Sheila Jackson-Lee Quietly Introduces Bill To BLOCK Taxpayer Money From Building The Wall

Published by 
Capture

Democrat congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee quietly introduced a bill called the “Protect American Taxpayers and Secure Border Act.”

The bill, with a title that means the exact opposite of what it proposes, was introduced on December 19 and now sits in the House Judiciary and Homeland Security committees.

Here is the text of the bill:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

Trending: CONFIRMED: The Government CAN Build The Wall With Brian Kolfage’s GoFundMe Money

This Act may be cited as the “Protect American Taxpayers and Secure Border Act”.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO BORDER SECURITY.

(a) In General.—No taxpayer funds may be obligated or expended to build a wall or barrier intended to impede travel between Mexico and the United States.

(b) Foreign Payment Required.—Any wall or barrier described in subsection (a) that is proposed to be built shall be paid for using funds provided by the Government of Mexico.

(c) Securing The Southern Border.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall take such actions as may be necessary to secure the southern border by making maximum effective utilization of technology and improved training of U.S. Custom and Border Protection agents and officers.

(d) Increase In Immigration Judges.—The Attorney General may appoint 100 additional immigration judges in addition to immigration judges currently serving as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

(e) Humanitarian Assistance.—The Secretary of Homeland Security shall take such actions as may be necessary to ensure that humanitarian assistance is provided to immigrants, refugees, and other displaced persons who are in need of medical assistance and aid to sustain health and life.

 

Top Democrats post identical ‘orange man bad’ anti-Trump tweet

Capture

Nanci Pelosi and Chuck Schumer ; the infamous ‘NPC’ meme © Reuters / Joshua Roberts

Ranking Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have been accused of being Trump-hating automatons after posting identical tweets attacking the president. The curious stunt has breathed fresh life into the infamous ‘NPC’ meme.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi were mocked as “non-player characters” (NPCs) – a video game term that has been retooled to describe those who mindlessly regurgitate anti-Trump mantras – after tweeting identical Christmas Eve roasts of Donald Trump.

“It’s Christmas Eve and @realDonaldTrump is plunging the country into chaos. The stock market is tanking and the president is waging a personal war on the Federal Reserve — after he just fired the Secretary of Defense,” Schumer tweeted.

Capture

Capture

Less than thirty minutes later, Pelosi tweeted an identical Christmas Eve warning. The lawmakers also posted a series of nearly-identical follow-up messages, lambasting the president for shutting down the government.

Capture

The lazy messaging strategy provoked a snark storm on Twitter, with many users dusting off their favorite NPC meme to satirize the herd-mentality hatred of the president.

“Holy smokes. They are literally NPCs. They think and speak EXACTLY alike!” one Twitter user wrote.

Capture

Capture

Capture

Capture

The NPC meme gained wide popularity ahead of the November midterm elections. In October, Twitter deleted an estimated 1,500 accounts that used the meme to mock liberal conformity, claiming they were Russian bots.

The “tanking” stock market that Schumer and Pelosi expressed identical grief over later experienced a record-setting rebound. The Dow added over 1,080 points (4.9%), its biggest single-day gain in history.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Neocons and Media Unite to Attack Trump’s Syria Decision

By Mark Alan

President Trump’s decision to withdraw US troops from Syria has been met with some push back among neoconservatives and the media. Although the move seems consistent with the presidents previous statements about the conflict, that didn’t stop some from expressing shock over the decision. Undoubtedly, the two loudest voices among Republicans were Senators Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio.

Graham called the move an “Obama-like” mistake. Rubio, apparently trying to establish himself as the leading figure of the neoconservative movement, went as far as calling the president’s decision a “retreat.” Graham and Rubio have both expressed past support for using the US military to topple Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The response from many in the media hasn’t been too different from that of the neocons. CNN’s Erin Burnett strongly condemned President Trump’s decision. She said the president was giving Vladimir Putin an early Christmas present by withdrawing US soldiers from Syria. However, she failed to articulate why she believes the lives of US soldiers are less valuable than the alleged disruption between the US and Russia.

