Category: HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

It’s not a new problem, so why does the media only care about dead migrant children under Trump?

Screen Shot 2019-06-26 at 11.23.51 AM

By Danielle Ryan

The tragic image of a drowned father and child washed ashore on the Rio Grande is being used as easy ammunition against Donald Trump — but where was the outpouring of grief when migrants were dying under the Obama administration?

There is no good argument to be made that journalists should not be critical in their coverage of the Trump administration. After all, to hold the president to account, to inform the public on the consequences of his policy choices, “to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable” as that famous saying goes, is all in the job description. It’s just a pity they only decided to take the responsibility seriously when Trump took office.

Why should anyone believe that their showy displays of grief and horror are sincere now, given their silence during the Obama years, when many of the same policies causing outrage now were also in place then?

The same thing goes for the Democrats, who are eagerly attempting to cast themselves as the party of compassion. Joe Biden railed against Trump’s “deportation state” in the Miami Herald this week, despite having served as vice president under Obama, dubbed the ‘Deporter in Chief’ by immigrants rights activists.

The Obama administration deported more migrants than any previous administration, with children “moved to the head of the line” to be turfed out.

Two years before Trump appeared on the scene, in 2014, 445 people died attempting to cross an increasingly militarized border. Obama boasted in 2011 that the number of border patrol agents had more than doubled since 2004 — proud that he had continued the increases that had begun under the Bush administration.

The University of Arizona’s Binational Migration Institute explained in a 2013 report that “segmented border militarization”had resulted in “the redistribution of migratory flows into remote and dangerous areas such as southern Arizona.” Rights organizations spoke up about the “alarming rise of migrant deaths on US soil.”

It would be inaccurate to say that there was no coverage of the crisis while Obama was president. There was some bland, less-emotional coverage. There was also some in-depth reporting which captured the extent of the crisis — but there was no mass media mobilization against Obama himself. The facts and death tolls were not plastered across the cable news networks night and day. No one argued that Obama was shaming America.

CAP

A clip of a Trump administration lawyer arguing that migrant children did not need soap and toothpaste to be “safe and sanitary” went viral last week. It was jarring to listen to, but again, there was nothing new here — only the willingness of some to suddenly be moved to outrage.

A 2015 lawsuit described “inhumane” conditions in border detention facilities under Obama. Men, women and children, it said, were “packed into overcrowded and filthy holding cells with the lights glaring day and night.” They suffered “in brutally cold temperatures; deprived of beds, bedding, and sleep,” were denied adequate food, water and medical care, as well as “basic sanitation items” like soap, toilet paper and diapers. This all while the media treated Obama with kid gloves and liberals sang his praises.

There were no deaths of children in Customs and Border Protection custody under Obama — and there have been six under the Trump administration, so it is fair to argue, that with the implementation of some more extreme anti-asylum policies and perhaps an even greater lack of caring, Trump has taken an already dysfunctional, inhumane and under-funded system — and simply made it worse.

CAP

There is a case to be made that he has done this on purpose; to make the situation as unappealing as possible to those who might be tempted to make the treacherous and potentially fatal journey to and across the US’s southern border — but the reality is, however unappealing he tries to make it, for many, it will still be more appealing than the alternative.

The biggest elephant in the room, however, is not that the Obama administration was guilty of many of the same things as the current one. It’s that every single US administration for decades has been guilty of contributing to the creation of this crisis through an abominable imperialist foreign policy that has ravaged the very countries these migrants are coming from.

Democrats and Republicans have spent decades enthusiastically destabilizing Latin America under the guise of democracy promotion. In reality, they have stolen its wealth and resources, engineered military coups and installed dictators, funded and equipped death squads — and imposed deadly economic sanctions. Where are all the liberals crying about that? How could such inhumane policy have led to anything else?

It’s hardly the first time an image of a dead child has been used to serve a political agenda. Remember Omran Daqneesh, the five-year-old boy who became the face of Syria’s war after a photo of him, covered in ash and sitting shell-shocked in an ambulance, shot around the world?

Regime-change activists within the mainstream media commentariat had the audacity to use that image to call for more Western bombing — so, seeing some of the same crowd using the image of Valeria Martinez to frame Trump as uniquely evil in the history of the US presidency is no big surprise.

0

VERITAS: O’Keefe Drops Leaked Internal Google Memo Teaching Employees to Protest Right Wing Policies

Though Trump isn’t specifically named, his policies are.

By

Project Veritas is back at it Thursday, this time publishing a leaked document from inside Google which reportedly teaches employees how to protest.

The document flaunts the title “Beginners Guide to Protesting,” and encourages users to contact Resist@Google.com become a part of the company’s social activism program. Though the document does not specifically mention President Donald J. Trump, #Resist has become a buzzword used by those who oppose him.

“This document leak is the fourth in a series of leaks from inside Google and their subsidiary, YouTube,” O’Keefe said. “This new document appears to show internal coordination of political protests which contradicts Google’s public statements that they are politically neutral.  More tech insiders are coming forward and we will continue to work with them to expose the secrets of Silicon Valley.”

The document has a “Do’s and Don’ts” section (Do: “Talk to the press and express your views. Don’t: “Escalate”) and a section of recommended chants. The chant are typical of what one hears at anti-Trump and far-left rallies across the nation.

One the chants specifically references the “Muslim ban,” (actually a ban on all immigration from seven majority Muslim nations) which is specifically a Trump policy.

CAP

Earlier this week, Project Veritas released undercover video in which it caught a Google employee admitting that the group plans to make sure that no one like Trump – presumably meaning a political outsider – can get elected again.

Big League Politics reported:

Investigative journalist James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas has released hidden camera videos showing a Google executive explaining how preventing Trump and similar leaders is at the top of the monolithic corporation’s list of priorities.

“Elizabeth Warren is saying we should break up Google. And like, I love her but she’s very misguided, like that will not make it better it will make it worse, because all these smaller companies who don’t have the same resources that we do will be charged with preventing the next Trump situation, it’s like a small company cannot do that,” said Jen Gennai, who works as Google’s Head of Responsible Innovation.

Project Veritas notes that Gennai is in charge of the division of Google that is responsible for implementing Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. This includes making sure that political outcomes unfavorable for liberals cannot be reached.

“We all got screwed over in 2016, again it wasn’t just us, it was, the people got screwed over, the news media got screwed over, like, everybody got screwed over so we’re rapidly been like, what happened there and how do we prevent it from happening again,” Gennai added.

“We’re also training our algorithms, like, if 2016 happened again, would we have, would the outcome be different?” she asked.

Gennai denied any political bias in the wake of the Veritas report, despite removingthe Veritas video from YouTube, its subsidiary.

“Google has repeatedly been clear that it works to be a trustworthy source of information, without regard to political viewpoint,” she said. “In fact, Google has no notion of political ideology in its rankings.”

0

Warren, de Blasio: I Would Abolish Private Health Insurance

MIAMI, FLORIDA - JUNE 26: (L-R) Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio, former housing secretary Julian Castro and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) shake hands after the first night of the Democratic presidential debate on June 26, 2019 in Miami, Florida. A field of 20 Democratic …

By Alana Mastrangelo

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio admitted they would abolish private health insurance during the 2020 Democratic Presidential Primary debate on Wednesday evening.

“Many people watching at home have health insurance coverage through their employer,” asked NBC’s Lester Holt, “Who here would abolish their private health insurance in favor of a government-run plan? Just a show of hands.”

Sen. Warren and Mayor de Blasio raised their hands in response to Holt’s question, admitting that they would abolish private health insurance in favor of cradle to grave, government-run healthcare.

Warren and de Blasio, however, are likely not the only candidates on stage who agree with abolishing private health insurance, but rather, the only candidates bold enough to actually admit it.

The Green New Deal, for example, would ban private health insurance, including employer-provided insurance plans. The Green New Deal was endorsed by Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Representative Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke (D-TX), two presidential candidates who shared the debate stage with Warren and de Blasio on Wednesday night.

Moreover, over 100 Democrats have endorsed “Medicare for All,” a proposal that would also effectively do away with private health insurance.

Another Democratic Presidential candidate, Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) — although not present on Wednesday night — has also admitted to wanting to eliminate private health insurance to replace it with a single-payer, government-run “Medicare for All” program.

Less than 24 hours later, however, Harris seemed to have thought better of her statement, quickly walking back her call to abolish private health insurance, and later insisting that “Medicare for All” would not eliminate the entire private health insurance industry.

While it is apparent that not every 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate may be comfortable with confessing their views on private health insurance just yet, the fact that some are willing to openly endorse socialist policies is a cause for concern, and a testimony to the radical shift the Democratic Party has taken over recent years.

 

0

Julian Castro Says He Would Force Taxpayers to Pay For Trans Peoples’ Abortions

By Chris Menahan

Powerful.

Published on Jun 26, 2019

From National Review:

“All of you on stage support a women’s right to abortion. You all support some version of a government health-care option. Would your plan cover abortion, Mr. Secretary?” asked MSNBC debate moderator Lester Holt.

“Yes it would. I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom, I believe in reproductive justice. And what that means is just because a woman, or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community — a trans female — is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t exercise that right to choose. So I absolutely would cover that right to have an abortion,” Castro said.

Finally someone is talking about the REAL ISSUES!

0

TUCKER CARLSON SLAMS REPUBLICANS FOR “DOING NOTHING” TO FIGHT BIG TECH CENSORSHIP

Tucker Carlson Slams Republicans For "Doing Nothing" to Fight Big Tech Censorship

“One day they’ll look up and find they have no supporters at all”

JUNE 26, 2019

Tucker Carlson has slammed Republicans and the Trump administration for doing nothing to fight back against Big Tech censorship “while their ideas are suppressed and their supporters are silenced.”

Carlson explained how as soon as Trump took the White House in 2016, Big Tech began plotting to “control the election outcome in 2020” by “using the excuse of “fake news” to control the public discourse.

The Fox News host chastised the previous Republican Congress for failing to act, as well as the White House which refused to use its control of the “vast regulatory apparatus” to intervene.

“They’ve sat motionless and doing nothing,” Carlson said of the Trump administration.

Tucker praised Senator Josh Hawley, who recently introduced a bill that would strip Big Tech companies of their legal immunity as platforms under Section 230 of the Communications Act, as “the only Republican who seems interested at all in keeping Big Tech in check.”

“Passing Hawley’s bill doesn’t seem to be a priority though, no one in Congress is talking about it,” said Carlson, adding this was a “big mistake”.

“Successful political parties look out for their supporters….and protect them from harm,” said Carlson, slamming Republicans for “sitting in a stupefied fog of libertarianism doing nothing while their ideas are suppressed and their supporters are silenced.”

“One day they’ll look up and find they have no supporters at all – who will be to blame for that? Only themselves,” he concluded.

As we reported earlier, the latest example of Big Tech election meddling is Reddit quarantining of ‘The Donald’ – a hugely popular forum with over 700,000 members that was credited with being the “most effective” at spreading memes during the last presidential election.

0

WATCH Reporter Asks Ilhan Omar, ‘Did You Marry Your Brother?’

By

A reporter for The Rebel confronted Ilhan Omar about her multiple marriages, as Omar stands accused of immigration fraud for allegedly marrying her own brother to get him into the country.

Can the Minneapolis Star Tribune be trusted with any real reporting when it comes to Ilhan Omar? Most probably not, given their love affair with the Somali immigrant woman who is currently running for Congress in Minnesota’s fifth Congressional district.

Big League Politics was recently tipped off by someone who visited Star Tribune’soffice, and took a picture of a painting of Ilhan Omar hanging on wall at the Minneapolis newspaper headquarters.

Next to the portrait there is a framed biography of Omar, and a dramatic retelling of her journey from a refugee camp to Minnesota politics.

Among Omar’s greatest legislative achievements in the Minnesota House since she was elected in 2016:

  • Opposing a ban on insurance payments to suicide terrorists
  • Opposing a ban on Female Genital Mutilation.

