debunking more liberal propaganda

For those of you who want to know the truth instead of the propaganda being pushed by the liberal mainstream media, I have a short message for you. I am sure that you have heard the baloney being pedaled that communities with higher illegal populations are 'safer than others'. Well, here are some 'real facts'. First of all, the percentage of the population that are illegals is about 7% of the general population. So, it the illegals commit the same number of crimes as the  'general' population, then the illegals should be committing about 7% of the total crimes. Here are the real numbers.

Illegals commit approximately 22% of all of the murders. Statistically, they should only commit about 7% of the murders. The math is extremely simple. It is obvious that they commit murder at three times the rate as the general population.

Illegals commit 18% of all the fraud. Statistically, they should commit only about 7% of the fraud. So, it is obvious that they commit fraud at 2 and a half  times higher rate than the general population.

Illegals commit 29% of the money laundering crime. So, they commit more than 4 times the money laundering than the general population. Simple math.

Illegals commit 72% of drug possession charges, ten times the rate of the general population.

The conclusion is obvious and undeniable, illegals commit more crimes than the general population.

One could ask why this is true. The answer is also obvious. The fact that they came to America illegally indicates that they had no respect for our laws from the very beginning. They committed a crime in entering our country illegally. They continue to commit a crime by staying here illegally. Since they have no respect for our law to begin with, it if clearly obvious that they will have no respect for our laws on a continuing basis while here illegally. There is a legal way to reside here in America. America has some of the most liberal immigration policies in the world, but America has the right to determine who can reside in our country. RESIDING IN AMERICA IS A PRIVELIDGE WHICH IS GRANTED ONLY TO THOSE HERE LEGALLY.

another unhearalded attaboy

The mainstream liberal Trump-hating media are doing their usual regarding positive news about President Trump. Either they bury it as a brief note or ignore it altogether. As soon as the tax bill was passed, there were multiple major companies that announced either pay raises for their employees or pay bonuses for their employees including AT&T's announcement of $1000 bonuses for each of their 200,000 employees. In case you are not doing the math, that is an expenditure of $200 million by AT&T in employee bonuses for 'middle-class' not 'rich' people. So much for the lies by the democratic leaders that the middle-class will see no benefits from the tax bill. Wells Fargo announced that they were implementing an increased minimum wage for all of their employees.

Just put it in your mind to remember when you get your new 'bonus' or pay raise within the next year, give President Trump some credit. Also, pay attention to your take-home pay after your company refigures the tax deduction to your paycheck a couple of months into 2018. The increase that you will see is due entirely to the tax bill which President Trump fought for. Oh and by the way, those of you who are currently seeking employment may be blessed by the benefit of finding a job, just remember to thank President Trump for fighting for the policy changes to create more jobs. Just remember that the democrats voted against the bill which is providing more money in your pocket. To stress the obvious, 100% of the democrats voted against the legislation which is now helping you because the democrats agenda provides no solutions or benefits. They are dedicated to an entirely negative agenda. resist anything and everything which Trump wants regardless of the consequences.

History is on Trump's side

An article By Stephen Moore

Last week during an address at the White House President Donald Trump likened his tax plan to the tax cut that John F. Kennedy proposed 55 years ago., This elicited some howls of protest from Trump's liberal critics, who say it's historically inaccurate to compare the Trump plan to JFK's.

Is it? In 1963 Kennedy proposed a tax cut that slashed business and individual tax rates by about 30 percent. It's true that tax rates were a lot higher then (90 percent in some cases) than now. But the philosophy was the same: Lower taxes will get businesses, investors and consumers going again and jump-start a lackluster economy.

There are other similarities between Trump and JFK on taxes. Democrats complain that the Trump tax cut will increase the deficit, just as Republicans made this same fatuous claim against the Kennedy tax cuts. President Kennedy declared at the New York Economic Club that it is a "paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low, and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now."

He reminded Congress that America's biggest problem was not the budget deficit but a "growth deficit."

That sounds almost identical to what Donald Trump is saying today on taxes and what Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are arguing against.

JFK, posthumously, was proven exactly right, and the tax cut critics were refuted by actual events. After the tax cuts were enacted in 1964, America experienced one of the greatest periods of prosperity in our history.

The U.S. had three straight years of 6 percent growth — the last time that has happened.

Larry Kudlow's 2016 book, "JFK and the Reagan Revolution," documented the post-JFK tax cut growth spurt: "The tax payments by the wealthiest filers nearly doubled. We had many quarters of 6 percent growth back then."