Burnett wasn’t the only CNN personality to attack the president for his decision. CNN’s Fareed Zakaria also bashed the withdraw of US troops from Syria. He claimed President Trump was making an even bigger mistake than former president George W Bush’s “mission accomplished” fiasco during the Iraq War. It’s worth noting that Zakaria is one of many prominent members of the media who supported the decision to invade Iraq.

Anchors from other networks also condemned the president’s choice to withdraw troops from Syria. Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade called Trump’s decision “stunning and irresponsible.” He also suggested the president was “cutting and running.” MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough expressed similar sentiments on his show this morning.

The reaction of the neoconservatives and like minded members of the media shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. The two groups have united numerous times in the past, salivating at the idea of a ground war to overthrow Assad in Syria. Thankfully, peace has prevailed.

United States military forces have been in Syria for over four years. The first known instance of American troops fighting on the ground in Syria occurred in July of 2014, as part of a hostage rescue operation. The Global War on Terror has already cost US tax payers nearly 6 trillion dollars. To provide that number some context, the combined value of the entire US housing market is worth about 30 trillion dollars.

Elsewhere, President Trump’s decision has been met with praise. Senators Mike Lee and Rand Paul both applauded the president’s withdraw of troops from Syria. Senator Paul saidthe president’s decision is another example of Trump keeping his campaign promises. Paul further defended the move, saying the president’s decision in Syria illustrates why he won the 2016 election.

Rapper Talib Kweli: ‘Nazi Germany Had a Wall Called the Berlin Wall’

NEW YORK, NY - JULY 22: Talib Kweli performs onstage during OZY FEST 2017 Presented By OZY.com at Rumsey Playfield on July 22, 2017 in New York City. (Photo by Bryan Bedder/Getty Images for Ozy Fusion Fest 2017)

By Justin Caruso

Rapper Talib Kweli gave his fans an incredibly wrong history lesson Friday, saying that the Berlin Wall was created by Nazi Germany and was proof of how “walls didn’t work for Nazis.”

“So, you’re unaware of the fact that nazi Germany had a wall called the Berlin Wall that was torn down in 1991 in order to foster humanity and diversity? Walls didn’t work for Nazis so why build them here? Build bridges not walls Nazi lover,” Talib Kweli said in response to another social media user.

Capture

Of course, the Berlin Wall was erected not by Nazi Germany, but by socialist East Germany, which was under the occupation of the communist Soviet Union at the time.

Also, unlike President Donald Trump’s proposed wall along the United States-Mexico border, the Berlin Wall was created to stop people from leaving East Germany’s occupation to travel into free West Berlin.

Talib Kweli’s social media posts are not only fact-deficient, they are often hate-filled and vitriolic. In 2016, the “Get By” rapper attacked Breitbart News’ Jerome Hudson, repeatedly disparaging him with the racial slur “coon.”

Capture

Twitter, despite their strict enforcement of rules when it comes to conservatives, took no action despite Kweli repeatedly racially abusing people on the platform over political disagreements.

See the source image

SOCIALIST OCASIO-CORTEZ SUDDENLY CONCERNED ABOUT GOV’T SPENDING AMID BORDER WALL PUSH

See the source image

Silent on giving $10 billion in aid to Mexico, Central America

The American Mirror – DECEMBER 22, 2018

Despite pushing for a socialist “Medicare for all” plan that countless experts argue would bankrupt the nation, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is now all of a sudden concerned about paying for things.

On Thursday, the Republican-led U.S. House of Representatives approved $5.7 billion in fundingfor the wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

The measure has not yet been voted on in the Senate amid ongoing negotiations, and the partial government shut down on Saturday morning.

But in response to the $5.7 billion for the wall in the House bill, the New York socialist took to Twitter to claim “no one’s asking the GOP how they’re paying for it.”

Capture

“And just like that, GOP discovers $5.7 billion for a wall. $5.7 billion… What if we instead added $5.7B in teacher pay? Or replacing water pipes? Or college tuition/prescription refill subsidies? Or green jobs? But notice how no one’s asking the GOP how they’re paying for it,” she wrote.

For starters, “no one” is asking how the GOP is “paying for it” because most people understand basic math and how the federal government works.

The federal government is funded by the taxpayers. When Congress passes a spending bill, it must allocate the necessary funding for the the following fiscal year to ensure all government can fully operate.

