tit for tat

The democrats are purposely sabotaging the confirmation of President Trump's cabinet members. It has been 8 weeks and there are still 8 cabinet members not confirmed. The republicans need to recognize the obvious fact. There will be no cooperation from the democrats for the entire Trump administration. Pass the necessary rules in the senate to force the confirmation votes. Use the nuclear option on EVERYTHING. In addition, there will be a time in the future when there will be a democrat sitting in the White House. When that happens, make sure that there will be no confirmation for ANY cabinet position in the democrat's White House!!!!!!

Keith Ellison would be disaster for democrats

In a 1990 column, Ellison accused a college president of stifling free speech for criticizing a guest speaker's remarks. The guest speaker was Kwame Ture (also known as Stokely Carmichael), who said that Zionists worked with the Nazis during World War II and that "Zionism must be destroyed."

"The Zionists joined with the Nazis in murdering Jews, so they would flee to Palestine," said True, according to one account by the Anti-Defamation League.

University of Minnesota President Nils Hasselmo called the statements offensive. Ellison said Hasselmo's remarks did not offer any "factual" refutation of Ture's comments.

Ellison also previously defended Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan by writing multiple articles arguing he is not anti-Semitic. Since entering Congress, Ellison has tried to distance himself from both Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, drawing ire from the group.

 

During a 2008 trip to Saudi Arabia, Ellison met with an Islamic cleric who endorsed the killing of U.S. soldiers. Pictures of the trip show Ellison met with Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, who issued a fawta in 2004 that urged jihad against U.S. forces in Iraq. Ellison's office told investigators of the House Ethics Committee that he did not participate in any "official" meetings.

The Minnesota Democrat also met with the president of a bank used to pay the families of Palestinian suicide bombers while in Saudi Arabia.

The trip was funded by an organization that has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

 

Ellison said in 1992 that black Americans do not have an obligation to obey the government because it considers them "less than human."

He made the comment after police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King and protests broke out nationwide.

Ellison also told protesters that black people do not live in a democracy.

 

Ellison once wrote a column that called the U.S. Constitution the "best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples."

Mother Jones interviewed a former classmate of Ellison's who claimed that the Minnesota Democrat said that Jews want to oppress minorities all over the world. Michael Olenick, Ellison's former classmate, said Ellison's argument was that "an oppressed group could not be racist toward Jews because Jews were themselves oppressors," according to Mother Jones.

Olenick went on to describe how Ellison would frequently talk about how European white Jews were the oppressors and bring up Jewish slave traders in conversation.

 

Below is an article by Alan M. Dershowitz, the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of “Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law” and “Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for the Unaroused Voter.”

Tomorrow the Democratic National Committee (DNC) will have to choose the direction of the Democratic Party, as well as its likely composition. It will be among the most important choices the DNC has ever had to make.  

There has been powerful push from the hard-left of the Democratic Party, led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), to elect Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) chairman.  If he is elected, I will quit the party after 60 years of loyal association and voting.  I will become an independent, continuing to vote for the best candidates, most of whom, I assume, will still be Democrats.  But I will not contribute to the DNC or support it as an institution.

My loyalty to my country and my principles and my heritage exceeds any loyalty to my party.  I will urge other like-minded people — centrist liberals — to follow my lead and quit the Democratic Party if Ellison is elected chairman.  We will not be leaving the Democratic Party we have long supported.  The Democratic Party will be leaving us!

Let me explain the reasons for this difficult decision.

Ellison has a long history of sordid association with anti-Semitism.  He worked with and repeatedly defended one of a handful of the most notorious and public anti-Semites in our country:  The Reverend Louis Farrakhan.   And worked with Farrakhan at the very time this anti-Semite was publicly describing Judaism as a “gutter religion” and insisting that the Jews were a primary force in the African slave trade.  

Ellison has publicly stated that he was unaware of Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism.  That is not a credible statement.  Everyone was aware of Farrakhan’s anti-Semitism.  Farrakhan did not try to hide it.  Indeed, he proclaimed it on every occasion.  Ellison is either lying or he willfully blinded himself to what was obvious to everyone else.  Neither of these qualities makes him suitable to be the next chairman of the DNC.

Moreover, Ellison himself has made anti-Semitic statements.  A prominent lawyer, with significant credibility, told me that while he was a law student, Ellison approached her and said he could not respect her, because she was a Jew and because she was a woman who should not be at a law school.  This woman immediately disclosed that anti-Semitic and anti-feminists statement to her husband and friends, and I believe she is telling the truth.

Ellison’s anti-Semitism is confirmed by his support for another anti-Semite, Stokely Carmichael.  

When there were protests about Carmichael’s speaking at the University of Minnesota, Ellison responded that: “The University's position appears to be this: Political Zionism is off-limits no matter what dubious circumstances Israel was founded under; no matter what the Zionists do to the Palestinians; and no matter what wicked regimes Israel allies itself with — like South Africa. This position is untenable."

But the connections are more recent as well. In 2009, Ellison headlined a fundraiser for Esam Omeish, a former candidate for Virginia state delegate who had told Palestinians that “the jihad way is the way to liberate your land.”

With regard to Israel, Ellison was one of only a small number of Congress people who recently voted against funding the Iron Dome, a missile system used by Israel to protect its civilians against rocket attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah.  His voting record with regard to the Nation State of the Jewish people is among the very worst in Congress.  

Ellison is now on an apology tour as he runs for DNC chairman, but his apologies and renunciations of his past association with anti-Semitism have been tactical and timed to his political aspirations.

He first claimed to realize that Farrakhan was an anti-Semite when he ran for office in 2006 seeking Jewish support. His claim to be a supporter of Israel was timed to coincide with his run for the chairmanship of DNC.  I do not trust him.  I do not believe him.  And neither should centrist liberal supporters of Israel and opponents of anti-Semitism.

The DNC has a momentous choice this weekend.  It can move the party in the direction of Jeremy Corbyn’s labor party in England, in the hope of attracting Jill Stein Green Party voters and millennials who stayed home.  In doing so they would be giving up on any attempt to recapture the working class and rust-belt voters in the mid-western states that turned the Electoral College over to Donald Trump.  

Jeremy Corbyn today could not get elected dog catcher in Great Britain.  I do not want to see the Democratic Party relegated to permanent minority status as a hard-left fringe.

Remember what happened when the Democrats moved left by nominating George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis — all good men.  The total combined electoral votes for these candidates would not have won a single election.  There is no reason to think the country has moved so far to the left since those days that the Democrats can win by pushing even further in the direction of the hard left.  The self-destructive election of Keith Ellison will be hard to undo for many years.

So, tomorrow, the Democrats must choose between electing Ellison or keeping centrist liberals, who support Israel, like me and many others in their party.  I hope they choose wisely.  But if they do not, I have made my choice.

Are you a deplorable - part 3

If you love America and want to protect it from those who want to harm it, the looney left will probably try to label you as deplorable. First of all, if you want to protect America and Americans, it is obvious that you must prevent those intent on harming America from being able to enter America. However, the looney left will label you as racist, and multi-phobic for insisting that terrorists, criminals, drug dealers and rapists should be prevented from entering the U.S.

If you state the obvious fact that America has the right and the power to limit access into our country, the looney left will try to tell you that criminal aliens and terrorists have an implicit right to unhindered access to our country. Nothing could be more wrong than this looney left contention.

If you love America, and want to protect our heritage and the symbols of America, such as our American flag, the looney left will also label you as deplorable. Most of the looney left hold the viewpoint that America is somehow inherently evil, and most of what they encourage is implicitly damaging to America. How someone can live here, enjoy the obvious benefits of being in America, and still try to destroy America is beyond my comprehension. But they will scream, riot, threaten, and break our laws to try to force the rest of us into their twisted, demented view of America, and they will label us as deplorable.

Another 'liberal' hate-based article

I just finished reading an article in the Washington Post on 2/19 by Glenn Kessler. It was written clearly for only one purpose, to demean, diminish or otherwise discredit President Trump's message in Florida. The article was so biased that I could feel the hatred oozing out, but I want to also commend Mister Kessler in that he has the ability to twist the reader's perception quite subtlety so that the misdirection was very obscured.

His first deflection was to mislead the reader into believing that the liberal media cannot write lies because they will be punished by 'someone' for printing lies. Everyone that has ever read the slanderous articles in the 'gossip' columns knows that the writers and publishers get away with murder. There is NO public recrimination for writing or publishing lies. Successful lawsuits for slander are rare because there really is no recourse for those injured by lies that are published. His whole argument for believing in the integrity of  'reporters' is flawed and totally incorrect. Every Trump supporter is very aware of the distortions, misdirection and outright lies being peddled by the liberal media about President Trump.

Then there was Mister Kessler's lie by misdirection regarding the Thomas Jefferson quote by President Trump. The quote was correct, and it applies to the current situation exactly as President Trump implied. Mister Kessler went on a rabbit trail to mislead the reader by trying to discount the validity of the quote by stating the Thomas Jefferson made the quote as a reaction to his being mistreated by the media, implying that the quote should therefore be discounted. Guess what. President Trump is being mistreated by the media in a very similar fashion in a totally hateful and unfair manner.

Then Mister Kessler embarked on a lengthy and circuitous defense of obamacare attempting to present this abomination as something desirable. A health care plan that costs the average family nearly $1000 in premium costs per month and has a deductible of more than $7000 per year is not affordable for the vast majority of Americans, and clearly does not provide 'affordable' health care. He also avoided mentioning the fact that almost all of the insurance companies are losing billions of dollars in association with obamacare. He made a big deal of saying that the grossly excessive premiums are not being paid by some of the people because they receive 'taxpayer assistance'. 'Taxpayer assistance' is paid for by the average taxpayer who is NOT receiving any obamacare reimbursements. 'Taxpayer assistance' is NOT FREE, but Mister Kessler tries to imply that it is!
A quick comment about Air Force 1 and 2 costs is also needed. If President Trump had not said anything, the cost would have been in excess of 4 billion dollars and that is a FACT.

Last of all, Mister Kessler tries to imply that there is 'adequate vetting' of refugees. It is a fact that both Obama and Hillary Clinton were both working very hard to diminish or delete vetting of refugees in addition to distributing illegal aliens throughout the U.S. with zero vetting. Both Obama and Hillary made it crystal-clear that they both wanted no vetting, no borders, and no deportation of anyone. It should be very clear to anyone with a modicum of intelligence that most of Mister Kessler allegations in his article are either flawed or outrageously wrong.

Are you a deplorable - part 2

If you believe that the overwhelming majority of police officers in America are good, decent people interested in doing the best job possible to enforce the law, then the looney left may label you as deplorable. If you do not support Obama's claim that all police officers are  racists, then the looney left will probably label you as deplorable.  If you do not support the 'Black Lives Matter' call to murder police officers, would it surprise you if the looney left labeled you as deplorable? If you respect our police officers and wish to support them in their work, does that make you deplorable? If you believe that America is governed by laws, not by mob rule, then the looney left will certainly label you as deplorable. The looney left encourages rioting, violence and mob rule and calls your right to free speech deplorable. What label would you apply to people who hate our police officers, call for the murder of our police officers, spread lies about our police officers, organize and participate in riots and destruction of property, and generally encourage an atmosphere of hate? Is the title 'looney left' good enough? For me, being called deplorable by the looney left is a sign that I am definitely doing the right and proper actions.

Are You a deplorable - part 1

If you believe that an unborn child is a human being, then the looney political left may label you as deplorable. According to the looney left, they can label an unborn child as a 'fetus', which they have defined as non-human, and they believe that a 'fetus' can be killed for absolutely no reason. According to Hillary Clinton and many more looney leftists, the 'fetus' can be murdered during the actual process of birth. If you believe that killing an unborn child is murder, then the looney left may label you as deplorable. If you see abortion as an issue of killing an unborn child instead of an issue of 'reproductive rights', then the looney left will probably label you as deplorable. If you ask the question, "What crime has the unborn child committed which deserves a death penalty?", then the looney left will probably label you as deplorable. If you believe any of these things, and the looney left has labeled you as deplorable, are you proud of the title?

David Horowitz on Dems: ‘Party of Hate’

“We have in this country a large ‘hate-America left,’ “Horowitz told Sean Hannity on Fox News. “It dovetails with the Democratic Party.

"It's a party of hate."

Horowitz said that the left's vitriol has not fazed President Donald Trump.

"The great thing about Donald Trump is that he's not intimidated by the attacks of the left," he said. "We're in the midst of one of the big witch hunts of American history."

Horowitz referred to Sen. Elizabeth Warren's attacks on Sen. Jeff Sessions during his confirmation hearing for attorney general.

The Alabama Republican was "defamed and slandered as a racist by Elizabeth Warren, who is making a career out of character assassination," he said.

"The spirit of the whole Democratic Party looks on people that disagree with it as racist, sexist, homophobes, Islamophobes," Horowitz added. "That's why we can't have a civil discussion in America anymore."

David Horowitz on Dems: ‘Party of Hate’

An article by Sandy Fitzgerald

Since the 9/11 attacks, 72 people coming from the seven Middle Eastern countries named in President Donald Trump's executive order on travel and refugees have been convicted on terrorism charges, according to a new report released Saturday.

According to the nonpartisan Center for Immigration Studies, the report stands "in stark contrast to the assertions by the Ninth Circuit judges who have blocked the president's order on the basis that there is no evidence showing a risk to the United States in allowing aliens from these seven terror-associated countries to come in."

At least 17 of those who have been convicted claimed to be refugees, while three came into the United States as students. Twenty-five more eventually became American citizens, the report shows.

According to a breakdown of the countries and the numbers of people who were eventually convicted of terror crimes:

·         Somalia: 20

·         Yemen: 19

·         Iraq: 19

·         Syria: 7

·         Iran: 4

·         Libya: 2

Jessica Vaughan, the center's director of policy studies, said she based the report on information from a report in 2016 from the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest. 

We are no longer a country based on the rule of law

The Looney Left has won a political victory today. America lost!!! In our history, it has been a matter of pride to be able to state that America is ruled by law. Today the Looney Left has managed to flush our laws down the toilet. To paraphrase the law: The president has undisputed authority to deny entry to the U.S. to ANYONE if, IN HIS OPINION, that person or class of people constitute a danger to the citizens of America.

Here are the names of the Looney Left judges who ignored the law and stated that they will write their own law. Judge Michelle Friedland, Judge William Canby Jr and Judge Richard Clifton today ruled that their power exceeds the power of the president and that their power exceeds the power of federal law. It is crystal-clear that these judges don't give a damn about the law. It is also crystal-clear that these judges don't give a damn about the safety of American citizens.

In my opinion, if there is ANY American citizen killed by anyone who has an association with any of the seven countries that President Trump tried to protect us from, then these three judges should by held personally responsible for the deaths. It would seem fair to me that these three judges be convicted of accessory to murder for ANY murders committed by any terrorist admitted into the U.S. from this point on who has any connection to any of the countries listed in President Trump's E.O. Although I am opposed to doing anything which benefits terrorists, it seems to be just and proper for the three judges to be beheaded by the same terrorists that they demanded be admitted into the U.S.

Obstruction for the sake of destruction

An incoming president should be able to install a working cabinet within a reasonable timeline. It is a forgone conclusion that depriving the president of a functioning cabinet is more than a hindrance. It is a crippling situation. The senate confirmation process is completely flawed because it provides a perfect instrument for the opponents of an incoming president to play politics strictly for the purpose of interfering or totally preventing an incoming president from working effectively. This not only prevents effective government during the interim, it also sets up a scenario that is dangerous for the security of America. While the opposition is playing political games, terrorists or hostile governments can use the ineffectiveness to attack America. This really needs to be corrected.

A simple and effective change to the process of filling the cabinet positions could provide a solution to this problem. First of all, do away with the ‘confirmation’ process in its present form. An incoming president would install his cabinet nominees into their cabinet position with full authority to perform their cabinet functions as ‘acting’ cabinet members as soon as the president announces his selections. Then the senate has a given time period, probably 30 to 60 days, in which by a majority vote they can reject the nominee. This preserves the senate’s power to vet cabinet nominees while avoiding the problem of crippling the incoming president’s effectiveness.

However, there is one other problem which needs to be addressed. Clearly, the direction of the political environment in America is toward total non-cooperation between democrats and republicans. Clearly, the democrats have demonstrated the possibility of making a newly-elected president completely ineffective by destroying the process of cabinet selections. It is imperative that for the sake of America, the president must be allowed to build a working cabinet. Therefore, it is obvious that if an incoming president is opposed by a congress controlled by the opposing party, there must be safeguards in place to prevent the congress from preventing the president from building his cabinet. Therefore, the first senatorial rejection of a cabinet nominee should require only a majority of the senate to pass. The second cabinet nominee rejection and all subsequent rejections should require a super-majority of 60 votes in the senate.

More drivel from the 'liberal media'

Today I am addressing an idiotic article written by Amy Brittain and Drew Harwell for the Washington Post. The article was obviously written to try to convey the entirely false idea that taxpayer money was spent on business expenses for Eric Trump. The article was both deceptive and misleading and was intended to leave the reader with an incorrect conclusion. First, be clear about one fact. Secret Service people will be defending Trump and his family for at least the next four years. Next, be clear about another fact, Secret Service expenditures are NOT a business expense. Next, be clear about another fact. There will be expenditures for Secret Service protection for Trump and his family regardless of what activities the family does. Last, be aware that anyone that tries to tell you that Secret Service costs for the Trump family are 'business expenses' is a deceitful liar.

I will leave you with this question. Where were these idiots (Amy Brittain and Drew Harwell) while the Obamas were racking up 90 million dollars in vacation costs during Obama's term of office? For your understanding of this question, please read the following article which was written last year.

Over the past eight years, President Barack Obama and his family have spent more than $10 million a year for travel and vacations, totaling in excess of $85 million — and the number is still growing.

The numbers were revealed Monday by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch. The organization has been tracking the president’s travel spending for several years and just disclosed, based on bills it received this week, that the first family spent almost $5 million in taxpayer money for their annual Christmas vacation to Hawaii last year.

The Obamas, who will officially move out of the White House on Jan. 20, are expected to leave soon for their annual Christmas trip, which last year lasted from Dec. 18 to Jan. 3.

The exact number for the 2015 holiday trip rang in at $4,823,206.88, which accounted for a robust U.S. Secret Service apparatus, flights and transportation and lodging for the security officials. That number does not include the costs for prepositioning aircraft and ships in the area or much of the necessary communications to protect the president and his family.

“The Secret Service and the Air Force are being abused by unnecessary travel,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said in a statement on the matter. “Unnecessary presidential travel for fundraising and luxury vacations on the taxpayers’ dime would be a good target for reform for the incoming Trump administration.”

From the Judicial Watch report:

According to bills obtained by Judicial Watch through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Secret Service also paid for rooms at the Hawaii Prince Hotel Waikiki and Golf Club.  The Secret Service also reserved rooms at the Moana Surfrider resort on Waikiki Beach, and the Ala Moana Hotel, which cost a total of $40,249.48 and $671,895.99, respectively.

The Secret Service rented cars from Avis, Alamo, and Hertz — 103 cars for the two-week vacation, totaling $165,893.88 in taxpayer money.

Reportedly, the Obamas stayed at the Hale Reena Estate, which “rents for anywhere between $5,000 to $10,000 a night, depending on the season.”

The first family also dined at several top-of-the-line restaurants while they were on the trip, which — in addition to the fees for the food — required presidential-level security.

Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the information in January and the documents were released in response to a lawsuit filed on May 6.