Posts for: OldGlory1951
Aug 27, 2018 17:06:38 #
(Main)
Deranged Democrats now insist America should PAY i*****l a***ns for crossing the border as a kind of reward system… seriously
Posted by Ethan Huff
The DC Clothesline Network is expanding. To visit our newest website Click Here.
(Natural News) A prominent Democrat from the People’s Republic of New York has announced that Americans aren’t doing enough to financially support i*****l a***ns who cross the country’s southern border illegally.
It’s apparently not enough for Joe Crowley, who recently lost his House seat to a 28-year-old socialist, for many i*****l a***ns to milk the welfare system and not be deported. He actually wants to see them receive taxpayer dollars as support for all that he says they’ve had to endure under the Trump administration.
“I suggest they need to be compensated for what this administration did,” Crowley, who shares the same last name as renowned satanist Aleister Crowley, stated during a recent Democratic weekly news conference – referring, of course, to the mainstream media’s ongoing f**e news hysteria over i*****l i*******t children allegedly being “ripped from their families” at the border.
I*****l a***ns already cost Americans $1,000 annually per household
Crowley’s recommendation comes at the same time that another prominent Democrat, Pennsylvania candidate Scott Wallace, is openly calling for American families who have more than two children to be taxed to the hilt for being “irresponsible breeders.”
Keep in mind that i*****l a***n families often have far more children than this, and already cost American taxpayers $1,000 annually per household. This represent the latest figures released by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which says i*****l i*********n is currently costing American taxpayers upwards of $113 billion per year.
READ MORE Big Pharma will BANKRUPT America: “Medicare for all” projected to cost nearly $33 trillion over the next decade
Every i*****l a***n crosser costs society nearly $95,000 over a lifetime
Over the course of their entire life in the U.S., each individual i*****l a***n is said to cost American taxpayers nearly $95,000 over his or her lifetime. This is taking into account the costs associated with their U.S.-born descendants, as well as other important factors.
Even low-end estimates of the overall burden that i*****l a***ns impose on America clock in at around $75,000 per i*****l a***n over the course of a lifetime. Meanwhile, American veterans and others are barely making ends meet, as many of them are living on the streets – all while the Democrats ignore them and pander to i*****l i*******ts and the “bleeding hearts” who naively support them.
And contrary to what many liberals claims, the tax revenue among those i*****l a***ns who actually pay state and federal taxes, is hardly a drop in the bucket to cover these costs. Based on FAIR’s analysis, only about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from i*****l a***ns – meaning the other two-thirds is covered by federal taxpayers.
The situation is even more grim on the state and local level, where outlays cover a mere five percent, at most, of the costs they impose on local communities – an incredible burden on society, and especially hardworking American taxpayers.
Trump’s border wall would save American taxpayers $64 billion over the next decade
This is one of the biggest reasons why President Trump is pushing the border wall so aggressively, as it would greatly reduce the number of illegal invaders that are able to make it into the U.S. against federal law.
READ MORE Organizer of London anti-Trump protest is a p*******e
If the wall stopped even just one-half of all attempted illegal border entries, the savings to taxpayers over the next decade would be about $64 billion – which is several times higher than the cost of the wall itself.
Even if the wall prevented just 160,000 to 200,000 illegal border crossings over the next 10 years, this would be more than enough to cover the estimated $12 to $15 billion that it would cost to build the wall the way that President Trump is proposing.
For more news on the insanity of l*****ts and their anti-American agenda, check out Libtards.news.
Sources for this article include:
TownHall.com
NaturalNews.com
Don't forget to follow D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter.
http://www. d.c. clothesline.com
Now this is totally insane!!!!These Dems are smoking some serious Drugs!!!! if they feel this way, about these I*****l I*******ts barging their way into our country and filling their pockets with our Money if they come illegally. Not My Money!!!!!! that's for sure. What do Y'all think of these crazy Dems wanting to steal our money for this insane action.?
Posted by Ethan Huff
The DC Clothesline Network is expanding. To visit our newest website Click Here.
(Natural News) A prominent Democrat from the People’s Republic of New York has announced that Americans aren’t doing enough to financially support i*****l a***ns who cross the country’s southern border illegally.
It’s apparently not enough for Joe Crowley, who recently lost his House seat to a 28-year-old socialist, for many i*****l a***ns to milk the welfare system and not be deported. He actually wants to see them receive taxpayer dollars as support for all that he says they’ve had to endure under the Trump administration.
“I suggest they need to be compensated for what this administration did,” Crowley, who shares the same last name as renowned satanist Aleister Crowley, stated during a recent Democratic weekly news conference – referring, of course, to the mainstream media’s ongoing f**e news hysteria over i*****l i*******t children allegedly being “ripped from their families” at the border.
I*****l a***ns already cost Americans $1,000 annually per household
Crowley’s recommendation comes at the same time that another prominent Democrat, Pennsylvania candidate Scott Wallace, is openly calling for American families who have more than two children to be taxed to the hilt for being “irresponsible breeders.”
Keep in mind that i*****l a***n families often have far more children than this, and already cost American taxpayers $1,000 annually per household. This represent the latest figures released by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which says i*****l i*********n is currently costing American taxpayers upwards of $113 billion per year.
READ MORE Big Pharma will BANKRUPT America: “Medicare for all” projected to cost nearly $33 trillion over the next decade
Every i*****l a***n crosser costs society nearly $95,000 over a lifetime
Over the course of their entire life in the U.S., each individual i*****l a***n is said to cost American taxpayers nearly $95,000 over his or her lifetime. This is taking into account the costs associated with their U.S.-born descendants, as well as other important factors.
Even low-end estimates of the overall burden that i*****l a***ns impose on America clock in at around $75,000 per i*****l a***n over the course of a lifetime. Meanwhile, American veterans and others are barely making ends meet, as many of them are living on the streets – all while the Democrats ignore them and pander to i*****l i*******ts and the “bleeding hearts” who naively support them.
And contrary to what many liberals claims, the tax revenue among those i*****l a***ns who actually pay state and federal taxes, is hardly a drop in the bucket to cover these costs. Based on FAIR’s analysis, only about one-third of outlays are matched by tax collections from i*****l a***ns – meaning the other two-thirds is covered by federal taxpayers.
The situation is even more grim on the state and local level, where outlays cover a mere five percent, at most, of the costs they impose on local communities – an incredible burden on society, and especially hardworking American taxpayers.
Trump’s border wall would save American taxpayers $64 billion over the next decade
This is one of the biggest reasons why President Trump is pushing the border wall so aggressively, as it would greatly reduce the number of illegal invaders that are able to make it into the U.S. against federal law.
READ MORE Organizer of London anti-Trump protest is a p*******e
If the wall stopped even just one-half of all attempted illegal border entries, the savings to taxpayers over the next decade would be about $64 billion – which is several times higher than the cost of the wall itself.
Even if the wall prevented just 160,000 to 200,000 illegal border crossings over the next 10 years, this would be more than enough to cover the estimated $12 to $15 billion that it would cost to build the wall the way that President Trump is proposing.
For more news on the insanity of l*****ts and their anti-American agenda, check out Libtards.news.
Sources for this article include:
TownHall.com
NaturalNews.com
Don't forget to follow D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter.
http://www. d.c. clothesline.com
Now this is totally insane!!!!These Dems are smoking some serious Drugs!!!! if they feel this way, about these I*****l I*******ts barging their way into our country and filling their pockets with our Money if they come illegally. Not My Money!!!!!! that's for sure. What do Y'all think of these crazy Dems wanting to steal our money for this insane action.?Aug 27, 2018 16:51:54 #
(Main)
Russian Threat ‘Is Real,’ Trump Officials Say, Vowing to Protect U.S. E******ns
Video
Democracy ‘Is in the Cross Hairs,’ Trump Officials Say
By The Associated Press
The heads of the national security agencies said that Russia was attempting to influence the midterm e******ns. Their remarks were a departure from President Trump’s comments that played down the threat.Published OnAug. 2, 2018CreditImage by Tom Brenner for The New York Times
By Michael D. Shear and Michael Wines
Aug. 27, 2018
WASHINGTON — Top national security officials vowed Thursday to defend American e******ns against what they called real threats from Russia only weeks after President Trump seemed to accept President Vladimir V. Putin’s denials of interference during a summit meeting in Finland.
After the meeting, Mr. Trump said he had not meant to endorse Mr. Putin’s denial of e******n meddling, but insisted that the culprit behind the intrusion“could be other people.” A few days later, he asserted that the idea of any meddling by Russia was “all a big h**x.”
But the men and women charged with detecting and defending against any threats to the American political process showed no such ambivalence. They bluntly said that Russia was behind a “pervasive” campaign to weaken America’s democracy and influence the 2018 e******n.
They also sought to reassure v**ers that federal, state and local governments were taking steps to guard against what Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, described as a “24-7 365-days-a-year” effort by Russia to sow division as Americans head to the polls in the fall.
“Russia attempted to interfere with the last e******n,” Mr. Wray told reporters in the White House briefing room, “and continues to engage in malign influence operations to this day. This is a threat we need to take extremely seriously and to tackle and respond to with fierce determination and focus.”
Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, echoed that assessment, saying that “Russians are looking for every opportunity, regardless of party, regardless of whether or not it applies to the e******n, to continue their pervasive efforts to undermine our fundamental values.”
You have 4 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
Mr. Wray and Mr. Coats were joined at the briefing by Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of homeland security, John R. Bolton, the president’s national security adviser, and Gen. Paul M. Nakasone, the head of the National Security Agency.
Officials at the briefing did not describe specific threats to the coming e******ns, and they were vague about how the government was responding to what they called Russia’s interference campaign. But they said Mr. Trump had directed them in a National Security Council meeting last week to aggressively confront the threats.
“Our democracy itself is in the cross hairs,” Ms. Nielsen told reporters. “The progress we have made is real, and the nation’s e******ns are more resilient today because of the work we are all doing. But we must continue to ensure that our democracy is protected.”
EDITORS’ PICKS
It’s 4 A.M. The Baby’s Coming. But the Hospital Is 100 Miles Away.
‘Still Can’t Believe It Worked’: The Story of the Thailand Cave Rescue
A Year After Deadly Rally, a Protester Runs Charlottesville
Ms. Nielsen said the government had “seen a willingness and a capability on the part of the Russians” to hack into the American e******n infrastructure, including v**er rolls and v****g machines. In addition to helping states and local governments prevent that hacking, she said her department was working to ensure that methods were available to validate the v**e if a cyberattack occurred.
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, welcomed Thursday’s pledges of action from Trump administration officials, even as he chided the president for failing to take the lead in confronting Russian e******n-year aggression.
“Glad to see the White House finally do something about e******n security — even if it’s only a news conference,” Mr. Warner said on Twitter shortly after the briefing. “Now if only it was actually backed up by anything the President has said or done on Russia.”
E******n experts say v****g security has vastly improved since 2016, even if much remains to be done.
8 U.S. Intelligence Groups Blame Russia for Meddling, but Trump Keeps Clouding the Picture
The heads of the national security agencies on Thursday said that Russia was still trying to influence United States e******ns, contradicting statements made by President Trump.
July 16, 2018
“All the states realize that securing their e******n systems — both administrative systems and v****g machines — is a high priority,” said Charles Stewart III, a leading expert on e******n administration at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He said computer systems and v****g machines were now probably the most secure part of the e******n infrastructure, thanks in part to a stepped-up effort by Homeland Security officials.
The greatest vulnerabilities, Mr. Stewart said, lie in individual political campaigns, few of which have come to terms with the threat posed by foreign actors like Russia. Barely a week ago, Senator Claire McCask**l, a Missouri Democrat, confirmed reports that Russian hackers had sought, apparently unsuccessfully, to break in to her computer network in the Senate, and at least one other campaign is known to have been attacked as well.
Despite Mr. Trump’s public comments playing down the threat from Russia, his security officials did not hesitate in directly blaming the Russian government as the primary culprit behind the interference campaign.
“We acknowledge the threat. It is real. It is continuing,” Mr. Coats said. “We are doing everything we can to have a l********e e******n that everyone can have trust in.”
Mr. Bolton said the president did raise the issue of meddling with Mr. Putin at their meeting in Helsinki, and defended what he said had been Mr. Trump’s intense focus on the issue since he took office.
“I think the president has made it abundantly clear to everybody” in the government who oversees e******n security. Mr. Bolton said that Mr. Trump “cares deeply about it and that he expects them to do their jobs.”
The intelligence agencies do not believe that Russian efforts to interfere in the 2018 e******ns have reached the same level as in the 2016 p**********l campaign, Mr. Wray said. But he said the government was braced for the possibility that Russia could ramp up its efforts overnight, requiring a more forceful response from the United States.
“Any moment is just a moment before the dial can be turned up,” Mr. Wray said.
In the meantime, Mr. Wray said that the Russian efforts to inject d******e misinformation into American social media were continuing daily, even when e******ns are not on the horizon.
Earlier this week, Facebook reported that it had identified a political influence campaign targeting the midterm e******ns and had removed 32 pages and f**e accounts. Facebook did not link the campaign to Russia. The company has been criticized for not having done more to detect and remove the f**e accounts created by Russians during the 2016 p**********l campaign.
On Wednesday, Republicans in the Senate v**ed down an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have allotted $250 million to states to improve e******n security before the midterms. Only one Republican, Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, v**ed for the measure. Others argued that Congress had already allotted $380 million for security improvements earlier in the year, and that more funds were not needed.
Experts on e******n administration took issue with that.
“There’s no finish line in e******n security,” said David J. Becker, the director of the Center for E******n Innovation and Research, a Washington-based organization centered on improving v****g technology and security. “There needs to be a consistent funding stream — probably in all critical areas, but particularly in e******ns — to secure those systems from attack.”
But Mr. Becker and others also said that states and localities needed to make quick and often cheap basic fixes to their systems, such as giving security training to workers and toughening passwords, and plan carefully before spending millions on new equipment.
Mr. Becker compared the state of e******n security to trying to prevent burglaries: The two best ways to stop burglars, he said, are to secure a house against break-ins and to deter burglars from even attempting them.
In e******n security, “We’re doing a pretty good job of protecting the house,” he said. “But where are the consequences against the criminal? That can only be done by the executive branch. The big question is, where is the president?”
http://www.thenewyorktimes.com
We don't bother their countries E******ns, so what gives them the right to Medal in our E******ns? I smell a Skunk in the Rose Bed!!!!coming from the U.S.!!!. What do y'all think?
Video
Democracy ‘Is in the Cross Hairs,’ Trump Officials Say
By The Associated Press
The heads of the national security agencies said that Russia was attempting to influence the midterm e******ns. Their remarks were a departure from President Trump’s comments that played down the threat.Published OnAug. 2, 2018CreditImage by Tom Brenner for The New York Times
By Michael D. Shear and Michael Wines
Aug. 27, 2018
WASHINGTON — Top national security officials vowed Thursday to defend American e******ns against what they called real threats from Russia only weeks after President Trump seemed to accept President Vladimir V. Putin’s denials of interference during a summit meeting in Finland.
After the meeting, Mr. Trump said he had not meant to endorse Mr. Putin’s denial of e******n meddling, but insisted that the culprit behind the intrusion“could be other people.” A few days later, he asserted that the idea of any meddling by Russia was “all a big h**x.”
But the men and women charged with detecting and defending against any threats to the American political process showed no such ambivalence. They bluntly said that Russia was behind a “pervasive” campaign to weaken America’s democracy and influence the 2018 e******n.
They also sought to reassure v**ers that federal, state and local governments were taking steps to guard against what Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, described as a “24-7 365-days-a-year” effort by Russia to sow division as Americans head to the polls in the fall.
“Russia attempted to interfere with the last e******n,” Mr. Wray told reporters in the White House briefing room, “and continues to engage in malign influence operations to this day. This is a threat we need to take extremely seriously and to tackle and respond to with fierce determination and focus.”
Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, echoed that assessment, saying that “Russians are looking for every opportunity, regardless of party, regardless of whether or not it applies to the e******n, to continue their pervasive efforts to undermine our fundamental values.”
You have 4 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times
Mr. Wray and Mr. Coats were joined at the briefing by Kirstjen Nielsen, the secretary of homeland security, John R. Bolton, the president’s national security adviser, and Gen. Paul M. Nakasone, the head of the National Security Agency.
Officials at the briefing did not describe specific threats to the coming e******ns, and they were vague about how the government was responding to what they called Russia’s interference campaign. But they said Mr. Trump had directed them in a National Security Council meeting last week to aggressively confront the threats.
“Our democracy itself is in the cross hairs,” Ms. Nielsen told reporters. “The progress we have made is real, and the nation’s e******ns are more resilient today because of the work we are all doing. But we must continue to ensure that our democracy is protected.”
EDITORS’ PICKS
It’s 4 A.M. The Baby’s Coming. But the Hospital Is 100 Miles Away.
‘Still Can’t Believe It Worked’: The Story of the Thailand Cave Rescue
A Year After Deadly Rally, a Protester Runs Charlottesville
Ms. Nielsen said the government had “seen a willingness and a capability on the part of the Russians” to hack into the American e******n infrastructure, including v**er rolls and v****g machines. In addition to helping states and local governments prevent that hacking, she said her department was working to ensure that methods were available to validate the v**e if a cyberattack occurred.
Senator Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, welcomed Thursday’s pledges of action from Trump administration officials, even as he chided the president for failing to take the lead in confronting Russian e******n-year aggression.
“Glad to see the White House finally do something about e******n security — even if it’s only a news conference,” Mr. Warner said on Twitter shortly after the briefing. “Now if only it was actually backed up by anything the President has said or done on Russia.”
E******n experts say v****g security has vastly improved since 2016, even if much remains to be done.
8 U.S. Intelligence Groups Blame Russia for Meddling, but Trump Keeps Clouding the Picture
The heads of the national security agencies on Thursday said that Russia was still trying to influence United States e******ns, contradicting statements made by President Trump.
July 16, 2018
“All the states realize that securing their e******n systems — both administrative systems and v****g machines — is a high priority,” said Charles Stewart III, a leading expert on e******n administration at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He said computer systems and v****g machines were now probably the most secure part of the e******n infrastructure, thanks in part to a stepped-up effort by Homeland Security officials.
The greatest vulnerabilities, Mr. Stewart said, lie in individual political campaigns, few of which have come to terms with the threat posed by foreign actors like Russia. Barely a week ago, Senator Claire McCask**l, a Missouri Democrat, confirmed reports that Russian hackers had sought, apparently unsuccessfully, to break in to her computer network in the Senate, and at least one other campaign is known to have been attacked as well.
Despite Mr. Trump’s public comments playing down the threat from Russia, his security officials did not hesitate in directly blaming the Russian government as the primary culprit behind the interference campaign.
“We acknowledge the threat. It is real. It is continuing,” Mr. Coats said. “We are doing everything we can to have a l********e e******n that everyone can have trust in.”
Mr. Bolton said the president did raise the issue of meddling with Mr. Putin at their meeting in Helsinki, and defended what he said had been Mr. Trump’s intense focus on the issue since he took office.
“I think the president has made it abundantly clear to everybody” in the government who oversees e******n security. Mr. Bolton said that Mr. Trump “cares deeply about it and that he expects them to do their jobs.”
The intelligence agencies do not believe that Russian efforts to interfere in the 2018 e******ns have reached the same level as in the 2016 p**********l campaign, Mr. Wray said. But he said the government was braced for the possibility that Russia could ramp up its efforts overnight, requiring a more forceful response from the United States.
“Any moment is just a moment before the dial can be turned up,” Mr. Wray said.
In the meantime, Mr. Wray said that the Russian efforts to inject d******e misinformation into American social media were continuing daily, even when e******ns are not on the horizon.
Earlier this week, Facebook reported that it had identified a political influence campaign targeting the midterm e******ns and had removed 32 pages and f**e accounts. Facebook did not link the campaign to Russia. The company has been criticized for not having done more to detect and remove the f**e accounts created by Russians during the 2016 p**********l campaign.
On Wednesday, Republicans in the Senate v**ed down an amendment to an appropriations bill that would have allotted $250 million to states to improve e******n security before the midterms. Only one Republican, Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee, v**ed for the measure. Others argued that Congress had already allotted $380 million for security improvements earlier in the year, and that more funds were not needed.
Experts on e******n administration took issue with that.
“There’s no finish line in e******n security,” said David J. Becker, the director of the Center for E******n Innovation and Research, a Washington-based organization centered on improving v****g technology and security. “There needs to be a consistent funding stream — probably in all critical areas, but particularly in e******ns — to secure those systems from attack.”
But Mr. Becker and others also said that states and localities needed to make quick and often cheap basic fixes to their systems, such as giving security training to workers and toughening passwords, and plan carefully before spending millions on new equipment.
Mr. Becker compared the state of e******n security to trying to prevent burglaries: The two best ways to stop burglars, he said, are to secure a house against break-ins and to deter burglars from even attempting them.
In e******n security, “We’re doing a pretty good job of protecting the house,” he said. “But where are the consequences against the criminal? That can only be done by the executive branch. The big question is, where is the president?”
http://www.thenewyorktimes.com
We don't bother their countries E******ns, so what gives them the right to Medal in our E******ns? I smell a Skunk in the Rose Bed!!!!coming from the U.S.!!!. What do y'all think?Aug 27, 2018 16:38:02 #
(Main)
Editorial: Keep terrorist locked up
Herald Staff Saturday, August 27, 2018
FILE - In this Jan. 8, 2007 file picture Moroccan Mounir El Motassadeq waits prior his trial at a court in Hamburg, northern Germany,
Credit: Associated Press
FILE - In this Jan. 8, 2007 file picture Moroccan Mounir El Motassadeq waits prior his trial at a court in Hamburg, northern Germany,
It is outrageous that a man who helped facilitate and support the 9/11 terrorist attacks will be released from a German prison later this year. In fact, he’ll walk out earlier than his release date.
Mounir el-Motassadeq, a Moroccan, was the money guy, so to speak, for Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, who commandeered planes that departed from Logan airport and flew them into the World Trade Center in New York City.
The three were friends when they lived together in Hamburg before the attacks. El-Motassadeq has admitted attending a terrorist camp of Osama bin Laden’s in Afghanistan.
German courts had found that el-Motassadeq was aware of the plot to hijack and crash commercial flights into targets — though he may not have been aware of the specific targets — and so he was charged and found guilty of being an accessory to murder of the 246 people aboard the planes. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail. That would have put him behind bars until 2019, but he’ll be sprung in mid-October, for a reason not known.
Fifteen years for complicity in the 9/11 terror attacks. Incredible.
And so the German government coughs up another one and a terrorist goes free. Far from the wholesale incompetence seen in the handling of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre, but still quite egregious, our European ally will send el-Motassadeq back to Morocco this fall.
Our government should do everything in its power to compel Morocco to ensure that Mounir el-Motassadeq continues to be held accountable for his part in the facilitation of the worst attack ever on American soil. Morocco has been a good partner to the United States in the war on terror, and let’s hope it rises to the challenge again.
http://www.bostonherald.com
I totally agree with is article!! we must lock these insane Criminals, up and make them Reap what they Sew!!!. they need this punishment, big time. What do Y'all think?
Herald Staff Saturday, August 27, 2018
FILE - In this Jan. 8, 2007 file picture Moroccan Mounir El Motassadeq waits prior his trial at a court in Hamburg, northern Germany,
Credit: Associated Press
FILE - In this Jan. 8, 2007 file picture Moroccan Mounir El Motassadeq waits prior his trial at a court in Hamburg, northern Germany,
It is outrageous that a man who helped facilitate and support the 9/11 terrorist attacks will be released from a German prison later this year. In fact, he’ll walk out earlier than his release date.
Mounir el-Motassadeq, a Moroccan, was the money guy, so to speak, for Sept. 11 hijackers Mohamed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi, who commandeered planes that departed from Logan airport and flew them into the World Trade Center in New York City.
The three were friends when they lived together in Hamburg before the attacks. El-Motassadeq has admitted attending a terrorist camp of Osama bin Laden’s in Afghanistan.
German courts had found that el-Motassadeq was aware of the plot to hijack and crash commercial flights into targets — though he may not have been aware of the specific targets — and so he was charged and found guilty of being an accessory to murder of the 246 people aboard the planes. He was sentenced to 15 years in jail. That would have put him behind bars until 2019, but he’ll be sprung in mid-October, for a reason not known.
Fifteen years for complicity in the 9/11 terror attacks. Incredible.
And so the German government coughs up another one and a terrorist goes free. Far from the wholesale incompetence seen in the handling of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre, but still quite egregious, our European ally will send el-Motassadeq back to Morocco this fall.