They didn’t “discover” the money out of thin air, it has been there the entire time. The issue is that in Congress, a spending bill requires a supermajority, meaning 60 votes in the Senate.

No Democrats are agreeing to vote in favor of the House-passed package, so negotiations are ongoing about how much funding — which the government already has — will be allocated for “border security.”

Aside from Ocasio-Cortez not even having a rudimentary understanding of how government works, which she will be part of in a week, many are wondering why she’s not all of a sudden concerned about spending money.

See the source image

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

See the source image

By Robert Bridge

Once again, a reporter has been accused of writing fake stories – over a span of years – reinforcing the suspicion that we are living in a post-truth world where words, to paraphrase Kipling, “are the most powerful drug.”

This week, Der Spiegel, the German news weekly, was forced to admit that one of its former star reporters, the award-winning Claas Relotius“falsified his articles on a grand scale.”

Indeed, it seems the disgraced journalist was motivated more by fiction writers John le Carre and Tom Clancy than by any media heavyweights, like Andrew Breitbart and Walter Cronkite.

Relotius, who just this month took home Germany’s Reporterpreis (‘Reporter of the Year’) for his enthralling tale of a Syrian teenager, “made up stories and invented protagonists,” Der Spiegel admitted.

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

There is a temptation to rationalize Relotius’s multiple indiscretions, not to mention the failure of his fastidious employer to unearth them for so long, as an unavoidable part of the dog-eat-dog media jungle. After all, journalists are not robots – at least not yet – and we are all humans prone to poor judgment and mistakes, perhaps even highly unethical ones.

That explanation, however, falls short of explaining the internal forces battering away at the foundation of Western media, an institution built on the shifting sand of lies, disinformation and outright propaganda. And what is readily apparent to those outside of the Western media fortress is certainly even more apparent to those inside.

A good example is Russiagate. This elaborate myth, which has been peddled repeatedly and without an ounce of 100-percent real beef since the US election of 2016, goes like this: A group of Russian hackers, buying a few hundred social media memes for just rubles to the dollar, were able to do what all the Republican campaign strategists, and all the special interests groups, with all of their billions of dollars in their massive war chest, simply could not: keep Democratic voters at home on the couch come Election Day – a tactic now known as “voter suppression operations” – thereby handing the White House to Donald Trump on a silver platter. Or shall we say ‘a Putin platter’?

Capture

Don’t believe me? Here’s the opening line of a recent Washington Post article that should be rated ‘R’ for racist: “One difference between Russian and Republican efforts to quash the black vote: The Russians are more sophisticated, insidious and slick,” wailed Joe Davidson, who apparently watched too many Hollywood films where the Russkies play all of the villains. “Unlike the Republican sledgehammers used to suppress votes and thwart electorates’ decisions in various states, the Russians are sneaky, using social media come-ons that ostensibly had little to do with the 2016 vote.”

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel, despite being forced to come clean over the transgressions of Claas Relotius, will most likely never own up to its own factual shortcomings with regards to their dismal reporting on Russia.

For example, in an article published last year entitled ‘Putin’s work, Clinton’s contribution,’ the German weekly lamented that “A superpower intervenes in the election campaign of another superpower: The Russian cyber-attack in the US is a scandal.” Just like their fallen star reporter, Der Spiegel regurgitated fiction masquerading as news.

Capture

However, there is no need to limit ourselves to just media-generated Russian fairytales. The Western media has contrived other sensational stories, with its own cast of dubious characters, and with far greater consequences.

Consider the reporting in the Western media prior to the 2003 Iraq War, when most journalists were behaving as cheerleaders for military invasion as opposed to conscientious objectors, or at least objective observers. In fact, two reporters with the New York Times, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, arguably gave the Bush administration and a hardcore group of neocons inside Washington, which had been pushing for a war against Saddam Hussein for many years, the barest justification it required for military action.

Just six months before the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, Gordon and Miller penned a front-page article in the Times that opened with this stunning claim: “Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”

The article in America’s ‘paper of record’ then proceeded to build the case for military action against Iraq by quoting an assortment of anonymous senior administration officials, anonymous Iraqi defectors, and anonymous chemical weapons experts. In fact, much of the story was based on comments provided by one ‘Ahmed al-Shemri,’ a pseudonym for someone purported to have been connected to Hussein’s chemical-weapons program. The authors quoted the mystery man as saying: “All of Iraq is one large storage facility.”

Gordon and Miller also claimed their source had said that “he had been told that Iraq was still storing some 12,500 gallons of anthrax.” Several months later, just weeks before the US invasion of Iraq commenced, US Secretary of State Colin Powell invited the UN General Assembly to imagine what a “teaspoon of dry anthrax” could do if unleashed on the public.

Powell, who later said the testimony would be a permanent “blot” on his record, even shook a tiny faux sample of the deadly biological agent in the Assembly for maximum theatrical effect.

Shortly after the release of the Times piece, top Bush officials appeared on television and alluded to Miller’s story in support of military action. Meanwhile, UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq never found chemical weapons or the materials needed to build atomic weapons. In other words, the $1-trillion-dollar war against Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, was a completely senseless act of aggression against a sovereign state, which the US media helped perpetrate.

Aside from the question of whether readers really put much faith in these fantastic media stories, complete with pseudonymous characters and impossible to prove claims; there remains another question. Does the Western media itself believe its own stories?  The answer seems to be no, at least not always.

With regards to the Russiagate story, for example, an investigative journalism outfit, Project Veritas, caught a few Western journalists off-guard about their true feelings in relation to the claims against Russia, and their feelings in general about the state of the media.

“I love the news business, but I’m very cynical about it – and at the same time so are most of my colleagues, CNN Supervising Producer John Bonifield admitted, unaware he was being secretly filmed.

When pushed to explain why CNN was beating the anti-Russia drum on a daily basis, things became clearer: “Because it’s ratings,” Bonifield said. “Our ratings are incredible right now.”

In the same media sting operation, Van Jones, a prominent CNN political commentator who has pushed the anti-Russia position numerous times on-air, completely changed his tune when caught off-air and off-guard. “The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger,” he remarked.

This brings us back to the story of the fallen Der Spiegel journalist. It seems that a deep cynicism has taken hold in at least some parts of the Western media establishment. Journalists seem increasingly willing to produce extremely tenuous, fact-challenged stories, many of which are barely held together by a rickety composite of anonymous entities.

And why not? If their own media bosses are permitting gross fabrications on a number of major issues, not least of all related to Russia, and further afield in Syria, why should the journalists be forced to play by the rules?

Under such oppressive conditions, where the media appears to be merely the mouthpiece of the government’s position on a number of issues, those working inside this apparatus will eventually come around to the conclusion that truth is not the main priority. The main priority is hoodwinking the public into believing something even when the facts – or lack of them – point to other conclusions.

Thus, it is no surprise when we find Western reporters imitating the greatest fiction writers, because in reality that is what they have already become.

@Robert_Bridge

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

CHUCK SCHUMER SAYS REPUBLICANS MUST ‘ABANDON’ WALL IN ORDER TO REOPEN GOVERNMENT

See the source image

Henry Rodgers | Capitol Hill Reporter

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said Republicans need to “abandon” border wall funding if they want the government to reopen, just less than 24 hours into the partial shutdown.

Schumer, who has strongly opposed funding President Donald Trump’s border wall, saidthis on the Senate floor Saturday afternoon as the federal government is officially in a partial shutdown after Senate Republicans failed to receive enough votes to pass a short-term spending bill Friday that included funding for a border wall.

WATCH:

The New York senator also said Democrats are “open to discussing any proposal as long as they do not include anything for the wall,” showing Democrats are not willing to compromise on border wall funding.

Capture

Before the partial shutdown, Schumer said there was no way the wall was being funded on numerous occasions.

“I want to be crystal clear — there will be no additional appropriations to pay for the border wall,” Schumer said on the Senate floor on Dec. 13. “It’s done.” (RELATED: Chuck Schumer Makes It ‘Crystal Clear’ He Wants No Additional Funding For Border Wall)

The two parties will now have to figure out an agreement, and the senators must be present for a vote on the Senate floor to send a bill to the president to sign and end the partial government shutdown.

See the source image

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