Now, however, Democrats live to defy what was once common sense as well as stymy national priorities because of their Trump Derangement Syndrome. As we reported last week, they keep moving the goal post on the border-funding debate, coming back with lower and lower budget numbers. Senate Minority Leader Chuck scumbag/clown-Schumer and incoming House Speaker Nancy Pulosi are now offering just $1.3 billion in border-security funding, with none of it earmarked for the wall.
At that meeting, President Trump proudly declared he would own any government shutdown that results from the Democrats’ bad faith negotiating. This may sound like traditional Trump grandstanding, but the president knows as well as the rest of us that Republicans always get blamed for shutdowns thanks to the Demo-owned and operated media. Might as well proudly own it and explain why.
Just what kind of shutdown will Republicans be blamed for this time around? How bad will the damage be? Well, we won’t be seeing national monuments barricaded like when Barack scumbag/liar-nObama petulantly made a shutdown as politically painful as possible in 2013.
In fact, despite what Democrats and the media will say, this impending shutdown will not be nearly as disruptive as previous ones. For starters, the government is already 75% funded through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, 2019. This includes the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Labor, Energy, and Veterans Affairs. Only $314 billion of the government’s $1.24 trillion discretionary budget is still pending.
Homeland Security, Transportation, and Justice, among some other departments, remain unfunded. But airport-security personnel will still be on duty over the holidays, as essential workers are mandated to work through shutdowns. They’ll just have to wait until Congress returns to work to get their paychecks.
In fact, The Washington Times reports, “More than 400,000 essential government employees could be forced to stay on the job throughout a government shutdown — even if they’d already planned to take holiday vacations. A quirk of federal law says paid leave is considered government spending, and since no unauthorized spending can happen during a funding lapse, no one can take vacation.”
It’s an absolute myth that federal workers are not paid for working through a shutdown. Paychecks in some cases may be withheld, but full salaries are restored with retroactive pay once shutdowns conclude. The issue here is that this potential shutdown would come during the holiday season.
Another reason that a potential shutdown won’t be as painful as we are led to believe is because a vast majority of federal spending is on autopilot. In 2015, $3.2 trillion of the $3.7 trillion the federal government spent did not require any authorization by Congress.
As part of Congress’s long-term goal of divesting its responsibilities so its members can focus solely on reelection, legislators have set up “permanent appropriations” to automatically set spending levels for entitlements like Social Security and Medicare and also for wealth transfers via Medicaid and welfare. Federal agencies have been given power by Congress to spend money without legislative approval.
This trend has grown dramatically, with autopilot spending rising 87% since 1994. With no one minding the store on 86% of federal spending, it should come as no surprise that we have trillion-dollar annual deficits and a $22 trillion debt.
The media could focus on this and the fact that our elected members of Congress are shirking their constitutionally mandated responsibilities to the detriment of the country’s future. Blaming everything on President Trump is much easier, though. Better luck next shutdown. ~The Patriot Post
All Posts (29734)
{foxnews.com} ~ House Republicans on Tuesday released a transcript of their explosive closed-door session a day earlier with fired FBI Director scumbag-James Comey... who revealed during the questioning that FBI agents knew "exactly" what ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn had told Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak prior to interviewing Flynn at the White House. The 173-page transcript, which documented congressional Republicans' second hearing with scumbag-Comey this month, also included scumbag-Comey's explanation of why he broke normal protocol by sending two FBI agents into the White House to interview Flynn in January 2017, without involving or notifying White House lawyers. Flynn has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during that fateful interview about whether he had discussed sanctions imposed against Russia by the scumbag/liar-nObama administration with Kislyak. His sentencing was delayed on Monday, after a fiery hearing in which the presiding judge openly voiced his "disgust" at Flynn's conduct. Flynn was fired in February 2017 for misleading Vice President Mike Pence on the same topic, but was not charged with any wrongdoing related to the substance of his communications with Kislyak. And, a Washington Post article published one day before his White House interview with the agents, citing FBI sources, publicly revealed that the FBI had wiretapped Flynn's calls and cleared him of any criminal conduct...
Fast-forward two long years swamped with investigations and Democrat efforts to undermine Americans’ faith in our election integrity, and Isikoff now says many of the claims in the dossier “will never be proven and are likely false.” But why worry about facts when there’s an elected president to undermine? After all, Isikoff still insists the dossier author, Christopher Steele, “was clearly onto something” regarding “a major Kremlin effort to interfere in our elections” and help Trump.
That latter point brings us to the latest story from The Washington Post: “A report prepared for the Senate that provides the most sweeping analysis yet of Russia’s disinformation campaign around the 2016 election found the operation used every major social media platform to deliver words, images and videos tailored to voters’ interests to help elect President Trump — and worked even harder to support him while in office.”
The Post reported on the study and then gleefully editorialized that it is now indisputable that Russia supported Trump. Is it? Not so fast.
It may be true that Russians targeted the American electorate with messages supporting Trump, and we agree with the WaPo that “this foreign intervention [is] absolutely intolerable.” (It was also intolerable when Democrats sought Soviet help to defeat Ronald Reagan in 1984.) But to think a spate of social-media posts containing thoughts already widely reflected among voters somehow swung the 2016 election — much less that Trump was complicit in it — strains credulity. In fact, we in our humble shop have always believed Russian interference boiled down to this: The Kremlin, along with nearly everyone else, assumed scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton would win in 2016, and thus sought to sow discord among American voters that would then weaken an already reset-compromised scumbag/liar-Clinton, with whom Moscow would rather deal.
That the Russians succeeded beyond their wildest dreams is an indictment of Democrats, scumbag/liar-nObama “intelligence” hacks, and the Leftmedia, not of Trump. ~The Patriot Post
by Joe DiGenova
{townhall.com} ~ How many times in the last year and a half have we watched liberals clamor and cheer as if their hero, dirty cop-Robert Mueller, had actually uncovered something important?
This week, rabid anti-Trump voices in the media are giving the “this is it!” treatment to dirty cop-Mueller’s latest “bombshell”: the sentencing memo his Special Counsel’s Office had to submit for Gen. Michael Flynn, the former national security advisor whose family dirty cop-Mueller has harassed and threatened for almost two years.
The sentencing memo is just another complete failure on dirty cop-Mueller’s part to produce anything related to the supposed reason for his appointment: the non-existent “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russian hackers. It contains evidence of nothing except the fact that dirty cop-Mueller’s entire investigation is a vindictive, partisan farce intended to overturn the legitimate result of the 2016 presidential election that sent Donald Trump to the White House.
The memo recommends that the judge give Flynn a light sentence as a reward for the “substantial assistance” he provided to dirty cop-Mueller’s investigation. Liberals are treating that recommendation as if it could only have been given in exchange for the real goods, the bombshell that’s going to finally take President Trump down.
That’s completely wrong and misleading, just like every other gleeful prediction they’ve made about the President’s impending demise.
The federal sentencing guidelines in Flynn’s case call for 0-6 months -- exactly what dirty cop-Mueller is “graciously” recommending. dirty cop-Mueller did Flynn no favors. Quite to the contrary, the only reason Flynn is facing any threat to his liberty is dirty cop-Mueller’s insistence on prosecuting him -- and more importantly threatening his son with prosecution -- over “crimes” that would have been thrown out by any ethical prosecutor the moment they crossed his desk.
How many times in the last year and a half have we watched liberals clamor and cheer as if their hero, dirty cop-Robert Mueller, had actually uncovered something important?
First, they trumped up Flynn’s attempt to establish a rapport with the Russian ambassador before he took over as national security advisor into a violation of the Logan Act, an almost certainly unconstitutional law that has never yielded a conviction despite being on the books since 1799. Then, they said the paperwork filed for his work with the Turkish government was a violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, an extraordinarily broad statute famous in Washington for its rare and selective enforcement.
Because the sentencing memo doesn’t actually contain anything damaging against President Trump, the media are focusing on the “criminal investigation” the memo mentions Flynn has cooperated with, even though that section of the memo is completely redacted.
We’ve seen this routine before: dirty cop-Mueller teases an upcoming “bombshell” revelation, and when the disclosure turns out to have nothing whatsoever to do with collusion, the media dutifully contorts the information to fit its predetermined conclusion that Donald Trump could only have won the presidency by cheating.
