Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Rosenstein – Going Going ALMOST Gone!

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein is expected to leave his role at the Justice Department by mid-March, a senior DOJ official told Fox News on Monday.

An official announcement of who has been selected to replace Rosenstein could come as early as this week. A Trump administration official added that Attorney General William Barr has picked Jeffrey Rosen, who currently serves as Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation, to take over for Rosenstein.

A graduate of Northwestern University and Harvard Law School, Rosen previously served as General Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor for the White House Office of Management and Budget (2006 to 2009) and as General Counsel at the Department of Transportation (2003 to 2006), according to his online biography.

Rosen, confirmed for his current role by the Senate in May 2017, works under Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao in overseeing the daily operations of the department.

Fox News reported in January that Rosenstein was expected to step down in the coming weeks to ensure a smooth transition for Barr, who was sworn-in on Thursday.

Rosenstein long thought of his role as a two-year position and the two-year mark is coming soon, officials close to the departing attorney general previously told Fox News.

Speculation of Rosenstein’s departure mounted after the firing of former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in November. He has, until recently, overseen Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into whether Russia meddled in the 2016 presidential election. Rosenstein has often been a target of President Trump on Twitter.

Most recently, Trump accused Rosenstein, along with former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, of pursuing an “illegal and treasonous” plot against him after McCabe detailed private DOJ discussions about secretly recording and potentially ousting the president.

Read the rest at:  Rosenstein

California and New York working to empty out the state!

Starting next year, every new home built in California will have something extra on top.

Recently, California became the first state in the nation to make solar mandatory for new houses. Beginning in 2020, newly constructed homes must have solar panels, which could be costly for homeowners: According to California’s Energy Commission (CEC),that mandate will add between $8,000 and $10,000 to the cost of a new home.

CEC estimates suggest that the solar addition will increase the average monthly mortgage payment by $40, but new homeowners will save an average of $80 a month on their heating, cooling and lighting bills.

Still, the requirement does add a costly additional expense to already pricey new homes in one of the richest real estate markets in the country.

Danielle Hale, chief economist at, told CNBC’s “On the Money” that the new solar requirement could undermine a segment of the real estate market that’s struggled to add to new homes relative to demand.

The added costs could hit “the affordable side of the market,” she said, where prices on available homes have been under pressure.

“It’s a very different perspective depending on if you’re looking for affordable homes, or pricier homes,” Hale told CNBC. “It’s already difficult for builders to build, and I think this is just going to exacerbate that problem.”

Read the rest at: Solar Panels $$$


The ‘open borders’ lie(s)

Seriously it’s time to dispense with the lies!

““In 2013, every single Democrat in the Senate voted for the so-called Gang of Eight immigration overhaul bill that would have provided about $40 billion for border enforcement, including deploying thousands more agents and building 700 miles of fencing … And in 2006, 26 Senate Democrats voted to build 700 miles of walls and fences on the southwestern border.”

ere and there, now and then, there are certainly Democrats who support “open borders” — international boundaries marked merely with the sort of “Welcome to …” signs that separate, say, Illinois from Wisconsin, or, at most, the cursory, nod-and-wave checkpoints that used to separate the U.S. from Canada.

The left is home to more than a few one-world utopians, and it’s healthy to have thought experiments every now and then. Why do freedoms of movement and association ostensibly granted by nature or, if you will, God, stop at man-made borders? That kind of thing.

But really, no. President Donald Trump’s increasingly frequent accusation along these lines is a lie.

“Democrats love open borders,” he said in a June 19 speech to the National Federation of Independent Businesses.

“The Democrats want open borders,” Trump said the following day in a speech in Duluth, Minn. “Let everybody come in. Let everybody pour in — we don’t care, let them come in from the Middle East, let them come in from all over the place. We don’t care.”

On Monday, speaking to reporters: “The Democrats want open borders, and they don’t care about crime,”

Then there are the tweets: Democrats “want Open Borders and don’t care about Crime!” (June 24) “The Democrats are in Turmoil! Open Borders and unchecked Crime” and “the Democrats… want Open Borders and Unlimited Crime” (Tuesday) , “THE DEMS WANT OPEN BORDERS” (Wednesday) and so on.

Read the rest at: Walls Save!

Republic vs Democracy!

Hillary Clinton blamed the Electoral College for her stunning defeat in the 2016 presidential election in her latest memoirs, “What Happened.”

Some have claimed that the Electoral College is one of the most dangerous institutions in American politics.

Why? They say the Electoral College system, as opposed to a simple majority vote, distorts the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy because electoral votes are not distributed according to population.

To back up their claim, they point out that the Electoral College gives, for example, Wyoming citizens disproportionate weight in a presidential election.

Put another way, Wyoming, a state with a population of about 600,000, has one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the U.S. Senate, which gives the citizens of Wyoming three electoral votes, or one electoral vote per 200,000 people.

California, our most populous state, has more than 39 million people and 55 electoral votes, or approximately one vote per 715,000 people.

Comparatively, individuals in Wyoming have nearly four times the power in the Electoral College as Californians.

Many people whine that using the Electoral College instead of the popular vote and majority rule is undemocratic. I’d say that they are absolutely right. Not deciding who will be the president by majority rule is not democracy.

But the Founding Fathers went to great lengths to ensure that we were a republic and not a democracy. In fact, the word democracy does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or any other of our founding documents.

How about a few quotations expressed by the Founders about democracy?

In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wanted to prevent rule by majority faction, saying, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”

John Adams warned in a letter, “Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet, that did not commit suicide.”

Edmund Randolph said, “That in tracing these evils to their origin, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.”

Read the rest at: A Real Republic

Time to face facts – Obama’s Presidency was a DISASTER of TITANIC proportions!

Barack Obama, Caricature
Barack Obama, Caricature

The closing arguments for the Obama years are arriving, and they aren’t helping the outgoing president. A case in point is a new book published this week, one that acknowledges “Obama’s supporters have experienced [his presidency] as a continuous disappointment.”

Those supporters, and others, must have noticed that “for most of Obama’s term, wage gains were largely confined to the rich.” Or that “The administration’s planning in Libya clearly failed” or “It is certain that the actual outcome [of Obama’s Syria policy] was disastrous.”

Even many of President Obama’s proudest achievements look about as enduring as April snow: “If there was a single aspect of Obama’s legacy most vulnerable to reversal, it was his achievements on climate change,” the book says, and “Obama’s regulatory offensive is, of course, vulnerable to reversal by Donald Trump or the Supreme Court, since it rested upon executive action.” The longest chapter is titled “The Inevitability of Disappointment.”

Yet the title of the book containing these quotations is “Audacity: How Barack Obama Defied His Critics and Created a Legacy That Will Prevail,” by the New York magazine columnist and lefty firebrand Jonathan Chait.

Sustained coherence seems to elude the author. On Page 99 we hear about those “overblown or even false claims that the new law [ObamaCare] was raising premiums,” but three pages later we learn, “Big insurers like Aetna pulled out of the exchanges, reducing options, and insurers in most markets raised their premiums.” Oh. Republican opposition, which boils down to wariness of new spending while Obama is racking up more debt than the previous 43 presidents combined, doesn’t earn a rational counter-argument.

No, the GOP simply means “rage.” “Republican terror,” Chait writes, is “berserk” with a “fierce and even crazed tone” (this last describes Paul Ryan).

Read the rest at: Obama the Failure!

Is Acosta REALLY as clueless as he looks?

CNN White House correspondent Jim Acosta referred to Angel Moms as having their children “allegedly killed by undocumented immigrants” on Friday.

Acosta reported from the White House on Friday before President Donald Trump’s speech and subsequent press conference about his decision to declare a national emergency at the southern border, in order to secure funding for his long-promised wall.

Mothers of children killed by illegal immigrants brandished pictures of their children at Trump’s announcement, reportedly drawing derision from one reporter in attendance.

“We saw people leaving the White House there with photos. Do we know who they are?” anchor Jim Sciutto asked.

“Jim, we believe those are some of the Angel Moms that the president has talked so much about out on the campaign trail, at rallies and so on,” Acosta said. “These are parents of victims who were allegedly killed by undocumented immigrants. The president likes to point to these folks who have been through some terrible experiences as evidence a wall is needed down at the border.”

“I suspect, Jim, if we’re seeing some of the Angel Moms coming in, the president is going to be trying to drum up some emotional energy on this occasion here, to try to sell this wall,” he added. “We have seen him do it before.”

Later, Sciutto referred to the Angel Moms as “mothers who lost children, or alleged to have lost children to undocumented immigrants in this country.”

At Trump’s State of the Union address last week, he pledged never to abolish Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as some Democrats have pushed for, and said the “wonderful” angel families he had gotten to know shouldn’t have to suffer heartache because of illegal immigration.

“Year after year, countless Americans are murdered by criminal illegal aliens,” Trump said. “I have gotten to know many wonderful angel moms and dads and families. No one should ever have to suffer the horrible heartache that they have had to endure.”

