The Rules Don’t Apply To Democrat Bigwigs Like Rep. John Conyers

Leave a comment

H/T Conservative Headquarters.

The DemocRats have always been exempt from the rules Franklin D.Roosevelt,John F.Kennedy,Robert F.Kennedy and Turd(Ted)Kennedy have had a pass on their sexual escapades.

Turd(Ted) Kennedy even got away with causing the death of Mary Jo Kopechne.

Let’s call it the trickledown theory of get-out-of-jail-free cards. Once Bill and Hillary Clinton were given a pass on their serial transgressions; sexual assault, lawbreaking of all kinds, graft and corruption it seems no Democrat bigwig can be held accountable for anything.

Many will see this precedent in Senator Al Franken’s apparent get-out-of-jail-free card on his photo-documented serial groping and sexual harassment, now being excused as all in good fun by his former John ConyersSaturday Night Live castmates, Democratic politicians and even one of the victims – leftwing media mogul Arianna Huffington.

However, Franken’s consequence-free groping pales in comparison to the treatment afforded another Democrat bigwig – ranking member of the House Committee on the Judiciary and former Chairman of that panel Rep. John Conyers (MI-13) whom we have learned was protected from a sexual harassment charge by a $27,000 payout of taxpayer-funded hush money.

The 88-year old Conyers, first elected in 1964, is the “Dean” of the House, having served longer than any other current member of that body.

However, by rights, Conyers should not even still be a member of the House of Representatives.

In 2014 the Michigan Secretary of State ruled that Conyers had not met the petition signature requirements to appear on the Democratic Primary ballot because his petition circulators did not meet the statutory requirements, and thus the signatures they gathered were invalid.

However, Judge Matthew F. Leitman put him back on the ballot by judicial fiat in ruling that the requirement (instituted to prevent fraud) that petition circulators be registered voters was unconstitutional. “He shall be placed on the ballot,” ordered Judge Leitman.

It will surprise no one to learn that Leitman was nominated to the federal bench in 2013 by President Barack Obama. He was confirmed in March 2014.

We contrast that to the treatment Newt Gingrich received in 2008, when he was kept off the GOP primary ballot in Virginia through staff flubs.

Conyers received that get-out-of-jail-free-card on top of the pass Conyers received after two of his former aides alleged to the FBI and the House Ethics Committee that Conyers used his staff to work on several local and state campaigns, and forced them to baby-sit and chauffeur his children.

In late December 2006, Conyers “accepted responsibility” for possibly violating House rules. A statement issued December 29, 2006, by the House Ethics Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) and Ranking Minority Member Howard Berman (D-CA), said that Conyers acknowledged what he characterized as a “lack of clarity” in his communications with staff members regarding their official duties and responsibilities, and accepted responsibility for his actions. In deciding to drop the matter, Hastings and Berman stated:

After reviewing the information gathered during the inquiry, and in light of Representative Conyers’ cooperation with the inquiry, we have concluded that this matter should be resolved through the issuance of this public statement and the agreement by Representative Conyers to take a number of additional, significant steps to ensure that his office complies with all rules and standards regarding campaign and personal work by congressional staff.

But Conyers’ abuse of staff apparently didn’t end in 2006.

Conyers settled a wrongful dismissal complaint in 2015 with a former employee who alleged she was fired because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances.”

“I was basically blackballed. There was nowhere I could go,” the employee said in a phone interview with BuzzFeed. BuzzFeed News is withholding the woman’s name at her request because she said she fears retribution.

The former employee said Conyers repeatedly asked her for sexual favors and often asked her to join him in a hotel room. On one occasion, she alleges that Conyers asked her to work out of his room for the evening, but when she arrived the congressman started talking about his sexual desires. She alleged he then told her she needed to “touch it,” in reference to his penis, or find him a woman who would meet his sexual demands.

She alleged Conyers made her work nights, evenings, and holidays to keep him company.

In another incident, the former employee alleged the congressman insisted she stay in his room while they traveled together for a fundraising event. When she told him that she would not stay with him, she alleged he told her to “just cuddle up with me and caress me before you go.”

“Rep. Conyers strongly postulated that the performing of personal service or favors would be looked upon favorably and lead to salary increases or promotions,” the former employee said in the documents.

Three other staff members provided affidavits submitted to the Office Of Compliance that outlined a pattern of behavior from Conyers that included touching the woman in a sexual manner and growing angry when she brought her husband around reported BuzzFeed.

One affidavit from a former female employee states that she was tasked with flying in women for the congressman. “One of my duties while working for Rep. Conyers was to keep a list of women that I assumed he was having affairs with and call them at his request and, if necessary, have them flown in using Congressional resources,” said her affidavit. (A second staffer alleged in an interview with BuzzFeed that Conyers used taxpayer resources to fly women to him.)

BuzzFeed reports the employee said in her affidavit that Conyers also made sexual advances toward her: “I was driving the Congressman in my personal car and was resting my hand on the stick shift. Rep. Conyers reached over and began to caress my hand in a sexual manner.”

The woman said she told Conyers she was married and not interested in pursuing a sexual relationship, according to the affidavit. She said she was told many times by constituents that it was well-known that Conyers had sexual relationships with his staff, and said she and other female staffers felt this undermined their credibility.

“I am personally aware of several women who have experienced the same or similar sexual advances made towards them by Rep[.] John Conyers,” she said in her affidavit reported BuzzFeed.

A male employee wrote that he witnessed Rep. Conyers rub the legs and other body parts of the complainant “in what appeared to be a sexual manner” and saw the congressman rub and touch other women “in an inappropriate manner.” The employee said he confronted Conyers about this behavior.

“Rep. Conyers said he needed to be ‘more careful’ because bad publicity would not be helpful as he runs for re-election. He ended the conversation with me by saying he would ‘work on’ his behavior,” the male staffer said in his affidavit according to BuzzFeed.

The male employee said that in 2011 Conyers complained a female staffer was “too old” and said he wanted to let her go. The employee said he set up a meeting in December 2011 to discuss “mistreatment of staff and his misuse of federal resources.” BuzzFeed reports the affidavit says that Conyers “agreed that he would work on making improvements as long as I worked directly with him and stopped writing memos and emails about concerns.”

Another female employee also attested that she witnessed Conyer’s advances, and said she was asked to transport women to him. “I was asked on multiple occasions to pick up women and bring them to Mr. Conyers[‘] apartment, hotel rooms, etc.”

BuzzFeed News reached out to several former Conyers staffers, all of whom did not want to speak on the record. One former staffer, who did not want to be named, said she was frustrated by the secretive complaint process.

Documents from the complaint obtained by BuzzFeed News include four signed affidavits, three of which are notarized, from former staff members who allege that Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the powerful House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly made sexual advances to female staff that included requests for sex acts, contacting and transporting other women with whom they believed Conyers was having affairs, caressing their hands sexually, and rubbing their legs and backs in public. Four people involved with the case verified the documents are authentic claimed BuzzFeed.

Naturally, Conyers issued a blanket denial of the former employee’s allegations.

Last week the Washington Post reported that Congress’s Office of Compliance paid out $17 million for 264 settlements with federal employees over 20 years for various violations, including sexual harassment. The Conyers documents, however, give a glimpse into the inner workings of the office, which has for decades concealed episodes of sexual abuse by powerful political figures.

“Your story won’t do shit to him,” said the staffer. “He’s untouchable.”

Based on the Bill Clinton and Al Franken precedents it looks like the former staffer is right – at least if you are a powerful Democrat.



Politics: Chelsea Clinton promises her mom’s Supreme Court will gut the 2nd Amendment

1 Comment

This is from CainTV. 

I want to address the Not Trump and the Not Cruz crowd.

You mental midget’s along with the Establishment Republicans are making a clear path to the White House for Hillary.

Wake Up and Grow Up get behind either Cruz or Trump so we can take back the White House.

It has been a DemocRat wet dream for as long as I can remember to gut the Second Amendment and disarm Americans.

I find it ironic that John F.Kennedy a Life Member of the NRA was killed by a Marxist/Socialist Lee Harvey Oswald.

The same Lee Harvey Oswald today would be a DemocRat voter.

Wave buh-bye to your rights.

Back in February, I argued that the death of Antonin Scalia instantly made the 2nd Amendment the biggest issue of the 2016 presidential election.  Since then, Republicans have been busy bickering about transgender bathrooms and who they hate more: Trump or Cruz. While they indulge in that incredible waste of time, the left is cruising toward a future where the Constitution is decimated by a statist Supreme Court pick.

Obama has already nominated Merrick Garland to fill Scalia’s position on the bench. He’s about as anti-2A as they come, and if he’s confirmed, you can be 100% certain that he’ll overturn 2008’s District of Columbia v Heller decision. That would eliminate the concept of gun ownership as an individual right, basically gutting the 2nd Amendment.

He may or may not make it through the nominating process, but rest assured.  If he doesn’t, Hillary can’t wait to appoint someone else who will eliminate your rights. As Chelsea Clinton is all too happy to admit; her mom has plans for Heller…

In other words, “With Scalia dead, we can finally destroy your 2nd Amendment protections the way we’ve always wanted to, and we’re pretty excited about that.”

Remember, these are the people who constantly promise you can keep your plan, you can keep your doctor, and that no one wants to destroy your ability to “hunt and protect your family.”

As we head toward November, never forget that Hillary views the Constitution as nothing more than an insignificant obstacle. At heart, she’s an authoritarian gun-grabber who, if it furthers her agenda and pleases her donors, will gleefully shred every single one of your rights.

November 22,1963 The End Of Camelot

1 Comment



If you are old enough, you can recall this terrible day.

You can recall where you were, and what you were doing when you heard the news.
Like the greatest generation and Pearl Harbor, the memory is vivid in our minds.
I was nine years old at the time. I recall the teacher turning on the television to warm up. ( Yes, TVs then had tubes so they needed to warm up.)
Instead of our usual science program, there was a newscaster saying President Kennedy had been shot in Dallas, Texas. We were stunned and started to cry.
Then the announcement came that we were going home early.
The bus ride home was quiet except for our sobs.

When I got home my mother had the television on and we heard that President Kennedy had died. That added to the sorrow of that horrible day.

My younger brother was about five years old at that time.
He was a real fan of President Kennedy.
Whenever he heard the President’s voice, he would run into the room to listen.
He was really heart-broken.
Over the next few days we watched the events unfold in Dallas.
A suspect was named and then arrested. It was Lee Harvey Oswald.
Then we saw Jack Ruby murder Oswald on television.
President Kennedy’s funeral was broadcast along with John-John‘s salute to his fallen father.
Like the Twin Towers being brought down, this event is forever in my memory.

Marine’s Message to Those who Burned School’s American Flag: I Wear the Uniform to Show People this is not OK


This is from Freedom OutPost.

If I had these pukes, I would wrap them in what was left of the flag and finish burning it with them wrapped in it.


First Sergeant Reginald Daniels is the epitome of what John F. Kennedy had in mind when he said, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

Following an American flag burning at a local school, Daniels performed an honorable act, but wait till you grasp the entire story.

Daniels, a married, father of two Marine veteran, has given back to the community in Springfield, Oregon that he has faithful served.

He and several of his fellow Marines got involved at a local school, Brattain Early Learning Center, and helped to build a playground for the children.

Upon discovering that the school didn’t have a flag, Daniels went out and purchased one himself and then brought it to the school and instructed the staff in how to raise and lower it properly.

However, this past week, he learned that someone had burned the flag and left it burned and tattered at half-mast.

Daniels told KVAL that one of his fellow Marines was called by the school on Friday and asked how much the flag cost. When they contacted him, he wanted to know why they would need the price and that is when he learned what had been done.

Daniels immediately went to the school.

“Some of the teachers kind of teared up a little bit and then they took me in to the back room and showed me the flag that was burned,” Daniels said.

“I was lost for words to see that someone had pulled the flag down off the pole and burned it.”

He left and went to his office, picked up a new flag and brought it back to the school.

“The flag represents something a lot bigger than all the military services,” he told KVAL. “We put the uniform on to protect it, so that you and I and the little kids in the school can have something better. It’s bigger than you taking the time to burn the flag in our own country.”

“I love this country and what it stands for,” he added. “I know everybody has their views, but I think everybody can have something that they can look proudly at, and that’s – I take pride in the flag.

Someone out there thinks that this is OK. And this is the exact reason why I wear this uniform, so that – to show them that it’s not.”

Our veterans are a loyal bunch. Veteran Jim Brossard cut down an American flag that was being dishonored as a local business in downtown Reno was flying the Mexican flag above it declaring,

“I’m Jim Brossard, and I took this flag down in honor of my country with a knife from the United States Army.”

Following his display of patriotism, Ka-Bar designed a special knife to commemorate his act of patriotism and honor the man behind it.

The US Army Brossard commemorative knife had Jim’s statements and an American flag emblazoned on the blade.

First Sergeant Daniels has honorably served three tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. Well done Sir, well done

Kennedy heir shows ‘progressive’ threats to freedom include more than guns

Leave a comment

This is from The Examiner.

This is a man who his grandfather, Joseph P Kennedy Sr and his uncle John F Kennedy were Nazi sympathizers.

Joseph was recalled by Franklin Roosevelt from The Court of Saint James due to Nazi sympathies.

John was sent to the South Pacific to get him away from his  mistress that was a Nazi  sympathizer.

So it is not by any stretch of the little Bobbie Kennedy Jr would want to put people that oppose his agenda to death.


Jumping the shark in the furtherance of environmentalcase lunacy, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. asserts he would like to have the law changed so people who disagree with his views on “climate change” could be prosecuted, and even executed, by the government.

“[Kennedy] said there should be a law that lets authorities punish skeptics and deniers — those who engage in ‘selling out the public trust,’” The Washington Times reported Tuesday, citing an interview the “progressive” activist gave to Climate Depot at the people’s Climate March in New York City. “I wish there were a law you could punish them with. I don’t think there is a law that you can punish these politicians under…

“I think it’s treason,” he continued. “Do I think the Koch Brothers are treasonous — yes, I do Do I think they should be in jail — I think they should be [enjoying] three hots and a cot at the Hague with all the other war criminals.”

As an attorney with the finest education from exclusive schools money can buy, Kennedy certainly must be aware that conviction for treason can be punishable by death. And subjecting American citizens to international tribunals for “war crimes” over political differences in environmental policy is not only unprecedented; it’s stark, raving nuts.

That’s actually a pretty good description of the Climate March itself, where signs of the most basic misunderstanding of the way things work were evident, with slogans such as “No More Climate Change,” as if such a thing is even possible. Not that outright communiuh… “progressives can’t dream of controlling everything…

As with all national socialists, and that’s exactly what he and they are, every day is Opposite Day for this rich and privileged headcase. But while Kennedy wants agents of the state to come down with stomping jackboots on those who oppose his demands, he’s been treated with leniency in his own brushes with the law, encounters a non-elite might not be so fortunate to escape with his freedom, not to mention his skull, intact. Hey what good is egalitarianism if some animals aren’t more equal than others?

And while Kennedy maintains a police officer was lying when, as a teenager, he was accused of spitting ice cream in the officer’s face precipitating his arrest, he did not take the judge up on pleading not guilty, despite having the Kennedy fortune to mount a legal defense that would have allowed him to challenge the testimony. Likewise, his 1982 arrest for heroin possessionresulted in probation, community service and an expunged record. Curious, that the man who would control those without addictive personalities is still described as a man who can’t – or won’t – control himself.

It’s evidently easier to shrug it all off and say there wassomething about Mary.

As with all “progressives,” the hypocrisy is overwhelming. For an environmentalist, he not only refuses to make personal sacrifices to reduce his own “carbon footprint,” he also found all kinds of excuses to oppose other Greens on a Cape Cod wind farm — one that just happened to be within sight of the Kennedy compound.

Without meaning to open up the debate on man-made global warming, I will say I have my skepticism about it, about different reports on polar ice cap melting or expansion rates, about fudged statistics, about major polluting nations that will not sign onto Kyoto while we’re expected to, about Al Gore, about “consensus,” about the effects of the sun, and about a lot more. That makes those who share similar concerns what the Prozis want to call a “denier,” pointedly using the same terminology applied to those who dismiss the Holocaust, and equating us with genocide-enablers.

Color me even more doubtful when Kennedy lunacy is amplified by fellow travelers like the New York University “bioethicist” professor who says we ought to combat global warming by breeding humans genetically to live shorter lives and be allergic to red meat. And where would he get that idea but from a Nobel Prize-winning chair of a UN environmental panelwhose religion just happens to prohibit dietary beef?

That’s what this really is, a religious war, waged by the very fanatics who scream the loudest about a “wall of separation,” that is, until they find it convenient to employ useful idiots of the cloth to lobby from the pulpit. And as Kennedy shows with his charges of treason and his insane demands for the punishment of apostates, blasphemers, heretics and infidels, what such madmen hope to establish is very ISIL-like, and indistinguishable from an unchallengeable theocracy of evil.

So: Who wants to trust the enviromullahs and their ilk to define and enforce “reasonable and commonsense gun safety laws”? And who thinks negotiations with them, and unilateral “compromises,” are either possible or desirable?


6 Reasons Liberals are Incapable of Governing


This is from Town Hall.



When you think poor governance, you think liberalism. Barack Obama could fairly be called the worst President in history and one of his biggest competitors for that crown is Jimmy Carter, whose name primarily brings to mind the words “malaise,” “hostage crisis,” and “liberal peanut farmer.” Lyndon Johnson? Other than the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which more Republicans voted for percentage-wise than Democrats, his presidency was a complete disaster.

Some Democrats might point out John F. Kennedy’s time in the White House, but in all fairness, he’d probably have more in common with Republicans like Scott Brown or Chris Christie than he would with liberals today. Bill Clinton could fairly be called a liberal, but after the Republican Revolution of 1994 that came as a reaction to his liberalism, he was so chastened that he spent the last 6 years in the White House banging chicks and trying to fight off impeachment instead of pushing an agenda.

Of course, liberal incompetence isn’t just confined to the White House. Who botched the hurricane preparation for New Orleans so badly that tens of thousands of people were stuck in a city built inside of a geological soup bowl when Hurricane Katrina rolled in? Liberals. Who bankrupted Detroit? Liberals. Why are states like Illinois, Michigan, and California on track to default on their debts in the next few years? Liberals.

Why are liberals so bad at governing?

1) Their political alliances require a lot of corruption: If you boil the political pitch liberals make down to its essence, it’s basically, “Vote for us and we’ll give you ‘free’ stuff and let you do whatever you want.” Of course, somebody has to pay for all of the “free” stuff and as often as not, when you bend the law to let one person do whatever he wants, it gets done at someone else’s expense. You want special privileges for the unions? You have to screw businesses to make it happen. You want gay marriage? Well, then you’ll have to force Christians to violate their religious beliefs to get it. Want to give free contraception away? Then somebody has to pay for it and chances are, people think it’s a dumb idea. Liberals believe in deciding who wins and who loses in society based on political concerns, not merit, and it shows in the mediocrity of their performance.

2) Their close-mindedness keeps them from getting feedback: Liberals live inside a closed feedback loop. Conservative criticism of liberal policies is treated as wrong by default because those of us on the Right are supposedly awful, mean, racist people who hate poor people and puppies. Yet, liberals embrace tribalism to such an extent that they are only allowed to criticize each other for tactics or for not being liberal enough while support for liberal programs is as immutable as religious doctrine. There is no debate of significance on the Left about whether Obamacare is a good idea or whether the government can “afford” to spend more money on any new programs. Even the “moderate” liberals who talk tough about being pro-life or against gun control because they’re in a purple district will always cave on a liberal principle if they’re needed for a crucial vote. This is part of the reason you always hear so much talk about a “civil war” on the Right. Conservatives are open-minded enough to have ferocious, free-wheeling debates about the issues while the drones on the Left aren’t free thinkers.

3) They don’t care if their policies work: Liberalism was not, is not, and will never be about putting the best policies in place to help the most people. If liberals did care about results, they wouldn’t be liberals in the first place. To the contrary, liberalism is all about taking positions that make people feel good about themselves. If a policy bankrupts small businesses all across the country, but makes liberals feel compassionate, they view it as good policy. If a policy tramples over the rights of hundreds of millions of people, but makes liberals feel tolerant, they view it as good policy. If a policy mires tens of millions of people in poverty, but it makes liberals feel like they care, they view it as good policy. When you govern based on how policies make you feel, not whether they work or not, you’re nothing but an oblivious bull running through a china shop because the sound of all the breaking glass makes you happy.

4) Their strategy is centered around amassing government power: If people can take care of themselves, then they don’t need liberals telling them what to do “for their own good” and that just won’t do. So, liberals have embraced big government not because it’s effective at solving problems, but because it’s a good tool to use if you want to control people. Unfortunately for liberals, centralized control of a nation of over 300 million people can’t work. There are too many people, too many professions, and too much complexity for D.C. to handle. Put another way, if you put a genius at cooking in charge of making regulatory decisions for the banking or medical industry, she would be practically guaranteed to hopelessly screw it up because she wouldn’t have the specific knowledge needed to make good decisions. Oh, and guess what? Most politicians and bureaucrats aren’t “geniuses.” A lot of them aren’t that bright at all and many of the ones that are, have the inflated sense of self-esteem that comes from going to a good school and being told, “You’re smart,” your whole life without ever going out in the real world and testing yourself. “Big government” leads to “big disasters” and there was not, is not, nor will there ever be liberals smart enough to change that.

5) They don’t like America very much: Conservatives start with the assumption that America is a great nation that’s worth preserving. Liberals don’t share that assumption. Liberals are like a man that looks at his beautiful wife who took care of him, doted on him, and worshipped him for his whole adult life and thinks, “I bet that somewhere there’s a super model who’d do everything my wife does AND never ask me to take her out to dinner once in awhile. I want a divorce!” When you don’t love this country, when you don’t appreciate the INCREDIBLE economic prosperity and freedom we’ve had, when you feel no gratitude for all of the sacrifices that were made to get us to this point, how can you be trusted to govern?

6) They believe the ends justify the means: Liberals don’t care about rules unless the rules benefit them in some fashion. Of course, rules that are only rules when they benefit liberals are no rules at all. Why should you follow the law if illegals are allowed to break the law with impunity? Why shouldn’t you cheat on your taxes if a tax cheat like Tim Geithner can be Secretary of the Treasury? If Barack Obama can break the law any way he wants, just because he wants to do it, why shouldn’t YOU be able to break the law, too? What this erosion of respect for law and order leads to is a society based on legalism, where people only obey the letter of the law as long as they feel that they won’t get caught. Lies becomes routine, corruption becomes endemic, cover-ups become standard — in other words, the degeneracy of the Obama White House becomes the norm whenever liberals are in charge.

Colorado Sheriff Justin Smith Answers: Can The Secret Service Really Arrest A Sheriff? Read More: Colorado Sheriff Justin Smith Answers: Can The Secret Service Really Arrest A Sheriff?


This is from KAUD-FM K99 Ft .Collins, Colorado.



I wrote a story earlier this week about the possibility of the Secret Service being authorized to arrest Sheriffs across the country if they fail to uphold new gun control laws. Just a few minutes ago, I received a very nice email from Larimer County Sheriff Justin Smith who wants to clarify a few things.


It seems as though the story last night went viral and is now overwhelming his office with emails and calls, I assume in support. I was very worried when I read this story at the original source.

To the point, Sheriff Justin Smith wanted to clear the air while saying yes, there is a bill that would add the Secret Service to a “list of federal officers” but he says they would have “limited state authority” and the bill, he says, is not being portrayed correctly…

In the last decade, CO started to grant limited authority to certain federal law enforcement agencies. The purpose is so that if they witness a citizen being victimized, they can act and turn the case over to a local police officer (because most crimes against our citizens are not federal crimes and they have no other jurisdiction to intervene as federal officers. The law also allows them, in cases where they are investigating a crime that is against both state and federal law, to file the case with our local DA in situations where the damage amount doesn’t meet a threshold where the federal prosecutors will file it in federal court. If you read the bill, you will see the limitations clearly in it. As Sheriffs, we are the beacon against over reach by federal authorities, but in this situation, it is not the case – Sheriff Justin Smith

Read The Entire Bill Here

I think the bottom line is there are now around 350 Sheriffs from all across the country who are staring into a barrel of trouble when they refuse to arrest someone based on the 2nd Amendment issues they say they will not enforce. Someone will have to slap cuffs on these guys, so, who will be doing that?  Federal Marshall’s or the Secret Service?

I hold every one of these Sheriffs in the highest regard for taking the stand they have taken concerning 2nd Amendment rights, but I’m afraid it won’t end here and eventually they will be put to the test.  I hope I’m wrong but this is just getting started and I want to personally thank Sheriff Smith for his email.

NEXT: See the Questionable Letter the White House Sent About Gun Control


Read More: Colorado Sheriff Justin Smith Answers: Can The Secret Service Really Arrest A Sheriff? |

Did Lee Harvey Oswald Shoot Jesus? These People Think So…


This is from The Right To Bear Arms.

I weep for the future of America.

Just think these morons reproduce and vote..



Mark Dice is a political activist and video personality who is well-known for approaching random people on the street and posing questions with false assumptions built into them.

Example: “Do you think stricter gun control laws would have prevented Lee Harvey Oswald from shooting Jesus?”

A student of history would never answer such a question because it’s absolutely ridiculous. But there aren’t many students of history in America today.

As a result, there is no shortage of people who are all too happy to answer Dice’s questions — and, in the process, make fools out of themselves. Check out the video below.

Oh, and just for the record, Jesus was crucified on April 3, 33 A.D. and Lee Harvey Oswald allegedly shot President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, so the two events are roughly 1,930 years apart.

Also: These people actually vote.


1 Comment

This is from Breitbarts Big Holly Wood.

Like most of the stuff coming out of Holly Weird they rewrite history and

the facts to suit their agenda.

Holly Weird has spent and lost billions of dollars making trash.


The new political drama Lee Daniels’ The Butler takes its cues from a Washington Post article about a black servant named Eugene Allen who worked in eight presidential administrations.

That part of the story is essentially unchanged. The rest of the film, a movie stuffed with politics, historical re-creations and presidential imitations, is rife with inaccuracies that should be corrected.

Note: Some story spoilers ahead …

  1. President Ronald Reagan was indifferent to the suffering of people of color. Breitbart News reported this week that Reagan biographer Craig Shirley shredded this notion by detailing the president’s legislative achievements and personal outtreach to his black peers.
  2. The Democrats helped pass the Civil Rights Act: This is more of an inaccuracy by omission. The film showcases how both Presidents Kennedy and Johnson rallied on behalf of civil rights, but what’s left out is the voting record on the historic Civil Rights Act. Turns out “80 percent of the “no” votes in the Senate came from Democrats, including the late Robert Byrd (W.Va.) and Albert Gore (Tenn.), father of the future vice president,” so Republicans teamed up with President Johnson to pass the legislation.
  3. President Nixon dismissed black Americans–save for their votes: The film shows Nixon (John Cusack) promoting his upcoming election battle with John F. Kennedy by giving campaign buttons to the butler and his fellow black servers. Later, Nixon talks up black enterprise but only with an eye on winning votes. notes Nixon’s record on school integration outpaced his predecessors, and Allen has spoken fondly of Nixon in press interviews.
  4. The Butler disliked President Reagan: The real Eugene Allen has expressed affection for all the presidents he served, noting he voted for each when they were inhabiting the White House. A framed picture of the Reagans was displayed on Allen’s living room wall, and he noted that Nancy Reagan gave him a warm hug when he finally retired. Hardly sounds like the character in the movie, played by Forest Whitaker, who appeared to be fed up with the Reagans and quit for that very reason.
  5. The Butler met Obama: The film uses a framing device of the titular Butler waiting to meet personally with President Barack Obama. There’s no official record of such a meeting, although Allen was a VIP guest at Obama’s swearing in.

Extra: Screenwriter Danny Strong (Game Change) took tremendous liberties with Allen’s life beyond the name change to Cecil Gaines. Strong gave the butler two sons, not one, made the main character’s wife (Oprah Winfrey) a heavy drinker and fictionalized much of his life story prior to entering the White House.



How JFK secretly ADMIRED Hitler:

Leave a comment

This is from The U.K.Daily Mail.

Joesph p.Kennedy Sr was recalled from The Court Of St.James

because of being a Nazi Sympathizer.

Is there any reason His son would not feel the same?

The reason John was reassigned to the South Pacific

was his affair with a Nazi Sympathizer.

Ted Kennedy tried to under mind Ronald Reagan by writing

a letter to the Russians.

It seems the whole family had a love affair with despots and  

murdering dictators.

The rest of this story can be liked above and here.



Explosive book reveals former President’s praise for the Nazis as he travelled through Germany before Second World War

  • A new book reveals President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis
  • Embarrassingly close to visit being paid to Berlin next month by Obama
  • Comes one week before 50th anniversary commemorations of JFK‘s memorable ‘Ich bin ein Berliner‘ speech pledging US solidarity with Europe


PUBLISHED: 06:39 EST, 23 May 2013 | UPDATED: 10:24 EST, 23 May 2013

A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis.

The news comes embarrassingly close to a visit being paid to Berlin next month by President Obama – one week before 50th anniversary commemorations of JFK’s memorable ‘Ich bin ein Berliner’ speech pledging US solidarity with Europe during the Cold War.

President Kennedy’s travelogues and letters chronicling his wanderings through Germany before WWII, when Adolf Hitler was in power, have been unearthed and show him generally in favour of the movement that was to plunge the world into the greatest war in history

President kennedy
UNSPECIFIED - CIRCA 1920: Adolf Hitler (1889-1945), German statesman. (Photo by Roger Viollet/Getty Images)

Secret: A new book out in Germany reveals how President Kennedy was a secret admirer of the Nazis

‘Fascism?’ wrote the youthful president-to-be in one. ‘The right thing for Germany.’

In another; ‘What are the evils of fascism compared to communism?’

And on August 21, 1937 – two years before the war that would claim 50 million lives broke out – he wrote: ‘The Germans really are too good – therefore people have ganged up on them to protect themselves.’

And in a line which seems directly plugged into the racial superiority line plugged by the Third Reich he wrote after travelling through the Rhineland: ‘The Nordic races certainly seem to be superior to the Romans.’

The future president’s praise is now embarrassing in hindsight – a few years later he fought in War War Two against the Nazis and his elder brother Lt. Joseph Patrick ‘Joe’ Kennedy, Jr was killed.

Revealing: Presidential diaries and photographs are among more than 500 items from a collection John F. Kennedy documents and artifactsRevealing: Presidential diaries and photographs are among more than 500 items from a collection of John F. Kennedy documents and artifacts


John F. Kennedy juggles on a street in Amsterdam during a trip to Europe,
1937 --- John F. Kennedy recovers from jaundice in a London hospital in 1937. --- Image by CORBIS

Tour: Kennedy recovers, right, from jaundice in a London hospital in 1937 and left juggles on a street in Amsterdam during a trip to Europe

Trip: Kennedy and one of his sisters ride camels in Egypt in 1939Trip: Kennedy and one of his sisters ride camels in Egypt in 1939


Framed together are the Navy Marine Corps Medal and the Purple Hearttial 

As a young man, the future president had desperately wanted to go into the Navy but was originally rejected – mainly due to a back injury he sustained playing football while attending Harvard.

In 1941, though, his politically connected father Joe P Kennedy used his influence to get him in to the service and he joined the Navy.

In 1942, Kennedy volunteered for PT (motorized torpedo) boat duty in the Pacific.

On 12 June 1944 he received the Navy’s highest honor for gallantry for his heroic actions as a gunboat pilot during World War II.

The Navy Marine Corps Medal and the Purple Heart were presented to Lt. Kennedy for his heroics and injuries sustained in the rescue of the crew of PT 109 during on August 2, 1943 when the motor torpedo boat was struck by a Japanese destroyer.

His back was hurt during duty and Kennedy was released from all active duty and finally retired from the U.S. Naval Reserve on physical disability in March 1945.

‘I can imagine no more rewarding a career. And any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction: I served in the United States Navy.’

John F Kennedy


Other musings concern how great the autobahns were – ‘the best roads in the world’ – and how, having visited Hitler’s Bavarian holiday home in Berchtesgaden and the tea house built on top of the mountain for him.

He declared; ‘Who has visited these two places can easily imagine how Hitler will emerge from the hatred currently surrounding him to emerge in a few years as one of the most important personalities that ever lived.’


Kennedy’s admiration for Nazi Germany is revealed in a book entitled ‘John F. Kennedy – Among the Germans. Travel diaries and letters 1937-1945.’

When World War II did arrive, the future president’s father, Joe P Kennedy, strongly opposed going into battle with Germany and made several missteps that severely damaged his political career.

He adopted a defeatist, anti-war stance and tried to arrange a meeting with Adolf Hitler without the approval of the Department of State.

The reasons for this are unclear – some speculate he was eager to do anything to avoid war because he feared that American capitalism – which he profited from – would not survive the country’s entry into the conflict.

In his role as US ambassador to Britain he also opposed providing the UK with military and economic aid.

He said in an interview ‘Democracy is finished in England. It may be here [in the US].

During the World War II, JFK’s older brother Joe volunteered for a secret mission testing an experimental drone plane packed with explosives – a weapon the Allies hoped to use as a guided missile.

On the first test flight, the explosives detonated prematurely and the plane exploded – his body was never found.

Read more:
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: