After much anticipation, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) invoked the “nuclear option” on Thursday–halting Senate Democrats’ filibuster of the confirmation of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to the bench of the U.S. Supreme Court. With the confirmation vote scheduled for April 7th, Gorsuch will quickly be approved and confirmed by the U.S. Senate to fill the vacant seat left by former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away last year.
— CSPAN (@cspan) April 6, 2017
UPDATE: Senate confirmation vote on Judge #Gorsuch will take place ~ 11:30am ET on Friday. Watch LIVE on C-SPAN2.
— CSPAN (@cspan) April 6, 2017
The Democratic Party’s opposition to Gorsuch, manifested in the filibuster that took place on Thursday morning before McConnell invoked the nuclear option, yet again highlights the hypocrisy of the Left.
If you recall, back in November after the election of President Donald J. Trump over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Democrats protested Trump’s election, declaring that his election was illegitimate since Secretary Clinton had received a majority percentage of the national popular vote. Various members of the Democratic Party called for the abolishment of the Electoral College, thus promoting a direct democracy system of government.
— CBS News (@CBSNews) December 16, 2016
The presidency is the only office where you can get more votes & still lose. It's time to end the Electoral College. https://t.co/OXZ9vHaIH1
— Sen. Barbara Boxer (@SenatorBoxer) November 15, 2016
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) November 15, 2016
If you feel scared about the current state of American politics and Whitehouse sign this petition: https://t.co/2K88hLD8hn
— xoxo, Joanne (@ladygaga) November 10, 2016
Clinton received almost 3 million more votes, but Trump will be the next president. It's clear the electoral college needs to be changed.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) December 20, 2016
Now, fast forward to this month.
When news broke that the Senate Majority Leader was considering using the nuclear option to clear a path for Gorsuch’s confirmation, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)–along with many of his Democratic colleagues–promised that they would filibuster the confirmation vote.
— Senator Jeff Merkley (@SenJeffMerkley) March 27, 2017
— Kamala Harris (@KamalaHarris) June 15, 2016
Yet, by filibustering Gorsuch, the Minority Leader and Senate Democrats declared war on the popular vote.
The 17th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, in part, that “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.” In essence, this amendment transferred the election of U.S. senators from members of respective state legislatures to direct election by the citizens of each respective state.
Since the majority party (in this case, the Republican Party) controls the most seats in the U.S. Senate, it follows that their filibuster actually stifled the majority percentage of the national popular vote. Interestingly enough, it turns out that the Democrat Party trying to abolish the “undemocratic” Electoral College (which is explicitly called for in the U.S. Constitution) utilized the undemocratic filibuster (which is a Senate rule not in the U.S. Constitution).
If the Democrats truly believed in their filibuster, then they should have gladly embraced Donald Trump’s victory via the Electoral College. However, if they truly believed in abolishing the Electoral College, then Senate Democrats should not have supported a filibuster of Neil Gorsuch. They can’t have their cake and eat it too.
Then again, it’s the Democratic Party. Hypocrisy is one of their greatest staples.
The post Filibustering Neil Gorsuch: The Democratic Party’s War on the Popular Vote appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
My last column dealt with trying to define the fake news controversy. (In Search of: Fake News). Since it was published, not only has the controversy not gone away, it has seemed to intensify, and what qualifies as fake still hasn’t gotten any easier to define. The reason for the glut of misleading stories and half-truths is a little easier to figure out.
Don Lemon of CNN tried to boil it down to its simplest form: fake news is news that media outlets publish knowing the facts of the story are not true. If only it were that simple, but the truth rarely is.
The problem lies in the way news works these days. Whether reporters want to admit it or not, ideology has become a top factor in the way news is presented. It’s a way that in the past would have been unthinkable.
Before cable news networks and the internet, competition in television reporting was limited to the three networks. In cities and towns, there were one or two local papers. The audience pie was the same, but the slices were a lot bigger.
People would tend to stick with one paper, and as far as TV reporting, they usually watched the anchor whose personality they liked. Walter Cronkite made people feel comfortable, and in turn they trusted him to tell them what was going on in the world. Reporters always tried for scoops, but it was more important for them to be right or risk losing that trust. The lack of available competition also made it possible for them to present the facts without attaching their own conclusions.
In other words, news back in the day was all about getting the facts to the audience without attaching a conclusion to those facts.
The starkest example of this is when Cronkite broke into As the World Turns to report on JFK’s death by assassination. (You can watch that here.) Cronkite is obviously shaken- at one point he even wipes away tears- but the tone of the report never changes. Cronkite gave the who, what, when, where, and why and kept his opinion out of it. He didn’t bring on a panel to try to identify the shooter before they had all the facts or to give some sort of pop culture psychoanalysis of the sort of person who could have done it. (“Well, Walter, we’re pretty sure that this has to be some right-wing gun nut extremist who was on his way to bomb an abortion clinic and decided to just blow a president away.”)
People may not have exactly been surprised when they found out that Cronkite leaned to the left, but it wasn’t blatantly obvious to anyone who watched him on the tube.
Cut to today. Reporting just the facts, ma’am, fell out of fashion with the advent of the 24-hour news channels. With ratings playing an ever bigger role, news stopped being purely informative and became, well, a TV show. It’s as much about entertainment as information.The game is the same, the teams have just switched sides
One TV tactic to boost ratings is to offer counter-programming. When CBS puts on a program like Star Trek, NBC will try to put on something different hoping to catch an audience that weren’t sci-fi fans. Different channels applied that philosophy to news as well. While Fox News did well with a conservative audience, other channels decided to cater to liberals. Suddenly, decisions on what to report and how to report it took on a whole new importance. The liberal channels wouldn’t touch stories that might offend their sought-after audience, while conservative channels did the same for theirs. If they did happen to report on the same subject, the tone of the stories would be markedly different.
As ideology took over, news agencies hired reporters that would sacrifice objectivity for audience. They started taking sides.
Just look at the difference in the coverage of the last two scandals to see how this has played out. Fox went after the Hillary email scandals doggedly while the other networks declared it a non-story as soon as her name came up. If MSNBC did any reporting on it at all, it was to mock Fox for thinking there was something there. They would have panels that did nothing but defend her no matter what new information came out. Compare that to the Trump/Russia story. The big three networks, CNN, and MSNBC have run stories on it for almost two months straight, even though they’ve come up with nothing but increased speculation about how bad it might be.
The game is the same, but Trump’s election signaled halftime. The teams just switched sides.
Sean Hannity, in an interview with CBS’s Ted Koppel, said that the public should be given credit for being smart enough to distinguish between opinion and news programs. Koppel disagreed. The truth is that there’s very little difference between the two anymore. The line has become so blurred that it has almost disappeared.
Here is an example of what passes as news today. This headline ran on the MSN homepage. Joe Scarborough on Trump’s Tweeting: Something is Seriously Wrong with This Man. (I’ve added the video from the Daily Review that went along with the headline. It was also reported by The Huffington Post and Politico.)
Anyone with a fourth-grade education knows that that is an opinion. How does the fact that someone said it on TV suddenly make it news? And is it fake news or not? Even though Scarborough expressed an opinion that some would say is false, the fact that he said it is true. Whether it’s fake news or not depends on how the viewer wants to interpret the words.
Don Lemon probably didn’t take that into account for his simple explanation.
