Dems Disturbing Plan To Secretly Stop Americans From Buying Guns And Undermine Trump Just Got Out

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

If this scheme succeeds, What would happen if every gun owner decided to say screw you and use the debt settlement places to pay back less of their credit card debt?  

It has been a week since the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida that claimed the lives of 17 innocent victims and injured 14 others. Instead of the mainstream liberal media honoring the lives of those that lost were violently gunned down they have decided to jump on their soapbox and lecture the American people on gun control. While many on the left are clamoring to infringe on our gun rights the pushback from law-abiding gun owners has slowed any potential traction, which has these gun-grabbing liberals concocting a sneaky plan to undermine the Second Amendment and halt you from purchasing guns at all.

After a string of gun violence in the last several months, the left has been doing all that they can to further their gun control agenda by playing on emotions of weary Americans racked with grief. To sway the public’s perception, these gun-grabbing liberals are claiming that the only way to protect the population and protect our children is more government control and to ban inanimate objects. However, not everyone is buying it, but that has not stopped them, and now these leftist are going one step further by proposing credit card companies stop payment on gun purchases.

Yep, you read that correctly.

In an article found in the ultra-left wing publication, The New York Times, the author suggests that to combat gun violence in America is to pressure credit card companies from allowing people to use their product to buy guns. Now, this is not a new idea in the liberal sewage think tank as companies such as PayPal, Square, Stripe and Apple Pay have already announced years ago that they would not allow their services to be used for the sale of firearms.

A spokesperson for Square said at the time, “We do not believe permitting the sale of firearms on our platform is consistent with our values or in the best interests of our customers,”

And, now it is their right to decide what to do as a company it does drop us into murky waters on how the American people will proceed in the future when purchasing firearms.

Here is more from the ultra-left publication The New York Times:

What if the finance industry — credit card companies like Visa, Mastercard, and American Express; credit card processors like First Data; and banks like JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — were to effectively set new rules for the sales of guns in America?

Collectively, they have more leverage over the gun industry than any lawmaker. And it wouldn’t be hard for them to take a stand.

PayPal, Square, Stripe and Apple Pay announced years ago that they would not allow their services to be used for the sale of firearms.

“We do not believe permitting the sale of firearms on our platform is consistent with our values or in the best interests of our customers,” a spokesman for Square told me.

The big financial firms don’t even have to go that far.

For example, Visa, which published a 71-page paper in 2016 espousing its “corporate responsibility,” could easily change its terms of service to say that it won’t do business with retailers that sell assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, which make semiautomatic rifles fire faster. (Even the National Rifle Association has said it would support tighter restrictions on bump stocks.)

If Mastercard were to do the same, assault weapons would be eliminated from virtually every firearms store in America because otherwise the sellers would be cut off from the credit card system.

There is a precedent for credit card issuers to ban the purchase of completely legal products. Just this month, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America banned the use of their cards to buy Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

To be clear: Those three banks won’t let you use your credit card to buy Bitcoin, but they will happily let you use it to buy an AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle — the same kind of gun used in mass shootings in Parkland; Newtown, Conn.; San Bernardino, Calif.; Las Vegas; and Sutherland Springs, Tex.

Visa, oddly enough, is the card of choice of the N.R.A.: There is actually an N.R.A.-branded Visa card issued by First Bankcard, a division of First National Bank of Omaha. And Mastercard proudly announced last year that it was the branded card for Cabela’s, an outdoor gear megastore with a seemingly limitless assault-weapon catalog.

Visa spokesmen did not reply to several emails seeking comment. A spokesman for Mastercard sent a boilerplate statement that expressed “disgust with recent events, including last week in Florida.”

Now, if these credit card owners so happened to move forward with this idea, it will not stop the sale of guns in the future. In fact, it will only push more Americans to purchase their weapons with cash which many people would instead use in the first place, right?

At any rate, the left will not stop finding whatever ways they can to undermine Trump and our Second Amendment rights even if that means employing sneaky methods, which as we know is the liberal way in the first place. The left is hellbent on punishing legal gun owners for the horrific actions of others, and it is the time that we let them know enough is enough.


Robert Mueller It’s Time To Clear President Trump!

Leave a comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

Comrade Mueller will drag this witch hunt on until the 2018 midterms.


Mueller has found no evidence of any Americans (which includes Donald Trump) knowingly colluding with the Russians.

So far, Mueller’s investigation has found no evidence that any American was a knowing participant in Russia’s election interference plot.

Will Mueller’s indictment of 13 Russian Nationals for interference in the 2016 election finally lead to an exoneration of President Trump?

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced Friday that 13 Russian Nationals and three Russian companies were indicted for interfering in our 2016 presidential election. The indictment “detailed a sophisticated plot to wage “information warfare” against the U.S. The Russian nationals are accused of setting a “strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system…there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant. There is no allegation the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.”

“Rosenstein described a sophisticated operation by Russian organization Internet Research Agency. He said the scheme involved setting up hundreds of social media accounts using stolen or fictitious identities to make it appear like the accounts were controlled by individuals in the U.S. He said the defendants posed as politically active Americans and recruited “real Americans” to stage rallies and engage in political activities.”

But Rosenstein said those Americans did not know they were communicating with Russians.

The indictment document can be viewed here. Fox’s Catherine Herridge tells us the plot was “seeded in 2014 by an individual who was closely aligned with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin.”

Republicans see this new development as a vindication of Trump. Actually, Trump sees this as a vindication of Trump! Following the announcement, he tweeted “Russia started their anti-US campaign in 2014, long before I announced that I would run for president. The results of the election were not impacted. The Trump campaign did nothing wrong – no collusion!” Although the indictment is very good news for Trump, he is not out of the woods until Mueller says he is.

George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley spoke to Fox News’ Mike Emmanuel. Turley also sees this news as favorable for Trump. “It’s clearly saying that this was a Russian government operation…what’s fascinating is that it doesn’t say that they have evidence of collusion and this was brought out by Rosenstein. And this is good news for Trump.”

Sean Hannity’s Friday opening monologue (please see video below) takes us through Russia’s involvement in the election and goes in depth into Russian efforts to gain control of 20% of the US uranium supply.

Liberals, of course, do not interpret this news as vindication for Trump.  Since the announcement, the Democrats’ main talking point has been that Trump did indeed collude with the Russians because their interference was pro-Trump.

