WOW -POWER & MONEY

The MAJORITY of Americans don't realize just how much POWER & MONEY the Democrats make off "I*****l A***ns" being in our country even without v**er fraud.



This is why they created 'Sanctuary' cities and states.



Simply by including their numbers as part of the population in the US Census, they get MOUNTAINS of money from the federal government and for every 770,000 i*****l a***ns in their Democrat-controlled area, they get a seat in the US House of Representatives apportioned to their area following the census.



YES! READ IT AGAIN!



After the US Census (performed once every 10 years), the 435 seats in the US House of Representatives are divided up by state populations and the last one resulted in one seat for roughly every 770,000 people.



So, let's say California has about 4 MILLION non-citizens living there right now. That means that FIVE of their seats in the US Congress are due to people who are not Americans being counted in the Census!



NOW, imagine if by 2020, when they do the next census, they had 10 MILLION non-citizens living in California. That would mean California would get an additional 10 SEATS in the US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES due to non-citizens.



NOW, do you see why Democrats want Open Borders?



Next time you hear the bleeding-heart liberals and Democratic Party Leadership claiming how they 'care' about these pooooooorrr i*****l a***ns here, call it bulls**t!



The Democrats found a way to get money and seats in Congress without even having to rig e******ns!



IT'S ALL ABOUT MONEY & POWER!

The census is supposed to count all people wether they are citizens or not. There is concern that a citizenship question will cause non citizens to refuse to answer the census thus depriving some districts of representation and also reducing federal programs determined by population. It is a double edge sword. A repressed count would starve communities with large undocumented populations of federal resources which appeals to many conservatives. But a number of red states have these populations and it could cost them a house seat. What all Americans should want is as accurate a count as possible as our founders intended.

Did Obama’s DOJ Collude to Protect Hillary?
In newly released transcripts, FBI witnesses assert that Obama’s Department of Justice deliberately refused to prosecute any crime against Hillary Clinton. The Washington Examiner reports:

Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence,” but the Justice Department shut them down.

Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton’s emails. This goes back to the FBI’s “Midyear Exam” investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.


Comey cleared Clinton of all charges in a press conference on July 5, 2016.

Page told the committee that the FBI “did not blow over gross negligence.” Responding to a question from Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, Page testified the FBI, including Comey, believed Clinton may have committed gross negligence. “We, in fact — and, in fact, the Director — because, on its face, it did seem like, well, maybe there’s a potential here for this to be the charge. And we had multiple conversations, multiple conversations with the Justice Department about charging gross negligence,” she said.

Beyond instigating the Russian collusion falsehood, Obama’s DOJ is now implicated in deliberate corruption to protect one of their own. Will justice be served?

Dumb is dumb. But it does provide more proof of Darwin's theory. All of them should receive the Darwin Award. She might as well just get it over with now. She could save the planet just a little bit faster.

What scares me is that the person talking seems to be representing "Western" thought. That definitely is not Muslim thought. She would be saving the planet for them.

However, being more thoughtful about her point. She was actually thinking about her never-to-be child and the horrors of it having to live in the future world. There is another movement where children are suing their parents for creating them. Is there something in the water?

I saw this on Tucker today...So their answer to save the planet is not to have children????..That is an i***tic idea...It would have the opposite effect..If you stop having children, civilization will cease to exist,dont you think so???...Then who you would save the climate for???

I didn't see the C-SPAN broadcast, but the connection to the border is obviously over the prison involvement I posted about, because Wells Fargo was involved in financing them, making the bank a target for the open border "activists" and by extension, AOC.

What they want is to cut off the funding for the private sector prisons so ICE has noplace to incarcerate captured border jumpers and has to return to "catch & release," giving the i******s the opportunity to disappear into the U.S., never appearing for their court dates.

S.E. Cupp: What has the age of Trump wrought? People like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

In the wake of his unprecedented campaign and unexpected e******n, the question always was: What would come after Donald Trump? What were the consequences of electing someone who was inexperienced, undeterred by and uninterested in facts and uncannily adept at whipping people into a frenzy by way of mere gesticulations and tweets?

Would Trump beget more Trumps?

Or would the pendulum swing violently back in the opposite direction, producing perhaps a return to thoughtful, accountable and intellectually rigorous leadership?

While we await what 2020 will deliver unto 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., we have our short-term answer in Congress: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

In many ways, she is in the making of Trump himself, only plausible because of him, and only justified in comparison to him.

After all, it’s hard to imagine a political system more enamored and less scrutinized of a candidate-turned-politician as AOC, if Trump hadn’t made acceptable this particular form of politicking — one driven by feelings over facts and heavily reliant on a cult of personality. And that’s just what she’s done, with charisma, charm and impressive success.

Like Trump, she’s been caught repeatedly and unabashedly making stuff up. One example, telling PBS’s “Firing Line” that unemployment was low “because everyone has two jobs.” That’s no less egregious a factual error than when Trump insisted while campaigning that he’d “seen” unemployment numbers as high as 42% (when the official unemployment rate at the time was 5.1%).

She’s also been known, like Trump, to cherry-pick information from partisan sources and extrapolate false conclusions. Late last year, she tweeted a screenshot from an article in the left-leaning Nation magazine, comparing Pentagon spending to the cost of “Medicare for all.” People immediately pounced on her distortion of the data.

And, like Trump, she makes wild policy suggestions that have little footing in reality. Raising marginal tax rates on the last dollar earned by the wealthiest Americans to 70 percent is red meat for her base but is logistically implausible , much like Trump’s porterhouse of a suggestion to end birthright citizenship .
But possibly because of Trump, she’s learned that admitting mistakes is an irrelevant — elitist even! — exercise, so instead, she turns that notion on its head, insisting that being “morally right” can be more important than being factually right. It’s not Trump’s institution-undermining “f**e news” ploy, but a populist wink at the primacy of heart-versus-head politics.

She’s inarguably taking advantage of a new landscape that Trump helped establish, and for that you can h**e the game, but not the player.

One thing that importantly separates her from him: her earnestness. No one doubts she has a set of core beliefs and a principled commitment to them, even if her own party finds them impractical or politically perilous. And if Trump could totally disrupt the political establishment without a real belief in anything but himself, imagine how much further someone with actual values — and a sense of humor, to boot — could go.

Ocasio-Cortez is applying all the tactics of Trump, but with far more charm, likability and mainstream media support. This makes her a very real and significant phenomenon. And while it would be easy to dismiss her as naïve, unserious or even flimsy, there’s one thing she’s proved: Her composition is tailor-made for the politics of right now.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sarah Elizabeth (S.E.) Cupp is an American television host, political commentator, and writer as a conservative columnist for New York Daily News, contributing editor at Townhall Magazine, and a contributor for TheBlaze.