Speaking of Lemon, his definition begs another important question. Is it fake news for a reporter to pick and choose which facts to report in order to justify a wanted conclusion? Some might say that’s news, but most would call it propaganda.
Throughout Obama’s tenure, his unemployment numbers were constantly under question. Some journalists took the easy road and reported the number they were given. As that number went down, it made Obama look good. Others looked at the number that included people who had given up looking for work and had run out of unemployment insurance. That statistic wasn’t quite as flattering. Which number got reported depended on whether the agency doing the reporting supported Obama.
And Kellyanne Conway got slammed for using the term alternative facts.
As news has become ideology in search of an audience, people have drifted towards media outlets that support their own opinion. They tend to believe the stories that match their biases and dismiss those that don’t. Conservatives drift towards Breitbart and Fox News while liberals brand them fake news. Conservatives will do the same for CNN, MSNBC, and the New York Times. Unfortunately, biased does not always equal fake. Just as unfortunately, it doesn’t equal completely true, either. Consumers are forced to be more diligent about the news they see and read than they were in Cronkite’s time.
Skepticism is the new normal.
It’s too bad that the Weekly World News is not longer around. At least with them, we knew it was fake news.
Update: Since writing this article, it has come out that Susan Rice, an Obama political cohort, was responsible for unmasking surveillance on incoming Trump administration officials. The man who tried to define fake news, Don Lemon himself, declared it a non-story the day it came out and refused to report on it for CNN. Two of the three major networks decided not to mention it, while the other spent a whole 45 seconds on it devoted to defending Rice.
The new story changed immediately from “Trump wasn’t surveilled” to “Trump was surveilled, but legally.” Every channel has run a soundbite of Mother Jones’ David Corn claiming reporting on Rice is racist and sexist. Another opinion, but yes, he did say it.
Sure, no fake news there.
A Commonwealth Court panel will hear arguments, Wednesday, in a lawsuit seeking to have Philadelphia’s beverage tax declared illegal.
This will be the first time that lawyers for the city and the beverage industry actually argue their respective cases. Common Pleas judge Gary Glazer ruled the tax legal, based on briefs by the two sides.
The Commonwealth Court panel, though, will hear arguments on the appeal. Sitting in Pittsburgh as part of a regular rotation, they will quiz the lawyers for each side.
The beverage industry brought the suit, claiming the tax violates state law that taxes must be uniform and that local governments cannot tax items already taxed by the state.
The city argues that, because the tax is levied on distributors and not retailers, it does not conflict with state law.
Whichever side loses in Commonwealth Court is expected to appeal to the state Supreme Court.
The one-and-a-half cent an ounce tax took effect January first and raised $12Million in its first two months.
The city hopes it will raise $91million annually to pay for Mayor Jim Kenney’s anti-poverty program of universal pre-K, community schools and a rebuild of city parks, rec centers and libraries.
Bottlers and retailers have blamed it for a drop in sales and say they will have to lay off workers and cut hours as a result.
The post Court To Hear Arguments To Make Philly Drink Tax Illegal appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
Border enforcement veterans told lawmakers Tuesday that fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border has been “absolutely critical” in reducing violence, drug-smuggling and illegal entry — in testimony boosting President Trump’s call for a Texas-to-California wall.
Ronald Colburn, former Border Patrol deputy chief, and David Aguilar, former acting commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, testified to the Senate Homeland Security Committee about their experiences in the Bush administration when the first fencing was implemented.
Colburn also served as chief of the Yuma Border Patrol Sector, a stretch spanning southwestern Arizona and southeastern California, and was part of Operation Jump Start, which began in 2006 with the construction of a border fence.
Before the fence, the sector recorded 2,706 drive-throughs where illegal immigrants crossed the “unfettered” border with “contraband of drugs and people,” Colburn said. Of those, Yuma Border Patrol captured just 13.
“The rest all got away, with no idea what, or who, they brought in,” Colburn said. “Yuma had become the most dangerous part of the border.”
Colburn also cataloged more than 200 attacks by “border bandits” — gangs that would “prey on their own,” sexually assaulting, robbing and murdering Mexican migrants.
But once the fence was installed in 2006, violent bandit attacks went from 200 to zero, he said. The implementation of the fencing barrier also cut the number of so-called drive-throughs from 2,706 to six.
“Yuma became the ‘proof of concept’ that America can protect and control its border when the proper mix of resources are placed almost instantaneously,” Colburn said. “By 2008, Yuma Sector arrests of illicit border crossers and traffickers had dwindled from over 138,000 to 8,363.”
Colburn, who has long supported the idea of physical barriers at the border, called fences critical, saying, “It marked our border; our line in the sand.”
Aguilar agreed that physical barriers at the border are an “integral part” of an enforcement system, but acknowledged that “challenges remain.” He cited environmental considerations; eminent domain; and tribal autonomy—the Tohono O’odham nation occupies 75 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border.
“The noted issues will have to be taken into consideration, but it is important to note that there is nothing more destructive to environmentally sensitive land and communities than the uncontrolled illegal flow of people, vehicles, smugglers, and criminal organizations,” Aguilar said. “The placement of fences and deterrent infrastructure in previously uncontrolled parts of the border have actually allowed for the rejuvenation of areas that had previously been devastated due to heavy illegal pedestrian and vehicular traffic.”
In 2015, DHS installed 353 miles of primary pedestrian fencing and 300 miles of vehicle fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border, which Aguilar said improved detection and surveillance capabilities, dropping migrant apprehensions from 1.7 million in fiscal 2000, to 408,870 in fiscal 2016.
“We have done much to secure the border, but there is much more to do,” Aguilar said.
DHS Secretary John Kelly will testify before the Senate Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, just one day after the deadline for companies to bid to design and create President Trump’s border wall.
The plan continues to face intense Democratic criticism, as lawmakers warn the costly project would be an unfair burden on taxpayers.
“I don’t think there’s anyone in this Senate who doesn’t want our border to be secure,” Ranking Member Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said Tuesday. “But the wall that President Trump has promised could cost nearly $70 billion — that’s $200 for every man, woman and child in the United States.”
But the Republican chairman of the committee backed the call for more fencing along the border.
“We need a layered approach to border security, one that includes technology, manpower, a commitment to the rule of law, and the elimination of incentives for illegal immigration,” Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said. “Fencing does work, and we need more of it.”
The post Border wall ‘critical’ for reducing crime, former agents testify appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
To mask or not to mask, that is the question. The one thing to know is, yet again, Trump was right, he WAS being surveilled. This is my surprised face. Remember when I told you that if we know the NSA, and every other gumshoe in Washington is watching us, and listening to every one of our phone calls, for someone to say the Obama White House has nothing to do with anything like that was just about the stupidest thing to come rolling out of there since Bill Clinton forgot who ate pizza with him that night. Matter of fact, since I’ve been able to read I haven’t heard any of those guys tell the straight of it yet!
Enter Susan Rice with all the double talk we’ve all become accustomed to. And just what is “unmasking?” Well, as near as I can figure it’s the finking out a fink. The fink strikes a deal and goes blabbermouth, and when they run out of blabber they get thrown out in the street in their underwear. Then, there are leaks. You’d think the freaking government would be at least as secure as say, the Hell’s Angels, now wouldn’t you? And at least as fiscally sound as a crack house. Well, they’re not! And just who is Susan Rice? Why she’s the genius who blames Benghazi on a poorly edited YouTube video. That’s right! Remember that? All them there ragheads was all pent up over a flick. Rice completely forgot all them guns they were running all over creation. Of course Hillary was not involved. She was too busy resetting the password on her Yahoo mail so she could send a few more classified documents to eHarmony! Millions voted for her! Millions voted for the Black Knight . . . TWICE! And you wonder why Donald Trump doesn’t fit up there.