Wait a minute Dems. Yes, the interference during the general election was pro-Trump. But it was also pro (former Green Party Presidential Candidate) Jill Stein. And during the Democratic primary, the Russian interference was pro Bernie Sanders. Do Dems believe that Sanders or Stein colluded with the Russians also? We don’t need a lawyer to tell us this does not constitute evidence. The fact that the Russian interference was pro-Trump is not proof that Trump colluded with the Russians.

The indictment clearly states that no Americans knowingly participated in this interference. It says that several “state level” Trump volunteers may have unwittinglyhelped the Russians.

Moreover, the indictment states that Russian interference began in 2014, long before Trump had even announced his candidacy.

It also says the Russians supported “anti-establishment” candidates. In the Democratic primary, they supported Bernie Sanders. In the general election, they supported both Donald Trump and Jill Stein. They opposed “establishment” candidates Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz in the Republican primary and Hillary Clinton in the general.

Naturally, Adam Schiff (D-CA) had to weigh in on the news and his comments were predictable. He tweeted, “Mueller’s indictment reaffirms what the Intelligence Community concluded, what our investigation has borne out, and what President Trump denies — that Russia interfered in our election in an effort to assist his presidential campaign.”

Mueller’s indictment reaffirms what the Intelligence Community concluded, what our investigation has borne out, and what President Trump denies — that Russia interfered in our election in an effort to assist his presidential campaign.

No one denies that the Russians interfered in our election. But Schiff, so invested is he in the “Trump is a criminal” narrative, is still implying that Trump colluded with the Russians which is FALSE. The indictment clearly states that no Americans knowingly assisted the Russians. Therefore, Trump, being an American, did not knowingly assist the Russians.

“But after he was elected, they worked to undermine him. Russians wanted to “sow political discord” in America.

“It says the defendants spread derogatory information about various candidates throughout the 2016 campaign and by “early to mid-2016” was supporting Trump’s presidential campaign.

Rosenstein, though, said that after the election, the group worked both to stage rallies in favor of President-elect Trump and in opposition to his election.

Mueller’s investigation into Russian collusion has undermined Trump’s presidency. It’s amazing that Trump has accomplished so much in his first year with this shadow over his administration.

The indictment states that the Russian interference did not impact election results. The Russians spent approximately $1,250,000 monthly on their efforts. Compare this to the estimated $1.2 billion spent by the Clinton Campaign and $500-600 million spent by the Trump Campaign.

At long last, will the FBI turn their attention to the one who has truly colluded with the Russians, Hillary Clinton?

It’s time for Mueller to exonerate President Trump and to instead, begin three new investigations.

  1. A special counsel must be appointed to investigate the use of the “unverified” Trump dossier as evidence on a FISA warrant application (and renewals) to spy on Carter Page and by extension, the Trump Campaign. The dossier was prepared by former British spy Christopher Steele with input from the Russians and sources close to Hillary Clinton and was funded by the Clinton campaign and the DNC (which Clinton effectively controlled).
  1. A second investigation must examine Hillary Clinton’s role in the approval of the Uranium One deal, which essentially gave Russia control over 20% of US uranium reserves.
  1. A third investigation should look into Hillary’s use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State and her predetermined exoneration by the FBI well before the end of the investigation.

In conclusion, Friday’s indictment was a major event in the Mueller investigation. With any luck, it will end soon. The most significant takeaway from Rosenstein’s announcement is that, so far, Mueller has found no evidence of any Americans (which includes Donald Trump) knowingly colluding with the Russians. Hopefully, Trump will be exonerated soon.

Rep Adam Schiff: Russia Promoted Second Amendment Ads So Americans Would Kill Each Other

Leave a comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

It is a close race on which one is stupider Pencil Neck Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) or Nancy “The Botox Queen”Pelosi(D-CA).

Congratulations Rep. Schiff, you’re just demonstrating that you have drunk too much of your own Russian collusion kool-aid.

Sometimes, people say some of the most stupid things one could contemplate.  Take for instance Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and his comments last week regarding ads promoted during the 2016 elections.  Schiff actually believes the Russians like the Second Amendment so much that they were using it as anti-Hillary Clinton ads in order for Americans to be “doing nothing but killing each other every day.”

Obviously, Schiff is trying to target the Second Amendment himself by pitting himself against Russia, as if Russia was even behind such a fantastical bit of propaganda.  This is so he can promote his illegal, Communist-style gun confiscation legislation, of course.

Seriously, he is not stupid.  He’s being crafty here.

Take a look.

“You had the content that was clearly anti-Hillary, and you had the content that was very pro-Trump, but even the bigger quantity of content that was being pushed through social media was just content designed to pit us against each other, to exploit our divisions,” Schiff said to a crowd at the University of Pennsylvania.

“So, of course, they as you have seen they parroted Black Lives Matter to try to broaden the racial divide in this country,” he hypocritically added, knowing that the head of his own party for the past several years was at the top of the list doing that and he was in full support of it.

Then, Schiff went completely off the rails in saying that Russia was behind the pro-Second Amendment ads and such on social media during 2016.

“They also trumpeted the Second Amendment. Apparently, Russians are very big fans of our Second Amendment. They don’t particularly want a Second Amendment of their own, but they’re really glad that we have one.”

“The Russians would be thrilled if we were doing nothing but killing each other every day, and sadly we are.”

Um, what?  I suppose Rep. Schiff thinks that every Constitutional loving, Second Amendment supporting American who posted a meme, bought a pro-Second Amendment ad or even published a pro-Second Amendment article must be a Russian agent or plant, right?

I mean that is sort of what he is presenting here.

Americans should be united on the Second Amendment and what it says because, well, they are Americans and it’s part of our Constitution.

It wasn’t little Russian bots or fake Twitter or Facebook accounts promoting the Second Amendment Rep. Schiff!  It was American patriots and I’ll be that has you lying awake all night in fear, doesn’t it?  Yet, with well over 100,000,000 or us with over 300,000,000 guns, it’s obvious that we are not the problem in this country.

Sadly, people like Rep. Schiff, as well as Senator Dianne Feinstein, demonstrate that they are anti-American when they attack the very Constitution, and the rights of the people it was written to protect from evil politicians like them, not Russia.

Because of the committee he sits on the influence he has, Schiff is definitely a dangerous man.

Judge Who Presided Over Mistrial Acquits Sen. Robert Menendez on 7 of 18 Counts of Public Corruption

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

The judge that acquitted Sen.Robert Menendez is a Clinton appointee so I think something is rotten in Denmark if you will. 

