominee.” Trump has also been relatively disciplined on the campaign trail recently, while Clinton has been pushed onto the defensive by a surprise FBI statement about newly discovered emails.

Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute, acknowledged that the GOP nominee had not persuaded all Republican voters but said he has made progress.

“Reverting to type would assume some normal behavior, and we are not seeing that,” Murray said. “But you have seen Trump picking up some support from certain segments of the electorate that tend to vote for Republicans — such as white, working-class women, where Hillary Clinton remains stronger than average [for a Democrat] but Trump has been able to gain.”get-out-the-vote

Polling data underlines the point.

Two of the main tracking polls, from ABC News/Washington Post and IBD/TIPP, saw Trump moving up within the past couple of weeks.  The first IBD tracking poll appeared on Oct. 19 and showed Trump receiving the support of 82 percent of Republicans. That figure had climbed to 88 percent by Wednesday. The ABC News/Washington Post tracker first appeared on Oct. 23, giving Trump 83 percent GOP support. He is now up to 88 percent in the same poll. vote

Similar dynamics are also seen at the state level. Marist College polls of Florida, conducted for NBC News and The Wall Street Journal, show Trump’s Republican support rising from 76 percent in August to 86 percent one month ago to 88 percent in the most recent survey, conducted just before Clinton was hit with the FBI announcement. In Marist’s polling of North Carolina, he rose through those same dates from 80 percent to 86 percent to 89 percent.

There are other factors to Trump’s rise among Republicans, insiders say. Key among them is the contribution made by his running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence

Pence, with his unimpeachable conservative credentials, has one job above all others: To bring wayward Republicans into the fold.

Marc Short, a senior adviser to the VP nominee, told The Hill that a speech Pence delivered about ObamaCare in Philadelphia Tuesday was as much about ObamaCare as it was about “using ObamaCare as a vehicle to make the appeal for Republicans to come home.”

“Donald Trump has obviously struck a chord with a lot of Americans and has won an enormous amount of independent support — particularly among blue-collar workers and people who are fed up with Washington,” Short said.

“But we’re still working to consolidate the Republican Party,” he added. “Mike is uniquely positioned. … He has a lot of friendships and associations and is able to uniquely make the appeal as to why this election cycle is so important and why it’s important for Republicans to come home.” freedom-is-not-free-vote

Some of Pence’s private efforts appear to be bearing fruit. Republican members of Congress expressed greater comfort for the ticket after Pence visited them on Capitol Hill in early September. Even when Pence didn’t immediately succeed in securing Republican endorsements, he surely did no harm. Pence privately asked Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to endorse Trump, according to a source familiar with their Capitol Hill meeting in September. And while Cruz declined to endorse Trump following the meeting, Pence took some comfort when the Texan eventually came out for Trump. Cruz will appear on the campaign trail with Pence on Thursday in Michigan and Iowa, making his first appearances on behalf of the Republican ticket.american-voters

Liam Donovan, a former aide to the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said that recent polls notwithstanding, Trump’s “greatest challenge” has been his inability to consolidate self-identified Republicans.

“At some level the base naturally wants to come home, but Trump’s mouth keeps getting in the way,” Donovan said. “When the polling looks good it’s because he is performing like previous nominees — no more, no less.” 

Donovan said Trump gains with hesitant Republicans only when he campaigns with discipline.

Offering Trump some unsolicited advice, Donovan said, “Put away the Android Twitter app. Let the news cycle consume your opponent instead of trying to seize back the spotlight.”keep-voting-the-same-way

FBI Finds No Links Between Donald Trump and Russia


Authored by Warner Todd Huston, 31 Oct 2016

After a months-long, deep investigation into suspected foreign meddling in the U.S. election, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has determined that Donald Trump has no ties to the Russian government.

Federal officials conducted a wide investigation throughout the summer looking for financial connections between Trump and his operatives and the Russian government in connection with the hacking of Democrat party computers but found nothing, according to The New York Times.

Upon the conclusion of the investigation, the FBI decided that, contrary to claims by Democrats, the hacking may have been aimed at disrupting the election but was not intended to ensure the election of Donald Trump.

The allegations of Trump’s computer ties to the Russian bank were made in an article posted to the liberal Slate.com website.

But news that the FBI is now discounting any such ties coming on the heels of FBI Director Comey’s decision to open another investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal represents a double blow to the Democrats.

As part of the revelations, it was reported that earlier this year the FBI began investigating a possible connection between Trump and Alfa Bank, the largest private commercial bank in Russia. The Bureau was alerted to a series of electronic connections between a server owned by the Trump organization and two servers registered to Alfa Bank. The links were at first thought “questionable,” but after its long investigation the FBI determined, “there could be an innocuous explanation, like a marketing email or spam, for the computer contacts,” the Times reported.

The Trump campaign reiterated that the investigation had proven what they already knew.

Trump campaign press secretary Hope Hicks noted, “First of all, it’s not a secret server. The email server, set up for marketing purposes and operated by a third-party, has not been used since 2010.” Hicks added that the traffic on that server is not used for the sort of email communications that could be employed for any sort of collusion.

Alfa Bank also released a statement denying any ties to Trump.

“Neither Alfa Bank nor its principals, including Mikhail Fridman and Petr Aven, have or have had any contact with Mr. Trump or his organizations,” the statement read. “Fridman and Aven have never met Mr. Trump nor have they or Alfa Bank had any business dealings with him. Neither Alfa nor its officers have sent Mr. Trump or his organizations any emails, information or money. Alfa Bank does not have and has never had any special or exclusive internet connection with Mr. Trump or his entities.” 

Now it appears that the FBI has confirmed these statements.

EARLY VOTING: Results Are Showing TRUMP Is Going To DECIMATE Hillary


waving flagPosted on October 31, 2016

Looks like early voters have been good to Trump. Trump

fight

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

communications advisor Jason Miller said Trump has thousands of more early votes than Mitt Romney did during this point in the 2012 election. An excellent boost heading into election day.

By Katie McHugh

“I want to give you a couple of early voting, absentee voting successes we’ve seen,” Miller told SiriusXM host Matthew Boyle. “We can talk about polls… But let me tell you about real votes coming in now in Florida. Republican true battlenumbers at this point are a combination of absentee voting and early voting. Republican numbers are up seven percent, and Democrat numbers are down ten percent. So, what does that mean?”

“Usually, the Democrats will come out of early voting, pre-election voting ahead, but right now, we’re at a pace to be 100,000 votes closer than where Mitt Romney was four years ago,” Miller said.

CNN reports that in Florida, nearly three million voters have already cast their ballots. So far, registered Republicans lead Democrats by approximately 13,545 votes.

“Bounce up to North Carolina, where we just had our best day,” he said. “We had 79,000 people that showed up and voted on Friday for Mr. Trump, which is the best single day—well, Republicans showing up and voting, which I’ll assume are for Mr. Trump. Single individual best day of voting, even going back to 2012. We’ve narrowed the gap to where we’re 35,000 votes ahead of where the Republican ticket was four years ago.”Happy Happy Joy Joy

Professor Who Correctly Predicted Last 5 Elections Says This Candidate Will Win With ’87 Percent Certainty’


waving flagWritten by Philip Hodges

URL of the original posting site: http://eaglerising.com/37916/professor-who-correctly-predicted-last-5-elections-says-this-candidate-will-win-with-87-5-percent-certainty/

professor

If you go by the national polls, things aren’t looking promising for the Donald. A few polls have the Republican nominee down by 12 to 14 points. But in some key swing states, he seems to be doing fairly well, even taking the lead in some. And those local polls – especially in battleground states – are more important than the national polls.

If he can win the key swing states, that could generate the momentum he needs to sweep the rest of the country.

No matter which side people are on, they’re always going to think something is “rigged.” If Trump is down in the polls, his supporters will argue that the pollsters are rigging the question or messing with the sampling. If Trump is up, Hillary’s supporters will say the pollsters were obviously biased against Hillary and declare that the poll is rigged.

One political science professor who’s correctly predicted the winners of the last five presidential elections doesn’t go by the polls. His name is Helmut Norpoth, and he works at Stony Brook University in New York. iNews reports:

Using a statistical model based on previous election results, he is predicting that Mr Trump will triumph next month. Professor Norpoth told i: “My forecast says that he’s going to win 52.5 per cent of the two-party vote, that would give Hillary 47.5 per cent. I attach something like 87 per cent certainty that he’s going to win.”

Professor Norpoth admits that his prediction is not shared by many pollsters, with most showing Ms Clinton just ahead of Mr Trump – one by as many as 12 points. But he added: “My forecast is not poll-driven – I don’t live by the polls so I don’t die by the polls.”

It is to Mr Trump’s advantage that he represents a party which has been out of power for almost a decade, Professor Norpoth argues: “It’s very difficult for a party that’s been in the White House for two terms to get a third term, it’s not very common.” He added: “Obama openly won by about half the margin in 2012 compared to 2008 so that shows that the trajectory of the vote for the Democrats is down.”

Ms Clinton’s confidence could result in defeat, he claims. “I think that’s been a problem all along. She was complacent when she ran against Obama in 2008 and lost and I think she believes too much of the hype that she’s ahead in the polls.”

I think that most people – if not everyone – realize that this presidential election has been unlike any other in decades, considering Donald Trump’s rise. Lots of anti-establishment people have run for president, but none have made it as far as Donald Trump has. Maybe the old rules of predicting vote outcomes don’t apply this time around.fight

I’ve Had it!!!!!


waving flag New WhatDidYouSay LogoI am feeling a lot like Popeye right now. He would often say, “I’ve had all I can stands and I can stands no more.” Well, I’ve had all I can stands and I can stands no more about this ridiculous idiocy about Trump not committing to accepting the result of the vote.

picture2

klinton-kane-korruption-clinton-book-corrupt-together-427x600-copy

Image added by WHATDIDYOUSAY.org

only-you-copy

Image added by WHATDIDYOUSAY.org

WHOA: Well Respected Poll Has SHOCKING, Post Debate, Numbers – Are They REAL?


waving flagPublished on October 21, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/whoa-well-respected-poll-shocking-post-debate-numbers-real/

trump-clintonGuess who’s leading the polls now? Have these pollsters found something the others missed?

Rasmussen. Getting previous elections right gives them a certain credibility. For a reference point, some reviews of their past results will be included at the end of this piece.

What are the current findings?