Read the rest at: Acosta Confused

Congressional Women in White Dresses and Legal Vote Harvesting Fraud in CA

Found out this morning the meaning of the white dresses that the democrat women were wearing to the State of the Union. Women in Chile during dictator Pinochet’s regime would wear white dresses to show that their husbands and sons were missing, where-a-bouts unknown, but presumed murdered by Pinochet’s thugs and the bodies dumped where they would not be found. The women in Cuba and Venezuela also wear white dresses to Sunday church to show that they are also missing husbands and sons – presumably killed by the dictator’s thugs – bodies not to be found. Its the socialist murdering dictators that cause women in the Latin America countries to wear white and yet the socialist congressional women want to replace Trump and our government with a socialist murdering dictator. It makes no sense, unless you realize, as they must have realized, that once the US Constitution and our government is replaced by a socialist dictator, that they will be murdered as they are too close to power to be allowed to stay alive. This behavior was seen in Russia, China and every country that tries socialism. Maybe they are wearing white dresses now so that when they are dead, at least someone will have worn white to morn their passing.

Where the BLANK was Jim Brulte and the state republican party leadership – out playing in traffic? Jerry Brown signed AB 1921 into law allowing the harvesting of ballots, which means that anyone can walk into an election office and hand over truckloads of vote-by-mail envelopes with ballots inside, no questions asked, no verified records kept. And this is exactly how the democrats in CA won so many republican held offices this last November. Arizona passed similar laws 2x last year and the Arizona Republican’s took the issue to the 9th Circuit. Both times the 9th over turned the Arizona laws as an attempt at legalized voter fraud. The best part for CA democrats is that until the 9th over turns AB 1921, it is legal to engage in vote fraud by the truck load. Our voter registration rolls are on-line including signatures. So about 5pm on election day democrats looked to see who had not yet voted, filled in the vote-by-mail ballot for all democrat candidates, cut and pasted signatures from voter rolls onto ballot containing envelopes, gee the signatures match, and delivered said ballots to polling places – by the thousands. Cost estimate about $250,000 plus lots of volunteer time. Just in Orange County more than 250,000 ballots were dropped off at polls on election day. But it gets better. AB 1921 allows ballots up to 3 days to be delivered to polls after election day. So, if the democrat candidate is behind by 15,000 votes, 22,000 votes will suddenly show up all for democrat candidates after the election.

Republican’s could take advantage of the same corrupt laws to harvest votes from registered republicans. Is it just me or is it real that CA Republican party officials don’t seem to care one whit about actually helping republican candidates win elected offices? If the CA republican party officials worked as hard as democrat party officials using AB 1921 to their advantage, there is a good chance that Nancy Pelosi would not be the current Speaker of the House of Representatives. If the CA republican party leadership won’t take AB 1921 to the 9th like the Arizona Republicans did, then play the legal vote fraud, ops, sorry Vote Harvesting game as well or better than democrats.

Guest Post

Buy a Lottery ticket – 9th Circuit sides with Trump

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the Trump administration Monday in a case challenging its use of waivers to bypass environmental regulations in constructing parts of the border wall.

The state of California and several environmental groups sued President Donald Trump and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in September 2017 to stop construction of a border wall prototype and ongoing repairs to 14 miles of an existing barrier in San Diego.

“Under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), the Secretary of the DHS has long had the authority ‘to install additional physical barriers and roads … in the vicinity of the United States border,’” the 9th Circuit’s opinion states, quoting the IIRIRA.

The IIRIRA grants the secretary of the DHS “the authority to waive all legal requirements” as is “‘necessary to ensure expeditious construction’ of those barriers and roads,” according to the 9th Circuit.

The 9th Circuit’s three-judge panel ruled 2-1 in favor of the federal government. The dissenting judge, Consuelo Callahan, wrote she supported the Trump administration’s argument, but thought the court lacked jurisdiction to review California’s appeal.

The DHS waived provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act and the Coastal Zone Management Act in 2017, expediting approval to begin construction of the border wall prototype and repairs.

The ruling is another legal victory for Trump in the case after U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel ruled against California in February 2018. Curiel found “Congress delegated to its executive counterpart, the responsibility to construct border barriers as needed in areas of high illegal entry to detect and deter illegal entries.”

Trump accused Curiel of being biased against him in an earlier case involving Trump University. Curiel ruled against then-presidential candidate Trump on several points throughout the 2016.

“I think it has to do with perhaps the fact that I’m very, very strong on the border,” Trump told Fox News in February 2016. “Now, he is Hispanic, I believe. He is a very hostile judge to me.”

Trump eventually settled the case for $25 million.

Read the rest at: 9th Circuit

Knowingly sharing HIV no biggie in California

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Friday that lowers from a felony to a misdemeanor the crime of knowingly exposing a sexual partner to HIV without disclosing the infection.

The measure also applies to those who give blood without telling the blood bank that they are HIV-positive.

Modern medicine allows those with HIV to live longer lives and nearly eliminates the possibility of transmission, according to state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), authors of the bill.

“Today California took a major step toward treating HIV as a public health issue, instead of treating people living with HIV as criminals,” Wiener said in a statement. “HIV should be treated like all other serious infectious diseases, and that’s what SB 239 does.”

Supporters of the change said the current law requires an intent to transmit HIV to justify a felony, but others noted cases have been prosecuted where there was no physical contact, so there was an argument intent was lacking.

Brown declined to comment on his action.

HIV has been the only communicable disease for which exposure is a felony under California law. The current law, Wiener argued, may convince people not to be tested for HIV, because without a test they cannot be charged with a felony if they expose a partner to the infection.

“We are going to end new HIV infections, and we will do so not by threatening people with state prison time, but rather by getting people to test and providing them access to care,” Wiener said.

Supporters of the bill said women engaging in prostitution are disproportionately targeted with criminal charges, even in cases where the infection is not transmitted.

Republican lawmakers including Sen. Joel Anderson of Alpine voted against the bill, arguing it puts the public at risk.

“I’m of the mind that if you purposefully inflict another with a disease that alters their lifestyle the rest of their life, puts them on a regimen of medications to maintain any kind of normalcy, it should be a felony,” Anderson said during the floor debate. “It’s absolutely crazy to me that we should go light on this.”

Anderson said the answer could be to extend tougher penalties to those who expose others to other infectious diseases.

Read the rest at: HIV

Senate Intelligence Committee says NO COLLUSION!

To this day, there has been zero solid evidence to suggest there was a definitive collusion conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. After years of mocking Republicans for suggesting the Russians were a geopolitical threat, it took one election loss to turn them into rabid Russophobes the likes we haven’t seen since Joseph McCarthy was in the U.S. Senate. This has always been a sour grapes crusade peddled by Democrats still stunned that Hillary Clinton lost in 2016, still seething over that loss, and desperate to find something, anything, that they can use to impeach the president. We have the DOJ probe spearheaded by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who has been investigating this matter for over a year and a half. The investigation is closely guarded, but things leak in this town, especially on this. We would have known about potential solid evidence by now. We have none. And now the Senate Intelligence Committee has found “no direct evidence” of Trump-Russia collusion after two years of investigating and 200 interviews (via NBC News):

After two years and 200 interviews, the Senate Intelligence Committee is approaching the end of its investigation into the 2016 election, having uncovered no direct evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, according to both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.

But investigators disagree along party lines when it comes to the implications of a pattern of contacts they have documented between Trump associates and Russians — contacts that occurred before, during and after Russian intelligence operatives were seeking to help Trump by leaking hacked Democratic emails and attacking his opponent on social media.

“If we write a report based upon the facts that we have, then we don’t have anything that would suggest there was collusion by the Trump campaign and Russia,” said Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, the Republican chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said last week in an interview with CBS News.

Burr was careful to note that more facts may yet be uncovered, but he also made clear that the investigation was nearing an end.

“We know we’re getting to the bottom of the barrel because there’re not new questions that we’re searching for answers to,” Burr said.

Democratic Senate investigators who spoke to NBC News on condition of anonymity did not dispute Burr’s characterizations, but said they lacked context. 

Yeah, it’s a nothingburger. It’s always been a ridiculous story, one that exposed a rather schizophrenic narrative about the president from Democrats. He’s either a genius who colluded with the Kremlin or a moron; he cannot be both

Read the rest at: Shove It







Trump Approval Rating Skyrockets

Trump Approval Rating Skyrockets

Trump Approval Rating Soars to 52% after State of the Union Address

Going into the SOTU, the Trump approval rating was about 48%. That was a fairly strong number. The nearly 90 minute SOTU boosted his approval rating to a significant 52%.

The Trump Approval Rating was reported by Rasmussen Reports, which is actually a poll of “likely voters.” Typically, “likely voters” provide a better reading of future election results. Polls of “registered voters” are less informative because many registered voters do not follow through and actually vote in elections.

Note that in my forecast model, I think the Trump approval rating is higher than 52%.

Trump Approval Rating Means Media Attacks and Democrat Attacks are not Effective

The 52% approval rating Trump holds shows that the unprecedented media attack on Trump is simply not working. Despite about 92% of news media articles being negative, American voters are not buying the fake news story line.

Most voters can tell the American Economy is booming. Consider Monday’s Gallup article: “Americans’ Confidence in Their Finances Keeps Growing.”

  • About 50% of Americans think that they are better off than last year
  • About 69% of Americans think they they will be better off next year
  • American optimism about finances is about at a record high level


That’s a great position for the president to be in two years before the next presidential election.

Bottom line: the constant barrage of negative news from the media and Democrats is largely falling on deaf ears.

This Trump approval rating was impacted by two factors. First, his style of trying to create a better future for America by working together with Democrats was seen as very positive. Second, his efforts to follow through on his campaign promise to solve illegal immigration and protect border security with a wall was seem as showing true integrity.

Over the last decade, voters have voiced considerable concern over candidates promising one thing during an election, and not following through on those campaign promises after they were elected. Voters consider that a lack of campaign promise follow through is an important integrity issue.