The federal district judge who presided over the public corruption case against Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ) that ended in a mistrial in November, acquitted Menendez and his co-defendant, Dr. Salomon Melgen, on 7 of 18 public corruption counts in a decision released on Wednesday.

Last week, the Department of Justice announced its intent to re-try the case against both Menendez and Melgen, who was convicted on 67 felony counts of Medicare fraud in April.

“In an opinion filed on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge William Walls denied defense requests for a judgment of acquittal on all charges, based on the evidence presented in the first trial against Menendez and his co-defendant, Salomon Melgen,” reported. continued:

But quoting Gertrude Stein, the judge declared “there is no there there,” in tossing seven major charges against the two men involving political contributions involving hundreds of thousands of dollars in contributions by Melgen to several political committees with ties to the senator.

Politico reported on another point made by Judge Walls in his surprising opinion:

“A rational juror could not find that Menendez and Melgen were aware of the terms of the alleged quid quo,” Walls wrote in his opinion.

Walls left in place charges that Melgen allegedly provided Menendez with private jet flights and lavish vacations in exchange for political favors. Walls also left in place what is widely regarded as the toughest charge for Menendez to beat: That he purposefully filed false financial disclosure statements that left off Melgen’s gifts.

The acquittal on the seven counts could substantially shorten Menendez and Melgen’s retrial. The last trial ran two and a half months. At the end, juror Ed Norris said 10 of the 12 jurors wanted to acquit the senator.

Legal analysts called the decision a win for Menendez and his co-defendant, but not the end of the federal government’s case against the two men.

“The decision was not insignificant, according to Joseph Hayden of Pashman Stein Walder Hayden, a prominent New Jersey defense attorney,” reported:

“It’s a third of the indictment,” he said. “It’s not a knockout, but it’s a big gain for the defense.”

Hayden said the dismissal of the counts “removes an area where the jury can compromise in the jury room.”

Robert Mintz, a criminal defense attorney at McCarter & English and a former federal prosecutor, also said the judgment of acquittal on several bribery counts hands a victory to the defense, but left much of the case intact.

Judge Walls “also announced he will not preside over the retrial,” Politico reported.

Attorneys for the two defendants responded quickly to the judge’s decision. reported:

Kirk Ogrosky, an attorney for Melgen, said, “The court’s acquittal on all counts which involve monetary contributions is long overdue. There was simply never any quid-pro-quo agreement between my client and Senator Menendez, and the court has now acquitted these two longtime Hispanic-American friends on all counts that involved political contributions. Hopefully, this Department of Justice will read the court’s decision and drop the remainder of the case.”

“In a statement, Menendez attorney Abbe D. Lowell said the court’s decision to throw out parts of the case questions about why the government is seeking a retrial,” reported:

“With the court’s decision, this case is now solely about the purest of personal hospitality allegations–stays [at] his friend, Dr. Melgen’s family home and reimbursed trips on a plane that Dr. Melgen was flying anyway,” said Lowell. “A jury rejected the government’s facts and theory of bribery, and now the trial judge has rejected a critical legal theory on which the case was brought. The decision of the Department of Justice to retry the case makes even less sense than it did last week and we hope it would be reconsidered.”

The Department of Justice responded cautiously.

“The Justice Department is reviewing the judge’s order and considering its next steps, a spokeswoman, Nicole Navas Oxman, said,” reported.

“Sh*thole” Lie Peddler Dick Durbin: Amensty Is “Civil Rights Issue of Our Time”

Leave a comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

Besides being a pathological liar Little Dickie Turdbin is an idiot amnesty is not a Civil Rights Issue.


I really am struggling to understand how a man that claims to uphold the Constitution, and immigration laws that were enacted by Congress, can stand with a straight face and say that those who are violating the law and should not be prosecuted or deported is somehow a “civil rights issue.”

Still, Senator Dick Durbin, the man behind the lie about President Donald Trump’s alleged “sh*thole countries” comment, says that giving amnesty to those who illegally came to the US is a “civil rights issue of our time.”

Unless I’m mistaken, it’s not a right to break the law, is it?

Just prior to a vote to break the filibuster and reopen the federal government, Democratic Whip Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) said that amnesty for illegal aliens under the unconstitutional executive action DACA program (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) is “the civil rights issue of our time.”

“So many of you cast a vote that was very hard and very difficult, because you believed as I did that the issue of immigration, the issue of the Dreamers is the civil rights issue of our time. You stuck your necks out and said I’m willing to go on record even if it’s going to be hard to explain back home, and I will never forget that,” Durbin said prior to the vote.

He claims the in the past few days, he has witnessed “constructive bipartisan conversations and dialogue on the floor … about the future of this institution and what the Senate will be from this point forward.”

“I cannot tell my colleagues how many have come up to me from the other side of the aisle and said, ‘We’re with you on this issue. We want to help you get this done,’” he added.  “Each of them has a little different take on what that means, but I do believe them, and I do believe we have this opportunity to move together.”

“My last word is this: we have gathered the largest bipartisan group of senators to ever commit to moving forward on the Dream Act and immigration,” he said.  “We have a process. I want to thank Senator McConnell for explicitly saying today, it will be a level playing field. It will be open to both sides. We will move to the issue as you characterized it this morning of DACA and immigration. Thank you for doing that. I believe that that sets the stage for us to work together.”

This blah, blah, blah about leveling the playing field always comes up, but how does this level the playing field for those who came here through the legal process?  How is it leveling the playing field for American citizens who were born here Senator Durbin?  How is providing foreigners who break the law in numerous ways upon stepping foot into the country and then receiving welfare benefits level the playing field?

Simple.  It doesn’t.

“For the first time in five years, we will have a debate on the floor of the Senate on the Dream Act and immigration. To all the Dreamers who are watching today, don’t give up,” said Durbin, encouraging those who stand in violation of US immigration law and demand that America bend to their whims rather than America enforce her own laws.

Durbin was much like Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), who pontificated to browbeat those who opposed him and seek to defend illegal aliens over protecting American citizens.

Schumer said:

“The reason why the Republican majority had such difficulty finding consensus is they could never get a firm grip on what the president of their party wanted to do. These days you never know who to deal with when it comes to the Republicans. The Republican leaders told me to work out a deal with the White House. The White House said work it out with Republican leaders on the hill.”

“Separately, President Trump turned away from not one, but two bipartisan compromises. Each would have averted this shutdown. Each would have led to a deal on the budget and health care and disaster aid and things like opioids and veterans and pensions and on immigration.”