The latest “major development” from dirty cop-Mueller is just another disingenuous political attack job from the Office of Special Counsel, while there is still no single sign of collusion. It’s time for dirty cop-Mueller to wrap it up and close shop.
Cutting off support for Saudi Arabia’s anti-Iranian operations in Yemen would just be another in a pattern of America abandoning allies. Should senators like Chris Murphy, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul get their way, the Saudis would join the Hmong and Montagnard tribes who fought alongside American special forces in Southeast Asia, the Shah of Iran (which got us the present genocidal Islamist regime in Tehran), Carlos Castano (who helped take down Pablo Escobar), and the Kurds as American allies who had the rug pulled out from under them (this list is not exclusive, but you get the idea).
But either Saudi Arabia, Turkey, or Iran will be the primary Muslim power in the Middle East. Two decades ago, it would have been little problem to just balance between Turkey and Saudi Arabia. But Erdogan has changed that calculus, as Turkey has trended away from respecting human rights and democracy. He’s no good guy and America has needed to thus reevaluate the relationship. Cutting off F-35 deliveries was also a smart call. By contrast, the crown prince at least is spearheading some reforms in Saudi Arabia — and that country, while no exemplar of religious freedom, freedom of speech, or equal rights for women, is trending in the right direction.
What about Iran? The track record of the theocratic regime, which has routinely sponsored terrorism and which routinely calls for Israel to be wiped off the map, should dispel any notions that it would be in America’s interest to allow it to become the primary Muslim power in the Middle East. This was tried before, and Iran only continued its bad behavior.
Furthermore, in Yemen, the Saudis are fighting Iranian stooges in the Houthi. Which brings us to another important note long forgotten by our media: The Houthi fired missiles at one of our ships on multiple occasions. Thankfully, the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Mason (DDG 87) wasn’t hit, but it’s in the interests of our overstretched Navy to ensure that taking potshots at our ships is seen as being very hazardous to one’s existence.
Yes, what is going on in Yemen is horrible, and yes, civilians are caught in the middle of the conflict — as has been the case in just about all the world’s wars throughout history. But, dude, the Houthi fired missiles at one of our ships on multiple occasions. If Iran’s allies get Yemen, then we will see more potshots at our ships, and the outcome may not be as good as what happened with USS Mason.
The fact is, right now, Congress is on the verge of pulling off a very dubious feat. Not only could they give Iran a foothold in Yemen, but they could also screw up America’s relationship with a crucial ally.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/60072?mailing_id=3951&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3951&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body In what should be one of the biggest stories of the year, 16 FBI agents raided the home of Dennis Nathan Cain on Nov. 19. Cain is a former FBI contractor, and what makes the raid highly questionable is the reality that he is also a recognized Justice Department whistleblower. One, according to his attorney Michael Socarras, who had already delivered documents the FBI was seeking to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who turned them over to the House and Senate Intelligence committees.
Those documents allegedly reveal that federal officials didn’t properly investigate potential criminal activity perpetrated by former Secretary of State scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton, the scumbag/liar-Clinton Foundation, and a Russian company called Rosatom, which purchased Canadian mining company Uranium One in 2013.
The transactions resulted in Russia obtaining 20% of America’s uranium production capacity.
Which federal officials? The head of the FBI at the time was dirty cop-Robert Mueller. The investigation was supervised by former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe. It was centered in Maryland, whose U.S. attorney was Rod Rosenstein. And it ended in late 2015, during the tenure of former FBI Director scumbag-James Comey.
In other words, the same scumbag-James Comey who purposefully manipulated Rod Rosenstein into green-lighting an investigation conducted by dirty cop-Robert Mueller to determine if Donald Trump colluded with the Russians.
What does genuine collusion with the Russians look like? The scumbag/liar-nObama administration “green-lighted the transfer of control over one-fifth of American uranium-mining capacity to Russia, a hostile regime — and specifically to Russia’s state-controlled nuclear-energy conglomerate, Rosatom,” Andrew McCarthy explains. “Worse, at the time the administration approved the transfer, it knew that Rosatom’s American subsidiary was engaged in a lucrative racketeering enterprise that had already committed felony extortion, fraud, and money-laundering offenses.”
That racketeering enterprise was conducted by Vadim Mikerin, the Russian official in charge of Tenam USA, the American arm of Rosatom subsidiary Tenex. He secured the help of since-identified American lobbyist William D. Campbell to facilitate his deal-making. When Campbell became uncomfortable with the illegality of Mikerin’s machinations, he became an FBI informant.
The FBI had proof of Mikerin’s racketeering in 2010, when any disclosure of it would have killed the deal. Yet the agency allowed it to continue for another three years. At that point Rosenstein allowed Mikerin to plead guilty to one count of money-laundering conspiracy, rather than charging him with far more serious crimes with far more serious prison sentences.
The deal was cosigned by the DOJ’s Fraud Section, then run by Andrew Weissmann, one of dirty cop-Mueller’s lead investigators.
The raid on Cain’s residence was permitted by a court order signed Nov. 15 by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher in the U.S. District Court for Baltimore. According to the special agent from the FBI’s Baltimore division who conducted it, Cain possessed stolen federal property. But the agency refused to explain who authorized the raid on a recognized whistleblower.
That didn’t sit too well with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA). He sent a letter addressed to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz and FBI Director Christopher Wray, requesting that they “produce all documents to the Committee and provide an update with respect to the steps you have taken, or plan to take, regarding the FBI’s treatment of Mr. Cain’s disclosures no later than December 12, 2018.”
Grassley also wanted to know if the FBI was aware of Cain’s lawful disclosures to the IG and the congressional committees, whether it considers them protected, whether any of the information was classified, and if it was when Cain had it at his residence — and on what basis the agency conducted the raid, including a copy of the warrant and all supporting affidavits.
Grassley’s deadline was ignored, and the bombshell report by the Daily Caller two days earlier explains why: “The Department of Justice is requesting that the justification of an FBI raid on a reportedly recognized whistleblower’s home remain secret, according to a letter from U.S. Attorney Robert Hur.”
The letter was a response to the Caller’s request to unseal court documents that would reveal the why the raid was conducted and whether the FBI and Gallagher were aware that Cain was a legally protected whistleblower. Hur insisted that releasing such info would “seriously jeopardize the integrity of the ongoing investigation.” He further insisted the department’s opposition to public release was an effort “to guard against possible tampering of witnesses and destruction of evidence, and to maintain the ability of the grand jury to investigate this matter.”
Apparently some efforts by the FBI and DOJ to maintain integrity and guard against destruction of evidence are “more equal” than others. In yet another stunning revelation, IG Horowitz revealed a number text messages between anti-Trump ex-FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page have “gone missing,” and government phones issued to Strzok and Page by dirty cop-Mueller’s office had been “wiped completely clean” — by the special counsel’s records officer. Americans also learned that form 302 records of the FBI interview precipitating Gen. Michael Flynn’s prosecution were altered — months after the fact.
How long the increasingly transparent corruption can stay hidden remains to be seen. MDA Analytics LLC, a company run by ex-federal criminal investigators turned over 6,000 pages of evidence attached to a whistleblower submission filed secretly more than a year ago with the IRS and FBI. That evidence alleges the scumbag/liar-Clinton Foundation engaged in illegal activity. Those documents are in addition to the more than 5,000 documents and detailed daily briefs to the FBI turned over by Campbell — also more than a year ago.
Nonetheless, the Russian collusion investigation remains focused on Trump — enabled and conducted by a cadre of people who themselves should be investigated.
And those who dare to expose their malfeasance? Until former Attorney General Jeff Session lifted it, Campbell was issued a gag order and threatened with prosecution by the Loretta Lynch-led Justice Department when he pursued a civil action that would have revealed information about the sale. Cain had his home raided, and the FBI declines to say who authorized it or why it was authorized.
In short, what is being reported by a wholly corrupt, Trump-hating media as an investigation into the current administration’s collusion with Russia is looking more like a counteroffensive, aimed at preventing genuine Russian collusion perpetrated by several members of the scumbag/liar-nObama administration — and possibly scumbag/liar-nObama himself — from being exposed.
No one can remotely justify giving the Russians any control whatsoever of America’s uranium production capacity. The stench rising from this deal and the wholly one-sided, see-no-Democrat-evil “investigation” conducted by dirty cop-Mueller is overwhelming.
“So I blow the whistle on the FBI, get raided by the same FBI, and now they want to keep the FBI’s reasons secret? Do we now live in a secret police state? Feels a little like 1984,” Cain tweeted last Monday. It feels a lot like 1984. ~The Patriot Post
Your liberties rest not upon things written upon paper, they depend upon yourselves, and upon maintaining your property, your knowledge, and your virtue”Y. Samuel Williams 1794.
Less than a week ago I read a column that was written by Sheriff David Clarke on Townhall that made me think over what I have seen in politics over these past few years. Being a retired military veteran I have followed Sheriff Clarke for a while now, and I can honestly say it is this man who speaks for me. And from the following that Sheriff Clarke has amassed, it would appear that others follow him as well. The reason are varied I am sure, but the truth that Sheriff Clarke speaks should be a starting point for all patriots and conservatives in this country.
In his column, Sheriff Clarke speaks of an organized ground level force of conservatives who speak the truth and fight back against what the progressive socialists have done to our country. This is a war that is being forced upon our country by progressive socialists who want nothing more than to destroy our way of life, our moral underpinnings that have shaped our country and the very country itself. These conservative fighters can only come from patriots who are willing to help our duly elected President put an end to the progressive socialist lies of the mainstream media and the leftists in our government that would like nothing more than to impeach the only man who can stop the destruction they have started.
The rules governing our politics have changed. Lies, innuendo, and the constant threat of violence from these progressive socialists are all they have to offer. When talking to one of these George Soros funded fascists I always ask the same question. What are you proposing to have as a policy that will help the citizens of this country move forward? The answer is always to call me a racist ( a word that has lost all meaning because of the demeaning way the progressive socialists use it, I mean is there anything that isn’t racist these days?) and to attack by any means possible, usually in a mob to protect themselves.
The propaganda and lies permeating everything that these animals have in store for the country is everywhere, from the mainstream media to our children’s education, to entertainment, and every other facet of our daily lives that they can infiltrate. They have every intention of making violence an aspect of the conservatives everyday lives. We must understand that it has gone far past having disagreements of policies and that with groups like Antifa, Media Matters, and even some in the mainstream media, all funded by the globalist agenda that both parties adhere to, resorting to public displays of intimidation and violence, it is up to us to fight back. One by one, or in groups, it will come down to clearing our streets of this vermin.
The higher ideals that conservatives pride themselves on will not work against the rage that is becoming an everyday occurrence. Progressive socialists don’t understand that the self-ingrained thoughts of them being superior and therefore have a right to demand that we follow the rules they proclaim will no longer work. They use such phrases as “white privilege, microaggressions, safe spaces, and systemic racism are the buzzwords of no meaning that they attempt to use to shut down debate. I will not allow the loud voices or the mob rule to control what I say or do or think. Once they shut down all debate it will only be a short step to total dominance against those who disagree. I will o longer apologize to those who attempt to force the opinions that I know are wrong, no matter who they are. Whether a government entity who assists them, or the mob in the street who attempt to intimidate people wearing a MAGA hat, or an official who is only doing the job they were elected to do. Keep in mind, the rabble who look to overthrow our government and way of life are a minority of maybe 10%. But the violence, and shouting, and following the path set out for them by the globalists in charge, they appear on the mainstream media regularly.
Just a few months ago, we should remember that the puppets on CNN were comparing Antifa to the battle of Normandy. So call me what you want. Racist, homophobe or any other phrase you think will make a difference, It won’t. I know better because I am better than that and I realize most of the people in this country are. So take your paid for politicians, and you corporatists’ puppet masters and slink away.
Your agenda for destroying those patriots who will fight and fight harder than you with courage and patriotism in our hearts will never give in, will never stop beating back the global socialism you think we deserve whether you are just a stupid self-centered teenager who thinks you are making a difference, to the boardrooms and meeting places of the globalist and political elite. We know who you are, where you are and what you have planned.
It is past time to wring our hands and sob about what is happening to our country. If we want to keep our culture, our way of life and even our country and the sovereignty that is ours it is time to fight back. We can not allow the morality that has made this great nation the powerhouse it is today to falter. We must demand not only of ourselves but of those that surround us that everyone take responsibility for their own actions. It is not the responsibility to cover your face and attack people or destroy businesses or attempt to bully your way into the accepting your faulty way of life. It is not responsible to attack the values or individual rights of others, nor is it right to use the power of government to move socialist systems forward and force the American people to live by a system that has never worked in the past and in our country will only lead to civil war. The American people will never accept a reincarnation of the old Communist Party before its collapse nor the propaganda of those in the media, academics, and entertainment who have little or no knowledge of the drivel that they espouse.
It is over. No longer will conservatives, the religious, and those that value our way of life willing to just sit back and allow these animals to control our government, our culture, even our very lives. The pushback is here through countless millions who agree that this can no longer be allowed to grow and bastardize the light that this country has become. Can any of there dim bubs explain to me that if our country is so bad, why are millions of migrants and illegal aliens wanting to come here?
It will take all of us to turn this around. It will take someone jumping up on the table at CNN, MSNBC, and any other media that label us as racist and hold a panel discussion with four liberals and one conservative and get in their faces and shout them down. We need to stop allowing the media to call classless acts such as Jennifer Rubin, and Ana Navarro Republicans. They aren’t any more Republican that all the other Never Trumpers who accede to whatever it is their liberal masters want.
It is over, we will listen no more, we will no longer stand by and let you trash our nation and those of us who hold the virtues that this country has shown the world as righteous. Have there been mistakes? Of course. No country, as well as no one person, is perfect. But be advised, the war is coming to you socialists, whether in the streets or in the boardrooms, one on one or in a mob, the truth will find you, and will vanquish you.
The American people are incensed with low information mobs making themselves feel good by attacking anyone who disagrees with them. If it is a war that you want, you now have it. Voices will be raised against you, and if necessary arms as well. Be careful what you wish for you may well get it.
CBP agents “took every possible step to save the child’s life under the most trying of circumstances,” explained the Department of Homeland Security in a statement. “Unfortunately, despite our best efforts and the best efforts of the medical team treating the child, we were unable to stop this tragedy from occurring.” The DHS also noted, “The initial indication from Providence Hospital is that she passed due to sepsis shock. Her father was with her.”
The CBP said that the girl had evidently not eaten or consumed water for several days. The group of migrants had crossed a very remote and arid region of New Mexico, where there is little access to water and food. DHS also addressed the ultimate culprit, stating, “Once again, we are begging parents to not put themselves or their children at risk attempting to enter illegally. Please present yourselves at a port of entry and seek to enter legally and safely.”
Attorneys representing the migrant girl’s family pushed back against the CBP’s report, claiming that her father “made sure she was fed and had sufficient water.” Yet the Centers for Disease Control describes sepsis as the body’s extreme reaction to an existing infection somewhere in the body that can lead to rapid organ failure and death. In other words, it appears that this girl was already suffering from an infection that was exacerbated by the extreme desert conditions she was subjected to.
Unfortunately and predictably, many on the Left heaped blame for this child’s death upon border agents. Cynthia Pompa, an advocacy manager for the ACLU, suggested that “lack of accountability, and a culture of cruelty within the CBP” resulted in the girl’s death, not negligence on the part of her father. Yet he was the one responsible for dragging his daughter across a desert to illegally cross a border he knew he was not allowed to cross.
This tragedy also exposes the problem with accepting asylum requests from migrants who cross the border illegally. Ending the abuse of the U.S. asylum system will help to dissuade migrants from the notion that just making it across the border is a ticket to an indefinite stay.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/60064?mailing_id=3951&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3951&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body When Republicans passed tax reform, they repealed the tax penalty that enforced scumbag/liar-nObamaCare’s individual mandate. In doing so, they intentionally recalled Chief Justice John Roberts’s tortured logic and despotic legal rewrite in saving scumbag/liar-nObamaCare in 2012. He declared the mandate to be illegal under the Commerce Clause — “The Framers gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it” — but then he rewrote the law to declare the penalty a tax so as to justify it under Congress’s tax authority. Never mind that Democrats spent four years declaring it wasn’t a tax, or that they had drafted the law to specifically avoid that language. Republicans set the tax at $0.
Thus, 20 suing states argued and O'Connor agreed that the law is undermined and unconstitutional since the tax no longer exists and the entire law depends on the mandate. Republicans hoped for this outcome when drafting tax reform, but having repealed the tax while leaving the rest of the law standing, they undermined their own argument. Roberts did get it entirely wrong in 2012, but O'Connor’s ruling is unlikely to stand when it goes before the Fifth Circuit Court and then potentially the Supreme Court.
California led the 17 states opposing Texas and 19 others. The pro-scumbag/liar-nObamaCare states will challenge the ruling on the grounds that it represents, as California Attorney General Xavier Becerra put it, “an assault on 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, on the 20 million Americans who rely on the A.C.A.‘s consumer protections for health care, on America’s faithful progress toward affordable health care for all Americans.”
The Democrats’ strategy in establishing scumbag/liar-nObamaCare was politically and practically brilliant. They constructed a new entitlement that could survive legal challenge even when it shouldn’t have, and millions of Americans now depend on the law, making repeal of any kind — via Congress or the courts — effectively untenable. Ask congressional Republicans. And, as we warned from the beginning, the Democrats’ ultimate goal was single-payer health care. scumbag/liar-nObamaCare was deliberately faulty and incomplete, for which the convenient “solution” is total government health care. commie-Bernie Sanders and his ilk have made this plain with “Medicare for All.”
We hate to play the role of Debbie Downer, but this ruling may end up being little more than a blip on the radar. Congressional Republicans cannot outsource to the courts the work of scumbag/liar-nObamaCare repeal. ~The Patriot Post
{townhall.com} ~ Hell may have no fury like a woman scorned, but scorning the Washington Establishment produces even greater anger.
The Establishment's full fury has been unleashed against Donald Trump and is not about to subside until its goal is reached: the removal of the president from office, either through impeachment or defeat in the 2020 election.
If there were more than the kitchen sink to throw at Trump, the Establishment would be throwing it. The latest is the hyping of private money paid to two women by Trump's disgraced lawyer, Michael Cohen. The women claim it was money to keep them quiet over alleged affairs with him.
Behavior that was tolerated, or overlooked, by previous presidents is now grounds for indictment and impeachment, says the Establishment. Members of Congress who claim Trump violated campaign finance laws by making personal payments to these women are mostly silent about a $17 million congressional fund out of which have come payments in unknown amounts to settle sexual harassment cases. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) used "office money" translation, taxpayer dollars to settle a sexual harassment case against him. He was eventually forced to resign.
Beyond the sideshow that has rapidly become center stage in Washington is the question of where the country is headed. There is a school of thought which claims Trump is the "last man standing" against a wave of socialism that would be sweeping the nation were it not for him.
That view was expressed Monday by Rush Limbaugh on his radio program, which is a go-to source for many conservatives. Limbaugh responded to an email he received from a listener: "His point is, this is all worth it. The alternative to Donald Trump was unacceptable -- scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton and the continuation of the scumbag/liar-nObama agenda and the dilution of the United States of America as a sovereign nation and a continuation of it's becoming a member of the global conglomerate -- where there wouldn't be any debate about climate change; we would just pay up. Where there wouldn't be any debate about open borders; we would just keep them open. Where there wouldn't be any debate about whatever American culture or society is. It would be whatever the socialists said it was going to be."
Limbaugh's concern is that Trump voters might "go wobbly" and that if the president's approval numbers dip into the 30-percent range we might see a replay of what happened to Richard Nixon when a delegation of Republican members of Congress visited the White House and told Nixon his support had evaporated, subjecting him to likely impeachment by the House and conviction in the Senate.
Some congressional Democrats have said impeachment may not be their priority come January. Forty-six incoming House Democrats have sent a letter to their leadership asking that the focus be on legislation not investigations of Trump. That is not likely to play well to the Democrat base, which smells blood and wants Trump's head.
The key for conservatives, and especially Trump's loyal base of evangelical Christians, is how much more of this are they willing to take before Trump becomes an embarrassment to them, to their agenda and even their faith? Evangelicals, especially, are paying a price for their dismissal of Trump's past behavior and present tweets, which are becoming increasingly nasty.
A little humility would be especially helpful to Trump, but that might appear insincere and beyond his capabilities. One thing is certain: the Establishment won't give up in their daily pursuit of his destruction.








Be sure to Click LIKE at the bottom of this article, and share it everywhere!!
By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
Late last Friday, a ruling from U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, a federal judge in Texas appointed by President George W. Bush, found that Obamacare is unconstitutional after last year’s tax bill eliminated the penalty for not having coverage.
Shortly after the ruling came down, President Trump issued a tweet applauding it, and stated, “Obamacare has been struck down as an UNCONSTITUTIONAL disaster! Now Congress must pass a STRONG law that provides GREAT healthcare and protects pre-existing conditions.”
Yes, they do…and…no they won’t…but before I get into why congress won’t do what needs to be done, allow me to provide a bit of a refresher course on how we got to this point…
{townhall.com} ~ Last week, federal prosecutors in Washington and New York filed sentencing memorandums with federal judges in advance of the sentencings of Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen. President Donald Trump's former campaign manager and his former personal lawyer had pleaded guilty to federal crimes, and the memorandums, which are required by the federal rules of criminal procedure, set forth the prosecutors' desired prison sentences for them.
Judges rely on these submissions, as well as on those of defense counsel, before making the mathematical calculations that the law requires. Sadly, sentencing today is largely an algorithmic function, dictated by federal sentencing guidelines, with some room for judicial deviation based on the facts of the crimes and the personal backgrounds of the defendants. In my career as a judge in New Jersey, I sentenced more than 1,000 people using state guidelines that were substantially similar to the present federal guidelines.
When the federal prosecutors made their submissions for the most part public, they revealed two disturbing facts. Special counsel dirty cop-Robert Mueller in Washington revealed that in the government's view, Manafort had reneged on his plea agreement by lying to FBI agents who were sent to debrief him about his contacts with the White House. And federal prosecutors in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York revealed that some of Cohen's crimes had been committed with the knowledge of and at the direction of Trump or to shield him.
Then all hell broke loose. Here is the back story.
Manafort, who has been convicted of federal financial crimes in Virginia, opted to avoid a second trial in Washington, D.C., on another set of alleged federal crimes by pleading guilty and agreeing to cooperate with the special counsel's office by truthfully telling its FBI agents what they sought to learn about ongoing investigations of President Trump.
The FBI agents wanted to know whether Manafort knew whether Trump committed any federal crimes -- such as conspiracy namely, agreeing to receive foreign assistance during his campaign, obstruction of justice interfering with the FBI in order to keep it from investigating him and bank and tax fraud before he was president.
When the special counsel announced that Manafort had declined to be truthful to its FBI agents and Manafort's lawyers claimed he had been truthful, that conflict set up a dispute that must be resolved by a federal judge -- after a public hearing -- before she can sentence Manafort. That hearing will most likely reveal what prosecutors wanted to learn about Trump and what they claim Manafort lied about. Even though the hearing -- which has not been held as of this writing -- could be explosive about Trump, the president claimed he was exonerated by this turn of events.
At the same time, career prosecutors in New York -- whose chief, a Trump appointee, has removed himself from the case -- asked a federal judge to sentence Cohen to substantial prison time for the crimes to which he pleaded guilty, notwithstanding the substantial assistance he had provided them in their investigations of the president. Of the president? Yes. The feds in New York City, as well as the special counsel in Washington, are investigating the president? Yes.
How do we know this? We know that Cohen pleaded guilty to tax evasion, bank fraud, lying to Congress and campaign finance violations. According to the submission of the special counsel, Cohen lied to Congress -- about candidate Trump's efforts to build a hotel in Moscow by cutting a deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin during the presidential campaign -- to protect the president, who had publicly denied any campaign-time communications with Russians.
But the most damning thing we learned from the submission of the New York federal prosecutors was that they have evidence that Cohen's deceptive and criminal payments of hush money to women alleging to have experienced sexual intimacy with Trump before he was an active candidate were made "in coordination with and at the direction of" the president.
Prosecutors in the Southern District of New York enjoy the highest reputation for excellence in the legal, judicial and law enforcement communities. They know that they cannot ethically make a charge in federal court without corroborated evidence to support it. In their Cohen sentencing memorandum, they chose to reveal the existence, but not the substance, of their evidence against the president.
