Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘FOX News’

Tucker Carlson Loses Big-Name Sponsors Over His ‘Black Lives Matter’ Stance


Reported By Randy DeSoto | Published June 11, 2020 at 2:54pm

Fox News host Tucker Carlson lost some high-profile advertisers over comments he made earlier this week after he contended the current protests are “definitely not about black lives.”

The advertisers who have announced they are pulling ads from “Tucker Carlson Tonight” include ABC, whose parent company is Disney, T-Mobile and Papa John’s Pizza.

In a segment that aired on Monday, Carlson said, “No matter what they tell you, it has very little to do with black lives. If only it did.”

“If Democratic leaders cared about saving the lives of black people — and they should — they wouldn’t ignore the murder of thousands of black men in their cities every year.”

“They wouldn’t put abortion clinics in black neighborhoods,” Carlson said. “They would instead do their very best to improve the public schools and to encourage intact families.”

Carlson argued that Democratic leaders don’t even try to make these changes that would improve the lives of African-Americans.

“This may be a lot of things, this moment we are living through, but it is definitely not about black lives and remember that when they come for you, and at this rate, they will,” he concluded.

“At a moment like this, there is no advantage in cowardice,” Carlson said. “Tell the truth. And the truth is this is a good country, better than any other. Of course, we are flawed, but we are trying, unlike most places, and we have nothing to be ashamed of.”

Disney confirmed to Deadline that it will not be placing ads on “Tucker Carlson Tonight” going forward, noting that a third-party buyer secured the spots in the first place.

T-Mobile tweeted that it had not run ads on Carlson’s show since early May, but has canceled future ads.

“We will continue to support those who stand against racial injustice,” the tweet read.


T-Mobile

@TMobile

Of course. We haven’t run ads on Tucker Carlson Tonight since early May and have cancelled all future placements. We will continue to support those who stand against racial injustice.

2,241 people are talking about this

T-Mobile CEO Mike Sievert also chimed in, tweeting, “Bye-bye, Tucker Carlson!”

Sherlock Ohms@SherlockOhms

Why do you still sponsor Tucker Carlson. I watched him for the last time last night. Vile

Mike Sievert

@MikeSievert

Same. We aren’t running ads on that show and we won’t be running ads on that show in the future. Bye-bye, Tucker Carlson!

789 people are talking about this


The self-described anti-bigotry advocacy group Sleeping Giants responded to T-Mobile’s announcement, encouraging the company to pull all advertising from Fox News, given the network “continues to push this type of rhetoric.”

In a statement to Bloomberg, Papa John’s said it will no longer be advertising on any opinion-based programs like “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

Fox News spokesperson told Bloomberg that all the ads and revenue pulled from Carlson’s show have been moved by advertisers to other programs on FNC.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Made In China

This Chinese virus originated in the Wuhan Lab while the World Health Organization Lied and Biden with the media blamed Trump.
Coronavirus Made In ChinaPolitical cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2020.
See Fox News article and cartoon >>> HERE

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and has had his toons tweeted by President Trump.

Shocking Fox News Impeachment Poll Debunked by New York Post


Posted By Paul Duke | 

Donald Trump’s last few weeks in office have been quite eventful, to say the least, as House Democrats continue on their push to possibly impeach the 45th President of these United States.

He has weathered this storm before, or at least something fairly similar in the form of Robert Mueller’s “Russia Gate” conspiracy theory.  This time, during the newly christened “Ukraine Gate” scandal, Trump has a much simpler story to massage, free from the nuanced nonsense of Mueller’s probe.

Still, the mainstream media has done a fairly stout job of pinning trouble on Trump during this go-round, even coercing an ugly, impeachment-favoring poll out of Fox News – the shock of which was touted ad nauseam over the weekend in an effort to snowball its results  into something tangible for the liberal left.

The poll itself is coming under some scrutiny, however.

The New York Post released an analysis Saturday, which found Fox News had “mispresented” their poll, suggesting a majority of Americans supported impeachment of President Donald Trump.

Fox News released a poll this week which found that 51 percent of registered voters want President Trump impeached and removed from office, while 4 percent want Trump impeached but want him to stay in office, and 40 percent of voters oppose impeachment. The Fox News poll found that supposedly showed a double-digit increase in the number of voters who wanted Trump impeached and removed from office.

But is that really the case?

However, according to a New York Post analysis, Fox News misrepresented Americans’ alleged support for impeachment.

Braun Research, the pollster firm that conducted the survey, noted that 48 percent of its respondents were Democrats; however, the Post revealed that the “actual breakdown” based on party affiliation is 31 percent Democrat, 29 percent Republican, and 38 percent independent.

The Post noted that, when weighting the poll for party affiliation, would have revealed that only 44.9 percent of Americans, or less than a majority, back impeachment of President Trump. Forty-four percent of Americans oppose impeachment, according to the Post‘s analysis.

As President Trump would say:  “FAKE NEWS!”.

Today’s TWO Politically INCORRECT Cartoons by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – Tech Threat

The liberal elites want you looking at the phony Russia Collusion hoax while hoping you ignore the real “collusion” of high tech and the left.

Google Democrat CollusionPolitical Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

A.F. Branco Cartoon – Two Faced

No one recalls Shepard Smith of Fox News shedding a single tear over illegal immigrants dying during the Obama Administration, but a different story with Trump in office.

Shepard Smith Phony TearsNo one recalls Shepard Smith of Fox News shedding a single tear over illegal immigrants dying during the Obama Administration, but a different story with Trump in office. Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.
See more Conservative Daily News cartoons here

Donations/Tips accepted and appreciated –  $1.00 – $5.00 – $10 – $100 –  it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into the cartoons that have been seen all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, the great El Rushbo, and most recently President Trump.

Actual Descendant of Pocahontas Speaks Out on Elizabeth Warren’s DNA Test – ‘I Feel Betrayed’


Reported By Steven Beyer | October 17, 2018 at 10:20am

A descendant of the famed 17th-century Powhatan princess Pocahontas spoke out against Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test results Tuesday on Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight,” saying she felt “betrayed” by the senator’s claims of Native American ancestry.

Host Carlson asked Debbie White Dove Porreco about the Massachusetts Democrat’s test results, saying, “You’ve watched Elizabeth Warren, once again, put herself at the head of the ‘Me Sioux’ movement, and come out with this DNA test which you called for. Now that we have the results, what’s your response?”

“Well, first of all, I’m so glad she ended up taking one,” Porrecco said, “and it did prove that she wasn’t the Cherokee Indian that she’s been claiming to be for so long.”

“How did that make you feel as a descendant of Pocahontas?” Carlson asked. “Cultural appropriation is often in the news. Do you think she’s guilty of it?”

Porrecco replied, “Well, I think she’s guilty of claiming she’s been American Indian but (has) no proof, and using it for applications, for college, for political reasons.

“And that was all wrong, that she did that this whole time.”

Carlson then asked her how she felt about Warren being called the “first female faculty member of color” at Harvard.

“I feel betrayed,” Porrecco said, “because she wasn’t. She was using the name, trying to be American Indian just to rise above.”

She went on to say that Warren’s claim of being American Indian took away “benefits” from the American Indians that belonged to them.

Carlson asked Porrecco if other Native Americans felt the same way she did.

She responded, “I do. I think they feel betrayed. They feel disappointed, you know. I think at this point, she needs to come back and apologize to everybody for what she’s done.”

“Yes,” Carlson said, “I think that’s right.

Porrecco, however, isn’t the only Native American to speak out after Warren released her DNA test results on Monday. Chuck Hoskin Jr., the Cherokee Nation’s secretary of state, said in a statement Monday that “Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.”

Additionally, Hoskin said, “A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America.”

Using a DNA test to prove that you have a connection to the Cherokee or any other tribal nation, Hoskin noted, is “inappropriate and wrong.”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Steven is a husband, father, and follower of Jesus. You can find him enjoying listening to or playing jazz piano, enjoying the Disney parks, or hiking the Arizona landscape.

Lindsey Graham Pulls Out Piece of Paper, Issues Incredible Challenge to Chuck Schumer


Reported By Benjamin Arie | October 7, 2018 at

7:19pm

Lindsey Graham is on a roll. For years, he was seen by many Republicans as sort of “conservative lite,” a fairly moderate politician who wasn’t particularly passionate or exciting. All that seems to have changed with the Brett Kavanaugh kerfuffle. The South Carolina senator appears to have taken a few classes in cool, and his heartfelt defense of the embattled Supreme Court nominee caught the attention of conservatives everywhere.

On Sunday, Graham kept that energy going. During an appearance on Chris Wallace’s much-watched program, the senator issued a direct challenge to his Democrat counterpart in the Senate.

As the cameras rolled, Graham held up a piece of paper that listed all of the names on President Trump’s shortlist for the Supreme Court.

“There are twenty-something people on this list,” the Republican challenged Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. “Name five, name three, name one that would be okay with you.”

His point was clear: The last-minute attempt to block and smear Kavanaugh had nothing to do with that nominee specifically. Instead, Democrats are intent on obstructing any of Trump’s potential nominees, all of whom are well-respected names. Kavanaugh just happened to have drawn the short straw.

The senator pushed back against liberals who are pretending that the newest Supreme Court member is some sort of far-right radical.

“Brett Kavanaugh was a mainstream judge,” Graham explained, according to The Daily Caller.

“I would’ve chosen him if I had been president, Bush supported him, everybody running for president on our side believe that Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch were outstanding conservative jurists,” the senator continued.

Graham was just getting warmed up. He pointed out that when Democrats held the White House, Republicans didn’t try to derail all of their Supreme Court picks … yet that is exactly what the left is doing now at every opportunity.

“So, Chuck, if you want someone new? Look at this list and see anybody you agree to, but what you want to do, Senator Schumer, is to overturn the election,” the Republican challenged.

“If you want to pick judges, then you need to win the White House. When Obama won, I voted for two judges that he picked,” Graham continued.

Those two judges, of course, were Kagan and Sotomayor, both women. A number of Republicans, including Graham, voted for them.

“So Chuck Schumer, name one person on this list you think is acceptable,” Graham challenged.

The South Carolina senator is right: Liberals want to have it both ways. They whine about civility and bipartisanship, but then act shockingly uncivil and refuse to extend olive branches at every turn.

Dragging a family man and widely-respected judge through the mud for political reasons may be a new low point in American politics. The American people are paying close attention … and like Senator Graham, they’re quickly losing patience for these antics.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Benjamin Arie has been a political junkie since the hotly contested 2000 election. Ben settled on journalism after realizing he could get paid to rant. He cut his teeth on car accidents and house fires as a small-town reporter in Michigan before becoming a full-time political writer.

Cohen’s Lawyer Has 1 Shot on Live TV, Accidentally Sends People to Trump’s Website


Reported By Jared Harris | August 22, 2018 at 5:39pm

Editor’s Note: Fox News reported that the website mentioned by Michael Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis, directed users to President Donald Trump’s campaign website. However, it now redirects visitors to a GoFundMe page for President Trump’s border wall. 

Lanny Davis is not having a good day.

On top of having to convince people his client Michael Cohen is ‘committed’ to the truth, he was apparently also tasked with raising his own paycheck.

On Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom,” Lanny preached Cohen’s love of everything true. “He’s committed to telling the truth.”

“We’ve actually set up a website with the name ‘truth’ in it, called michaelcohentruth.com, and he’s looking for help from people who want to give donations to help him uh… tell the truth.”

There’s only one problem. Typing michaelcohentruth.com in your browser takes you to a GoFundMe page for President Donald Trump’s border wall.

Better not cash that paycheck just yet, Lanny.

//video.foxnews.com/v/video-embed.html?video_id=5825364878001&loc=westernjournal.com&ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.westernjournal.com%2Fct%2Fcohens-lawyer-1-shot-live-tv-accidentally-sends-people-trumps-website%2F&_xcf=

Watch the latest video at <a href=”http://www.foxnews.com”>foxnews.com</a><br />

Where did it all go so wrong?

Lanny did the math. Fox has a huge number of viewers, so it would be a perfect place to promote the website. With possibly millions watching, what could go wrong?

Lanny gave a typical lawyer interview and was a courteous professional. Everybody wants to donate to those guys.

But despite doing everything right, our lovable lawyer failed to take a crucial step: visiting the website you’re planning to promote.

It’s a deceptively simple concept, one that 7 years at Yale never prepared him for.

Nobody noticed the website despite it being mentioned twice, and it was not corrected in the interview.

Before the questions get a little more aggressive and Lanny gets a little more frustrated, he was able to get one more confusing jab in.

“When Rudy Giuliani says ‘truth isn’t truth,’ you just heard Donald Trump reverse truth and make it into a falsehood.”

“It’s classic,” Lanny said, shaking his head with a chuckle. “Classic.”

You got that one right, Lanny.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 

Slow Death: CNN Dropped Below “Pawn Stars” Channel in Ratings


Reported By Ben Marquis | August 20, 2018 at 4:44pm

By now it has become predictable old news to hear that Fox News Channel defeated their cable news rivals CNN and MSNBC in the weekly ratings, as they have finished number one out of the big three in total average viewers per day for 31 consecutive weeks, according to Adweek.

Nor is it a surprise to hear that Fox beat their rivals in prime time viewership either, as they have done so for 11 consecutive weeks now.

What is somewhat surprising, and incredibly laughable, is that CNN — the formerly vaunted crown jewel of the establishment media — has sunk so low in the ratings that they are losing out to other basic cable networks in terms of prime time viewers, networks with decidedly less important topics to air than the serious news of the day.

The Daily Caller noted that while Fox ranked number one in total prime time viewers for the week of August 6-12 — 2.18 million viewers on the average evening — and were followed closely by MSNBC — 1.75 million viewers — both were trailed significantly by CNN, which averaged only 992,000 viewers during the prime time hours.

That placed CNN at seventh on the list, behind such basic cable networks as Home and Garden Television (1.33 million), USA Network (1.25 million), the History Channel (1.06 million) and TBS Network (1.02 million).

Essentially, CNN’s prime time stars like Anderson Cooper and Chris Cuomo are drawing fewer viewers than History Channel shows such as “Pawn Stars,” “American Pickers,” “Counting Cars,” “Mountain Men,” and perhaps funniest of all, “Ancient Aliens.”