That same effect was duplicated when Ronald Reagan chopped the top income tax rates from 70 to 28 percent and the corporate rate from 48 to 35 percent. The share of taxes paid by the richest 1 percent rose from 19 percent in 1980 to above 25 percent by 1990, according to IRS tax return data. Total tax revenues surged from roughly $500 billion in 1980 to just over $1 trillion by 1990.

In 1986, Reagan's Tax Reform Act passed the U.S. Senate by a vote of— are you sitting down? — 97-3. This included the votes of such prominent Democrats as Bill Bradley, Ted Kennedy, Howard Metzenbaum and Sam Nunn. Where are the pro-growth Democrats today? Are there any?

In 1998, Bill Clinton, who had raised taxes in 1993, reversed course and signed into law one of the biggest bipartisan tax cuts in history, which included a slashing of the capital gains tax. The growth and employment boom was so great that the budget reached a budget surplus.

Democrats say they wish that Trump had put forward a bipartisan tax plan, but where is the Democratic alternative? The only alternative I've seen is Bernie Sanders' proposal to raise tax rates to 50, 60 or even 70 percent. Can anyone with a straight face argue that this would help the economy?

Sadly, the modern Democratic Party today has repudiated JFK economics. Now they are infuriated that Donald Trump has picked up that mantle. Readers can go to the Committee to Unleash Prosperity website and see and hear recordings of JFK dispensing wisdom on taxes.

Here's one more excerpt from a radio address by Kennedy: "Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary. And these new jobs and new salaries can create other jobs and other salaries."

There is one last similarity between JFK, Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump: economic optimism. President Trump shares their belief in American potential — that there are no limits to our economy or our greatness. Trump says we can grow at 3 or 4 percent. Liberal pessimists dismiss this as wild-eyed happy talk. They are selling America short.

 

 

Department of 'Just Us'

 

 

I find it to be difficult to understand the thinking processes of the leaders in the Democratic Party, so I decided to put down a few examples depicting their actions and I then try to determine their underlying thinking processes or motives. In this effort I may draw some conclusions about democrats in general, but I am sure that trying to lump all of them together is most likely inaccurate.

To begin with, I have done quite a bit of analysis and reading about the Clinton Foundation. There have been many people with strong backgrounds in criminal investigation who have said that it is a really good example to use if you want to set up a money-laundering scheme. They take in donations from many political sources including many foreign countries who obviously would have the desire to use the political connections of the Clintons. Now if I talk to a staunch democrat, I will be told that there is nothing wrong with the Clintons receiving donations from foreign countries and foreign companies who want to get special help from the Clintons. As the democrats tell me, the Clintons are much too honest to use this setup as a means of receiving bribes for political favors. However, I am dead certain that if any republican were to be known to receive millions of dollars from people who would clearly want political favors, these same democrats would scream ‘bribes’ at the top of their lungs. So it seems that the only logical conclusion is that in the democrats’ eyes it is OK for democrats to receive suspicious ‘gifts’ that ‘look like bribes’. They also seem to be saying that it is even better than OK for the Clintons to receive anything regardless of appearances.

I think that laid the groundwork for the next ‘short subject’, the Uranium One scandal. It is completely true that during the Obama reign at the same time that Hillary was the head of the State Department, 20% of America’s uranium resources were sold to the Russians. My first question is this. What kind of an idiot would ever think it was a good idea to sell one of America’s chief adversaries our uranium? Now there were supposedly multiple committees who looked at this deal and had to give their approval of the sale. Since this occurred during Obama’s reign, you can be sure that either all of the committee members or almost all of them were Obama appointees. All of them approved of the sale. However, the head of the state department was solely responsible for the ultimate decision. In other words, it the Russians had Hillary’s approval, the deal would be concluded. Interestingly, at or nearly at the same time that the deal was approved, the Russians donated over 140 million dollars to the Clinton foundation. Now we are back to what I said in the previous paragraph. According to the democrats, there is nothing wrong with the Clintons being paid over 140 million dollars at the same time that Hillary is ‘smoothing the way’ for a Russian takeover of 20% of American Uranium. But wait. It gets even better.

The Uranium One deal did not happen overnight. It took years to set up the deal. During those years, the FBI was actively investigating the actions of the Russians involved in the deal. The FBI was absolutely certain that the Russians involved were using bribes, extortion, and many other criminal activities to further the culmination of the Uranium One deal. Now Eric Holder was the attorney general at that time, and he sat in on the Uranium One meetings. In addition, he either knew about the FBI investigation or he should have known about it in his role as attorney general. The FBI covered up the information regarding the investigation of the illegal Russian activities. So now you have a situation where a sale of American uranium that should have never ever been considered is known to be involving multiple criminal actions, and this is kept secret from the very people who should be informed, the members of the various committees approving the sale. But wait it gets even better.

The top FBI men who appear to have been involved in this cover up include two familiar names, Rosenstein and Mueller. We may come back to this later in a post in the future. Suffice to say that these are the same names which are now deeply involved in the ongoing witch hunt about ‘Russian collusion’. Since they may have been involved in the cover up of ‘Russian collusion’ before, I guess the democrats think that they should have the honor of looking for imaginary ‘Russian collusion’ now! But back to the main story line.

So now it appears that we have the democratic president, Obama, who certainly should have known about the proposed sale of American uranium and the related criminal activity and the ongoing cover up. You have the head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton (democrat), who appears to have received over 140 million dollars in bribes by the Russians involved. You have Eric Holder, Rosenstein, and Mueller who may have been involved in the cover up. Can it get any better? Oh yes it can. Did I mention the agent who was deeply involved in the FBI investigation who was forced to sign a non-disclosure agreement about the whole affair? Guess who forced him to sign the non-disclosure agreement, the DOJ (read that as department of just us). Who were they preventing from hearing his testimony with this non-disclosure agreement? Only the United States senators and congressmen!!! Now why would the head of the DOJ make a person sign a non-disclosure agreement which had the single purpose of preventing the truth from ever emerging regarding the criminal activities related to the sale of 20% of America’s uranium to an unfriendly government? Who in the plethora of high-level democrats involved in the Uranium One deal have secrets they want kept hidden?

 

 

The enemy among us

The Enemy Among Us

Charles Krauthammer

"There's a reason why in New York Harbor we have the Statue of Liberty, not the Statue of Equality"

An article from the New York Post:

I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called "Organizing for Action" (OFA).

OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do.  This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing.  It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago.  If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run.  What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws?

If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country?  We are about to find out in America!

Our ex-president said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep.  He has moved many of his administration's top dogs over to Organizing for Action.

OFA is behind the strategic and tactical implementation of the resistance to the Trump Administration that we are seeing across America, and politically active courts are providing the leverage for this revolution.

OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for "progressive" change. Its issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform.

OFA members were propped up by the ex-president's message from the shadows:  "Organizing is the building block of everything great we have accomplished Organizers around the country are fighting for change in their communities and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines.  Commit to this work in 2017 and beyond."

OFA's website says it obtained its "digital" assets from the ex-president's re-election effort and that he inspired the movement.  In short, it is the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic we know as AMERICA.

Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says, “The OFA will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the ex-president will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House."

Sperry writes that, “The ex-president is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the Trump administration through a network of non-profits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide.  The OFA IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate that the OFA has 32,525 (and growing) volunteers nationwide.  The ex-president and his wife will oversee the operation from their home/office in Washington DC.

Think about how this works.  For example:  Trump issues an immigration executive order; the OFA signals for protests and statements from pro-immigrant groups; the ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action in support of these activities; the twitter sphere lights up with social media; and violence follows.  All of this happens from the ex-president's signal that he is heartened by the protests.

If Barack Obama did not do enough to destroy this country in the 8 years he was in office, it appears his future plans are to destroy the foundation on which this country has operated on for the last 241 years.

If this does not scare you, then we are in worse trouble than you know.

So, do your part.  You have read it, so at least pass this on so others will know what we are up against.  We are losing our country and we are so compliant.  We are becoming a "PERFECT TARGET" for our enemy!

Charles Krauthammer

Most 'liberal' media bury news about another Trump success

An article By Wanda Carruthers

 

The media has largely ignored a significant $83.7 billion "economic game changer" President Donald Trump helped broker with China during his 12-day trip to Asia that's poised to create numerous petrochemical projects in West Virginia over the next 20 years, Salena Zito said in a New York Post opinion piece Saturday.

President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping witnessed the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding on Thursday between West Virginia Secretary of Commerce H. Wood Thrasher and a representative of China Energy. The investment is part of several Chinese investments totaling $250 billion the president has helped negotiate.

Yet, as Zito pointed out, the BBC and CNN reported the story in their business sections and The New York Times ran a short Associated Press story, giving it "low key" placement and "muted" headlines.

"One would have suspected that the prospect of an investment this large — nearly three times the total annual budget for the Department of Energy — would have been front-page news," said Paul Sracic, political science professor at Youngstown State University.

As Zito pointed out, Trump had little to gain by making a deal to West Virginia if he was out to woo voters, since the state is expected to vote solidly Republican in 2020. This suggested he was perhaps intending to follow through on a campaign promise to bring more jobs to the U.S. economy.

"This deal suggests that Trump hasn't forgotten what really matters to his base, but few are giving him props for it," the article stated.

"We have to make sure it is good for the economy of our state — that the workers of our state get the benefits of the jobs, and that the nation is secure," West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin told the Post.

West Virginia Gov. Jim Justice has insisted the state had offered no financial incentives to bring the deal to fruition — a deal that will bring jobs to a state that had been hit hard by "job and population losses, as well as wage stagnation, over the past 30 years," Zito explained.

However, the lack of coverage failed to communicate significant positive economic changes for the American people.

"Once again, the media is missing a story that matters to the American people outside the liberal echo chamber. But, it would have helped if Trump had shouted about his own success," the article concluded. "Trump needs to remember that his megaphone isn't just for the haters, but for the voters who are desperate to finally see real change."

Atta boy for President Trump

Excerpt from an article written by LiAngelo Ball

Three UCLA basketball players detained in China on suspicion of shoplifting were headed back to the United States on Tuesday after President Donald Trump said he had sought the help of Chinese President Xi Jinping in the case.

Staff for Delta Air Lines confirmed that the players - freshmen LiAngelo Ball, Cody Riley and Jalen Hill - had boarded a Delta flight from Shanghai to Los Angeles.

"What they did was unfortunate," Trump told reporters earlier in Manila. He said the trio, who have been held since last week, could have faced long prison sentences, and described Xi's response as "terrific."

"They're working on it right now," Trump said.

Trump had raised the issue with Xi during a dinner held during the U.S. leader's Nov. 8 to 10 state visit to Beijing. Trump was in the Philippines capital for a summit of Asian leaders.

Asked about the trio and Trump's discussing the issue with Xi, China Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang told a daily news briefing in Beijing: "Until now, I have not received any update, so I am unable to provide any further information."

The three basketball players from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) were detained by police on Nov. 7 in the eastern Chinese city of Hangzhou over allegations of shoplifting. They were not on the team's return flight to the United States on Saturday.

A senior White House official said the players had been given relatively light treatment due to Trump's intervention.

"It's in large part because the president brought it up," the official told Reuters.

I seriously doubt that you will see this reported in the main stream HATE-TRUMP media. After all, it does reflect the fact that Trump is aware of Americans in trouble, and actually does something positive to help!

Hillary/Russian collusion

Back in October of 2016, I posted information about the Uranium One scandal. Finally, the main stream people in power are waking up. You want to talk about collusion with the Russians. Forget about the so-called collusion fantasy that the main stream media has been making up about President Trump for over a year. That fantasy will probably die sometime without ever producing anything to support the fantasy. However, Hillary and Bill Clinton did collude with Russia to arrange the sell of 20% of American Uranium reserves to Russia, and they were paid bribes of over 140 million dollars by way of 'donations' to the Clinton Foundation. Of course, they were immersed in the deal, but as usual, Hillary has developed total amnesia regarding the bribes ever occurring. There were probably many more 'liberals' from the Obama administration also involved such as Eric Holder. The Clintons tried to mask the transfer of the 140+ million dollars, but there should be plenty of evidence to convict them of the crimes. However, for those who have initiated the current investigation, follow the money. I am sure that there were others who received payoffs related to this occurrence, with my guess being the Eric Holder also benefitted as well. Lastly, Obama himself had to have been aware of the deal, and there is no way that anyone can justify selling American nuclear resources to the Russians under any circumstances. If you are also concerned and infuriated, then write your congressman and insist that the people who initiated and profited from the sellout of American interests be prosecuted. There MUST NOT be a two-tier justice system in America. The Clintons need to be held accountable just like anyone else would be.

Typical Hatemongering from the 'left leaders'

It appears that Florida congresswoman Wilson was slinking around the White House in typical snake-like fashion trying to find something that she could label as 'deplorable'. During her skulking around, she claims that she 'accidently' overheard President Trump talking to a widow who lost her husband while fighting for America. Of course, you and I know that she had no business listening to a 'private' phone call, and you and I know that what she is claiming is a lie, but her intention is crystal-clear. What really needs to be stated is that she does not care even a tiny bit what harm she does to the widow that President Trump was talking with. Congresswoman Wilson is only concerned with expounding on her 'HATE' and cares nothing about anyone else's feelings. An American soldier died in service to our country, and Wilson should not demean his death in her demented hate-trump actions.

