President Joe Biden announced Thursday that he will sign an executive order to rebuild the US’s refugee resettlement program, raising the annual cap on admissions to 125,000 starting in October.
In a speech at the State Department, he acknowledged that the US refugee program suffered under former President Donald Trump, who slashed the cap on refugee admissions to just 15,000 this fiscal year — the lowest number since the refugee program was created in 1980 and down from 110,000 just four years earlier. Increasing the US’s capacity to accept more refugees will be a gradual process, Biden said.
“The United States’ moral leadership on refugee issues was a point of bipartisan consensus for so many decades,” he said. “It’s going to take time to rebuild what has been so badly damaged.”

This is Crapola. The universities are already indoctrination centers for the left and Schmucky Schumer wants to give away more of your money. This is absolute insanity from the Democrats and RINOs to gain more v**ers. When people figure out they can v**e benefits to themselves, all is lost. The teachers don't want to go back to work. The university teachers have a lifetime job due to tenure and they keep getting their paychecks through the p******c. The Democratic Party doesn't care one iota about little people they claim to look out for. The Republicans will try to play one-upmanship by also spending your money because they see the taxpayers as an endless supply of money, and when that runs out they can print more.

Schumer, Democratic lawmakers to push for $50,000 in student loan forgiveness
By DAVE GOLDINER
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |
FEB 04, 2021 AT 5:59 PM


Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer joined Sen. Elizabeth Warren and several of the most progressive Democratic lawmakers on Thursday in urging Biden to use executive action to forgive $50,000 in federal student debt for all borrowers.

“We are here to take a huge burden off so many people,” Schumer said. “College should be a ladder up (not) an anchor down.”

Newly minted Rep. Mondaire Jones, who represents Westchester County, supported the push along with fellow Democratic Reps. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.


Schumer (D-N.Y.) said he and Warren (D-Mass.) have researched the question and concluded that “this is one of those things the president can do on his own.” Past presidents have cleared debt, Schumer said, although not at the scale being proposed.

Democrats are pressing the issue as a matter of racial justice and as C****-** relief. They draw on statistics showing that Black and Latino borrowers are more likely to take on student debt and to take longer repaying their loans.

Hours after the Schumer presser, a tweet by White House press secretary Jen Psaki said President Biden was looking to Congress to act next on student loan relief. Biden has said he supports up to $10,000 in student loan forgiveness per borrower.

“The President continues to support the canceling of student debt to bring relief to students and families,” Psaki tweeted. “Our team is reviewing whether there are any steps he can take through executive action and he would welcome the opportunity to sign a bill sent to him by Congress.”

Calls for debt forgiveness have been mounting following years of college tuition increases that have contributed to ballooning national student debt. More than 42 million Americans now hold federal student loans amounting to a combined $1.5 trillion, according to Education Department data.

In an effort to provide relief soon after the p******c hit last year, the Trump administration paused federal student loan payments and set interest rates at zero percent. Upon taking office, Biden extended the moratorium through at least Sept. 30.

Republicans have pledged to fight any attempt at blanket debt cancellation, saying it unfairly moves the burden from borrowers to taxpayers.

In a Wednesday hearing with Biden’s nominee for education secretary, Sen. Richard Burr ( R-N.C.) urged the White House to reject calls for mass forgiveness and instead pursue legislation to simplify loan repayment options.

Islam And Inbreeding
Bill Warner, PhD

Do an experiment for yourself, go to your computer and google Islam inbreeding. I think you'll be stunned at the results. You'll find that in the Arab world, 40 to 50% of all marriages are inbred. In Egypt, 40% of the marriages are to a first cousin. In Saudi Arabia, 2/3 of the people who marry, marry a close relative. In Britain, the Pakistani refugees, 55% of their marriages are to first cousins.

Now, the result of inbreeding is genetic damage, you get increased diseases, mental r****dation, and lower intelligence. I call inbreeding a crime against the next generation. Now why is there so much inbreeding in Islam? Well, if you think about it you know the answer. Because of Mohammed, he married his first cousin, so that makes that process sunnah.

The Koran lays out rules of marriage, but it allows first cousins to marry. Half of Muslims are inbred. Lower intelligence and insanity rates are higher with inbred people, and the closer you are in blood relation, the more schizophrenia there is.

In Denmark, three times as many Muslims fail the military intelligence test as the average Dane. 2/3 of all the Muslims in Denmark are illiterate. And in Denmark, education for slow children, slow learners, accounts for 1/3 of their educational budget. It's expensive to have such people.

Sharia is evil, since it dictates the suffering of people is Allah's wish. Now think about this - Islam says it is destined to rule the world, and if it does, inbreeding will be everywhere, and humanity will actually devolve. And this can't be changed, because the Sharia is Allah's law. But why are we silent about Sharia, suffering? Why can't we educate about this harm?

https://rumble.com/vdk149-islam-and-inbreeding.html?mref=9btlf&mc=5bj1z

HR 127 PAY ATTENTION

Like it says: "GUN CONTROL isn't about guns. It's about CONTROL"

Please read and send to family and friends

H.R. 127: A New Bill In Congress Would Literally End Your 2nd Amendment Rights Permanently

February 1, 2021 by Michael Snyder

If a new bill that has been introduced in Congress eventually becomes law, the 2nd Amendment will still be in the U.S. Constitution, but for all practical purposes, the rights that it is supposed to guarantee will be dead and gone.
 
H.R. 127 was submitted on January 4th, and if you have not read it yet you can find the full text right here.  It contains a lot of technical languages, and so in this article, I am going to try to break down what it means very simply. 

Now that the Democrats control the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives, there is going to be a major push to ram through some form of gun control legislation. If it is not this bill, it will be another one, so we need to be diligent.

One of the biggest things that H.R. 127 would do is that it would create a national firearms registration system that would literally be accessible by anyone…

HR 127 establishes a federal firearms registration system that will be accessible by federal, state, and local governments, including the military – even the GENERAL PUBLIC!

The system will track the make, model, and a serial number of all firearms, their owners, the dates they were acquired, and where they are being stored.

So if your neighbor, a co-worker, or someone that just wanted to rob your home wanted to know how you were armed, all they would have to do would be to look it up in the firearms registration system.

This bill would also apply retroactively. Within three months, you would have to report to the government where you bought all of your guns when they were purchased, and where they are currently being stored.

Needless to say, if the government knows where all of your guns are being stored, it would make it that much easier to grab them from you at some future date. H.R. 127 would also require all gun owners to be federally licensed.

That would mean that owning a gun would no longer be a right.  Instead, it would be reduced to a “privilege” that the government could take away at any time. According to the bill, the licensing procedure would include “a psychological evaluation”… The licensing requirement mandates that the license applicant undergoes a criminal background check, and then submits to a psychological evaluation to determine whether the person is psychologically unsuited to possess a firearm.

Successful licensees must show they have an insurance policy which will cost $800. I know a lot of guys out there that would definitely not want to go through any sort of a “psychological evaluation” by a government-approved psychologist. And it wouldn’t just be you that would get interviewed. According to the bill, spouses and other family members would be interviewed as well…

For the psychological evaluation, a licensed psychologist will interview individuals’ spouses and at least two other family members or associates to “further determine the state of the mental-emotional, and relational stability of the individual in relation to firearms.”

Licenses will be denied to individuals hospitalized for issues such as depressive episodes; no duration for license disability is specified, and it does not matter whether the individual sought help voluntarily. The goal, of course, is to make owning guns as difficult as possible. Democrats figure that if they can put up as many barriers to gun ownership as possible, a lot fewer people will end up owning them. Thirdly, this bill would also greatly restrict the type of ammunition that you can own…

Finally, HR 127 also criminalizes the possession of “large-capacity magazines” (those carrying greater than 10 rounds) and “ammunition that is 0.50 caliber or greater.” I know that all of this sounds utterly ridiculous, but the restrictions in this bill actually sound very, very similar to what Joe Biden has been publicly proposing…

During the 2020 campaign, Joe Biden promised a long list of gun control regulations. There is a reason that Michael Bloomberg spent $125 million helping Biden in Florida and something over $600 million nationally in the general e******n. The agenda includes: classifying many semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than 10 bullets as Class 3 weapons (which can require nine months or more for approval and a $200 fee), national gun licensing, “red f**g” laws that let judges take away people’s guns without a hearing, background checks on the private t***sfer of guns, and bans on some semi-automatic firearms that happen to look like military weapons.

Gun control is very high on the list of things that Joe Biden wants to get accomplished during the next four years So like I said, if it isn’t this bill, it will be another one that is similar. They are coming for your 2nd Amendment, and they aren’t going to stop until they get what they want. Meanwhile, this is all happening at a time when murder rates all across America are going through the roof…

“Homicide rates were higher during every month of 2020 relative to rates from the previous year,” the report states, calling the 30 percent surge “a large and troubling increase that has no modern precedent.” We have never seen major city murder rates jump by an average of 30 percent in a single year. Things are getting really crazy out there, and many believe that 2021 will be even worse. For almost a year, there has been civil unrest in our cities on an almost nightly basis. 

As I write this, civil unrest has erupted in Rochester, New York.  We live at a time when r**ting, l**ting, arson, and vandalism have become commonplace, and the senseless violence that we have witnessed so far is just the leading edge of the storm. (ALL MAGA PEOPLE LIKE DC 1*6/21, EH???)

Millions of Americans can see what is happening to our society and they are quite concerned.  2020 was a record year for gun sales in the United States, and dealers have reported that demand is extremely strong so far in 2021 as well. The Democrats do not like this one bit, and they are going to do their very best to put a stop to it. (TRY & GET AMMO!!!!!!) Please let your friends, family, and contacts know about H.R. 127 because an all-out attack on the 2nd Amendment is coming, but at this point, most people are not even aware that it is about to happen.

If the Socialist/C*******t in the Congress and Senate get our weapons our Constitutional Republic will be lost, the enemy in Washington D.C. will be no different than the former N**i and U.S.S.R. governments and present C*******t China, C*******t North Korea, C*******t Cuba, and Islamic dictator governments.

(Welcome To The New America That The I***ts V**ed For ~ F**K!!! Don D.)

February 6, 2021 | Vivek Saxena--BPR
President Joe Biden has endorsed the idea of revoking former President Donald Trump’s access to intelligence briefings, though he hasn’t moved on it yet. The idea first emerged last month when the likes of former Principal Executive of National Intelligence Susan M. Gordon and current House Intelligence Committee chair Adam Schiff began calling for it. At the time, the Biden administration vowed to look into it.
During an interview this week with CBS News, the president himself was asked bluntly, “Should former President Trump still receive intelligence briefings.” “I think not,” Biden pithily replied. Asked to clarify “why not,” he said it’s “because of [Trump’s] erratic behavior unrelated to the i**********n.” This prompted CBS News host Nora O’Donnell to point out all the names that Biden has called the former president. “You’ve called him an existential threat. You’ve called him dangerous. You’ve called him reckless,” she said. “Yeah, I have, and I believe it,” the president replied. “What’s your worst fear if he continues to get these intelligence briefings?” O’Donnell then asked. “I’d rather not speculate out loud. I just think that there is no need for him to have the intelligence briefing. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?” Biden responded. (WHO TO CHINA AND GET YOUR CUT)
The irony is that during Trump’s presidency, it wasn’t him who kept revealing classified information to the public — it was his enemies in the Democrat Party and the media. Last year then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe was forced to drastically scale-back e******n security briefings to Congress specifically because Democrats were turning around and leaking that intelligence to the media “within minutes.” “Within minutes of one of those briefings ending, a number of members of Congress went to a number of different outlets and leaked classified information for political purposes,” he remarked at the time on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures.” Why? “To create a narrative that simply isn’t true, that somehow Russia is a greater national security threat than China,” Ratcliffe explained. “So I’m going to continue to keep the promises that I made, I’m going to continue to follow the law, I’m going to continue to keep Congress informed, but we’ve had a p******c of information being leaked out of the intelligence community, and I’m going to take the measures to make sure that stops.”
Unfortunately, the sorts of leaks he referenced came to define Trump’s presidency. Speaking on the matter during a briefing last summer, then-White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany tried for the umpteenth time to explain to Democrats and their media allies how damaging these leaks happened to be. “According to the DOJ, classified leaks surged in this administration. There were under President Obama just 39, on average, criminal leak referrals. In this administration, we have seen 100 criminal leak referrals to the DOJ in 2017, 88 in 2018 and 104 on average per year,” she said. “We have seen targeted leaks of classified information against this president and it is irresponsible; phone calls with foreign leaders, meetings with government officials, and now reports of alleged intelligence. Make no mistake, this damages our ability as a nation to collect intelligence,” she added.
The irony is that some of the leaks from Democrats to the media were traced to Schiff, one of the left-wingers who’s now calling for Trump’s access to intelligence to be revoked. “There’s no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing, not now, not in the future. I don’t think he can be trusted with it now and in the future, he certainly can’t be trusted,” the Democrat lawmaker said to CBS News on Jan. 17th.
The irony is that some of the leaks from Democrats to the media were traced to Schiff, one of the left-wingers who’s now calling for Trump’s access to intelligence to be revoked. “There’s no circumstance in which this president should get another intelligence briefing, not now, not in the future. I don’t think he can be trusted with it now and in the future, he certainly can’t be trusted,” the Democrat lawmaker said to CBS News on Jan. 17th. The remarks were made a day after Gordon penned a column for The Washington Post arguing that her former boss should be denied intelligence briefings. “My recommendation, as a 30-plus-year veteran of the intelligence community, is not to provide him any briefings after Jan. 20. With this simple act — which is solely the new president’s prerogative — Joe Biden can mitigate one aspect of the potential national security risk posed by Donald Trump, private citizen,” she wrote. Not mentioned in her column was the fact that she unceremoniously departed the Trump administration in apparent spite two years ago after Trump chose to promote someone else to director of national intelligence. In response to her and Schiff’s call for the former president’s intelligence access to be revoked, current White House chief of staff Ron Klain said last month that the administration would seek input from “our intelligence professionals” before making a decision on the matter. “We’ll certainly look for a recommendation from the intelligence professionals in the Biden administration,” he told CNN.
As of Feb. 6th, a final ruling hadn’t been made yet, though Biden’s endorsement of revoking former President Trump’s access is likely a sign of what’s soon to come.

Something a good friend that is hard conservative has said for years has bothered me, and I have tried to write about it to hear what people say about it, but it finally really clicked on things he was saying among the totally backwards rhetoric his head is filled with. It came about with how he reconciles the crap he's believing when faced with a friend trying to tell him facts that can be proved.

When I would say let me prove to you the facts I am basing my position on, and here's the part that says it all...

...he says this is a free country, that means you are free to believe that, I don't believe that, that is my right to believe wh**ever I want to. I told him we are talking about the difference between facts and beliefs that have nothing to do with facts. You can believe wh**ever you want, that will never make it the t***h, 50 million other clueless people can believe it as well and it will never be the t***h and reality, the only reality being that there are 50 million clueless and ignorant people. The t***h is wh**ever the facts are whether you agree with or believe them or not.

He wanted to know what makes what I believe right and what he believes wrong. I told him to start with he can't tell me a single detail about what he believes, he knows nothing about it, I asked him why he would continue to believe something he knows nothing about when he's talking to someone who could provide a hundred details on it that he's never heard of?

That revelation that this is how people who's heads are filled with garbage believe it is their god given constitutional right to believe wh**ever they want to, and they don't have to prove it or understand anything about it.