Think about the significance of this. The Department of Justice has accused President Trump of coordinating with, ordering and paying Cohen to commit a federal crime for which Cohen has pleaded guilty. Stated differently, career federal prosecutors who are not in the office of special counsel dirty cop-Mueller have told a federal judge that they have corroborated evidence that the president committed felonies.
Let's be clear. If A pays B to shoot someone and B does the shooting, A is as criminally liable as he would be if he had pulled the trigger.
Nevertheless, when the president learned of all this, the revelation of which had been authorized by his chosen but unconfirmed acting attorney general, he claimed that this submission, too, exonerated him. I was sorry to learn that.
These submissions place the president directly in the legal crosshairs of federal prosecutors -- closer to knowing about a campaign-time agreement for something of value with Russians than we have heretofore been. And they show a more direct procurer of criminal behavior than we have heretofore had.
The president may want the public to think that none of this troubles him. Yet the evidence of the falsity of his publicly denied proximity to Putin during the campaign and the possession of evidence by the Department of Justice of his pre-presidential criminal behavior are gravely serious, and he cannot reasonably pretend that they are not.
He can try to avoid reality, to paraphrase Ayn Rand, but he cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. Those consequences may be fatal to his presidency and to his liberty.
{punchingbagpost.com} ~ When it was only reports in the newspapers that the CIA had sufficient evidence to confirm that Saudi Prince Mohammad bin Salman was complicit in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, President Trump may have been prudent in initially holding off his final judgment on the role played by the heir apparent to the Saudi throne.
Now that a group of bipartisan Senators – including Republicans supportive of President Trump – have been briefed by the CIA and have all concluded that bin Salman is guilty beyond any doubt, we have an entirely different situation. None of the senators equivocated on their unanimous guilty verdict. Whether the Prince ordered it or approved of it at the suggestion of others is a distinction without a difference. In this “who done it,” he done it.
One of the more bothersome questions is why Trump did not know all the facts long before the senators got their briefing? One would have expected that the President would have had CIA Director Gina Haspel in his office as soon as she returned from Turkey, where the Turkish government provided a detailed account and apparently conclusive evidence pointing to the Prince.
One also wonders why two of the administration’s most important and most credible Cabinet members – Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Defense James Mattis – had also stated that there was no “direct link” to the Prince. That may be technically true – and maybe not – but there appears to be sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish bin Salman’s guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.
Republican senators Bob Corker (a critic of the President) and Lindsey Graham (an ally of the President) were unequivocal in their statements that the Prince was personally responsible. Corker said that any jury would convict bin Salman of murder “after thirty minutes” of deliberation. Lindsey seemed to be addressing not only Trump, but Pompeo and Mattis, when he said that one would have to be “intentionally blind“ not to see bin Salman’s complicity.
Trump has no choice but to accept the conclusion of the CIA and now the majority of the Senate. The Congress is poised to pass tough sanctions against Saudi Arabia by a majority that could and would overrule any presidential veto. The legislators may take over the relationship by terminating arms sales and withdrawing support for the war in Yemen.
Trump’s resistance to blame the Prince seems largely due to a desire not to destroy our critical – and yes, it IS critical — working relationship with Saudi Arabia. They are a key player in the strategy to keep Iran – and indirectly, Russia and China – from dominating the Middle East. Democrats’ claim that it has to do with business interests between the Saudi royal family and the Trump organization – including son-in-law Jared Kushner. That is nothing more than political garbage.
That bogus theory would not explain the comments of Pompeo and Mattis. They clearly understand the strategic importance of Saudi Arabia – as does Israel and most of the European Union. The EU heads-of-state have been no harsher on bin Salman than has Trump. There were a large number of those heads-of-state in Argentina for the G20 confab – and they all seemed pretty friendly in their dealings with bin Salman. Whatever the resolution to l’affaire Khashoggi, the alliance between Saudi Arabia and the western world needs to be preserved. That is the dilemma.
Editor’s note: The big question is, does this make any difference? Trump has been trying to give MBS the benefit of the doubt because he knows that MBS is not going anywhere either way, and better to just go with the flow. Saudi Arabia is an important ally and the stability of the Middle East currently depends on that alliance. At some point, however, this becomes an issue for Trump (ironically less so for MBS), since demands to terminate our relationship with him will grow louder.
It is the nature of governments that when the stakes are large, people die. In some countries, people die when the stakes are small. As a former inteligence officer, I can tell you that if we broke off relations with countries who might be willing to do what MBS purportedly did, then we would have relationships with no one. The big mistake was getting caught.
This is, of course, a mistake that scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton has never made, even though from Vince Foster to Seth Rich, fingers have been pointed.
{townhall.com} ~ Is it coincidence or contagion, this malady that seems to have suddenly induced paralysis in the leading nations of the West?
With lawyer-fixer Michael Cohen's confession that he colluded with Donald Trump in making hush money payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, America's stage is set for a play that will run two years.
As Democrats test the waters for a presidential run by savaging Trump, the establishment Trump detests and defeated in 2016 will use every weapon in its considerable arsenal to break and bring him down, as it did half a century ago to Richard Nixon.
By spring 2019, Americans will be unable to escape the vitriol on cable and social media. And the outside world will see America again as a house divided. Our politics will be even more poisonous than now, and it is not easy to see what would bring our warring tribes together again.
Consider, then, the situation of our old ally Great Britain.
Prime Minister Theresa May was just forced to pledge that she would not lead her party in the next election -- to survive a no-confidence vote in Parliament. A third of all Tory members voted to throw her out.
The no-confidence vote was called after May had to cancel a vote on the Brexit plan she had negotiated with the EU, when it was evident that a coalition of Tories and Labor would vote to kill her plan.
May has been humiliated. Yet her humiliation solves nothing. The clock is running toward a March deadline for concluding a Brexit deal. And no plan acceptable to both Parliament and the EU is on the table.
The possibility exists that Britain could simply crash out of the EU, causing severe economic damage to both.
Realizing this, Brussels has left the door open if Britain should vote in a second referendum to remain in the EU. But calling and carrying out that referendum would be a betrayal of the 52 percent of the British people that voted to restore full national independence.
While London wanted to stay in the EU in 2016, England voted to leave. Northern Ireland wanted to stay, as did Scotland, though 45 percent of Scots had earlier voted to declare their own independence from Great Britain.
In France, after four Saturdays of anarchy, arson, looting and vandalism of her national monuments, President Emmanuel Macron capitulated to the rioters. He withdrew the fuel tax that triggered the uprisings. He agreed to have his government add $113 a month to those earning the minimum wage, and to let workers get overtime pay and Christmas bonuses tax-free, and to revoke higher social charges on modest pensions.
The cost of Macron's retreat is estimated at $11 billion, 0.4 percent of France's GDP. Saturday will tell us if his appeasement bought peace.
The political collapse of Macron has been extraordinary.
In 2017, he won almost two-thirds of the national vote, and his La Republique en Marche! won an absolute majority of the National Assembly.
Today, one poll puts Macron's approval at 21 percent. The idea that he can replace Angela Merkel as the recognized leader of the EU seems ridiculous.
As for Merkel herself, hailed as leader of the West in the time of Trump, her party and coalition lost so much support in the recent election that she stepped down as leader of the CDU and pledged not to run for another term as chancellor.
Europe's fourth-largest economy, Italy, is now led by a coalition of the populist-left Five Star Movement and populist-right Lega party. The coalition seeks greater freedom on spending than Brussels is willing to allow, and a halt to migration from across the Med.
With Poland and Hungary at odds with Brussels over alterations in their political systems, the EU has never seemed less united.
What are the underlying causes of these 21st-century crises of Western democracies?
Certainly, globalization, with its creation of ties among transnational elites at the expense of nation-states and their indigenous peoples is one. Capitals -- Washington, London, Paris, Berlin -- seem ever more distant from the countries they rule.
Then there is demography. The native-born of almost all Western nations are aging, shrinking and dying. Death rates exceed birth rates. While peoples of the West are living longer, they are producing fewer children to replace them.
At the same time, Western elites have welcomed foreign workers and left borders unsecured against mass migration. And the people coming in, almost all now from the Third World, are not assimilating as the children of 19th- and 20th-century European immigrants to the USA had largely done by 1960.
A consequence and related cause is the rise of tribalism, or ethno-nationalism, the search for identity and community with one's own. Loyalties to family, tribe, neighborhood, culture and country appear paramount, rising above intellectual and political alignments.
The heart has reasons of which reason knows nothing, said Pascal. And so it does.
by Marc A. Thiessen
by Marc A. Thiessen
{patriotpost.us} ~ Good news for the incoming House Democratic majority! They have something President Trump really, really wants: money to build a border wall. Trump is desperate for this money. Mexico won’t give it to him. Only congressional Democrats can. Without their consent, he can’t deliver on one of the key campaign promises he made during the 2016 election.
There’s a name for this in classic negotiating strategy. It’s called “leverage.” Good negotiators use leverage (something they have, which their adversary wants) to obtain what are called “concessions” (something their adversary has, which they want). The result is what experts call “compromise.” This is how the civilized world gets things done.
But in a fit of pique, Democrats are throwing away their leverage, insisting that they will never — under any circumstances — give Trump the wall he so desperately wants. The reason? Because he wants it and they despise him.
There is a name for this in negotiating strategy as well. It’s called “insanity.”
It would be one thing if Trump was demanding that Democrats make some great moral compromise. But he is not. Democrats say they are for border security. They may think that a wall is a costly and inefficient way to secure the border, but there is nothing inherently wrong with a wall. In 2006, 26 Senate Democrats — including Sens. Charles scumbag/clown-Schumer, Barack scumbag/liar-nObama and scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton — voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which required the Department of Homeland Security to build two layers of reinforced fencing along 700 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. Is there some profound moral difference between a fence and a wall? No.
So why not give Trump his wall in exchange for something they want? They could give Trump the $5 billion he is asking for to begin construction of the wall, in exchange for a path to citizenship for the nearly 2 million “dreamers” — illegal immigrants who were brought to the United States as children through no fault of their own. Trump would negotiate on this basis in a heartbeat.
Then, when Democrats take the majority next year, they could offer him the remaining $15 billion to $20 billion he needs to finish the wall, in exchange for legal status for the other 11 million people here in the country illegally. The wall could buy legal status for every illegal immigrant living in the shadows — a longtime Democratic priority.
Again, Trump would likely be willing to cut such a deal. He is on record repeatedly saying that he wants to find a way for the vast majority of illegal immigrants (the “good ones,” he calls them) to get right with the law and secure legal status, so long as we get rid of the rapists, murderers and drug dealers (aka the “bad ones”) and secure the border. That is what Democrats claim they want to do as well. So take him up on it.
Or, if they don’t want to use their leverage to solve the illegal immigration problem, then Democrats could use the wall as leverage to win concessions from Trump on something else. Democrats have laid out an ambitious agenda — from shoring up scumbag/liar-nObamacare, lowering the cost of prescription drugs and Medicare-for-all to modifying Trump’s tax cuts, increasing the minimum wage, strengthening environmental rules, tackling global climate change and enacting paid family leave. The possibilities are endless. If Democrats don’t use the wall as leverage, they won’t get any of this.
In their Oval Office meeting, scumbag/clown-Schumer told Trump that “elections have consequences” — echoing the infamous words spoken by scumbag/liar-nObama to congressional Republicans in 2009 when they presented him with their ideas for a stimulus package. Back then, however, Democrats controlled not just the House but the Senate and White House, too. Today, Republicans control the executive branch and have an expanded Senate majority. So if Democrats want to get anything done, they can’t ram it through over GOP objections, because Trump has leverage, too — in the form of a pen he can use to sign or veto legislation. To get anything done, Democrats have to negotiate — and compromise.
The answer for Democrats is simple: Don’t refuse the wall; use the wall. ~The Patriot Post
{cato.org} ~ Republicans have criticized the socialism of Democrats such as Rep. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but they should reflect on their own party’s socialist vote in the Senate yesterday... The upper chamber voted 87-13 for the bloated monstrosity known as the farm bill, which funds farm subsidies and food stamps. Republicans in the Senate voted in favor 38-13. It is not hyperbole to call the farm bill “socialism.” It will spend $867 billion over the next decade, thus pushing up government debt and taxes. It includes large-scale wealth redistribution in the form of food stamps. At its core is central planning, which is obvious when you consider that the bill is 807 pages of legalese laying out excruciating details on crop prices, acres, yields, and other micromanagement. Furthermore, the bill lines the pockets of wealthy elites landowners, which is a central feature of socialism in practice around the world. The bill does not represent incremental reform toward smaller government. It is an extension and expansion of big government programs. Many Republican senators who claim to be conservative voted for farm bill socialism yesterday. They voted for wealth redistribution, central planning, and ultimately higher taxes. Yet on their official Senate websites, these members who approved socialism yesterday nonetheless claim to favor conservative budget policies... https://www.cato.org/blog/farm-bill-socialism-senate?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWVRJNU5EaGlOR1ExWW1NMiIsInQiOiJNcmp3ZlZ0S0pxQ0hWTkZucHpqb0pkNEcyUVltK3RhRnh3NVR3YnZBXC9pQnJNazl3dk91b2J0YjVLdkNnU2x1RUlvdjNZWkd6Y2h6NDlnQzk1UTcxUllMMktYZDBST25qVWJic2FvRkhDMjY3Nm85Rlo0Y0tqVWFoUVFpbFwvQUNLIn0%3D
The Myth of Capitalism-Caused Inequity
by Political Editors: The expressions of greed and envy can be present in both the poor and rich alike. Or to put it another way, wealth does not make one greedy any more than poverty makes one envious. Both of these negative attitudes are manifestations of a deeper condition — that of selfishness. It is this deeper condition that politicians have made a profession of preying upon. And no political movement does this more so than socialism, which preaches that any inequality anywhere is a sure sign of injustice.
This is why leftists continuously point to differences, especially those involving income, and loudly declare, “Injustice!” “Not fair!” Rather than soberly considering the fact that within a free-market economy various income differences exist due to a multitude of social and economic factors, including one of the largest — personal choice — these socialists only play the politics of envy and resentment.
Like the infamous gender-pay-gap trope, which proponents tirelessly claim is evidence of some fictional unjust social order steeped in patriarchal misogyny, socialists dubiously misuse statistics to further their crusade against capitalism by maintaining that it only serves the greedy and the rich. And for “evidence,” they point to the supposed “explosion of income inequality” and blame capitalism for making the rich richer while making the poor poorer.
This was clearly the message of French economist Thomas Piketty in his 2014 bestseller Capital in the Twenty-First Century. In the book, Piketty contended that there was a skyrocketing income-inequality gap within Western societies and that capitalism was to blame. It’s unfortunate that Piketty’s book wasn’t classified under fiction, for it was little else.
Phil Magness of the American Institute for Economic Research notes Piketty’s errors, writing, “In short, the widely reported explosion of inequality in the past three decades is likely a myth, built upon outdated and flawed statistics. … Whereas Piketty … [shows] a massive century-long swing of almost 20 percentage points in the income share of the top 10 percent, the adjusted figures show a much flatter curve with a little over half the variation. Inequality still falls and rises under the revised numbers, but at a comparatively subdued rate. Under the adjustments, the top 10 percent income share seldom strays more than 5 percentage points away from a century-long average of about 35 percent.”
Magness adds, “Perhaps instead of assuming that we’re in the midst of a surging inequality crisis, we should first settle more fundamental issues affecting the accuracy of our measurements over the past century.” Or as James Freeman of The Wall Street Journal observes, “Perhaps we should also focus on ensuring an abundance of opportunity, rather than regarding it as a problem when some people inevitably make more than others.”
Greed and envy are not caused by and are not exclusive to capitalism; rather they are manifestations of the selfishness residing within the human heart. But no other economic system in history has allowed for more economic growth, created more wealth, or raised up more people out of poverty than capitalism. To suggest otherwise is to entertain an economic fiction rooted in resentment of the wealthy rather than concern for the poor. ~The Patriot Post
{thepoliticalinsider.com} ~ Democrat Rep. scumbag-Adam Schiff is requesting that the Department of Justice change guidelines that prohibit a sitting President from being indicted... The call comes as President Trump’s former lawyer has been sentenced to three years in prison for tax evasion, lying to Congress, and other crimes. Michael Cohen arranged payment on behalf of Trump to cover up an affair he allegedly. The implication by Democrats is that he did so at the direction of the President himself, something that remains to be proven. scumbag-Schiff believes the DOJ needs to rewrite the rules, established during the Nixon administration, as a means to prevent Trump from allegedly ‘escaping justice.’ “I think the Justice Department needs to re-examine that OLC opinion, the Office of Legal Counsel opinion,” scumbag-Schiff told CNN, “that you cannot indict a sitting president under circumstances in which the failure to do so may mean that person escapes justice.” While many in the mainstream media scoffed at the notion, President Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani has already revealed that dirty cop-Mueller has no intention of indicting Trump, as per the DOJ guidelines. “They, the special counsel’s office acknowledge the fact that they can’t indict us,” Giuliani told NBC News in May. “They know they don’t have that power.”...scumbag-Schiff has been against President Trump from day one. https://thepoliticalinsider.com/schiff-president-indicted/?utm_campaign=TPI_breaking_newsletter_12_14_2018&utm_source=criticalimpact&utm_medium=email&utm_content=4b4ea4948726422aa6473c7b9fa19141&source=CI
This week, Google CEO Sundar Pichai faced the House Judiciary Committee, where he laughably asserted, “I lead this company without political bias and work to ensure that our products continue to operate that way. To do otherwise would go against our core principles and our business interests.”
Actually, to do otherwise would reinforce Google’s core principles, and that’s exactly what the company has done. Last year, our Thomas Gallatin reported, “Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology … ran an experiment to determine just how biased toward leftist politics were the nation’s leading social media giants. … Epstein found that Google searches returned twice as many pro-scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton news articles as did Yahoo. Even more disturbing was Google’s targeting tactic. Men in blue states saw more than double the pro-scumbag/liar-Clinton articles than did women in red states.”
Gallatin continued, “Another study conducted by Nicholas Diakopoulos, a professor at Northwestern University, found that in December 2015 Google search results of presidential candidates showed seven out of every 10 articles were positive toward Democrats, whereas less than six out of 10 were positive for Republican candidates. … On election night, only 1% of 113 featured Google election-related searches produced articles from conservative news sources.” Furthermore, “Conservative media outlets began to see more of their content limited on leading social media sites, such as Prager University witnessing much of its content on Google-owned YouTube being labeled as restricted for no apparent reason other than the fact that it promotes conservative ideology.”
There are other machinations as well. Earlier this year, our Louis DeBroux reportedthat “Google finds itself the subject of a lawsuit for discriminatory practices, targeting conservative and white male employees for harassment and mistreatment simply because of their appearance and beliefs.” Google also listed the California Republican Party’s ideology as “Nazism,” censored the word “gun,” and utilizes the Southern Poverty Law Center to police YouTube.
More recently, The Daily Caller reported, “Google employees debated whether to bury conservative media outlets in the company’s search function as a response to President Donald Trump’s election in 2016, internal Google communications … reveal.”
We’d like to know what Pichai’s definition of “political bias” actually is. Because none of these functions appear to be without it.
Sadly, Democrats couldn’t care less. In fact, during Tuesday’s testimony, they basically blessed Google with carte blanche. According to Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), “Even if Google were deliberately discriminating against conservative viewpoints, just as Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting and conservative talk-radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh discriminate against liberal points of view, that would be its right as a private company to do so, not to be questioned by government.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) chimed in, “You’ve got a right to have whatever politics you have. We could subpoena Fox News and bring them in here and beat them up about how 90% of the references on Fox News to Barack scumbag/liar-nObama or scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton are negative, but they’ve got that right under the First Amendment, and you’ve got a right under the First Amendment to have whatever political views you’ve got.”
While technically true, these aren’t fair comparisons. Unlike some of these other big names, Google — whose consumer base is substantially more sizable — isn’t a political entity. Yet its influence is second to none. As Tony Perkins observes, Pichai has “90 percent of the world’s online searches at his fingertips,” and those searches in some cases are being used as a tool for promotion and/or censorship, depending on the circumstance. Furthermore, guys like Rush Limbaugh are distinguished becausethey brand themselves as politically biased. If the circumstances were flipped and it was conservatives being aggrandized by Google, Nadler and Raskin would argue just the opposite.
Pichai should be ashamed for doubling down with such an egregious lie. And Democrats should be ashamed for cultivating it.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/60035?mailing_id=3947&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3947&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body+In Sacramento, California, two illegal aliens voted five times in 2016.
The Public Interest Legal Foundation found over a thousand persons who voted illegally in Virginia.
*In Cincinnati, a poll worker found her dead neighbor's name on an active voter registry.
*In Maryland, several Democratic city governments are allowing noncitizens to fraudulently vote in elections.
*In Ft. Worth, Leticia Sanchez formed a mail-in voter fraud ring, which included helping a blind voter. Just prior to being arrested, she warned her minions that a group of “malicious people” were investigating.
*Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes refused to turn over voting records on the counting and collection of ballots, despite the law saying she had to. There were many irregularities in that 2018 election, such as there being more voters on rolls than actual citizens. s Some 80,000 individuals filled out blank voting forms. Broward County has seen past instances of voter fraud, always in favor of Democrats, the key being absentee ballots. “Irregularities” also occurred in Santa Rosa, Citrus, and Okaloosa counties. To date, no one has been arrested...(the list goes on) Keep in mind also that these are just a tiny portion of detected transgressions. How many more illegal acts have occurred that have gone unnoticed? After all, voting illegally is child’s play, with no checks and balances and a minimum of negative repercussions. Since Republican voters are almost always the victim and the Republican Party is without doubt the Stupid Party, this stomach-churning travesty will continue...
Challenging the Bureaucratic State
by Brian Mark Weber: One of President Donald Trump’s core pledges during the 2016 campaign was to drain the Swamp, but taking on the Washington bureaucracy will require far more than cutting back on spending or making government more efficient.
For well over 100 years, our nation operated without a monarchical executive. Then along came Woodrow Wilson, an academic and a “progressive” who believed that an enlightened administrative state was superior to government “by the people.” Franklin D. Roosevelt then “perfected” this bureaucratic governance with his “New Deal” programs, which resulted in soaring deficits, a tripling of the federal budget between 1933 and 1941, and a needlessly prolonged Great Depression.
Thus, modern presidents, including Trump, and their executive agencies have enjoyed carte blanche without having to worry too much about that pesky separation of powers. Ironically, Trump’s conservative appointments to the Supreme Court may be just what’s needed to finally curb the power of the executive branch and its myriad agencies that have run roughshod over the Constitution.
Here’s the good news: Just this week, The Wall Street Journal opined, “The Supreme Court announced that it will hear a legal challenge to two of its precedents that defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous regulations.”
Defer to agencies may not sound as threatening as the border caravan, ISIS, or a turbulent stock market, but for those of us who still believe in the quaint constitutional principles of separation of powers and limited government, it’s right up there with the most pressing issues of our time. And these agencies have had a detrimental impact on Liberty for far too long.
For the monster of bureaucratic overreach, we can partially thank the Supreme Court, which in 1984 reached a decision in Chevron U.S.A vs. Natural Resources Defense Council that the judiciary will defer to an agency as long as Congress has not “directly spoken” to the issue and the agency has engaged in a “permissible construction” of the statute.
The result of this seemingly innocuous ruling is that the president and his executive branch agencies now have tremendous power to operate as an autonomous government. In other words, they can make, interpret, and execute their own policies without deferring to Congress or the Supreme Court. In fact, it’s Congress and the Supreme Court that now defer to the agencies, thanks to the Chevron ruling. The Constitution is pretty clear about the separation of powers, and how those powers should function. But when one branch of government tells another that it’s basically free to act without oversight from the other branches, it’s no wonder we have the Swamp.
The late Justice Antonin Scalia did not participate in Chevron, but he did seem to throw up his hands and give in to the growing power of the federal government when he stated not long after the ruling that “broad delegation to the executive is the hallmark of the modern administrative state.”
Compare this to Justice Neil Gorsuch, who, in 2016 as a member of the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, stated in reference to Chevron, “There’s an elephant in the room with us today. We have studiously attempted to work our way around it and even left it unremarked. But the fact is Chevron … permit[s] executive bureaucracies to swallow huge amounts of core judicial and legislative power and concentrate federal power in a way that seems more than a little difficult to square with the Constitution of the framers’ design. Maybe the time has come to face the behemoth.”
National Review’s David French writes, “This Supreme Court … has the opportunity to begin the arduous process of paring back the powers of the president. The Court can’t, however, work miracles. It can push the president back a bit and reassert its own authority, but it can’t make Congress step forward and reassert its rightful lawmaking primacy. If the presidency recedes, the legislative branch must step forward.”
Despite many attempts to erode its relevancy and authority, the Constitution of the United States is the single most important document we have to protect and defend Liberty. We can only hope that President Trump’s Supreme Court appointments of Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh will begin to push back against the Court’s previous ruling in Chevron and restore the important constitutional balance among the legislative, judicial, and executive branches. ~The Patriot Post
Flynn’s legal team’s argument is that the FBI failed to alert Flynn to the criminality of lying to investigators and that then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe pressured agents to set up an interview that precluded Flynn from having an attorney present. That was enough to prompt Sullivan to seek answers before sentencing Flynn for lying to the FBI.
The actors in this whole event should raise a few eyebrows. The now-fired anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok was one of the two agents in the interview that the also now-fired McCabe set up. Clearly, Flynn believed the meeting was not intended as an interrogation of any sort, as he quickly agreed to meet with the agents the same day as he received the call from McCabe. Flynn even gave them a tour of the West Wing. And, of note, those agents described Flynn as “unguarded,” “relaxed and jocular,” as well as saying they “didn’t think he was lying” and that he “clearly saw the FBI agents as allies.”
Importantly, Flynn was never found to have committed any crime related to collusion with Russians. Instead, as Mark Alexander notes, dirty cop-Mueller has only “accumulated some ‘process crimes,’ most notably perjury charges related to the testimony of George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, and Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen. … There is nothing that remotely establishes Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. Nothing.”
Of most significance is the different treatment Flynn received to that of scumbag/liar-Hillary Clinton, who showed up with nine lawyers to her interview with FBI agents. Or consider George Papadopoulos, who was given explicit warnings by agents of the criminality of perjury and was allowed to have attorneys present.
Interestingly, The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland points out, “The most recent iteration of Sullivan’s standing entered in the Flynn case required dirty cop-Mueller’s office to produce ‘any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.’ The order further required the government to submit to the court any information ‘which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes not to be material.’” Sullivan may smell a rat.
dirty cop-Mueller and the DOJ have until 3:00 p.m. today to produce for the court the requested documents. Hopefully, those documents will shed a little more light on this twisted web of legal gotcha. And for Flynn, who has lost almost everything in this politically motivated witch hunt, there could be at least a little redemption in the end.
~The Patriot Post
https://patriotpost.us/articles/60054?mailing_id=3947&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.3947&utm_campaign=snapshot&utm_content=body{thehill.com} ~ Insurance company Pacific Life announced Friday that it is pulling its advertisements from Fox News's “Tucker Carlson Tonight”... after the host said the “immigration crisis” in America makes the country “poorer and dirtier and more divided.” The action came after an advertisement from the company was shown on-screen right after Carlson made the comment on his opening monologue. The ad promoted the company as having been “protecting generations of families for 150 years.” The company quickly received backlash on social media calling for it to distance itself from Carlson’s program. Pacific Life said it would pull all ads from the show "in the coming weeks as we reevaluate our relationship with his program,” according to a statement posted to Twitter. “One of our ads appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show last night following a segment where Mr. Carlson made a number of statements regarding immigration,” the company said. “As a company, we strongly disagree with Mr. Carlson’s statements. Our customer base and our workforce reflect the diversity of our great nation, something we take great pride in,” the statement also read. "We will not be advertising on Mr. Carlson's show in the coming weeks as we reevaluate our relationship with his program."...
by sundance
{theconservativetreehouse.com} ~ An interesting pattern of seemingly disconnected political stories is beginning to show signs of a common continuity. In the bigger of the big pictures seven words continue to set the baseline: “There are trillions of dollars at stake”.
When the common sense Tea Party movement formed in 2009 and 2010 it contained a monumentally frustrated grassroots electorate, and the scale of the movement caught the professional republican party off-guard. When Donald Trump ran for the office of the presidency he essentially did the same thing; he disrupted the apparatus of the professional republican party.
The difference between those two examples is one was from the bottom up, and the second was from the top down. However, the commonality in the two forces resulted in the 2016 victory.
It took a few years for the heavily armored old guard of GOP to formulate a plan to retain their control. In the example of the Tea Party, the republican power structures moved in 2011 through 2014 to co-opt the vulgarian movement and impede their disruptive influence. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was at the forefront of those power moves. {Go Deep} and {Go Deep} The basic issue for the GOP was retention of power.
McConnell and crew tamped down the fire. A few years pass and the issues that spurred the Tea Party movement remained unresolved. In 2015 Donald Trump taps in to that exact same Tea Party frustration toward the control authority within one-half of the DC UniParty; again, the professional republican apparatus was disrupted. The movement rebranded and now the MAGA movement wins the presidency.
So it should not come as a surprise to see an eerily similar response from within the GOP toward the new threat; the Trump presidency. After all, there are two constants in an ever changing universe: (1) “NeverTrump” didn’t go away; and (2) the Bush-clan, or GOP old guard, will never accept losing power.
The professional republicans and the professional democrats, ie. “the uniparty”, have a common enemy in President Trump. The vulgarian leader of the deplorable coalition never asked for permission; never paid the indulgency fees; never attended the necessary cloistered club meetings paying homage; and never offered the indulgent team of political elites terms for his takeover.
Thus Donald Trump, just like the Tea Party, would never be accepted.
Why is this important now?
Current events highlight the resurgence of a never disassembled GOP Bush clan influence. For the past two years it’s been a never-ending game of whac-a-mole as each of the establishment minded embeds surfaces at different times. Within the dynamic, the one commonality within the internecine conflict inside the Trump administration is the establishment GOP -vs- Trump MAGA.
Establishment GOP consultant Alex Castellanos was very open about the best design to getting rid of Donald Trump back in 2015 when he discussed an almost identical strategy for how Mitch McConnell destroyed the threat from the Tea Party a year earlier:
[…] “The best way to do it is how Brutus killed Caesar. Get real close, snuggle up, and shiv him in the ribs”…
Forgive me for mixing my metaphors here; but as each of the shiv-bearers appears, that’s when Trump is forced to deliver the whac-a-mole hammer. It’s like having an administration filled with establishment terror cells. Each cell acts independently, but each cell also acts based on a common objective: retain the UniParty.
The latest whac-a-mole example was Condi Rice’s embed plant and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson popping his head up. But there are many more examples all around in various forms; including the self-serving GOP exit of U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.
When you think about the actual structure of the Republican state party machines; it’s enough to make you wonder if the mid-term outcome and lack of structural fight was not part of this dynamic. After all, “their” party was taken over by a new base and a new leader.
The same UniParty dynamic is visible in the way the FBI/DOJ and aggregate intelligence community were weaponized against Donald Trump – with Democrats and Republicans participating in the unlawful processes. Now, in the downstream consequence phase, we see a UniParty defense approach to block Trump from revealing what happened.
I’m not sure people fully completely understand this dynamic within “spygate”. It was not a targeting operation by democrats; republicans were just as complicit. The ongoing goal to eliminate candidate and president Trump is *not* partisan.
Which brings me to the current state of the advisers around the executive. Remember, there are trillions at stake here – and the downstream benefactors are both Republicans and Democrats who make up the UniParty.
Within the UniParty dynamic, in order to retain full financial benefit, the political class need to align with Wall Street priorities. That alignment means the UniParty needs to eliminate Main Street priorities that are adverse to their interests.
Border controls and immigration enforcement are adverse interests to the UniParty. Additional cross party alignment to benefit Wall Street surrounds: •budgets and massive government spending; •government controlled healthcare retention; •government controlled education (common core); •and most importantly the removal of any national economic and trade policy that would threaten the structure of the multinationals.
On all of these issues the Democrats and Republicans have an identical outlooks, common interests and mirrored legislative priorities. It is not coincidental that US Chamber of Commerce President Tom Dohonue also outlined these issues as primary priorities for his massive lobbyist spending.
There are trillions of dollars at stake; and we must never discount how far the Big Club participants will go to ensure the White House counselors are shaping their advice toward those objectives.
There are no MAGA lobbying groups in Washington DC advocating for policies that benefit economic nationalism. On this objective President Donald Trump stands alone.
We don’t need a third party in Washington DC, we actually need a second one.