“My recent offer to the president was a generous one. I put his signature issue on the table in exchange for DACA, and still he turned away. President Trump’s unwillingness to compromise caused the Trump shutdown and brought us to this moment. The facts are well known.”

Chuck Schumer owns the shutdown.  Personally, I don’t care if it stays shutdown, as long as they are not backpaid.  All we are really getting rid of at this point is a high percentage of non-military people in government which are considered “non-essential.”  We should be eliminating that permanently anyways.  After all, they are non-essential!

On Saturday, President Donald Trump took to his bullhorn, Twitter, in order to rake the Democrats over the coals about their pursuits.

“Democrats are far more concerned with Illegal Immigrants than they are with our great Military or Safety at our dangerous Southern Border. They could have easily made a deal but decided to play Shutdown politics instead.  in order to power through mess!” he tweeted.

Democrats are far more concerned with Illegal Immigrants than they are with our great Military or Safety at our dangerous Southern Border. They could have easily made a deal but decided to play Shutdown politics instead. in order to power through mess!

He added, “Democrats are holding our Military hostage over their desire to have unchecked illegal immigration. Can’t let that happen!”

Democrats are holding our Military hostage over their desire to have unchecked illegal immigration. Can’t let that happen!

“Great to see how hard Republicans are fighting for our Military and Safety at the Border. The Dems just want illegal immigrants to pour into our nation unchecked. If stalemate continues, Republicans should go to 51% (Nuclear Option) and vote on real, long term budget, no C.R.’s!” Trump continued.

Great to see how hard Republicans are fighting for our Military and Safety at the Border. The Dems just want illegal immigrants to pour into our nation unchecked. If stalemate continues, Republicans should go to 51% (Nuclear Option) and vote on real, long term budget, no C.R.’s!

I agree, they should change the rules in the same manner that they were changed on them under Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.

He then talked about certain “services” that were being turned down.

“The Democrats are turning down services and security for citizens in favor of services and security for non-citizens. Not good!” Trump tweeted.

“Democrats have shut down our government in the interests of their far left base. They don’t want to do it but are powerless!” he added.

The Democrats are turning down services and security for citizens in favor of services and security for non-citizens. Not good!

Democrats have shut down our government in the interests of their far left base. They don’t want to do it but are powerless!

The vote for cloture was 81 to 18 and brought about the shutdown.

Trump has called for an end to the obstruction of the Democrats.

Well, Sir, get with the Republican leadership, change those rules and ram through your agenda!  Let’s end Republican and Democrat obstruction and build the wall you promised and not compromise on immigration law.  Should be pretty simple, right?  But no, we have people who claim to believe one thing and do another.

That really is the problem here.  Dick Durbin and Chuck Schumer are sticking to their guns.  Why won’t Republicans bring a full-on frontal assault to deliver what was promised to the American people?

Watch the Senate from Monday here.

Massachusetts Governor Proposes Legislation To Combat Opioid Crisis That Violates 4th & 5th Amendments

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

I want to correct the author of this story Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker is a Republican he is a RINO because no true Republican would propose anything this drastic to fight the opioid crisis.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. – Fourth Amendment, Constitution of the united States of America.

What would you say if the government, federal or state, held you against your will because of an issue you have with overeating?  It sounds ridiculous for the government to hold you against your will just for eating, doesn’t it?  What about the federal or state government holding you against your will because of a nicotine or alcohol issue?  The Fourth Amendment guarantees each individual the God-given right to security in our persons against unreasonable search and seizure.  Moreover, a warrant is required, affirmed by oath, that describes specifically what is to be searched and what is to be seized.

So, it would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment for the government to seize you because you had a health problem, correct?  Well, if you live in the State of Massachusetts or are even passing through, the governor wants to propose a law that would allow the State to “hold drug addicts against their will for potential treatment.”

The Daily Caller reports:

The Massachusetts governor called on state lawmakers to approve a bill that would allow drug addicts to be held against their will for potential treatment.

Republican Gov. Charlie Baker proposed a law aimed at trying to fix the state’s growing opioid addiction problem, reports NECN. One part of the bill allows doctors and law enforcement officers to place drug addicts in a treatment center for a three day period, regardless if the person gave their express permission or not.

“The bill also permits medical professionals or police officers to authorize the transport of a patient to a substance use treatment facility for emergency assessment and treatment when the patient presents a risk of serious harm due to addiction and the patient will not agree to voluntary treatment,” the bill reads. “A treatment facility receiving a patient transported under this provision would then be required to attempt to engage the patient in voluntary treatment for a period of up to 72 hours.”

Massachusetts has struggled with an opioid crisis since 2000, seeing about 13,000 deaths related to the crisis. Other parts of the bill call for setting standards for the credentials recovery coaches might need in helping people overcome their addictions, as well as allowing people to use naloxone, a drug that reverses drug overdoses. [some may know this drug as Narcan]

Some people have taken issue with the involuntary hold, saying it poses due process concerns.

Governor Charlie Baker, a Republican of all things, wants to enact a law to allow a doctor or law enforcement officer to hold individuals they have “labeled” as drug addicts by force for “three days of treatment.”  NECN states the governor is urging lawmakers to take additional steps to fight the “opioid addiction scourge.”  So, the opioid crisis has now morphed to an opioid scourge.  Clever how the “news” can warp a health care issue into some scathing mass plague destined to overtake us all if not abated (scourge).

Even reporter Amber Randall at The Daily Caller personified the State of Massachusetts  when stating “the state’s growing opioid addiction problem” and “Massachusetts has struggled with an opioid crisis.”  It is individuals who have health problems not States.  But, we all are guilty at times of personifying an object when penning articles when an individual quoted uses personification or someone speaks in broad terms regarding health care issues.

Personification of the “state” as a living entity with “rights” is typical in communist/socialist governments/regimes.  The individual has no God-given individual unalienable rights since the “state” becomes the giver of rights.  The best illustration of this type of mindset involves Hillary Clinton, speaking with George Stephanopoulos, claims, “I think that for most of our history, there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment until the decision by the late Justice Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right – as we do with every amendment – to impose reasonable regulations.”  According to Hitlery, the federal government has a “right” to regulate “reasonably” God-given individual unalienable rights recognized and protected by the Bill of Rights.

What Gov. Baker proposes should be a big bold red flag with flashing lights and audio alerts saying “Danger.  Warning.”  While Governor Baker believes he is being altruistic in nature to help those addicted to drugs, particularly opioids, this piece of legislation has the potential to go horribly wrong and be abused and misused by the medical professionals and law enforcement officers.