Trump continues to score high on follow-through and integrity. This boosts his reelection prospects for 2020. He appears to be moving toward an easy reelection victory.

For more information on polling and forecast models, please see my 2018 book More Great News for America .

eCigs creating lung issues in kids!

The American Lung Association gives a federal agency and individual state governments poor marks in a new report card evaluating tobacco prevention programs.

The federal government is failing to act to protect kids from e-cigarettes, which can lead to a potential addiction, according to the association’s 17th annual State of Tobacco Control report. Tobacco, the leading cause of preventable death and disease in the nation, kills 480,000 people in the United States each year, while an additional 16 million are living with a tobacco-related disease.
Some of the harshest criticism is reserved for the US Food and Drug Administration, which received a grade of “F” from the lung association, primarily due to a “lack of action,” said Thomas Carr, an author of the new report and national director of policy at the American Lung Association.
The inaction, in particular the FDA’s passivity regarding vaping, is “putting the lives and health of Americans at risk,” said Carr, who noted the “staggering 78% increase among high school students and e-cigarette use in 2017-18.”
Read the rest at eCig Lung Damage

e-cigs are NOT stopping teens from smoking!

Public health experts are continuing to sound the alarm on the teen vaping epidemic, tying the 1.3 million increase in teen tobacco users from 2017 to 2018 directly to e-cigarettes. The rise has been so significant that it has wiped out any progress in declining youth tobacco use in recent years, according to a report published Monday.

The report from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention specifically singled out e-cigarette giant Juul as a contributing factor to the escalating rates.
“The bottom line is, we have considerably troubling news on the tobacco control front when it comes to kids,” said Brian King, a deputy director in the CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health and co-author of the report.
King said that the rise in vaping was the single biggest jump in teen use of a tobacco product since the beginning of the survey in 1999.

King and his colleagues analyzed data from the 2011-18 National Youth Tobacco survey to estimate trends among high school and middle school students and found that in 2018, 27% of high school students and 7.2% of middle school students said they used tobacco for one or more days in the month.
Among all tobacco products, including cigarettes, chewing tobacco and hookah, e-cigarettes — also known as vapes — were the ones most commonly used by teens; 3.05 million or 20.8% of high school students and 570,000 or 4.9% of middle school students said they vaped at least once in the previous month. Also, there were 1.5 million more teens using e-cigarettes in 2018 than in 2017.

The researchers also found no significant change in the current use of combustible tobacco products by teens, other than e-cigarettes, that drove the overall increase in youth tobacco use. Notably, no decline in use of other tobacco products was identified.
Before 2018, high school e-cigarette use had peaked in 2015 with 16% of students vaping. Use of e-cigarettes fell for the first time in the history of the survey by 29% in 2016, and the drop was sustained through 2017. However, in 2017-18, e-cigarette use jumped 77.8% among high schoolers and 48.5% among middle schoolers, erasing any previous declines.

Read the rest at: eCigs

AOC is REALLY out of touch!

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) attacked federal immigration officers on Thursday after an illegal alien MS-13 gang member, who had 12 prior arrests, allegedly murdered someone on Sunday in her district, which is a sanctuary city.

“This is one of the most urgent moral issues and crises that we have in America right now,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “This is not a political issue. Children dying in detention centers should not be a partisan concern. It should be a universal concern for every American in the United States.”

“ICE operates with virtually no accountability, ripping apart families and holding our friends and neighbors indefinitely in inhumane detention centers scattered across the United States,” Ocasio-Cortez continued.

“We’re here to say that an agency like ICE, which repeatedly and systematically violates human rights, does not deserve a dime.”

“I will not give one dollar to black-box detention facilities that think that some people in this country are deserving of constitutional protections and others are not,” Ocasio-Cortez added.

“We are a land of laws, what that means is that every person that steps foot on this soil deserves … to have access to our Bill of Rights.”

Ocasio-Cortez also attacked President Donald Trump over his State of the Union address, where she begrudgingly stood and refused to clap when he championed cracking down on child sex trafficking.

Read the rest at: AOC out of touch

KAMALA – Did you miss AOC’s memo?

We apologize for our error and for any confusion we may have caused.

The Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential hopefuls aren’t exactly off to an inspiring start.

With the race for the White House already underway, two of the leading women from the left — Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris — have embarrassed themselves right out of the gate.

Warren has made a series of blunders that caused her to be mocked by those on both sides of the political aisle. The Massachusetts senator’s internet livestream left viewers feeling as bland as the beer she awkwardly swilled on camera, while she found herself apologizing to Native Americans and everyone else after her Cherokee Nation kerfuffle.

West-coast liberal darling Kamala Harris isn’t faring much better. On Thursday, the California Democrat endorsed the “Green New Deal” proposed by socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., a ridiculous plan that has been roundly mocked by Republicans and Democrats alike.

An FAQ page about the Green New Deal was quietly removed from Ocasio-Cortez’s website after the proposal went over like flatulence in an elevator.

Then again, she apparently knows a few things about flatulence. We’re not being crass: The congresswoman’s Green New Deal FAQ page discussed doing away with “farting cows” as a way to fight climate change.

Read the rest at: KAMALA

Will the Democrats EVER own up to slavery!

The Petition for Abolishing the Slave-Trade. 'Come, listen to my plaintive ditty,/Ye tender hearts, and children dear!/And, should it move your souls to pity,/Oh! try to end the griefs you hear.' From Ameilia Opie "The Black Man's Lament; or How to Make Sugar", London, 1826. (Photo by: Photo 12/UIG via Getty Images)

Very few people today know that in 1808 Congress abolished the slave trade. That’s because by the 1820’s, most of the Founding Fathers were dead and Thomas Jefferson’s party, the Democratic Party, which was founded in 1792, had become the majority party in Congress. With this new party a change in congressional policy on slavery emerged. The 1789 law that prohibited slavery in federal territory was reversed when the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise in 1820. Several States were subsequently admitted as slave States. Slavery was being officially promoted by congressional policy by a Democratically controlled Congress.

The Democratic party policy of promoting slavery ignored the principles in the founding document.

“The first step of the slaveholder to justify by argument the peculiar institutions [of slavery] is to deny the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence. He denies that all men are created equal. He denies that they have inalienable rights.” President John Quincy Adams, The Hingham Patriot, June 29, 1839

In 1850 the Democrats passed the Fugitive Slave Law. That law required Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or pay huge fines. The Fugitive Slave Law made anti-slavery citizens in the North and their institutions responsible for enforcing slavery. The Fugitive Slave Law was sanctioned kidnapping. The Fugitive Slave Law was disastrous for blacks in the North. The Law allowed Free Blacks to be carried into slavery. 20,000 blacks from the North left the United States and fled to Canada. The Underground Railroad reached its peak of activity as a result of the Fugitive Slave Law.

Fugitive Slave Act – 1850

Fugitive Slave Act

31st United States Congress – Wikipedia In 1854, the Democratically controlled Congress passed another law strengthening slavery, the Kansas-Nebraska act. Even though slavery was expanded into federal territories in 1820 by the Democratically controlled Congress, a ban on slavery was retained in the Kansas Nebraska territory. But through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Democrats vastly expanded the national area where slavery was permitted as the Kansas and Nebraska territories comprised parts of Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, and Idaho. The Democrats were pushing slavery westward across the nation.

The History Place – Abraham Lincoln: Kansas-Nebraska Act–Nebraska_Act

Frederick Douglas believed that the 3/5th clause is an anti-slavery clause. Not a pro-slavery clause. Frederick Douglas believed that the Constitution was an anti-slavery document.

(1860) Frederick Douglass, “the Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-slavery?” | The Black Past: Remembered and Reclaimed

What Did Frederick Douglass Believe About the U.S. Constitution? | The Classroom | Synonym…onstitution_did_not_condone_slavery/page/full

And so did others.

Read the rest of the REAL story at: Democrat Slavery

Finland fails at forced basic income!

Giving jobless people in Finland a basic income for two years did not lead them to find work, researchers said.

From January 2017 until December 2018, 2,000 unemployed Finns got a monthly flat payment of €560 (£490; $634).

The aim was to see if a guaranteed safety net would help people find jobs, and support them if they had to take insecure gig economy work.

While employment levels did not improve, participants said they felt happier and less stressed.

When it launched the pilot scheme back in 2017, Finland became the first European country to test out the idea of an unconditional basic income. It was run by the Social Insurance Institution (Kela), a Finnish government agency, and involved 2,000 randomly-selected people on unemployment benefits.

It immediately attracted international interest – but these results have now raised questions about the effectiveness of such schemes.

Universal basic income, or UBI, means that everyone gets a set monthly income, regardless of means. The Finnish trial was a bit different, as it focused on people who were unemployed.

Another popular variation is ‘universal basic services’ – where instead of getting an income, things like education, healthcare and transport are free for all.

Although it’s enjoying a resurgence in popularity, the idea isn’t new. In fact, it was first described in Sir Thomas More’s Utopia, published in 1516 – a full 503 years ago.

Such schemes are being trialled all over the world. Adults in a village in western Kenya are being given $22 a month for 12 years, until 2028, while the Italian government is working on introducing a “citizens’ income”. The city of Utrecht, in the Netherlands, is also carrying out a basic income study called Weten Wat Werkt – “Know What Works” – until October.

Read the rest at: Basic Income Fails

No criminals coming over the border?

U.S. Border Patrol agents said Thursday that they apprehended several illegal immigrants at the southern border in Texas, in places where there are no physical barrier walls to deter illegal crossings.

Among those caught crossing into the U.S. were a Mexican man with a previous conviction in Georgia for child molestation, a Honduran man with a record in North Carolina showing a conviction for “Indecent Liberties with Child,” and another Honduran male with a Florida record that identified him as a member of the violent MS-13 gang.

The apprehensions occurred in the Rio Grande Valley sector of the southern border on Monday and Tuesday, according to a release by the Border Patrol.

I toured a portion of that sector in January, and agents said that areas that feature a 25-foot barrier of concrete and steel have proven critical in blocking illegal border crossers, forcing them to attempt their crossings in specific areas where they can be apprehended. They’ve asked for more of the same kind of border wall to fill in the long gaps that current exist.

When President Trump said during his State of the Union address Tuesday that his proposal is for new barrier that “will be deployed in the areas identified by the border agents as having the greatest need,” this is what he meant.

Read the rest at: BORDER

Chief Justice Roberts sides with Libs?

Chief Justice John Roberts was the decisive swing vote in a ruling which struck down Abortion restrictions in Louisiana, Thursday, marking a reversal in his jurisprudence.

The Bush-appointee ruled in favor of a nearly-identical law in the past, fueling speculation that Roberts is shifting leftward.

Fox News reports:

The ruling comes as Roberts, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, has increasingly and deliberately sought to present the federal judiciary as nonpartisan, amid a flurry of attacks from progressive groups arguing that the Supreme Court’s new conservative majority imperils the country. Last year, in a highly unusual statement, Roberts rebuked President Trump for criticizing partisanship in the federal judiciary.

The Louisiana law is virtually identical to a Texas measure the justices struck down three years ago by a 5-3 vote, shortly after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. Roberts dissented in that case, when he was not the deciding vote, and sided with the conservative minority that wanted to uphold the anti-abortion law — making his decision on Thursday a significant reversal.

The justices decided in a 5-4 vote on Thursday, with Roberts as the swing vote, that they will not allow Louisiana to put into effect a law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The Supreme Court is set to issue a final ruling on the merits of the case later, and Thursday’s majority ruling did not spell out a rationale.

In the 2016 Texas case, the Supreme Court held that the admitting-privileges requirement “provides few, if any, health benefits for women, poses a substantial obstacle to women seeking abortions, and constitutes an ‘undue burden’ on their constitutional right to do so.”

Read the rest at: Roberts BETRAYAL

Lemon shames Gladys Knight for Singing Anthem!

CNN’s Don Lemon was angry that the legendary Gladys Knight sang the National Anthem at the Super Bowl — and sung it beautifully. Lemon was really perturbed that the African-American icon would bypass the radical left’s “Colin Kaepernick” boycott of the event by celebrities and sing one of our nation’s most patriotic songs.

Well, Gladys really loves America, and she utterly destroyed the Trump-hater. You’ll love this.

Typically singing at the big game is a coveted spot for musical artists. But not this year, as America-hating leftists pressured musical acts not to perform during the halftime show in protest of how the NFL “treated” the anthem-kneelers during the last two seasons.

Prominent artists including Rihanna, P!nk and Cardi B turned down the offer to headline Sunday’s championship game between the New England Patriots and L.A. Rams, amid the controversy over racially charged police brutality protests spearheaded by former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick.

The pressure was no less more intense for the anthem itself, with demands for singers to boycott it, for the sake of “the cause.”

But, when the 74-year-old Grammy winner Knight was offered the big job, she didn’t hesitate to grab the chance.

And her amazing performance, accompanied by U.S. military colors, thrilled America.

This was too much for rabid Trump-hating CNN anchor Don Lemon, who took to the airwaves Monday to grill the legendary Gladys Knight herself.

Lemon starts off by showing Ms. Knight a clip of high-powered Hollywood attorney Mark Geragos, who is now representing Colin Kaepernick. Geragos other clientele included Michael Jackson, and convicted wife murderer Scott Peterson.

In the clip, Geragos shames anyone performing in the Super Bowl as “crossing an intellectual picket line” and “caring more about their career than doing what is right.” And that’s when Don Lemon asked, “Numerous performers declined to sing at the Super Bowl this year. How do you respond to that?”

The Grammy winner doesn’t skip a beat. With a big smile on her face, she says, “About what they’re thinking? People are going to have their opinions about whatever. And all I can deal with right now is what my heart says. I believe in truth and I believe in fairness… I grew up with the National Anthem, we used to sing it in school before school started. We used to say prayer in school before school started. And we just don’t have that anymore. And I’m just hoping it will be about our country, and what we are about, and about the great country that we are.”