It’s accepted that black people can dance, and Susan Rice is shuffling along pretty good right now. Fox News is drilling down on this. The Main Stream Media is still looking for Russians. Alternative media has so eclipsed the MSM I’m amazed they can still pay the bills anymore. Rice IS a big story and they act as if it never happened. And a lot of YOU PEOPLE still depend on them for news. Yeah, I really said that, and you know who you are.
Well, welcome to Trump America. The judge will be confirmed, the wall will be built, taxes will go down, and kids will come out of school and WILL have a job waiting because companies will come home and hire them. The future gets brighter every day for middle America. Well all but Susan’s future, because judging by his track record, Donald Trump is about to be on her like white on rice. Get it, white on rice. I KILL me!
“If you ask me, am I a moderate or an extremist, I’m a Muslim.”– The words of Jordan’s King Abdullah II said in a CNN interview with Fareed Zakaria at al-Husseiniya Palace in Amman, Jordan
And so the man who claims to be a purveyor of peace will not admit to being either a moderate or an extremist, but know King Abdullah II is indeed an extremist…a wolf hiding in sheep’s clothing in fact…a wolf soon coming to Washington D.C. to meet with President Trump and try to fool him like he has fooled past presidents. Hopefully, our current president will see through his lies.
And Abdullah is indeed the spreader of lies as all roads to the problems in today’s Middle East lead directly back to Jordan and their relationship to the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan al-Muslimun). The Muslim Brotherhood who, over the past 80 decades or so, has had their tentacles deeply entwined into Jordan’s Hashemite kingdom…a kingdom whose population is comprised of 60% citizens of Jordanian/Palestinian origin and 40% of those of tribal origin (known as East Bankers and of which Jordan’s royal family belongs)…a kingdom that allows the Brotherhood to hide behind the guise of calling itself Jordan’s premier ‘charitable organization’…but to those knowing the truth it is anything but charitable for with the Muslim Brotherhood charity comes with strings attached.
So while President Trump keeps being advised not to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization…advised by those truly not on America’s side or by those ignorant to the facts…know that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and even Syria consider the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization whose goal is to overthrow their existing governments and install one of their own. One just has to look back to Egypt to see this has already been tried but thankfully, in the end, failed, for remember when the Muslim Brotherhood led the toppling of Hosni Mubarak’s pro-West government and installed their puppet President Mohamed El-Morsi who in turn was toppled by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s military-led coup.
And know that the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood is an umbrella organization of sorts…an organization that controls the political, charitable, and the ‘so-called’ spiritual needs and activities of the growing Islamist movement within Jordan…a movement that basically supports all things sharia. And know that the Muslim Brotherhood has a long and sordid history in Jordan…a history of Jordan condoning if not outright supporting this most dangerous of groups.
Briefly, after the Muslim Brotherhood was born in Egypt in 1928, affiliated groups starting popping up throughout the region. In fact, then King Abdullah I of Transjordan wanted Abdul-Hakim Abidin, the brother-in-law of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna’s, to lead a new Jordanian government. And while he refused, the Muslim Brotherhood still became fully functioning and operational in both Transjordan and in then called Palestine by 1942 and was given ‘official recognition’ by King Abdullah I in 1946.
Then in April 1948, right before the creation of the Jewish State of Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood in Transjordan joined forces with their fellow Brotherhood members in Egypt to fight what became a losing war with now called Israel. And while they lost said war both Egypt and now Jordan continued to receive so-called ‘general supervision’…as in terror tactics and funding…from Egypt’s Mufti Hajj Amin al-Husseini, the region’s Muslim Brotherhood leader.
Now fast forward to present day Jordan where the Muslim Brotherhood maintains a close alliance with the monarchy, and know that King Abdullah II is directly tied to the Brotherhood no matter his and Jordan’s smoke-and-mirrors cursory role in the Syrian conflict and in the ‘War on Terror’…for the fact is that Abdullah is still paying off the ‘debt’ to the Brotherhood incurred by his late father King Hussein and his grandfather King Abdullah I before him. And that debt started in the 1950’s when King Hussein (who became king after the assassination of Abdullah l) relied on the Muslim Brotherhood…the region’s main Islamist movement at that time…to help protect his Hashemite kingdom against threats of revolution and overthrow from other Arab nationalist movements.
And as part of his debt to them, King Hussein then and King Abdullah II now both supported the Muslim Brotherhood becoming part of Jordan’s government to the point where their political party, the Islamic Action Front (IAF), continues to represent Jordan’s main political opposition force while directly being controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood through governance structures and financial ties.
And after the Muslim Brotherhood did so well in Jordan’s 1989 election…garnering 23 out of Jordan’s Parliament’s 80 seats…King Hussein allowed them to hold five ministry positions no matter that he reined them in a bit after their showing strong opposition to his peace treaty with Israel…a peace treaty in appearance alone as it is a peace treaty not to be trusted, for Abdullah the son has still not repaid that debt in full and he must do so or face reprisals by the Muslim Brotherhood’s henchmen…henchmen of both the political and tangible sort.
So when will this debt be repaid…only when the Muslim Brotherhood says it is.
Are you starting to see the problem now…a problem whose solution lies within both Abdullah II himself and the Muslim Brotherhood, for noticeable tensions exist between Brotherhood members over the need for internal reform as well as to define what its ties to the terrorist group Hamas will be0 And it is via those tensions that Abdullah hopes to divide and conquer by keeping the political faction of the Muslim Brotherhood as the kingdom’s and his personal and legally sanctioned vanguard, while the more radical and younger faction covertly becoming his link to Hamas…and the hoped-for demise of Israel for as it stands now Jordan is not really their friend.
And with Abdullah knowing well that unless he can make the “divide” work in his favor as well as repaying in full the debt of his father and grandfather, that he cannot nor will he be permitted to keep his throne, thus he allows the Muslim Brotherhood needed space to operate from, helping to assure that both his authority as king and the continuity of the monarchy in Jordan will remain…at least for the time being.
But Abdullah is also smart enough to know that with ISIS sitting on Jordan’s doorstep…that if ISIS surpasses the Muslim Brotherhood regarding grassroots support amongst the people (and know that over 2,500 Jordanian young men have already joined ISIS and that Jordan was one of ISIS’ black market oil customers), then he will surely lose control of Jordan for the Muslim Brotherhood will not take kindly to his not preventing this from happening. That is why Abdullah allows the Muslim Brotherhood, via its charity fronts, to keep the people’s support from waning. In other words they both pull each other’s strings to some degree…but with the Brotherhood pulling more strings…especially with both the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and terrorism in general still not settled, and with the fact that 6.3 million Palestinians are not happy with the king who denies them rights, privileges, and assistance other Jordanian non-Palestinians…as in the East Bankers…receive.
So King Abdullah II’s words that Islamic terrorism…of which the Muslim Brotherhood both fully supports and finances…is the “greatest threat to our region” and that “Muslims must lead the fight against it”…become mere empty words for all terrorism leads back to Jordan as ground zero because of Jordan’s decades-long support for the Brotherhood. And Abdullah knows this but will try his best to keep this fact hidden from others.