NFL 'facts'

Here are some “fun” NFL facts:

 

_{In 2012 the NFL had an issue with Tim Tebow kneeling for each game to pray, they also had an issue with Tebow wearing John 3:16 as part of his blackout to avoid glare and made him take it off.}

 

_{In 2013 the NFL fined Brandon Marshall for wearing green cleats to raise awareness for people with mental health disorders.}

 

_{In 2014 Robert Griffin III (RG3) entered a post-game press conference wearing a shirt that said “Know Jesus Know Peace" but was forced to turn it inside out by an NFL}

_{uniform inspector before speaking at the podium.}

 

_{In 2015 DeAngelo Williams was fined for wearing “Find the Cure" eye black for breast cancer awareness.}

 

_{In 2015 William Gay was fined for wearing purple cleats to raise awareness for domestic violence. (not that the NFL has a domestic violence problem…)}

 

_{In 2016 the NFL prevented the Dallas Cowboys from wearing a decal on their helmet in honor of 5 Dallas Police officers killed in the line of duty.}

 

_{In 2016 the NFL threatened to fine players who wanted to wear cleats to commemorate the 15th anniversary of 9/11.}

 

_{So tell me again how the NFL supports free speech and expression all of a sudden}

_{Don't think you will be a bit surprised or taken aback by  the comments of NFL players in this study. Remember most have been to college and are millionaires... guess neither of those achievements make them}

_{"rocket scientists or brain surgeons " or even semi intelligent of America's history.}

_{Wonder who ties their shoes?}

 

_{Do not miss the last one!!  It does reveal the awful level of public education….sad……how can you help those who will not help themselves??}

 

 _{NEW YORK (World News Bureau) - In a recent polling of 585 NFL players, nearly all of them were unsure of exactly what they are protesting.}

<sub>Here's a sampling of responses to the question "What are you protesting by kneeling during the National Anthem?"

"Pretty sure it's against Nazis - especially the white ones."

"We're protesting America becoming capitalistic instead of equal."

"I'm protesting against Trump saying black lives don't matter."

"We're against global warming and the police."

"We're showing the world that we care about, ahh, things such as... such as....ahhhhh, freedom from suppression?"

"Me and my fellow players are protesting the Constitution of Independence because of what it does to people of color."

"We are displaying our right to stand up by kneeling for our beliefs."

"We are protesting Trump, because he, you know, keeping the black man down and sh*t."

"Myself is kneeling to show that just because I'm American don't mean I got to act like one."</sub>

More Trump success

As I am sure you are aware, the GOP leaders in the house and senate have accomplished almost nothing to support President Trump's goals. They have failed miserably regarding health care legislation, and they have yet to even present any bills regarding immigration or taxes. However, even without any GOP assistance, President Trump is making progress in achieving his stated goals. If you want to help President Trump achieve more, vote republican in the next elections, but vote against the incumbent GOP leaders in the primaries. Mitch McConnell is one of the major roadblocks to achieving ANYTHING, and he must be ousted in the republican primary. Having said all of that, I am now going to attach an article by F McGuire dated Oct 13th, 2017.

article is below:

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross says the economy is shifting into high gear, telling Newsmax TV that is largely because of President Donald Trump’s quest to abolish the sea of corporate red tape imposed by the Obama administration.

“I think the animal juices are starting to flow but I think a lot of that has to do with the regulatory reform,” Ross, 79, told Newsmax Finance Insider, economist and moderator Larry Kudlow in a "Newsmax in the Nation's Capital" special sponsored by Newsmax and Google.

“Every day CEOs are coming into our office usually looking for something new but they usually begin by saying how happy they are and how much better they're doing because of the reduced regulatory burden,” Ross said.

Ross told Kudlow now that the corporate shackles have been removed, businesses are ready to invest in themselves, their workers and the country.

“I think it's coming back big time. A number of them have announced plans to expand even before the tax code comes onto the horizon. And I think assuming we get the tax cut that will really be very, very powerful for the economy because it'll have a multiplier effect on everything else we're doing,” Ross said.

“Well, already we have Foxconn bringing in from overseas huge facility – 10 billion. A couple of weeks ago on a trip to Thailand we got back a $6 billion petrochemical plan for Ohio. These are big numbers and important places,” Ross said.

Ross does see some storm clouds on the horizon, but offered a solution as well.

“My biggest worry about the constraint on growth is the workforce. I'm very involved with Ivanka Trump and her workforce of the future and the truth is our high schools are not properly equipping people for the jobs in the new technology world and it's driven big corporations to where they have to pay local community colleges to do programs to teach people about computers, about welding, about all kinds of things which is great but with all the money we're spending on education we're not spending it on what used to be called vocational training,” Ross said.

“We have the least vocational training of any OECD country. The least. That's ridiculous. And there's a social opprobrium that has come if you don't go to college. Well, I think pushing kids into college when they're not right for it all it ends up is tragedies because the one-third of all people entering college don't have a degree even six years later," he said.

"But you know what they do have $50,000 of accumulated student loans. What a terrible thing to make people think that they can do something that they shouldn’t be doing and then saddle them with debt as a penalty. It's horrible.”

Kudlow's wide-ranging interview with Ross was conducted at Google's headquarters in Washington.

The session will re-air on Newsmax TV, as well on DirecTV 349, FiOS 615 and U-Verse 1220 – and other outlets. More Info Here.

 

an article By Mark Swanson Monday, 09 Oct 2017 02:25 PM

·         The controversial June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Russians, Donald Trump Jr. and others was indeed about the Magnitsky Act, not dishing dirt on Hillary Clinton, CNN reported.

Documents provided to CNN back Trump Jr.'s account — and that of Jared Kushner — that the meeting was insignificant and a waste of their time.

An attorney for the Russian billionaire who requested the meeting provided the documents to CNN, and suggested the mixup originated with the publicist who brokered the meet and greet with Trump Jr., Kushner and other members of President Donald Trump's campaign.

The attorney, Scott Balber, told CNN that the publicist, Rob Goldstone, "probably exaggerated and maybe willfully contorted the facts for the purpose of making the meeting interesting to the Trump people."

And the seeds of a Russia collusion story were born, CNN reported.

"The documents … are consistent with my client's understanding of the purpose of the meeting which was from the beginning and at all times thereafter about her efforts to launch a legislative review of the Magnitsky Act," Balber told CNN.

Since this did not pan out for Muellar, I wonder what will be his next rabbit trail to waste money and time investigating!!!

More hyprocrisy

For those of you who are following the NFL protests, here is some information. I have been able to determine that the following NFL teams did not have players kneeling during the national anthem this last weekend: Vikings, Bears, Packers, Jets, Saints, Jaguars, Texans, Steelers, Ravens, Panthers, Patriots, Falcons, Bengals, Browns, Cowboys, and Rams. However, the Cowboys did stand with locked arms during the anthem. I have also determined that the following teams did have players kneeling during the national anthem in protest: Bills, Dolphins, and Lions. I have not been able to get information on the other NFL teams at this time.

Just for your information, I am very opposed with the political posturing and protests by the NFL players because I see it as total disrespect for our country, and even less respect for all of the dedicated soldiers who have died defending our country. If you don't love our country, then why don't you get out!!! It is absurd for NFL players who are making millions of dollars simply because of the opportunities available in this country to demonstrate such disrespect. Personally, any team that I know that has players demonstrating from now on are on my do-not-support-or-attend list for at least a year, and I encourage everyone who feels similarly to also vote with your pocketbook. If these grossly overpaid athletes have to pay for their expressed disrespect, just maybe they may learn how to be a little humble and appreciative!

Disgusting

The unbridled hatred for America demonstrated by so many so-called ‘liberals’ evidenced by actions desecrating our flag or showing disrespect for our country is disgusting. If they hate our country so much, then why don’t they get out! Perhaps they can go to a country they can love such as N. Korea, Afghanistan, or Iran. It is especially galling to see those who are making millions of dollars each year because of the opportunities afforded by living in America showing such disrespect for America! The current ‘liberal’ demonstrations of disrespect by players in the NFL is the apex of hypocrisy. These are men who should be aware that they are privileged to be earning millions of dollars in a country that allows such personal achievement. Instead, they return hatred and disrespect in repayment. Personally, if I should turn on a game where ANY NFL players kneels during the national anthem, I intend to turn the game off. If it happens too often this year, I may simply decide to boycott any NFL games for the remainder of the year. In addition to their hypocrisy, I find it insulting that they believe that I should hate or disrespect my country simply because they want it. Not only do I have little respect for their actions, but I totally disagree with what they are expressing. Why don’t they just go riot with all of their other ‘liberal’ brothers!  

I also rescind my invitation

I want to join President Trump and also rescind any invitation to Curry of the Warriors to any kind of social affair. I am so sick and tired of hearing spoiled, rich, know-nothing people express their hatred for our country and for our president that as far as I am concerned you can all go take a long walk off a short pier. It would be only fitting if you were somehow forced to live in a country like North Korea or Afghanistan so that you could learn to appreciate what you have here in America. In addition, who told you that your opinion is so important! You are simply rotten, spoiled, insolent brats demanding that you have everything your way. As for me, any professional sports figure who wants to grandstand his political views deserves to lose his prestige and money. I never have put any faith in your opinions anyway, and now I have an excuse to simply stop watching you play as well. Hopefully, there will be many other people who feel the same way I do, and stop spending any money to watch you. If so, maybe once you are hurt enough in your pocketbook, you might learn to be a decent person with respect for other people’s feelings and opinions. It is an honor to be invited to the White House BY ANY PRESIDENT! By the way, the same goes for the NFL players who show their disrespect and hatred for our country and our flag!

California 'sanctuary law'

For those of you who may be confused by the new California ‘sanctuary law’, I will give you some highlights by providing some what-if scenarios.

What if a person commits a murder in California?

Scenario one: The person accused of the murder is a U.S. citizen.

The person will be held, possibly without bail, and prosecuted for the crime of murder. If unable to afford an attorney, a totally insufficient defense lawyer will be provided by the state of California whose only role is to convince the accused person to accept a plea bargain. Of course, if the accused is wealthy, then he may be able to afford to hire a decent attorney.

Scenario two: The person accused of the murder is an illegal alien who has no legal right to be in the United States.

Since the person is an illegal, the state’s ‘sanctuary provisions’ are invoked. Most likely, the accused will be granted bail, and perhaps the state will provide the money to pay the bail. Of course it is obvious that the state will pay the legal expenses of the accused allowing him to hire the attorney or attorneys of his choosing. If the U. S. immigration service has an outstanding warrant for the accused, it is obvious that the state of California will pay all of the legal expenses incurred by the accused to avoid arrest by the immigration service as well as providing alternate I.D. documents for the accused to prevent the immigration service from successfully finding him.

Scenario three: In addition to being an illegal alien, the accused is either a member of violent criminal gang (such as ms-13) or the accused is a known terrorist.

In addition to all of the benefits noted in scenario two, the state of California will also pay the accused an ‘apology’ amount to be no less than $50,000 for the inconvenience that the accused will be subjected to in avoiding any consequences for the ‘wrongful accusation’. Of course, all charges will be dropped immediately.

Hopefully, you can see how the same principles will be applied for all other felonies committed in California, such as rape, theft, assault and so on.

Of course, you can probably see that this new ‘sanctuary law’ will cost the state of California millions (or maybe billions) of dollars in new legal expenses. If you are a legal resident of California, don’t concern yourself with this cost. In discussions regarding how to afford this expense, California is debating how to divert all Federal funding received for the purpose of enforcing immigration policies into a fund to help pay for this bill. There has also been discussion of releasing all illegals being held in California prisons and using the prison money to pay the costs of the ‘sanctuary law’. Failing that, they are also investigating the possibility of taxing American citizens incarcerated in California to pay the costs of incarcerating illegals in California. Democrats in the California legislature are also considering new taxes to be levied on any American citizen who is employed in California to cover any shortfall. Again, if you are legal resident, do not concern yourself with the cost of this law. Democrats are also already examining how California can declare bankruptcy and pass all of the costs on to the Federal government.

Of course, the actual effects of the ‘sanctuary law’ may not be this grievous, but it does appear that if you are a legal United States citizen residing in California, perhaps you should consider getting out of the state before being an illegal becomes a legal requirement in California!

Have a good day!

Taking the low road

Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez has said that all democrats must support abortion without exception. I guess that this means that the Democratic Party is the party of Hobson’s choice. In his opinion there can be no discussion, debate or difference of opinion permitted in the Democratic Party on this issue. On listening to him regarding other subjects, I can say with complete assurance that he has the same attitude about almost every subject. Stating it a little differently, it appears to me that Tom Perez believes that the Democrats should be the party of NO CHOICE! What ever happened to the concept of free speech! Speaking of speech, is it possible for Tom Perez to utter even one complete sentence without using obscene language. His cursing is obnoxious! Since the democratic leaders put him into the chairman position, it is easy to ascertain the attitudes of the democratic leadership. Obviously they whole-heartedly support and demand that in order to be a ‘good’ democrat, you must love to murder babies before they are born. Secondly, they obviously believe that being a loud, foul-mouthed dictator is the necessary qualifications for a democratic leader. Personally, I can see nothing positive to having such a low-grade individual in a powerful position.

An article By Daniel Bonevac

Last week I ventured where few conservatives dare to tread — MSNBC. Washington Post fact-checkers had that very day proclaimed that they had documented 1,000 false or misleading statements from the mouth (or the Twitter account) of the president. The president, they insist, has trouble with the truth.

To those of us who voted for Trump, this sounds wrong from the start. We supported him partly because he resisted the lies that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the media have been telling us. "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," "Obamacare will reduce costs by 20 percent," "Global warming is a greater national security threat than terrorism," "Islam is a religion of peace."

Those are lies. They didn’t come from Donald Trump.

But what lies is Trump supposed to have told? Before looking at cases — two points. First, let’s set aside hyperbole, which is a figure of speech; a hungry child who tells his mother "I’m starving!" is exaggerating. He isn’t telling a lie. Second, lying is more than saying something false; it’s doing it intentionally, saying something the speaker knows is false. Talk of lying, in this context, is misleading. The issue is truth, as The Washington Post is careful to note — even if its readers are not.

Now, on to cases. On MSNBC, the example I was given concerned murder rates in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Trump said, in 2016, that they were going up. But in 2007, the host exclaimed, the rate was four times as high!

A moment’s reflection should show that those two claims are perfectly compatible. The murder rate might be climbing now after an earlier and larger decline. (For a graphic representation, draw a checkmark and look at it in a mirror. The line goes down, and then starts going up again.) In fact, that was Trump’s point: the change in policing following the Black Lives Matter protests swapped a successful strategy for an inferior one. Trump was right. Imagine a doctor who followed the logic of an MSNBC host:

 Patient: "Hey doctor, my temperature’s rising. It’s now 101 degress."

 Doctor: “That’s not true! Your temperature was even higher when you had the flu."

The doctor’s allegation wouldn’t fool anyone.

An interlocutor on the show gave a second example, saying, "Trump said people on both sides committed violent acts in Charlottesville, Virginia. But only one side had someone ram a car into a crowd!" Again, these claims are plainly compatible. People on both sides engaged in violence, but only one engaged in a certain kind of violence. (Let’s set aside the point that the perpetrator didn’t ram his car into a crowd but into another car, which hit a third car, which was pushed into a crowd.)

Again, in another context, this kind of reply would fool no one. "Both American and Japanese bombers attacked aircraft carriers at Midway," "Not true! Only the Americans used B-17s!"

The Post's examples are less overt, but just as incorrect. The president has touted "new highs in a stock market that he previously derided as being a 'big, fat bubble . . . " That’s not a contradiction. Trump quite reasonably believes that the economic fundamentals have changed for the better since his election. Reducing regulations and proposing tax cuts arguably justify price levels that previously reflected monetary easing more than economic prospects.

In instance afrer instance, the story is similar. The President asserts that P. The Post observes that Q — which is entirely compatible with P — and concludes that P is false.

Several examples concern announcements of job-creating investments. The president has taken credit for bringing jobs back to America, and the companies concerned have given him credit for their decisions. Yet the Post claims that because the companies had other incentives for making the investments, Trump’s statements are false. That’s absurd. People make decisions on the basis of many factors; one thing’s being a reason doesn’t preclude something else from being a reason.

Some examples concern disputed matters of fact. Did Hillary Clinton give the Russians control over 20 percent of our uranium supply? Well, the Russians ended up with that 20 percent, and the Clinton Foundation got $145 million. What happened in between remains mysterious. But it’s far from clear that the answer to that question is "No."

More absurd examples concern the future. Is Obamacare dying, as the president claims? Will Mexico pay for the wall? Maybe; maybe not. It’s outrageous to count Trump’s statements as falsehoods.

If anyone has trouble with the truth, it’s the so-called fact-checkers.

Harry Truman is reputed to have said, "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." I think he’d find a kindred spirit in Donald Trump.

Daniel Bonevac is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. Author of five books, most recently, "Ideas of the Twentieth Century," and editor or co-editor of four others, he has published over 60 articles in professional journals. He has also written for The Washington Post, The Critique, and The American Spectator. His massively open online course, "Ideas of the Twentieth Century," has enrolled over 50,000 students. He is co-founder of BriefLogic, a marketing communication firm. He is also a contemporary Christian musician and songwriter; you can hear his music on his daughter’s debut album, "Transfiguration." To read more of his reports — Click Here Now.

 

an article By Jason Devaney

A Republican congressman said he will meet with President Donald Trump to tell him that Russia was not behind the hack of a Democratic National Committee computer server last summer.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., told Fox News' Sean Hannity that he recently met with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who presented evidence that showed another entity, not Russia, stole the DNC data.

"It is my understanding from other parties who are trying to arrange a rendezvous with myself and the president, it is being arranged for me to give him the firsthand information from [Assange]," said Rohrabacher, who generally takes a pro-Russia stance on issues.

"If the information comes out, there will be an outrage among the American people that their time has been wasted. They've had this story over and over and again shoved down their throats as if the Russians colluded with Donald Trump, and this is an attempt, as I say, to negate their vote in the ballot booth.

"When the American people realize that this is a con job and a power grab they'll be upset."

Assange reportedly told Rohrabacher that Russia was not involved in the data theft.

"I'm trying to get this out in the public now where we can get this Julian Assange thing straightened out so that people know that it wasn't the Russians that hacked into the system, and that's not how this information was released," Rohrabacher said Monday.

There are several congressional investigations and a Department of Justice probe looking at whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. A report earlier this month claimed the DNC hack never took place, and instead it was someone on the inside who leaked sensitive information.