That’s right, Ilhan Omar wants US insurance companies to pay out life insurance policies to jihadists who get killed while waging jihad overseas against the United States and our allies. She’s also against banning Female Genital Mutilation – a barbaric Islamic practice of maiming young girls by cutting off their clitoris.

“Asked about having her portrait painted, Ilhan said since she was elected in 2016, all of a sudden she sees painting or drawings of her on social media quite frequently,” the biography reads.

No doubt a celebrity politician has emerged in our midst, and who are we not to be impressed with her?

Could it be because there is now strong evidence Ilhan Omar committed immigration fraud and married her brother so she could get him into the US?

Recently, David Steinberg from PJ Media reported that official school records indeed support the claims she married her brother. Steinberg has turned his discoveries over to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota.

“As this implicates Rep. Omar in multiple state and federal felonies, I have contacted the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota to submit all other information uncovered during our investigation,” said Steinberg.

What about the multiple MN House Ethics Violations? Accepting payments for speaking at colleges she was going to vote on receiving subsidies from the state; using campaign resources for travel expenses and divorce fees.

These are the kind of things you won’t read about in the biography hanging on the wall at the Star Tribune, which pretends to be objective.

The latest campaign finance violations were discovered discovered by MN Rep. Steve Drazkowski in the 2017 year-end report for Omar’s campaign committee. The report showed over $3,000 in travel-related disbursements, including airfare to Estonia and travel expenses to Massachusetts so Omar could speak at a rally for a Boston City Council candidate.

“What we are seeing before our eyes is a serial violator of our laws,” Drazkowski said.

However, the Star Tribune doesn’t see any such issues. Instead the newspaper has been working hard to sell to Minnesotans the image of a suffering refugee with a magical story turning her into a charming success story for multiculturalism, the newest utopia of the Left.

When confronted with these allegations by her Republican opponent Jennifer Zielinski, Omar is quick to avoid giving any real answers, to counter-attack and insult Rep. Drazkowski whom she called a “sad, overzealous representative” in a recent interview at the Minnesota Public Radio. In the same interview, Omar complains about life in the United States and vows to vote for the impeachment of the President if elected to U.S. Congress. When asked whether she used campaign funds for travel and for her divorce, Omar denies any wrongdoing.

She hasn’t denied however her 2013 trespassing arrest and booking at Hennepin County Jail “to prevent further criminal conduct,” according to a newly uncovered police report. Again, the Star Tribune remained silent on the discover made by Alpha News.

Currently, in the lead, Ilhan Omar is set to “inherit” Keith Ellison’s seat in U.S. Congress while he seems to be failing in his campaign for Minnesota Attorney General amid numerous allegations of domestic violence that have been brought against him.

No doubt the bias of the liberal Minnesota media has been a huge factor in turning Minnesota into a hotbed for Islamic terrorists, a hub for mega-Muslim events, and a launchpad for Muslim candidates who commit fraud and demonstrate defiance for the law even while seeking political offices.

0

CIRCUS COMES TO MIAMI!

Screen Shot 2019-06-26 at 11.34.34 AM

By Laurie Kellman

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sixty seconds for answers, a television audience of millions and, for some candidates, a first chance to introduce themselves to voters.

The back-to-back Democratic presidential debates beginning Wednesday are exercises in competitive sound bites featuring 20 candidates hoping to oust President Donald Trump in 2020. The hopefuls range widely in age, sex and backgrounds and include a former vice president, six women and a pair of mayors.

The challenge: Convey their plans for the nation, throw a few elbows and sharpen what’s been a blur of a race so far for many Americans.

What to watch Wednesday at 9 p.m. Eastern on NBC, MSNBC and Telemundo:

___

WHAT’S HER PLAN?

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s task is to harness the recent momentum surrounding her campaign to prove to voters that she has what it takes to defeat Trump. As the sole top-tier candidate on stage Wednesday, she could have the most to lose.

The Massachusetts senator and former Harvard professor is known for her many policy plans and a mastery of classical, orderly debate. But presidential showdowns can be more “Gladiator”-style than the high-minded “Great Debaters.” This is no time for a wonky multipoint case for “Medicare for All,” student debt relief or the Green New Deal.

So, one challenge for Warren, 70, is stylistic. Look for her to try to champion her progressive ideas — and fend off attacks from lesser-known candidates — with gravitas, warmth and the brevity required by the format.

“Preparing for the debates is trying to learn to speak in 60 seconds or less,” she said in Miami, ahead of a visit she live-streamed to a migrant detention center in Homestead, Florida.

Another obstacle is to do so without alienating moderates any Democrat would need in a general election against Trump.

Being the front-runner on stage conveys a possible advantage: If the others pile on Warren, she gets more time to speak because the candidates are allowed 30 extra seconds for responses.

___

WHO’S THAT?

There may be some familiar faces across the rest of the stage, such as New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker, 50, or former Texas congressman Beto O’Rourke, 46. But a few names probably won’t ring any bells at all.

These virtual strangers to most Americans may be enjoying their first — and maybe last — turn on the national stage, so they have the least to lose.

Take John Delaney, 56, a former member of the House from Maryland. Look for him to try to make an impression by keeping up his criticism of Warren’s plans.

Or Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan, 45, who sits on the powerful House Appropriations Committee. He has likened the Democratic primary to “speed dating with the American people.”

BREAKING OUT, GOING VIRAL

For several of the candidates onstage Wednesday, the forum is about finding the breakout moment — a zinger, a burn — that stays in viewers’ minds, is built for social media and generates donations, the lifeblood of campaigns.

In 2015, Carly Fiorina won applause and a short surge for her response to Trump, who had been quoted in Rolling Stone as criticizing Fiorina’s face.

“Look at that face,” Trump was quoted as saying. “Would anyone vote for that?”

Asked on CNN to respond, Fiorina evenly replied: “I think women all over this country heard very clearly what Mr. Trump said.”

For candidates such as O’Rourke, a breakthrough moment on Wednesday is critical to revitalizing a campaign that has faded. The 10 White House contenders have two hours on stage that night and up until the curtain rises on the star-studded second debate the next day to make their mark. Former Vice President Joe Biden, 76, and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, 77, headline Thursday’s debate and are certain to take up much of the spotlight.

___

BREAKING OUT BADLY

An “oops” moment can be politically crippling to any presidential campaign.

Just ask Energy Secretary Rick Perry, the former Texas governor who, in a 2011 debate, blanked on the third agency of government he had said would be “gone” if he became president.

“Commerce, Education and the, uh, what’s the third one there?” Perry said.

“EPA?” fellow Republican Ron Paul offered. Yep, Perry said, the Environmental Protection Agency.

“Oops,” he finished. Perry’s campaign, already struggling, never recovered.

___

WHAT ISSUES?

There’s simply no time for an in-depth discussion of issues. But the migrant crisis would be an apt topic, even in shorthand. Dominating the news in the hours before the showdown were vivid reports and images of the toll of the administration’s policy on children, especially.

Expect at least a mention, or perhaps the appearance, of a bracing photo of the bodies of a migrant father and his 23-month-old daughter face-down along the Rio Grande.

In addition to Warren, other candidates, such as Sen. Amy Klobuchar, were visiting the migrant center.

___

TRUMP

This is the Democrats’ night.

But Trump has dominated the political conversation since that escalator ride four years ago, and he loathes being upstaged. It’s worth asking: Will he tweet during the debates? And if he does, will NBC and the moderators ignore him or respond in real time?

NBC News executive Rashida Jones said the focus will be on the candidates and the issues.

“Beyond that, it has to rise to a certain level,” she said.

During Wednesday’s debate, Trump will be on Air Force One on his way to the Group of 20 summit in Osaka, Japan. The plane’s cable televisions are usually turned to Fox News, which is not hosting the debates. For the second debate, Trump will be beginning meetings at the G-20.

Trump told Fox Business Network on Wednesday that he’d watch because “it’s part of my life” but that “It just seems very boring. … That’s a very unexciting group of people.”

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