How so…one just has to look at how Jordan currently responds to terrorism within its own country…or should I say does not respond…for the kingdom seems to close its collective eyes and look away when it does happen. Focusing on specific individuals deemed to pose a particular threat, the king dares not take into account the big picture involving the Muslim Brotherhood’s ties to terrorism because the big picture would expose the truth that under his rule Jordan has not punished or even spoken out against troublemakers operating from within the ranks of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood for he dare not utter a word until his debt is paid-in-full…if even then.
And while the Muslim Brotherhood is now ‘supposedly’ illegal in Jordan…with ‘supposedly’ being done with a wink and a nod of course…the truth is that they still hold an ever-growing influence within the country by their freely being allowed to fuel the anger and resentment that simmers amongst young Jordanian Palestinians…Jordanian Palestinians that feel slighted by their government and who will now willingly join their ranks. And they have done just that to the tune of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood having 10,000+ members and with their IAF party having over 4,000 members. In fact, the more discontent the Brotherhood stirs up…the more its more radical members side with Hamas…the more power they actually coalesce behind Hamas…power they then use to demand and get political concessions from Abdullah’s government.
And nowhere is this more apparent than to those who have been peacefully working for democratic reform within Jordan’s government…reform as in replacing the Muslim Brotherhood supporting monarchy with a secular government…those whose pro-Israel movement is known as the Jordanian Opposition Coalition and whose leaders the king either jails or expels from their homeland. These are the words of Dr. Mudar Zahran, Secretary General of the Jordanian Coalition Opposition:
“Shockingly, while the king puts all seculars in jail and sentences me, the head of the secular opposition, to live in prison, he allows the Muslim Brotherhood to have their own charity, which is now worth over 4 billion dollars, their own TV station, and their own daily newspaper, and he even went as far as shutting down the opposition parties that oppose the Muslim Brotherhood and this is documented.” “What most Americans and Israelis don’t understand is how many Arab regimes work this way and play on them.”
And how very right Dr. Mudar Zahran is.
Now as for Hamas’ somewhat recent breakaway of sorts from Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood’s leadership and King Abdullah II’s role in how they operate….first, while Hamas remains part of the Brotherhood’s ideological base organization they do operate independently from them as it benefits strategically (in their war against Israel) both from Jordan’s Palestinian presence and it’s 60% and growing Palestinian population. And second, those very numbers allow Hamas to operate in the open while Abdullah looks away as the Hamas-linked reformist sector gains control of the IAF who are no longer content with the political role they had traditionally played in Jordan, as now they want to be influential players in the political decision-making process. And thanks to Abdullah’s inactions and his still ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, they are.
In other words, Hamas, coupled with the Muslim Brotherhood, is making major policy decisions regarding Jordan’s role in the Middle East…a role that has turned more observational than tactical as was promised by Abdullah. And with Hamas’ numbers continuing to rise means Abdullah has basically become politically impotent as opposition to his government has become more radical, and this is why Hamas has been able to position its sympathizers amongst the leadership of the country’s Islamists…whose numbers are also increasing.
And that is also why the Muslim Brotherhood hierarchy is concerned about Abdullah because as Hamas’ influence grows throughout Jordan they become relegated to second tier string-puller status. And you know that does not sit well with the Brotherhood in regards to Abdullah’s repaying of the debt owed because they can see that as Hamas increases its power they have already started to lose some of the benefits and protections they were afforded by Abdullah. And that makes for a very unhappy Muslim Brotherhood who now are forced to pull the (figurative) noose tighter around Abdullah’s neck, which means he cannot be trusted to work on Jordan’s behalf, on America’s behalf, or even to uphold the peace treaty his father signed with Israel for King Abdullah will throw all under the Muslim Brotherhood bus to save his own neck.
And now we have come full-circle back to the beginning.
And Abdullah’s response: “I think he is right and I think this is something that has to be understood on a much larger platform because they’re looking for legitimacy that they don’t have inside of Islam. When we’re asked in this debate, you know, are you a moderate or extremist – what these people want is to be called extremist. I mean, they take that as a badge of honor. If you ask me, am I a moderate or an extremist, I’m a Muslim…”
And King Abdullah II’s response makes him an extremist because like I have always said…” if you do not condemn you condone”…and nowhere has the king condoned either the Muslim Brotherhood or Hamas nor any of their actions. And this is why when Abdullah meets with President Trump next week, Trump must not only have both eyes open but have his ears focused not on what Abdullah says but on what he does not say.
A lot of futures depend on President Trump doing just that.
Copyright © 2017 Diane Sori and Craig Andresen / Right Side Patriots
Today, Tuesday, April 4th from 7 to 9 pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori will discuss why Jordan’s king is a wolf hiding in sheep’s clothing, Craig bursts liberal therapy bubbles and important news of the week.
Hope you can tune in at http://bit.ly/2cpXuRd
By now it is well-established that advocates of the American Health Care Act failed to secure sufficient support from conservative members of the House Freedom Caucus last Friday to pass the bill. Both Paul Ryan and Donald Trump made that clear.
Of course, the debate will continue to rage over who ultimately deserves the blame (or credit), but in an immediate, practical sense, insufficient support from the Freedom Caucus prompted proponents to pull the vote Friday afternoon.
Earlier this month, I identified the mounting friction between AHCA supporters and skeptics as a sign that the Tea Party infrastructure was working. From March 10:
After the House released its repeal and replace plan earlier this week, conservative movement groups and elected officials such as the Tea Party Patriots and Rand Paul voiced vehement opposition to the legislation. The threat of heightened backlash from Tea Party players triggered the administration to respond by inviting them to share that opposition with the president and the vice president at the White House.
Whether these Tea Party-backed Republicans will be able to lobby successfully for healthcare legislation that meets their standards is yet to be determined. But those people the movement imported to Washington during the long winter of Obama’s presidency have not forgotten what brought them there.
On Friday, the Freedom Caucus successfully leveraged their clout to uphold, from members’ perspectives, what constitutes a key campaign promise. The group does not disclose its membership, but a very significant chunk of its publicly-confirmed members were swept into Congress by the Tea Party wave. Veterans, such as founding Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, eagerly aligned with the movement as well.
Some of the bill’s most visible opponents outside the House, from Rand Paul to Ted Cruz to Sean Hannity, were vocal Tea Party supporters.
In fact, in an op-ed urging the GOP to fix the AHCA, Hannity himself wrote, “It’s very important the House Freedom Caucus and senators such as Rand Paul, Ted Cruz Marco Rubio and Lee have input into this bill.”
Still, a full two-thirds of the entire Republican House Majority was elected in 2010 or later, and it’s likely every single one of these (and many of those first elected before that) campaigned against Obamacare. Freedom Caucus members, for their part, just disagreed that the bill achieved what constituents sent them to Washington to do.
The cry at Tea Party rallies years ago was for a “full-scale” repeal of the Affordable Care Act. That is not what the House bill offered. Thus, Tea Party-beneficiaries worked to stay true to their pledges.
Given the way the party is operating now, come 2020, it may turn out the only effective wall Republicans were able to build this decade was the Tea Party firewall.
