Published on Mar 14, 2019
Just to get through it, we trimmed his speech down (a lot) and put the 1812 overture finale behind it.
Published on Mar 14, 2019
By Sean Moran
The Senate passed on a resolution Thursday, 59-41, that would end President Donald Trump’s national emergency. The vote featured strong Democrat support for the bill and a surprising amount of Republicans voting for it. The House passed its version of the resolution in February with the help of 13 Republicans.
Several Senate Republicans voted against President Trump’s national emergency.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who previously signaled he would vote to end the emergency, said he will back Trump’s emergency after Trump said he will work with Republicans on a president’s national emergency authority. Tillis is up for re-election in 2020.
Sens. Cory Gardner (R-CO), Mike Braun (R-IN), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Joni Ernst (R-IA), and Pat Roberts (R-KS) voted in favor of the national emergency.
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) voted against the national emergency.
Many Senate Republicans have stood by the president and have said Trump is right to take action to secure the southern border.
Sen. Graham said in a statement on Thursday, “I voted with President Trump and rejected Nancy Pelosi’s motion of disapproval regarding the emergency declaration to build a barrier on the southern border.
Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) said ahead of the vote that she will vote to keep Trump’s national emergency, stating:
Since Congress gave emergency powers to the executive branch in 1976 under the National Emergencies Act, presidents from both political parties have declared national emergencies in the United States over situations far less dire than the security and humanitarian crisis that is currently plaguing the southern border. The president and Congress must take swift action to secure our border, protect our citizens, and defend our sovereignty. I support President Trump’s declaration of a national emergency, and I reject the resolution of disapproval.
Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) told Breitbart News recently that, despite some media reports, there remains a “five-alarm crisis” at the southern border.
“There’s a five-alarm crisis going on down there. It’s not just the human traffic; it’s the drug traffic,” Perdue said in a statement to Breitbart News. “This is not just about building the wall; it’s about closing the loopholes and getting border patrol agents the resources they need.”
The Georgia conservative traveled in February to the southern border with Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) and witnessed first-hand the border crisis. Perdue told Breitbart News that the border crisis was “staggering.” The two Republicans saw illegal crossing hotspots and received real-time briefings from border patrol agents.
Daines told Breitbart News that he backs Trump’s national emergency, contending that without a secure border, every state is a border state.
“Montana is a northern border state with a southern border problem. Our communities all over Montana are being torn apart by the flood of Mexican meth coming through the southern border,” Daines said. “We must protect our citizens and secure the border.”
Many Republican senators have said they oppose any form of executive overreach, which includes former President Barack Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) illegal alien amnesty.
However, one federal district judge ruled in August 2018 that DACA was illegal, whereas many lawyers have argued that Trump has the authority under the National Emergencies Act of 1976 to reappropriate money to build the wall.
The Senate vote announcement comes as a Morning Consult/Politico poll suggests that nearly three-quarters of Republican voters would more likely vote for a candidate if they backed Trump’s national emergency on the border.
In an interview with Breitbart News this week, President Trump said he found it “hard to believe” that any Republican would vote against his efforts to secure the border.
By Chris Menahan
From the Free Beacon:
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a far-left nonprofit known for its “hate group” designations, has surpassed a half billion dollars in total assets and now has $121 million parked offshore, according to the group’s most recent financial statements.
[…]According to the filings submitted to California’s Office of Attorney General, the group reported total assets of $518 million from November 2017 to the Oct. 31, 2018, an increase of $41 million from the $477 million in total assets it reported on its previous year’s tax forms.
The SPLC’s assets increased despite its total revenue falling by $15 million last year. The SPLC hauled in $136 million in total revenue throughout 2017. This number fell to $121 million in 2018. Its contributions and grants also fell by more than $20 million from 2017 to 2018, from $132 million to $111 million.
Despite the fall in revenue, the SPLC’s vast investment portfolio expanded in 2018, which included a drastic increase in the amount of money it has parked overseas. By the end of 2018, its non-U.S. equity funds rose to $121 million, an uptick of nearly $30 million from the $92 million it had parked in offshoreinvestments throughout 2017.
The SPLC pushed the Jussie Smollett story:
They also pushed the Covington Catholic hoax:
“Fighting hate” is big business.
Published on Mar 13, 2019
MARCH 14, 2019
From The Hill:
Three Democratic lawmakers reintroduced a Journalist Protection Act that intends to designate “certain attacks on those reporting the news” as a federal crime.
The bill was introduced by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.).
[…] “The Journalist Protection Act makes it a federal crime to intentionally cause bodily injury to a journalist affecting interstate or foreign commerce in the course of reporting or in a manner designed to intimidate him or her from newsgathering for a media organization,” reads the Tuesday press release. “It represents a clear statement that assaults against people engaged in reporting is unacceptable, and helps ensure law enforcement is able to punish those who interfere with newsgathering.”
The lawmakers said they were introducing the bill as a response to President Trump’s “climate of extreme hostility” toward the media.
In effect, this is the same process as making it a federal “hate crime” to attack a journo.
Mike Adams issues his own warning to President Trump about the consequences of idleness, ignorance, and apathy toward the MASSIVE issue of big tech’s coordinated censorship campaign against conservatives in the U.S., especially in relation to campaigning, voting, and political dialogues in general.
You can read the full text of the bill here. The text says anyone who “intentionally commits or attempts to commit … bodily injury to a journalist” shall be “fined under this title or imprisoned” for 3 to 6 years.
Sen. Menendez claimed on Twitter that “threats of violence” alone would classify as a federal crime under the bill.
It’s not enough that journos are a protected class on social media who can get all their critics banned merely for tweeting “learn to code” at them — they need it enshrined in federal law that they’re a class above us.
Incidentally, while Rep. Swalwell claims to be deeply concerned with protecting the First Amendment rights of journos, last year he suggested he would use nuclear weapons against American citizens who resisted his plan to gut the Second Amendment through mandatory gun confiscations.
March 13, 2019
Paul Ryan would not support President Donald Trump and refused to campaign with Donald Trump.
The Republican speaker shafted President Trump, Republican lawmakers and conservative-populist voters.
Paul Ryan repeatedly promised to fund the Trump Border Wall.
But at every opportunity he denied the Republican President funds for his border wall.
It was not until President Trump threatened to shut down the government the Speaker Paul Ryan FINALLY pushed legislation that included ONLY $5 BILLION to fund the border wall.
The president won the election in an electoral landslide with a promise to build a border wall with Mexico.
Paul Ryan later told Tucker Carlson he would fund the Trump border wall.
Paul Ryan did not once include funding for the Trump border wall in any financial package since Trump’s election — until Trump threatened a shutdown.
Last week President Trump called on the GOP Congress to finally pass funding for the border wall — With the threat of a shutdown Paul Ryan left the White House and finally included funding for the Trump border wall which passed with ease in the GOP House.
On Wednesday Breitbart.com released the latest segment of their interview with President Donald Trump.
In this segment President Trump told the pro-Trump news network that Speaker Paul Ryan BLOCKED SUBPOENAS of Democrats.
President Donald Trump is not happy that former House Speaker Paul Ryan blocked subpoenas of people and entities Trump thinks the House GOP should have been investigating during the first two years of his administration.
Trump told Breitbart News in an exclusive lengthy Oval Office interview that Ryan blocked issuance of subpoenas to people he thinks should have been investigated on the political left, and now that the Republicans no longer have the majority in the House, people Trump says Ryan protected may have gotten away with whatever they did that warranted investigation.
Trump said that House Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) and his predecessor and fellow conservative Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) wanted to be tougher with the left, but that Ryan would not let them.
“Paul Ryan wouldn’t give the right to have any subpoenas,” Trump told Breitbart News. “Okay? Now in all fairness, Meadows and Jordan and all these guys, they wanted to go tougher, but they weren’t allowed to by leadership.”
Trump’s comments came in a wider part of the conversation about how the left is more “vicious” than the right—and that the left in American politics plays “cuter and tougher.”
By DAN LYMAN
Ulf-Arvid Mejlænder, a former journalist himself, penned a scathing op-ed titled, “Say It as It Is,” which was surprisingly published by NRK, Norway’s government-owned media organization.
Mejlænder called out tactics employed by much of the Western press, asserting that key details about crimes are manipulated or left out completely when the perpetrators are migrants or have foreign backgrounds.
“We rarely get to know who commits gang rape, uses a knife or beats up casual victims in the new Norway,” Mejlænder wrote. “I get embarrassed when the media’s clouding of criminal ethnicity is so predictable that ‘the Norwegian’ and ‘Norwegian citizen’ become the code words for foreign origin.”
Mejlænder cited multiple recent examples of misleading coverage of stories involving migrant crime, concluding, “There is no pressure on politicians who repeat their ‘sleep in peace’ message, citing better integration as the solution to everything.”