This proposed legislation is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment – unreasonable seizure without a warrant.  It is treating individuals as criminals who are using opioids and identifying them as such (illegal seizure without due process) through coercion of medical professionals and law enforcement officers for the purpose of “forced” medical treatment.  Because the government is now involved in everyone’s health care, thanks to Hussein Soetoro and his band of merry Democrats, Governor Baker believes the State now has the “right” to “force” these individuals to receive care for their problem, which Republicans now support in the federal proposal of “repeal and replace” health care insurance plan.

Notice also there is no indication of the individual being allowed due process – violations of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution for the united States of America.  No outlet is reporting how this affects the numerous individuals who receive opioids as treatment for pain management or how police are to distinguish the difference.  Moreover, there is no mention of who is responsible for the treatment costs.

Matt Segal, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union, speaks out against Baker’s proposal.

“For over 40 years, America has been trying to arrest and coerce its way to decreased substance abuse,” said Matt Segal, the legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union in Massachusetts. “If Massachusetts is serious about ending the opioid crisis, we need to invest in treatment on demand and social services that do not take place in correctional settings, as opposed to coercion and imprisonment.”

Massachusetts has to have a problem filling its county jails and privatized State prisons with criminals;  therefore, the State needs to invent criminal activity out of an individual’s health problem – addiction to illegal opioids such as heroin, disguised as a government treatment program.  Individuals who take opioid pain medications for their pain condition as the doctor prescribes have only a 3% chance of becoming addicted.  Additionally, the governor’s proposal does not indicate a differentiation between addiction, dependence and tolerance, which is apples, oranges, and grapefruits.

Reports about law enforcement officers overstepping their bounds to illegally search vehicles during a traffic stop abound as law enforcement officers “claim” to smell marijuana or alcohol when the window of the vehicle is rolled down.  The attention this overzealous action taken by law enforcement causes many individuals to research the various state laws to provide guidance on how to exercise your rights if involved in a traffic stop.  There are many videos on YouTube addressing this situation;  however, a lawyer has a series of videos on his YouTube channel to advise individuals on exercising those rights.  Cooperate with law enforcement officers when stopped, but, exercise your rights up front.

The question that remains unanswered is “how will law enforcement officers know someone is an ‘addict’?”  In this day and age, forced blood draws are now the norm for individuals suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol, particularly when refusing a field breathalyzer or sobriety test.  It is feasible to assume law enforcement in Massachusetts could employ this technique with the suspicion of opioid use during a traffic stop or DUI checkpoint (which is stretching the freedom of movement) should Gov. Baker’s proposal clear the legislature.

The proverbial “war on drugs” has gone nowhere in the forty years of fighting against this problem.  How could it when the US military protects the Afghan poppy fields and rumors about the CIA importing it into the US abound while private mercenaries profit from the counternarcotics contracts.   Moreover, with the government targeting opioids as a “national crisis,” one can bet the distinction between addiction, dependence and tolerance will be blurred causing individuals needing prescription narcotic pain medications for pain, unrelieved by other non-narcotic agents, to suffer indignation at the hands of government goons.  Hopefully, the proposal by Massachusetts Governor Baker goes nowhere or it could be the template other States use for the profitable, government-sponsored, criminalization of individuals engaged in lawful activities in the faux “war on drugs,” since our republic has supported the opium expansion in Afghanistan.  The mantra “never let a crisis go to waste” will be the central theme to further control the population under the guise of an “opioid crisis.”  Either way this goes, Massachusetts residents and visitors are looking at a recipe for disaster in the making.

Denzel Washington: Stop Blaming The Prison System Black America – “It Starts At Home”

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

Denzel Washington is 100% correct the system is not to blame for so many black men being in prison.

The blame is the absent fathers that is encouraged by the Great Society programs started by DemocRat Lyndon B.Johnson.

Denzel Washington has starred in some of my favorite films.  From Man on Fire to The Manchurian Candidate to The Siege, I’ve always enjoyed the work he has produced.

I’ve also appreciated many of the things he has said publicly, as well.

In his latest commentary, he voices to those of the community in Black America, and it’s a similar message to what Bill Cosby used to say, which got an uproar.

When it comes to filling up the prison system in America, Washington says that American blacks should not blame the system, but should look to solve the problem by starting at home.

“It starts at the home. It starts at home. It starts with how you raise your children. If a young man doesn’t have a father figure, he’ll go find a father figure,” the Academy Award-winner told the New York Daily News.

Washington, whose latest role as a dogged defense attorney in Roman J. Israel, that the role has reinforced his position on the matter.

“So you know I can’t blame the system. It’s unfortunate that we make such easy work for them,” Washington said.

Washington recounted his own childhood and youth experience.

“I grew up with guys who did decades (in prison), and it had as much to do with their fathers not being in their lives as it did to do with any system,” said Washington. “Now I was doing just as much as they were, but they went further.”

“I just didn’t get caught, but they kept going down that road and then they were in the hands of the system,” the actor added. “But it’s about the formative years. You’re not born a criminal.”

Washington is actually presenting a biblical worldview in the matter.

Men are conceived in sin.  We inherit a sin nature from our parents and that is where we are naturally bent.

However, we are also instructed as parents to train our children in the way they should go so that when they are older they will not depart from it (Proverbs 22:6).  We are told this happens in the home, not the public indoctrination centers we call public schools.  God commands:

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.  These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart.  You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up.  You shall bind them as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. -Deuteronomy 6:5-9

Sadly, in the black community, fathers are often absent completely.  Single mothers are often left to raise young children all on their own.  Sometimes they are just as complicit in the matter by engaging in sex outside of marriage.  Yet, no matter, the children are often the casualties in the parents’ choices.

As Scripture also teaches us, “The LORD is slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, forgiving iniquity and transgression; but He will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generations” (Numbers 14:18).

He is not speaking of holding children accountable for the sins of their fathers for that would be a contradiction of His holy nature to do so (Ezekiel 18:20).  What is referenced here is that because fathers act wickedly, that is then taught and conveyed to the children to behave in a similar manner and thus, children end up following in their fathers’ footsteps and reaping the same consequences as their fathers.

As my friend Taleeb Starkes has continually pointed out, the family is what must be built back up in the black community if it is to survive.

I’ll add that Marxists have the family, no matter the ethnicity, in their sites, and white families must be on guard against the same seductions the black community has come under.


Does Anyone Else Smell A Rat In These Sexual Allegations Against Roy Moore?

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

Where were these women when Judge Moore was running for the Alabama Supreme Court?

The Washington Compost found these women allegedly and the Compost support Moore’s Dippycrap opponent. 

The allegations coming out against Alabama’s candidate for US Senate Roy Moore are completely suspicious and I don’t think I’m the only one to notice.

It seems that Bezos’ CIA-tied Washington Post has decided to run a hit piece on Moore in which allegations by a woman who was then 14-years-old claims that Moore touched her sexually, and that three other teen girls at the time he was in his early thirties dated him and they hugged and kissed.

The first thing that makes these accusations almost unbelievable is that Moore has been in Alabama politics as a judge for years.  He’s not been in some closet somewhere.

Why are these allegations of things that allegedly took place four decades ago just now coming out?  My guess is it’s because the establishment knows Roy Moore is the real deal.

It seems that The Post got the right reporter too, one that has a bit of fraud of her own.

Stephanie McCrummen appears to have engaged in writing a fake check.

Got News reports:

According to left-leaning New York Magazine, McCrummen has an extensive criminal record, committing four infractions in three different states.

The original 2011 report details how McCrummen’s criminal career began with her writing a fake check in North Carolina:

“Ms. McCrummen’s criminal history began with North Carolina Case # 1992 CR 00654, a violation of the Article 19 – False Pretenses and Cheats section of the North Carolina Criminal Code. Ms. McCrummen was convicted of a crime punishable by up to six months of imprisonment for writing a hot check that was deemed worthless.”

Is it possible a journalist with a history of writing fake checks could also write fake news?

Why yes, yes it is quite possible Ms. McCrummen would participate in writing fake news.  The question is, did she do so?

The thing that is most telling about the hit piece from The CIA-tied Washington Post is that out of the four women interviewed, the 14-year-old’s story seems to be completely inconsistent with the other women’s story of Roy Moore.

I don’t think there was a problem with the age gap considering that in Alabama, the other three women would have been considered to be able to be of consent, but the juiciest details the Post could come up with is that they hugged or kissed.

The woman who claimed to be 14 at the time that she says Roy Moore touched her and guided her to touch him sexually has a questionable story for sure.

Corfman may not have been 14 at the time either. Marion Talley, who lives in Etowah County and believes her brother actually dated Corfman in 1976, claims that Corfman would have been at least 17 years old in 1979.

The age issue is a simple one to determine via birth records.

Corman also has a sordid history of her own.

According to one report, has made a plethora of false accusations of sexual impropriety against Christian leaders.


One of the “accusers” cited by @bethreinhard in  story is Deborah Wesson Gibson. Gibson is a Lib who volunteers for ‘s DEM opponent Doug Jones. Why the hell wasn’t this disclosed in the @washingtonpost story?

Props to @Jan2017Trump for sharing!

Roy Moore’s main accuser Leigh Corfman has had three divorces and major financial problems. Filed for bankruptcy three times, once in 1991 with $139,689 in unpaid claims. She has had multiple issues with the IRS and has been charged with multiple misdemeanors as well. Hmm….

One of the “accusers” cited by @bethreinhard in  story is Deborah Wesson Gibson. Gibson is a Lib who volunteers for ‘s DEM opponent Doug Jones. Why the hell wasn’t this disclosed in the @washingtonpost story?

Props to @Jan2017Trump for sharing!

Other accuser, Leigh Corfman, has long history of making false sexual allegations according to her neighbors on Facebook.

View image on Twitter

One of her neighbors said, “she…went to various churches within our denomination and accused at least three other pastors besides an uncle of ours [of] making sexual advances at her. Each time that she brought it to a District board for Alabama they found her to be uncredible [sic] and she changed her story many times.”

She also apparently tried to sue a pastor in one of the sections within the woman’s denomination in 2007 and the Circuit Judge would not hear the case.

As far as I’m concerned, this has establishment written all over it, both Democrats and Republicans.

Take a look at what Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a man known for violating the Constitution and selling out the American people over and over, said.

“If these allegations are true, he must step aside,” McConnell said in a statement on behalf of all Senate Republicans.

Senator John McCain (R-AZ), a man who has sold America out time and again and also demonstrated that he doesn’t care for innocent until proven guilty, saidunequivocally, “He should immediately step aside and allow the people of Alabama to elect a candidate they can be proud of.”

Funny John, I could say the same thing about the people of Arizona.

President Donald Trump was more reserved in his assessment in a statement from White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who was accompanying Trump as he traveled from China to Vietnam on Friday.

Sanders said, “Like most Americans, the president does not believe we can allow a mere allegation, in this case one from many years ago, to destroy a person’s life. However, the president also believes that if these allegations are true, Judge Moore will do the right thing and step aside.”

If that was not enough, The Daily Beast reported:

A day after explosive allegations of sexual assault surfaced against Alabama senate candidate Roy Moore, the Republican Party’s senate campaign arm has severed financial ties with the embattled former state supreme court justice.

A joint fundraising committee benefitting Moore and a handful of Republican Party organs filed paperwork with the Federal Election Commission on Friday removing the National Republican Senatorial Committee as one of its beneficiaries. Going forward, the committee’s fundraising will benefit Moore’s Senate campaign, the Alabama Republican Party, and the Republican National Committee but not the NRSC.

The establishment hates Roy Moore.  They hate him because of his principled convictions.  He believes in the God of the Bible, the Bible as the source of truth and law and justice, and the limits of the Constitution in restraining government and protecting the liberties of the people.

The establishment is against this, on both sides of the aisle.

Time will tell the truth, but here’s the thing to keep your eye on: Roy Moore has unapologetically called these allegations false.

“These allegations are completely false and are a desperate political attack by the National Democrat Party and The Washington Post on this campaign,” he said in a statement.

He later attributed the news to “The Obama-Clinton Machine’s liberal media lap dogs.”

The Obama-Clinton Machine’s liberal media lapdogs just launched the most vicious and nasty round of attacks against me I’ve EVER faced!

We are are in the midst of a spiritual battle with those who want to silence our message. (1/4) 

Unlike others who have dropped out of races over allegations, demonstrating that the allegations probably had merit, I suspect Roy Moore will go the distance and the people of Alabama should vote for a principled man in the US Senate, one who has yet to sell them out to the dog with the biggest bark or the machine with the most money.

Liberal Fanatic Michael Moore Proposes The 28th Amendment To Regulate Guns

Leave a comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

Piss on this lard assed Jabba The Hut wanna be.

Michael Moore should stick to making movies.  All the ones he has churned out are crap, so it looks like he needs more practice at that.

However, following the Las Vegas shooting, Moore took to Facebook to call for a repeal of the Second Amendment and adopt a 28th Amendment that would prohibit your right to purchase what you like as far as guns go and inserts the notion that people have a right to be free from gun violence.

However, he is seeking to implement the very thing in which major cities in America, including Chicago and New York have done and yet, they continue to see increases in violent acts that involve guns.

Moore’s call for repealing the Second Amendment comes as no surprise since his film Bowling for Columbine.

While Moore called the Second Amendment “ancient and outdated” because it was written before bullets, revolvers and modern weapons were created, he doesn’t mention anything about the First Amendment being “ancient and outdated” simply because he is profiting from things like mobile video, television and the internet to voice his anti-American ideas.

Here’s his post.

“A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed.”

“I, Michael Moore, along with all who support an end to this epidemic of gun violence, propose a new Amendment to our Constitution that repeals the ancient and outdated 2nd Amendment (which was written before bullets and revolvers were even invented), and replaces it with a new 28th Amendment that guarantees States can have State militias (a.k.a. State National Guards which are made up of citizen-soldiers who are called upon in times of natural disasters or other State emergencies), allows individuals to use guns for sport and gathering food, and guarantees everyone the right to be free of, and protected from, gun violence (i.e., the public’s safety comes ahead of an individual’s right to own and fire a gun),” Moore wrote.

According to Moore, ”

This amendment would allow states and the federal government to pass laws that would regulate gun ownership in the following manner:”

• As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.

• All automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.

• No gun or clip can hold more than 6 bullets.

• To activate a gun for it to be used, the trigger must recognize the fingerprint of its registered owner. This will eliminate most crimes committed with a gun as 80% of these crimes are done with a stolen gun.

• One’s guns must be stored at a licensed gun club or government-regulated gun storage facility. Believing that having a gun in your home provides you with protection is an American myth. People who die from a home invasion make up a sad but minuscule .04% of all gun murders in the US. And over a third of them are killed by their own gun that the criminal has either stolen or wrestled from them.

• To own and operate a gun one must obtain a license (like one does to operate a car). To get a license you have to complete a gun training and safety course and pass a thorough background check.

• As nearly half of all gun deaths are suicides, mental health care must become a top national health priority and must be properly funded. And by making it more difficult to purchase a gun – and requiring its storage outside the home – easy access during a suicidal moment is denied.

• Current restrictions placed on the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), due to successful lobbying by the NRA, have prohibited them from studying the gun violence epidemic in the US. These rules need to be removed and the funding restored. Science will then be free to find out why we are ALONE among nations in killing each other at such a massive rate (hint: It’s not just the guns – it’s us as Americans).

OK, OK.  So all automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.  You guys will just have revolvers.  Oh, and if you have it, you’ve got to have a “smart gun,” which is really a dumb gun that allegedly only you can use, but can be foiled fairly simply.

Additionally, by banning ALL of these weapons, isn’t Moore going to also be arming the State National Guard, police and military with revolvers.

“This is the sane approach that meets everyone’s needs – everyone, that is, except those of the serial killer, the mass murderer, the violent ex-husband, the disgruntled employee or the disturbed and bullied teenager,” Moore wrote. 

Sadly, this doesn’t stop those serial killers, mass murderers, violent husbands, disgruntled employee or the disturbed and bullied teenager, does it?  Nope, it does not.

“This can come to an end with the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and replacing it with the 28th Amendment,” Moore said.

Actually, it would do no such thing as criminals would continue to have the very weapons Moore wants to be outlawed.



Trump Condemned for Charlottesville Statements – Obama Got a Pass on #BlackLivesMatter

1 Comment

H/T Freedom OutPost.

The lame stream media worshiped at the shrine of Bathhouse Barry and wanted to prop him up.

However the lame stream media is out to take down and destroy President Donald J.Trump so whatever says or does the will condemn him. 

Taking center stage this past weekend was the incident in Charlottesville, Virginia, where “white nationalist groups” and counter-protestors collided resulted in the death of a woman after James Fields Jr. hit her with his car.

One can pick up any news source and read all about it.  One can also read the response by President Trump and those who have come out condemning him for not issuing a stronger response.

According to The Washington TimesSenator Lindsay Graham (R-SC) stated on “Fox News Sunday,” “These groups seem to believe they have a friend in Donald Trump in the White House. … I would urge the president to dissuade these groups that he’s their friend.  I think the president can be very clear when he wants to be, and he needs to be clear here.”

For eight years, Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah openly supported Black Lives Matter and their rhetoric, minimizing their participation in violence and rioting due to some perceived slight stemming from a justifiable police shooting of black thug Michael Brown.

Hussein Soetoro openly condemned a law enforcement agency during a memorial for five officers killed by Black Lives Matter members.

Where was Lindsay Graham in holding Obama accountable for dissuading those groups that “he was their friend?”


The Washington Times continued:

Other Republican senators, including Orrin G. Hatch of Utah, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Ted Cruz of Texas, Marco Rubio of Florida and others condemned the deadly demonstration. But Mr. Trump’s handling of the situation fueled commentary that he is comfortable with the support of white nationalist groups, some of which praised his remarks and said they amounted to a victory because they didn’t explicitly blame anyone for the violence.

On Sunday night, Vice President Mike Pence denounced such white supremacists as “dangerous fringe groups” and said Mr. Trump shares his views.

“We have no tolerance for hate and violence from white supremacists, neo-Nazis or the KKK,” Mr. Pence said at a press conference in Cartagena, Colombia. “These dangerous fringe groups have no place in American public life and in the American debate, and we condemn them in the strongest possible terms.”

Mr. Gardner on Sunday urged the president to speak out again in more forceful terms and make clear that the Republican Party does not welcome such views. A failure to do that, the senator said, makes it fair to question if Mr. Trump wants to remain popular among white nationalists.

“Call this white supremacism, this white nationalism, evil, and let the country hear it, let the world hear it. It’s something that needs to come from the Oval Office,” Mr. Gardner said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program. “If he doesn’t do that, then we can continue to answer the question of why.”

After eight years, Republicans in Washington, DC still do not get it.  In fact, no one in Washington gets it.  Vice President Pence added to his statement to criticize accusations that President Trump was not strong or specific enough in his response.

Vice President Pence stated, “I take issue with the fact that many in the national media spent more time criticizing the president’s words than they did criticizing those that perpetrated the violence to begin with.  We should be putting the attention where it belongs, and that is on those extremist groups that need to be pushed out of the public debate entirely and discredited for the hate groups and dangerous fringe groups that they are.”

So, according to Mike Pence, dangerous fringe groups have no place in American public life and in American debate when those groups are white supremacists, neo-Nazis or the KKK.

There is no tolerance for hate and violence from these groups.

Moreover, Pence stated that extremist groups “need to be pushed out of the public debate entirely and discredited for the hate groups and dangerous fringe groups that they are.”

Yet, for eight years, citizens witnessed “tolerance” and overt support for dangerous fringe groups, such as Black Lives Matter, Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, etc. from Obama and his administration.

Is Pence saying that white supremacists, neo-Nazis, and the KKK are the only extremists groups that will receive no tolerance for hate and violence?

Is Pence saying that other “extreme fringe groups” will receive tolerance for hate and violence?

Since Pence and a few fellow Republicans are all on the band-wagon for calling out “extremist fringe groups” and going so far as to declare “these groups have no place in American public life and in the American debate,” it is only fair to include Muslim groups who support Shari’a law, killing infidels (anyone not Muslim or Muslim enough), female genital mutilation (on the rise in the US), honor killings, misogyny, and inequality under the law as also having no place in American life and in the American debate.

Why is it groups like this and others are not included?

Is it because the group who was exercising their right to peaceful assembly was white, supported nationalism, inclusion of all history, was provoked by another group, which then turned the entire assembly into a big ole hub-bub?

Why is it the other group present was not called out?

Where is the chastisement of law enforcement who did not keep the two groups separated, almost encouraging the conflict?

 Who is Mike Pence or any other individual serving in government to determine who should be excluded from American public life and American public debate?And, let’s not even get started on those in both chambers of Congress who are looking to oust/impeach/remove a duly constitutionally eligible and elected president for nothing more than not wanting the man to occupy the office.

It seems politicians have totally discounted the First Amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America.

You know that pesky little amendment that recognizes and protects free speech, freedom of the press, the right to peaceably assemble, freedom of religion and the right to petition government for a redress of grievances.

No one has once thought about the disenfranchisement of many American citizens during the eight years Hussein Soetoro “reign” where being white was almost condemned.

No one has thought about the support and encouragement of members of Black Lives Matter to riot, loot, commit assault and battery, engage in vandalism, and disrupt society during their “assemblies.”

And, none of these individuals have thought about the number of individuals attending Trump events during the presidential election cycle who were met with violence as police officers stood by and watched.

Make no mistake – the First Amendment does not protect violence, riots or commission of crimes.

It does protect all speech and peaceful assemblies.

That said, while some may not agree with the viewpoints of the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, BLM or the Black Panthers and may not like what they say or represent, these groups have a right to their beliefs, a right to voice those beliefs and a right to come together in peaceful assembly to petition government for a redress of grievances.

What they do not have the right to do is infringe on the rights of others or engage in criminal behavior using the protection of the First Amendment.

Whether these politicians realize it or not, members of these government dubbed “extreme fringe” groups are voters.

To make matters worse, Cokie Roberts, appearing on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday, had plenty to say in the panel discussion on Trump’s response.

Breitbart reported:

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” network contributor Cokie Roberts declared during a panel discussion about President Donald Trump’s reaction to the violence in Charlottesville, VA that Trump had to “share responsibility.”

Roberts said, “Well, the president has to share responsibility. The fact is, is that through hat campaign, he blew all kind of whistles that those of us who grew up in the Jim Crow South, like I did, recognized immediately.”

“It was just calling out to these white supremacists who then felt empowered by it, and the president now not calling them out — you know, he should listen to Nikki Haley, his now UN ambassador,” she continued. “She’s the person who started bringing down Confederate monuments. And she did it so graciously and exactly the right tone after the killings of Mother Emmanuel Church.”

According to “Cooky” Roberts, Trump has to “share responsibility” because a “hat campaign” called out “white supremacists.”

And, that hat campaign “blew all kinds of whistles” to individuals who grew up in the Jim Crow South?  Really?

That’s a lot of assumption on a campaign slogan.

As someone who lives in the “deep south” and lived through part of the Jim Crow years, there was not one time that “whistles blew” recognizing the “calling out to white supremacists” from the Trump campaign slogan.

Actually, to me, it was a call to return to our American greatness of loyalty to the Constitution, supporting its tenets, and standing against government usurpations and any ideology anathema to it.

While that may not have been its intent, it is what I think is what makes America great.

Only someone looking to find discourse would read something sinister in the slogan.

Roberts goes on to voice support for the removal of historical monuments pertaining to the Civil War, “War of Northern Aggression,” “The War to Enslave the States,” or whatever one feels bests describes the conflict.

To support such an action, regardless of any incident, is the echo of saying Hitler’s Germany burning books and banning certain elements of history is acceptable.

If one is going to eradicate history as it pertains to Confederate monuments, then one might as well go full Monty and eradicate Union monuments, civil war battlefields, monuments to Union generals, Mount Rushmore, the Geronimo monument,  and so forth and so on – which is ridiculous.

History is history that one cannot change.

It is best to remember all elements of history in order that we may learn from it.

In looking at the atmosphere across the united States today, there are plenty of citizens who have not learned from it, if they know enough to even garner one lesson from it.

What we are seeing in all of this and the last eight years is there is no equality under the law, no Bill of Rights to protect citizens’ individual God-given rights, and whichever group(s) claims the most “offense” is the group(s) that receives special treatment.

This is the result of a government that has ignored the constitutional tenets in favor of pandering to special interest groups it deems worthy of protection – the rest of society be damned.

This is the result of a government that has engaged in usurpation, bent to the evils of corruption, supported ideologies instead of law, fueled policy through emotion stirred by special interest and an “entertainment” based news media.

Some say there are two sets of laws – one for the elite and one for the peons.  In reality, there are three sets of laws – one for the elite, one for the peons, and one for special interests favored by government.

If these charlatan Washington politicians and other charlatan elected officials would apply the laws equally, there would be no group or groups who could claim “disenfranchisement,” “discrimination,” “racism,” “bigotry,” and a whole list of other perceived slights, which would go a long way to healing a nation torn apart by a carpetbagger criminal communist socialist identity thief.

Likewise, if the lamestream enemedia would actually do their job, instead of fomenting discontent through backing a criminal enterprise, the knowledge that the Constitution is the law and its tenets apply to all might just begin to reach the many citizens who remain ignorant.

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: