Hawaii Senators Urge Congress To Repeal Second Amendment

I don’t know where these people come from but “rights” are not repealable.  They are “unalienable,” which means they can’t be given up nor taken (Only cowards acquiesce to either of those).  Yet, here are cowardly tyrants in the state of Hawaii introducing resolutions that encourage Congress to violate the Constitution and the rights of the people, the very thing they took an oath before God and man to uphold.

Hawaii state senators, all of them Democrats, introduced Senate Resolution 29 and Senate Concurrent Resolution 42, both of which conclude with these lines:

BE IT RESOLVED by the Senate of the Thirtieth Legislature of the State of Hawaii, Regular Session of 2019, the House of Representatives concurring, that the United States Congress is urged to propose and adopt a proposed amendment to the United States Constitution pursuant to article V of the United States Constitution to clarify the constitutional right to bear arms; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the United States Congress is requested to consider and discuss whether the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution should be repealed or amended to clarify that the right to bear arms is a collective, rather than individual, constitutional right.

Unbelievable!  The senators of Hawaii have just declared war on the united States, its Constitution and its people and should summarily be arrested for undermining the very law they swore to uphold.

Chris Gomez at The New American writes:

This proposal to deny Americans their right to posess firearms underscores the serious dangers of amending the federal Constitution in this current age. And although neither resolution is an application to Congress to call a convention for proposing amendments, also known as a “convention of states” or constitutional convention (Con-Con), under Article V, they offer a preview into the type of amendments that a Hawaii delegation to such a convention would propose, should one be called by Congress.

In fact, Hawaii lawmakers have already suggested a convention to propose, among one of its aims, an amendment to do just that. In 2012, liberal Democratic state legislators introduced House Concurrent Resolution 114, a radical leftist Con-Con application that sought to repeal the Second Amendment, declare ObamaCare to be constitutional, and to abolish the Electoral College. The key excerpts from Hawaii’s HCR 114 (2012) read:

Whereas, the Legislature supports the proposal and ratification of the following amendments to the United States Constitution:

(1) The repeal or modification of the Second Amendment to strengthen firearms restrictions;

(2) A declaration of the constitutionality of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, including the individual mandate requiring the purchase of health insurance;

(3) An amendment to Article I, Section 5, to prohibit the supermajority cloture requirement under Rule 22 of the United States Senate for ending floor debates and filibusters, to facilitate a more reasonable voting standard for cloture;

(4) An amendment abolishing the electoral college established under Article II, Section 1, and providing for the direct election of the United States President and Vice President by voters; and

(5) An amendment to Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, to require that Senate confirmations of appointments of officers of the United States be made by a simple majority vote within sixty days of the nomination….

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Concurrent Resolution constitutes a continuing application in accordance with Article V of the United States Constitution until at least two-thirds of the legislatures of the several states have made application for a constitutional convention that is limited to consideration of the amendments to the United States Constitution enumerated in this Concurrent Resolution. (Emphasis added throughout.)

Fortunately, HCR 114 failed to pass in 2012. However, like both SR 29 and SCR 42 of 2019, it also reveals just how far some on the Left are willing to go to eviscerate our constitutional freedoms. One should not expect liberal delegates to an Article V convention — especially coming from stronghold “blue states” such as Hawaii, California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Washington — to sit idly by as purportedly conservative Republicans make changes to the nation’s law of the land. In fact, even the so-called conservatives at Mark Meckler’s Convention of States Project/Action organization, also known as COS, may not be reliable guardians of the Second Amendment.

These aren’t the only lawless tyrants who have advanced this idea.  We have had all sorts of past and present politicians who have pushed for outright gun confiscation to what they call “common sense” regulations, which are actually stupid.

Remember Dianne Feinstein in 1995?

And yet, she blurts out the truth in 2017, she admits that no guns laws can stop mass shootings or any gun crime for that matter.

Then there was “relic of the twentieth century,” former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens who wrote that the Second Amendment should be repealed because it was a “relic of the eighteenth century.”

These people have no idea why the Second Amendment was written, no idea that corrupt men and governments will continue to exist to advance tyranny and arms a means of the people keeping them in check, not to mention the defense of their persons, families, and communities.

The John Birch Society put out a video titled “Tricked Into Gun Control,” which demonstrates that the idea of “clarifying the Second Amendment” is just another way of attempting to create outlaws out of law-abiding citizens and leads to gun confiscation.

Muslim Rep. Ilhan Omar Claims Obama Is A “Pretty Face” Who Got “Away With Murder” – Then Walks Her Comments Back

OK, for once, I actually agree with Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).  In an interview that ware published on Friday, she tore into the usurper, Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah, claiming that his “hope and change” campaign was nothing more than an illusion and that he was nothing more than a “pretty face” who got “away with murder.”

She cited things we have known for some time, like the caging of children at the southern border, as well as the “droning of countries around the world,” as we have pointed out also.  Much of that droning came amid questions regarding congressional authorization and in some instances killing innocent US citizens who were not engaged in anything criminal.

“We can’t be only upset with Trump,” the freshman congresswoman told Politico Magazine.

“His policies are bad, but many of the people who came before him also had really bad policies,” she added.  “They just were more polished than he was.”

“And that’s not what we should be looking for anymore,” Omar continued.  “We don’t want anybody to get away with murder because they are polished. We want to recognize the actual policies that are behind the pretty face and the smile.”

However, as soon as the interview was published, Omar attempted to walk back her comments in an attempt to paint Trump as the culprit, not Obama.

Clearly, she was referencing both men.

“Exhibit A of how reporters distort words. I’m an Obama fan! I was saying how [President] Trump is different from Obama, and why we should focus on policy not politics,” she tweeted.

https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1104116455224807424

Policy and not politics?  Is that why she is a “fan” of Obama and not a “fan” of Trump?  She isn’t playing politics?  Give me a break!

No, Ms. Omar, no one distorted your words, you took to task both men, and rightfully so, but now that it painted her beloved “messiah” as the bad guy, she wanted it to look like it’s just the system Obama worked in, but not necessarily have people view that about President Trump.

I have no problem calling out both men.  I have often said that Obama engaged in unconstitutional foreign policy, including using the military without congressional approval, but neither he, his former defense secretary nor his generals were ever held accountable for their clear violations of the Constitution.

Trump has engaged in similar behavior with two missile strikes coming a year apart on the nation of Syria in response to alleged gas attacks without any evidence of the Assad government being involved.  In fact, Trump’s own defense secretary declared there was no evidence that Assad attacked.  Yet, we spent millions of dollars tossing missiles into a country that had not attacked us, and turns out, we couldn’t even prove they attacked their own people.

Granted, I question Omar’s motives considering her Islamic jihad ties with designated terror groups like Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), but the point is a valid one on this front and it spans both parties.  For decades the military industrial complex and globalists have infiltrated our government and we have been the tool in the Middle East to not bring about peace, but dismantle quite a bit of it in the name of the War on Terrorism.

Frankly, while I’m not a friend of Islam and long to see the death cult dead and buried, I have no ill will towards individual Muslims.  In fact, I wish they would embrace Jesus the Christ, but I digress.

The war and devastation we have brought in much, not all, of that region is without any constitutional warrant.

If Socialists Taught How To Debate “Right Wingers,” It Might Look Something Like This

“If they attack you personally, it means they have not a single political argument left.” -Margaret Thatcher

In a video put out by the guys at Reason, they aptly provide a simple video piece that demonstrates exactly what “debate” means to a Socialist.

It doesn’t mean engaging in facts or logic or economics with real numbers.  It means to attack your opponent rather than attempt to dismantle his ideas.

This is constantly going on in politics, whether it is from the right or the left, both sides have problems in many cases defending certain positions when someone other than their particular controlled opposition begins to question them about their logic or their ideas.

I’ll admit, this happens a lot more on the openly Socialist “Left” than it does on the “Right,” but it does happen on both sides.

The Reason video, titled “How to debate right wingers,” is a satirical video that will make you laugh, but you will see clearly the point it’s making, and a good point it is.

Furthermore, if you are already in a public indoctrination center, we refer to as public schools, you will immediately understand the re-education process if you speak out of the normal political echo chamber of the teacher.

You will also not the humiliation of those who actually want to think for themselves and engage in conversation to see whose ideas are right, wrong or even the best and wisest to follow.

This is one that should be shared with all your friends regardless of political affiliation because no one wants to be thought of as a useful idiot, do they?

Perhaps this might be eye-opening to people across the political spectrum, not just those the video specifically targets.

Trump Donated Thousands To Kamala Harris & Other Socialist California Democrats

Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) is about as crooked as they come.   From literally whoring her way to political power in California with Willie Brown to her being an accomplice to Planned Parenthood baby murders and body parts trafficking to her anti-American views that push socialism and gun confiscation, Kamala Harris rivals the corruption of notable Democrats in DC.  This brings up the question, why would then-citizen Donald Trump and his daughter, Ivanka, be providing one dollar to her re-election as California’s attorney general?  Yet, that’s exactly what the father and daughter did between 2011 and 2014, and it wasn’t just Harris that Trump supported.

However, Harris was not the only Socialist in California to whom the Trump’s donated.

First, Javier Panzar of the LA Times tweeted out the following donations from Donald Trump to the Harris campaign in 2011 and 2013 that totaled $6,000.

Panzar followed up to show that Trump also donated to Governor Jerry Brown a total of $3,500 in 2004 and 2006 and $2,500 to Gavin Newsom in 2009 for a gubernatorial campaign.

Ivanka Trump donated $2,000 in 2014 to Harris’ campaign.

However, in order to distance herself from Trump, Harris claims she didn’t use their money.  The Sacramento Bee reports:

Harris campaign spokesman Ian Sams told McClatchy that Harris donated the $6,000 Trump had contributed to a non-profit that advocates for civil and human rights for Central Americans. But that donation wasn’t made until 2015, a year after she won her reelection for attorney general and as she was launching her run for the Senate.

OK, but how do we know this?  How did she pull out the exact $6,000 Trump gave and donate it in 2015 when it was donate 2 and 4 years prior?  We don’t, and neither does Harris nor Sams.  It’s a cover like Planned Parenthood in saying they don’t use unconstitutionally provided federal funds for abortion.  They have absolutely no way to determine where that money goes and no one can actually verify it wasn’t used for abortions any more than Harris can document the money given to her by the Trumps was donated and not used for her campaign.

To be fair, this was emphasized by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), according to the LA Times, and Trump has donated to Republicans even more money in the state, even though former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger can hardly be considered a real Republican.

He even gave to RINO Republican and actor Arnold Schwarzenegger a total of $12,000 in 2007 and 2008 and the California Republican Party $25,000 in 2006.

However, I realize there will be those who try and defend this money going to Harris, Brown and others, including anti-Americans in many states, as nothing more than “good business.”  They will say that Trump is a businessman and as such, he’s giving to both sides to sort of hedge his bets for possible political favors concerning his business.  OK, but isn’t that the very definition of corruption?  This writer believes it is, and those who may oppose me would call it exactly that if it were Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah or Hillary Clinton if they were doing it.  Why won’t we be consistent?

“I give to everybody,” he said in a debate in 2015. “They call, I give. And you know what, when I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me.”

See?  I’ll scratch your back, you scratch mine, no matter whose rights are violated or what laws are broken.  And this includes donations to your favorite Socialists and Communists like Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton.

Watch.

Notice, he called it a “broken system,” but he never answered the question about what they did for him.

No, the system isn’t broken. Trump and all men are broken. They are sinful and they will engage in this if given the opportunity and then seek to blame the system for their behavior rather than lead by example.

Supporting anti-Americans for business favors is corruption, no matter who does it.

I ask you, my fellow Americans, do you give your money to those hellbent on destroying your state, your country?  No, you don’t.

The interesting thing is that when it comes to each of the Democrats mentioned in California to which Trump donated, every single one of them has blasted him in public.

Just last month, Harris told The Root that she believes the president is a racist, saying, “When you talk about him calling African countries s—hole countries, when you talk about him referring to immigrants as rapists and murderers, I don’t think you can reach any other conclusion.”

When you support corruption, it makes you corrupt and in the end, it comes back to bite you.

If you want to know why corruption thrives in American government and politics, it’s because we allow it and seek to justify it when it come to “our team” doing it.

A little leaven leavens the whole lump. -Galatians 5:9

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

She Told The City Council She’d Be Back – She Blasted Them For Not Upholding The Law

Back at the end of January, Desiree Maes showed up at the Phoenix City Council informing them that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of equality was dead as she cited the numbers from the American holocaust known as abortion.  At that time, she informed them that she and those like her were teaching their children to combat this scourge on our nation and after reminding them of their duty and the law on the books that criminalizes abortion, she warned she would be back.  In a video dated February 22, 2019, Mrs. Maes kept her promise and blasted the council for not upholding the law.

After introducing herself and thanking them for the opportunity to be heard, she declared, “As you know, HB 2 696 was presented today and
this is the allotted citizen comment time, and as a citizen I would just like to say that I’m utterly disgusted and angry.  I honestly can’t even
believe that anyone would have the audacity to present a bill like this and that there would be others openly supporting it.  Thank God it got killed today.”

She then pointed out the obvious.

“Here’s the thing,” she began, “we should all be equally outraged at abortion at any stage because it’s murder.  Whether it’s a baby at five weeks gestation, 20 weeks or 40 weeks, people don’t become more or less valuable because of their age.”

She went on to expound and destroy the arguments of the “pro-choice to murder your baby” advocates.

“It’s just that one of the whole arguments of the pro-choice movement is that the baby in the womb is an unviable clump of cells,” Maes said.  “Again, an unscientific argument that’s outdated by decades, but here’s the hard truth that we saw in vivid color today:  those who support abortion, when presented with this scenario of a baby actually surviving a botched abortion and is laying on the operating table breathing, want the abortionist to have the right to legally look that baby in the face and watch her die a slow and painful death when they have the power to help her.”

“Can you think of anything more barbaric?” she asked rhetorically.

She then followed out the progress logically if you legalize murder in the womb.

“Make no mistake, this is the agenda of the pro-choice movement:  abortion on demand, at any stage, no restrictions for any reason and now they’re pushing for the rights to kill outside of the womb,” Maes said.  “What’s next, two-year-olds?  Eight-year-olds?  Murder is murder at any age.”

She’s exactly right.  Not one person that supports abortion can identify when life begins consistently.  The only consistent claim of when life begins is at conception.  Anything else is subjective and simply cannot be proven.

She then addressed the issue of more regulations in alleged “pro-life” bills, which continues to allow the murder of the unborn, or there can simply be enforcement of existing law which criminalizes those who engage in the murder of the unborn.

Citing Senate Bill 1367, which was passed to strengthens Arizona’s law to ensure babies born alive after an abortion would receive life-saving care, she then went on to chide her representatives for their lack of fulfilling their duty under the law.

Maes said, “You see, we don’t need more legislation to regulate abortion.  We need to end it!”

This is exactly what the abolition movement is about.  People are tired of Americans being murdered everyday in their cities and states and have had enough and we’re coming to make sure the law gets enforced one way or another.

Maes once again cited Arizona statute 13-3603 which criminalizes abortion.  That statute reads:

A person who provides, supplies or administers to a pregnant woman, or procures such woman to take any medicine, drugs or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of such woman, unless it is necessary to save her life, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two years nor more than five years.

Then Maes tore into them for their neglect and laziness concerning justice.

“You are all neglecting to do what you’ve been sworn in office to do, which is uphold the law,” Maes pointed out.  “It is your duty to establish justice for every person regardless of their age, and I will remind you again that 60 million babies have been murdered since Roe v Wade.  More will die gruesome and barbaric deaths.”

“Today, in this city and in the state, how many more have to die until you’ll do something?” She queried.

She then exhorted them to do what is right.

“Please, let this be the day that you get the courage to stand up for what is right,” she pleaded.  “If you do, we pledge to stand behind you.  We don’t need cowards in office, we need bold men and women who will take a stand for what is right, regardless of what our culture and society says.”

She then reminded her representatives that slavery was once legal in our country too, but it took brave Americans to say, “No more.”

She then invited her representatives to join her and those of like mind in the fight to not regulate abortion through more compromising “pro-life” bills, but fight to abolish it.

I hope all God-fearing women will rise up like this, along with God-fearing men to demand that representatives do what they were put in office to do instead of pandering on things they were never authorized to be dealing in.

Mrs. Maes’ pastor, Jeff Durbin also addressed the council earlier this year and it was a perfect example of how Christian men should be addressing those in authority who are failing to do their duty before GodClick here to watch Pastor Durbin.

Alleged Fraud Rep. Rashida Tlaib Pushes For Impeachment of President Trump: “This Is An Emergency For Many Of Us”

Islamic jihad-tied and alleged election fraud artist Rashida Tlaib is not only facing cries from Americans that she should be impeached, but the classless Michigan representative has promised to “impeach the motherf**ker” President Donald Trump.  Now, she’s claiming that writing articles of impeachment against Trump is somehow an “emergency” for her.

According to The Hill, Tlaib claims that she will soon introduce articles of impeachment against the president, despite not saying why she is producing them.

The Hill reports:

Democratic leaders have sought to deter members of the caucus from pressing the impeachment issue, arguing the need for further investigations into Trump’s actions in office. They’re concerned that without more evidence of presidential wrongdoing — and more public support for impeachment — the issue could backfire on the Democrats at the polls next year.

But Tlaib, a firebrand freshman who has long advocated for impeachment, said constituents and activists are clamoring for Democrats to launch the effort, creating “a sense of urgency” that will compel her to introduce articles before month’s end.

“We saw record turnout in an election year, where people wanted to elect a jury that would begin the impeachment proceedings to Donald Trump,” Tlaib said during a packed press briefing in the foyer of her Capitol Hill office.

“We want to work on these economic justice issues, racial justice issues and everything. But guess what? There is a wall there, and a constitutional crisis that is not going to [let us] do our jobs as American Congress members to push a lot of these agendas forward.”

“This is the largest class since Watergate,” Tlaib said, referring to the freshmen Democrats. “This is a class — a diverse class — that comes … with a sense of urgency to act. To act to hold corporations accountable, to act in holding President Trump accountable, to act to really try to see real reforms, even within our congressional process.

“This is an emergency for many of us.”

Of course, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is attempting to stave the pressure for impeachment till after special counsel Robert Mueller wraps up his multi-million dollar “investigation” that has basically produced nothing concerning that which he was charged to investigate.  Signs are that is close to being completed as Amazon is already putting up pre-orders to milk the American people for money for a report for which they have already paid.

For Pelosi’s part, she has said, “When the facts are known, then we can make a judgment.”

I’m pretty sure we’re aware of the facts.  They’ve been out for quite a while now, so no bombshells are likely to be made known.

Still, Tlaib is not the only Democrat pushing to impeach Trump.

Three Democrats have already put forth articles of impeachment:  Representatives Brad Sherman (CA), Al Green (TX), and Steve Cohen (TN).

Sherman introduced his on the first day of Congress and Green introduced his last year only to claim that he will re-introduce something similar in the future and demand they be brought to the floor of the House for a vote.

Meanwhile, after Cohen had presented articles of impeachment before, he has not re-introduced them so far.

Thing is, if Tlaib wants to go ahead and push for it, she will look like more of a fool than she already does.  She has no basis for them unless she wants to actually cite unconstitutional actions by President Trump which we have evidence for, but she isn’t going to do that.

Remember, this is a woman that not only draped herself in the flag of another people when she won the election but also has warned that the “Muslims are here.”

Hypocrite Dianne Feinstein Actually Used To Say, “People Who Should Be Here Are Those Who Come Legally”

As Democrats such as Senator Dianne Feinstein continue to support illegal immigration through the unconstitutional DREAM policies of the Obama administration and sanctuary cities policies of states like California, in a galaxy far, far away, Senator Feinstein actually opposed illegal immigration, especially in her state.

Years ago, Feinstein used to take an approach that sounds much like President Donald Trump.  Take a listen for yourself.

https://twitter.com/therealcornett/status/1102665191890866177

Now, who is that?  Yep, it’s her alright.  Now’s she’s changed her tune without a bit of explanation as to why.

At that time, Feinstein claimed that there was a need to reduce the flow of illegal aliens at the time due to budgetary concerns and lower crime.

Since before Trump became president though, Feinstein has been advancing the pro-illegal immigration agenda.  However, at the time, she said:

People who should be here are those who come legally… We’ve got to enforce our borders. The day when America can be a welfare system for Mexico is gone. 

Well, that isn’t true.   It’s actually worse now for both illegals and citizens.

It’s not time to stop welfare just for illegals.  It’s time we put an end to it for citizens as well.  Welfare and entitlements are socialism despite the claims of President Trump that the US won’t be a socialist nation.

The fact is that we have been for quite some time.  We are a mixture of capitalism, cronyism and socialism, but make no mistake, we have bits of socialism in government and society, the large part of it imposed on the population in direct contradiction, and criminally I might add, to the US Constitution and the Creator’s command, “You shall not steal.”

The question for Dianne Feinstein and anyone else is, what has changed?  What changed her mind to go from rhetoric that sounds Trump-esque to rhetoric that is the direct opposite.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Woman Boldly Confronts City Council On Abortion – Does She Represent You, Women Of America? (Video)

I love when there a bold and courageous people who are willing to stand and be heard.  Such is the case with Desiree Maes, who confronted her local city council in Phoenix, Arizona earlier this year, following in the footsteps of Pastor Jeff Durbin who also reminded the council of their duty as ministers of God to cut off the crimes of the murder of the unborn in the state.

Maes stood before the Phoenix City Council on January 23, 2019 to proclaim unapologetically that she was a “follower of Jesus Christ, a local resident, a wife, a mother and a member of Apologia Church.”

She opened by saying that the country had just celebrated the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and pointed to his dream that referenced our Declaration of Independence that all people are created equal by their Creator.

“Well, that dream is dead for nearly sixty million people,” she stated.  “Since Roe v. Wade, nearly 60 million babies have been murdered.”

“So, that means every day for the past 46 years, children have been executed in our country and in our neighborhoods, all in broad daylight,” she added.

Woman Boldy Confronts City Council

THIS! This is how a woman should be. This is how we do this. This is courageous womanhood. #Feminism #ReproductiveFreedom #ProChoice #PlannedParenthood

Posted by Apologia Studios on Thursday, January 24, 2019

Maes said that to contemplate the magnitude of these crimes is hard to wrap our minds around, and indeed, it is.

“You may have bought into the ‘pro-choice’ mantra: ‘her body, her choice,’ but that ignorant, unscientific argument has been debunked for decades,” she thundered.  “So, I’m not here to talk about ‘her body,’ but I’m here to talk about the body inside of her body.”

She went on to recount the distinct attributes of the baby carried in the womb with it’s own DNA and set of fingerprints, as well as a soul.

Maes noted that through modern medical technology everyone knows what God said long ago, and that is that the baby in the womb is a living person from conception.

Not only did she mention science, true science I might add, but she also was bold enough to proclaim what many fail to understand and that is that true science is only discovering or proving what God has already told us.  Without fail, when given the opportunity, true science will always demonstrate the trustworthiness of God’s Word, the Bible.

Indeed, God’s Word tells us that every child is a gift to their parents and to generations that follow (Psalm 127-128).

“Regardless of the circumstances that surrounded your conception, whether planned or unplanned, whether you were wanted or unwanted, whether you were born into poverty or wealth, whether you were born healthy or with special needs, whatever the circumstances were, each of you were a gift to your parents,” Maes said.

Maes went on to state that every single child is precious and deserves the same protection as every other person made in the image of God.

She then recounted about thinking about the day when our children and grandchildren would look back on the American holocaust and ask, “What were you doing?  Where was everybody?”

She then charged the council, “I come here today to plead with you to use your power to do something.  God has sovereignly placed each of you in the positions that you’re in, and now is the time to do your duty and stand up for what is right.”

Maes then added, “Arizona already has laws on the books that criminalizes abortion.  Why are we not enforcing them?”

“Ignore Roe and uphold AZ statute 13-3603!” she challenged.  “Don’t be ruthless tyrants like New York.  Be courageous and help Arizona to be the first in this country to be on the right side of history by protecting the most defenseless among us.”

In case you are wondering, 13-3603 reads:

A person who provides, supplies or administers to a pregnant woman, or procures such woman to take any medicine, drugs or substance, or uses or employs any instrument or other means whatever, with intent thereby to procure the miscarriage of such woman, unless it is necessary to save her life, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than two years nor more than five years.

I’d say that’s pretty straightforward, but sadly is a pretty pitiful excuse for justice.  However, at least it would be something if those charged with enforcing the law actually upheld it rather than shirking their duty.

Believing that she is speaking for an “army of Christians,” and I might add others, that “this needs to end now,” Maes concluded by saying, “We will not stop fighting and bothering you all until this monstrous, barbaric practice of legalized abortion ends… and we’re teaching our children to do the same.”

Remember, unlike you are told by our constitutionally ignorant president, some of the judges he has appointed and representatives, Roe v. Wade is not settled law.  It is a ruling in one case, and applies only to that case, even though it was an unconstitutional rulingLegislation is only authorized to the Congress, and even that is limited and does not include the murder of Americans.

Rashida Tlaib At Designated Terror Group Event: “We Always Said ‘The Muslims Are Coming’… I Think We’re Here!'”

It’s been nearly twenty years since 9/11.  We were told it was Islamic jihadis were responsible, even though there is evidence that they either had help or had the door opened for them in some way.  Still, here we are and in 2019, we are seeing Muslims elected to Congress, put on the bench and openly tied to designated terror groups while pontificating about how pure as the wind-driven snow they are. In a recent event put on by designated terror group, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) declared that they had always said, “The Muslims are coming,” but now she is declaring they are “here.”

Rashida Talib speaking at the HAMAS linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) conference in Chicago

Rashida Talib speaking at the HAMAS linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) conference in Chicago in "Jesus was born in my country, Palestine" my mother said

Posted by Never Again UK on Tuesday, March 5, 2019

Not only did she acknowledge how Muslims are getting a foothold around the world in various governments, but praised the fact that they are in the united States Congress.

She thanked the designated terror group for inviting her to speak at a “civil rights organization that is around the unified fight against hate and racism in our country.”

No, CAIR is not a civil rights organization.  It is a defender only of Muslims, and that has nothing to do with either hate nor race, as Islam is an ideology, not an ethnicity.

We might also add that CAIR has been involved in pushing the propaganda of fake hate crimes against Muslims too.  Over and over again, they have come to the side of those claiming that they are victims of those who “hate Muslims,” only to be exposed as the ones perpetrating the crimes against themselves.

Tlaib then had the audacity to bring up lying by lobbyists, which we already know exists.  However, the fact that this congresswoman provided a false address to win her district and was even outed by her own father for lying about it, is pretty hypocritical.

Tlaib provided an experience she had with Congressman John Dingle (D-MI) in which she asked how he was able to continue in Congress for so many years with all the “lying.”  Instead of providing an answer that would be more fitting of “adaptation,” she claims that Dingle provided an Indian quote about standing still long enough on the riverbanks that you would “see your enemies float by dead.”

She called that “uplifting.”

She then tried to bring in her mother to a story about what followed after Trump won.  Now, this story may or may not be true, but honestly, can you imagine someone just looking over and telling a woman to take off her hijab?  I can’t, but Tlaib said someone told her mother to do that in a supermarket after Trump won, and she claims her mother said, “You don’t understand, Jesus was born in my country, in Palestine.”

OK, I have no idea what the two things have to do with each other, but nevertheless, I don’t understand why someone would respond that way and why they would do so knowing that Jesus was born of a virgin (Matthew 1:18-23), and that He is God in the flesh (John 1:1), but deny it, continuing in the anti-Christ (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7)  religion of Islam, which denies that very thing.  But there you have it.

This is your representative that you continue to tolerate, Michigan.  She is a national threat.

Almost 300,000 people have signed the petition to impeach her based on her fraudulent address provided to run for office.

Yet, she is given a platform by a designated terror group, afforded a seat at the table of legislation and allowed to basically mock the Lord Jesus Christ.  When is America going to have enough, repent and see justice prevail?

Investigative Reporter Explains Why Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Comments About Israeli Lobbyists Are Not Anti-Semitic – Fails To Address Her Actual Anti-Semitism

Investigative reporter Ben Swann often will cover stories no one else will, and quite often make points or provide additional information you simply won’t hear in the mainstream media, or even in alternative media.  I’ve always appreciated his approach to his reports.  In a recent Reality Check, Swann took on the issue of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) questioning of loyalty regarding representatives who appear to be selling out to lobbyists from Israel.  While Democrats want to condemn anti-Semitism, they don’t necessarily want to name people like Omar or Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI).  However, were her comments anti-Semitic or not, that is the question.

Here’s Swann’s report.

Rep. Omar’s Comments On Israel Were Not Anti-Semitic

Reality Check, Representative Omar did not accuse Jews of having an allegiance to Israel, she questioned the motivation of lawmakers who are not Jewish from both sides of the political isle who have unquestioned support of, not Jews, but of the nation and government of Israel. There is a very big difference between those two things.

Posted by Ben Swann on Tuesday, March 5, 2019

Here’s Omar’s comments.

“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is OK for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.”

“I want to ask, ‘Why is it OK for me to talk about the influence of the NRA, or fossil fuel industries or Big Pharma, and not talk about a powerful lobbying group that is influencing policy?'”

Swann is quite clear that Omar was simply questioning the lobbying efforts of a foreign nation, Israel, which she was.

He was also clearly distinguishing between questioning the government of Israel and calling out individual Jews, which is good because frankly I question sending money to Israel, as well as Muslim nations and other nations around the world.

While I think that Swann simply dealing with these comments is correct, I think he failed to acknowledge the reason behind her comments.  While true Americans can question such things based on the Constitution, Omar, who is tied to designated terror group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) is a practicing Muslim, and as such, she is taught anti-Semitism in the Koran.

That’s not all.  This same woman thought it just fine to marry her brother in order to commit immigration fraud to get him into the country, and nowhere have we heard her call out the same behavior from lobbyists for Qatar or Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR.  In fact, Omar applauds someone like freshman Rep. Rashida Tlaib who openly demonstrated her support for terror run Palestine, who national charter says its goal is the complete annihilation of the state of Israel.

Omar has also pleaded for leniency for Islamic State jihadis in Minnesota and even encouraged people to violate the law.

However, does questioning foreign policy and influence mean one is somehow “anti-Semitic”?  The answer is clearly, no.

Questioning the actions of a government does not necessarily make you an enemy of that government, though it may do just that.  I question the actions of our government all the time based on our founding documents and the Bible.  Does that make me un-American or mean I hate America?  Of course not.

Yet, in the case of Omar, we have a history of her anti-Semitism that is fueled by her Islamic worldview which is anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian and anti-American.

However, let’s just deal with the anti-Semitism part.

Omar has clearly understood and admitted that she engaged in anti-semitic comments in the past when she targeted Israel.

In 2012, she tweeted that Israel had “hypnotized” the world, which many thought bought into age-old anti-Semitic motifs. Omar disavowed the tweet last month, writing on Twitter, “It’s now apparent to me that I spent lots of energy putting my 2012 tweet in context and little energy in disavowing the anti-semitic trope I unknowingly used, which is unfortunate and offensive.”

She issued a string of apologies, but attempted to correct herself by pointing at government actions rather than a particular religion.

Except she wants to be lenient on those who would seek to join warmongers like the Islamic State and fundraise with designated terror groups like CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups.

Then there was another tweet she issued about a month later after her apology.  The Jewish Telegraph Agency reports on that and why it was considered anti-Semitic.

Less than a month after that apology, controversy reignited on Twitter. Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., called for “action” against her and her fellow Muslim congresswoman, Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., while being vague on what “action” he wants to take.

Omar then retweeted journalist Glenn Greenwald, a frequent critic of Israel who shared an article about McCarthy, adding the comment, “It’s stunning how much time US political leaders spend defending a foreign nation even if it means attacking free speech rights of Americans.”

Omar wrote six words that would ignite debate: “It’s all about the Benjamins baby,” adding a music note emoji to the end of her tweet.

OK, this just could’ve been a reference to the Puff Daddy song “It’s All About The Benjamins.” Why is it so problematic?

Well, we are so glad you asked! Because that wasn’t the end of the Twitter drama.

The Forward’s opinion editor, Batya Ungar-Sargon, then quote-tweeted Omar’s “Benjamins” tweet, writing, “Would love to know who @IlhanMN thinks is paying American politicians to be pro-Israel, though I think I can guess. Bad form, Congresswoman. That’s the second anti-Semitic trope you’ve tweeted.”

Omar then quote tweeted Ungar-Sargon’s tweet (you still with us?), simply writing “AIPAC!”

And so the controversy began.

Wait. Why?!

AIPAC is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the most influential pro-Israel lobbying group.

Many people began to call out Omar for repeating the anti-Semitic trope that Jews influence governments through money.

Dan Shapiro, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, tweeted: “@IlhanMN’s outrageous comments equating politicians’ support for Israel with being bought off by American Jewish money are a vile anti-Semitic trope. They need to be condemned by all in our party.”

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called on Omar to apologize, as did the whole Democratic caucus. Even Chelsea Clinton chimed in.

However, on the other side of the argument, many started arguing that Omar was just pointing out the influence of lobbyists. It has nothing to do with the Jews! Omar notably retweeted Jewish journalist Ashley Feinberg, who wrote, “accurately describing how the Israel lobby works is not anti-semitism.”

I’m confused. Is calling out AIPAC anti-Semitic?

Not in theory, no. You can criticize AIPAC without being anti-Semitic.

However, when you focus on AIPAC as the example of money in politics, or link Jewish influence to deep pockets, that’s when it becomes a problem. As JTA Editor-in-Chief Andrew Silow-Carroll pointed out, “Invoking ‘AIPAC!’ as a metonym for the influence of money in politics was a minefield, and the idea that she doesn’t know that by now — coming only a week after she apologized for her 7-year-old ‘hypnotized’ tweet — is implausible.”

The tweet was also technically incorrect: AIPAC is not a political action committee and does not endorse or give money directly to politicians or campaigns. It does signal to supporters who might be worthy of a donation, but its self-described role is to “engage lawmakers directly on the merits and substance of policy.”

As Brent Sasley pointed out in The Washington Post, “Interest groups have always been an important part of the policymaking process in the United States. It is normal, not nefarious, that interest groups lobby Congress, the executive and the bureaucracy to get their priorities on the agenda. Interest groups play such a role on almost every issue, and many of them are highly effective at shaping agendas and votes.”

So, perhaps it was an issue that Omar singled out AIPAC — and for what it’s worth, she apologized, tweeting, “Anti-Semitism is real and I am grateful for Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.”

Ok, another apology.  All should be good, right?  Apparently, not as this continues to this day.

However, the thing I at least appreciated in the piece I cited above by JTA was that they acknowledge it’s ok to criticize just as long as you aren’t attempting to paint “the Jews” as the sole influence.

I get that.  Even some of the writers I republish who are Jewish have called out AIPAC.  So, there’s nothing anti-Semitic about that.

There is no doubt and it’s demonstratable that there are Jews in banking, entertainment and a variety of other areas of society who have been very successful.  Some of them are utterly wicked, such as George Soros and we could cite many bankers and members of Congress.  Some are good citizens in their community.  This happens across the board.

So, what does this actually mean?  On the one hand, Omar’s comments can be understood to be questioning the loyalty of those who are lobbied by Israeli interests, something that I don’t understand why the US allows in the first place, just like I don’t understand Muslim, European or Asian nations being allowed to lobby our representatives.  They are there to represent us, not those nations.

On the other hand, to dismiss her history, her theology and her ideology and completely remove that from her comments is to seek to remove those questions from her previous actions, thought process and religious belief system, which even though the questioning may be valid, one would have to also consider the motive behind it.  This is why she is being called out on it.

In the final analysis, while I welcome the questioning about the lobbying and foreign policy, when you put Ms. Omar into perspective, it’s clear to me that she is engaging in taqiyya in order to deceive as much as possible to advance a particular Islamic agenda, and this should be apparent from looking at not only what she has said, but who she is affiliated with.

Because of this, Jewish groups have demanded that she be removed from the Foreign Affairs Committee.

Omar has refused to assimilate into American culture, even going so far as to call it “silly” to claim our foundations are Christian and based upon the Bible.

As far as Swann is concerned, he has been clear about what has been taking place on the Israeli border.  Some of the actions of the Israelis I simply don’t have a problem with as they have been defensive or in retaliation, but there are other actions that have taken the lives of people who seem to pose absolutely no threat that are simply unwarranted.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Video Shows Minneapolis Muslims Believe Sharia Law Is Better Than American Law

As I have pointed out time and again, the first states of America had laws based on Biblical law, not Sharia.  I have had to clear up the misunderstanding of ignorant Christians and others that Biblical law is not Islamic law.  Still, over and over, we are inundated with the claims of Islamists in our society that they are either above the law since they are Muslim or that Sharia is either constitutionally compliant or even superior to American law.  In a forgotten report by Fox News from 2016, Minneapolis Muslims declare that they believe Sharia law is better than American law, and you must realize that these people are not here to assimilate but to conquer.

In 2016, Satirist Ami Horowitz asks Minneapolis Muslims if they prefer Sharia law over American laws, and if it right to kill someone for depicting the prophet Muhammad.

While these Muslims admit to enjoying America for its freedoms, they still believe that Sharia is better than American law, even though Sharia does not afford them the very protections of law for which they rave about freedoms in America, which come from our Creator, the God of the Bible, not the Koran.

Additionally, these people, who claim they are all for “freedom of speech,” want to have laws in place that would make it a crime to speak out against Muhammad, the non-prophet.  They would love for Sharia to be imposed upon the American people, in which case the penalty of death would be imposed upon anyone who called Muhammad what he was:  a lying, deceiving, demonically controlled pedophile, false prophet.

That would get me a beheading in other countries and this is what Minneapolis Muslims say on camera they wish would occur in the US.

On top of that, these Muslims believe it is right and a good thing to kill those that insult the non-prophet Muhammad.  What’s ironic is one of the men claims that it becomes so frustrating to live among such “hate” that it drives you to kill others.  Say what?  Yep, they get so angry because of what they perceive as hate that they will hate others to the point of not pointing out the truth or even mocking, but be willing to kill themselves as well as those “insulting” Muhammad.

Can you say, hypocrite?

Even more hypocritical is the fact that these same Muslims declare that though they love America, they would rather live in a Muslim country like Somalia among their own people than in America, just like Rep. Ilhan Omar.  Perhaps we should be looking to provide these people a one-way ticket to Somalia where they can indeed live under the oppressive tyranny and rid ourselves of such people in our own culture.

It’s long past time that Muslims in the US abandon Islam and Muhammad and assimilate into the culture, or get themselves on a plane to a Sharia compliant country of their choice and live in that environment rather than force their ungodly, demonically inspired beliefs on the rest of us.

Furthermore, it isn’t just going on in Minneapolis.

According to the leader of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Muslims living in America should not be bound by U.S. law. “If we are practicing Muslims, we are above the law of the land,” said Herman Mustafa Carroll, executive director of the Dallas-Fort Worth CAIR branch.

Muslims have tried to undermine the US court system to enforce Sharia law.

They have sought to illegally set up Sharia tribunals on American soil, push social media giants to enforce Sharia law, and establish Sharia cops in the Big Apple.

Now they are being elected to positions of representation and sitting on court benches in America because Americans have turned their backs on the One, True God.

If Americans don’t repent, God will continue to use these people to judge us, but if we will repent, they will either submit to the Lordship of Jesus the Christ or they will have to be dealt with according to the law.

The Difference Between a Democracy & A Constitutional Republic? One Is A Lynch Mob With A Guy Swinging At The End Of A Rope – The Other is Just Laws That Protect The Guy At The End Of The Rope From The Passions Of The Mob

As has been presented in a past, viral post, a civics lesson is very much needed in our country to distinguish what we are, a constitutional republic, from a mob mentality democracy.  Pure democracy is nothing more than an emotional, tyrannical rule, but our founders rejected it and so should we, according to our Constitution.

As a result, I came across a very old black and white video that boiled this down succinctly.  While the man citing the principles does not point to the Creator, our founders and those that came before them most certainly did.

Still, the Constitution was written to keep the majority from infringing on the rights of the minority, but it was also written to discourage what we see today:  the minority infringing on the rights of the majority.

This brief video demonstrates that if you are a person seeking pure democracy, then you are advancing the notion of the lynch mob, and those you oppose are the man swinging from the end of the rope.  However, the constitutional republic approach is to protect the man at the end of the rope from the lynch mob.

Our Republic was simply advanced to uphold the law, but that was only acknowledged as the people were righteous, upright and just.  As soon as the people abandon the law of God, they will not only fail to uphold the law, but they will eventually devolve into demanding mob rule.

The difference between the two is both life and death, and liberty and slavery.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Massive Carbon Footprint Demonstrates That She Fails To Practice What She Preaches

While Communist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez advances her ridiculous Green New Deal, the fact of the matter is that she leaves one giant carbon footprint herself, which is evidence of the “Do as I say, not as I do” hypocrisy of people like herself.  When she is called out on her hypocrisy, she blasts her critics in a mocking tone.

What’s interesting is how the New York Post exposed the self-proclaimed “boss'” hypocrisy.

In a report by Isabel Vincent and Melissa Klein at the NY Post, the duo claimed:

But the woman who boasts of a “razor-sharp BS detector” seems to have trouble sniffing out her own.

Since declaring her candidacy in May 2017, Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign heavily relied on those combustion-engine cars — even though a subway station was just 138 feet from her Elmhurst campaign office.

She listed 1,049 transactions for Uber, Lyft, Juno and other car services, federal filings show. The campaign had 505 Uber expenses alone.

In all, Ocasio-Cortez spent $29,365.70 on those emissions-spewing vehicles, along with car and van rentals — even though her Queens HQ was a one-minute walk to the 7 train.

The campaign shelled out only $8,335.41 on 52 MetroCard transactions.

“Everyone — top to bottom — used the MetroCards,” Ocasio-Cortez spokesman Corbin Trent told The Post.

By comparison, fellow freshman Rep. Max Rose — whose district is more than twice the size of AOC’s and, like hers, spans two boroughs — listed only 329 transactions for car services, totaling $6,091.29, campaign filings show.

In a district with limited transit options and a $17 Verrazzano Bridge toll, Rose spent only $732 more than AOC on gas and tolls — an indicator of personal car usage.

That’s not all.  It appears she has a thing for flying, which is major carbon footprints.

“I knocked doors until rainwater came through my soles,” she tweeted last June, famously donating her worn-out campaign shoes to the Cornell Costume Institute for an exhibit about women and empowerment.

But Ocasio-Cortez and her staff appear to have done much less walking after she vanquished Crowley in the party’s June 2018 primary.

Instead, her campaign embraced the friendly skies, logging 66 airline transactions costing $25,174.54 during campaign season.

The Democratic firebrand or her staff took Amtrak far less — only 18 times — despite high-speed rail being the cornerstone of her save-the-world strategy.

Then, there’s her car usage:

On Oct. 12, 2018, the campaign logged 26 car-service transactions, its highest number in a single day, as Ocasio-Cortez shuttled between the Bronx and Queens for “phone banking,” according to social-media posts.

“Canvassing is what that people power is about,” the candidate wrote on Facebook that day, boasting about “actually making contact at someone’s door.”

Those 26 cars produced a lot of carbon dioxide, which heavily contributes to global warming. According to the American Public Transportation Association, “a single person … by eliminating one car and taking public transportation instead of driving, a savings of up to 30 percent of carbon-dioxide emissions can be realized.”

Ironically, the Uber-loving politician took a tough public stand against the conveyance after a New York City taxi driver committed suicide in February 2018.

“Yellow cab drivers are in financial ruin due to the unregulated expansion of Uber,” she tweeted on March 21. “What was a living wage job now pays under minimum.”

Her campaign billed only seven rides in yellow cabs in a year and a half, federal filings show.

And while she is quick to dispense all sorts of planet-saving tips to her constituents and fans, telling a high school assembly in Queens last month that they should “skip disposable razors and switch to safety razors” and “skip meat/dairy for a meal,” she doesn’t always take her own green advice.

Of course, when confronted with her obvious hypocrisy, Ocasio-Cortez claimed that she had to use “present technology” to fight for her Green New Deal.

AOC responded to the Post article, tweeting: “I also fly & use A/C,” adding “Living in the world as it is isn’t an argument against working towards a better future.”

This is the way it always works with Marxists.  They never, ever, never, ever lead by example.

On Sunday, she tweeted in another attack against The Post, “The Post put the fact that I get into cars (while proposing a plan to invest in better car technology) on their front page,” adding “Pack it up folks, the Pulitzer’s been decided. No one can rival this kind of hard-hitting journalism.”

Ocasio-Cortez wouldn’t know journalism if it came up and ripped her mask off her Marxist face, which it has.  She could easily take a bicycle, couldn’t she?  Yep, but that is beneath her.

However, to demonstrate the effects of the journalism of The New York Posts’ report, AOC continued on Monday to try to justify her hypocrisy.  She tweeted,

“I need to admit something to you all. Frankly, I don’t know how my environmental reputation can recover.” only to reveal “Today… I wrote in a book… made out of PAPER.”

“Apparently using present technology means I can’t fight for new jobs, investing in infrastructure, & renewable energy.”

No, it just means you’re a hypocrite who is out to control the people you claim you represent, along with the rest of America.  Next time, try practicing what you preach!

Despite No Evidence Of Russian Collusion, House Democrats Demand Trump Hand Over Communications With Putin

Yes, they are still pushing a debunked conspiracy theory (take note Newsguard for those outlets who continue to promote such that you have green flagged).  House Democrats simply cannot accept the fact that there is absolutely zero evidence of Russian collusion by the Trump campaign.  As such, the usual criminals, House Intelligence Committee chairman Adam Schiff (D-CA), Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman Elijah Cummings (D-MD), and House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Eliot Engel (NY) have made a demand that the Trump administration turn all of his records and interviews related to his communications with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

While ignoring actual criminal Russian collusion by their party’s nominee, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah the trio made the demands, which were reported by The Hill.

The Hill reports:

The three chairmen also want access to the interpreters who sat in on Trump’s meetings with Putin.

“President Trump, on multiple occasions, appears to have taken steps to conceal the details of his communications with President Putin from other administration officials, Congress, and the American people,” the lawmakers wrote, citing media reports.

The lawmakers said they were concerned that materials “may have been manipulated or withheld from the official record in direct contravention of federal laws, which expressly require that Presidents and other administration officials preserve such materials.”

They said manipulating or withholding records would violate the Presidential Records Act, which was instituted after President Nixon left office following the Watergate controversy.

“President Trump, on multiple occasions, appears to have taken steps to conceal the details of his communications with President Putin from other administration officials, Congress, and the American people,” they wrote in their letters.

The Communist trio claimed the White House did not respond to their queries.

“As a result, we are now expanding our investigation,” they wrote.

Fine, you’ve found nothing in over two years to the expense of American taxpayers while you politic and now you’re going to expand your investigation?  Knock yourself out and discover that you will only swell the ranks of those that will get behind President Trump, right or wrong.

Of course, this is nothing but a ploy by criminal Democrats to use to impeach the president.  Don’t get me wrong, I think there are impeachable offenses committed by President Trump, but I have seen no evidence of Russian collusion.  Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) also thinks the same.

Breitbart adds:

The letters were sent as House Judiciary Committee chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) sent more than 80 separate document requests to Trump’s family members, campaign advisers, business associates, and former White House aides.

Nadler, who will lead Trump impeachment proceedings in the House if Democrats pursue it, said on Sunday that he believes the president has “obstructed justice.”

“It’s very clear that the president obstructed justice,” Nadler said on ABC News’s This Week.

Well, it’s not so clear to anyone else, including criminal special counsel Robert Mueller, whom Democrats have praised as almost a god.

It’s not so clear that Democrats actually have any evidence to impeach Trump on, do they?  Nope, nothing.

House Minority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) said, “I think Congressman Nadler decided to impeach the president the day the president won the election.”

Of course, that was the Democrat strategy all along and Trump should have simply shut it down.  Now, he’s not only dealing with out of control Democrats, he’s also hearing from his former opponent Hillary Clinton in a possible 2020 bid, that is, if she can even stand up by then.

Spokesman for Nunes, Jack Langer, said in a statement to The Hill, “With their Russian collusion allegations imploding, the Democrats are weaponizing congressional committees to try to manufacture some new case to use to impeach the president.  After they hyped the collusion hoax for more than two years, I don’t know how anyone can view them as honest investigators as opposed to zealous, partisan operatives.”

Of course, they did, and the state-controlled media has run with it for over two years without a shred of evidence, but neither they nor the Democrats have yet to call Hillary Clinton’s collusion with the Brits and the Russians in the debunked Russian dossier.  They have yet to call out Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah‘s collusion with the Russians regarding nuclear disarmament and Uranium One.

Not a peep from those hypocrites on that.

Frightened Cops Show Up to Innocent Unarmed Man’s Home, Start Shooting for No Reason

Ashland City, TN — Last August, Mark Campbell was sitting in his house when two strangers showed up at his door. These two strangers lightly knocked and told Campbell that they had guns. Moments later, bullets came flying through Campbell’s door and nearly killed him and his wife. Instead of the two strangers getting arrested for attempted murder, Campbell found himself in jail—because the two strangers were cops.

That night, Campbell had done nothing wrong when Cheatham County sheriff’s deputies — Sgt. Doug Fox and Chris Austin showed up to his home. The deputies claim they were responding to a 911 hang up, but according to Campbell’s attorney, he never made a 911 call until after these two maniacs started shooting through his door.

As the body camera footage shows, when the deputies arrived, they had on no flashing lights and no sirens. They never once announced themselves as police and simply started quietly knocking on Campbell’s door and calling his name.

Not knowing who was at his door, Campbell was naturally scared—especially when the unidentified men started talking about guns.

“Come on out Mark. What’s up man?” said one deputy.

“You gotta gun?” said Campbell.

“What’s going on Mark?” said the deputy.

“I got one too,” said Campbell.

Campbell was merely trying to tell the strangers at the door that he was armed too, so they shouldn’t try anything. But these strangers had qualified immunity, so they took this claim by Campbell as a threat to their lives and began shooting.

“I went to open the door and boom, boom two shots through the door,” said Campbell, who by some incredible chance, wasn’t hit.

The other deputy, however, was almost shot. As the video shows, he has to dive to the ground to get out of the way of his lunatic partner with a gun.

When the rounds started coming through the door, Campbell yelled to his wife to call 911 because people were trying to kill them.

“When I hit the floor I told her to call 9-1-1 to say someone is shooting at us,” said Campbell.

“You still had no idea who it was?” asked the interviewer.

“Never had any idea who it was,” said Campbell.

As the video shows, the cops never identified themselves so Campbell had no idea who he was dealing with until after they shot up his home.

“They do not announce themselves as police or law enforcement,” said Campbell’s attorney John Morris.

Morris is now suing the department on behalf of his client, noting that there was no justification for the use of deadly force.

“We’re alleging violation of civil rights,” said Morris.

Adding to the ridiculous nature of this interactions is the fact that after they tried to kill him, Campbell was then arrested and charged with assault on the officers—despite never assaulting them!

As the video shows, when the sheriff shows up, he congratulates his deputies for shooting at the innocent man and says, “good job” as he hugs the deputy.

What’s more, the sheriff attempted to justify his deputies’ actions by claiming that Campbell hates cops—therefore it was okay to open fire on the unarmed innocent man and then kidnap him.

“He just hates law enforcement. He hates anyone in authority,” said Sheriff Mike Breedlove. “It’s simply dangerous going to his house.”

Campbell’s attorney disagrees and noted that he’d been a victim of home invasion before—not from the police—and so he is naturally wary.

“My client has had issues with people coming to his home and roughing him up in the past. Not the police, but other individuals. He doesn’t know these are the police,” said Morris.

We can hear on the body camera that the deputies claimed Campbell had a gun, which they used as justification for opening fire.

“Chief, I was the one who shot. We got up to the door. He asked do we have a gun. He says I got a gun. He opens the door and lifts something up. Puts it up to the door and I shoot at him,” said Sgt. Fox.

However, the body camera footage never shows Campbell lift anything up, only crack the door open before they started shooting.

What’s more is the fact that no gun was found and Campbell doesn’t own one.

Naturally, Sheriff Breedlove said the video doesn’t show everything and he believes his deputies who said Campbell pointed a weapon—despite no weapon in the home.

“I’m scared to death if I open my door who’s out here now,” said Campbell.

Indeed. Had the deputies actually killed Campbell, rest assured that his name would’ve been dragged through the mud, his character assassinated, and the officers hailed as heroes. The body camera footage would have never seen the light of day and the public would have never known the difference.

However, because he lived, the world now knows just how dangerous these deputies are in Cheatham County.

If you doubt the dangerous nature of this department, remember that they were the ones who made national headlines in 2017 for strapping a teenager down to a restraint chair and torturing him with a taser on video. The same sheriff who congratulated his deputies for shooting at an innocent man took to Facebook at the time to brag about the teen allegedly urinating on himself during the torture. In that incident, two deputies were charged though neither of them went to jail.

Article posted with permission from The Free Thought Project

This State Confiscated 2,290 Guns In 2018 – But That Failed To Stop Criminals With Guns

An unprecedented about of gun confiscation is going on in the US.  California, which we should possibly consider referring to as “Commiefornia,” is the only state in the US with a database which tracks people who they claim are prohibited from owning a firearm, admitted that they confiscated 2,290 firearms through the Armed and Prohibited Persons program.

ABC 30 reports:

The Armed and Prohibited Persons program allows state agents to take guns away from criminals but it’s difficult to reduce the long list because people keep getting added to it.

The APPS program database shows 9,404 people unlawfully own a firearm.

But it is a never-ending search.

Over the past five years, the Bureau of Firearms says 53,000 people have been taken off the database but over 56,000 more people have been added to the APPS program.

Governor Gavin Newsom has proposed spending $5 million dollars to add more agents to the program.


“How many lives they’ve saved?” said State Attorney General Xavier Becerra.  “We’ll never know but I guarantee you, those thousands of firearms that are no longer on the streets in the hands of dangerous people saves lives for all of us.”

You’ll never know because confiscating those guns won’t stop criminals from acting.  To make the point, in January it was reported that California had confiscated a semi-automatic rifle from a man, who just two months later would somehow obtain two handguns and murder a police officer.

From that report:

Davis, CA — Last Thursday, a tragedy unfolded in California as a deranged gunman, Kevin Douglas Limbaugh, walked up on an innocent woman, officer Natalie Corona, pulled out his guns and began shooting her repeatedly until she died. Limbaugh then fired several more shots at others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life.

Police say that Limbaugh’s rampage left Corona, 22, dead, and left bullet holes in a nearby house, a passing fire truck, a textbook inside a backpack worn by a young woman and the boot heel of a firefighter fleeing the gunfire.

According to police, Limbaugh’s guns were confiscated last year likely related to the red flag law. In September, Limbaugh was charged with a felony count of battery with serious bodily injury. That charge stemmed from Limbaugh punching a co-worker, Gilbert Duane McCreath, while the two worked at the casino the night of Sept. 20, according to the Sacramento Bee.

After the charges, Limbaugh was given a high-risk assessment that determined the chance of him re-offending was low, but he was still ordered to turn in his registered weapons to police, the only being a Bushmaster AR-15. On November 9, Limbaugh turned in the weapon.

Police officials noted that Limbaugh had no other guns registered to him, and thus he was successfully disarmed. Two months later, however, Limbaugh would somehow acquire two handguns and use them to commit a horrific act of murder.

See?  these kinds of things simply do not work when you are dealing with criminals.  They just don’t.

However, it’s not just someone like Kevin Douglas Limbaugh that had his guns confiscated.  There are others also.

Additionally, those that pass background checks and has gone on to commit horrific crimes such as Ian David Long, a former Marine, who wrote a final post on his Facebook page before going into the Borderline Bar & Grill and murdering a dozen people before turning the gun on himself in November 2018 demonstrate that unlawful bills such as HR8 and HR1112 will do absolutely nothing to stop such crimes.

Sadly, even the White House endorses unconstitutional actions such as red flag laws, which are nothing more than the vehicle for unconstitutional gun confiscation.

Becerra claims that the state has almost completed its backlog from 2013 of confiscating guns from some 20,721 people.  They only have 538 more to take care of now.

“Our data systems are in need of modernization and that is an understatement,” Becerra added.  “We need technology that keeps up with the changing times because the work that our agents do is too important to not be done as quickly and as efficiently as possible.”

It should be noted that many of these confiscations may be deemed “legal,” but they are most definitely unlawful and violate the person’s rights that are to be protected under our Constitution.

In fact, one farmer even tried to comply with registering his weapon and not only had the gun confiscated, but was charged with a felony.

It’s past time that we stop putting people in office across the country who want to act like they are doing something to deal with a particular problem when they are actually doing nothing but violating the law and the rights of the people.

A Second Attack On Your Gun Rights Just Passed The House

Earlier this week,  I reported on HR 8 that passed the House, which seeks to violate not only the Second Amendment and the restrictions Congress is bound to in Article I of the US Constitution, but also your Fifth Amendment rights.  However, a second unconstitutional piece of legislation has passed the Democrat-controlled House that again seeks to attack your God-given right to keep and bear arms.

On Thursday, the House voted 228-198 to advance the HR 1112 to the Senate.

The lawless bill which was sponsored by Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-SC) is referred to as the “Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019” and has been nicknamed the “Charleston Loophole” bill.  In other words, it violates the Fifth Amendment by depriving you of liberty and assumed you are guilty before being able to obtain a gun.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has claimed that HR 1112 is far “worse” than HR8.

Under that bill, gun sales from licensed dealers would be subject to the discretion of federal officials. Through either malice or incompetence, the legislation creates an unworkable system where gun buyers could be placed in an endless loop of background checks and would never actually receive the firearms they wish to purchase.

Emotionally driven, rather than lawfully aware, representatives advance this kind of tyranny believing it will actually stop criminals and crime.

Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ), who is a survivor of domestic violence, sought to amend the bill to maintain a three day limit on background checks for victims of domestic violence attempting to purchase a gun for protection.

“Do we really want to tell victims of domestic violence they have to wait up to 20 business days,” the she asked, “before they are allowed to adequately defend themselves?”

While I applaud that she was will to stand against a 20 day waiting period, I have to ask why would should make any law-abiding citizens wait any period of time to purchase any kind of arm to :

and bear in protection of themselves and others, when we are to guard that right they have been given by their Creator?

The NRA responded to the legislation in a statement:

“The anti-gun politicians in the House of Representatives continue to employ the shameful tactic of exploiting tragedies to market gun control that won’t prevent criminals from committing murder.  It’s a sham and the Charleston Loophole bill is the perfect example of their dishonesty. The assertion that a supposed 10-day delay would have prevented a crime that took place over 60 days after the initial delay is ridiculous.  This legislation would not have prevented the Charleston murders, and even worse, the legislation is so poorly drafted it would put law-abiding citizens who need a firearm for self-defense at risk by trapping them in an endless loop of delays. The NRA will continue to fight for the constitutional right of law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families without apology.”

Fortunately, though many in the Senate and even President Trump support unconstitutional bans on bump stocks and imposing Red Flag laws, which violate the Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections of citizens, neither are likely to usurp their authority and advance this bill or HR8 into “law.”

Keep in mind, as I told you previously, this is gun confiscation, not gun control, and it is just three short steps to obtain that.

  1. Universal Background Checks
  2. Firearm Registration
  3. Firearm Confiscation

Banning alcohol didn’t stop people from selling or buying or consuming alcohol.  It was just as stupid as the claim that if we outlaw plants, things will be far better.  The opposite has been true, just listen to those pushing for a wall on the southern border and you will hear the remarks about all the “drugs” coming over the border.  OK, stop outlawing plants and their derivatives and they won’t be coming over the border because the power of the drug cartel would be smashed by a free market rather than a black one.

The same thing happens concerning arms.  The more these people seek to usurp their authority, violate their oath of office and seek to disarm you, the greater danger they put you, your family and your neighbors, as well as the States in danger.

Yeah, right!  No one is coming for your guns… don’t believe it.

NRA Calls “BS” On Those Who Claim No One Is Coming For Your Guns

Unprecedented Gun Confiscation Hits US as Thousands Of Guns Seized from Innocent Citizens

Incoming Communists Ready Bill To CRIMINALIZE Private Gun Sales

Republican Rep. Introduced “Minority Report” Gun Confiscation Bill

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

Maryland Sheriff Mike Lewis: “We Will Not Comply” On Gun Confiscation Bill

In a state that has already implemented unconstitutional and unlawful “red flag” laws, Wicomico County, Maryland Sheriff Mike Lewis has stated that he and his deputies absolutely will not comply with Maryland representatives’ “pretended legislation” of long gun licensing and gun confiscation “laws.”

According to Delmarva Now:

Legislators heard testimony from constituents and public officials during a hearing on Monday that addressed 19 different bills related to firearms. When speaking to a room of people after testifying, Lewis reiterated his thoughts on these bills.

“We’re gonna let them know that we are sick and tired of being penalized for Baltimore City’s inability to control crime,” Lewis told the room in a video that circulated on social media. “If these bills pass, we will not comply.”

Lewis told Delmarva Now on Tuesday that he testified in Annapolis as the sheriff of Wicomico County and not as a representative for the Maryland Sheriffs Association, which has not taken positions on any gun-related legislation.

Wow!  I love when people in authority actually buck against the corrupt, demonic and Communistic system that seems to encroach on the God-given rights we have as those made in the image of God.

The mission statement for the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Office states that its members work “to enforce the law impartially.”

Well, what is being put forth is not “law.”  It’s “pretended legislation” because it seeks to undermine the right of the people, which are not up for debate and not up for restriction or regulation under the law.  For those of you who think different, not only do you need to read your Bibles, but you need to read the Declaration of Independence.

Sheriff Lewis has been working in law enforcement for 35 years.  However, the hypocrisy comes in the fact that he said he was not opposed to every piece of gun legislation that has been introduced to the Maryland General Assembly. Rather, he only raises issue with the bills that would “further encroach or infringe upon law-abiding citizens’ right to bear arms.”

I’m sorry sheriff, but every single piece of gun legislation that aims to restrict or regulate the people’s right to keep and bear arms is unlawful and you should oppose every single one of them.

WBOC-TV 16, Delmarvas News Leader, FOX 21 –

Delmarva Now adds:

Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary, D-13-Howard, House Bill 786 would require a person to obtain a license in order to purchase or otherwise acquire shotguns or rifles — also known as long guns. Currently, in the state of Maryland, residents only need a license to have a handgun.

While the bill text does not explicitly mention confiscation of unlicensed long guns, it does say violators could face five years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines.

No, but confiscation is the end result because once you violate the law, what happens to the guns?  They are confiscated.  This is why every single “law” that is advanced should not be termed as “gun control,” but rather gun confiscation.

Police One reports that Maryland’s House Bill 786 “would regulate shotguns and hunting rifles similarly to handguns.”

Say what?

These Communists want to create a license for long gun ownership and require a universal background check, which is also unconstitutional for long gun sales and purchases.

WBOS adds:

WBOC spoke with Sheriff Lewis on Tuesday, who says he’s sticking with his guns.

“Our citizens deserve to be protected,” Lewis said.

Somerset County Sheriff Ronnie Howard joined Lewis in Annapolis and says he also does not plan on enforcing the bill even if it passes. Howard agrees with Lewis that the gun control measure is unconstitutional and says guns can provide safety for people in remote areas.

“It would be very dangerous for someone to turn in their weapon, living in a very remote area and someone else trying to break into their house. I can’t. I’m not. They need it for protection,” Howard said.

But Sheriff Lewis’ statements are triggering concerns for activists like Jamaad Gould of the Maryland Progressive Caucus. Gould argues Sheriff Lewis is failing to do his job as an elected leader.

“How do you expect to garner the respect of the community and the trust of the community when you’re saying we’re above you guys, we’re not abiding by the same laws that we’re going to force you to abide by? That’s an issue all the way around,” Gould said. “In my personal opinion, he should resign.”

But Sheriff Lewis says he’s not backing down.

“I will stand up against it,” Lewis said.

A spokesperson with Attorney General Brian Frosh’s Office says, when it comes down to it, Lewis is a sheriff who must uphold the law even if he does not agree with the law. Still, the Attorney General does not have the authority to force Lewis to uphold the law. It is up to any State’s Attorney Office or person who files a lawsuit.

That’s not true.  When the “law” undermines the law that is written to protect the people, it is unlawful and therefore, Mr. Frosh is an enemy of the people of his state.  He is not upholding his own oath to uphold the true law, not a manufactured, Communist, gun-grabbing “law,” which is no law at all.

While the bill doesn’t actually detail gun confiscation, “it does allow the Department of State Police to create regulations to carry out the law.”

That means, gun confiscation. Keep that in mind with every single gun legislation that comes down the pipe.

Red flag laws, which have been endorsed by President Donald Trump, led to the death of an innocent American in the state of Maryland at the hands of two brownshirts “just following orders.”

Thanks, Sheriff Lewis for standing against this. Please, stand against all restrictions and regulations against the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Harvard Scientists Want To Spray Particles into Atmosphere 4,000 Times a Year… To “Fight Global Warming”

Despite the exposing of the global warming and climate change hoax, complete with the revelation that “studies” were falsified and manipulated, there are still people pushing the hoax.  Now, there are scientists at Harvard University who want to fight the mythical “global warming” by flying at least 4,000 missions per year and dumping particles into the stratosphere.  Anyone wanna guess what this is going to cost us besides health issues?

The following is an article written by Barry Brownstein, professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore and author of The Inner-Work of Leadership, at Foundation For Economic Education, which explains this ridiculous notion that man thinks he is in control of the Creation rather than the Creator.

Harvard’s Gernot Wagner wants to save the world from global warming. His method? Develop a new type of plane that will fly more than 4,000 missions a year dumping particulates into the stratosphere.

Wagner and his colleague Wake Smith call the proposed plane “SAI Lofter (SAIL).” Anonymous individuals at “Airbus, Atlas Air, Boeing, Bombardier, GE Engines, Gulfstream, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Near Space Corporation, Northrup Grumman, Rolls Royce Engines, Scaled Composites, The Spaceship Company, and Virgin Orbit” provided input.

Estimates for SAIL’s design and operation seem sophisticated but are fabricated. Wagner and Smith admit, “No existing aircraft design—even with extensive modifications—can reasonably fulfill [their] mission.”

Wagner and others believe that scientists can calculate how many particulates will be needed to cool the Earth to a desired temperature.

Wagner and Smith are not alone in their geoengineering dreams. As early as 2006, Paul J. Crutzen, Nobel laureate in chemistry, called for “stratospheric geoengineering research.” Harvard professors David Keith and Frank Keutsch hope to experiment via balloons spraying “a fine mist of materials such as sulfur dioxide, alumina, or calcium carbonate into the stratosphere.” Wagner, Keith, and Keutsch are all part of the Solar Geoengineering Research Program at Harvard.

Geoengineering is gaining global traction. Last fall, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a report saying geoengineering could be used as an emergency “temporary remedial measure.”

Spraying aerosols in the stratosphere would mimic what large volcanoes do.”

In 1815, Mount Tambora in Indonesia erupted, spewing “millions of tons of dust, ash, and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, temporarily changing the world’s climate and dropping global temperatures by as much as 3 degrees.” As the particulates moved around the global atmosphere, “1816 became the year without a summer for millions of people in parts of North America and Europe, leading to failed crops and near-famine conditions.”

No doubt, Wagner and others will tell you careful calculations will limit global cooling to just the right degree. Skeptics might conclude otherwise: scientists blinded by unlimited hubris are partnering with crony capitalists to threaten humanity.

To be sure, some scientists warn geoengineering will have unintended consequences. MIT’s Daniel Cziczo, an atmospheric scientist, warns that geoengineering could destroy the ozone layer. Without the ozone layer, photosynthesis would be difficult, the food chain would be destroyed, and life on Earth would perish. In this case, unintended consequences would be apocalyptic.

In his book The Fatal Conceit, F.A. Hayek observed, “The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.” Is Hayek’s statement equally applicable to scientists imagining they can safely modify the biosphere?

Regardless of your beliefs about global warming, Nassim Taleb’s “precautionary principle” would rule out plans altering the biosphere. Taleb writes:

The precautionary principle (PP) states that if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing severe harm to the public domain (affecting general health or the environment globally), the action should not be taken in the absence of scientific near-certainty about its safety.

In the late 1980s, outside Tucson, Arizona, scientists built a closed ecosystem (all food and water had to be obtained from inside the dome) to replicate the Earth’s biosphere. Eight humans resided in the biosphere for a short period of time. Not long into the experiment, project organizers had to open the sealed doors of Biosphere 2: “Oxygen levels got so low halfway through the first year that they had to put more in over fear for the safety of the Biosphere residents.”

John Adams, deputy director of Biosphere 2, clearly states the takeaway: “What they did learn, and in my opinion the single most important lesson, was just how little we truly understand Earth’s systems.” I suspect that Wagner won’t be calling Adams soon.

If you think Wagner’s plan to cool the atmosphere by mimicking the effects of volcanoes is bonkers, consider the Atlantropa project—”the craziest, most megalomaniacal scheme from the 20th century that you never heard of.”

After World War I, German engineer Herman Sörgel had a plan to prevent mass starvation in Europe. Sörgel called his plan the Atlantropa Project. The heart of the Atlantropa madness was to block the Atlantic Ocean from entering the Mediterranean by damming the Strait of Gibraltar. Deprived of a significant source of water flow, the Mediterranean would drain.

Sörgel imagined the dams would produce almost unlimited energy and the reclaimed land used for farming. World peace would reign when Europe and Africa were linked as a giant continent—Atlantropa.

Sörgel’s mad scheme had the enthusiast support of many expert engineers and the German public.

Yet, problems with Sörgel’s mad scheme were endless. An enormous amount of concrete would be required to build a dam across the Strait of Gibraltar. If the dam would fail, millions might die by floods. As for the reclaimed land, salt left behind on the seabed would prevent farming and turn the land into a desert.

Herman Sörgel’s crazy scheme is not so different from Gernot Wagner’s—both imagine they know how our biosphere works. In Sörgel’s case, dams would have altered the Gulf Stream with catastrophic global cooling the result.

Without government support, Sörgel had no power to impose his crazy dream on others. Humanity averted disaster when the Nazis rejected Sörgel’s engineered “utopia.” In another instance, the Soviets were not as lucky.

Consider the Aral Sea. The Aral Sea—once the fourth largest body of water on the planet—is now a vast wasteland that has shrunk to less than 25 percent of its former size.

The Aral Sea in Uzbekistan (formerly part of the Soviet Union) stands as a tragic monument to the environmental carnage that often occurs under socialism. How could this have happened? Was it a change in weather? No, the destruction of the Aral Sea was the consequence of the Soviet decision to divert waters that flowed into the Aral Sea to irrigate land for cotton farming.

In their book World Politics: International Politics on the World Stage, John Rourke and Mark Boyer write of the Aral Sea:

Then, beginning in the 1960s, Soviet agriculture demands and horrendous planning began to drain water from the sea and from the two great rivers that feed it (the Amu Darya from the north and the Syr Darya from the south) faster than the water could be replenished.

The sea started to shrink rapidly. As it did, the level of its salinity rose, and by 1977 the catch from the once-important fishery had declined by over 75 percent. Still the water level continued to fall, as the sea provided irrigation for cotton fields and for other agricultural production. The same Soviet planning that brought the world the Chernobyl nuclear plant disaster in Ukraine, stood by paralyzed as the Aral Sea began to disappear before the world’s eyes.

Now, in reality, geographical name Aral Sea is a fiction, because it has shrunk in size and depth so much that a land bridge separates the so-called Greater Sea to the north from the Lesser Sea to the South. What was a single sea has lost 75 percent of its water and 50 percent of its surface area in the past 40 years. That is roughly equivalent to draining Lake Erie and Lake Ontario. The Uzbek town of Munak was once the Aral Sea’s leading port, with its fishermen harvesting the sea’s abundant catch. Now there are few fish, but even if there were many, it would not help the people of Munak. The town is now in the middle of a desert; the shoreline of the Lesser Sea is 50 miles away.

Let’s put all of this together. Human hubris and madness will always exist. Scientists can dream of controlling the uncontrollable, but they need an agent of coercion to implement their dangerous schemes. Their tool of coercion can only be government.

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

Model Natacha Jaitt Who Outed International Pedophile Ring & Feared For Her Life Found Dead

A 41-year-old Argentinian model was found dead on Saturday February 23 in a bed at the Xanadú party salon in La Ñata, in the Tigre district, north of Buenos Aires City, according to police.  However, the woman said she accidentally exposed an international pedophile ring in 2018 and was in fear for her life, even going to the extent of claiming, “I will not commit suicide. I won’t be bought off or drown in a bathtub, nor will I shoot myself in the head. So, if that happens, IT WASN’T ME.”

Last year, Natacha Jaitt, a model, socialite, TV personality and mother of two threatened to expose an international pedophile ring that she apparently uncovered.

Here’s the video from 2018 where she discusses the pedophile network.  Though it’s in Spanish, there are English captions.

Less than a year ago, around the time of the interview above, she tweeted out that she would never commit suicide and that if she were found dead, it was not her doing.

“I will not commit suicide. I won’t be bought off or drown in a bath tub, nor will I shoot myself in the head. So, if that happens, IT WASN’T ME. Save this tweet,” she wrote.

Jaitt is said to have died from a cocaine overdose (heart failure/stroke).

Buenos Aires Times reports:

A controversial Argentine media personality was found dead on Saturday night at a private event’s facility in Tigre district, north of Buenos Aires City.

Natacha Jaitt’s body was found in a bed at the Xanadú party salon in La Ñata, in the Tigre district, north of Buenos Aires City, police confirmed.

Investigators are currently looking into the circumstances of the 41-year-old’s death, including running checks on the five people who had been with her in the hours prior. An autopsy was underway at the San Fernando morgue.

Jaitt, a well-known media personality, previously worked as a model, actress, escort, and TV and radio presenter.

The report went on to state that though she had been a former drug user, those who were closest to her insisted that she was no longer a user.

Sputnik News adds:

The tweet [above] followed allegations by Jaitt that dozens of high-profile Argentinians, including members of local football clubs such as Independiente and River, were involved in a VIP pedophile ring. She also claimed to have evidence that local celebrities, politicians, religious figures, actors, and television producers were involved in child abuse, trafficking and child prostitution. Jaitt’s remarks on these issues led to a barrage of attacks against her in the final months of her life, including death threats. Local media dismissed her allegations as “unfounded.”

Last month, Jaitt accused film director Pablo Yotich and a friend of his of raping her.

Jaitt’s brother and her lawyer believe Natacha may have been murdered, with the brother claiming that despite an earlier drug problem, she could not have consumed cocaine on the night of her death, since she knew that the drug could react dangerously to medications she was taking.

Police have not ruled out foul play, but said that Jaitt’s body “showed no signs of violence.”

Interestingly enough, Luis Antonio Ventura posted pixelated pictures of the model’s dead naked body on Twitter and wrote: “Investigate.”

However, within minutes of posting the pictures, he deleted them.

In one of the photos, someone can clearly be seen in the reflection of the sliding glass doors. Who is this person?

However, at least one outlet claimed that Pope Francis was even mentioned by Jaitt.

Diario Registrado (translation) reported:

In the program La Noche de Mirtha (Channel 13), the media Natacha Jaitt named journalists, producers, politicians and even involved the very Pope Francis as accomplices of a large network of pedophilia.

At the beginning, Jaitt spoke specifically of the deputy Gustavo Vera and with the journalist Mercedes Ninci in between, he shot: “Mercedes, you are a close friend of Vera, did you know that he is a pedophile and that he runs brothels?”

The accusation without evidence of the media – and with certain strong exchanges with Ninci – also led her to involve the Pope himself.

“(Julio) Grassi practiced pedophilia and Bergoglio moved to a place of children without resources to save him,” he said.

After these accusations, he referred to the public relations officer Leonardo Cohen Arazi – detained a few days ago – and also involved several accomplices. “Cohen Arazi asked for sex in exchange for work, his partner is Francisco Delgado from Big Brother, Brian (Lanzelotta) took the boys from the village to the referee (Martín Bustos) and to him,” he accused.

He added: “A network was being put in. Combat participants entered not by casting but by having sex with Cohen Arazi.”

At the same time, he added the producer of Liliana Parodi and the journalist Juan Cruz Sanz among the accomplices of the public relations specialist. “Sanz is a friend of Cohen Arazi,” he said.

In this sense, Natacha also involved several journalists such as Carlos Pagni and Oscar González Oro. As well as the humorist Enrique Pinti.

Another journalist appointed by Jaitt was Alejandro Fantino. “The driver of Animales Sueltos was also a client of Leo Cohen Arazi,” he said. At that moment and when he had also mentioned Ernesto Tenenbaum, he was interrupted by the conductor Mirtha Legrand, complaining about the attitudes of the media against Ninci.

Her brother and attorney are alleging this was a murder, not a suicide and not an accidental overdoes.

While investigators are not ruling out foul play and claiming it looks like a suicide or accidental overdose, is it really so far fetched that she would be in fear for her life, having two small children, and openly declare she wouldn’t do this and then kill herself?  I think not.

Earlier this month, Sabrina Bittencourt was found dead in her home in Barcelona just days after exposing President Bill Clinton’s “faith healer” as a child rapist and claiming he ran a “sex slave farm.”

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Republicans File Complaint With FEC Over Allegations of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Illegally Funneling Thousands Of Dollars To Boyfriend

Members of the Washington, DC-based Coolidge Reagan Foundation has filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging the Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) campaign possibly funneled thousands of dollars to her boyfriend, Riley Roberts, via a PAC.

After being outed on social media with no legitimate response, Ocasio-Cortez is finally having a complaint filed against her concerning her boyfriend that she listed as a staff member.

I previously reported:

“While you were having a nice Valentine’s Day, @AOC decided to put her boyfriend on staff – drawing a salary on the taxpayer’s dime. Nice to see her adapting to the swamp so quickly,” he said.

Now, this isn’t some super secret information and it’s obviously not private.

Still, AOC rebuffed Thompson by tweeting, “Actually this cal designation is a permission so he can have access to my Google Cal. Congressional spouses get Gcal access all the time.  Next time check your facts before you tweet nonsense.”

Except there’s one little problem, Roberts is not her spouse.  They aren’t married.

Of course, Thompson was targeted by the vultures at Twitter and temporarily suspended, even though the tweet remains posted.

https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/1096441192697511936

Anyone see how they provided cover for AOC without actually removing the tweet?  Yep, I noticed it too.

Thompson didn’t let her off that easy and quickly started pointing out the facts for Ms. Clueless.

“He’s not your spouse. Is he being paid? At what level? It says “staff” not spouse or boyfriend,” he tweeted.  “Furthermore he doesn’t appear to be in any groups and the House doesn’t use Google. Are you giving him access to your official calendar? Why does he have his own email address?”

He also pointed out, “The House doesn’t use Google Calendar, and he’s in the staff directory as on her staff. She’s lying.”

Then the clencher, probably the thing that actually got him suspended.

Of course, Roberts immediately removed his LinkedIn account after Thompson pointed it out.

And it appears the “pretty little liar” is unwilling to address the facts presented to her that once again demonstrates she is so off the mental charts it’s unbelievable.  Right up there with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  They both live in an echo chamber.

One tweet actually asked some questions that should be asked.

And yet another pointed out that the freshman might be engaging in more ethics violations.

This led to the filing of the complaint, which you can read below against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, her campaign and Brand New Congress PAC.

Ocasio Cortez Complaint by on Scribd

Fox News reported:

Members of the Washington, D.C.-based Coolidge Reagan Foundation allege in their complaint that when the Brand New Congress PAC (BNC) — a political arm of Brand New Congress LLC, a company that was hired by Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., to run and support her campaign — paid Roberts for marketing services, it potentially ran afoul of campaign finance law.

“It’s not illegal for [Ocasio-Cortez] to pay her boyfriend, but it appears that they created some sort of scheme to avoid claiming the money [as a campaign expense],” Dan Backer, a D.C.-based attorney who filed the complaint on behalf of the foundation, told Fox News. “What exactly did he do for that money?”

It was first reported last week that the Brand New Congress PAC paid Roberts during the early days of the Ocasio-Cortez campaign. According to FEC records, the PAC made two payments to Roberts – one in August 2017 and one in September 2017 – both for $3,000.

The FEC complaint specifically cites the use of “intermediaries” to make the payments, “the vague and amorphous nature of the services Riley ostensibly provided,” the relatively small amount of money raised by the campaign at that stage and “the romantic relationship between Ocasio-Cortez and Riley” in asserting the transactions might violate campaign finance law.

The Coolidge Reagan Foundation — a 501(c)(3) — is requesting that the FEC look into the payments for potential violations on relevant campaign finance laws that state that campaign contributions “shall not be converted by any person to personal use” and that “an authorized committee must report the name and address of each person who has received any disbursement not disclosed.”

BNC claims that everything was perfectly fine with the hiring of Roberts.

“[Roberts] is a professional digital marketing and growth consultant who specializes in social media presence and subscriber engagement,” said BNC’s Communications Director Zeynab Day, adding that his hiring was based “on his experience managing successful advertising and social media campaigns.”

“He was hired through a 2 month trial period, beginning on August 3, 2017, and worked through the end of September 2017,” she added. “Services to the Brand New Congress PAC consisted of advertising strategies for potential growth, developing metrics, and aiding in execution of strategy to increase brand awareness for the PAC as a whole.”

Ocasio-Cortez even doubled down on her claims of not paying her boyfriend.

Right!  And this woman treats being a representative like it’s a fourth-grade civics class.  In other words, she doesn’t have a clue about reality, how our government functions or how actual journalism works.

This is a woman who is all about self-promotion and could care less about those she represents, as demonstrated in her absolutely ridiculous statements about the jobs lost due to Amazon not settling in New York.

Fox adds:

News of the payments came after it was discovered that Roberts was recently given a congressional email account, with some suggesting it was an ethics violation as boyfriends might not reach the level of partners or spouses who might otherwise be given such access. The spokesperson for the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, David O’Boyle, told Fox News that “from time to time, at the request of members, spouses and partners are provided House email accounts for the purposes of viewing the member’s calendar.”

Of course, that was debunked (see above) as Roberts is not her spouse and the House doesn’t use Google.

Would be nice if some actual justice was brought to bear every once in a while rather than just pointing fingers.  Does anyone actually think this will be dealt with properly?  Not on your life.

Georgia: 79-Year-Old Woman Fights Off Intruder For 10 Minutes With Her Gun – “Come On! I Got Something For You!”

This is definitely a story for the defense of the right to keep and bear arms, but it’s also the story of how crooks are really dumb.  A 79-year-old Jackson County, Georgia woman fended off a 20-year-0ld home intruder over the span of ten minutes with prayer and her pistol.

The unnamed woman called 911 just after noon on February 12 to report the home intruder, twenty-year-old Hans Rogers.

She stayed on the phone for nearly ten minutes fending him off to keep him away from her, firing at least two shots while she was on the phone with 911.

WBIR reports:

It was just after noon on Feb. 12 when the woman called 911, and shot at the 20-year-old suspect twice – while she was still on the phone with 911. She was able to fend him off until deputies arrived to arrest him.

She stayed on the line with the 911 operator.

For nearly 10 minutes, the woman and her pistol took control of the home invasion while she gave the 911 dispatcher a play-by-play of the 20-year-old man who she said was making a racket ransacking another part of the house.

“They’re trying to get in the back door. Hurry. Hurry. Please,” she tells the 911 dispatcher, thinking there are two burglars.

The 911 dispatcher asks her where she is in the house.

“I’m in the kitchen,” she answers.

“I’m watching the door that they were trying to get in. Ooh, they’re breaking glass,” she says.

She shouts at the burglar though the back door: “Okay, come on! I got something for you!”

She fired shots at the man as he ransacked another part of the house.

And she prayed.

“I’m just scared, Ma’am … Please hurry. Please hurry,” she pleaded. “Please, please dear God. Lord have mercy … please…”

You can hear the entire 911 call here:

WBIR then reports:

But the woman shouts defiantly at the burglar, who had moved away from the back door where he initially tried to break in. He climbed the back outside stairs, and broke through that second-floor door, and began to ransack the upstairs rooms.

“I’m waitin’ on ya’, come on!” she shouts from downstairs. “When you come down those stairs I’m gonna blow your damn brains out!”

Still on the phone with 911, she fires her pistol again, toward the second floor of the house.

“Ma’am, are you shootin’ at him again?” the 911 dispatcher asks.

“Yes, ma’am,” she answers.

The woman was shooting in the man’s direction not trying to hit him, explaining to her daughter later, she just wanted to keep him away from her.

He finally tried to hide in an upstairs closet, now afraid of her.

“He made the comment to my mother, you know, ‘B****, you’re trying to kill me,’ because, you know, she was shooting at him.”

The woman told her daughter that she wasn’t trying to actually hit the man, but to keep him away from her.

“She didn’t allow herself to become a victim,” the woman’s daughter said, Tuesday. “My mother’s a very strong woman. I know where I get my strength from, now.  As a matter of fact, I think she’s a little stronger.”

“I don’t know if I could have handled that situation as well as she did,” the daughter continued. “My mother’s a very spiritual person … if she wanted to hit him, she could have hit him … She just wanted to keep him off of her.”

Rogers has a history of medical issues and apparently needed prescription medication, which he did not have that day, according to the sheriff.  That’s no excuse for his behavior, of course.

“Looking back on it, I thank God that he found my mother, and not someone else, because he could have been dead, now,” the daughter said, adding that she hoped he would get the help he needed.

Indeed!  He could be six feet under right now.

Instead, he was arrested and jailed without bond, and was charged with felony first degree burglary and felony home invasion. He’s also facing a charge of misdemeanor criminal trespass.

House Passes Unconstitutional Bill Requiring Universal Background Checks On All Gun Sales

We were warned that anti-American gun confiscating politicians in the House of Representatives were going to attack the Second Amendment this year, but not only are they doing that but in the same measure, they are attacking the Fifth Amendment whereby you must prove your innocence before exercising your right to keep and bear arms.  The House passed its unconstitutional legislation which would mandate a federal criminal background check for every gun sale, including private transactions.

The House passed the “Bipartisan Background Checks Act” (HR8) on a 240-190 vote.

The bill was put together by two men known for their unconstitutional behavior in the past, Reps. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and Pete King (R-N.Y.).

“Gun violence is a true national emergency,” said Thompson, who noted that he’s an avid hunter. “If this bill did anything to erode gun rights … I wouldn’t support it and have my name on it.”

Yet, it does and Fifth Amendment rights, but he still put his name on it.  By the way, this has nothing to do with hunting and these people know it.

Of course, while we are given the stories about how legislation will stop crimes committed with guns, including mass shootings, House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), who was almost killed in 2017 when a Bernie Sanders supporter opened fire targeting GOP representatives at a congressional baseball practice, says it wouldn’t have stopped them.

In the case of Scalise, the man who shot him, obtained his firearms legally.  Others have done the same and till others have obtained them through theft.

“If you look at the bill, it wouldn’t have stopped many of these mass shootings. What it would do is make it harder for law-abiding citizens to exercise their rights,” Scalise told The Hill on Tuesday.

The legislation also offers an exception in cases of temporary transfers “necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.”

However, who is going to determine that and how long will it take them to determine such a thing?

The bill is an overreach, just like any and all federal gun laws.  These criminal legislators usurp their authority and not only are attempting to restrict and regulate firearms, but are also violating the rights of law-abiding citizens and denying them due process.

Let me explain.

By forcing someone to perform a universal background check before they can purchase a firearm to exercise a right granted to them by their Creator, not a privilege given by government, they are being denied their right and liberty without due process.

The Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution plainly states:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. (emphasis mine)

This, along with the explicit boundaries of the Second Amendment that the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” demonstrate just how tyrannical those in Congress who have advanced this legislation are.

The fact is that this legislation would do nothing to stop mass shootings nor stop crimes committed with guns, and it isn’t just Scalise that has said this.

Even gun grabber Senator Dianne Feinstein has said that no set laws will stop such things, which tells you that this is not about safety or security, but about disarming Americans.

Clayton E. Cramer has written that UBCs do not reduce murder rates either.

Furthermore, none of this works without a national gun registry.  It’s simply unenforceable.

AWR Hawkins explained in 2017:

So-called “universal” background checks have become a go-to gun control push for anti-Second Amendment politicians. They come out of the woodwork to push such checks each time a high-profile firearm-based crime occurs. The fact that the vast majority of high-profile attackers already acquire their guns via background checks matters not; gun control proponents step up and demand that background checks be expanded to cover private gun sales anyway.

We saw this after the horrific attack on Sandy Hook Elementary. President Barack Obama called for universal background checks, Vice President Joe Biden called for them, U.S. Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., pushed legislation containing such checks, and the whole of the Democrat Party rallied to secure them.

But a strange thing happened while Manchin was trying to sell his gun control bill: The American people realized such checks would not prevent another Sandy Hook from occurring because the gunman in that attack did not acquire his guns via some private sale in a dark alley—rather, he stole his guns. Moreover, he stole them from his mother, then killed her before going to the school.

During an April 14, 2013, appearance on “Face the Nation,” Manchin admitted his gun control would not have prevented the attack on Sandy Hook.The bottom line—no amount of gun control would have stopped him, and universal background checks, in particular, would have proven impotent to restrain his evil desires. (During an April 14, 2013, appearance on “Face the Nation,” Manchin admitted his gun control would not have prevented the attack on Sandy Hook.)

If Manchin is right—that is, if universal background checks would not have prevented Sandy Hook—why do Democrats continue to push such checks, and why have entire gun control groups formed with seemingly the sole purpose of securing them? The answer is that universal background checks are insidious, and instead of being the end-all, be-all gun control that makes Americans safe, they are the vehicle through which other controls—including gun registries—are instituted. In fact, universal background checks are unenforceable without a gun registry.

Think about the mechanics behind universal background checks. They treat private sales like retail sales and require a background check to be performed whenever a gun changes hands. In many cases this includes requiring a background check before a hunter can loan a gun to a fellow hunter. Viewed theoretically, the Left sees these checks as a way to “keep guns out of the wrong hands.” The theory sounds good and, when pushed after a high-profile attack, benefits from good-hearted Americans who are thinking with their emotions rather than their brains.

But ask yourself one simple question: How can the government know whether a gun is changing hands? That is, how can they know a resident in Nebraska is not selling a gun to his neighbor in Nebraska at this very moment? How can the government know that a resident in Kentucky is not selling a gun to his neighbor in Kentucky at this very moment? After all, they have to know these things in order to make universal background checks enforceable.

Consider the example of California, a state that adopted universal background checks in the 1990s. They followed those checks with numerous other gun controls, a gun registry chief among them. It is the registry that makes universal background checks enforceable, because it is the registry that tells the government the name of every gun owner and the guns that owner possesses.

The thing one must keep in mind is that UBCs are advanced as a stepping stone to gun confiscation.  Here’s the process.

  1. Universal Background Checks
  2. Firearm Registration
  3. Firearm Confiscation

Furthermore, it is thought that Red Flag laws will be advanced as well, and the Trump administration with its new gun confiscating attorney general in place at the Justice Department has been promoting it for over a year now.

This bill will probably not make it through the US Senate, but make no mistake about it, this year your right to keep and bear arms is going to be attacked like it never was under Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah, so we have to remain vigilant.

Article posted with permission from Guns in the News

Former Federal Prosecutor: America Is Growing Into A “Civil War” – “I Vote & I Buy Guns”

Former federal prosecutor Joe diGenova warned that America is growing into a “civil war” and that things will get much worse before they get better, but said that he does two things as things heat up to “total war”:  “I vote and I buy guns.”

Joe diGenova’s comments came when he appeared on the Laura Ingraham Show and was discussing how the Communists and Socialists in our government have teamed up with the state-controlled media to attack those that are in opposition to their point of view and yet provide cover for people like Virginia Governor Ralph Northam and VA Attorney General Mark Herring for appearing in blackface and appearing uninterested with Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax’s credible sexual assault allegation.

“We are in a civil war in this country,” diGenova told Ingraham.

“There’s two standards of justice, one for Democrats one for Republicans,” he said.

“The press is all Democrat, all liberal, all progressive, all left – they hate Republicans, they hate Trump,” he added.

“So, the suggestion that there’s ever going to be civil discourse in this country for the foreseeable future in this country is over,” diGenova continued.  “It’s not going to be. It’s going to be total war.”

And what advice did he give for what’s taking place and what’s about to come in our future?  Vote and buy guns, and I’ll add become efficient with those guns.

“And as I say to my friends, I do two things – I vote and I buy guns,” diGenova said.

While I do believe in voting, I don’t buy into the notion of the “lesser of two evils.” The issue I see, especially in those who claim to be on my side ideologically, is that they vote out of fear: fear that Hillary will be president, fear out of this person or that person. My goodness, since 2012, when I first began writing, that’s all I’ve heard out of “conservatives.” They feared four more years of Obama, so they held their nose and voted for a liberal masquerading as a conservative who did far more they opposed as governor than Obama wanted to accomplish as president.k

The same language was used when Donald Trump ran for office.

Many of the same people did not support Trump, but voted for him because they were afraid of Hillary.  It wasn’t about actually supporting a person and the law.

It reminds me:

The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion. -Proverbs 28:1

A thousand shall flee at the threat of one; at the threat of five you shall flee, till you are left like a flagstaff on the top of a mountain, like a signal on a hill. -Isaiah 30:17

And I will set My face against you, so that you will be defeated by your enemies. Those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee when no one pursues you. -Leviticus 26:17

Sadly, many of our representatives are very similar in their approach to governing.  they flee when no one is chasing them and they fear their opposition

As an example, just recall last week how representatives in Oklahoma, a self-proclaimed “pro-life” state, can’t seem to pass an abortion abolition bill because “pro-life,” and I use that term lightly, men are scared they might lose in court.  No one is pursuing them and they have the opportunity to do what is right on behalf of literally tens of thousands of unborn Americans.  Yet, they do it not.

As far as guns go, I’m right there with Mr. di Genova, and don’t forget your ammo.  After all, the very thing he is speaking of is the very thing the Second Amendment was written for, and don’t forget, when things get bad, tyrannical government will move in to take your guns in the name of “safety” and “security.”  At that time, you not only have the right to use those weapons against such tyranny, but the duty as well.

Just remember Hurricane Katrina.

NY Abortion Worker To Expectant Mother: ” ‘Flush’ The Baby Down The Toilet, Or ‘Put It In A Bag’ If She’s Born Alive” (Video)

As Congress began looking at legislation to protect newborns from murder after birth (infanticide), a 2013 Live Action video resurfaced in which a New York abortion worker told a woman to drown her baby in a toilet or put it in a bag if it is born alive.

Live Action founder Lila Rose tweeted out the video with the gist of the discovery:

“Our investigators exposed this New York abortion facility, which says they will put a born-alive baby in a jar of “solution” to drown her. They also say to “flush” the baby down the toilet, or “put it in a bag” if she’s born alive.

Life News reports:

The undercover investigation involved an investigator seeking an abortion at 23 weeks of pregnancy at Emily’s Women’s Center in the Bronx. At the time, abortions were legal for any reason up to 24 weeks in New York. In January, however, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a new law allowing unborn babies to be aborted for basically any reason up to birth.

In the video, the abortion clinic worker explained that an abortion at 23 weeks – about six months – would be a two-day procedure. Then woman asked what would happen if, while at home after the first day, she would give birth to a living baby.

“If it comes out, then it comes out,” the worker said. “Flush it … or put it in a bag” and bring it back to the abortion facility.

Asked how common 23-week abortions are, the worker said they see women at her stage “every day.”

The worker also told the woman not to call a hospital if something went wrong. At another point, the worker said the reason is because the hospital could force her to give birth to a live baby.

Of course, Congress isn’t going to pass anything like this with pro-baby murderers in charge of the House in spite of President Donald Trump calling for such legislation during his State of the Union speech following the ghoulish celebrating of the despicable “law” New York passed to allow for infanticide and which will only line the pockets of these murderers even more through the trafficking of those babies’ body parts.  That same week, a Virginia Democrat pushed for legislation to murder babies during delivery.  But let such legislation be applied to abortion supporters, and I’ll bet we’ll get an entirely different response.

Understand, Trump didn’t call for the protection of all babies.  He merely did political grandstanding for late-term abortions.  He has gone right along with unconstitutionally funding Planned Parenthood with your tax dollars for his entire time in office on several occasions.  All the blood of those babies who have been murdered by Planned Parenthood and all the crimes of body parts trafficking are on his hands and that of the Congress.

U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse, the Nebraska Republican who is the sponsor of the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, told LifeNews that he appreciates the upcoming vote.

“A lot of Senators spend a lot of time telling people how they fight for the little guy. Well, here’s the chance for them to prove it,” Sasse said. “We’re going to have a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act and everyone is going to have to put their name by their vote.

“It’s cowardly for a politician to say they’ll fight for the little guy but only if the little guy isn’t an actual 7-pound baby who’s fighting for life. It shouldn’t be hard to protect newborn babies – let’s pass this legislation,” he said.

I agree.  No law needs to be passed to save American children.  It is enshrined in our founding document, the Declaration of Independence which reads in part:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Life is the very first right afforded to human beings by their Creator and government is to “secure these rights.”

When government “becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

I have a question, have we not gone well past the point our founders declared in the Declaration of Independence?  Should we not be seeking to abolish the federal government and institute new Government with its foundations and principles based on the unchanging Word of God, which was the foundation of American government long before the Constitution?

Indeed, I think it’s time to give that some serious consideration.

For more on the abortion agenda, I highly recommend Corey Lynn’s excellent investigation below.

The Abortion Agenda: Its Benefactors & What You Don’t Know

Article posted with permission from The Washington Standard

Criminal Illegal Alien Opens Fire On American Police Officer – Gets Put Down Like The Dog He Was

A criminal illegal alien is now dead after pulling a handgun on a police officer who had stopped to check his car in a parking lot.  After firing at the officer, she then pulled her weapon and shot into the car, killing the Mexican national who had been previously deported three times.

Javier Hernandez-Morales, 43, also had a loaded rifle in his red Honda when he was confronted by Napa County sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki.

Morales was previously deported twice in 2007 and once in 2010.  And though Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had detainers on Morales for arrests on suspicion of driving under the influence, battery on a peace officer, selling liquor to a minor and unknown probation violations, none of those detainers were honored by jail staff.

Can we say that they had a hand in the further crimes and attempted murder of Napa County sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki?  I think we could safely say that.

Here’s the report and body cam video from CBS News.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle:

Napa County sheriff’s Deputy Riley Jarecki was on solo patrol Sunday night when she checked on a driver parked on the 1100 block of Henry Road in a southern part of the county, said Henry Wofford, a sheriff’s spokesman.

Jarecki was conducting a vehicle check, where deputies search to see if occupants of a vehicle require help or if there is something “nefarious” going on inside, Undersheriff Jon Crawford said in a Wednesday afternoon news conference.

The two talked for a few minutes before Jarecki asked to look inside of the red Honda that 43-year-old Javier Hernandez Morales was driving, Crawford said.

“Can I look around and make sure?” she says as she gestures at the interior of the car, and the suspect, wearing a camouflage hoodie, throws his hands up. “All right, wait right there, don’t move, OK?” the deputy says.

“OK,” Hernandez Morales responds in Spanish as he throws his hands up again. “No problem, I don’t have problems.”

She walks to the driver’s side, raps on the glass and repeatedly asks Hernandez Morales to roll down the window.

He hesitates, looking back and forth from the inside of the car to the deputy.

“What’s up?” he says in Spanish as he rolls down his window.

Twelve seconds after Jarecki’s initial request, Hernandez Morales whips out a .22-caliber revolver, firing at least one shot at her at point-blank range.

The body camera footage gets shaky as the deputy races away from the driver’s window.

“Shots fired, shots fired,” Jarecki calls into her radio, and then as the car engine sounds like it’s revving, she fires 15 shots into the passenger side of the car. The video ends on the last shot.

In writing on the protection afforded to criminals like Hernandez-Morales by the state of California, Daniel Greenfield reminds us of just how this state views incidents like this.

Jon Rodney of the California Immigrant Policy Center, which fights deportation, did not decry the Mexican criminal’s attack on a female American police officer, any other crimes Hernandez-Morales had committed, or his unlawful presence in the country. As Rodney told the Chronicle,  “We have seen how ICE and the president politicize tragedy, and I think that is irresponsible and wrong.”

Napa County Undersheriff Jon Crawford went on record that by pulling a loaded pistol and firing at officer Jarecki, the Mexican intended to kill her. Crawford did not speculate on other goals the violent Mexican criminal might have had in mind. At this writing, pro-sanctuary California governor Gavin Newsom has not weighed in on the case, and Californians might watch how attorney general Xavier Becerra responds.

The pro-sanctuary Becerra is unconcerned about the immigration status of the MS-13 gang members who have murdered 14 during a reign of terror in Mendota, near Fresno. So former congressman Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, is not likely to side with officer Riley Jarecki.

California’s Democrat attorney general has also been rather quiet about the murder of police officer Ronil Singh, a legal immigrant from Fiji, by Mexican gang member Paulo Virgen Mendoza, also known as Gustavo Perez Arriaga and other names. The Mexican killed Singh in Newman, California, on the day after Christmas, and new developments in the case are proving educational.

Sanctuary advocates proclaim that illegals commit fewer crimes that legitimate citizens. And without sanctuary laws, Californians are endlessly told, the “undocumented” will not call the police. None ever called the police on the murderer of Ronil Singh. In fact, they helped him escape.

As the Modesto Bee notes, last week a federal grand jury returned a nine-count indictment against Erik Razo Quiroz, Adrian Virgen Mendoza, Conrado Virgen Mendoza, Erasmo Villegas Suarez, Ana Leydi Cervantes Sanchez, Bernabe Madrigal Castaneda, Maria Luisa Moreno. Their aid to the fugitive Mendoza, “included transporting and housing him, providing him with clothes, money and a cell phone, and wiring money to smuggle him out of the country.” And the indictment adds “ID fraud to previous charges.”

Mendoza’s brothers, Conrado Virgen Mendoza and Adrian Virgen-Mendoza, are “charged with using a false Social Security number and possessing a false lawful permanent resident card, or green card, to secure employment.” Another relative, Erasmo Villegas-Suarez, is charged with “using a false Social Security number to gain work.”

As this confirms, the Mexican nationals who aided the fugitive cop killer were not “undocumented.” They were false-documented, like virtually all foreign nationals who violate U.S. immigration law and continue to live and work in the United States. Document fraud is a serious crime but when committed by Mexican nationals in the country illegally, California takes no action. That applies whether or not the false-documented illegal is a previously deported criminal.

Repeatedly deported felon Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, or whatever his real name is, was not handed over to federal official and proceeded to gun down Kate Steinle in San Francisco. In similar style, gang member Paulo Virgen Mendoza, or whatever his real name is, had previous encounters with the law but enjoyed protection from federal immigration officials.

That’s why officer Ronil Singh, who came to the United States to become a police officer, is dead. Mendoza returns to court on April 8. Prosecutors have not announced whether they will seek the death penalty.

Meanwhile, Javier Hernandez-Morales, or whatever his real name is, also enjoyed protection from immigration authorities. That’s why he was able to commit crimes and attempt to kill Napa County sheriff’s deputy Riley Jarecki. Had the Mexican been successful, other false-documented illegals would surely have helped him flee.

Deporting illegal aliens simply does not do the trick and does not deal justly with those who have also been criminally convicted of capital crimes for which they should be put to death, if our society actually acted justly.

In any case, Morales is where he belongs now, and because of Deputy Jarecki’s quick actions, she is alive today.

Article posted with permission from Guns in the News

NYC DOJ Hired Islamic State Jihadi – Currently Works In Brooklyn Office

So, you become a member of an avowed enemy of America and you get a job in the Department of Justice, during the Trump administration, I might add.  This isn’t going on under Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.  Yet, here we now have confirmation that a New York man traveled to Syria to join the Islamic State, and apparently, was allowed back into the US and is now employed at the Department of Justice.  Can you say, “Injustice”?

Mohimanul Alam Bhuiya, 30, left New York City in 2014 to join up with the Islamic State.  He embraced Islam and jihad, even seeking to devise a plan to destroy civilian aircraft and promote it to ISIS.

During his time in the Islamic State, he admitted to receiving small amounts of military training.

Now, this guy eventually contacted the FBI and sought to return to the states claiming that he was somehow disillusioned, and while he faced criminal charges which could have put him in prison for 25 years, he simply cooperated with the FBI, and simply got supervised release.

“We’ve watched him closely,” said Seth DuCharme, a prosecutor who worked with him when he ran the counterterrorism unit of the United States attorney’s office in Brooklyn. “And we have developed — with a great sense of caution — trust in him over time.”

Yes, you read that right! This is the same FBI that has dropped the ball over and over and over again in “watching” people closely that they knew were Islamic jihadis.

This is how the FBI handled Bhuiya, according to court documents.

Of course, since the US was claiming to fight ISIS, how is this not treason?  Yet, when questioned by the judge in the matter of his future, Bhuiya said, “I have seen a lot and I have been through a lot of pain.  And at my age, right now, I’m considering what I call retirement. Like, I’m just going to relax, have kids and just live my life.”

Well, that’s good for him.  What if this guy is playing the FBI and is a plant?  I just don’t think these people give up an ideology like that without some sort of conversion.  I really don’t and Bhuiya shows no evidence of converting to Christianity.  So, in my opinion, he is a ticking time bomb, just waiting for his opportunity to strike.

Keep in mind this also occurred during James Comey’s time as director at the FBI.

As Patrick Poole of PJ Media points out:

Bhuiya was charged with material support for terrorism upon his return and faced 25 years in prison, but a federal judge last June sentenced him to supervised release with no jail time the New York Times reported, thanks to the intervention and recommendation of his Justice Department co-workers.

According to the Wall Street Journalhe now works with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Brooklyn.

Bhuiya’s return helped the FBI under Comey to clear up a case they had previously botched.

According to the criminal complaint against Bhuiya, he had been approached on June 5, 2014, by FBI agents who had been monitoring his interactions online and were concerned he might try to leave the U.S. to join ISIS. He later explained to the Columbia Spectator that he had been radicalized by a “Muslims in Diaspora” course he had taken at Columbia University.

Exactly a week after the FBI visited him he was allowed to get on a plane to Turkey, where he crossed the border into Syria and joined the terror group.

According to an interview he gave to NBC News, he received indoctrination on Islamic law and military tactics at an ISIS training camp. On his ISIS application found in personnel files later obtained by NBC News, in addition to his personal data, Bhuiya detailed that he had a plan to “break down [i.e. crash] aircraft” that he wanted to present to the terror group.

On the same day that Bhuiya was allowed to leave the U.S., ISIS committed one of their worst atrocities: the mass murder of more than 1,000 unarmed military cadets at Camp Speicher near Tikrit, Iraq.

The terror group separated the Shia and non-Muslim cadets from their Sunni comrades and killed them individually and in groups. As many as 1,700 were murdered by ISIS during the Camp Speicher massacre. Mass graves of their victims are still being discovered. ISIS released a propaganda video of the killings.

According to Bhuiya, he was stationed in the Syrian town of Manbij near Aleppo.

An August 2014 UN report on atrocities in Syria and Iraq documents that an execution site was set up in a parking lot in Manbij, where public beheadings, amputations, and beatings were carried out.

The UN report also states that two weeks prior to Bhuiya’s arrival in Syria 153 teenage male Kurdish students were abducted in Manbij coming home from exams.

During Bhuiya’s tenure with ISIS, they humiliated and summarily executed 250 Syrian soldiers, beheaded American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, and massacred several thousand Yezidis in northern Iraq while abducting thousands more.

You don’t think he had anything to do with any of those crimes, do you?  I do.  By the way, he wasn’t “radicalized.”  He became a devout Islamists, plain and simple.

Furthermore, isn’t it interesting that Poole emphasizes, “Bhuiya’s return helped the FBI under Comey to clear up a case they had previously botched“?

I think so.  If you wonder why Islamic terrorism occurs in the US, look no further than the abject failure of the FBI to deal properly and lawfully with Islam itself, which teaches such things.

However, after engaging in blatant treason, Bhuiya emailed the FBI, wanting to come home and sought “exoneration.”

Seriously, he should have been immediately tried for treason and publicly executed, not given a job at the Justice Department.

As atrocious as this is, Richard Moorhead reminds us that this guy is not the only problem child in the DOJ, and that the DOJ has lost all credibility when it comes to the public perception of the department.

Bhuiya’s employment for the Department of Justice is emblematic of the dominance of cultural elite progressives within America’s primary federal legal institution. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions was described in a recent book by Deep State leaker Andrew McCabe as having bemoaned the employee force of the DOJ, calling them “new people with nose rings and tattoos.”

It’s uncertain how a department credibly accused of systemic political corruption and bias against right-of-center Americans aims to retain credibility among the broader public, especially with a hiring policy that allows former ISIS terrorist wannabes to secure employment within its ranks.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.  Why aren’t people in New York City, the city that was attacked on 9-11-2001, not demanding that this man not only be fired, but tried as a traitor?  Oh wait, all you have to do is look at who they elect to know that answer.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Legislators Seek To Charge Police Officers With Felony For Turning Off Body Cameras

Legislators in Memphis, Tennessee are attempting to hold police officers accountable who fail to turn their body cameras on when they encounter the public as they are required to do because it seems that many officers are not rolling the video in an attempt to hide things.  They are seeking to charge them with a Class E felony.

WREG reports:

Officers have been caught hiding things recently. Most notably, in the Martavious Banks case where the department says three officers turned off their body cameras before shooting a man.

WREG is now learning the full story of what Memphis Police say happened on the night of September 17, 2018 when officers shot Banks, leaving him in critical condition.

Police say three officers deliberately hid their actions from supervisors by communicating on a radio frequency that dispatch couldn’t hear and turning off their body cameras before the shooting.

While the officer who fired the shots resigned with no charges, the other three officers were suspended and a family attorney believes the behavior to be “egregious” and that the officers received a “slap on the wrist.”

So, now representatives are attempting to include language in existing law to deal with the matter as tampering with evidence and obstructing justice, which is exactly what it is.

Rep. G.A. Hardaway (D- Memphis) “What we want to do is take the issue of tampering with evidence, obstructing justice and put some specific language into the Tennessee code.”

Of course, the police are combating that saying it puts too much stress on them when they have to deal in a dangerous environment.

“Body camera policy violations should be exactly that, a policy violation, not a criminal law violation,” said Matt Cunningham with the Memphis Police Association (MPA). “We feel it’s not only excessive, but it adds to stress they have to deal with dangers.”

“You got that catch-clause in there. We feel that’s a pretty slippery slope, defining what intent to obstruct justice means,” Cunningham said. “Police officers do a job where transparency is vital, but officers have umpteen things to think about during an encounter.”

But what about the man that was shot, Mr. Cunningham?  What about the excessiveness of the officers involved?  What about the dangers those you are supposed to serve encounter at the hands of such men?

The MPA claims that if this becomes law, many officers are threatening to quit.

Fine, let them quit.  This is not a difficult thing to do and it is to protect officers just as much as it is those they are supposed to serve.  It protects officers from fraudulent claims, but it also works to protect the public from criminal cops who abuse their authority and behave badly.

Mayor Jim Strickland said there were dozens of cases of officers doing the same thing: turning off their body cameras when they should be rolling.

Activist Hunter Demster said he’s happy to see lawmakers taking a serious look at police reform.

“I think that this bill is important, it’s one way to hold them accountable. At the end of the day, you’ve done nothing wrong. What do you have to hide?” Demster said.

Here’s a simple solution:  Use lithium rechargeable batteries and high capacity SD cards or even SSD drives in the body cams.  At the beginning of every shift, the officer must have it turned on by their superiors with a locking mechanism so that it cannot be turned off for any reason.  Then when the shift is over, the officer has it turned off and recharged by his superior and the contents are kept for 14 days as evidence in case there are complaints.

Of course, my proposal would never become policy because that would be too simple and too clear to follow that it just might actually work.

Still, body camera footage is very important in many incidents.  Take this incident from last year where Arizona police engaged in a ridiculous amount of tyrannical excessive force.

Additionally, body cams have been used to protect officers who used justifiable deadly force, such as this body cam video, also from Arizona.

Finally, just as these would provide both transparency and protection for officers and the public, legislation is also being put forward in Illinois that would require politicians to wear body cameras to try and curb corruption.

“Annie Christ” Drag Queen Allowed To Read To Kids At Library Despite Protests

The Drag Queen Story Time is continuing to grow across the country, and more and more it’s pulling the mask off of what it truly is:  AntiChrist.  The latest story out of the mentally ill community of men dressing up as women and wanting to groom the next generation of America’s kids is a drag queen named Miss Annie, who goes by a stage name “Annie Christ.”  How’s that for in your face, parents?

Earlier this month, WPVI in Philadelphia reported on Annie Christ reading to children in Lansdale, Montgomery County and the protests that ensued over it.

WPVI reports:

Dozens of families brought their children to hear readings by Drag Queen Miss Annie.

Her stage name though is Annie Christ.

But Christ says her name shouldn’t stop her from doing events like these.

“It’s like an actor being in a rated R movie not being able to read to kids. It’s my side job it’s what I do at a club that’s 21 and over,” said Annie Christ Drag Queen.

She says the focus of today is “Acceptance diversity not bullying.”

Families, who showed up by the dozens were thrilled to be here.

Missy Bonham of Lansdale said, “I wanna raise him to accept people and be nice to everyone.”

Tristan Bonham of Lansdale added, “Treat people how you want to be treated.”

Well, on the surface, I agree.  We should treat people the way we want to be treated, but wouldn’t that also imply that we guard our children and the children of others from such perversion?  I think so.

Annie wanting to equate an actor in an R rated movie not being able to read to kids to what he is doing is a complete misrepresentation.  Let’s make a more parallel comparison, shall we?

Let’s have Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga show up to libraries from the R rated film A Star Is Born and recreate their “love” scene.  How well would that go over?  What about have some of the lines uttered in the film repeated in the presence of the children there?  How would that be?

I’m sure plenty of people who took their kids to this wouldn’t approve of that.  Yet, by dressing in drag, this is, in effect, what Annie is doing.  He is doing the exact thing God has said a man should not be doing and is desensitizing kids to his perversion in hopes that one day many of them will go down the same road to Hell he is on.  He is bringing a perversion right in front of the children and confusing them and thereby corrupting them.  It used to be considered contributing to the delinquency of a minor.

However, there were those that protested the event and rightfully so.  After all, although libraries shouldn’t be funded with tax dollars, they are and these people are upset that their tax dollars are being used to corrupt the children of the community.

“When you do that, little children, they think oh well this is okay. When it’s really not natural or normal,” said Marilyn Teed of Lansdale.

Albert Howard of Lansdale added, “If you want to do what you wanna do and be that’s fine. That’s between you and God one day, but to teach the kids – no.”

Some people asked why there were not times where Bible stories are read.

Library director Tom Meyer explained, “People have been asking me why you don’t have bible story times. We do! We’ve done it. It’s happened.”

Right, but that doesn’t provide a right to allow this kind of behavior around children.

Does this mean that Annie should be treated hatefully?  No, but neither should his little act be respected.  Instead, it should be shunned and he should be confronted with his open and defiant sin and called to repent of it and find forgiveness in the Lord Jesus Christ.  Sadly, too many will only curse the darkness and never provide the light.  Both the law and the Gospel need to be presented to Annie for that is the only way to start dealing with the abomination of drag queens and the Drag Queen Story Time.  Is there anyone there in Pennsylvania doing that?

The One Truth In Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “I’m The Boss” Statement That True Statesmen Should Pick Up On

Over the weekend, it was reported that narcissist and self-avowed Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) rebuked those who called out the stupidity of her Communist-style Green New Deal, saying that since no one else really wanted to address the ridiculous and debunked notion of the fictitious version of “climate change,” aka global warming, then she claims that she is “the boss.”  In that statement, she does make one clear statement of fact, which statesmen ought to latch onto, and that statement is to speak loudly and make controversial statements.  By that, I mean they should take on the very things that are politically incorrect and be very pointed about it and create conversation among the people.

Here’s a recap of AOC’s comments.

“I’m at least trying and they’re not,” AOC said of her Green New Deal critics. “If you’re trying, you’ve got all the power, you’re driving the agenda, you’re doing all this stuff.”

“Like, I just introduced Green New Deal two weeks ago and it’s creating all of this conversation. Why? Because no one else is even trying — because no one else has even tried!”

AOC retorted at her critics, “I’m like you try! You do it! Cuz you’re not!” AOC said pointing her finger.

“So until you do it, I’M THE BOSS! How about that?” AOC said.

The obvious question should be, what are you “trying” AOC?  To take people’s money?  To control them?  To stop them from eating hamburgers?  To be God?

I mean, look, any baby can try to crawl, and we can at least admire that because it’s a part of growing and it’s something they learn to do for themselves, not in an attempt to control others.  In fact, it’s a part of being independent, something our forefathers fought against tyrants to establish.

Here’s the part that no one in conservative media is addressing:  “If you’re trying, you’ve got all the power, you’re driving the agenda, you’re doing all this stuff.”

That’s exactly right!

I wanna know, where are the Christians, the conservatives and the constitutionalists who are making the statements about why the Second Amendment exists and why its a right versus a privilege that is not up for regulation, debate or restriction?

Where are the Christians, the conservatives and the constitutionalists who are willing to walk onto the House, Senate or their state legislature’s floor and hold up posters of murdered unborn children by abortionists and call out the criminal representative enablers for their crimes?

I can tell you this, they aren’t just Democrats!

After Donald Trump correctly said there should be punishment for mother and doctor for the murder of the unborn, I had “pro-life” commentators write articles they wanted me to post blasting Trump, just like the media, claiming the mother was a victim.  Huh?  I rejected those pieces as they were wicked and evil.  They were just as sinful and criminal as the media and Democrats they decried.

And you know what happened as a result of the outcry of so-called “pro-lifers” like that?  Trump changed his tune, cause that’s how he is.  He is not a principled man, just read his books where he tells you he isn’t.

Where are the representatives who will call Communists, Communists?  Where are the legislators who will call out unconstitutional wars?  Where are the senators who will point out the entanglements we are engaged in through ungodly treaties with other ungodly nations in attempts to protect them from the judgment of God because they act wickedly?

Very few of them exist, and often when these men come to the forefront, they are attacked and no one will stand with them and often they fade into the background.

Even Fox News’ Tucker Carlson gets this to some extent.

TuckerShe’s the boss. How did this happen? Well, for the last two years Democrats have been very distracted.

They have spent all of their time hating Donald Trump. And none of their time thinking about what they would do if they ever took charge as they just did of the Congress last November.

So they arrive in Washington in January and they have no idea what to do. Lucky for them someone had a plan. She was a 29-year-old bartender from the Bronx and she showed up with a brand new democratic platform already written.

She imposed it on her party. It’s called the green new deal. In less than two months she was basically convinced the entire leadership of the Democratic Party to buy into this plan, to ratify it.

It’s a perfect plan, it would shut down the entire economy except for the hedge funds which for the Democratic party is absolutely perfect. There is only one downside.

The plan, if enacted would cost some estimate more than the entire global G.D.P. Not the G.D.P. of the United States. But the G.D.P. of the world.

It’s pretty expensive. But it doesn’t bother Ocasio-Cortez at all. She doesn’t care.

Is it okay to still have children? Well, I don’t know Alexandria, can we? You are the boss now. If you say we can’t reproduce the species, of course we won’t.

It’s your call. My gosh. It’s a measure of how cowardly and passive everyone has become all of a sudden that a chorus of right-thinking Democrats has hasn’t told this wind bag to be quiet and take a seat.

Nobody has done that they are all too afraid of her. What you are watching isn’t politics it’s a children’s crusade an army of tiny combatants marching off in oversized clothes into an unknown puffed up with ignorant self-righteousness.

Well, yeah, because Republicans seem to know how to point out problems, but have no idea of how to lead… and I might add, lead according to the Constitution.

Both parties have become corrupt.  One party is utterly criminal and the other party is partly criminal and partyly complicit by their silence and inaction.

To prove my point, just listen to the following series I helped put out with Jerry Johnson when I was at Nicene Council on the utter failure of the Reagan Revolution after 30 years.

I want to ask you something, do you think AOC cares about that?  Do you really think she will fade into the background because she is espousing stupidity?  Then you are not paying attention.  Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah did the same thing and he went from state senator to US senator to president in less than a term in office as senator.  AOC is being set up the same way.

It’s time that true statesmen start creating the controversy to drive us back to the law, not away from it.  It’s time that we stopped facing the lying, propaganda from the giant corporate media and go out with a sling and a stone and declare that we come in the name of the Lord, and when that happens we will see victory, but not until.

Laugh all you want at AOC, and there is much to laugh at, but in the end, if those who claim to truly represent us and uphold the law don’t have the male anatomy to take up arms against the giant, they are just as unworthy of their office as is the freshman Socialist from New York.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Ex-CNN Reporter Amber Lyon Explains How They Fake The News

You may recall the name of journalist Amber Lyon.  She is the one that left the most worthless name in news, CNN, after her reporting was censored.  She went on to out the state-controlled propaganda machine at the time.  However, in a short interview with Abby Martin on Sky News, Lyon explains just how propaganda outlets like CNN fake the news.

First, did you know that six corporations control nearly 90% of all the media in America?  Of course, this marginalizes anything and any view that differs with what these media outlets consider to be “mainstream.”

In fact, many reporters have either left or been fired for speaking out against the establishment line of their particular network or going against those who pay money to advertise on the network.

Martin pointed out that in 1999, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson of Fox attempted to air their investigation uncovered the dark secrets of rBGH, but were blocked from airing the report by threats from Monsanto.

She then pointed out NBC’s Peter Arnett, who was fired for making critical comments about the Iraq War on Iraqi television.  The same held true to longtime talk show host Phil Donahue who was also fired for his critical comments of the Iraq invasion.

At that time, this very poignant statement came forward and it’s still true today.

“Commercial television decided amassing corporate money and providing entertainment [was] its central mission.” -Award winning journalist Christ Hedges

Andrea Seabrook of NPR resigned in protest after constantly being required to reprint government press releases, referring to the incestuous relationship between reporters and politicians “collusion.”

Finally, former CBS reporter Sharyl Attkisson resigned from the network citing a growing bias by CBS and pressure from its corporate partners.

With these examples as a startup, Martin interviewed Amber Lyon about what she experienced at CNN.

Lyon said that she produced a documentary exposing the Bahrain regime, which the US had been supporting financially and with weapons, was actually using some of those weapons to torture and murder some of its own people.

However, once the documentary was complete, CNN informed Lyon and her colleagues that the documentary wasn’t going to air with virtually any explanation why it would not be aired.

However, Lyon discovered that Bahrain was a “paying customer at the network, at CNN.”  She also discovered that Bahrain and several other pro-US regimes worldwide are actually paying CNN big money to produce “positive content” and “fake documentaries” about them, which she called “infomercials for dictators.”

Meanwhile, CNN fails to disclose any of this to their viewers or their own journalists, but rest assured, outlets like NewsGuard have given them a clean bill of health when it comes to transparency, believing the “nutritional value” of fake news outlets like CNN, who have a long track record of simply fabricating news, are safe for you to watch and you can trust them.  Yeah, right!

Lyon says this is defrauding and misleading people, and she is correct.

Ms. Lyon also points out that many serious journalists have had to abandon the mainstream media outlets they have previously worked for because they simply can’t do their job without self-censorship, something I have warned many of my own colleagues about.  Who needs government censorship if you are going to censor yourself for a dollar?

“In ten years of working in the mainstream, I was censored on stories at every single one of my jobs, whether that be to please corporate interests or the story was censored to please the united States government,” Lyon told Martin.  “So, this is a chronic problem that’s really destroying journalism in the united States.”

“People really need to understand that when your are watching mainstream media, you’re not getting the accurate picture,” she added.  “A lot of the journalists have been turned into lapdogs versus watchdogs because that’s what management wants.”

When asked whether journalists have the editorial freedom to cover stories people want covered, Lyon responded, “No, they don’t.”

Lyon didn’t have that freedom either.

In fact, Lyon claims that while she was at CNN, she would have other “journalists” write or call her and ask her to amend her reports in favor of the US government or their entities, which she often refused to do.

She also emphasized the “cosy” relationships that exist between journalists and “authorities” in DC, which she said were “very questionable.”  In fact, she said they are “doing more propaganda than they are investigative journalism.”

Furthermore, she said the message comes from the top down to journalists as what is appropriate to cover and what isn’t.  As an example, Lyon said the Occupy movement was targeted by management claiming that viewers weren’t interested in it and what was taking place in the streets.  She even had an executive at CNN tell her “Occupy doesn’t deserve to be covered.”

Of course, when there is this kind of guidance, it influences what you see in the media, but it also influences what you won’t see in the media, which is often very important.

 

 

UCLA Students Sign Petition That Would Put Conservatives in Concentration Camps

Seriously, this follows after signing petitions to murder babies after birth by George Mason University studentsKent State graduate and all around gun girl Kaitlin Bennett showed up undercover at UCLA to promote a petition that would put conservatives in concentration camps, and yes, there were students who signed it.

I actually believe that people in these indoctrination centers, more than less, don’t have a clue about life or the world around them.

Still, Bennett posed as Jenna Talia to ask students if they would sign her fake petition to throw conservatives in involuntary re-education camps, also known as concentration camps.

According to Liberty hangout:

Not only were the students she approached ecstatic to sign it, but one member of UCLA’s student government encouraged her to change the language to “diversity” and “sensitivity training” to hide their real intentions so the administration would approve it.

Take a look.

You see, this is not about higher education.  People like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Bill Ayers have learned this.  This is why they specifically targeted education to indoctrinate young people.

However, it’s not just liberal Marxists who are to blame.  President Ronald Reagan, whom all conservative fawn over, allowed the unconstitutional Department of Education to stand even though he declared it so and even ran on abolishing it as part of his platform.

Julie Borowski reminds us in a piece from 2011:

Eliminating the Department of Education used to be a standard Republican talking point. In 1980, Ronald Reagan ran on abolishing the federal department soon after Jimmy Carter created it. The 1996 GOP platform read, “the Federal government has no constitutional authority to be involved in school curricula or to control jobs in the market place. This is why we will abolish the Department of Education, end federal meddling in our schools, and promote family choice at all levels of learning.”

The Republican Party has since lost its way. George W. Bush championed the No Child Left Behind law—also known as the No Federal Bureaucrat Left Behind law—which has massively expanded the federal government’s role in education. With a few notable exceptions such as Michele Bachmann and Ron Paul, modern day Republicans have backed away from gutting the Department of Education. It has become more common for Republicans to promise that they will eliminate “waste, fraud and abuse” in government programs without giving any specifics.