Indeed, it would appear that more Americans would prefer to watch people haggle over the price of obscure antiques and old cars — or dive into the conspiracy theory of intelligent aliens visiting ancient civilizations on earth to help build the pyramids and teach them other civilization-building knowledge — than watch Cooper or Cuomo prattle on about Russians or bash the Trump administration on a daily basis.

Some of our readers who frequent social media have likely seen the memes of “Ancient Aliens” crazy-haired star Giorgio Tsoukalos stating “I’m not saying it was aliens, but it was aliens.”

That meme has recently been transformed in light of the ratings news to now feature Cooper or Cuomo stating, “I’m not saying it was the Russians, but it was probably the Russians.”

It is worth noting that while CNN lost out to the History Channel during prime time hours, the media outlet did manage to beat the History Channel in terms of total day viewers — 674,000 to 548,000. That means that at least some day time viewers seem to prefer watching CNN compare the current administration to Nazis than watching documentaries on actual Nazis during WWII.

So there is that, I guess, that CNN has going for them. Now if only CNN can find a way to woo viewers away from Nickelodeon, HGTV and Investigation Discovery … but they’d still be trailing Fox and MSNBC during the day.

It is also worth pointing out that while Adweek had noted that number one Fox News had seen a slight decline in its total numbers over last year — down 4 percent in total day viewers and down 18 percent among the key 25-54 demographic — CNN saw an even greater decline in their viewer numbers over last year.

Indeed, CNN’s daytime total was off by 13 percent and they fell by 23 percent in terms of the key 25-54 demographic of viewers that advertisers are so fond of.

We are witnessing the slow death of the overtly biased liberal media — which isn’t confined simply to TV, as formerly widely-read legacy newspapers have also seen immense drops in their numbers. This decline has been brought about their own actions, and no amount of kicking and screaming about Russia, Trump is Hitler or racism everywhere is going to save them.

Reporting the news in a straight-forward and objective manner is the only remedy that will save them now, but that might as well be buried beneath an alien spacecraft hidden inside a pyramid or tucked away on the back shelf of a pawn shop, given the media’s continued lurch leftward in spite of their plummeting ratings.

Breaking: Trump Pulls Out of Summit with North Korea, ‘Sad Moment in History’


disclaimerReported By Rebekah Baker | May 24, 2018 at 7:52am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/breaking-trump-pulls-out-of-summit-with-north-korea-sad-moment-in-history/

President Donald Trump announced Thursday morning that his highly anticipated meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has been canceled. The president pointed to Kim’s “hostility” displayed in the past month as the reason why going forward with the summit would be “inappropriate.”

Earlier this month, Kim had threatened to pull out of the meeting with Trump set to be held in Singapore on June 12 and also abruptly canceled a meeting with South Korea.

 

“Based on the tremendous anger and open hostility displayed in your most recent statement, I feel it is inappropriate, at this time, to have this long-planned meeting,” Trump wrote. “Therefore, please let this letter serve to represent that the Singapore summit, for the good of both parties, but to the detriment of the world, will not take place.”

tletter01tletter02

Leading up to Trump’s decision, North Korean officials had been threatening to not go through with the summit.

On Thursday, Vice Minister of the North Korean Foreign Ministry, Choe Son Hui, said that whether the U.S. “will meet us at a meeting room or encounter us at nuclear-to-nuclear showdown is entirely dependent upon the decision and behavior of the United States,” according to South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency.

Choe also made a disparaging comment about Vice President Mike Pence who had said that North Korea asked to have the meeting.

“As a person involved in the U.S. affairs, I cannot suppress my surprise at such ignorant and stupid remarks gushing out from the mouth of the U.S. vice president,” Choe reportedly said.

According to Fox News, however, Trump officials said the threat of nuclear war, not the insult to Pence, was the reason for the summit pullout.

“I felt a wonderful dialogue was building between you and me, and ultimately, it is only that dialogue that matters. Some day, I look very much forward to meeting you,” Trump wrote in his letter to Kim.

“If you change your mind having to do with this most important summit, please do not hesitate to call me or write. The world, and North Korea in particular, has lost a great opportunity for lasting peace and great prosperity and wealth. This missed opportunity is a truly sad moment in history.”

On Monday, Pence noted in an interview with Fox News that unlike former presidential administrations, Trump will not be “played” by North Korea.

“Truthfully, the Clinton administration, even the Bush administration got played in the past,” Pence said.  “It would be a great mistake for Kim Jong Un to think he could play Donald Trump.”

Pence also made clear that Trump was completely willing to walk away from the negotiating table if North Korea backs away from its promises.

“There’s no question,” he said.

When asked whether Trump was concerned about the possible embarrassment that could result if this process with North Korea fails after so much progress, Pence replied, “I don’t think President Truplease likeand share and leave a commentmp is thinking about public relations. He’s thinking about peace.”

 

Ex-US Attorney: Obama CIA Chief Led Operation To Frame Trump


disclaimerReported By Ben Marquis | May 16, 2018 at 2:16pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/obama-cia-chief-led-frame-trump/

 

The Trump campaign/Russian collusion narrative — which led to special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation — has been steadily unraveling in recent weeks. Despite a year long investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election, no credible evidence of collusion with the Trump campaign has been found, and the “evidence” and intelligence that has been offered up appears to be false and manufactured.

Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova spoke about that and other recent developments during an appearance on Fox News with Laura Ingraham on Tuesday night, and cast the blame on the operation, which he viewed as a set up to frame President Donald Trump, on former Obama administration CIA Director John Brennan. 

“It was abundantly clear that there was no legitimate basis even for a counter intelligence investigation, let alone a criminal investigation,” DiGenova said.

“It is quite obvious that John Brennan was at the head of the group of people who were going to create a counter intelligence investigation against Trump by creating false information that was going to be fed through Carter Page, and fed through George Papadopoulos so that it would be picked up, reported back to Washington and provide the basis for a counter, a fake, counter intelligence investigation,” he continued.

“And it was all Brennan’s doing,” DiGenova stated emphatically. 

“And that is why the Justice Department is viciously fighting revealing everything they can about the source in London, who everybody knows the identity of.”

Ingraham asked the former U.S. attorney to further explain recent reports about an unnamed “source in London who allegedly provided information that was used as a basis for the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign.

“The source in London was another person who was feeding false information to George Papadopoulos and others about collusion which did not exist,” DiGenova replied.

Another guest on the program, former federal prosecutor Sidney Powell, spoke about another aspect of the creation of the Trump/Russia collusion narrative and the anti-Trump dossier compiled by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele on behalf of Democrat-funded political opposition research firm Fusion GPS.

She noted how the FBI had granted access to a handful of private contractors, likely to include Fusion GPS, to sift through raw intelligence gathered under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This was then passed on to Steele and others and recycled back to the U.S. intelligence community with a false air of legitimacy to help form the narrative used as the basis for the investigation into Trump. 

DiGenova picked up on what Powell had mentioned and pointed out that there had been two opinions issued by the FISA court in opposition to that illegal practice of allowing private contractors access to the sensitive raw intelligence data.

“All of that was designed for the unmasking and the leaking of the names, and that was all done by private contractors,” DiGenova said. “The FISA court objected to it and it never stopped.”

The supposition that Brennan was the ringleader of an attempt to “frame” Trump is little more than DiGenova’s opinion, informed however well it might be by experience and information obtained through public and private sources.

That said, it increasingly appears as though the entire Trump/Russia collusion narrative was indeed created wholly out of false, manufactured or misconstrued information in order to provide justification for the investigation that was likely intended to prevent Trump from winning the election, or at least hamstring his agenda and lead to his impeachment once he took office. 

On top of that, Brennan has made it blatantly obvious that he loathes Trump, so it isn’t too much of a stretch to think he may have used the powerful intelligence tools at his disposal in order to “frame” an innocent man and destroy him politically. Hopefully we will find out the truth soon when the DOJ inspector general’s report is released.

please likeand share and leave a comment

Fox News’ Worst-Rated Show Just Delivered Brutal Punishment to CNN


Reported By Ben Marquis | May 6, 2018 at 2:12pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/fox-news-worst-punishment-cnn/

Of the three major cable news networks, Fox News Channel obviously leans to the right but provides fairly balanced coverage of the news of the day. MSNBC, meanwhile, openly presents itself as left-leaning and provides equally left-leaning news coverage to their liberal viewers. CNN, however, has attempted to portray itself as unbiased and centrist as a media organization, but its news coverage quite obviously skews toward the left. It appears a significant number of viewers have taken notice and are no longer watching based on recent ratings numbers, according to Breitbart.

In fact, the highest-rated primetime program on CNN fell short of the lowest-rated primetime program on FNC, and even lost to a handful of Fox’s afternoon and morning programs.

Those dismal numbers for CNN were revealed in Adweek‘s report of the ratings by Nielsen Media Research for the month of April, numbers that have Fox and MSNBC cheering while CNN looks on from afar.

The best-rated weeknight show for CNN — “Anderson Cooper 360” — placed a distant 24th on the list of most-watched cable news programs. Meanwhile, the lowest-rated Fox News program in the evenings was “Fox News at Night with Shannon Bream,” which came in at 13th on the list.

Much to the dismay of liberals, Fox’s Sean Hannity came in at No. 1 in both total viewers and among the coveted advertising demographic of adults aged 25-54. Hannity was followed by MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow in both categories, and the top five in total viewers was rounded out by Fox’s Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham, and MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell. Carlson and Ingraham swapped spots in the top five among the key demo.

Spots six through 10 for total viewers were filled respectively by Fox’s “Special Report with Bret Baier,” “The Five,” “The Story with Martha MacCallum,” MSNBC’s “All In with Chris Hayes” and “Hardball with Chris Matthews.”

Hilariously, morning programs for Fox like “America’s Newsroom” (12th), “Fox and Friends” (14th), “Outnumbered” (16th) and “Happening Now” (18th) all beat CNN’s top-rated show.

Even mid-afternoon Fox programming like “Your World with Neil Cavuto” (17th), “Shepard Smith Reporting” (20th), “Outnumbered Overtime” (22nd) and “Daily Briefing with Dana Perino” (23rd) ranked higher in total viewers than Cooper’s program on CNN.

Following Cooper for the most-watched CNN programs at all times of the day within the top 40 were “Erin Burnett Out Front” (27th) and “CNN Tonight” (28th), along with “The Lead with Jake Tapper” (32nd), “Situation Room” (33rd), “CNN Newsroom” (37), “Wolf” (38th), “Inside Politics” (39th) and “At This Hour” (40).

The only Fox News Channel program that CNN beat in terms of total viewers was “Fox and Friends First,” which ranked 42nd on the list — and airs at 4 a.m. Eastern!

The only saving grace among this horrible news for CNN is that they did slightly better among the key 25-54 demo than among total viewers, as Cooper’s show ranked 12th, though he still lost out to Bream’s program — which airs late at 11 p.m. Eastern — which came in at 11th on the list among the demo coveted by advertisers.

In Nielsen’s tally of viewership of all cable networks, not just cable news channels, Fox still emerged as the most-watched cable channel both in primetime and the daytime.

Turner Network Television, which has been airing NBA playoff games since mid April, came in second for total primetime viewers, followed closely by MSNBC in third place. CNN ranked eighth in total primetime viewers for the month, losing out to cable networks such as TBS, HGTV, ESPN and the USA Network.

So perhaps this should be a lesson to any network that purports to be unbiased in its coverage, but is blatantly left-leaning and caters exclusively to liberal Trump-haters with its news coverage. It quickly becomes irrelevant and loses out “bigly” to its competition.

Former Fox News Host Bill O’Reilly Negotiating On-Air Return: Report


Reported By V. Saxena | October 26, 2017 at 12:56pm

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/former-fox-news-host-bill-oreilly-negotiating-air-return-report/?

Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly is in the midst of negotiations with the Sinclair Broadcast Group, one of the nation’s largest television station operators, for his own syndicated show on its litany of local channels.

Sources confirmed with NBC News this week that O’Reilly is “about midway” through negotiations and that Sinclair has been considering placing him on its local stations, which include Los Angeles’ KTLA, Chicago’s WGN and Philadelphia’s WPHL, among many others.

“What you are going to see is a syndicated show, not a news channel,” one source said. “I know they’ve been talking about doing something in syndication and something that could air on WGN.”

Were the deal to go through, O’Reilly could reportedly wind up with a two-hour show that would begin daily at either 6:00 or 7:00 pm.

They want to do something anti-CNN, anti-MSNBC,” the source added, suggesting Sinclair is seeking to acquire a more prominent voice in the commentary business.

Sinclair has previously been widely criticized by mainstream media outlets for its supposed conservative bent.

“People who tune into Sinclair stations for local news often end up getting some conservative commentary in the mix as well,” according to a Vox article.

“The broadcaster has a history of airing right-leaning segments critical of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama,” Vox continued.

However, like many other mainstream outlets, Vox has itself repeatedly been accused of liberal bias due to the stories it selects and how it words them.

The news regarding O’Reilly’s potential show with Sinclair comes amid recent reports from mainstream media outlets hammering O’Reilly’s former employer, Fox News, for not terminating him from the network earlier over allegations of sexual harassment.

“Last January, six months after Fox News ousted its chairman amid a sexual harassment scandal, the network’s top-rated host at the time, Bill O’Reilly, struck a $32 million  agreement with a longtime network analyst to settle new sexual harassment allegations, according to two people briefed on the matter,” The New York Times reported.

O’Reilly continues to maintain the sexual harassment allegations against him are baseless and that he only settled them to spare his family pain.

“This was hit job, a political and financial hit job,” he said this week on NBC’s “Today,” as reported by Reuters.

“My conscience is clear, what I have done is organize a legal team to get the truth to the American people,” he added.

“Nobody’s a perfect person, but I can go to sleep at night very well knowing that I never mistreated anyone on my watch in 42 years.”

He likewise published an affidavit from one of his accusers in which she retracted her allegations and swore under oath that the two had “resolved all of our issues.”

O’Reilly Fires Back at Megyn Kelly, Shares Hand-Written Letters from Her and Gretchen Carlson


Reported By Ellysa Chenery | October 24, 2017 at 9:05am

URL of the original posting site: https://www.westernjournalism.com/oreilly-fires-back-megyn-kelly-shares-hand-written-letters-gretchen-carlson/?

Hours after NBC host Megyn Kelly told her “Today” show viewers that she had complained about former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly’s behavior while they were colleagues at Fox, he brought forth evidence seeming to indicate the two had a very close relationship while they worked together.

“O’Reilly’s suggestion that no one ever complained about his behavior is false. I know because I complained,” Kelly said.

But later, O’Reilly posted to his website two hand-written notes from Megyn Kelly and one from former Fox host Gretchen Carlson. All three appeared to show that O’Reilly had friendly relationships with the two women.

In one note, which Kelly sent to O’Reilly after he attended her baby shower, she called him a “class act” and said she was “truly touched.”

“You’ve become a dear friend (no matter what you say) + I am grateful to have you in my life,” the letter read.

In Kelly’s other note, she thanked O’Reilly for promoting her husband Doug’s book.

“Thanks for the plug on Doug’s book. I realize you didn’t have to do that, especially after mentioning it already. I appreciate how supportive you have been of me over the years here @ FNC.”

Kelly’s sign-off on this letter revealed she even looked up to O’Reilly: “You are a true friend + mentor. XOXO.”

Meanwhile, in Carlson’s note, she wrote a poem to O’Reilly.

“Thank you for being the calm in the sea. Thank you so much for supporting me. Thank you for being my friend. It means the world to me,” Carlson said.

On Sunday, O’Reilly said in a statement that in the 20 years he worked at Fox, not one complaint was ever filed against him with human resources or the company’s legal department. But in her “Today” segment, Kelly said that a remark from O’Reilly prompted her to send an email to the co-presidents of Fox News.

During a November 2016 appearance on CBS News, O’Reilly said he was wasn’t interested in “litigating something that is finished, that makes my network look bad.”

“Perhaps he didn’t realize the kind of message his criticism sends to young women across the country about how men continue to view the issue of speaking out about sexual harassment,” Kelly wrote in her email.

Kelly said Monday she perceived O’Reilly’s comments as “shaming women into shutting the hell up” about harassment and assault.

Shortly after he was interviewed on CBS, O’Reilly tried to make his perspective clearer. On “The O’Reilly Factor,” he argued that someone who was wronged in their workplace should “go to human resources or leave. I’ve done that. And then take the action you need to take afterward if you feel aggrieved. There are labor laws in this country.”

But according to Kelly, “Women everywhere are used to be dismissed, ignored, or attacked when raising complaints about men in authority positions.”

She also extended her criticism to Fox News media relations chief Irena Briganti, who she said “is known for her vindictiveness” and publishes stories attacking Kelly and others.

Fox News responded to the allegation against Briganti with a short statement saying, “Irena is a valued colleague and she has our full support.”

More Politically INCORRECT Cartoons for Monday August 7, 2017


HTTP://TOWNHALL.COM

https://tribunecontentagency.com/premium-content/editorial-cartoons/conservative-cartoons/dana-summers/

 

Hannity Prepares for WAR


Posted by http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/ on May 1, 2017

Last week Sean Hannity was hit with an accusation of sexual harassment by some chick named Debbie Schlussel. Of course this kind of news went viral in the liberal media. Former Fox News guest Debbie Schlussel accused Sean Hannity of sexual harassment.

Hannity issued a statement vehemently denying her claims:

“LET ME BE CLEAR THE COMMENTS ABOUT ME ON A RADIO SHOW THIS WEEK by this individual ARE 100% false and a complete fabrication. This individual is a serial harasser who has been lying about me for well over a decade. The individual has a history of making provably false statements against me in an effort to slander, smear and besmirch my reputation. The individual has not just slandered me over the years but many people who this individual disagrees with.”

He vowed to retain the finest and toughest lawyers in the country to proceed with the proper legal course of action.

Schlussel heard him loud and clear.

In an interview with LawNewz, Schlussel has now denied that she was ever sexually harassed by Hannity.

Hannity, livid not only at Schlussel but also because the media ran with these claims without fact checking. The background of the accuser is very shady, so the idea the media never vetted the claims — one media outlet printed a false claim that the accuser hadn’t even made — shows this was a target on Hannity’s character.

Now, making good on his promise, the FOX News host has gathered an army of attorneys ready to fight this scandal to its death.

In a released statement Sean said he “retained a team of some of the finest and toughest lawyers in the country who are now in the process of laying out the legal course of action we will be taking against this individual.”

One tweeter suggested “they” are trying to pull a Bill O’Reilly on Hannity, who was recently dropped the network following charges of sexual harassment. To which Hannity offered some details of his army, saying: “They have no idea…”

Whomever targeted him they better be ready to get bloody, because Hannity is coming out ready for war!

Veteran newsman Ted Koppel tells Sean Hannity he’s bad for America


Reported | Morning Mix | March 27 at 7:14 AM

URL of the original posting site: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/03/27/veteran-newsman-ted-koppel-tells-sean-hannity-hes-bad-for-america/?utm_term=.073f1e00a1f1

Veteran broadcast journalist Ted Koppel has long railed against news shows that wear their politics on their sleeves. And on Sunday, he pulled no punches with Sean Hannity. In a tense exchange on CBS Sunday Morning, Koppel told the Fox News host and staunch supporter of President Trump that his brand of opinion-based journalism was harming the country.

The segment focused on the political divide in America and the role partisan news programming played in driving liberals and conservatives further apart. During a sit-down interview, Hannity called on Koppel to “give some credit” to people’s ability to differentiate between a news show and an opinion show.

“You’re cynical,” Hannity said.

“I am cynical,” Koppel responded.

“Do you think we’re bad for America? You think I’m bad for America?” Hannity asked.

Koppel didn’t miss a beat. “Yeah,” he said, and continued over multiple interruptions from Hannity:

Koppel: “In the long haul I think you and all these opinion shows —”

Hannity: “Really? That’s sad, Ted. That’s sad.”

Koppel: “No, you know why? Because you’re very good at what you do, and because you have attracted a significantly more influential —”

Hannity: “You are selling the American people short.”

Koppel: “No, let me finish the sentence before you do that.”

Hannity: “I’m listening. With all due respect. Take the floor.”

Koppel: “You have attracted people who are determined that ideology is more important than facts.”

During the 2016 presidential campaign, Fox News anchor Sean Hannity was accused of going soft on Donald Trump – even by his coworker, anchor Megyn Kelly. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Fox News anchor Sean Hannity was accused of going soft on Donald Trump – even by his coworker, anchor Megyn Kelly. Is Sean Hannity too friendly with Donald Trump? (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

After the segment aired, Hannity responded with a series of tweets calling the show “Fake Edited News” and accusing CBS of leaving out parts of his answers that discussed media bias. He asked CBS to release the raw recording of the interview, which he said ran about 45 minutes.

In the decade-plus since he stepped down as host of ABC’s “Nightline” after 25 years, Koppel has lamented a changing media landscape that he sayscelebrates the opinions of overtly partisan news hosts at the expense of neutral reporting. He has criticized journalists on the right and the left for biased coverage, particularly those at Fox News and its liberal-leaning rival MSNBC.

“The commercial success of both Fox News and MSNBC is a source of nonpartisan sadness for me. While I can appreciate the financial logic of drowning television viewers in a flood of opinions designed to confirm their own biases, the trend is not good for the republic,” Koppel wrote in a Washington Post column in 2010.

“Beginning, perhaps, from the reasonable perspective that absolute objectivity is unattainable, Fox News and MSNBC no longer even attempt it,” he said. “They show us the world not as it is, but as partisans (and loyal viewers) at either end of the political spectrum would like it to be. This is to journalism what Bernie Madoff was to investment: He told his customers what they wanted to hear, and by the time they learned the truth, their money was gone.”

In the same column, Koppel called then-MSNBC host Keith Olbermann the “most opinionated” among the network’s “left-leaning, Fox-baiting, money-generating hosts. More than a million viewers flocked to his nightly program because Olbermann was “unabashedly and monotonously partisan,” he said.

Koppel lumped MSNBC host Rachel Maddow into the same category, along with Glenn Beck, who was a Fox News host at the time.

He waded into the issue of media partisanship during the 2016 election as well. In a March 2016 appearance on Fox News’s “O’Reilly Factor”, Koppel scolded host Bill O’Reilly about the political debate surrounding then-candidate Trump, who had just triumphed in the Super Tuesday primaries. O’Reilly told Koppel he had interviewed Trump on many occasions. “Not an easy interview,” he said. “How would you do it?”

“It’s irrelevant how I would do it,” Koppel fired back. “And you know who made it irrelevant? You did.”

O’Reilly, seemingly unfazed, asked him to elaborate. And Koppel did — in an exchange not unlike his discussion with Hannity on Sunday.

“You have changed the television landscape over the past 20 years. You took it from being objective and dull to being subjective and entertaining,” Koppel told O’Reilly. “And in this current climate, it doesn’t matter what the interviewer asks him. Mr. Trump is going to say whatever he wants to say, as outrageous as it may be.”

Potential ‘smoking gun’ showing Obama administration spied on Trump team, source says


Reported by James Rosen| Published March 23, 2017 | FoxNews.com

URL of the original posting site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/23/potential-smoking-gun-showing-obama-administration-spied-on-trump-team-source-says.html

Republican congressional investigators expect a potential “smoking gun” establishing that the Obama administration spied on the Trump transition team, and possibly the president-elect himself, will be produced to the House Intelligence Committee this week, a source told Fox News.

Classified intelligence showing incidental collection of Trump team communications, purportedly seen by committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., and described by him in vague terms at a bombshell Wednesday afternoon news conference, came from multiple sources, Capitol Hill sources told Fox News. The intelligence corroborated information about surveillance of the Trump team that was known to Nunes, sources said, even before President Trump accused his predecessor of having wiretapped him in a series of now-infamous tweets posted on March 4.

The intelligence is said to leave no doubt the Obama administration, in its closing days, was using the cover of legitimate surveillance on foreign targets to spy on President-elect Trump, according to sources. The key to that conclusion is the unmasking of selected U.S. persons whose names appeared in the intelligence, the sources said, adding that the paper trail leaves no other plausible purpose for the unmasking other than to damage the incoming Trump administration.

The FBI hasn’t been responsive to the House Intelligence Committee’s request for documents, but the National Security Agency is expected to produce documents to the committee by Friday. The NSA document production is expected to produce more intelligence than Nunes has so far seen or described – including what one source described as a potential “smoking gun” establishing the spying.

Some time will be needed to properly assess the materials, with the likely result being that congressional investigators and attorneys won’t have a solid handle on the contents of the documents – and their implications – until next week.

Because Nunes’s intelligence came from multiple sources during a span of several weeks, and he has not shared the actual materials with his committee colleagues, he will be the only member of the panel in a position to know whether the NSA has turned over some or all of the intelligence he is citing. However, Fox News was told Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., had been briefed on the basic contents of the intelligence described by Nunes.

CIA Director Mike Pompeo is also sympathetic to the effort to determine, with documentary evidence, the extent of any alleged Obama administration spying on the Trump team, sources said. At a dramatic Wednesday news conference, Nunes claimed to have seen evidence that members of the Trump transition team, possibly including the president-elect, were subjected to “incidental surveillance” collection that Nunes characterized as legal but troubling.

“What I’ve read bothers me,” he told reporters, “and I think it should bother the president himself, and his team because I think some of it seems to be inappropriate.”

Schiff blasted Nunes for not coming first to the Intelligence Committee with the information.

“If accurate, this information should have been shared with members of the committee, but it has not been,” Schiff said in a Wednesday statement.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

James Rosen joined Fox News Channel (FNC) in 1999. He currently serves as the chief Washington correspondent and hosts the online show “The Foxhole.” His latest book is “A Torch Kept Lit: Great Lives of the Twentieth Century” (Crown Forum, October 4, 2016).

Clinton Cheerleader & Democratic Pollster Just DUMPED Hillary On Live TV


waving flagPublished on October 31, 2016

URL of the original posting site: http://clashdaily.com/2016/10/clinton-cheerleader-democratic-pollster-just-dumped-hillary-live-tv-watch/

This is what someone who puts his love of country ahead of personal politics looks like. He’s been a friend of the Clintons since 1994. But his integrity will not permit him to vote for her now.

This partial transcript is courtesy of Real Clear Politics:

DOUG SCHOEN: As you know, I have been a supporter of Secretary Clinton… But given that this investigation is going to go on for many months after the election… But if the Secretary of State wins, we will have a president under criminal investigation, with Huma Abedin under criminal investigation, with the Secretary of State, the president-elect, should she win under investigation.

Harris, under these circumstances, I am actively reassessing my support. I’m not a Trump — 

HARRIS FAULKNER, FOX NEWS: Whoa, whoa, wait a minute. You are not going to vote for Hillary Clinton?

Never-Hillary-Egl-sm

Image added by WhatDidYouSay.org

SCHOEN: Harris, I’m deeply concerned that we’ll have a constitutional crisis if she’s elected.

FAULKNER: Wow!

SCHOEN: I want to learn more this week. See what we see. But as of today, I am not a supporter of the Secretary of State for the nation’s highest office.

FAULKNER: How long have you known the clintons.

SCHOEN: I’ve known the clintons since ’94.

FAULKNER: Wow! But their friend here has said he’s reconsidering.

SCHOEN: I have to, because of the impact on the governance of the country and our international situation.

FAULKNER: So the news in that is are there other people, I would imagine, like Doug Schoen.

A Democrat with integrity is making the call that he cannot pull the lever for Hillary. Good for him!

Why is this PARTICULAR guy jumping ship a big deal?

Here’s a little background on the man.

Schoen was on a panel with fellow Democrat pollster Pat Caddell and former Republican Congressman John LeBoutillier.

Schoen’s bio reads in part:

Douglas E. Schoen has been one of the most influential Democratic campaign consultants for over thirty years. A founding partner and principle strategist for Penn, Schoen & Berland, he is widely recognized as one of the co-inventors of overnight polling.

Schoen was named Pollster of the Year in 1996 by the American Association of Political Consultants for his contributions to the President Bill Clinton reelection campaign.

His political clients include New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Indiana Governor Evan Bayh, and his corporate clients include AOL Time Warner, Procter & Gamble and AT&T. Internationally, he has worked for the heads of states of over 15 countries, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and three Israeli Prime Ministers…” — Gateway Pundit

There are LOTS of Democrats out there … DECENT people, who pick their candidate actually thinking they will do good for the country … who should take a look at Shoen’s example. Many of them will want to follow it.or a liar

Report: Megyn Claims Fox News’ Ailes Sexually Harassed Her


waving flagTuesday, 19 Jul 2016

Image: Report: Megyn Claims Fox News’ Ailes Sexually Harassed Her (AP)

New York magazine’s Gabriel Sherman reported Tuesday that Fox News star Megyn Kelly has accused the network’s chairman of sexual harassment.  The blockbuster report comes on the heels of Sherman’s Monday story, citing sources at Fox News’s parent company, indicating Roger Ailes was soon to be fired.