A Florida woman told to stop calling 911 was found dead just hours after arguing with her boyfriend. (KTRK)
Three hours before Latina Herring was murdered, she can be seen on Sanford police body camera video arguing with her boyfriend, Allen Cashe.
Cashe is accused of going on a shooting rampage, killing Herring, her 8-year-old son and attempting to kill her 7-year-old son, her father and two bystanders.
The suspect allegedly went on the killing spree around 6:30 a.m. Monday. It all started at about 3:20 a.m. when police were called to a Wawa store.
“I don’t have her house keys,” Cashe is heard saying on newly released body camera video. “Man, you got my keys,” Herring yells.
“I’m not trying to play games,” said Cashe. “You have an attitude coming home from the club drunk.”
Police let Cashe leave the scene after he got his keys, which sparked the argument.
Twenty minutes later, police were called again to a home on Hays Drive. According to the video released by Sanford police on Friday, officers on scene dismissed Herring’s concerns.
“She’s making false accusations,” an officer says. “It’s the second time she’s done it.”
At one point, police tell Herring to “stop calling 911.”
“We’re going to handle it,” an officer tells Herring. “Just stop calling 911 and making accusations that you don’t know about.”
Police, in the video, say the couple was just arguing and it was not physical. They call it a “civil matter.”
At one point, Cashe is handcuffed and placed in the back of a patrol car, but is later released. Police said there was no reason to arrest anyone. One officer said Herring should have just lied and said Cashe hit her.
It is unclear why Cashe or Herring called 911. Officers on scene remarked he may have wanted to harm her.
“I think he’s calling because he’s afraid he’s going to do something to her,” an officer says to another.
Herring’s friend, Ladasha Beasley, said Sanford police should have done more.
“Sanford PD’s a big disappointment to me and to others,” Beasley added. “To protect and serve who, man? Who? Justice needs to be served.”
Sanford police did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the newly released body camera video and how officers handled the scene.
The four shooting survivors remain in the hospital. WESH reports that three are stable and one is in critical condition.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) drew the hilarious ire of liberals Sunday after confirming the worst news Democrats have heard since Trump defeated Hillary Clinton last November.
Speaking on the Sunday talk shows, McConnell explained that Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorusch will be confirmed this week no matter what.
“We’re going to confirm Judge Gorsuch this week,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.”“The way in which that occurs is in the hands of the Democratic minority.”
He reiterated his comments in an interview with NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
“Neil Gorsuch will be confirmed this week,” McConnell told show host Chuck Todd.
Democrats have been staunch in their opposition to Gorsuch ever since President Donald Trump announced that Gorsuch was his pick to replace the late Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, who suddenly passed away last February.
Mostly, Democrats oppose Gorusch because they believe that he will reinforce a conservative bend on the Supreme Court, which would then, most likely, rule against Democratic laws and policy initiatives. Democrats also oppose Gorsuch because he is an “originalist,” or someone who intercepts the Constitution by considering what the Founders meant when they wrote it.
This view of the Constitution, liberals believe, will reverse “progress” made by recent Democratic administrations, both in the White House and in state capitols across the country.
Needless to say, Democrats were seething after McConnell’s comments on TV Sunday. They were also angry because McConnell explained why the Senate didn’t hold a vote on former President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland.
The post Liberals meltdown after Mitch McConnell says that Neil Gorsuch ‘will be’ confirmed appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange found asylum in Ecuador’s London embassy back in 2012 and has been holed up there ever since. Now, with the Ecuadorian election results looming, Mr. Assange’s fate is up in the air.
In Latin America, a so-called “pink tide” of leftist leaders has been ebbing, and now, the vote is seen as crucial to say the least.
Argentina, Brazil and Peru have all shifted to the right in recent months, as the region has sunk into recession and leftist leaders have been tarnished by a string of corruption scandals.
One of the Ecuadorian race’s hot issues is the fate of Assange.
Ex-banker Guillermo Lasso has threatened to revoke the political asylum Ecuador has granted its most famous guest.
Leftist, Rafael Correa who had led the country for the last decade and is also an outspoken critic of the United States, let the WikiLeaks founder stay at the London embassy to avoid arrest and extradition to Sweden over rape allegations by two women.
The 45-year-old Australian, who denies the accusations, says he fears Sweden would send him to the United States to face trial for leaking hundreds of thousands of secret US military and diplomatic documents in 2010.
His case has returned to the spotlight since WikiLeaks was accused of meddling in the US election last year by releasing a damaging trove of hacked emails from presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign and her Democratic party.
The post Julian Assange’s fate could soon take a DRASTIC turn appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
In an interview with the Financial Times, President Trump made a promise to, “solve the North Korea problem.” He gave China an ultimatum stating, “Well if China is not going to solve North Korea, we will. That is all I am telling you.”
America currently has about 900 active nuclear warheads. The strategic nuclear warheads are deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and strategic bomber aircraft. The State Department announced in April 2015 that approximately 2,500 warheads are retired and await dismantlement. The United States and Russia account for 93 per cent of nukes. Since their peak in the mid-1980s, global arsenals have shrunk by over two-thirds. More countries have given up weapons and programs in the past 30 years than have tried to acquire them.
Deputy White House national security adviser KT McFarland says the US could be hit by North Korea’s nuclear weapons by 2020, while Trump has said he would be discussing the issue of North Korea with Chinese president Xi Jinping when he hosts the world leader at his resort this week.
He added, “China has great influence over North Korea. And China will either decide to help us with North Korea, or they won’t. If they do, that will be very good for China, and if they don’t it won’t be good for anyone.”
The post Trump pledges to ‘solve North Korea’ problem amid Kim Jong-un nuke threats appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
A federal complaint was unsealed today charging Candace Marie Claiborne, 60, of Washington, D.C., and an employee of the U.S. Department of State, with obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements to the FBI, both felony offenses, for allegedly concealing numerous contacts that she had over a period of years with foreign intelligence agents.
The charges were announced by Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary B. McCord for National Security, U.S. Attorney Channing D. Phillips of the District of Columbia and Assistant Director in Charge Andrew W. Vale of the FBI’s Washington Field Office.
“Candace Marie Claiborne is a U.S. State Department employee who possesses a Top Secret security clearance and allegedly failed to report her contacts with Chinese foreign intelligence agents who provided her with thousands of dollars of gifts and benefits,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General McCord. “Claiborne used her position and her access to sensitive diplomatic data for personal profit. Pursuing those who imperil our national security for personal gain will remain a key priority of the National Security Division.”
“Candace Claiborne is charged with obstructing an official proceeding and making false statements in connection with her alleged concealment and failure to report her improper connections to foreign contacts along with the tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits they provided,” said U.S. Attorney Phillips. “As a State Department employee with a Top Secret clearance, she received training and briefing about the need for caution and transparency. This case demonstrates that U.S. government employees will be held accountable for failing to honor the trust placed in them when they take on such sensitive assignments”
“Candace Claiborne is accused of violating her oath of office as a State Department employee, who was entrusted with Top Secret information when she purposefully mislead federal investigators about her significant and repeated interactions with foreign contacts,” said Assistant Director in Charge Vale. “The FBI will continue to investigate individuals who, though required by law, fail to report foreign contacts, which is a key indicator of potential insider threats posed by those in positions of public trust.”
The FBI arrested Claiborne on March 28. She made her first appearance this afternoon in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
According to the affidavit in support of the complaint and arrest warrant, which was unsealed today, Claiborne began working as an Office Management Specialist for the Department of State in 1999. She has served overseas at a number of posts, including embassies and consulates in Baghdad, Iraq, Khartoum, Sudan, and Beijing and Shanghai, China. As a condition of her employment, Claiborne maintains a Top Secret security clearance. Claiborne also is required to report any contacts with persons suspected of affiliation with a foreign intelligence agency.
Despite such a requirement, the affidavit alleges, Claiborne failed to report repeated contacts with two intelligence agents of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), even though these agents provided tens of thousands of dollars in gifts and benefits to Claiborne and her family over five years. According to the affidavit, the gifts and benefits included cash wired to Claiborne’s USAA account, an Apple iPhone and laptop computer, Chinese New Year’s gifts, meals, international travel and vacations, tuition at a Chinese fashion school, a fully furnished apartment, and a monthly stipend. Some of these gifts and benefits were provided directly to Claiborne, the affidavit alleges, while others were provided through a co-conspirator.
According to the affidavit, Claiborne noted in her journal that she could “Generate 20k in 1 year” working with one of the PRC agents, who, shortly after wiring $2,480 to Claiborne, tasked her with providing internal U.S. Government analyses on a U.S.-Sino Strategic Economic Dialogue that had just concluded.
Claiborne, who allegedly confided to a co-conspirator that the PRC agents were “spies,” willfully misled State Department background investigators and FBI investigators about her contacts with those agents, the affidavit states. After the State Department and FBI investigators contacted her, Claiborne also instructed her co-conspirators to delete evidence connecting her to the PRC agents, the affidavit alleges.
Charges contained in a criminal complaint are merely allegations, and every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The maximum penalty for a person convicted of obstructing an official proceeding is 20 years in prison. The maximum penalty for making false statements to the FBI is five years in prison. The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes. If convicted of any offense, the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
At her court appearance today, Claiborne pleaded not guilty before the Honorable Magistrate Judge Robin M. Meriweather. A preliminary hearing was set for April 18.
The FBI’s Washington Field Office is leading the investigation into this matter. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys John L. Hill and Thomas A. Gillice for the District of Columbia and Trial Attorney Julie Edelstein of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.
President Donald Trump’s border wall project could get funding through an unlikely method: voluntary donations from private citizens.
The newly-founded America First Foundation, Inc., has started accepting donations to fund “the great wall of America,” with the ultimate goal of raising $21 billion to contribute to construction of the nearly 2,000 mile, 18 to 30-foot-high barrier between the U.S. and Mexico.
“This is not a joke, this is not a scam, this is the REAL DEAL!” a post on the group’s Facebook page reads.
America First’s founders want to bring the American people together to be part of what will be a historic construction project, securing the southern border by slowing illegal immigration, reduce drug trafficking, and reducing the burden on federal coffers.
“They are going to put up the wall. We’re just trying to help,” Steven Vulich, co-founder and vice president of America First Foundation, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Vulich is an Army veteran who was medically discharged after taking shrapnel during Operation Iraqi Freedom, and now works as a police officer on military bases. He lives in Colorado Springs, Colo., and is also an entrepreneur who created a social networking app.
America First was founded shortly after Trump won the 2016 presidential election, based on the premise of “getting American citizens together for a common cause,” Vulich said.
Right now, that cause is Trump’s border wall, or the “GREAT SOUTHERN BORDER WALL,” according to America First’s website.
So far, the campaign has raised $138.00 from 130 donations, but Vulich said word about the campaign is spreading. The website launched in February, and people are nervous about donating money to a new nonprofit, but the group is working to legitimize the organization. The group has a small staff, a public relations firm, and other projects as well.
One campaign listed on the website asks for money to help people displaced by the Oroville, Calif. damn floods, and another general disaster relief team that can “Respond Quickly To Many Types Of Disasters Around The Country With The Early Supplies Needed To Assist Those Who Are Effected [sic] And Displaced.”The border wall campaign is getting positive attention on social media, and significant numbers of people are just waiting to donate, Vulich said. “There are people who give recurring amounts every payday. They drop $50 every paycheck,” Vulich said.
Any money America First raises for the wall project will go toward the border wall construction. Vulich wants to work with the administration and the Department of Homeland Security to directly pay contractors working on the wall through a public-private partnership.
Arizona tried raising funds through private, voluntary donations for a fence solely covering its 200-mile portion of the U.S. border with Mexico several years ago, but the project ultimately failed. State legislators initiated the project in 2011 and hoped to raise $50 million, but by 2015, the project had only garnered $265,000 and the project was abandoned, the Associated Press reported at the time.
The 2016 election may indicate voters want the border wall, according to Vulich. “It’s what the people have been asking for. It’s what people want,” Vulich said.
The Trump administration is seeking $999 million in supplemental funding to start the wall project this year, but that’s a fraction of the cost. A DHS reportobtained by Reuters earlier this month put the cost of entire project at $21 billion.
Federal agencies are soliciting prototypes for the wall from construction firms, but ultimately, the project will require Congressional action to fully fund itself, and Democratic leaders have already threatened a government shutdown.
“It’s not about Republicans or Democrat,” Vulich said. Bringing in private money for the construction project could, in theory, allow the administration to fund other parts of the budget important to Democrats. “We’re trying to make everybody happy.”
The post Group Wants To Crowd-Source Money For Trump’s Border Wall appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
As Women’s History Month comes to a close, it is remarkable observing how the Democrat Party has attempted to lecture Republicans and the American people about women’s suffrage and equality. Either in ignorance or in duplicitous fashion, they repeatedly hijack American history, abusively perverting it in order to fit their own narrative of generations of Democrats fighting the moral, just, and virtuous battles for civil rights and for all things considered good by society.
And yet, with a little research, history stands on its own two feet and illuminates the lies fabricated and propagated by the party of Wilson.
In 1878, Aaron Augustus Sargent, a Republican U.S. Senator from California and husband of Susan B. Anthony’s close friend Ellen Clark, introduced the 19th Amendment for the first time to the United States Senate. Sargent’s first proposal was, of course, defeated by the Democratic Party. That disappointing vote on the floor of the Senate would only be the first of a series of shutdowns by congressional Democrats.
Year after year—for 40 years—Republicans in Congress repeatedly re-introduced the amendment for a vote, never reaching the required two-thirds threshold necessary for its passage. Even when Republicans held the majority in one or both houses of Congress, Democrats refused to reach across the aisle and stand for the political equality of women.
Frustrated with the actions of Senate and House Democrats in the federal government, suffragists— including Susan B. Anthony— led efforts to get bills passed in state legislatures that granted women the right to vote. If enough states passed these types of bills, they projected that there would be overwhelming political pressure on Congress to pass the 19th Amendment. By the end of 1918, fifteen states had adopted referendums that allowed women to legally vote in elections at all levels of government.
Attempting to persuade congressional Democrats, Suffragists made the argument that President Woodrow Wilson — a Democrat who vehemently opposed women’s suffrage — would not have won reelection in 1916 over Supreme Court Justice Charles Evans Hughes had it not been for state’s allowing women to cast votes for their state’s slate of electors. Unfortunately, that argument was not enough to convince Democrats in Congress to halt their opposition to the 19th Amendment.
The tide finally turned in late 1918, as the Democrat Party lost majorities in both houses of Congress — due in large part to Woodrow Wilson’s drop in popularity. Wilson campaigned on keeping the United States out of World War I, but he reneged on that promise. The GOP, now with majorities in Congress and several states aligned with their campaign, was finally in a position to pass the 19th Amendment. By July of 1919, the 19th Amendment had passed both houses of Congress, and on August 24th, 1920, the State of Tennessee would become the final state needed to ratify the amendment.
So, why do Democrats deceptively take credit for the accomplishments of Republicans like A.A. Sargent, Ellen Clark, and Susan B. Anthony? Perhaps, because they are desperate to ensure that the racist, sexist history of their own party remains a secret.
Sadly, they have been successful in this effort. After all, the Democrat Party and the Left generally control the media and academia—two critical outlets of influence that are utilized today as indoctrination mills. It is through these outlets that the Democrats have brainwashed the next generation into believing that their party is morally superior, having accomplished all of the progress actually made by Republicans, and that the Republican Party is nothing more than a collection of ignorant, woman-hating racists who seek to destroy the proletariat.
In fact, this exact scenario happened just this week. During the course of his remarks at the Women’s Empowerment Panel on Wednesday, President Donald Trump paid tribute to three historically influential American women, of which Susan B. Anthony was among them.
Trump, sarcastically: "Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony? I'm shocked you've heard of her." https://t.co/dQ97ZRjL2v
— Daniella Diaz (@DaniellaMicaela) March 29, 2017
Here is a transcript of Trump’s remarks about the leader of the 19th century women’s suffrage movement:
“And we’ve had leaders like Susan B. Anthony—have you heard of Susan B. Anthony? I’m shocked that you’ve heard of her—who dreamed of a much more equal and fair future, an America where women themselves, as she said, ‘helped to make laws and elect the lawmakers.'”
To any person who watched the remarks in whole, as opposed to in selective part, would have quickly picked up on the fact that Trump’s off-hand remark was made in a sarcastic fashion.
Yet, as one would expect, the Democrats and the praetorian guard media (a fitting term coined by constitutional lawyer Mark Levin), in unison, spared no time attempting to lecture the President, treating him like a benighted fool who had never heard of Susan B. Anthony.
For example, Karen Tumulty, a national political correspondent for The Washington Post who is most recently remembered as a laughing-stock for her “unbiased,” “stalwart” investigation of the “expensive tastes” of former President George Herbert Walker Bush’s daughter-in-law, Columba Bush, in which she twists facts in order to trash the wife of former GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush. In similar fashion, the correspondent tweeted of Trump’s comments:
"Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?" Trump asks at women's empowerment event.
— Karen Tumulty (@ktumulty) March 29, 2017
Rebecca Ballhaus (The Wall Street Journal), Emma Gray (The Huffington Post), Frank Thorp (NBC News), and Jennifer Epstein (Bloomberg)—all non-partisan, unbiased reporters, of course—joined in chorus with Tumulty.
"Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?" asks Trump at a women's empowerment event at the White House.
— Rebecca Ballhaus (@rebeccaballhaus) March 29, 2017
"Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?" -the President of the United States
— Emma Gray (@emmaladyrose) March 29, 2017
President Donald J Trump: "Have you heard of Susan B Anthony?"
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) March 29, 2017
"Have you heard of Susan B. Anthony?" the president asked a group of women today at the White House.
— Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) March 29, 2017
Then came the lecture. And of course, from none other than the daughter of former Secretary of State and Democratic Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton:
Do you think Trump knows Susan B. Anthony & Frederick Douglass were friends? Worked together on universal suffrage? (Knows who they were?) https://t.co/fY5Zi171wO
— Chelsea Clinton (@ChelseaClinton) March 29, 2017
What is most damning about Clinton’s remarks is that they showcase her own historical ignorance of who Susan B. Anthony really was. Perhaps these “journalists” should have tagged Clinton’s account in their tweets because apparently she never cared to figure out that Anthony was a Republican who fought for political equality for women in spite of the Democratic Party, which sabotaged her efforts at every turn.
The former First Daughter, though, wasn’t the only one to lecture the President and Republicans on Susan B. Anthony and women’s suffrage during Women’s History Month.
Recall on the last day of February, several Democratic congresswomen decided it would be clever to dress in all white for the President’s first joint address to Congress as a symbol of women’s suffrage, hoping to take another stab at protesting the legitimate election of Donald Trump to the Office of the Presidency by way of the electoral college.
The outfit coordination effort was led by the chair of the Democratic Women’s Working Group, Representative Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), who represents Florida’s 21st congressional district.
“We wear white to unite against any attempts by the Trump Administration to roll back the incredible progress women have made in the last century, and we will continue to support the advancement of all women. We will not go back,” commented Frankel, who tweeted this photo—picturing House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi (D-Cal.)—hours before President Trump’s Address:
— Rep. Lois Frankel (@RepLoisFrankel) February 28, 2017
What these Democratic women did was so deceptively inappropriate that even Susan B. Anthony was rolling over in her grave. The irony of the whole debacle is that they commandeered an issue actually fought for by the Republican Party, and then used that stolen credit to virtue signal and self-righteously position themselves as the moral superiors to a Republican President of the United States—all for political optics. It makes one wonder whether they have any shame at all.
Certainly the most laughable part of the stunt by Pelosi, Frankel, and these various Democratic congresswomen is, just like Mrs. Clinton, the exposure of a severe lack of knowledge on their part about their own party’s history. What they fail to remember is at the same time that the GOP was crusading for women’s suffrage, the Democrats were integrating the Ku Klux Klan as a military arm of their party to carry out post-slavery racism. Unless they were planning to switch parties, one might mistake this group of Democrats dressed in all white as merely symbolizing the racist heritage of their party—not supporting policies that are a direct result of Republican virtue.
The post Women’s Suffrage: A Triumph of the Grand Old Party–Not the Democrats appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
Today, Friday March 31st from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori will discuss ObamaCare Repeal…the Big Picture Explained, and important news of the week.
Hope you can tune in at: http://bit.ly/2cpXuRd
It is no surprise that California is leading the nation in the gender-neutral bathroom saga. While in $777,918,403,000 debt, California is making it a priority to unveil the new gender-neutral bathroom signs for single user bathrooms.
“Providing inclusive, safe, gender-neutral restrooms is an important step forward for Long Beach,” Mayor Robert Garcia, a Democrat, said in a statement. “It is important that all people feel valued and respected as a vital part of our diverse community.”
According to a new California law, which was signed by Gov. Jerry Brown (D) in September and went into effect March 1, every single-user restroom across the state must be made available to people of every gender identity.
Apparently, the new icon is a sign of inclusivity.
Check it out here:
The post You’ll want to see the new gender-neutral bathroom signs California just unveiled appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
The Go Fund Me Access To Bloggers Mess?
Clevenger & Witt, for the news you don’t want to hear. And there are plenty of readers who don’t want to hear this. Let me start off by saying that no finer aspiration compels human behavior like being paid to do something they love. For a whole 18 months after I became a 3 handicapper I dreamt night and day of going on the PGA tour and living the dream of my lifetime. After 18 months of being dragged up and down tough golf courses, shucking out bucks I couldn’t afford for travel, entry fees, and access to practice ranges so that I might hit two or three hundred balls a day, I gave up. That’s because I didn’t have what is needed to support my dream inside me. Like the young boy in the movie “A Christmas Story” whose deepest wish was for the magical talisman of transformation (“old blue”, the red rider bb gun he nearly shot out his eye with), I had the dream, without the means. So, I am not opposing those who want to go out into life, break the surly bonds of modern reality of life in America, and soar into the commercial where the people look so happy watching the sunset from their separate bathtubs. And least of all am I critical of those who want to fly there on a talent such as writing.
I truly love to write. I’m pretty sure that the reason for this is that I get to teach when I write, only I get to do so my way. So that’s what I’m doing now. Teaching, I mean, and today’s lesson is an extension of one recently taught, so it should be relatively easy to understand.
If you will remember, The Butcher and I did a bit of investigative writing on the subject of what happened to the Tea Party. Well…it was really writing that was based on other articles documenting the fact that super pacs claiming to represent the interests of publicly Tea Party candidates, then pocketed all but a few thousand of tens of millions of dollars, putting a pittance into supporting those candidates, usually by paying a few bloggers of questionable worth to write articles for the same publications that they were advertising through. Still, the articles we wrote were the first to appear in publications frequented by Tea Party members (or ex-members), and were widely plagiarized within days. We don’t mind plagiarism of our work, by the way. Imitation really is the most sincere form of compliment, and it helped to form a sense of informed community.
Hey, what’s new? Glad you asked! Go Fund Me, a truly useful and powerful tool for good, is creating a terrible mess in the online social media blogosphere. I’ll skip the usual folderol and get right to it. The Butcher and I are writing this book called “The List” right? And during the initial investigative phase, we found a direct correlation between Go Fund Me money, as well as other donations and shockingly immoral uses of the money. Now, I know that when I give a homeless guy a few dollars, there’s a pretty good chance he’s going to be getting high soon. We all take that risk when we give money away. In some cases, say a Go Fund Me account for a child who has some terrible illness, not so much.
What I’m saying is this. Yeah, I’m a liberal. And, not that I received such a warm welcome from them, I am working as hard as my job will permit me to reconstruct that great vehicle. America needs it. Without it Donald Trump would still be a reality show host. But I’m doing it under a much smaller umbrella than I would have been since the breakup of the party, and now even that is threatened.
What we have uncovered, and continue to uncover is, at best, dissension created by bloggers attacking each other with rumors and lies, and at worst, outright character assassination of bloggers whose only crime is that they have a few donors in their reader/viewership that another blogger wants. It’s like baseball. It used to be a game, but now it’s all about the money.
I hope that if this article has not informed you, it has at least made you think. You may be sure of more writing on this subject, as well as discussion. Be sure to catch my video on Clevenger Witt tomorrow; it won’t be live, so you can view it on that page whenever you like. I’m quite sure Billy will have words on his live at five show as well.
It is, after all the news you don’t want to hear.
Clevenger & Witt Multimedia Group
The post The GoFundMe Access To Blogger’s Mess and What It Means To YOU! appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
While you were imagining their lies, like the Russian Conspiracy, were just stupid, the democrats were learning from their lies.What have Democrats learned?
That’s right: If you imagined democrats were stupid, they continued to learn that lying is ok. You trained them you would accept their lying, by self-deluding it was stupidity, not lying.
John D. Lofgren @ Junto Club: www.atlasShouts.com
Author of “Atlas Shouts” #13 rated Money book on Amazon:
Atlas Shouts, The Movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrPgka9SBJ4
The post Russian Conspiracy Enabled By Calling Democrats Stupid appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
Two former associates of New Jersey Governor Chris Christie have been jailed for their role in a political revenge plot dubbed Bridgegate.
Ex-Port Authority executive Bill Baroni was sentenced to two years for closing lanes on a busy New York City bridge.
Former Christie aide Bridget Kelly was handed a prison sentence of 18 months for her role in the 2013 scandal.
The traffic jam was arranged to target a local mayor who decided not to endorse Mr Christie’s re-election bid.
Kelly and Baroni were convicted in November on counts including wire fraud, conspiracy and misusing the bridge for improper purposes.
On Wednesday, Baroni told the judge he regretted his actions and that he had “failed”.
“I regret more than anything that I allowed myself to get caught up in this and fail to help those who need it,” Baroni said.Ms Kelly testified that Governor Christie knew of the lane closures in advance
Baroni, 45, was the former deputy executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which oversees airports, tunnels and bridges in the New York area.
Christie aides initially tried to explain the four days of gridlock in September 2013 on the George Washington Bridge between New Jersey and New York City as a legitimate traffic study.
Both Kelly and Baroni testified in court that Mr Christie had known in advance about the lane closures on the country’s busiest span.
Kelly, the governor’s 44-year-old former chief of staff, provided one of the most damning pieces of evidence in an email she wrote saying: “Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee.”
But Mr Christie denied any knowledge of the political plot and was not charged.
A third aide who has already pleaded guilty, David Wildstein, testified that Mr Christie had laughed about the traffic jam during a 9/11 memorial service two days after the lanes were blocked.
Baroni’s defence lawyers argued that his long career in public service warranted leniency.
But Assistant US Attorney Lee Cortes said Baroni should have known better and alerted authorities to the plot instead of helping to cover it up.
US District Court Judge Susan Wigenton said Baroni deserved some prison time for what she called “an outrageous display of abuse of power”.
Baroni will be allowed out on bail while he appeals his conviction.
He was also sentenced to 500 hours of community service.
The scandal was widely perceived to have contributed to Mr Christie’s failure in his 2016 bid for the White House.
On the same day his aides were sentenced, Mr Christie was appointed by President Donald Trump to lead a federal task force on the opioid crisis in America.
When asked on Wednesday before the sentencing whether Baroni and Kelly should go to jail, Mr Christie said: “The judge will do what the judge believes is appropriate.”
The post Bridgegate: Christie aides Bill Baroni and Bridget Kelly jailed appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.
As we reported recently, Hillary Clinton feels the coast is clear, as she emerged from her rat hole.
I’m not sure what she was paid to speak at this event, but you can bet it was a small fraction of what she used to get.
— Yashar (@yashar) March 28, 2017Hillary Clinton knows that race pimping is where the money is, so she will continue.
At this event, she decided to protect two women. Two black women. A journalist and a Congresswoman.
Because in the food chain of womanhood, one rich white woman trumps five silly Negro women, no matter their stature. Thus, Clinton felt a responsibility to step in and defend these black woman.Here is the transcript from the speech:
Just look at all that’s happened in the past few days, to women who were simply doing their jobs.
April Ryan, a respected journalist with unrivaled integrity was doing her job just this afternoon in the White House press room when she was patronized and cut off trying to ask a question.
One of your own, California Congresswoman Maxine Waters was taunted with a racist joke about her hair.
Now too many women, especially women of color, have had a lifetime of practice taking precisely these kinds of indignities in stride.
But why should we have to? And any woman who thinks this could be directed to her is living in a dream world.
Recall that less than a week ago Clinton called for Americans to bridge the divide. How long did the detente between men and woman last for the twice-failed presidential candidate? About a day!
There exists no money in getting along. Fake wars make as much money as real ones, and the Clintons know this better than anyone. With the new base salary for speeches, the Clintons have no room for people getting along.
The war begins again.
The post WATCH HILLARY CLINTON RESCUE Two Black Women [VIDEO] appeared first on Tea Party Tribune.