“The gap between the risk of our multicultural experiment and the storytelling of the mainstream media must not grow larger.”
He also pointed out that major cultural and economic shifts are taking place due to Islamic migration, with very little accurate coverage by the press.
“Immigration costs are increasing, cultural conflicts are building up and Islam is gaining more and more space,” Mejlænder wrote. “The danger signals of our greatest social change process are clearly visible today, but traditional media show limited interest in exploring them. It weakens the press’s relevance and credibility.”
“…one has to go mainly to alternative media to gain knowledge about studies that show that anti-Western attitudes and intolerant interpretations of the Qur’an are relatively widespread among Muslims in Western countries.”
You can read Mejlænder’s full piece with English translation here.
MARCH 14, 2019
Carusone has been leading a campaign against Fox News host Tucker Carlson for things he said on a radio program several years ago. Sensing hypocrisy, Daily Caller reporter Peter Hasson uncovered an old blog in which Carusone allegedly used hateful rhetoric against a series of groups.
“Carusone’s now-defunct blog included degrading references to ‘trannies,’ ‘jewry’ and Bangladeshis,” Hasson wrote. “Carusone posted a lengthy diatribe in November 2005 about a Bangladeshi man who was robbed by ‘a gang of transvestites,’ as Carusone described it. Carusone was offended that the gang was described as ‘attractive’ in an article.”
The Daily Caller – which was co-founded by Carlson – posted screen images of Carusone’s alleged old blog. The report also indicated the Media Matters honcho also “downplayed a male basketball coach’s alleged sexual and physical abuse of his female players” and used an ethnic slur.
The Daily Caller report also indicated that Carusone allegedly made anti-Semitic comments about his then-boyfriend and once praised then-West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat and former high-ranking member of the Ku Klux Klan, as one of his favorite public figures, writing: “In his lunacy, we trust.”
“In another post, Carusone claimed that his boyfriend only leaned conservative ‘as a result of his possession of several bags of Jewish gold,’” Hasson wrote. “Carusone previously dismissed concerns about his past anti-Semitic comments on the grounds that his longtime partner is Jewish.”
Media Matters did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Media Matters is known as a tax-exempt lobbying organization which has aimed to silence many conservative media voices. Carusone has led numerous boycott attempts but famously opted against taking action after hateful rhetoric from MSNBC host Joy Reid’s pre-fame blog was unearthed.
“In its original tax application to the IRS, Media Matters claimed that the American news media were dominated by a pro-Christian bias and that they were needed to balance it. Despite the obvious absurdity of this claim, the group received non-profit status. It has been violating the terms of that status ever since,” Carlson said on Tuesday night.
“An internal chart prepared by federal investigators working on the so-called “Midyear Exam” probe into Hillary Clinton’s emails, exclusively reviewed by Fox News, contained the words ‘NOTE: DOJ not willing to charge this’ next to a key statute on the mishandling of classified information,” the Fox report said. “The notation appeared to contradict former FBI Director James Comey’s repeated claims that his team made its decision that Clinton should not face criminal charges independently.”
What exactly was the DOJ “not willing to charge” Clinton with?
Three particular statutes were mentioned in the Fox report – crimes related to willfully retaining national defense information that could harm the United States, crimes related to gross negligence in handling classified material, and crimes related to “retaining classified materials at an ‘unauthorized location.’”
The document was called “Espionage Act Charges – Retention/Mishandling,” according to the report.
Wednesday, it was widely reported that disgraced former FBI lawyer Lisa Page revealed to the House Judiciary Committee that the Obama DOJ told the FBI not to charge Clinton in the email scandal in 2018 closed-door testimony.
Disgraced former FBI agent Lisa Page sang like a canary when questioned under oath last summer, according to the the social media account of one of the members of the House Judiciary Committee who took part in her hearing before Congress.
“Lisa Page confirmed to me under oath that the FBI was ordered by the Obama DOJ not to consider charging Hillary Clinton for gross negligence in the handling of classified information,” said Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) on Twitter, attaching a transcript of the hearing.
“So let me if I can, I know I’m testing your memory,” the transcript said. “But when you say advice you got from the Department, you’re making it sound like it was the Department that told you: You’re not going to charge gross negligence because we’re the prosecutors and we’re telling you we’re not going to —”
Page interrupted him and said “That is correct.”
Selective justice is a hallmark of any authoritarian state.