Early results from their final debate are in, and Donald Trump remains barely ahead of Hillary Clinton in the White House Watch.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey of Likely U.S. Voters finds Trump with a 43% to 41% lead over his Democratic rival. Five percent (5%) favor Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson, while Green Party nominee Jill Stein earns three percent (3%) support. Another three percent (3%) like some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.

Yesterday, Trump was ahead by three.

Rasmussen Reports

Yes. Trump up by three. Is that what YOU are hearing on the news?propaganda machine

As for their historical accuracy?

Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen wrote in 2010 that Rasmussen has an “unchallenged record for both integrity and accuracy.”[41] Slate Magazine and The Wall Street Journal reported that Rasmussen Reports was one of the most accurate polling firms for the 2004 United States presidential election and 2006 United States general elections.[40][66][not in citation given] In 2004 Slate magazine “publicly doubted and privately derided” Rasmussen’s use of recorded voices in electoral polls. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were among the most accurate in the 2004 presidential election.[40] According to Politico, Rasmussen’s 2008 presidential-election polls “closely mirrored the election’s outcome.”[67]

At the end of the 2008 presidential election, there were eight national tracking polls and many other polls conducted on a regular basis. Polling analyst Nate Silver reviewed the tracking polls and said that while none were perfect, and Rasmussen was “frequently reputed to have a Republican lean”, the “house effect” in their tracking poll was small and “with its large sample size and high pollster rating [it] would probably be the one I’d want with me on a desert island.”[68]

In the January 2010 special election for the Senate seat from Massachusetts, Rasmussen Reports was the first to show that Republican Scott Brown had a chance to defeat Martha Coakley. Just after Brown’s upset win, Ben Smith at Politico reported, “The overwhelming conventional wisdom in both parties until a Rasmussen poll showed the race in single digits in early January was that Martha Coakley was a lock. (It’s hard to recall a single poll changing the mood of a race quite that dramatically.)”[69] A few days later, Public Policy Polling released the first poll showing Brown in the lead, a result differing from Rasmussen’s by 10 points.[70] Rasmussen’s last poll on the race found Coakley with a 2-point lead, when she in fact lost by 5 points, a 7-point error.[71]

Journalist Mickey Kaus said, “If you have a choice between Rasmussen and, say, the prestigious New York Times, go with Rasmussen.”[72] — Wikileaks

only-you-copy

IMAGE ADDED BY WHATDIDYOUSAY.ORG

Ann Coulter Letter: Hillary’s Advantage: The Media; Trump’s Advantage: The Issues


waving flagCommentary by  Ann Coulter  | 

Say, does anyone remember when Trump was the lightweight with no policy specifics”? I have an entire chapter in my book, In Trump We Trust: E Pluribus Awesome!, quoting media savants complaining about Trump’s lack of policy specifics,” interspersed, by date, with his major policy speeches and papers. At this point, the only “policy specific” Trump hasn’t given us is which company will supply rebar for the wall.

But now, the media’s entire campaign against Trump is to prevent him from talking about policy. They would rather talk about fat-shaming than trade, immigration and jobs. Sometimes, it seems like Trump is cheating by taking the vastly more popular side of every issue.

The official GOP used to send its candidates out with ankle weights, a 75-pound backpack and blinders. But Trump didn’t agree to take any staggeringly unpopular positions, however much the Business Roundtable loved them.

He’s against amnesty, for building a wall, against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, for Social Security, against the Iraq War and for extreme vetting of Muslim immigrants.

ignore-hillarys-lies-copyThat’s why the media have to change the subject to something flashy that will capture the attention of the most down-market, easily fooled voters. Trump is a groper!

The media’s interest in sex scandals goes back and forth, depending on their needs at the moment. When the last name of the perp is “Kennedy” or “Clinton,” they’re not interested. When it’s “the Duke lacrosse team”: Guilty.

The fact that a lacrosse team at an elite college had hired a couple of strippers, who — THANK GOD ALMIGHTY — turned out to be black, was all the evidence our media needed to conclude that the athletes had committed a gang-rape, based on centuries of entitlement.h-sup-pac-600-ci-copy

By contrast, when former U.S. senator John Edwards was cheating on his dying wife — while he was running for president, paying his mistress with campaign funds and lying to the American people about it, between lecturing us about morality with the unctuous sanctimony that passes for policy in the Democratic Party — the media primly refused to cover it. That is, until Edwards was out of the race, at which point the media refused to cover it because he wasn’t a candidate. (You guys are the best! I love the media.)

For more than a year, the National Enquirer had the entire Edwards story to itself. Finally, its reporters chased Edwards into a hotel bathroom at 2:40 in the morning, after having caught him spending the evening with his mistress and their love-child at the Beverly Hilton. At that moment, when the affair was plastered in photos all over the Enquirer, Los Angeles Times editor Tony Pierce emailed his bloggers, instructing them not to mention the “alleged affair,” explaining, “We have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations,” since “the only source has been the National Enquirer” — he might have added, “a vastly more interesting and accurate publication than the L.A. Times.”Leftist Propagandist

A few years passed, and suddenly we were back to Duke lacrosse standards of proof. As a rule of thumb, the only sex stories our media believe are the false ones.

Emma Sulkowicz, or “Mattress Girl,” claimed she had been raped by a fellow student at Columbia University and that college administrators refused to take action against her rapist. Columbia, to refresh your memory, is the institution that invited Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. University administrators are constantly changing mascot names and canceling traditional celebrations because some feminist yelps. But, somehow, Mattress Girl’s claim that administrators at Columbia turned a deaf ear to her brutal rape was completely believable to our media and political class. You could see the corporate recruiters lining up!

Among the many, many articles in The New York Times about brave Mattress Girl, art and culture writer Roberta Smith said her art project — carrying a mattress around campus to symbolize the weight carried by rape victims — raised “analogies” to Christ’s Stations of the Cross (especially to writers at the Times, where not a minute goes by without their thinking about the Passion).More Evidence

Mattress Girl made the Times’ “Quotation of the Day” for this humdinger: “I’ve never felt more shoved under the rug in my life.”

Even as the charges were unraveling, easily fooled U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand brought Mattress Girl as her special guest to President Obama’s State of the Union address. (If only Clinton had known it was possible to invite girls with mattresses to the State of the Union!) After Mattress Girl had spent a couple of years accepting awards, her alleged rapist finally released her texts to him, both before and after the alleged rape.

Here are a few from before the alleged rape:

“f**k me in the butt”

“I love youuuu”

And here are a few after:

“I wanna see yoyououoyou”

“I love you Paul. Where are you?!?!?!?!”

Unlike Trump’s secretly recorded hot-mic conversation 11 years ago, the Times never thought it worthwhile to quote any of Sulkowicz’s messages to Paul — much less on its front page, sans asterisks. The closest the Times came to acknowledging these texts was to delicately note that the two had “traded mutually affectionate messages.”Leftist Propagandist

Continuing the media’s winning streak, about the same time as Mattress Girl was sitting for her Smithsonian portrait, Rolling Stone’s Sabrina Rubin Erdely was all over the news, reaping accolades for a story about a gang-rape at the University of Virginia even more preposterous than the Duke lacrosse case.

Sadly for the media, the victim wasn’t black. But, on the other hand, the alleged perps were “frat boys.” (As far as our media are concerned, the lowest circle of hell is reserved for “frat boys.”)

Erdely was the toast of the town … until a few weeks later, when her story completely fell apart. Rolling Stone retracted the article, the Columbia Journalism Review investigated, and there are currently three defamation lawsuits proceeding against the magazine.

Now, the same people who brought us the Duke lacrosse case, Mattress Girl and the Rolling Stone abomination — but who discreetly left John Edwards’ sex scandal to the National Enquirer; Bill Clinton’s serial sexual assaults to private litigant Paula Jones; and the Kennedy family’s whoring to investigative journalists Seymour Hersh (30 years later) and Leo Damore (20 years later) — these are the people who tell us they’re pretty sure Donald Trump is a groper.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Three weeks before a major presidential election.

Trump has been a rich celebrity for 40 years, employing thousands of women, but this is the first time he has been seriously accused of any sexual impropriety. You will recall that, just this May, The New York Times conducted a major investigation into Trump’s treatment of women — and came up empty-handed.

Trump denies the allegations, but don’t expect a “Correction” like this one from the Chicago Tribune, dated Sept. 5, 1996: “In her Wednesday Commentary page column, Linda Bowles stated that President Clinton and the former campaign adviser Dick Morris both were ‘guilty of callous unfaithfulness to their wives and children.’ Neither man has admitted to being or been proven to have been unfaithful. The Tribune regrets the error.”Leftist Propagandist

Strangely, the allegations against Trump don’t even tell a larger story about the (apocryphal) “campus rape culture.” Trump’s not a member of the Duke lacrosse team. He isn’t a “frat boy.”

The only reason for these 11th-hour claims is that the ruling class doesn’t want voters thinking about the immigration policies, trade deals and wars that are destroying their way of life. Ever since Trump started raising the issues that no one else would, the media and the political class have done everything in their power to try to stop our movement.AMEN

They’re so close! Just four more years of importing the Third World at breakneck speed, and America will be O-ver.

Maybe it will work. And then six months after the election, Americans will realize they’ve been scammed by the media into giving away their country.Picture1

BONUS Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagAll In For Hillary

Monday October 17, 2016

The entire media complex and the Washington DC establishment, are at war with Donald Trump.

Media Against Trump / Revised A.F. Branco cartoon from 2015.

A.F. Branco 2017 Calendar <—- Order Here!

propaganda machine

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagFeel the Scorch

Tuesday October 18, 2016

Hillary and the media have been using a scorched earth strategy against Trump and the American people.

Hillary Scorched Earth / Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2016.

More A.F. Branco Cartoons at Net Right Daily.

A.F. Branco Coffee Table Book <—- Order Here!

Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Remember when Bill Clinton fought like hell to keep refugees out of his state?


waving flagAuthored October 17, 2016

Remember when Bill Clinton fought like hell to keep refugees out of his state?

And did so with a string of expletives that would make a Teamster blush. More on that latter.

When Wednesday night’s debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump rolls around, Trump may want to ask Clinton — who has threatened to increase the influx of refugees to the U.S. by 500% — about her husband’s very different stance when he was the governor of Arkansas in the 1980s.

Bubba vehemently protested President Jimmy Carter’s orders to house Cuban refugees in his state. Then-Cuban President Fidel Castro faced a bad economy in the country. Because of the country’s economic problems, he allowed 125,000 Cubans leave and go to America.

Carter, who at the time said Americans must welcome the refugees with “open arms,” told Clinton Arkansas’s Fort Chaffee should hold some of them. The fort had been used as a training and prisoner of war camp during World War II, holding almost 3,000 German POWs. In the late 70s, it served as a place to process Southeast Asia refugees and connect them with American sponsors. This time, Carter ordered Clinton to use it to house almost 20,000 Cuban refugees.

Publicly, it seemed that Clinton was in favor of the idea, telling Arkansans that the country “must accept our responsibility as the leader of the free world.” In private, Clinton objected and tried to get around it. He suggested to the White House that the Cubans be screened before entering the U.S. Those who did not pass screening could be housed elsewhere, he proposed.

“We still have a base at Guantanamo, don’t we?” Clinton said in his memoir “My Life.” “And there must be a gate in the fence that divides it from Cuba. Take them to Guantanamo, open the door, and march them back into Cuba.”

The White House dismissed his proposal and sent 20,000 refugees to Arkansas by May 20, much to the dismay of the locals. About six days after the refugees arrived, a “couple hundred” escaped from the fort and walked the streets chanting “Libertad! Libertad!”Do you want

Clinton spoke to Carter and “demanded that someone be given authority to keep the Cubans on the base.”

Lynn Merechka, a former guard at Fort Chaffee, spoke on the Travel Channel about the dismal conditions at the fort:

Some of these guys were in prison from the time they were 12 years old. And that’s all they knew was prison life. They had American people who would sponsor them to get them a job, a house, stuff like that. Once they figured out they weren’t going to leave, some of them got kind of desperate, saying ‘Hey, I just traded one prison for another.

According to Merechka, there were fights almost everyday and stabbings were a regular occurrence. One thousand Cubans rioted and escaped the fort June 1, 1980. They battled with the National Guard and State Police; in the end, 62 refugees had injuries and police arrested another 46.

Carter promised Clinton that he would not send more refugees after the riot, but a couple of months later, he called to inform Clinton that more refugees would be coming.Partyof Deceit Spin and Lies

Clinton asked for them to be placed elsewhere and exploded at the White House personnel who gave him the news, cursing a blue streak. “You’re f*cking me,” Clinton is on record as having screamed. “How could you do this to me? I busted my ass for Carter. You guys are gonna get me beat. I’ve done everything I could for you guys. This is ridiculous.”

He was right, but let’s see if his wife agrees that flooding the nation with refugees is ridiculous when the cameras are on her.

This report, by Amber Randall, was cross-posted by arrangement with the Daily Caller News Foundation.

VIRAL VIDEO: New Trump Video Is MELTING The Internet — You HAVE To See This


waving flagPosted on October 16, 2016

This is a hard hitting fan-made ad. You watch it, though, and you realize the importance of making Trump president. Share everywhere.

The newest Donald Trump video, created by his die-hard, patriotic, and passionate supporters, surpasses the meaning of the word “epic.” It is brutally honest in its depiction of what is actually going on in America and just how close we are to losing it all.

Hillary Clinton has frequently lambasted Donald Trump for painting a dark and scary view of our status as a nation. Trump is not engaging in some creative writing experiment—he is speaking the truth.

We see the riots, angst, poverty, intentionally sparked racial division, moral corruption, crumbling streets, and failing schools with our own eyes. Donald Trump is a wealthy man, but he did not hire actors to go out and fulfill scripted roles to depict a nation in trouble. We ARE a nation in trouble.

The nation is teetering on the brink of disaster on many fronts. It has taken decades to reach the boiling point, but we are there, folks.

The 2016 election will be the most important one of our lifetimes. We have one last chance to get it right, to get America back on track, and to make it resemble something the Founding Fathers would recognize.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FTrumpFanNetWork%2Fvideos%2F1304573902915562%2F&show_text=0&width=560

freedom combo 2

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon


waving flagBait and Switched

Friday October 14, 2016

Hillary doesn’t respect everyday Americans.

Hillary Everyday Americans / Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2016.

A.F. Branco 2017 Calendar <—- Order Here!

Hillary tryant

100,000 Pennsylvania Democrats Switch to Republican Party!


waving flagWritten by Philip Hodges

URL of the original posting site: http://eaglerising.com/37509/100000-pennsylvania-democrats-switch-to-republican-party/

pennsylvania

Republicans – particularly Trump’s supporters – are always talking about how the polls are either rigged by the pollsters, or they’re not accurate because they don’t include all the voters who are new to the voting process. They only survey likely voters based on previous data, and things have changed rather dramatically since then.

In Pennsylvania, nearly 100,000 (97,603) Democrats have switched over to the Republican Party this year alone.

On top of that, the Republican Party of Pennsylvania has seen over 243,000 new voters since November of last year.

How does this compare with the Democrats in the state? They’ve seen some switch-overs as well, but not to the extent that the Republicans have seen. They’ve seen just over 38,000 voters switch from Republican to Democrat.

“Enthusiasm is clearly on the side of the Republican Party of Pennsylvania this year,” Republican Party of Pennsylvania Chairman Rob Gleason said. “Republicans are making historic gains in voter registration in the Keystone State. As the last-minute registrations are processed, we’re confident we will see our Party grow even larger.

“Now, it is time to turn Republicans’ voter registration momentum into victory for Donald Trump and our entire Republican ticket this November.”

According to the Pennsylvania GOP, “the surge in Republican registrations is nearly twice the number of newly registered Republicans compared to both the 2008 and 2012 numbers combined.”

Most of the recent polls taken immediately after Trump’s 2005 derogatory comments surfaced show the Republican nominee’s numbers falling. Only one had him in a tie with his Democratic opponent.

Over the next few days, I imagine his support will inch back up, but is it possible – considering that many people are registering to vote for the first time – that these polls are leaving out a substantial number of voters? I guess we’ll have to wait until we vote in the only poll that actually matters on November 8 to find out.great-question

BOOM: The Difference Between Donald & Bill PERFECTLY Illustrated In One Meme


Published on October 13, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/boom-difference-donald-bill-perfectly-illustrated-one-meme/

What’s the difference between The Donald’s talk and Slick Willy’s actions? We have it summed up it right here:

donald-bill-meme

That perfectly encapsulates it.

‘Believe me.’

We’ve heard time and again that Bill isn’t running for President, and it’s unfair to use his actions against Hillary.

But, his actions were covered up by Hillary, and they (allegedly) haven’t stopped. What’s more, they may even be worse than what has been reported so far.

The potential ‘First Gentleman’ is certainly no gentleman at all. Despite repeated adultery, sexual assault, and rape allegations, Hillary continues to ‘stand by her man’ AND play the woman card. She is trying to have it both ways. She says that women who are victims of sexual assault have a right to be believed, but she stays married to Slick Willy.

That just doesn’t sit right with many female voters.

Alibi

Words Versus Deeds


waving flagCommentary by  Thomas Sowell | 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2016/10/12/words-versus-deeds/

Donald Trump’s gutter talk about women shows yet again that he is bad news. The problem is that Hillary Clinton is far worse. Trump’s talk is indefensible. But Hillary Clinton’s actions as Secretary of State, carrying out the Obama administration’s foreign policies, have cost many lives in many places, including the American ambassador and others killed in Benghazi. 

Women have a right to be offended by Trump’s words. But women have suffered a far worse fate from Secretary Clinton’s and President Obama’s actions. Pulling American troops out of Iraq, despite military advice to the contrary, led to the sudden rise of ISIS and their seizing of many women and young girls as sex slaves.RAPE

A message from one of these women urged the bombing of ISIS. She said she would rather be dead than live the life of a sex slave. Some women who tried to commit suicide and failed have been tortured for trying.picture1

Meanwhile, President Obama tried to downplay ISIS with flippant words, by calling them the junior varsity. His half-hearted, foot-dragging military response has allowed ISIS to parade before the world as triumphant conquerors, appealing to disgruntled people in Western countries to carry out terrorist attacks in support of their cause.picture1

That is a lot worse than some stupid and gross words by Donald Trump, which even he has had to repudiate. Make no mistake about it. Neither party has a good candidate for President. The choice is between bad and disastrous.

Are women more in danger from Trump’s words or Hillary’s actions?

Are Americans in general more in danger from Trump’s shallowness on issues or Hillary’s ruthless grabs for money and power — a track record that goes all the way back to the days when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas?or a liar

Mrs. Clinton’s own announced agenda attacks the very foundation of American Constitutional government, on which Americans’ own freedom depends. She has already said that she will appoint Supreme Court justices who will specifically overturn a recent Supreme Court decision, “Citizens United versus FEC.” That decision said that both corporations and labor unions have freedom of speech, including the right to contribute money toward political campaigns. Hillary Clinton’s determination to pick judicial appointees on the basis of their willingness to overturn that decision is a more brazen extension of the political left’s other attempts to stifle the free speech of those who oppose their agenda.hillary-puppet-master-copy

Demands that various advocacy organizations reveal the names of all their donors are an obvious attempt to scare off those donors, with harassment by everyone from vandals to rioters to the Internal Revenue Service and other government bureaucrats.

Without the right to free speech, none of the other rights is safe. Government officials can get away with all sorts of abuses, if others are not free to talk about those abuses.

Despite Hillary Clinton’s claims to be a champion for black people, her political agenda threatens the education of black children, the employment of black adults and the physical safety of black communities.

Mrs. Clinton is on the side of the teachers’ unions that want to stop the expansion of charter schools, even though these are among the very few places where black children can get a quality education to prepare them for a better future. Here, as with other issues, her public statements are contradicted by her actions.

No law has done more damage to the employment prospects of young blacks than the federal minimum wage law. But nothing is easier, or more popular, than for some politician to raise the minimum wage — despite the fact that unemployment rates among black young people have skyrocketed to several times what they were before. You don’t get any wage at all when you are unemployed. And if you are young and unemployed, you don’t get any job experience to help you rise up the ladder, when you don’t get on the ladder.picture1

As for safety in the black community, Hillary Clinton has allied herself with those who demonize the police. The net result has been a sharp increase in the number of blacks killed by other blacks, as criminal elements take control of the streets when the police are not allowed to.Epidemic of racism

Do you choose a President by talk — or by actions and consequences?great-question

Ann Coulter Letter: Casting Call For Another Anita Hill


waving flagCommentary by  Ann Coulter  | 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2016/10/13/casting-call-for-another-anita-hill/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

*Please note graphic language throughout the column.*

Donald Trump is the only hope to save America, so the media have gone to war to stop him. They don’t care about being exposed as lying, hypocritical swine — I’d describe them more fully, but it would require locker room talk. They’ll win the public back later. Right now, all that matters is stopping Trump.

The same media that are pretending to consider the use of a bad word equivalent to rape don’t give a fig about real rape, real sexual assault, real whoring, even real homicide, depending on who did it.

  • JFK was an STD-infected drug addict who cavorted with whores at the White House, but the media ferociously hid all this from the public, publishing fairy-tale versions of his presidency as “Camelot.”
  • And what happened to the 11-year rule? Trump said the word “p*ssy” 11 years ago, in a secretly recorded conversation. Eleven years before Sen. Teddy Kennedy ran for president, he killed a girl — but he ran, not only without apology, but, indeed, as the Conscience of the Democratic Party.
  • Throughout 2009, good, decent Americans who happened to oppose Obamacare were called the name of a gay sex act hundreds of times on TV — and that was just on MSNBC. CNN’s Anderson Cooper made the reference explicit when he giggled, “It’s hard to talk when you’re tea-bagging.” Among the people using this sexual slur were distinguished members of Congress such as U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez and Rep. Barney Frank. Were they fit to hold office?

Going way, way, way back to a few weeks ago, the same media gasping in horror at “p*ssy” sure didn’t mind my being called a c*nt repeatedly on a Comedy Central broadcast. And when I say “didn’t mind,” I mean they thought it was awesome.

But saying “p*ssy” 11 years ago is over the line.

Cut the crap, media.

A few years ago, Sen. Al Franken joked on a Comedy Central roast about producer Rob Reiner butt-f*cking his children. Does Hillary think he’s fit to be a U.S. senator? Is he fit enough for the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, but not the Senate Finance Committee?

None of these were leaks of secretly recorded conversations — considered a hanging offense in the Clinton years. These vulgarities were intentionally, publicly broadcast by the same media that, today, pretend to need smelling salts after hearing “p*ssy.”

At least this new puritanical standard explains why rappers like Jay Z are banned from the White House. Wait — what?

Perhaps realizing their Victorian virgin act wasn’t cutting it, the media turned to their Pretend We Don’t Understand English method of argument, and claimed that Trump was confessing to having committed a “sexual assault”!

Trump said: “When you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do any of that. (Laughter.)” Journalists turned this into “sexual assault” by being literal on the “grab” part, non-figurative on the “you” part — and on the “they let you do it” part? Stone, cold deaf.

If “they let you do it,” it’s not an assault.

Like most of Trump’s bragging, his loutish boast was not intended to be taken seriously, nor was it. Far from whipping out his pencil and carefully taking notes, “Access Hollywood”‘s Billy Bush laughed. The gist of what Trump was saying is that — hold onto your hats! — women like to sleep with celebrities! I don’t know if you’ve heard that before.

At least we’re back to the media pretending to care about sexual assault — until further notice.

This is the same media that ran interference for an actual sexual predator in the White House, ignoring Bill Clinton’s serial pants-dropping, groping and raping for nearly a decade, while gleefully vilifying his accusers, and would have been happy to continue if Bill Richardson had become president. Clinton talking about p*ssy was one of his more dignified moments, proudly attested to by his friend Vernon Jordan in a nationally broadcast interview with Mike Wallace.

  • In the pages of The New York Times, feminist icon Gloria Steinem announced the “one-free grope” rule, specially developed for the Clinton era.
  • Former Time magazine correspondent Nina Burleigh said of Clinton, “I would be happy to give him a bl*w job just to thank him for keeping abortion legal.”
  • Time magazine’s Margaret Carlson said Linda Tripp had “lost membership in the family of man” for secretly tape-recording Monica Lewinsky. Tripp kept the recordings not for something so exalted as stopping Trump, but to protect herself from a charge of perjury.

Even when the law began to close in on the horny hick — midway through the second term he won because of the media’s heroic self-censorship — the rest of us had to spend a year listening to liberals say “Guys like bl*w jobs,” “Everybody does it” and “Let’s move on.”

When Clinton was credibly accused of rape by Juanita Broaddrick, NBC strategically held the story — until a week after the Senate had voted in the rapist’s impeachment trial. All the public could do was helplessly sport “Free Lisa Myers” buttons, referring to the investigative reporter who got the interview.

Explaining NBC’s incomprehensible decision to hold its own investigative report, Myers told Broaddrick: “The good news is you’re credible. The bad news is that you’re very credible.”

At least NBC ran the story eventually. The name “Juanita Broaddrick” never crossed the lips of “CBS Evening News” anchor Dan Rather.

Asked by FNC’s Bill O’Reilly why he never got around to mentioning that the commander in chief was, more likely than not, a rapist, Rather said, “When the charge has something to do with somebody’s private sex life, I would prefer not to run any of it.”

So according to our media, committing a rape is “somebody’s private sex life,” but using a bad word is rape.

Poor Billy Bush has to be fired from NBC’s “Today” show so the media can pretend that Trump’s using bawdy language is a very, very serious offense. Meanwhile, Billy’s ex-president uncle and cousin openly fraternize with the rapist. The second President Bush calls Bill Clinton his “brother from another mother” and praises Clinton’s “character” — something even Clinton’s defenders never did with a straight face.

Now the networks are holding casting calls for some loon willing to falsely accuse Trump of sexual assault, so they can hype it like the Duke lacrosse case, Mattress Girl and Rolling Stone’s fraternity rape. Unfortunately — for us, fortunately for the media — by the time the truth comes out, the election will be over.propaganda machine

LMAO: TV Star Says ‘I’d Rather Be Grabbed By The P-SSY Than GOVERNED By One’


waving flagPublished on October 12, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/lmao-tv-star-says-id-rather-grabbed-p-ssy-governed-one/

Katie Hopkins, former Apprentice UK contestant, now columnist, wrote a piece for the Daily Mail titled: ‘So Trump is (a very flawed) human – big deal. I’d rather be grabbed by the p**** than governed by one’. She starts by saying it is difficult to listen to, but it was Trump bragging. He was being the ‘Alpha Male of the Media Pack’. The ‘mass hysteria’ that has followed isn’t to scale with the event itself.

People have said that his comments ‘condone’ sexual assault. So far, though, not one woman has come forward to say that he ‘grabbed them by the p****’. If that happens, then the outrage is justified. Trump is flawed, (as we all are,) but many critics get on their high horse and condemn him for his words.

*cough*Anderson Cooper*cough*

Trump’s lewd talk offers ‘virtuous’ men the perfect platform to parade their feminist credentials.

John Oliver from Last Week Tonight slammed both Trump’s vulgar comments and the GOP’s lame reaction to them, calling Trump ‘one giant, salivating, dick-size-referencing, pussy-grabbing warthog in a red power tie’.

Sportsmen are falling over themselves to say their locker-room talk is nothing of the sort. That they never talk about women in this way……But for all the outrage and desertion I cannot say I am offended.

What he said was crude. But no worse than I heard on a train to work this morning, when two male managers were discussing their working trip to Vegas and their shared motto, ‘Never screw the payroll’, salivating over their memories of a woman who had indulged both of them, one laughing that ‘she was young enough to have been his daughter’, mentioning his child by name.

No worse than young women happily swiping right on Tinder, prostituting themselves for shared pleasure to a face on a screen — just bodies pleasing themselves, with only a side-swipe for permission.

Or politicians indulging themselves with rent boys, permission through payment; or Bill Clinton getting light relief from Monica in the Oval Office, permission through power.

Or the 74% of American men who would have an affair if they wouldn’t get caught, permission through secrecy.

Or the 1 in 5 Brits who say they have had an affair. Or those who go dogging in public toilets or are admitted to ER with an umbrella up their backside.

And certainly no worse than the Hillary-voting, smug rape-culture rappers who like to hang out at the Obama White House while peddling vile lyrics to kids that would make Trump blush.

And I am not concerned by any of this. If anything, I hope they all had a jolly good time. These are people’s personal preferences. What any of us chooses to do in private is entirely our own affair. As I readily acknowledge, I have indulged in a few ‘preferences’ of my own.

But how can we harbor our own sticky secrets and sling mud at another? How can we act shocked at a conversation about grabbing a woman without permission, when the very modern form of permission is money, power or a casual swipe right?……How casual we have become. And before you tell me, ‘Yes, but I am not running for President’ — neither was Donald. He was a businessman and reality TV show host when he had that private conversation in 2005. The idea of standing for election wasn’t even a twinkle in his roving eye.

But he became a man so sick of the system and its failure to get things done that he decided to stand up for the little man. To use his own money to fund his campaign. To try to give voice to those fed up with the Establishment telling them what to do, lining its own pockets all the while.

Donald Trump made it as the Republican candidate for President against all the odds. Because the average American shared his fatigue with politicians saying one thing and doing quite another, and was afraid of another four years of liberal politics losing control of immigration, the Supreme Court and the Second Amendment.

It will be a cruel irony if the very thing that sees Trump lose this election is that he has human flaws just like the rest of us.AMEN

If he fails, it will be he failed to be duplicitous enough to be part of the Establishment regular Americans simply cannot stand. Read more: Daily Mail

Trump’s words were just words. Obama, Hillary, Kaine… they are soft. Clint Eastwood called out the ‘P*ssy Generation’, and those are the votes the Democrats want.

The US should be ‘Pussified’ according to their worldview.

FRANKLIN GRAHAM: Weighs In On Trump’s Sex Comments From 2005 – You’ll Be SHOCKED!


waving flagPublished on October 10, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/franklin-graham-weighs-trumps-sex-comments-2005-youll-shocked/

Franklin Graham isn’t timid. He speaks his mind and is unapologetic about his faith. He even held a ‘Decision America Tour’ ahead of the Presidential Campaign, insisting that America needs a ‘moral revival’ or it will fall.

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FFranklinGraham%2Fposts%2F1271741769548668&width=500

Here is the full text of his Facebook post:

The crude comments made by Donald J. Trump more than 11 years ago cannot be defended. But the godless progressive agenda of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton likewise cannot be defended. I am not endorsing any candidates in this election. I have said it throughout this presidential campaign, and I will say it again—both candidates are flawed. The only hope for the United States is God. Our nation’s many sins have permeated our society, leading us to where we are today. But as Christians we can’t back down from our responsibility to remain engaged in the politics of our nation. On November 8th we will all have a choice to make. The two candidates have very different visions for the future of America. The most important issue of this election is the Supreme Court. That impacts everything. There’s no question, Trump and Clinton scandals might be news for the moment, but who they appoint to the Supreme Court will remake the fabric of our society for our children and our grandchildren, for generations to come.AMEN

Tag Cloud