Republicans need to return to their small government roots. We just can’t solve our budget problems and restore liberty by simply tinkering around the edges. Instead of pledging to “fix” unconstitutional government programs—we need more elected representatives willing to scrap entire departments. Today’s GOP should channel Mr. Conservative himself Barry Goldwater who declared that “I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient…my aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them.”

The Department of Education deserves to be on the chopping block. Our children’s education is too important to be left up to a federal centralized bureaucracy. Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education as a political payoff to the teachers’ unions for their 1976 endorsement. We should judge all governmental agencies by their results rather than their intentions. Like virtually every federal department, the Department of Education has only made things worse. Student educational outcomes have worsened since the creation of the Department of Education.

The Department of Education is blatantly unconstitutional, like so much that the federal government does. The truth is that the federal government only has about thirty enumerated powers delegated to it in the Constitution. Education is not specifically listed in the document, which means that the authority over education should be left up to the states and the people. We cannot afford to waste anymore taxpayer dollars on failed national schemes.

Federal agencies always cost more than initially predicted. The Department of Education’s 2011 budget is nearly six times greater than its original budget. It has increased from $13.1 billion (in 2007 dollars) in 1980 to $77.8 billion in 2011. The federal government throwing more money at education has done virtually nothing to improve educational outcomes. Student test scores in math, reading and science have remained flat or declined over the past four decades. The chart below from the Cato Institute shows how increased federal spending has not had a positive effect on educational achievement:
FederalEducation

The federal government meddling in education has been a failure to say the least. A group of federal bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. cannot possibly design a curriculum that meets the unique needs of millions of school children across the nation. We need to restore control over education to the local level where teachers and parents are put back in charge. Make no mistake; eliminating the Department of Education is a pro-education position.

More of today’s Republicans need to grow spines and renew the call to abolish the Department of Education. It’s unconstitutional, a waste of taxpayer dollars and has been detrimental to the quality of education in America.

Reagan also tripled our national debt, but don’t look to self-proclaimed “conservatives” to remind you of that.  After all, they are too busy playing politics as usual while covering for the man wearing their team’s jersey when he acts unconstitutionally.

This is largely why I promote homeschooling.  Parents are charged by God to teach their own children (Deuteronomy 6:1-10).  I’ve even linked numerous times to where you can begin this journey of freedom for free by clicking here.

The history of our country, in the early days, was marked by a high literacy rate long before the federal government forced “public education” on society after Abraham Lincoln’s unconstitutional tyranny and the oppression that followed which demanded states take up education as part of their job.

President Donald Trump is no different than presidents who came before him with regard to education.  He is advancing the same unAmerican, unconstitutional, global indoctrination through Betsy DeVos and the unconstitutional Department of Education as the rest of them.

If you don’t believe me, you need to check out the reports that aren’t as “sexy” as the regular “news” by people such as Charlotte Iserbyt and Lynne Taylor.  On education, the Trump agenda is the same as the Obama agenda, the Reagan agenda, the Clinton agenda and the Bush agenda.  It is to dumb the citizens down.

And this video is just the latest evidence of that dumbing down.

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

AOC: Americans Must “Eat Fewer Hamburgers” To Stop Climate Change

How someone this stupid got elected to Congress is truly beyond me.  I guess she got out and beat the streets harder than her opponent.  In either case, we are stuck with hearing from Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for at least the next 2 years unless someone has the good wherewithal to impeach her.  In saying that, the New York congresswoman presented a new way, in her opinion, to fight climate change:  eat fewer hamburgers.

If you recall, President Donald Trump invited the NCAA football Champion Clemson Tigers to the White House and served them between 300 and 1,000 burgers, along with other food.

Trump had gotten burgers from McDonald’s, Burger King and Wendy’s and declared they’re all “great American food.”

However, Ocasio-Cortez seems to think that’s out of line, especially as she pushing her Green New Deal.

In an appearance on the season premier of Showtime’s Desus & Mero this week, AOC said that Americans need to not eat hamburgers for “breakfast, lunch and dinner.”  She said we need to make some changes to our diet so we can address the ‘problem’ of factory farming.

“In the deal, what we talk about – and it’s true – is that we need to take a look at factory farming, you know? Period. It’s wild,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “And so it’s not to say you get rid of agriculture. It’s not to say we’re gonna force everybody to go vegan or anything crazy like that. But it’s to say, ‘Listen, we gotta address factory farming. Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.’ Like, let’s keep it real.”

However, diets are just the start for AOC.  She wants to nanny state Americans far more than Michael Bloomberg ever dreamed.

“But we have to take a look at everything,” Ocasio-Cortez continued, “and what we need to realize about climate change is about every choice that we make in our lives, you know?”

OK, but if it’s our “choice,” why are you trying to push your agenda on people?  This is the same woman that doesn’t want the law imposed on women for “choosing” to murder their babies.  Yet, she wants to pontificate on forcing you to choose whether or not you follow her “law.”

AOC removed her Green New Deal Frequently Asked Questions page from her site, which called for getting rid of “farting cows.”

The obvious question that should be asked here is, if we are eating them, aren’t we actually doing that?  Why not try feeding them grass instead of corn and their own waste?  After all, that’s what organic farmers have been doing for years.

The solution is not to stop eating hamburgers, it’s to get rid of snake oil salespeople like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who actually think the world is coming to an end in 12 years but live like there is no tomorrow.

Watch the interview below around the 18-minute mark.

https://youtu.be/TgYJgM9pFaA

H/T Zero Hedge

Federal Judge: Trump’s Labor Secretary’s Attorneys Broke Law in Jeffrey Epstein Case

Convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein has been covered in the news regarding not only his conviction but also his sweetheart deal he obtainedThat deal led to an investigation into how he got it.  Now, a federal judge has now ruled that prosecutors who worked under former Miami US Attorney Alex Acosta, who is now President Donald Trump’s Labor Secretary, broke the law when handling convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s case.

First, we know that part of the deal that Epstein got was providing the feds with “information,” but we don’t exactly know what that was.  In essence, he was an FBI informant… and informant for Robert Mueller’s FBI.

We also know that the Clinton State Department was tied to Epstein and child trafficking and that former President Bill Clinton frequently flew on Epstein’s Lolita Express.

With that in mind, neither of the Clintons have been dealt with for any of their crimes, much less these ties.  However, what many are willing to simply overlook is the fact that President Donald Trump has Epstein ties too.

As reported by The Daily Wire:

  • Trump called Epstein a “terrific guy” and “a lot of fun to be with” who “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.” (New York Magazine)
  • Trump was in Epstein’s “little black book,” which was stolen by a former employee in 2004. The book listed “14 phone numbers including emergency numbers, car numbers, and numbers to Trump’s security guard and houseman.”
  • Jeffrey Epstein’s brother, Mark, testified in 2009 that Trump flew on Jeffrey’s private jet at least once. Message pads seized from Epstein’s Palm Beach mansion indicate that Trump called Epstein twice in November of 2004. (Vice)
  • In 2010, while under oath, Epstein admitted to “socializing” with Trump, but pled the fifth to Trump attending sex parties with underage girls. (Vice)
  • In April 2016, a woman in California, “Katie Johnson”, filed a $100 million lawsuit against Trump, accusing him of raping her more than 20 years ago when she was just 13 years old and threatening to harm her and her family.” The lawsuit also names Epstein for alleged sexual misconduct and threats. (Independent) The lawsuit was dismissed over technical filing errors (the address listed in court documents was a foreclosed home that has been vacant since its owner died), with the plaintiff failing in her attempt to avoid incurring the cost of the litigation. (Radar Online) “Johnson” filed a second lawsuit, which she also dropped after failing to show up at a press conference, claiming threats to her life.

For his part, through his attorney Alan Garten, Trump said he has “no relationship” with Epstein other than Epstein having frequented Trump’s Mar-A-Lago in Miami. Garten said: “A lot of people hung out there, including Jeffrey Epstein. That is the only connection.” (Daily Wire)

Now, that an investigation has taken place regarding the deal that Epstein got, a federal judge has ruled that attorneys working under former Miami US Attorney Alex Acosta broke the law when handling the case of billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

The Miami Herald reports:

Federal prosecutors, under former Miami U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, broke the law when they concealed a plea agreement from more than 30 underage victims who had been sexually abused by wealthy New York hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

While the decision marks a victory for crime victims, the federal judge, Kenneth A. Marra, stopped short of overturning Epstein’s plea deal, or issuing an order resolving the case. He instead gave federal prosecutors 15 days to confer with Epstein’s victims and their attorneys to come up with a settlement. The victims did not seek money or damages as part of the suit.

It’s not clear whether the victims, now in their late 20s and early 30s, can, as part of the settlement, demand that the government prosecute Epstein. But others are calling on the Justice Department to take a new look at the case in the wake of the judge’s ruling.

“As a legal matter, the non-prosecution agreement entered into by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida does not bind other U.S. Attorneys in other districts. They are free, if they conclude it is appropriate to do so, to bring criminal actions against Mr. Epstein and his co-conspirators,’’ said lawyer David Boies, representing two of Epstein’s victims who claim they were trafficked by Epstein in New York and other areas of the country.

The report went on to point out:

Marra, in a 33-page opinion, said prosecutors not only violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act by not informing the victims, they also misled the girls into believing that the FBI’s sex trafficking case against Epstein was still ongoing — when in fact, prosecutors had secretly closed it after sealing the plea bargain from the public record.

The previous lawsuit against Epstein threatened to out members of his pedophilia ring, which was said to include, “American politicians, business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known prime minister & other world leaders.”

So, the question is, why did Donald Trump appoint Acosta?  You can’t tell me he wasn’t aware of this.  I don’t believe it for a minute.  Matt Agorist writes:

As TFTP reported in May, the FBI released nearly 300 pages of documents in eight parts. Although the majority of the content was made up of clippings from newspaper articles about Epstein, lists of the pages that had been deleted, and large blank spaces where information was being redacted, there was one document that stood out. Page 21 of Part 6 stated:

“On 09/11/08, case agent advised writer that Epstein is currently being prosecuted by the State of Florida and is complying with all conditions of his plea with the State of Florida. Epstein has also provided information to the FBI as agreed upon. Case agent advised that no federal prosecution will occur in this matter as long as Epstein continues to uphold his agreement with the State of Florida. Case agent also advised that no further forfeiture assistance will be required for this case.” 

As the report in the Herald notes:

The eccentric hedge fund manager, whose friends included former President Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and Prince Andrew, was also suspected of trafficking minor girls, often from overseas, for sex parties at his other homes in Manhattan, New Mexico and the Caribbean, FBI and court records show.

Facing a 53-page federal indictment, Epstein could have ended up in federal prison for the rest of his life.

But on the morning of the breakfast meeting, a deal was struck — an extraordinary plea agreement that would conceal the full extent of Epstein’s crimes and the number of people involved.

Not only would Epstein serve just 13 months in the county jail, but the deal — called a non-prosecution agreement — essentially shut down an ongoing FBI probe into whether there were more victims and other powerful people who took part in Epstein’s sex crimes, according to a Miami Herald examination of thousands of emails, court documents and FBI records.

The pact required Epstein to plead guilty to two prostitution charges in state court. Epstein and four of his accomplices named in the agreement received immunity from all federal criminal charges. But even more unusual, the deal included wording that granted immunity to “any potential co-conspirators’’ who were also involved in Epstein’s crimes. These accomplices or participants were not identified in the agreement, leaving it open to interpretation whether it possibly referred to other influential people who were having sex with underage girls at Epstein’s various homes or on his plane.

These are undisputed facts — yet Trump still appointed Acosta.

During his appointment hearing in 2017, Acosta even defended the way he handled the Epstein case.

“At the end of the day, based on the evidence, professionals within a prosecutor’s office decide that a plea — that guarantees that someone goes to jail, that guarantees that someone register generally and that guarantees other outcomes — is a good thing,” he said last year.

Let’s see how he defends this deal now, knowing that a federal judge just ruled his prosecutors all broke the law. Perhaps these victims may see justice after all.

Yes, let’s see the explanation, and let’s see the people run with it because you know if this were Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah, people would be up in arms with Trump and Acosta.

Article posted with permission from Sons of Liberty Media

Liberal Professor: “My Liberal Students Scare Me”

You may have missed this little nugget, and if you didn’t, please forgive me for bringing it to everyone’s attention, but a few years ago, a liberal professor at New York University said that while he attempted to teach conservative political theory, he found that his liberal students simply could not handle conflict or anything that was contrary to their own opinions.  In fact, this professor declared that his “liberal student scare me.”

Liberal professor and psychologist Jonathan Haidt said he found that his students simply could not handle anything outside their echo chamber and opinions.

According to Haidt, those people born before 1980 will generally behave according to the following principles regarding life at a university.

  • You are here to come to terms with ideas that might be upsetting or disconcerting.”
  • “We need opposition to help us learn and help us grow.”
  • “We know we are imperfect and prone to bias and ad hoc reasoning.”

Typically, these individuals would grow up and have to actually deal with real life and face challenges and dangers by themselves.  So, they had to work things out.

“If someone called you a stupid idiot, you either called him a stupid idiot back or you punch him,” Haidt said.

However, those born after 1980, due to how parents reared their children in an environment where child murders and kidnapping began to rise in the US, children were given less independence and, as a result, failed to resolve conflicts themselves and sought out authority figures to resolves them for them.

“People born after 1980 are much more likely to be in a state of moral dependency,” he said. “If somebody has done something to me, I won’t deal with it myself.  I will get an adult authority, a bureaucratic authority, a diversity a department, something to punish the person who did this to me.”

So, since our universities are largely comprised of these adult adolescents, universities, and even societies, seek to remove anything that could be deemed offensive or unsettling.

As Professor Haidt points out, “This makes it impossible to teach. This makes it impossible to have an intellectual community,” he said. “I’m a liberal Professor and my liberal students scare me.”

Haidt was not alone in this discovery.

Professor Andrew Latham of Macalester College in Minnesota echoed Haidt’s comments.

Annie Holmquist of Intellectual Takeout comments:

As Professor Latham implies, Macalester College has a large population of politically liberal students. Niche.com ratings underscore this point, with 82 percent of students describing the political beliefs of Macalester as “Progressive/very liberal,” and 18 percent describing them as “Liberal.” Given this, Professor Latham thought his conservative political theory course would be relatively empty and a breeze for him to teach.

He was wrong.

In a video for Macalester College, Latham explains that Macalester students have come flocking to his class, eager to engage and learn about conservative political theory:

[The class] is capped at 25 and I routinely have 30 and 32 students. Out of that 30 or 32 students, one or two will be self-described, they will identify as conservative, and the rest are just progressive, left-of-center Macalester students really interested in ‘How could anybody think other than I do? What are the roots of these alternative political perspectives?’

Why this intense interest, particularly in a time when political viewpoints are so polarized? Latham suggests that the interest is driven by a genuine hunger for knowledge and understanding:

Macalester students by and large had not systematically been exposed to conservative political theory. They tended to view conservative political thought as either insanity or evil, but on the basis [of] really no systematic exposure of it. So I thought I would teach a course in which we exposed our students to thinkers – really it begins with Edmund Burke, and then builds on that, Russell Kirk and a few other – mostly American, although some British thinkers. It has been a wonderful experience.

There often seems to be an unspoken fear – on both sides of the political aisle – that open discussion and presentation of opposing viewpoints will result in greater anger, offense, and contention. But Latham has not found this to be the case. Instead, he infers that open discussion and deep digging into ideas builds a type of respect and understanding of the other side – the type of civil discourse that society has been looking for – as well as a personal wrestling with life’s great questions:

Nobody changes their mind in the course of this class, and that’s not why I offer this class – I’m not in that business – but I think the progressive students, the leftist students understand better what the other side of the aisle looks like and thinks like. And the one or two conservative students are a little more grounded in their conservatism. It’s not all visceral, it’s not all instinctive, there’s actually some philosophy behind it.

Part of having a civil society does mean that we should be able to engage one another without violence or having a mental breakdown.  The problem is that our universities, for the most part, are moving away from real education and towards indoctrination.  That is where the problems begin to arise.

Then, those kids coming out of the universities become the radicals we see taking to the political stage today, people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others.

Some of this had already begun years ago and has produced some of the big name socialists in the Democrat Party such as Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.

This is the one area where conservatives need to focus on.  Why?  Because this is where we are losing the country, in the education system.  While praising Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump, conservatives have failed to see how their administrations undermined education and brought us to the point we are at both politically and socially.  If you don’t believe me, you really need to read Charlotte Iserbyt’s book, The Dumbing Down of America and read some of the recent articles by Lynne Taylor.

New Mexico Counties Vote To Become ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties’

As DC gears up to infringe on your rights and violate the Constitution, multiple counties across New Mexico are voting to declare themselves “Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties” in a similar way to how some cities have voted to become sanctuary cities for those who are in the US illegally.

Check out this report.

KRQE reports:

SAN JUAN COUNTY, N.M. (KRQE) – Three more counties have declared themselves Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties. San Juan, Lincoln and Eddy Counties have all adopted the resolutions, Tuesday.

At the San Juan County meeting, hundreds of people filled the room. These counties now join Quay, Curry, Union and Socorro Counties who pledge not to enforce certain new gun laws if they pass the state legislature.

The New Mexico Sheriff’s Association has been vocal against the gun bills, including one that would require background checks on all gun sales. It says the laws would be unenforceable and punish law-abiding citizens.

Other counties are also considering taking up the measure.

And here’s another report as the movement gains traction in the state.

Second Amendment advocates are praising the movement.  For instance, the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association took to Twitter to advocate for more counties and municipalities to join in.

Recounting the counties that have declared themselves “Second Amendment Sanctuary Counties,” NMSSA highlight them in tweets.

On Tuesday, the group pointed back to what seems to have been the catalyst, which was a resolution passed in 1994 in Carton County, New Mexico.

Additionally, the group also tweeted on Tuesday that Valencia and Hidalgo counties both voted to join in.

In all, 13 counties have passed these resolutions.

Well done!  Now, if we could just get people to start taking their counties back one at a time like this on every single right the government is supposed to be protecting but has been infringing on, then we might actually have a shot at restoring America, one county at a time.