Read the rest at: Anthem

SERIES – Congressional Democrats that have been CHARGED with Crimes #2

Prosecutors charged Fattah, one of Philidelphia’s most powerful political bosses on federal racketeering, fraud, and other corruption charges in July 2015, in a blow to one of America’s last remaining big-city political machines.

The congressman continued to serve until December 12, 2016 – two days after a jury convicted him on 23 counts.

Fattah, 62, received a 10-year prison sentence.

See his arrest video at:  Another Democrat arrested

Church told to change their scripture or else!

American religious freedom showing Bible and Declaration of Independence.

Duke University is among the 93 Methodist-affiliated colleges and universities across the country that brought in the new year by penning and signing a petition calling on the denomination to embrace LGBTQ+ inclusivity within the church.

The petition, which claims that part of its acceptance should be based on the fact that the church’s “core religious and humanistic values [are] that all persons are of sacred worth and equal standing,” was ultimately signed by every attending member at the National Association of Schools and Colleges of the United Methodist Church (NASCUMC).

It continues: “historically, the church has witnessed a profound commitment to the sacred worth of all persons and to social justice, such as the church’s position on civil rights, women’s rights, and the rights of different ethnic communities.”

The Methodist Church’s current Book of Discipline states that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching.”

“Therefore, self-avowed practicing homosexuals are not to be certified as candidates, ordained as ministers, or appointed to serve in The United Methodist Church,” it adds.

Duke’s vice president for public affairs and government relations, Michael Schoenfeld, claimed that the petition “is consistent with Duke’s longstanding commitment to diversity and inclusion,” according to The Duke Chronicle.

However, Duke’s Divinity School has recently come under fire for issues relating to diversity and inclusion after a protest erupted during the then-dean’s 2018 State of the School speech addressing the university’s treatment and view of LGBTQ+ individuals and African-Americans. The current dean of the Divinity School, L. Gregory Jones, told The Duke Chronicle that the school is working on its standing as it relates to diversity and inclusion.

Read the rest at: Change scripture

Forced abortion services?

Abortion On Demand Sign, Planned Parenthood
Abortion On Demand Sign, Planned Parenthood

‘No specific opt-out process’ for student insurance

Students at Yale University are automatically enrolled in health insurance that covers elective abortion, and they are unable to opt out of it even if they are opposed to the procedure.

Yale provides its “Basic Coverage” to all full- and part-time students at the university. According to the student insurance handbook, abortion is one of the provisions covered by the policy.

“If a student chooses to end a pregnancy, Yale Health can arrange a referral for a termination procedure, which is covered under Yale Health Basic,” the handbook states.

A 2004 story from The Yale Daily News stated that, under the health insurance plan, “any female student is entitled to unlimited, free abortions.”

A representative from Yale Health declined to comment, instead referring The College Fix to the university’s public relations office.

Campus spokeswoman Karen Peart told The Fix that the policy “is one of a number of programs supported by Yale to enhance student life on campus. It is available to all students enrolled at least half time in a degree-granting program.”

“There is no enrollment process other than matriculation at Yale and no individual charge for these services. Students may elect to use or not use any of the services available to them on campus, but there is no specific opt-out process,” Peart said.

Peart did not explain how the insurance is ultimately paid for, or if the school makes it clear to first-year students that the policy includes abortion coverage.

Yale University’s support for abortion-related services is not new.

Last year Yale was set to debut a project that would sell students “emergency contraception” drugs from vending machines. In the end the school had to scrap the idea because it would have violated Connecticut state law, which forbids selling such medications from vending machines.

Though the Plan B pill is marketed as emergency contraception, it can cause abortion.

Plan B’s website warns that the drug may destroy a newly-created human, stating that the pill may work “by preventing attachment (implantation) to the uterus (womb).”

Read the rest at “Forced Abortions?”

Trump scores a 76% approval for speech!

President Trump delivered his second State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress, followed by the Democratic response by former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.

Trump said we must reject the politics of revenge and resistance because victory is not winning for our party, it is winning for our country.

“We must reject the politics of revenge, resistance and retribution, and embrace the boundless potential of cooperation, compromise, and the common good,” Trump said Tuesday night.

“Together we can break decades of political stalemate,” Trump said. “We can bridge all divisions, heal old wounds, build new coalitions, forge new solutions, and unlock the extraordinary promise of America’s future. The decision is ours to make. We must choose between greatness or gridlock, results or resistance, vision or vengeance, incredible progress or pointless destruction. Tonight, I ask you to choose greatness.”

Earlier in the day, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told FOX News that the theme of this year’s State of the Union is ‘Choosing Greatness.’

“The president is going to lay out some of the great successes we’ve had over the last two years and paint a picture of what we can do for this country if we come together and if we work together over the next two years,” Sanders said.

Read the rest at: SOTU