Our government should do everything in its power to compel Morocco to ensure that Mounir el-Motassadeq continues to be held accountable for his part in the facilitation of the worst attack ever on American soil. Morocco has been a good partner to the United States in the war on terror, and let’s hope it rises to the challenge again.
http://www.bostonherald.com
I totally agree with is article!! we must lock these insane Criminals, up and make them Reap what they Sew!!!. they need this punishment, big time. What do Y'all think?Aug 27, 2018 16:29:00 #
(Main)
2 Marines Received Valor Awards for Secret Gunfight Against al-Qaida
Marine Special Operations School Individual Training Course students fire an M249 squad automatic weapon during night-fire training April 13, 2017, at Camp Lejeune. (U.S. Air Force/Senior Airman Ryan Conroy)
Marine Special Operations School Individual Training Course students fire an M249 squad automatic weapon during night-fire training April 13, 2017, at Camp Lejeune. (U.S. Air Force/Senior Airman Ryan Conroy)
Task & Purpose 15 Aug 2018 By Paul Szoldra
This article by Paul Szoldra originally appeared on Task & Purpose, a digital news and culture publication dedicated to military and veterans issues
Two members of Marine Special Operations Command received valor awards for their heroism during a gun battle last year with al-Qaida militants in Northern Africa, a spokeswoman for U.S. Africa Command confirmed on Wednesday.
While on a three-day operation to train, advise, and assist partner forces in the unnamed country -- which the command withheld due to "classification considerations, force protection, and diplomatic sensitivities" -- the Marine Special Operations Team on February 28, 2017, became engaged in a "fierce fight against members of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb," according to one of the award citations for the unnamed Marines, who are often referred to as "Raiders."
The two award citations for the Navy & Marine Corps Achievement Medal (with "V" distinguishing device for valor) were released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Task & Purpose. Despite redactions of names and the specific Marine Raider team involved, the citations provide a glimpse of a battle between Americans and militants on the African continent that had not previously been made public.
While the specific country where the battle took place remains unknown, Northern Africa consists of Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, and Western Sahara, according to the United Nations.
Africa Command spokeswoman Samantha Reho told Task & Purpose in a statement that partner forces initially engaged and k**led one al-Qaida fighter with small arms fire before calling for helicopter support. Militants then attempted to flank the Marines and partner forces from the rear, leading the Marines to "return fire in self-defense."
According to one citation, the Raiders' communications chief and assistant element leader -- typically a sergeant or above -- "provided critical communications relay and ensured proper positioning of partner force elements." The citation went on to say the Marine, while under accurate enemy fire, provided immediate trauma care for a fellow Raider who was wounded and helped evacuate him into a partner force helicopter that was hovering six feet above his position.
The second citation for an element member on the team -- typically a sergeant or below -- captures how the battle raged from the helicopter overhead. While onboard the partner force helicopter, the Marine fired at militants below, coordinated close air support, and directed the gunners and pilots on board the aircraft.
The militants responded with accurate fire, however, and a partner force soldier behind the helicopter's M60 machine gun was shot twice in the foot, after which "[the Marine Raider] took control of the M60 and continued to suppress the enemy while treating the wounded gunner," the citation said.
"He then accompanied the helicopter during the casualty evacuation of the Marine Raider and a second casualty later in the day, and conducted two re-supply deliveries all under enemy fire," the citation added.
The partner force ultimately secured the site of the battle and "assessed two enemies were k**led," Reho told Task & Purpose. The wounded Marine was evacuated and has since made a full recovery.
The gun battle between Marines and al-Qaida militants took place seven months before a deadly battle between ISIS militants and U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers who were advising partner forces in Niger. The October 4, 2017 ambush resulted in the deaths of four American service members and led the Pentagon to conduct a major review of U.S special operations missions in Africa.
More articles from Task & Purpose:
Urban Outfitters Is Selling The Military's Most Reviled Piece Of Gear
Why Do So Many Recent Veterans Dislike Police Officers?
Russia Wants The Same Amphibious Capability As The US Marine Corps
Related Topics Military Headlines Marine Corps Topics Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command - MARSOC Special Operations Global Hot Spots Terrorism al-Qaida Africa .
http://www.military.com
I am so proud of these 2 great Marine Hero's and what they have done. What do y'all think?
Marine Special Operations School Individual Training Course students fire an M249 squad automatic weapon during night-fire training April 13, 2017, at Camp Lejeune. (U.S. Air Force/Senior Airman Ryan Conroy)
Marine Special Operations School Individual Training Course students fire an M249 squad automatic weapon during night-fire training April 13, 2017, at Camp Lejeune. (U.S. Air Force/Senior Airman Ryan Conroy)
Task & Purpose 15 Aug 2018 By Paul Szoldra
This article by Paul Szoldra originally appeared on Task & Purpose, a digital news and culture publication dedicated to military and veterans issues
Two members of Marine Special Operations Command received valor awards for their heroism during a gun battle last year with al-Qaida militants in Northern Africa, a spokeswoman for U.S. Africa Command confirmed on Wednesday.
While on a three-day operation to train, advise, and assist partner forces in the unnamed country -- which the command withheld due to "classification considerations, force protection, and diplomatic sensitivities" -- the Marine Special Operations Team on February 28, 2017, became engaged in a "fierce fight against members of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb," according to one of the award citations for the unnamed Marines, who are often referred to as "Raiders."
The two award citations for the Navy & Marine Corps Achievement Medal (with "V" distinguishing device for valor) were released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by Task & Purpose. Despite redactions of names and the specific Marine Raider team involved, the citations provide a glimpse of a battle between Americans and militants on the African continent that had not previously been made public.
While the specific country where the battle took place remains unknown, Northern Africa consists of Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Sudan, Tunisia, and Western Sahara, according to the United Nations.
Africa Command spokeswoman Samantha Reho told Task & Purpose in a statement that partner forces initially engaged and k**led one al-Qaida fighter with small arms fire before calling for helicopter support. Militants then attempted to flank the Marines and partner forces from the rear, leading the Marines to "return fire in self-defense."
According to one citation, the Raiders' communications chief and assistant element leader -- typically a sergeant or above -- "provided critical communications relay and ensured proper positioning of partner force elements." The citation went on to say the Marine, while under accurate enemy fire, provided immediate trauma care for a fellow Raider who was wounded and helped evacuate him into a partner force helicopter that was hovering six feet above his position.
The second citation for an element member on the team -- typically a sergeant or below -- captures how the battle raged from the helicopter overhead. While onboard the partner force helicopter, the Marine fired at militants below, coordinated close air support, and directed the gunners and pilots on board the aircraft.
The militants responded with accurate fire, however, and a partner force soldier behind the helicopter's M60 machine gun was shot twice in the foot, after which "[the Marine Raider] took control of the M60 and continued to suppress the enemy while treating the wounded gunner," the citation said.
"He then accompanied the helicopter during the casualty evacuation of the Marine Raider and a second casualty later in the day, and conducted two re-supply deliveries all under enemy fire," the citation added.
The partner force ultimately secured the site of the battle and "assessed two enemies were k**led," Reho told Task & Purpose. The wounded Marine was evacuated and has since made a full recovery.
The gun battle between Marines and al-Qaida militants took place seven months before a deadly battle between ISIS militants and U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers who were advising partner forces in Niger. The October 4, 2017 ambush resulted in the deaths of four American service members and led the Pentagon to conduct a major review of U.S special operations missions in Africa.
More articles from Task & Purpose:
Urban Outfitters Is Selling The Military's Most Reviled Piece Of Gear
Why Do So Many Recent Veterans Dislike Police Officers?
Russia Wants The Same Amphibious Capability As The US Marine Corps
Related Topics Military Headlines Marine Corps Topics Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command - MARSOC Special Operations Global Hot Spots Terrorism al-Qaida Africa .
http://www.military.com
I am so proud of these 2 great Marine Hero's and what they have done. What do y'all think?Jul 14, 2018 18:52:38 #
(Main)
glibona wrote:
Agree... think obama is becoming irrelevant in attempting to further obstruct the governing, best intetests and welfare of America that President Trump is succeeding in doing.
gilbona!!!!
You sure got that Right!!!!By!! Gumbo!!!Jul 14, 2018 18:47:12 #
(Main)
BigMike wrote:
The signs are all there...they've blown the mid-term. The trolls on the OPP are not analytical enough to read the tea leaves. 2018 will be a surprise to them but somehow they'll convince themselves they're winning.
Democrats are Shear I***ts if they think that they can take back the American Ship, LOL!!!! White House. They are totally Lost!!!!, BigMike!! Let that be known!!!Jul 14, 2018 18:35:24 #
(Main)
Trump Wants I*****l I*******ts Who 'Invade' US Sent Immediately Back Home
Leah Barkoukis
Leah Barkoukis
|
@LeahBarkoukis
|
Posted: July 14, 2018 8:54 AM
Trump Wants I*****l I*******ts Who 'Invade' US Sent Immediately Back Home
President Trump on Sunday called for i*****l i*******ts who “invade” the U.S. to be sent “back from where they came” from without due process for deportation cases.
“We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order,” he tweeted. “Most children come without parents…”
“Our Immigration policy, laughed at all over the world, is very unfair to all of those people who have gone through the system legally and are waiting on line for years! Immigration must be based on merit - we need people who will help to Make America Great Again!” he added.
The president's suggestion was quickly criticized by groups like the ACLU, which said what he was calling for was illegal.
“What President Trump has suggested here is both illegal and unconstitutional,” Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, told the AP. “Any official who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws should disavow it unequivocally.”
Schumer Calls Out Mad Maxine: Calls To Harass Trump Officials In Public Are 'Not American'
Matt Vespa
The House is expected to v**e on immigration legislation this week, but Trump has signaled the lawmakers are "wasting their time."
"Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November. Dems are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solves this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave!" he wrote on Twitter Friday.
http://www.townhall.com
President Trump is Right, 100%. If you can't come here Legally then y'all need to stay away from our Country completely. Y'all will Reap what Y'all Sew, if you ignore it. This is our Country not Yours. Well folks what do Y'all think?
Leah Barkoukis
Leah Barkoukis
|
@LeahBarkoukis
|
Posted: July 14, 2018 8:54 AM
Trump Wants I*****l I*******ts Who 'Invade' US Sent Immediately Back Home
President Trump on Sunday called for i*****l i*******ts who “invade” the U.S. to be sent “back from where they came” from without due process for deportation cases.
“We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country. When somebody comes in, we must immediately, with no Judges or Court Cases, bring them back from where they came. Our system is a mockery to good immigration policy and Law and Order,” he tweeted. “Most children come without parents…”
“Our Immigration policy, laughed at all over the world, is very unfair to all of those people who have gone through the system legally and are waiting on line for years! Immigration must be based on merit - we need people who will help to Make America Great Again!” he added.
The president's suggestion was quickly criticized by groups like the ACLU, which said what he was calling for was illegal.
“What President Trump has suggested here is both illegal and unconstitutional,” Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, told the AP. “Any official who has sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and laws should disavow it unequivocally.”
Schumer Calls Out Mad Maxine: Calls To Harass Trump Officials In Public Are 'Not American'
Matt Vespa
The House is expected to v**e on immigration legislation this week, but Trump has signaled the lawmakers are "wasting their time."
"Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November. Dems are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solves this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave!" he wrote on Twitter Friday.
http://www.townhall.com
President Trump is Right, 100%. If you can't come here Legally then y'all need to stay away from our Country completely. Y'all will Reap what Y'all Sew, if you ignore it. This is our Country not Yours. Well folks what do Y'all think?Jul 14, 2018 18:23:52 #
(Main)
A Poll About Immigration Just Signed The Democrats Death Warrant
The midterm e******ns are shaping up as a referendum on Donald Trump’s immigration policies.
Democrats and the media believe Trump’s proposed crackdown on i*****l i*********n will sink Republicans up and down the b****t.
But the results of this brand new poll just signed the Democrats death warrant on the issue.
Democrats and the media have convinced themselves that Donald Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy of referring every adult caught crossing the border for criminal prosecution is a political loser.
The anti-Trump media used f**e news photographs about family separations to try and drive the President into retreat.
And when Trump signed an executive order ending the separation of families – mandating that they be detained together – the media and Democrats pounded their chests because they believed they stumbled on a winning issue.
But the celebration was short lived.
A brand new CBS/YouGov Battleground Tracker poll found Trump’s positions on immigration are popular and that the Democrats support for open borders and “catch and release” is politically toxic.
The survey found 48% of Americans wanted the family sent back to their home country together.
Another 11 percent backed arresting the parents and keeping the children with them in the same detention facility.
And four percent supported arresting the parents and placing the children in separate holding facilities.
Taken together, a full 63 percent of the American people backed Trump’s law and order crackdown on i*****l i*********n.
The Democrats position of open borders and catch and release had the support of just 21 percent of Americans.
Americans want secure borders and to enforce i*********n l*ws.
The President expressed this sentiment when he tweeted that i*****l a***ns should just be turned around at the border and sent back to their home countries without putting the government through the hassle of years-long deportation proceedings:
Hiring many thousands of judges, and going through a long and complicated legal process, is not the way to go – will always be disfunctional. People must simply be stopped at the Border and told they cannot come into the U.S. illegally. Children brought back to their country……
….If this is done, i*****l i*********n will be stopped in it’s tracks – and at very little, by comparison, cost. This is the only real answer – and we must continue to BUILD THE WALL!
President Trump’s call to build the wall also resonated with the American people.
The CBC/YouGov survey found a majority of the American people – 51 percent – thought building the border wall was a good idea.
Democrats live in the mainstream media bubble.
Because elitist reporters and Democrats who live in big cities on the coasts support amnesty and open borders, they believe the rest of the country lines up with that version of immigration policy.
But the CBS poll tells a different story.
It’s really the Democrats – and their allies in the media – who are out of step with reality on immigration.
And if the Democrats want to make immigration enforcement and building the wall the central issue of the midterm e******ns, they are sealing their own doom.
We will keep you up to date on any new developments in this midterm e******ns.
http://www.americanpatriotdaily.com
The Democrats are sealing their own Fate!!!!! and they can't blame the Big Guy) President Trump). Everything is all about I******s and their Free Passing into our Country. They want a free pass with every thing they can get, and To Blazes with our Laws and our Country. Democrats will Reap what they Sew, and they will have one to blame but Obama and his Crocked Ways. Now what do Y'all believe?
The midterm e******ns are shaping up as a referendum on Donald Trump’s immigration policies.
Democrats and the media believe Trump’s proposed crackdown on i*****l i*********n will sink Republicans up and down the b****t.
But the results of this brand new poll just signed the Democrats death warrant on the issue.
Democrats and the media have convinced themselves that Donald Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy of referring every adult caught crossing the border for criminal prosecution is a political loser.
The anti-Trump media used f**e news photographs about family separations to try and drive the President into retreat.
And when Trump signed an executive order ending the separation of families – mandating that they be detained together – the media and Democrats pounded their chests because they believed they stumbled on a winning issue.
But the celebration was short lived.
A brand new CBS/YouGov Battleground Tracker poll found Trump’s positions on immigration are popular and that the Democrats support for open borders and “catch and release” is politically toxic.
The survey found 48% of Americans wanted the family sent back to their home country together.
Another 11 percent backed arresting the parents and keeping the children with them in the same detention facility.
And four percent supported arresting the parents and placing the children in separate holding facilities.
Taken together, a full 63 percent of the American people backed Trump’s law and order crackdown on i*****l i*********n.
The Democrats position of open borders and catch and release had the support of just 21 percent of Americans.
Americans want secure borders and to enforce i*********n l*ws.
The President expressed this sentiment when he tweeted that i*****l a***ns should just be turned around at the border and sent back to their home countries without putting the government through the hassle of years-long deportation proceedings:
Hiring many thousands of judges, and going through a long and complicated legal process, is not the way to go – will always be disfunctional. People must simply be stopped at the Border and told they cannot come into the U.S. illegally. Children brought back to their country……
….If this is done, i*****l i*********n will be stopped in it’s tracks – and at very little, by comparison, cost. This is the only real answer – and we must continue to BUILD THE WALL!
President Trump’s call to build the wall also resonated with the American people.
The CBC/YouGov survey found a majority of the American people – 51 percent – thought building the border wall was a good idea.
Democrats live in the mainstream media bubble.
Because elitist reporters and Democrats who live in big cities on the coasts support amnesty and open borders, they believe the rest of the country lines up with that version of immigration policy.
But the CBS poll tells a different story.
It’s really the Democrats – and their allies in the media – who are out of step with reality on immigration.
And if the Democrats want to make immigration enforcement and building the wall the central issue of the midterm e******ns, they are sealing their own doom.
We will keep you up to date on any new developments in this midterm e******ns.
http://www.americanpatriotdaily.com
The Democrats are sealing their own Fate!!!!! and they can't blame the Big Guy) President Trump). Everything is all about I******s and their Free Passing into our Country. They want a free pass with every thing they can get, and To Blazes with our Laws and our Country. Democrats will Reap what they Sew, and they will have one to blame but Obama and his Crocked Ways. Now what do Y'all believe?Jul 14, 2018 18:05:32 #
(Main)
Liz Peek: Democrats are furious about Trump and the Supreme Court – They have only Obama to blame
Liz Peek
By Liz Peek | Fox News
Trump meets with four potential Supreme Court nominees
President says he will meet with two or three more candidates before choosing a nominee; John Roberts reports from the White House.
Though they won’t admit it, Democrats are suffering continued fallout from the arrogance of the Obama White House. Liberals are furious that President Trump will have the opportunity to appoint another justice to the Supreme Court, thus cementing a conservative majority for the foreseeable future.
Moreover, liberals are upset that the Trump administration may have convinced Justice Anthony Kennedy to recently announce his retirement, viewing that effort as dirty pool. That Kennedy, age 81, is nobody’s fool – and is unlikely to have been manipulated – appears irrelevant.
The real offense, which actually merits outrage from the left, is that President Obama did not convince liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire during the many years that Democrats controlled the Senate.
Ginsburg is 85. She will surely leave the bench in the next few years, opening up the possibility that the Supreme Court will have an even greater conservative cast – one that might indeed persist for a generation.
Why did President Obama not plan for such a possibility, which would at least have guaranteed four liberal v**es on the court? The obvious answer is that he never anticipated that the opportunity would pass.
It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum.
Even though he received what he called a “shellacking” in the 2010 midterms, and even though the GOP made unprecedented political gains during his tenure, President Obama was always convinced the country was behind him.
As Mara Liasson wrote for NPR in 2016: “During Obama's eight years in office, the Democrats have lost more House, Senate, state legislative and governors seats than under any other president.” She noted that the Obama legacy includes “one huge failure: a diminished Democratic Party.”
In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., invoked the so-called “nuclear option,” discarding traditional filibuster protections for the minority party in favor of requiring only a simple majority to approve judicial and executive branch nominees. He carved out an exception for people put forward for the Supreme Court.
The next year – with CNN describing President Obama as an “unpopular president limping through his second term” – Republicans reclaimed control of the Senate. As a result of that achievement, President Obama’s chances of securing a liberal majority on the high court all but disappeared.
In the spring of 2016, Senate Republicans blocked a v**e on Judge Merrick Garland, who President Obama nominated to the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The Republicans said the looming e******n should allow Americans to decide which party’s president could appoint the next Supreme Court justice.
Last year, with partisanship riding high in the Senate, Republicans extended Reid’s majority rule provision to include Supreme Court justices, clearing the path for confirming Judge Neil Gorsuch to become a Supreme Court justice. President Trump’s pick to take Justice Kennedy’s place will have to win a majority of Senate v**es, which is no mean task.
Now liberals are anguishing about the potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing a******n nationwide.
Three Republican senators – Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Susan Collins of Maine – have indicated they will not v**e for a Supreme Court nominee who suggests he or she might not respect the precedent of earlier rulings allowing a******n. Moreover, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona has not shown up in the Senate since last year because he is being treated for brain cancer, and cannot be counted on to be able to cast a v**e.
With the GOP having but a two-v**e advantage in the Senate, the path is narrow.
Still, there is little question that the court will likely soon move to the right, and there is little Democrats can do about it.
President Trump has said he will announced his Supreme Court pick Monday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has made it clear he wants to v**e on the new nominee this fall.
It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum of the sort we have witnessed since the e******n of President Trump.
Stagnant wages, sluggish job growth and lagging capital investment never prodded President Obama to reach out to the business community or to partner with it in reviving the economy.
The Obama White House could not have imagined President Trump’s plan to lower corporate taxes and ease up on regulations. Even through eight disappointing and costly years of economic underperformance, President Obama seems to have never doubted his policies.
In President Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhode’s book “The World as It Is: a Memoir of the Obama White House,” President Obama asks his aides, after Donald Trump’s e******n: “What if we were wrong?” It was, as The New York Times noted, a moment of “rare self-doubt.”
President Obama’s destruction of his party has largely been overlooked by Democrats, but his indifference to the future of the Supreme Court is an act of political malpractice impossible to ignore.
Recent Supreme Court rulings have not gone well for Democrats. These include Janus v. AFSCME (the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), which could undermine the influence of public employee unions that generally support Democrats in e******ns; the upholding of President Trump’s travel ban on countries that pose a national security risk; and the ruling in favor of a baker who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
These decisions and others hint at the influence of the new conservative Supreme Court, and the damage that will done to the progressive movement.
And the retirement of Justice Ginsburg could be next.
http://www.foxnews.com
Democrats need to 'Reap what they Sew!!!! and stop blaming the other Guy!! President Trump. Democrats refuse to clean up their own mess.(Obama). Now what do y'all believe?
Liz Peek
By Liz Peek | Fox News
Trump meets with four potential Supreme Court nominees
President says he will meet with two or three more candidates before choosing a nominee; John Roberts reports from the White House.
Though they won’t admit it, Democrats are suffering continued fallout from the arrogance of the Obama White House. Liberals are furious that President Trump will have the opportunity to appoint another justice to the Supreme Court, thus cementing a conservative majority for the foreseeable future.
Moreover, liberals are upset that the Trump administration may have convinced Justice Anthony Kennedy to recently announce his retirement, viewing that effort as dirty pool. That Kennedy, age 81, is nobody’s fool – and is unlikely to have been manipulated – appears irrelevant.
The real offense, which actually merits outrage from the left, is that President Obama did not convince liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire during the many years that Democrats controlled the Senate.
Ginsburg is 85. She will surely leave the bench in the next few years, opening up the possibility that the Supreme Court will have an even greater conservative cast – one that might indeed persist for a generation.
Why did President Obama not plan for such a possibility, which would at least have guaranteed four liberal v**es on the court? The obvious answer is that he never anticipated that the opportunity would pass.
It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum.
Even though he received what he called a “shellacking” in the 2010 midterms, and even though the GOP made unprecedented political gains during his tenure, President Obama was always convinced the country was behind him.
As Mara Liasson wrote for NPR in 2016: “During Obama's eight years in office, the Democrats have lost more House, Senate, state legislative and governors seats than under any other president.” She noted that the Obama legacy includes “one huge failure: a diminished Democratic Party.”
In 2013, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., invoked the so-called “nuclear option,” discarding traditional filibuster protections for the minority party in favor of requiring only a simple majority to approve judicial and executive branch nominees. He carved out an exception for people put forward for the Supreme Court.
The next year – with CNN describing President Obama as an “unpopular president limping through his second term” – Republicans reclaimed control of the Senate. As a result of that achievement, President Obama’s chances of securing a liberal majority on the high court all but disappeared.
In the spring of 2016, Senate Republicans blocked a v**e on Judge Merrick Garland, who President Obama nominated to the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. The Republicans said the looming e******n should allow Americans to decide which party’s president could appoint the next Supreme Court justice.
Last year, with partisanship riding high in the Senate, Republicans extended Reid’s majority rule provision to include Supreme Court justices, clearing the path for confirming Judge Neil Gorsuch to become a Supreme Court justice. President Trump’s pick to take Justice Kennedy’s place will have to win a majority of Senate v**es, which is no mean task.
Now liberals are anguishing about the potential reversal of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing a******n nationwide.
Three Republican senators – Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia and Susan Collins of Maine – have indicated they will not v**e for a Supreme Court nominee who suggests he or she might not respect the precedent of earlier rulings allowing a******n. Moreover, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona has not shown up in the Senate since last year because he is being treated for brain cancer, and cannot be counted on to be able to cast a v**e.
With the GOP having but a two-v**e advantage in the Senate, the path is narrow.
Still, there is little question that the court will likely soon move to the right, and there is little Democrats can do about it.
President Trump has said he will announced his Supreme Court pick Monday. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has made it clear he wants to v**e on the new nominee this fall.
It was President Obama who left his party in this position. His anti-business agenda was unpopular, but was never revisited. Democrats’ losses over the past decade stemmed in large part from a slow-growth economy that never gained momentum of the sort we have witnessed since the e******n of President Trump.
Stagnant wages, sluggish job growth and lagging capital investment never prodded President Obama to reach out to the business community or to partner with it in reviving the economy.
The Obama White House could not have imagined President Trump’s plan to lower corporate taxes and ease up on regulations. Even through eight disappointing and costly years of economic underperformance, President Obama seems to have never doubted his policies.
In President Obama’s Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhode’s book “The World as It Is: a Memoir of the Obama White House,” President Obama asks his aides, after Donald Trump’s e******n: “What if we were wrong?” It was, as The New York Times noted, a moment of “rare self-doubt.”
President Obama’s destruction of his party has largely been overlooked by Democrats, but his indifference to the future of the Supreme Court is an act of political malpractice impossible to ignore.
Recent Supreme Court rulings have not gone well for Democrats. These include Janus v. AFSCME (the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees), which could undermine the influence of public employee unions that generally support Democrats in e******ns; the upholding of President Trump’s travel ban on countries that pose a national security risk; and the ruling in favor of a baker who refused to produce a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.
These decisions and others hint at the influence of the new conservative Supreme Court, and the damage that will done to the progressive movement.
And the retirement of Justice Ginsburg could be next.
http://www.foxnews.com
Democrats need to 'Reap what they Sew!!!! and stop blaming the other Guy!! President Trump. Democrats refuse to clean up their own mess.(Obama). Now what do y'all believe?Jul 14, 2018 17:55:13 #
(Main)
no propaganda please wrote:
They have no right to be here, they have committed a crime coming here. Of course they have no right to bear arms. However, they do have a right to bare arms if they so choose, as long as they don't mind sunburned arms as they walk back across the border on their way to where they came from.
They will be a threat to our Security and our Borders, if they carry Arms!!!!. Stay Home and Bear Arms, don't trespass into our Country. They have no legal Rights in any way shape or form. If they enter our country without Legal Documents, then it will be Illegal for them to Bear Arms in any way shape and Form...Jul 14, 2018 17:49:27 #
(Main)
BigMike wrote:
Well they should build their own Army!!! and not depend on The US.Trump just does what the previous presidents tried to do (BS...they didn't try. That was theater) and failed.
The Europeans want to form their European nation with a single army anyway...why do they need us?
The Europeans want to form their European nation with a single army anyway...why do they need us?
Jul 14, 2018 17:13:30 #
(Main)
Trump Sent A Message That Caused Every World Leader’s Jaw To Hit The Floor
0 0
No president in modern history has stood up against unfair world leaders more harshly than Donald Trump has.
He knows that we are being ripped off around the world and he’s tired of it.
And he just made that more clear than ever with a single message that left every world leader’s jaw sitting on the floor.
Being forced to meet with President Donald Trump should be bad enough for most world leaders. He is such a master deal maker that they know he has his sights set on dismantling the weak deals negotiated by past presidents.
One deal that President Trump specifically wants to rework is the NATO alliance. NATO is a mutual defense alliance between 29 North American and European countries.
At its core, it is an agreement that if one of the 29 countries in the alliance gets attacked, all of the countries in the alliance side with them.
So on paper it sounds like a good thing. But as soon as you begin looking into how NATO is funded, it is quickly realized that it is an excuse for other countries to have the United States subsidize their defense spending.
22 percent of NATO funds come directly from the United States, with the country closest to matching that number being Germany, who provides 14 percent of NATO’s funding.
And while this is bad enough, U.S. Armed Forces also help protect NATO countries with direct boots on the ground, defending their countries, something that no other country in turn does for the U.S.
That’s why President Trump is fed up and fighting back. He announced through Twitter that at the upcoming NATO conference he is attending he will make clear that U.S. taxpayers footing the bill for their defense isn’t fair.
Trump also points out the fact that U.S. taxpayers are also ripped off through unfair tariffs with the European Union.
This isn’t the first step President Trump has taken to make his frustrations with NATO nations known.
Trump sent letters to the leaders of Canada, Norway, Germany, and Belgium just last week to make it clear that they are going to begin paying their fair share for defense.
That letter likely came in response to the intense disrespect he has received from those countries. Canada in particular has chosen to lash out at Trump.
Despite the fact that the United States has for many years helped Canada in a disproportionately beneficial relationship, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau chose to go after Trump and the United States.
Trudeau announced a plan to impose $12.6 billion in tariffs on the U.S. in response to Trump’s fair trade policy with the world.
That deal is very likely not going to go the way Trudeau wants it to. Donald Trump wrote the book on deals, and knows exactly how to craft a deal that is beneficial to him and the United States.
Trump seems like he is going to use those exact deal-making sk**ls with NATO leaders.
Do you think that President Trump is going to be able to make other NATO countries pay their fair share for defense?
Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.
http://www.blackeyepolitics.com
President Trump is going to be fighting a Big Battle!! when it comes to these other countries paying their own Bills!! We should not have to Foot The Bill, for any of these other Countries of NATO!!!. They should Pay for themselves in Defense!! We are not their Piggy Banks!!!. Now what are Y'all going to say about this Money Grubbing Mess.?
0 0
No president in modern history has stood up against unfair world leaders more harshly than Donald Trump has.
He knows that we are being ripped off around the world and he’s tired of it.
And he just made that more clear than ever with a single message that left every world leader’s jaw sitting on the floor.
Being forced to meet with President Donald Trump should be bad enough for most world leaders. He is such a master deal maker that they know he has his sights set on dismantling the weak deals negotiated by past presidents.
One deal that President Trump specifically wants to rework is the NATO alliance. NATO is a mutual defense alliance between 29 North American and European countries.
At its core, it is an agreement that if one of the 29 countries in the alliance gets attacked, all of the countries in the alliance side with them.
So on paper it sounds like a good thing. But as soon as you begin looking into how NATO is funded, it is quickly realized that it is an excuse for other countries to have the United States subsidize their defense spending.
22 percent of NATO funds come directly from the United States, with the country closest to matching that number being Germany, who provides 14 percent of NATO’s funding.
And while this is bad enough, U.S. Armed Forces also help protect NATO countries with direct boots on the ground, defending their countries, something that no other country in turn does for the U.S.
That’s why President Trump is fed up and fighting back. He announced through Twitter that at the upcoming NATO conference he is attending he will make clear that U.S. taxpayers footing the bill for their defense isn’t fair.
Trump also points out the fact that U.S. taxpayers are also ripped off through unfair tariffs with the European Union.
This isn’t the first step President Trump has taken to make his frustrations with NATO nations known.
Trump sent letters to the leaders of Canada, Norway, Germany, and Belgium just last week to make it clear that they are going to begin paying their fair share for defense.
That letter likely came in response to the intense disrespect he has received from those countries. Canada in particular has chosen to lash out at Trump.
Despite the fact that the United States has for many years helped Canada in a disproportionately beneficial relationship, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau chose to go after Trump and the United States.
Trudeau announced a plan to impose $12.6 billion in tariffs on the U.S. in response to Trump’s fair trade policy with the world.
That deal is very likely not going to go the way Trudeau wants it to. Donald Trump wrote the book on deals, and knows exactly how to craft a deal that is beneficial to him and the United States.
Trump seems like he is going to use those exact deal-making sk**ls with NATO leaders.
Do you think that President Trump is going to be able to make other NATO countries pay their fair share for defense?
Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.
http://www.blackeyepolitics.com
President Trump is going to be fighting a Big Battle!! when it comes to these other countries paying their own Bills!! We should not have to Foot The Bill, for any of these other Countries of NATO!!!. They should Pay for themselves in Defense!! We are not their Piggy Banks!!!. Now what are Y'all going to say about this Money Grubbing Mess.?Jul 14, 2018 16:58:02 #
(Main)
Does Alien Caught at Border Have Right to Bear Arms?
Terry Jeffrey
Terry Jeffrey
|
Posted: Jul 14, 2018 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
Does Alien Caught at Border Have Right to Bear Arms?
Trending
Larry Elder
S***ery: What They Didn't Teach in My High School
Kurt Schlichter
Liberals Are Super Sad About the Supreme Court. Good.
Ann Coulter
Kavanaugh Threatens the Left's Right to C***t
Does a detained alien caught illegally crossing the border have a right to bear arms, contribute to Nancy Pelosi -- or k**l an unborn child?
Last September, 17-year-old "Jane Doe" was caught illegally crossing into the United States. She had left her parents behind in her native country where a******n is illegal.
Following normal procedure, the Office of Refugee Resettlement took custody of this girl, put her in detention and gave her a medical exam. She was eight weeks pregnant.
She demanded an a******n.
The ORR, which under the Trump administration has adopted a policy of not "facilitating" a******ns, declined to let her out of detention for that purpose.
But it would allow her to voluntarily leave the United States -- or release her to a qualified sponsor within the United States as soon as one could be found.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the government on Jane Doe's behalf. It argued that Planned Parenthood v. Casey -- the 1992 opinion co-authored by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor and David Souter -- gave Doe a right to an a******n in the United States and that the government was violating that right by placing an "undue burden" on it.
The administration offered a weak rebuttal. It assumed (without conceding the point) that Casey applied to the novel case of an alien caught at the border who demands an a******n. But it argued that ORR policies did not place an "undue burden" on Doe's "right" to an a******n.
CARTOONS | AF Branco
View Cartoon
Nine states -- led by Texas -- made a stronger argument. They said Supreme Court a******n precedents did not apply.
"If on the facts of this case Doe has a Fifth Amendment right to an a******n, it is hard to imagine why she could be denied any other constitutional rights -- such as the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms," they said in an amicus.
"Yet courts have consistently rejected the notion that unlawfully-present aliens with no substantial connections to this country are protected by the Second Amendment," the states said.
When the case ultimately went before the full appeals court, the majority accepted the ACLU's argument.
Judge Karen Henderson -- in a dissent noted in this column last October -- echoed Texas.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh filed a dissent echoing the Justice Department.
Henderson smacked the department for evading the fundamental question.
"Does an i*****l a***n who attempts to enter the United States eight weeks pregnant -- and who is immediately apprehended and then in custody for 36 days between arriving and filing a federal suit -- have a constitutional right to an elective a******n?" Henderson wrote.
"The government has inexplicably and wrongheadedly failed to take a position on that antecedent question," she said. "I say wrongheadedly because at least to me the answer is plainly -- and easily -- no."
To back her argument that the court must decide this, Henderson cited Chief Justice John Roberts' concurring opinion in Citizens United v. FEC: "There is a difference between judicial restraint and judicial abdication. When constitutional questions are 'indispensably necessary' to resolving the case at hand, 'the court must meet and decide them.'"
Henderson said her opinion that an alien caught illegally crossing the border did not have a right to a******n in the United States was based on Supreme Court precedents addressing the rights of aliens.
"If the Due Process Clause applies to J.D. with full force, there will be no reason she cannot donate to political campaigns ... inasmuch as freedom of political expression is plainly fundamental to our system of ordered liberty," Henderson said.
Kavanaugh admitted that "this case presents a new situation not yet directly confronted by the Supreme Court." But then he adopted the Justice Department's argument and "assumed" Casey applied to an alien caught illegally crossing the border.
Recommended
Trey Gowdy Destroys FBI's Peter Strzok: Why Did You Talk About Impeaching Trump a Day After the Special Counsel Launched?
Katie Pavlich
"All parties to this case recognize Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey as precedents we must follow," Kavanaugh wrote. "All parties have assumed for purposes of this case, moreover, that Jane Doe has a right under Supreme Court precedent to obtain an a******n in the United States."
Kavanaugh rejected the ACLU's claim that Doe had a right to an "immediate a******n," but conceded she had a right to one "expeditiously."
Kavanaugh wrote that the majority's decision was "ultimately based on a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. government detention to obtain immediate a******n on demand, thereby barring any government efforts to expeditiously t***sfer the minors to their immigration sponsors before they make that momentous life decision."
Kavanaugh further argued that by assuming Casey applied to detained aliens -- as the government did -- it must be conceded that such an alien may eventually need to be granted an a******n in federal detention.
"But if t***sfer does not work, given existing Supreme Court precedent and the position the government has so far advanced in this litigation," he said, "it could turn out that the government will be required by existing Supreme Court precedent to allow the a******n, even though the minor at that point would still be residing in a U.S. government detention facility."
Kavanaugh did not address the question of whether the government must allow her to buy a gun -- or send a check to the House minority leader.
http://www.townhall.com
Nope!!! they have no rights to Bear Arms, none of them.Nada!!!! Zip!!!! No Way. Now what do all Y'all think?
Terry Jeffrey
Terry Jeffrey
|
Posted: Jul 14, 2018 12:01 AM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
Does Alien Caught at Border Have Right to Bear Arms?
Trending
Larry Elder
S***ery: What They Didn't Teach in My High School
Kurt Schlichter
Liberals Are Super Sad About the Supreme Court. Good.
Ann Coulter
Kavanaugh Threatens the Left's Right to C***t
Does a detained alien caught illegally crossing the border have a right to bear arms, contribute to Nancy Pelosi -- or k**l an unborn child?
Last September, 17-year-old "Jane Doe" was caught illegally crossing into the United States. She had left her parents behind in her native country where a******n is illegal.
Following normal procedure, the Office of Refugee Resettlement took custody of this girl, put her in detention and gave her a medical exam. She was eight weeks pregnant.
She demanded an a******n.
The ORR, which under the Trump administration has adopted a policy of not "facilitating" a******ns, declined to let her out of detention for that purpose.
But it would allow her to voluntarily leave the United States -- or release her to a qualified sponsor within the United States as soon as one could be found.
The American Civil Liberties Union sued the government on Jane Doe's behalf. It argued that Planned Parenthood v. Casey -- the 1992 opinion co-authored by Justices Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O'Connor and David Souter -- gave Doe a right to an a******n in the United States and that the government was violating that right by placing an "undue burden" on it.
The administration offered a weak rebuttal. It assumed (without conceding the point) that Casey applied to the novel case of an alien caught at the border who demands an a******n. But it argued that ORR policies did not place an "undue burden" on Doe's "right" to an a******n.
CARTOONS | AF Branco
View Cartoon
Nine states -- led by Texas -- made a stronger argument. They said Supreme Court a******n precedents did not apply.
"If on the facts of this case Doe has a Fifth Amendment right to an a******n, it is hard to imagine why she could be denied any other constitutional rights -- such as the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms," they said in an amicus.
"Yet courts have consistently rejected the notion that unlawfully-present aliens with no substantial connections to this country are protected by the Second Amendment," the states said.
When the case ultimately went before the full appeals court, the majority accepted the ACLU's argument.
Judge Karen Henderson -- in a dissent noted in this column last October -- echoed Texas.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh filed a dissent echoing the Justice Department.
Henderson smacked the department for evading the fundamental question.
"Does an i*****l a***n who attempts to enter the United States eight weeks pregnant -- and who is immediately apprehended and then in custody for 36 days between arriving and filing a federal suit -- have a constitutional right to an elective a******n?" Henderson wrote.
"The government has inexplicably and wrongheadedly failed to take a position on that antecedent question," she said. "I say wrongheadedly because at least to me the answer is plainly -- and easily -- no."
To back her argument that the court must decide this, Henderson cited Chief Justice John Roberts' concurring opinion in Citizens United v. FEC: "There is a difference between judicial restraint and judicial abdication. When constitutional questions are 'indispensably necessary' to resolving the case at hand, 'the court must meet and decide them.'"
Henderson said her opinion that an alien caught illegally crossing the border did not have a right to a******n in the United States was based on Supreme Court precedents addressing the rights of aliens.
"If the Due Process Clause applies to J.D. with full force, there will be no reason she cannot donate to political campaigns ... inasmuch as freedom of political expression is plainly fundamental to our system of ordered liberty," Henderson said.
Kavanaugh admitted that "this case presents a new situation not yet directly confronted by the Supreme Court." But then he adopted the Justice Department's argument and "assumed" Casey applied to an alien caught illegally crossing the border.
Recommended
Trey Gowdy Destroys FBI's Peter Strzok: Why Did You Talk About Impeaching Trump a Day After the Special Counsel Launched?
Katie Pavlich
"All parties to this case recognize Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey as precedents we must follow," Kavanaugh wrote. "All parties have assumed for purposes of this case, moreover, that Jane Doe has a right under Supreme Court precedent to obtain an a******n in the United States."
Kavanaugh rejected the ACLU's claim that Doe had a right to an "immediate a******n," but conceded she had a right to one "expeditiously."
Kavanaugh wrote that the majority's decision was "ultimately based on a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong: a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. government detention to obtain immediate a******n on demand, thereby barring any government efforts to expeditiously t***sfer the minors to their immigration sponsors before they make that momentous life decision."
Kavanaugh further argued that by assuming Casey applied to detained aliens -- as the government did -- it must be conceded that such an alien may eventually need to be granted an a******n in federal detention.
"But if t***sfer does not work, given existing Supreme Court precedent and the position the government has so far advanced in this litigation," he said, "it could turn out that the government will be required by existing Supreme Court precedent to allow the a******n, even though the minor at that point would still be residing in a U.S. government detention facility."
Kavanaugh did not address the question of whether the government must allow her to buy a gun -- or send a check to the House minority leader.
http://www.townhall.com
Nope!!! they have no rights to Bear Arms, none of them.Nada!!!! Zip!!!! No Way. Now what do all Y'all think?May 17, 2018 17:39:04 #
(Main)
bahmer wrote:
Amen and Amen
Amen and Amen!!!!, thank you Lord.May 17, 2018 17:37:26 #
(Main)
glibona wrote:
Agree... think obama is becoming irrelevant in attempting to further obstruct the governing, best intetests and welfare of America that President Trump is succeeding in doing.
I totally agree with your statement!!!! glibona!!!!