The decision to remove Ailes in the coming weeks was the result of misconduct discovered after a legal review of his actions in the wake of claims made by former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson.
Carlson has filed suit in New Jersey Superior Court claiming the Fox News chairman requested they sleep together for favorable treatment.

But it was unclear as to the immediate cause motivating Ailes pending dismissal, New York said, “until now.”

New York reported the bombshell revelation:

“According to two sources briefed on parent company 21st Century Fox’s outside probe of the Fox News executive, led by New York–based law firm Paul, Weiss, Kelly has told investigators that Ailes made unwanted sexual advances toward her about ten years ago when she was a young correspondent at Fox. Kelly, according to the sources, has described her harassment by Ailes in detail.”

21st Century Fox executives have told Ailes to quit by Aug. 1 or be fired, according to the report.

Ailes has hired lawyer Susan Estrich, Michael Dukakis’ former presidential campaign manager, to head up his defense strategy.

New York also claims Ailes has turned to Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani for advice on the widening scandal.

New York said Fox and its parent company, as well as Kelly, declined to comment for the story.

Since the Carlson suit filed in June, nine women have accused Ailes of sexual harassment during his five decades as a media and entertainment executive.

© 2016 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

fight Picture1 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Rubio Backs Closing Mosques: Shutter ‘Anyplace Where Radicals Are Being Inspired’


waving flagby John Nolte20 Nov 2015

During an interview on Fox News Thursday night, Rubio told Megyn Kelly that he is open to closing “anyplace where radicals are inspired.” This includes mosques:

It’s not about closing down mosques. It’s about closing down anyplace, whether it’s a cafe, a diner, an internet site — anyplace where radicals are being inspired. The bigger problem we have is our inability to find out where these places are, because we’ve crippled our intelligence programs, both through unauthorized disclosures by a traitor, in Edward Snowden, or by some of the things this president has put in place with the support even of some from my own party to diminish our intelligence capabilities.

So whatever facility is being used — it’s not just a mosque — any facility that’s being used to radicalize and inspire attacks against the United States, should be a place that we look at.

In service to Hillary Clinton, the DC Media has intentionally taken Trump’s statement on closing American mosques completely out of context. Here’s what he actually said:

Well, I would hate it do it but it’s something that you’re going to have to strongly consider because some of the ideas and some the hatred, the absolute hatred, is coming from these areas. You know, New York City as an example. We had a group of people from what I understand that really knew what they were doing, that were really studying the situation and they’re not doing that anymore under the new mayor. And I think that’s a mistake. It’s something that many people — not just me — are considering and many people are going to do.

Here are the phony headlines that perfectly reasonable, common sense statement generated. The good news is that instead of caving to the media’s lies, Rubio is correctly following Trump’s lead. Oh, and Trump is not assuming a position that’s any different from a number of left-wing leaders in socialist Europe.

Do you want America are you really paying attention Obama Muslim collection In God We Trust freedom combo 2

FBI reportedly recovers deleted emails from Clinton server


waving flagPublished September 23, 2015 / FoxNews.com

TeflonFederal investigators reportedly have recovered work-related and personal emails from Hillary Clinton’s time as secretary of state that the Democratic presidential front-runner claimed had been deleted from her personal server. The recovery of the emails was first reported by Bloomberg News late Tuesday. The initial report, which cited a source familiar with the FBI investigation into Clinton’s private email server, was corroborated by The New York Times, which cited two government officials. It was not immediately clear whether all 30,000 messages Clinton said she had deleted from the server had been recovered, but one official told the Times that it had not been difficult to recover the emails that had been found so far.

The FBI is investigating whether classified information that passed through Clinton’s so-called “homebrew” server during her time as secretary of state was mishandled. Clinton turned over approximately 30,000 copies of messages she deemed work-related to the State Department this past December. Clinton said earlier this year that the emails she deleted from the private server she kept at her Chappaqua, N.Y., home mostly pertained to personal matters such as her daughter Chelsea’s wedding and the secretary’s yoga routines.

Like I SaidAn intelligence source told Fox News earlier this month that investigators were “confident” they could recover the deleted records. The source said that whoever had been deputized to scrub the server must “not be a very good IT guy.  There are different standards to scrub when you do it for government versus commercial.”

It is not known when exactly Mrs. Clinton “wiped” her server, nor who was directed to do so. However, it seems the move came after October 2014,  when the State Department requested personal emails be returned as part of her business records.

The source also told Fox News an FBI “A-team” is leading the “extremely serious” investigation into Clinton’s server and the focus includes a provision of the law pertaining to “gathering, transmitting or losing defense information. The section of the Espionage Act in question is known as 18 US Code 793.

When asked about the report, Clinton’s presidential campaign spokesman Nick Merrill told Fox News that Clinton’s team “will always cooperate with the FBI,” and that Clinton and her staff “simply don’t know what the FBI has, and doesn’t have” in regard to the ongoing investigation.

Clinton Democrat PartyFox News’ Ed Henry said Tuesday that should the report of the newly-recovered emails prove true, some of the emails recovered would already be in investigators’ hands.

A separate source, who also was not authorized to speak on the record, said the FBI will further determine whether Clinton should have known, based on the quality and detail of the material, that emails passing through her server contained classified information regardless of the markings. The campaign’s standard defense and that of Clinton is that she “never sent nor received any email that was marked classified” at the time.

It is not clear how the FBI team’s findings will impact the probe itself. But the details offer a window into what investigators are looking for — as the Clinton campaign itself downplays the controversy.

Fox News’ Ed Henry, Catherine Herridge and Pamela Browne contributed to this report.

95b119e45c50cbea1e7a4fbfa33415f3 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Dozens of intelligence analysts reportedly claim assessments of ISIS were altered


waving flagPublished September 10, 2015 FoxNews.com

URL of the original posting site: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/10/dozens-intelligence-analysts-reportedly-claim-reports-on-isis-were-altered/?intcmp=hpbt1

was

Dozens of intelligence analysts working at the U.S. military’s Central Command (CENTCOM) have complained that their reports on ISIS and the Nusra Front in Syria were inappropriately altered by senior officials, according to a published report.

The Daily Beast reported late Wednesday that more than 50 analysts had supported a complaint to the Pentagon that the reports had been changed to make the terror groups seem weaker than the analysts believe they really are. Fox News confirmed last month that the Defense Department’s inspector general was investigating the initial complaint, which the New York Times reported was made by a civilian employee of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

At a panel discussion Thursday moderated by Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, DIA Director Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart also confirmed the probe and said the DIA will let the investigation play out. He said the DIA “delivers the truth wherever the debate takes us.”

http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4470101404001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>&#8221; href=”http://http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4470101404001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript>”&gt;http://video.foxnews.com/v/embed.js?id=4470101404001&w=466&h=263<noscript>Watch the latest video at <a href="http://video.foxnews.com">video.foxnews.com</a></noscript&gt; aligncenter wp-image-19298″ src=”https://mrb562.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/isis.jpg&#8221; alt=”isis” width=”795″ height=”571″ />

The Pentagon acknowledged the IG investigation as well.

“I think … the best thing for us to do is wait” for the IG investigation, spokesman Peter Cook said. He said Defense Secretary Ash Carter expects “candid assessments” from the intelligence teams. 

“Unvarnished, transparent intelligence is what this secretary expects on a daily basis,” he added.

The assessments in question are prepared for several U.S. policymakers, including President Obama.

The Daily Beast report, which cited 11 individuals, claimed that the complaint being investigated by the Defense Department was made in July. However, several analysts reportedly complained as early as this past October that their reports were being altered to suit a political narrative that ISIS was being weakened by U.S.-led airstrikes in Syria.

“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” the report quotes one defense official as saying.

According to the report, some analysts allege that reports deemed overly negative in their assessment of the Syria campaign were either blocked from reaching policymakers or sent back down the chain of command. Others claim that key elements of intelligence reports were removed, fundamentally altering their conclusions. Another claim is that senior leaders at CENTCOM created a work environment where giving a candid opinion on the progress of the anti-ISIS campaign was discouraged, with one analyst describing the tenor as “Stalinist.”

The report alleges that when the analysts’ complaints were initially aired, some of those who complained were urged to retire, and did so. Facing either resistance or indifference, other analysts self-censored their reports, the Daily Beast claims.

The defense official quoted by the Daily Beast said that some who spoke up did so out of guilt that they did not express doubts about former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s alleged chemical weapons program in the run-up to the Iraq. War. “They were frustrated because they didn’t do the right thing then,” the official said.

The House and Senate Intelligence Committees have been advised of the complaint that prompted the inspector general’s investigation, which is required if Pentagon officials find the claims credible.

Government rules state that intelligence assessments “must not be distorted” by agendas or policy views, but do allow for legitimate differences of opinion.

Central Command spokesman Col. Patrick S. Ryder said in a statement Wednesday that they welcome the IG’s “independent oversight.”

“While we cannot comment on ongoing investigations, we can speak to the process and about the valued contributions of the Intelligence Community (IC),” he said, adding that intelligence community members typically are able to comment on draft security assessments. “However,” he said, “it is ultimately up to the primary agency or organization whether or not they incorporate any recommended changes or additions. Further, the multi-source nature of our assessment process purposely guards against any single report or opinion unduly influencing leaders and decision-makers.”

Earlier this summer, on the eve of the anniversary of the launching of airstrikes against Iraq, the Associated Press reported that U.S intelligence had concluded that the airstrikes had helped stall ISIS after sweeping gains in the summer of 2014. However, the report also said the terror group remained a well-funded army that could easily replenish its numbers as quickly as fighters were eliminated.

95b119e45c50cbea1e7a4fbfa33415f3 In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Ann Coulter Letter; “Fox News Anchored In Stupidity on 14th Amendment


waving flagAnn Coulter  | 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2015/08/19/fox-news-anchored-in-stupidity-on-14th-amendment/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

Fox News Anchored In Stupidity on 14th Amendment

Based on the hysterical flailing at Donald Trump — He’s a buffoon! He’s a clown! He calls people names! He’s too conservative! He’s not conservative enough! He won’t give details! His details won’t work! — I gather certain Republicans are determined to drive him from the race.

These same Republicans never object to other candidates who lack traditional presidential resumes — Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson, Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain, to name a few. I’m beginning to suspect it’s all about Trump’s opposition to mass immigration from the Third World.

Amid the hysteria, Trump is the only one speaking clearly and logically, while his detractors keep making utter asses of themselves.

By my count — so far — Fiorina, Chris Christie, Rick Perry and the entire Fox News commentariat are unfamiliar with a period of the nation’s history known as “the Civil War.” They seem to believe that the post-Civil War amendments were designed to ensure that the children of illegal aliens would be citizens, “anchor babies,” who can then bring in the whole family. (You wouldn’t want to break up families, would you?)

As FNC’s Bill O’Reilly authoritatively informed Donald Trump on Tuesday night: “The 14th Amendment says if you’re born here, you’re an American!”

I cover anchor babies in about five pages of my book, Adios, America, but apparently Bill O’Reilly and the rest of the scholars on Fox News aren’t what we call “readers.”

Still, how could anyone — even a not-very-bright person — imagine that granting citizenship to the children of illegal aliens is actually in our Constitution? I know the country was exuberant after the war, but I really don’t think our plate was so clear that Americans were consumed with passing a constitutional amendment to make illegal aliens’ kids citizens.

Put differently: Give me a scenario — just one scenario — where guaranteeing the citizenship of children born to illegals would be important to Americans in 1868. You can make it up. It doesn’t have to be a true scenario. Any scenario!

You know what’s really bothering me? If someone comes into the country illegally and has a kid, that kid should be an American citizen!

Damn straight they should!

We’ve got to codify that.

YOU MEAN IT’S NOT ALREADY IN THE CONSTITUTION?

No, it isn’t, but that amendment will pass like wildfire!

It’s like being accused of robbing a homeless person. (1) I didn’t; (2) WHY WOULD I DO THAT?

“Luckily,” as FNC’s Shannon Bream put it Monday night, Fox had an “expert” to explain the details: Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox’s senior judicial analyst.

Napolitano at least got the century right. He mentioned the Civil War — and then went on to inform Bream that the purpose of the 14th Amendment was to — I quote — “make certain that the former slaves and the native Americans would be recognized as American citizens no matter what kind of prejudice there might be against them.”

Huh. In 1884, 16 years after the 14th Amendment was ratified, John Elk, who — as you may have surmised by his name — was an Indian, had to go to the Supreme Court to argue that he was an American citizen because he was born in the United States.

He lost. In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, the Supreme Court ruled that the 14th Amendment did not grant Indians citizenship.

The “main object of the opening sentence of the Fourteenth Amendment,” the court explained — and not for the first or last time — “was to settle the question, upon which there had been a difference of opinion throughout the country and in this court, as to the citizenship of free negroes and to put it beyond doubt that all persons, white or black … should be citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.”

American Indians were not made citizens until 1924. Lo those 56 years after the ratification of the 14th Amendment, Indians were not American citizens, despite the considered opinion of Judge Napolitano.

Of course it’s easy for legal experts to miss the welter of rulings on Indian citizenship inasmuch as they obtained citizenship in a law perplexingly titled: “THE INDIAN CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1924.”

Yeah, Trump’s the idiot. Or as Bream said to Napolitano after his completely insane analysis, “I feel smarter just having been in your presence.”

The only reason the 14th Amendment doesn’t just come out and say “black people” is that — despite our Constitution being the product of vicious racists, who were dedicated to promoting white privilege and keeping down the black man (Hat tip: Ta-Nehisi Coates) — the Constitution never, ever mentions race.

Nonetheless, until Fox News’ scholars weighed in, there was little confusion about the purpose of the 14th Amendment. It was to “correct” — as Jack Nicholson said in “The Shining” — the Democrats, who refused to acknowledge that they lost the Civil War and had to start treating black people like citizens.

On one hand, we have noted legal expert Bill O’Reilly haranguing Donald Trump: “YOU WANT ME TO QUOTE YOU THE AMENDMENT??? IF YOU’RE BORN HERE YOU’RE AN AMERICAN. PERIOD! PERIOD!” (No, Bill — there’s no period. More like: “comma,” to parents born “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States “and of the state wherein they reside.”)

But on the other hand, we have Justice John Marshall Harlan II, who despite not being a Fox News legal expert, was no slouch. He wrote in the 1967 case, Afroyim v. Rusk, that the sponsors of the 14th Amendment feared that:

“Unless citizenship were defined, freedmen might, under the reasoning of the Dred Scott decision, be excluded by the courts from the scope of the amendment. It was agreed that, since the ‘courts have stumbled on the subject,’ it would be prudent to remove the ‘doubt thrown over’ it. The clause would essentially overrule Dred Scott and place beyond question the freedmen’s right of citizenship because of birth.”

It is true that in a divided 1898 case, U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, the Supreme Court granted citizenship to the children born to legal immigrants, with certain exceptions, such as for diplomats. But that decision was so obviously wrong, even the Yale Law Journal ridiculed it.

The majority opinion relied on feudal law regarding citizenship in a monarchy, rather than the Roman law pertaining to a republic — the illogic of which should be immediately apparent to American history buffs, who will recall an incident in our nation’s history known as “the American Revolution.”

Citizenship in a monarchy was all about geography — as it is in countries bristling with lords and vassals, which should not be confused with this country. Thus, under the majority’s logic in Wong Kim Ark, children born to American parents traveling in England would not be American citizens, but British subjects.

As ridiculous as it was to grant citizenship to the children born to legal immigrants under the 14th Amendment (which was about what again? That’s right: slaves freed by the Civil War), that’s a whole order of business different from allowing illegal aliens to sneak across the border, drop a baby and say, Ha-ha! You didn’t catch me! My kid’s a citizen

– while Americans curse impotently under their breath.

As the Supreme Court said in Elk: “[N]o one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent.”

The anchor baby scam was invented 30 years ago by a liberal zealot, Justice William Brennan, who slipped a footnote into a 1982 Supreme Court opinion announcing that the kids born to illegals on U.S. soil are citizens. Fox News is treating Brennan’s crayon scratchings on the Constitution as part of our precious national inheritance.

Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals is America’s most-cited federal judge — and, by the way, no friend to conservatives. In 2003, he wrote a concurrence simply in order to demand that Congress pass a law to stop “awarding citizenship to everyone born in the United States.”

The purpose of the 14th Amendment, he said, was “to grant citizenship to the recently freed slaves,” adding that “Congress would not be flouting the Constitution” if it passed a law “to put an end to the nonsense.”

In a statement so sane that Posner is NEVER going to be invited on Fox News, he wrote: “We should not be encouraging foreigners to come to the United States solely to enable them to confer U.S. citizenship on their future children. But the way to stop that abuse of hospitality is to remove the incentive by changing the rule on citizenship.”

Forget the intricate jurisprudential dispute between Fox News blowhards and the most-cited federal judge. How about basic common sense? Citizenship in our nation is not a game of Red Rover with the Border Patrol! The Constitution does not say otherwise.

Our history and our Constitution are being perverted for the sole purpose of dumping immigrants on the country to take American jobs. So far, only Donald Trump is defending black history on the issue of the 14th Amendment. Fox News is using black people as a false flag to keep cheap Third World labor flowing.

Drudge, Fox News could be censored under new federal rules, experts warn


waving flagBy Rudy Takala 8/13/15

FCC Monster

A Washington, D.C., appeals court is set to hear arguments later this year on new net neutrality rules, which critics say could lead to government regulators censoring websites such as the Drudge Report and Fox News. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments against the Federal Communications Commission’s rules on Dec. 4. A panoply of amicus briefs filed with the court last week offer a preview of the arguments.

In its February vote on net neutrality, the Federal Communications Commission stated that broadband providers do not have a right to free speech. “Broadband providers are conduits, not speakers … the rules we adopt today are tailored to the important government interest in maintaining an open Internet as a platform for expression,” the majority held in its 3-2 vote. Free Speech Definition

The rules, which went into effect in June, require that broadband providers — such as Verizon or Comcast — offer access to all legal online content. It did not place such a requirement on “edge providers,” such as Netflix and Google. The FCC defines edge providers as “any individual or entity that provides any content, application, or service over the Internet, and any individual or entity that provides a device used for accessing any content, application, or service over the Internet.” 

Writing in separate briefs, former FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth and the Center for Boundless Innovation in Technology argues that the rules violate the First Amendment right of Internet providers to display the speech they choose. “If rules such as these are not reviewed under the most rigorous scrutiny possible, government favoritism and censorship masquerading as ‘neutrality’ will soon cascade to other forms of mass communication,” the center argues.Tyranney Alert

Furchtgott-Roth argues that the differentiation between content providers and broadband providers is an unconstitutional division. “In addition to compelling speech, the order impermissibly singles out broadband providers without imposing similar requirements on the speech of other Internet entities who also act as gatekeepers,” his brief states. While the rules have yet to apply to such gatekeepers, observers have warned that may come if net neutrality is allowed to stand. “If the court upholds the FCC’s rules, the agency’s authority over the Internet would extend from one end to the other,” Fred Campbell, president of the Center for Boundless Innovation in Technology, told the Washington Examiner. “Because the same theories the FCC relied on to impose its new regulations on Internet service providers are also applicable to companies like Apple and Netflix, the FCC could extend its regulatory reach much further in the future.”

Specifically, Campbell said, the FCC will likely try to control political speech.

“This possibility raises the risk that Congress or the FCC could impose restrictions on Internet video and other services that have traditionally been imposed on over the air broadcasting and cable television, including the fairness doctrine that once put the government in charge of determining whether broadcasters were fairly representing both sides of an issue,” he explained.Picture2

FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai, who voted against the net neutrality rules, has said such restrictions may be coming if net neutrality is allowed to stand, warning in March that online political content like the Drudge Report could face greater regulation. “It is conceivable to me to see the government saying, ‘We think the Drudge Report is having a disproportionate effect on our political discourse,” Pai said. “He doesn’t have to file anything with the [Federal Election Commission]. The FCC doesn’t have the ability to regulate anything he says, and we want to start tamping down on websites like that. Is it unthinkable that some government agency would say the marketplace of ideas is too fraught with dissonance? That everything from the Drudge Report to Fox News … is playing unfairly in the online political speech sandbox? I don’t think so,” Pai added.Leftist Giant called Tyranny

Other organizations that have filed lawsuits against the rules include the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the National Association of Manufacturers, TechFreedom, the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy, the International Center for Law and Economics, and others. Those lawsuits take aim at a range of issues, from the legal authority of the FCC to impose the regulations to the adverse economic impact that they will impose.

Proponents of net neutrality say the FCC needs to have power over the Internet precisely to ensure free speech is protected, and that the policy prevents Internet providers from blocking or throttling traffic to websites they don’t like. The attention being paid to this topic is proof of why the open and free exchange of information must be protected,” FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler said. “The Founding Fathers must be looking down and smiling at how the republic they created is practicing the ideals they established.”More Evidence

The court is expected to make a decision early next year.

burke Freedom is never free Demorates In God We Trust freedom combo 2

‘His Life Matters’: Black Officer and White Police Chief Share Powerful Photo


waving flagby Fox News Insider

Two Texas police officers of different races have shared a powerful response to the Black Lives Matter movement.

The Trinity Police Department shared a moving photo of Chief Steven Jones and Officer Donald Givens, which has gone viral across social media. Both officers had the words “his life matters” written on their palms, with arrows pointing to one another.

His Life Matters

Officer Givens said this morning on “Fox and Friends” that they’re amazed by the reaction that the photo has received. He said that it shows that the voices of their small community are heard around the nation.

The officer added that race doesn’t matter in law enforcement. What matters is “if you live Christian values … and you live morally,” Officer Givens said.

Officer Givens called for the nation to come together and move forward.

“We can’t stand behind officers that do bad things,” Chief Jones said. “However, the community and the nation can’t condemn every single officer just on the actions of a few.”

Watch the Interview below:

blCK

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

 

Ann Coulter Letter: “‘Immigrant’: The New N-Word”


waving flag Ann Coulter 

URL of the original posting site: http://humanevents.com/2015/08/12/immigrant-the-new-n-word/?utm_source=coulterdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl

'Immigrant': The New N-Word

Americans have got to drop their weird verbal tic of inserting “illegal” into any discussion of immigration. After I pointed out on “Fox News” that the dispute between Sen. Rand Paul and Gov. Chris Christie over spying on “Americans” was entirely a problem of immigration, “Fox Insiders” put these two sentences together: 

“[Coulter] explained that halting illegal immigration would help solve other key issues such as the economy and national security. ‘Don’t make terrorists citizens through immigration, and we’ll have a lot less of a national security problem,’ Coulter said, pointing to the attacks at the Boston Marathon and in Chattanooga.” (Emphasis added.)

Were those guys illegals? Did Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev swim across the Rio Grande to get to Boston? Did Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez hire coyotes to sneak him across the border so he could shoot four Marines and a sailor in Chattanooga?

No. Our government invited them in.

Some of our other beloved legal immigrants include:

– Anwar al-Awlaki, the man whose death in Afghanistan provoked Rand Paul to stage a 13-hour filibuster in opposition to the use of drones against — I quote — “American citizens”;

– the Fort Hood shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan;

– the attempted Times Square bomber, Faisal Shahzad;

– all those Somali immigrants living in Minnesota, bloc-voting for Al Franken before flying to Syria to fight with ISIS;

– Sirhan Sirhan;

– the 9/11 hijackers;

– the Pakistani terrorist Daood Sayed Gilani, American anchor baby, responsible for four days of bombings in Mumbai in 2008;

– the New York subway bomb plotter, Najibullah Zazi;

– Pakistani terrorist Aafia Siddiqui, who shot a U.S. Army captain in 2010;

— the “local man” arrested this week for trying to organize an army of ISIS fighters in New York and New Jersey, Nader Saadeh — anchor baby “American citizen.”

ALL LEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR CHILDREN! Why were any of them in this country? What are we getting out of this?

It’s not just the Fox website. Wherever I go on this book tour, I find people injecting “illegal” into the discussion, as if they’re being polite, like saying “Jewish” instead of “Jew.” But all these “homegrown,” “American” terrorists aren’t Americans, at all — except as a result of recent government policy.

This week, Sens. Jeff Sessions and Ted Cruz have sent a letter to the Obama administration asking how many “non-citizens, naturalized U.S. citizens and natural-born U.S. citizens have been involved in terrorist-related activity since 1993.” National Review’s headline? “Cruz, Sessions: How Many ‘Homegrown’ Terrorists Were Illegal Immigrants?” (The headline was later changed, after complaints.)

It’s a national neurosis! People simply refuse to see what’s right in front of their faces.Illegal Immigration Giant

Admittedly, the media hide the evidence, but did anyone read this 2010 New York Times headline, “2 New Jersey Men in Terrorism Case Go Before a Judge,” and think, Oh my gosh! What is America coming to?

The “New Jersey men” were Mohamed Mahmood Alessa and Carlos Eduardo Almonte. Alessa, born to legal immigrants from Jordan and the Palestinian territories, told his Boy Scout troop, “Osama bin Laden is a hero in my family” and expressed a desire to mutilate homosexuals and subordinate women. (He was the first member of his troop to earn a merit badge in female circumcision.) Alessa’s co-conspirator, Almonte, is a legal immigrant from the Dominican Republic. (Raising suspicions, he doesn’t play baseball.) He could be heard on a wiretap saying that he wanted U.S. troops to come home “in caskets.”

He also attended an anti-Israel rally with a large sign reading “DEATH TO ALL JUICE,” which he posted to his Facebook page — a social media platform created by a juice. (Naturalization officials must have high-fived one another when they got that guy.)

CNN was so relieved to have a “homegrown” terrorist who wasn’t a Muslim, the network abandoned its own rule book and identified Almonte as the child of “Latino immigrants” — amid fulsome descriptions of him as “an all-American kid” and an “all-American altar boy.”

So the good news is: Not all “American” terrorists are Muslim immigrants. Some are Latino immigrants — who typically become radicalized after coming into contact with one of our prized Muslim immigrants.

In addition to “DEATH TO ALL JUICE” Almonte, there was Bryant Neal Vinas, whose parents were legal immigrants from Argentina and Peru. Vinas fought with al-Qaida in Afghanistan and, in 2008, plotted to bomb New York’s Penn Station.

At least he’s not one of those icky illegal immigrants!

I have a word limit, so I’ve limited today’s discussion of legal immigrants to the terrorists. But I note that the big news this week is about an illegal immigrant, Victor Aureliano Martinez Ramirez, who raped, then murdered 64-year old Marilyn Pharis with a hammer at her home in Santa Maria, California. Has anyone noticed that Martinez Ramirez’s co-conspirator in the rape-torture-murder was legal immigrant Jose Fernando Villagomez?

It’s getting to the point where we’re going to need cattle prods and shock collars to break people of the neurotic compulsion to slip “ILLEGAL” in front of the word “immigrant.” The reality of legal immigration cannot make a dent in the elite’s make-believe world, where legal immigrants are only hot Swedish models, Rupert Murdoch and Sergey Brin.cause of death

Instead of Christie and Paul sparring over government policy on search warrants in a post-9/11 world, could we reconsider the government policy of admitting legal immigrants who need to be spied on?

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

Nancy Reagan invites 16 candidates to CNN GOP presidential debate


GOP presidential candidates from left, Chris Christie, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Scott Walker, Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and John Kasich take the stage for the first Republican presidential debate, Aug. 6, 2015, in Cleveland. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)

Former first lady Nancy Reagan is inviting 16 Republican candidates to participate in the CNN/Reagan Library presidential debate. Candidates must achieve an average of at least 1 percent of support in three national presidential polls before Sept. 10 to be included in the Sept. 16 debate at the Air Force One Pavilion at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California.

The top 10 contenders who made it into the first GOP debate last week on Fox News — Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Chris Christie, John Kasich — have all been invited, as well as six of the seven candidates who participated in the earlier debate: Rick Perry, Rick Santorum, Bobby Jindal, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham and George Pataki. Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore has not yet been invited.

The CNN event will be broken into two back-to-back debates with two groups of candidates. CNN’s Jake Tapper will moderate both debate groups.

“Debates are a crucial part of the election process, and I’m thrilled that so many qualified candidates have the opportunity to be heard at the Reagan Presidential Library,” Reagan, the widow of late President Ronald Reagan, said in a press release.

Picture1

(h/t CNN)

In God We Trust freedom combo 2

GOP candidates battle to stake their positions in first 2016 debate


waving flagPublished August 07, 2015; FoxNews.com

From fiery criticism of ObamaCare and the Iran nuclear deal to support for Israel and the rights of the unborn, the top 10 Republican presidential candidates did all they could to define and separate themselves Thursday night during the Fox News debate in Cleveland, Ohio.

The governors on stage, notably John Kasich of Ohio and Scott Walker of Wisconsin, touted their economic records. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz vowed to scrap the Iran deal. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson reminded voters in his closing remarks of the professional background that separates him from the rest: “I’m the only one to separate Siamese twins.”

Throughout the debate, Donald Trump was the unrivaled lightning rod, but the prime-time showdown made clear he’s not the only fighter on the stage – or in the race.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie reclaimed his reputation as a tough-talking executive, blasting his rivals for their positions on domestic surveillance and entitlements. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul traded barbs with several candidates, including Christie.

Meanwhile, one-time front-runner former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush found himself on defense several times and largely avoided tangling with Trump on the Fox News/Facebook stage.

Perhaps the most fiery moment came in an exchange between Christie and Paul. Long-simmering tension between the two exploded when Christie stood by his criticism of the senator for opposing NSA bulk collection of Americans’ phone data.

Paul said he’s “proud of standing for the Bill of Rights,” but Christie called his stance “completely ridiculous” – suggesting he wants to cherry-pick only some data.

“When you’re sitting in the subcommittee just blowing hot air about this, you can say things like that,” Christie said.

Paul fired back: “I know you gave [President Obama] a big hug, and if you want to give him a big hug again, go ahead.” Christie said the hugs he gave were to the families of 9/11 victims, and then accused Paul of playing “politics,” by using videos of floor speeches to raise money.

The exchange was striking, even in a debate that was tense from the start. Though several rivals stood out, Trump did not hold his fire, either – making clear he’s not softening his approach to campaigning as he picks up steam in the polls.

If anything, the debate signaled the primary race is about to get tougher and is still wide open as 17 candidates vie for the lead with months to go until the opening contests.

Trump, the billionaire businessman front-runner, sparred at the outset of the debate with Paul after refusing to pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee if it’s not him and to swear off an independent run.

“I will not make the pledge at this time,” Trump said.

Paul accused him of “hedging his bet on the Clintons.”

“He’s already hedging his bets, because he’s used to buying politicians,” Paul said. (Trump later acknowledged he gave money to the Clintons and demanded Hillary Clinton “be at my wedding” in exchange; he called this a sign of a broken system.)

Trump also stood firm on his vow to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. “If it weren’t for me, you wouldn’t even be talking about illegal immigration,” Trump said, blasting “stupid leaders” in the U.S. harboring illegal immigrants.

Bush said a comprehensive solution is needed, including a “path to earned legal status,” which he said is not “amnesty.”

Moments later, Cruz said some on stage support “amnesty”, while he does not.

A big question going into the debate was whether Bush would aggressively challenge Trump and try to knock him off his perch.

But he would only go so far as to question Trump’s tone, calling his language “divisive.” Hours before the debate, Politico ran a story saying Bush recently told a donor he thinks Trump is a “buffoon” and a “clown.” Asked about that report on stage, Bush denied it.

“It’s not true,” Bush said.

Trump then called Bush a “true gentleman.”

As for his tone, Trump said it’s “medieval times” in the Middle East, and, “We don’t have time for tone.”

But other candidates were able to stand out on the crowded stage. Carson called Hillary Clinton the “epitome” of the progressive movement.

“She counts on the fact that people are uninformed. The Alinsky model, taking advantage of useful idiots,” he said.

Walker also blasted the Iran nuclear deal, as did other candidates: “This is not just bad with Iran, this is bad with ISIS, it is tied together and once and for all we need a leader who is going to do something about it. It is yet another example of the failed foreign policy of the Obama-Clinton doctrine.”

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio landed laughs when, upon being asked about his faith in God, he said: “I think God has blessed us, he’s blessed the Republican Party with some very good candidates. The Democrats can’t even find one.”

Rubio also vowed to repeal and replace ObamaCare, and called the lack of accountability after the Veterans Affairs scandal “outrageous.”

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee vowed to defend entitlements and stood his ground on social issues. He blasted Planned Parenthood and defended his pro-life views, accusing abortion providers of “selling” fetal parts “like they’re parts to a Buick.”

Kasich, like Walker and Bush, tried to keep the focus on his record in his state.

“America is a miracle country and we have to restore the sense that the miracle will apply to you,” he said.

And Cruz vowed, if elected, to prosecute Planned Parenthood, cancel the Iran nuclear deal and nix Obama’s executive orders. “I believe the American people are looking for someone to speak the truth,” he said.

Trump was challenged several times on his conservative views. He previously was pro-choice, but said he’s “evolved” on the issue.

Also, under questioning from moderator Megyn Kelly about past disparaging comments he made about women, Trump interrupted to say, “Only Rosie O’Donnell.” He then said, “Honestly, Megyn, if you don’t like it, I’m sorry.”

The candidates squared off at the second of two kick-off debates, hosted by Fox News and Facebook in conjunction with the Ohio Republican Party.

The seven other Republican hopefuls spent much of the first debate doing their best to hammer home the message that Clinton represents four more years of Obama. In the earlier debate, the candidates largely avoided sparring with each other and instead trained their fire on the Obama years — with promises to roll back ObamaCare and undo the Iran nuclear deal.


 

waving flagHuckabee: ‘The Military Is Not A Social Experiment’ [VIDEO]

Reported by Steve Guest; Media Reporter

URL of the original posting site: http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/07/huckabee-the-military-is-not-a-social-experiment-video/#ixzz3iA7i4eqC

During the Fox News GOP debate Thursday, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee stated, “The military is not a social experiment.” Huckabee continued, “The purpose of the military is kill people and break things. It’s not to transform the culture by trying out some ideas that some people think would make us a different country and more diverse. The purpose is to protect America. I’m not sure how paying for transgender surgery for soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines makes our country safer.”

huck


 

Fiorina stands out in Republican ‘happy hour’ debate

Getty Images

Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina stood out Thursday in the first GOP primary debate, taking shots at Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton while showing off her foreign policy acumen.

Fiorina, the only woman among the 17 Republican candidates taking part in Thursday’s two debates, shined as the seven candidates who didn’t make the Republican top 10 squared off in a 5 p.m. undercard.

Minutes into what’s being called the happy hour debate, she took a shot at GOP front-runner Donald Trump for his connections to Bill and Hillary Clinton.

“I didn’t get a phone call from Bill Clinton before I jumped in the race. Did any of you get a phone call from Bill Clinton? I didn’t,” Fiorina said, referencing reports that Trump spoke with Bill Clinton ahead of his presidential launch.

“Maybe it’s because I haven’t given money to the foundation or donated to his wife’s Senate campaign,” she added.

Fiorina further highlighted Trump’s policy inconsistencies, an attack that may return in the 9 p.m. debate.

“I would also just say this. Since he has changed his mind on amnesty, on healthcare and on abortion, I would just ask, what are the principles by which he will govern?” Fiorina asked.

Fiorina outlined an ambitious agenda for her first days in office if she were to become president. She would call Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Iranian supreme leader to express displeasure with the agreement, she said, then on the second day, she’d convene a summit at Camp David with Arab allies.

Fiorina, who has often been discussed as a possible vice presidential candidate for her party, closed her performance by taking a shot at Hillary Clinton, the Democratic front-runner for that party’s presidential nomination.

She criticized Clinton for dodging questions on topics including the 2012 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead.

“We need a nominee who is going to throw every punch, not pull punches,” Fiorina said.

Google reported that Fiorina was the most searched candidate during the early debate, and she also received the most Twitter chatter.

Pundits also gave her good reviews, with Washington Post columnist George Will saying she “stood out with precision and fluency,” and Fox News host Chris Wallace also praising her.

Fox News pundit Charles Krauthammer said she won the debate “going away.”

Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry also maintained a steady performance throughout the debate, using his time on stage to tout his state’s economic performance and calling for the Iran nuclear deal negotiated by President Obama to be torn up.

It was a much stronger performance for Perry than four years ago, when his first presidential campaign quickly came crashing down after he was heard saying “oops,” when he forgot that he wanted to abolish the Department of Education in response to a debate question.

But Perry also seemed to boost Fiorina, by at one point suggesting she should have negotiated the Iran deal on behalf of the U.S. instead of Secretary of State John Kerry.

“I would whole lot rather have Carly Fiorina over there doing our negotiation than John Kerry. Maybe we would have gotten a deal where we didn’t give everything away,” Perry said.

Fiorina has not been shy about going after Clinton, whose allies quickly fired back on Thursday.

“Carly Fiorina sure seemed to like Hillary Clinton back when she spoke before the Clinton Global Initiative,” Correct the Record spokeswoman Mary Jennings said.

Correct the Record is a rapid-response organization allied with Clinton.

“In reality, Fiorina is just another cookie-cutter, out-of-touch far-right Republican — holding the same out-of-date positions as all the rest on stage, and willing to take shots at the positive, philanthropic work of others.”

The seven candidates for the initial debate performed before a mostly empty auditorium; tickets were not sold for the undercard to the 9 p.m. debate.

The Fox News hosts moderating the debate, Martha MacCallum and Bill Hemmer, essentially asked each candidate at the beginning why anyone should take them seriously.

MacCallum and Hemmer asked Perry why he’s ready to lead the country now after his failed 2012 bid; whether Fiorina comparing herself to Margaret Thatcher is “a stretch;” if former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum’s moment had “passed;” and why Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal should be president given his low popularity in his home state.

The seven underdogs spared each other from criticism, but aimed fire at two Republicans who will be on the prime-time stage: Trump and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Under questioning from the moderators, Jindal criticized Kasich for expanding Medicaid in Ohio under ObamaCare.

“I don’t think anybody should expand Medicaid,” said Jindal, who rejected the Medicaid expansion in his state. “I think it was a mistake to expand Medicaid everywhere, in Ohio and across the country.”

Kasich stands out among the Republican presidential candidates for accepting the expansion. Under ObamaCare, states have the choice of expanding eligibility for Medicaid, the government health insurance program for the poor, up to 138 percent of the poverty level.Complete Message

Former New York Gov. George Pataki sided with Jindal.

“I don’t think you expand entitlements when so many people are dependent on government,” he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who appeared loose and open in a New Hampshire forum earlier this week, seemed tense at the start of Thursday’s debate and rambled on an answer about Clinton’s comment that she and her husband were “dead broke” when they left the White House.

But near the end of the debate, Graham shared a compelling story of depending on Social Security after his parents died.

“Today I’m 60. I’m not married, I don’t have any kids. I would give up some Social Security to save the system that Americans are going to depend on now and in the future,” Graham said.

The Democratic National Committee panned the debate as a repeat of GOP candidates who ran for president four years ago.

“They are outdated, out of touch and out of line, but not out of company. If you missed the pre-show, these ideas will be on full display again in a few hours,” DNC spokeswoman Holly Shulman said in a statement.

Jesse Byrnes and Peter Sullivan contributed.

This story was updated at 7:46 p.m. 

President Obama Asks Liberals to Watch the GOP Debate so They See Them Ruin his Hard Work


waving flagPosted by    August 4, 2015

Obama-Mean

If you thought only Republicans would be watching the GOP debate this Thursday, let me be the first to tell you: Masses of Obamabots will be tuning in from their very own debate watch parties!

Earlier today President Obama ensured that Fox News would receive the entire nation’s attention during the Cleveland debate after he sent an email to the Democratic National Committee requesting that fellow liberals watch the televised event.

From Cleveland.com:

Democrats need to “listen carefully to what the Republican candidates for president say, and then hold them accountable for trying to undo all of the hard work we’ve done to move this country forward,” Obama said in an email message sent today by the Democratic National Committee. 

“I can’t overstate what an important difference you can make by doing this.”

All the hard work? The Golfer-in-Chief actually says stuff like that with a straight face. To be quite frank, Mr. President seems a little bitter…

“I’m gonna bet that they’ll all promise to repeal the Affordable Care Act,” he writes. “They’ll all tell us that even though they aren’t scientists, we shouldn’t believe in the science behind climate change. They’ll all want to reverse course on immigration reform and marriage equality.

“They’re going to deny all of the progress we’ve made together over these past six years,” he adds.

“But here’s the thing: While these Republicans may have bad ideas, they’re still smart politicians. They know how to make policies that will take us in the wrong direction sound like they might actually be pretty good ideas.”

Regardless of the motive behind Obama’s email, I think the Democratic viewers may be enlightened by the debate. Perhaps they’ll finally understand the logic behind some of our policies. Wouldn’t THAT be a miracle?

Thank you for the publicity, Mr. President. I know Fox appreciates you driving more viewers their way.Indenification of Obama

H/T WZ

More Evidence Alinsky affect freedom combo 2

Boehner vows fight to scuttle Iran nuclear deal


waving flagPublished July 22, 2015, FoxNews.com

House Speaker John Boehner vowed Wednesday to do “everything possible” to stop the newly struck Iran nuclear deal, as Congress formally begins consideration of the hard-fought pact. “While the president’s Iran deal may have been applauded at the United Nations, I think he faces serious skepticism here at home,” Boehner told reporters at a briefing. “Let me just assure you that members of Congress will ask much tougher questions this afternoon when we meet with the president’s team, because a bad deal threatens the security of the American people.”Suicide-USA-NRD-600

The warning comes just days after the U.N. Security Council endorsed the deal, over the objections of many in Congress. Republicans, and some Democrats, had wanted the administration to wait until Congress reviews it before seeking approval from the United Nations.  Congress nevertheless will have its say. Fox News has learned the administration formally sent the deal to Capitol Hill on Sunday — this starts a 60-day clock for lawmakers to consider it, and then vote to approve or disapprove it or take no action.

The White House has launched an aggressive campaign in recent days, trying to sway wavering Democrats while publicly ripping Republicans for opposing the deal. In an appearance on “The Daily Show” Tuesday, Obama portrayed the controversial deal as the best compromise the government could achieve. In a jab at the George W. Bush administration, he joked that his critics think if only former Vice President Dick Cheney had been on the U.S. negotiating team, “then everything would be fine.” IranKerry

But Congress is facing pressure from both sides of the issue. While the White House lobbies for approval, Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer, a foe of the Iran nuclear, is telling Republicans that Congress must stop the pact. IranIraselNukes

Dermer met Wednesday morning with some 30 to 40 Republicans — part of the Conservative Opportunity Society — at the invitation of Rep. Steve King of Iowa, the group’s chairman. Dermer told the group that Congress is the last backstop and no deal is better than a bad deal.

The U.N. action would not take effect for 90 days. Congress technically has limited leverage over the international aspects of the agreement. Still, Obama does not want Congress to kill any part of the deal, and has vowed to veto any such effort. The agreement itself would roll back sanctions in exchange for limits on Iran’s nuclear program, with the ultimate goal of blocking Tehran’s pathway to a nuclear weapon for as long as the deal’s in place. Deflated Diplomacy

Critics argue that Iran could still be well-positioned to pursue a nuclear weapon after a decade, all the while reaping billions in economic benefits. Further, they’re concerned the deal gives Iran too much leeway to stall when international inspectors want to visit suspected nuclear sites.

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., said in a statement Tuesday that they learned from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that two “side deals” between Iran and the IAEA will remain secret from Congress and the public.  According to the lawmakers, one agreement covers inspection of the Parchin military complex, and the other concerns potential military aspects of Iran’s nuclear program. On the former, they said, Iran would be able to strike a separate arrangement with the IAEA concerning inspections at Parchin.

“In failing to secure the disclosure of these secret side deals, the Obama administration is asking Congress and the American people to trust, but not verify,” Cotton said in a statement. “What we cannot do is trust the terror-sponsoring, anti-American, outlaw regime that governs Iran and that has been deceiving the world on its nuclear weapons work for years.” Missing-Piece-600-LI

Fox News’ Chad Pergram and Lucas Tomlinson and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

freedom combo 2

Obama Honors Islam Before Dead Marines Killed by Islamic Terrorist; Americans Furious


waving flagPosted By Paul Joseph Watson On July 17, 2015

Article from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com

URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/obama-honors-islam-before-dead-marines-killed-by-islamic-terrorist-american-furious

muslim-obamaPresident Obama issued a statement yesterday urging Americans to respect the religion of Islam before he even commented on a terror attack by an Islamic extremist in Chattanooga which killed four Marines, prompting widespread anger.

The White House tweeted out a statement wishing Muslims “Eid Mubarak!” as Ramadan came to a close, adding that, “the holiday is a reminder to every American of the importance of respecting those of all faiths and beliefs.”

It was only after Obama had lectured Americans about respecting Islam that he paid tribute to the four dead Marines killed by an Islamic terrorist.against America

Reaction to the timing was brutal.

t02 t03 t04

Obama has been widely criticized for his refusal to even use the term “Islamic” when referring to Islamist terror attacks, an illustration of the stifling political correctness that surrounds discussion of Islamic-inspired atrocities.

In the aftermath of the shootings, the leftist media, which immediately exploited the Charleston attack to collectively demonize all white Americans, is noticeably shy to discuss Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez’s motivation.

Salon.com, which said that “white America must answer for the Charleston massacre,” has as its top story this morning a piece about drafting Al Gore. There are no mentions of Chattanooga until you scroll well down the page.What did you say 05.jpg

Donald Trump also took Obama to task during a Fox News appearance last night, slamming his fear of using the term “Islamic terrorism.”

t05

Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71
FOLLOW Paul Joseph Watson @ https://twitter.com/PrisonPlanet

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.


freedom combo 2

In Oregon, 15-year-olds can get state-subsidized sex change surgery without parental consent


Socialism alert
transition between man woman transgender

Never mind death panels under Obamacare. Instead try to wrap your mind around ainsane different panel of experts, this one with the authority to grant your 15-year-old’s request to undergo sex reassignment surgery — and without your knowledge, much less your consent.

As unfathomable as it sounds, such a panel exists in the state of Oregon and has the Orwellian-sounding name Health Evidence Review Commission (HERC). This 13-member panel is hand-selected by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.

Fox News reports that HERC recently changed its policy to include cross-sex hormone therapy, puberty-suppressing drugs, and gender-reassignment surgery for people with gender dysphoria. Since the age of medical consent in Oregon is 15, your 15-year-old can decide on his own to become a her. To add insult to horrific injury, covered medical procedures are paid for through the Oregon Health Plan, the state’s Medicaid program. This means that although parents don’t get to participate in their child’s decision to undergo life-altering medical treatment, they do ultimately get stuck with the bill.Keys taken

Paul McHugh, of the Johns Hopkins Psychiatry Department and himself a pioneer in gender reassignment surgery, says Oregon’s policy amounts to child abuse. He is quoted as saying:

We have a very radical and even mutilating treatment being offered to children without any evidence that the long-term outcome of this would be good.

A 2008 study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry further calls into question the wisdom of this procedure, noting as it does that “most children with gender dysphoria will not remain gender dysphoric after puberty.”Screen-Shot-2015-06-17-at-10_25_32-AM-300x180

Jenn Burleton, who herself underwent sex-reassignment surgery and founded the Portland non-profit group TransActive, argues that the policy has the potential to save young lives:

Parents may not be supportive. They may not be in an environment where they feel the parent will affirm their identity, this may have been going on for years.

But a study conducted by Britain’s National Health Service found that the percentage of those who commit suicide after being denied the surgery is nearly identical to the percentage of people who kill themselves after receiving the surgery.

It is clear that more research is needed on this topic. In the meantime, one would be hard-pressed to justify letting any child make the decision unilaterally to undergo any surgery.

Big Gay Hate Machine freedom combo 2

Gun allegedly used by San Francisco shooting suspect belonged to federal agent, source says


waving flagPublished July 08, 2015; FoxNews.com

sanchezpleainternal.jpg
July 7, 2015: Francisco Sanchez, right, is lead into the courtroom by San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, left, and Assistant District Attorney Diana Garciaor, center, for his arraignment at the Hall of Justice in San Francisco. (AP)

The gun used by a Mexican illegal immigrant when he allegedly shot and killed a 32-year-old woman at a San Francisco pier belonged to a federal agent, a source confirmed to Fox News Tuesday. It was not immediately clear how Francisco Sanchez, 45, would have obtained the weapon. However, the San Francisco Chronicle reported sources told the paper the gun had been stolen during a car burglary in June.

Earlier Tuesday, Sanchez pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in last week’s shooting of Kathryn Steinle, 32, while she was walking with her father and a family friend at Pier 14. Police said witnesses heard no argument or dispute before the shooting, suggesting it was a random attack.

Sanchez had previously told KGO-TV Sunday in a mix of Spanish and English that he found a gun wrapped inside a shirt while he was sitting on a bench at the pier and smoking a cigarette. “So I picked it up and … it started to fire on its own,” Sanchez said, adding that he heard three shots go off. A source familiar with the investigation told the San Francisco Chronicle that Sanchez said he was at the popular pier to shoot at sea lions, and discarded the firearm after realizing he had shot Steinle.

The shooting has drawn national attention and criticism of the city’s sanctuary ordinance after federal officials revealed that Sanchez has seven felony convictions and was deported five times to his native Mexico. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had turned Sanchez over to authorities in San Francisco on March 26 on an outstanding drug warrant. The Sheriff’s Department released Sanchez on April 15 after the San Francisco district attorney’s office declined to prosecute him for what authorities said was a decade-old marijuana possession case.More Evidence

ICE spokeswoman Virginia Kice said the agency had issued a detainer for Sanchez, requesting notification of his release and asking that he remain in custody until immigration authorities could pick him up. The detainer was not honored, she said.

Freya Horne, counsel for the San Francisco Sheriff’s Department, said Friday that federal detention requests are not sufficient to hold someone. Under the city’s sanctuary ordinance, people in the country illegally aren’t handed over to immigration officials unless there’s a warrant for their arrest.tolerance level

Fox News’ Jessica Miller and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

freedom combo 2

Glenn Beck: ‘Prepare for all-out war’


Posted By Cheryl Chumley On 05/19/2015

Article reblogged from WND: http://www.wnd.com

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.wnd.com/2015/05/glenn-beck-prepare-for-all-out-war/ 

against America

Glenn Beck

Former Fox News host-turned-media-giant Glenn Beck issued a dire warning to America, telling citizens to be on guard and prepare – all-out war is coming. “I would suggest that you prepare for all-out war,” he said in a recent broadcast, Raw Story reported. “War unlike we’ve ever seen in our lifetime because that’s what I believe is coming, unfortunately. I’m hoping that there’s a way to put this genie back into the bottle, but I don’t see it.”war drums

Beck said he feared “losing our country” and said another Sept. 11-type attack would prove a devastation to the nation, Mediaite reported.

“We talk about World War II, where they did shock and awe,” Beck’s co-host Stu Burguiere said. “Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of civilians died. It was not a pretty picture. And obviously war is hell, but is there any way that America — with the backbone we have today, with the 99 percenters and Occupy Wall Street as part of this country, with all that — they are going to accept a war effort like that?” 

Beck said the next truly devastating terrorist attack will be perpetrated by “home-grown” terrorists, and “they will be in multiple cities, so you won’t know” what to expect next.

He said, in context of discussing the ISIS vow to harm the president and raise the terrorist flag over the White House: “Did you see what ISIS came out and said? That ISIS, their number one goal now is to hit America and kill the president. I cannot imagine. That would change perspectives entirely.’

“We got the Patriot Act the last time. Can you even imagine what the Department of Homeland Security would do if they, God forbid, hurt the president?”muslim-obama

Beck also said a different president – a Republican chief – would prove the better defender of America in a coming all-out war.

“We would bomb the snot out of them, if you had a Republican,” he said. “If we had President Barack Obama, I think we would just go on some apology tour. But if we had some economic collapse where people were frightened – really, truly frightened – and then on top of it we had some really bad terrorist attack, I think we would.”was


 

Bill O’Reilly calls allegations he abused ex-wife ‘100 percent false’


Yahoo News

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://news.yahoo.com/bill-oreilly-denies-abuse-ex-wife-divorce-custody-report-135437299.html

Bill O'Reilly (Frank Micelotta/Invsion/AP)
Bill O’Reilly (Frank Micelotta/Invsion/AP)

Bill O’Reilly is denying a report that he physically abused his former wife. “All allegations against me in these circumstances are 100 percent false,” the Fox News host said in a statement issued through his attorney to the Hollywood Reporter.

Those allegations surfaced Monday when Gawker reported details leaked from a recently-ended three-year custody battle between O’Reilly and his ex-wife, Maureen McPhilmy. According to Gawker, “a court-appointed forensic examiner testified at a closed hearing that O’Reilly’s daughter claimed to have witnessed her father dragging McPhilmy down a staircase by her neck, apparently unaware that the daughter was watching.”Picture3

The incident allegedly occurred in the couple’s Manhasset, Long Island, home prior to their 2010 separation. They divorced in 2011. Last month, a Nassau County court granted McPhilmy custody of the couple’s two minor children. Documents from the custody dispute are sealed. The website said it learned details from “a source familiar with the facts of the case.”Picture4

“I am going to respect the court-mandated confidentiality put in place to protect my children and will not comment any further,” O’Reilly said.

He did not address the allegation on Monday’s “O’Reilly Factor”. In the past, O’Reilly has frequently used his top-rated cable news show to tackle controversies head-on. In February, he dismissed allegations by former CBS News colleagues who disputed his description of Buenos Aires, Argentina, as a “combat situation” during the 1982 Falklands War.

“I was there on the street with my camera crews,” O’Reilly said on “Factor.” “The violence was horrific, as Argentine soldiers fired into the crowd, who were responding with violent acts of their own.”Picture5

OARLogo Picture6

Is Obama’s ISIS Strategy Made to Fail?


Obamacare

Posted by  / Tuesday, September 23, 2014

brit hume isis strategy
Brit Hume: “So he came up with a strategy for ISIS’s eventual defeat, which is designed…to fail slowly…”

President Obama has come under fire not only from voters but from Congressmen and members of the media over his strategy—or lack thereof—toImperial Islamic President Obama roll back ISIS in the Middle East.

The U.S. has already escalated involvement in the region by initiating air strikes as part of a joint U.S.-Arab offensive against ISIS strongholds:

The U.S. and five Arab nations attacked the Islamic State group’s headquarters in eastern Syria in nighttime raids Monday using land- and sea-based U.S. aircraft as well as Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from two Navy ships in the Red Sea and the northern Persian Gulf.

American warplanes also carried out eight airstrikes to disrupt what the military described as “imminent attack plotting against the United States and Western interests” by a network of al-Qaida veterans “with significant explosives skills,” said Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

If what Dempsey says is true (and as blunt as he has been in his testimony and media hits, I tend to trust the veracity of what he’s saying,) these missions are a necessary part of protecting American interests both in the Middle East and on U.S. soil. What isn’t clear yet is how far Barack Obama will take these missions; he’s declared time and again that he won’t put boots back on the ground, but military officials and analysts are already asking questions about the possibility of doing so if airstrikes aren’t sufficient to eradicate the ISIS network.

One theory that pundits and academics are floating is troubling, but what’s more troubling than the theory itself is its plausibility. Brit Hume laid it out on Monday’s edition of Special Report with Bret Baier:

There is an intellectually respectable case to be made that the United States should do nothing, or next to nothing, to destroy the terrorist force known as ISIS. It goes something like this:

I don’t buy this whole argument, but I sense that President Obama does, and would have preferred to take no action against ISIS beyond some air strikes in Iraq. But he felt his hand was forced by the public’s outrage and alarm over those videotaped beheadings. So he came up with a strategy for ISIS’s eventual defeat, which is designed not to succeed so much as to fail slowly in a mission he doubts should even be undertaken.

hum

We know that Obama doesn’t want to be in the Middle East because he ignored the best advice of his military advisers when he pulled our troops out of Iraq. He decided unilaterally that leaving a “footprint” in the region was an unacceptable option. He chose to support the Assad regime in Syria, which escalated tension in the region.

More importantly, he knows that right now the only thing saving his foreign policy approval rating from bottoming out is the current show of force against ISIS, and that he needs to drag this out until something happens that will allow Democrats to reclaim the “strength through diplomacy” narrative that recent events have torn to pieces. All he has to do to make this happen is the bare minimum; and even if the situation devolves, he can still claim that Bush (BUSH! BUSH!) left him with the impossible task of gluing the Middle East back together.

For this president, achieving the bare minimum at the expense of our international presence may be the only strategy he’s capable of.

You can check out the full transcript here, via Truth Revolt.

Article collective closing

STUNNING FLASHBACK: Shows 9/11 on Fox News In Real Time


Obamacare

http://clashdaily.com/2014/09/stunning-flashback-shows-911-fox-news-real-time/

Posted on September 11, 2014

911BEST remembering 911Watch the latest video at &amp;amp;lt;a href=”http://video.foxnews.com”&amp;amp;gt;video.foxnews.com&amp;amp;lt;/a&amp;amp;gt;

Every American remembers where they were 13 years ago when they first found out about the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. Here is a video that shows that day in real time on Fox News.BEST remembering 911 02

FOX NEWS INSIDER – As we mark the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, we’re taking a look back at the events of the day that changed America.

In the video above, watch how the attacks unfolded on Fox News that morning.never-forget-america-pride-remember-9-11-demotivational-poster-1284209324-554x478

Article collective closing

KIMBERLY GUILFOYLE: Fox News Host Hammers Obama With Hilarious Tweet


Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2014/07/kimberly-guilfoyle-fox-news-host-hammers-obama-hilarious-tweet/#7VO07bLecVQ2iMsm.99

Kimberly Guilfoyle seems to know Obama’s weakness. She hammers him with this one tweet that is both hilarious and somehow eerily true – because it seems like Obama would only act in the case of something preventing him from fundraising.

kimberlyArticle collective closing

 

VIDEO: Monica Crowley on What the Left Doesn’t Want to Accept – ‘We are in a Holy War’


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/11/video-monica-crowley-on-what-the-left-doesnt-want-to-accept-we-are-in-a-holy-war/

June 11, 2014 By

Monica-Crowley
In order to fight a battle and win, you have to understand what you’re up against. When it comes to the impact of the Bergdahl trade for 5 Taliban terrorists, Obama and the Left wants America to believe that it is no big deal. That mindset, however, is dangerous. Do they just not get it or do they not care about the safety and security of America? One person who does get it is FOX News Contributor Monica Crowley. During a panel discussing the Bergdahl trade on Hannity, Crowley laid out exactly what we must realize we are up against in this war on terror, and it was powerful. (Watch Video Below)

Obama defending muslimsThe left wants to make Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl out to be a victim, and nothing else. They’d like for us to forget how he was captured. He was not left behind on the battlefield, he left his post. They’d like for us to not notice the military officials who say that Bergdahl was worse than a deserter, he was a traitor because there is the belief after investigations that he collaborated with the enemy. They want us to believe the Obama story shift from saying that the five Taliban leaders he released will likely return to a life of terrorism to saying that it was determined that they no longer posed a threat. 

But, your story can alter and shift as you justify the unjustifiable when you are in denial about what this ‘war on terror,’ words that were actually struck from the lexicon by Obama, means to the terrorists.

WATCH Monica Crowley call Obama out for showcasing the wrong set of parents and making the case for the fact of what we must all accept – that we are in a Holy War

 

monica

Wake up America

Comming Soon 02Article collective closing

 

Judge Jeanine: IMPEACH OBAMA


http://www.tpnn.com/2014/05/04/judge-jeanine-blasts-obama-on-benghazi-you-condemn-anyone-who-says-something-negative-about-islam/

Judge-Jeanine
Describing the Obama Benghazi scandal as the biggest cover-up since Watergate, Judge Jeanine Pirro, on FOX News’ Justice with Judge Jeanine,  does what she does better than anyone; connect the dots and lay out the facts of corruption. The topic for her Saturday show was Obama’s culpability in the cover-up of Benghazi. (watch video below)

Judge Jeanine calls out not only Obama, but several of the other major players who, rather than seek answers and justice about the terrorist attack at Benghazi on September 11, 2012, sought to cover-up the truth about the attack to protect Obama’s re-election chances.

She calls not only calls Obama out for his lies, deception, and hypocrisy, but she questions just where his loyalty lies.

To add insult to injury, you (Obama) condemn anyone who says something negative about Islam. Mr. President, it’s not about them, it’s about us! You represent us! You’re supposed to protect us! And, instead of condemning the terrorists, you criticize free speech. I don’t even think you believe in the First Amendment, and you’re certainly not a man of your word.

In one of her most powerful statements, she says with Obama’s use of what happened at Benghazi to attack free speech, “Before our eyes, the terrorists become the victims and the American victims become irrelevant.”

In true Judge Jeanine fashion, she holds nothing back as she calls for the impeachment of Barack Obama for dereliction of duty, stonewalling Congress, and caring more about his re-election than he did about protecting Americans.

Mr. President, it’s called an abrogation of duty. You have not taken your oath to honestly and faithfully execute the duties of your office. As commander in chief, you have not protected us.

This dereliction of duty as commander in chief demands your impeachment. Your cover-up was for political advantage. The promotion thereafter virtually everyone involved in your conspiracy. And the stonewalling of Congress, the denying of access to key witnesses, all add up to a classic cover-up. And what’s that? You were elected? There is no contract with someone who thinks that the American people are nothing more than pawns in an all-consuming power play to change who we are as a nation. You swore to protect and defend the American people, but instead you left Americans to die, not lifting a finger to help them.

Mr. President, none of us want to believe that our president would let Americans die, but the arrogance, the failure to act, the lies, the cover-up make it clear that you, Mr. President, have defrauded the American people. You, Mr. President, have violated your constitutional oath. You have not faithfully executed your duties in the Office of the President. 

Fraud and deception in a quest for power – that about sums up the Obama presidency which should be brought to an end with his impeachment. 

WATCH this powerful opening statement by Judge Jeanine

(clicking on the image will take you to the original page I got this article from. The video is at the bottom of the page.)

judge

VOTE 02

 

Greta: Laughing at ObamaCare fears is disgraceful


Gretta

Published February 20, 2014  | On the Record | Greta Van Susteren

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the-record/2014/02/21/greta-laughing-obamacare-fears-disgraceful

By Greta Van Susteren

Let’s all go “Off The Record” for just a minute. Do you know what I find absolutely disgraceful? People laughing at other people’s fears and misfortunes, or even potential misfortunes.

But there’s something even worse than that — something more disgraceful. That’s when the ones laughing are also the very ones who caused the fears and misfortune. Case-in-point: Three politicians from Minnesota, all Democrats – two congressmen, Collin Peterson and Tim Walz, and U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar. Congressman Walz and Senator Klobuchar voted yes for ObamaCare. And now, well, they are laughing at what it’s doing to so many Americans. Listen to this exchange at a recent forum. (CLICK HERE to watch)

You heard right. That was laughing. Laughing at the nightmare ObamaCare is for many. And I bet if you live in Minnesota and if you have cancer or diabetes or a child with a serious disease, you aren’t laughing. In fact, you’re probably scared.

While Congressman Collin Peterson did not vote for ObamaCare, he did vote against its repeal, and now, he’s joining his two colleagues laughing. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONGRESSMAN COLLIN PETERSON: I voted no. So I’ll let these guys –

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Would you laugh if you played a role in creating this mess? That’s my “Off The Record” comment tonight. If you have an important story, issue think I should take “Off The Record,” go to GretaWire.com and tell us about it.

Only Democrats

Death and Taxes

This IS the best 90 seconds you can ever watch


Wonderful, it should be played every day till the American public wake up.

If you are not a regular watcher of Fox News (especially during the daytime hours) Then you may have missed this RETORT by Neil Cavuto. This is an excellent response (September 26, 2013) to the contradictory occupant of the White House. Takes only a moment to watch. ll want to send it on to others who have meaningful things going on in the daytime.

Cavuto

Have You Seen This Video Attack on Obamacare?


In case you missed Neal Cavuto, please see below.

Cavuto

LOVE IT! Yale Study Finds Tea Partiers Know More About Science Than Liberals, Researcher Shocked…


http://weaselzippers.us/2013/10/17/love-it-yale-study-finds-tea-partiers-know-more-about-science-than-liberals-researcher-shocked/

Although I doubt anyone here is even a little surprised by this, this will send shockwaves among the left who love to claim we’re uneducated morons.

Via Politico:

A finding in a study on the relationship between science literacy and political ideology surprised the Yale professor behind it: Tea party members know more science than non-tea partiers.

Yale law professor Dan Kahan posted on his blog this week that he analyzed the responses of a set of more than 2,000 American adults recruited for another study and found that, on average, people who leaned liberal were more science literate than those who leaned conservative.

However, those who identified as part of the tea party movement were actually better versed in science than those who didn’t, Kahan found. The findings met the conventional threshold of statistical significance, the professor said.

Kahan wrote that not only did the findings surprise him, they embarrassed him.

“I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension,” Kahan wrote.

“But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the Tea Party,” he continued. “All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the ‘paper’ (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused internet sites like Huffington Post & Politico). I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.”

PERJURY. Why Can’t We Just Say it Out Loud. Attorney General Holder Committed PERJURY.


Why is it so hard to say? Anyone of us caught lying to Congress, while under oath, would be charged with perjury. Attorney General Holder committed perjury while answering questions about his involvement with the DOJ‘s illegal act of invading the privacy of reporters, and the further slanderous invasion of privacy of FOX’s Rosen and his parents. They also committed perjury when they went to a Federal judge to get his signature for a search warrant accusing Rosen of being a co-conspirator.

That brings up a question I have been asking regarding President Obama instructing Attorney General Holder to investigate himself. Here is the question;

Have any of you ever heard of a time when an executive of a major corporation has been caught lying to the Board of Directors and then instructed by the Chairman of the Board to investigate themselves and return with a report? Anyone? Hello? Anyone out there ever heard of such a ridiculous situation?

Now even the liberals are joining the demand for Holders being fired. For me, he needs to be prosecuted for his repeated perjury before Congress.

Please see the following article from FOX NEWS;

House Republicans challenge Holder testimony on reporter surveillance

Published May 29, 2013

FoxNews.com

Top Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee openly challenged Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday over his testimony two weeks ago in which he claimed to be unaware of any “potential prosecution” of the press, despite knowing about an investigation that targeted a Fox News reporter.

Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-Wis., voiced “great concern” in a letter to Holder. They asked a litany of questions about the department’s dealings with the press, and pointedly alleged that the Fox News case “contradicts” his testimony at a May 15 hearing.

“It is imperative that the committee, the Congress, and the American people be provided a full and accurate account of your involvement,” they wrote.

The letter comes a day after the committee confirmed it was looking into Holder’s testimony. Appearing before the House Judiciary Committee on May 15, Holder insisted that “the potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material” is not something he was involved in or knew about.

But days later, it emerged that the Justice Department obtained access to the emails of Fox News reporter James Rosen — after filing an affidavit that accused him of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator” in the leak of sensitive material regarding North Korea. Rosen was never charged, and never prosecuted. But he was effectively accused of violating the federal Espionage Act. 

“The media reports and statements issued by the Department regarding the search warrants for Mr. Rosen’s emails appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony before the Committee,” Goodlatte and Sensenbrenner wrote in the letter Wednesday. They did not accuse Holder of committing perjury, but noted he was “under oath.”

Among other questions, they asked Holder how he could claim to have never heard of the potential prosecution of the press. And they asked him to clarify whether he “personally approved” the search warrant request. Sensenbrenner, in an interview on Fox News, threatened to subpoena Holder to come before the committee if necessary.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, though, said on Wednesday that it appears Holder testified truthfully. He said President Obama “absolutely” has confidence in him.

The top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, said he thinks Holder “was forthright and did not mislead the Committee.”

“Certainly, there are policy disagreements as to how the First Amendment should apply to these series of leak investigations being conducted by the Justice Department, and that is and should be an area for the committee to consider.  However, there is no need to turn a policy disagreement into allegations of misconduct,” he said.

Holder could argue that, in fact, Rosen was never prosecuted — and so his testimony was not misleading.

A federal law enforcement official said last week that the department had to establish probable cause in the affidavit in order to obtain the search warrant, per the terms of the Privacy Protection Act.

“Saying that there is probable cause to believe that someone has committed a crime and actually charging the person with that crime are two very different things,” the official said.

Meanwhile, one of the country’s most prominent liberal legal scholars called Wednesday for Holder to be “fired,” joining the growing list of left-leaning pundits slamming his department’s pursuit of journalists’ phone and email records.

Jonathan Turley, an attorney and law professor at George Washington University, hammered Holder in a USA Today column Wednesday. He charged that Holder has “supervised a comprehensive erosion of privacy rights, press freedom and due process,” aided by Democrats who looked the other way.

But in the wake of the reporter records scandal, Democrats are starting to join with Republicans in questioning whether Holder continues to be the right man to lead the Department of Justice in President Obama’s second term.

Turley, in his column, referenced a recent call by the Republican National Committee chairman for Holder’s resignation. “Unlike the head of the RNC, I am neither a Republican nor conservative, and I believe Holder should be fired,” Turley wrote.

While Democrats largely defended Holder when his department came under fire for the botched anti-gunrunning sting Operation Fast and Furious, they’ve been less forgiving over the move this year to seize two months of phone records from Associated Press offices. That bombshell was compounded by the revelation that the department seized phone and email records for Fox News offices. The scandal grew as the department acknowledged Friday that Holder was involved in the court document that accused Rosen of being a likely criminal “co-conspirator,” as part of the department’s successful argument for obtaining a search warrant for Rosen’s emails. 

According to a report in The Daily Beast, aides say Holder has started to feel regret for the investigations. Under Obama’s direction, he is starting a review of DOJ policies and meeting with representatives from the media. 

A Justice Department official said Wednesday that Holder will hold meetings with several Washington bureau chiefs of national news organizations over the next two days.

“These meetings will begin a series of discussions that will continue to take place over the coming weeks. During these sessions, the Attorney General will engage with a diverse and representative group of news media organizations, including print, wires, radio, television, online media and news and trade associations,” the official said.

Turley, in his column, scoffed at this course of action, since Holder was involved in the surveillance — at least the surveillance involving Fox News — in the first place. “Such an inquiry offers no reason to trust its conclusions,” Turley wrote.

He described Holder as a trusted Obama “sin eater,” swallowing the worst criticisms to shield the president.

“Indeed, these sins should be fatal for any attorney general,” Turley wrote.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/29/prominent-liberal-attorney-turley-joins-call-for-holder-to-be-fired/#ixzz2UilOlpay

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: