American Thinker|For the Record, Obama Made Mincemeat of the Constitution

For the Record, Obama Made Mincemeat of the Constitution

Good constitutional arguments can be made for and against President Trump’s evocation of emergency powers to address the crisis at our southern border.  But the notion that such a declaration would encourage a future Democratic president to do something similar borders on the comic.  Democrats don’t need encouragement.

Under President Barack Obama, the Constitution was violated more wantonly than a goat at a Taliban bachelor party, and the faithful cheered every violation.  In early 2014, New Yorker editor and Obama groupie David Remnick wrote about his experience accompanying Obama on a west-coast fundraising tour.

Obama confirmed to the audience that, yes, people did want him to sign more executive orders and “basically nullify Congress.”  At that point, wrote Remnick, “Many in the crowd applauded their approval.  Yes!  Nullify it!”  These were not wild-eyed tent-dwellers on Wall or some lesser street.  These were potential donors.

By 2014, Obama had successfully nullified any number of laws with negligible media objection.  In February 2011, for instance, Obama and “wing man” Attorney General Eric Holder came willy-nilly to the conclusion that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was not “constitutional.”  President Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law in 1996 with overwhelming support from Democrats in Congress and nearly unanimous support from Republicans.

No matter.  Going forward, Obama decided that the Justice Department would no longer enforce DOMA.  That simple.  Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley had a hard time making legal sense out of Obama’s left-field decision to ignore DOMA.  For one, Turley found the timing curious.  The Obama administration had been defending the law for the previous two years, and the president, publicly, at least, had not changed his personal stance on redefining marriage.

For another, Obama was basing this policy change on an interpretation “that had thus far remained unsupported by direct precedent.”  By refusing to enforce DOMA, Obama was setting a precedent and not a good one — namely, that a president could refuse to defend a law based on a legal interpretation that no court had ever accepted.

On the subject of illegal immigration, Obama did not bother deeming existing laws unconstitutional.  He chose not to enforce them because they did not poll well among Hispanic voters. It would get no deeper than that.

Since year one of the Bush administration, Congress had been trying to pass the awkwardly titled Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act, better known as the DREAM Act.  In a nutshell, this bill would have provided permanent residency to those illegal aliens who had arrived in the United States as minors and behaved themselves well enough not to get their mug shots plastered on the Post Office wall.

Although President Bush supported immigration reform, as did President Obama, neither the DREAM Act nor any major immigration bill made it to their desks. The reason was simple enough: no variation of such a bill could muster adequate congressional support.

In his 2006 book, Audacity of Hope, Obama praised the system of checks and balances in that it “encouraged the very process of information gathering, analysis, and argument.”  Once Obama ascended to the presidency, all those checks and balances just made it harder for him to transform America.

Obama’s constituencies, especially labor and the Hispanic lobby, wanted action, not gathering and arguing.  They started leaning on him to ignore Congress and act unilaterally.  One minor obstacle stood in the way, and that was Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution.  For the previous 220 years, that article had informed Congress in some detail on how to turn an idea into a law.

Obama could not enforce the DREAM Act, said constitutional scholar Nicholas Rosenkrantz, “by pretending that it passed when it did not.”  As late as March 2011, legal scholar Obama seemed to agree.  “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law,” he told a Univision audience.  “With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed.”

By June 2012, what Obama said in March 2011 seemed as stale as a morning-after bowl of tortilla chips.  The president had lost his taste for all that legislative analysis and argument, given that the result was “an absence of any immigration action from Congress.”

Five months before the presidential election, he knew that the media would give him a pass, and he hoped Latinos would give him their vote.  So he decided to dispense with debate and fix immigration policy by his own lights, confident he could make that policy “more fair, more efficient, and more just.”

This fix started with presidentially guaranteed relief from deportation for the so-called “Dreamers.”  On top of that came the right to apply for work authorization, both guarantees in full defiance of existing federal law.  “There has long been a general consensus that a president cannot refuse to enforce a law that is considered constitutionally sound,” said Jonathan Turley.  That chapter was apparently missing from Obama’s law books.

On August 23, 2013, in a move that the major media barely noticed, the Obama administration subtly expanded the list of those who would be excluded from deportation.  Deep in a nine-page memo from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters to its field offices was an order that “prosecutorial discretion” be shown to parents or guardians of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents, AKA “Dreamers.”

The news scarcely troubled the media, let alone the citizenry, but at least a few Republicans noticed.  “President Obama has once again abused his authority and unilaterally refused to enforce our current immigration laws,” said House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte.  Jonathan Turley agreed.  “In ordering this blanket exception,” said Turley, “President Obama was nullifying part of a law that he simply disagreed with.  There is no claim of unconstitutionality.”  Said Rosenkrantz, “Exempting as many as 1.76 million people from the immigration laws goes far beyond any traditional conception of prosecutorial discretion.”

Encouraged by the media to keep drafting laws of his own choosing, Obama made nullification a central part of his governing philosophy.  “I’m eager to work with all of you,” he said to Congress of the 2014 State of the Union speech.  “But America does not stand still — and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

Said veteran civil libertarian Nat Hentoff, “Obama is a bad man in terms of the Constitution.”

Good constitutional arguments can be made for and against President Trump’s evocation of emergency powers to address the crisis at our southern border.  But the notion that such a declaration would encourage a future Democratic president to do something similar borders on the comic.  Democrats don’t need encouragement.

Under President Barack Obama, the Constitution was violated more wantonly than a goat at a Taliban bachelor party, and the faithful cheered every violation.  In early 2014, New Yorker editor and Obama groupie David Remnick wrote about his experience accompanying Obama on a west-coast fundraising tour.

At one stop, when Obama walked out on stage, “It happened again: another heckler broke into Obama’s speech.  A man in the balcony repeatedly shouted out, ‘Executive order!’ demanding that the President bypass Congress with more unilateral actions.”

Obama confirmed to the audience that, yes, people did want him to sign more executive orders and “basically nullify Congress.”  At that point, wrote Remnick, “Many in the crowd applauded their approval.  Yes!  Nullify it!”  These were not wild-eyed tent-dwellers on Wall or some lesser street.  These were potential donors.

By 2014, Obama had successfully nullified any number of laws with negligible media objection.  In February 2011, for instance, Obama and “wing man” Attorney General Eric Holder came willy-nilly to the conclusion that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was not “constitutional.”  President Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law in 1996 with overwhelming support from Democrats in Congress and nearly unanimous support from Republicans.

No matter.  Going forward, Obama decided that the Justice Department would no longer enforce DOMA.  That simple.  Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley had a hard time making legal sense out of Obama’s left-field decision to ignore DOMA.  For one, Turley found the timing curious.  The Obama administration had been defending the law for the previous two years, and the president, publicly, at least, had not changed his personal stance on redefining marriage.

For another, Obama was basing this policy change on an interpretation “that had thus far remained unsupported by direct precedent.”  By refusing to enforce DOMA, Obama was setting a precedent and not a good one — namely, that a president could refuse to defend a law based on a legal interpretation that no court had ever accepted.

On the subject of illegal immigration, Obama did not bother deeming existing laws unconstitutional.  He chose not to enforce them because they did not poll well among Hispanic voters. It would get no deeper than that.

Since year one of the Bush administration, Congress had been trying to pass the awkwardly titled Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act, better known as the DREAM Act.  In a nutshell, this bill would have provided permanent residency to those illegal aliens who had arrived in the United States as minors and behaved themselves well enough not to get their mug shots plastered on the Post Office wall.

Although President Bush supported immigration reform, as did President Obama, neither the DREAM Act nor any major immigration bill made it to their desks. The reason was simple enough: no variation of such a bill could muster adequate congressional support.

In his 2006 book, Audacity of Hope, Obama praised the system of checks and balances in that it “encouraged the very process of information gathering, analysis, and argument.”  Once Obama ascended to the presidency, all those checks and balances just made it harder for him to transform America.

Obama’s constituencies, especially labor and the Hispanic lobby, wanted action, not gathering and arguing.  They started leaning on him to ignore Congress and act unilaterally.  One minor obstacle stood in the way, and that was Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution.  For the previous 220 years, that article had informed Congress in some detail on how to turn an idea into a law.

Obama could not enforce the DREAM Act, said constitutional scholar Nicholas Rosenkrantz, “by pretending that it passed when it did not.”  As late as March 2011, legal scholar Obama seemed to agree.  “America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law,” he told a Univision audience.  “With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed.”

By June 2012, what Obama said in March 2011 seemed as stale as a morning-after bowl of tortilla chips.  The president had lost his taste for all that legislative analysis and argument, given that the result was “an absence of any immigration action from Congress.”

Five months before the presidential election, he knew that the media would give him a pass, and he hoped Latinos would give him their vote.  So he decided to dispense with debate and fix immigration policy by his own lights, confident he could make that policy “more fair, more efficient, and more just.”

This fix started with presidentially guaranteed relief from deportation for the so-called “Dreamers.”  On top of that came the right to apply for work authorization, both guarantees in full defiance of existing federal law.  “There has long been a general consensus that a president cannot refuse to enforce a law that is considered constitutionally sound,” said Jonathan Turley.  That chapter was apparently missing from Obama’s law books.

On August 23, 2013, in a move that the major media barely noticed, the Obama administration subtly expanded the list of those who would be excluded from deportation.  Deep in a nine-page memo from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters to its field offices was an order that “prosecutorial discretion” be shown to parents or guardians of United States citizens and lawful permanent residents, AKA “Dreamers.”

The news scarcely troubled the media, let alone the citizenry, but at least a few Republicans noticed.  “President Obama has once again abused his authority and unilaterally refused to enforce our current immigration laws,” said House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte.  Jonathan Turley agreed.  “In ordering this blanket exception,” said Turley, “President Obama was nullifying part of a law that he simply disagreed with.  There is no claim of unconstitutionality.”  Said Rosenkrantz, “Exempting as many as 1.76 million people from the immigration laws goes far beyond any traditional conception of prosecutorial discretion.”

Encouraged by the media to keep drafting laws of his own choosing, Obama made nullification a central part of his governing philosophy.  “I’m eager to work with all of you,” he said to Congress of the 2014 State of the Union speech.  “But America does not stand still — and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that’s what I’m going to do.”

Said veteran civil libertarian Nat Hentoff, “Obama is a bad man in terms of the Constitution.”

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/02/for_the_record_obama_made_mincemeat_of_the_constitution.html#ixzz5fu1wc42S
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Source:American Thinker

Glendale, Arizona Nazi cops abuse an innocent man and go unpunished

Conservative Thinker  02/15/2019

I generally only share stories, I do not do a lot of writing myself. This story had me awake at 4 am this morning, I’m too mad to settle down. Too disappointed in the system to calm down. This is one kind of injustice that we as Americans cannot tolerate! We may as well live in Nazi controlled Germany once we let stuff like this slide!

Screenshot_191

Nazi style of police brutality on an innocent man video at:  http://bit.ly/2If6LgJ

VIDEO: Violent Police Brutality

Glendale, Arizona’s finest pulled in behind a vehicle on 07/27/2017 that had just turned into a motel 6. The officer approaches the parked car and asks “Are y’all staying here”. The occupant Johnny Wheatcroft answers “About to get a room” Wheatcroft is the passenger and is in the front with another man (driver) and in the back seat is his wife and their two son 6 and 11 years old. The next question Officer Mathew Schneider asked is “You guys got your IDs on you real quick?” Wheatcroft asked “Who me?”. The cop then says “All of you”.

The officers then claimed the reason for the stop was failure to signal when turning into the parking lot. The vehicle was actually already stopped when officers approached it. But my belief is that officers targeted these people because of how they looked.

The officers wished to run the occupants’ Identification cards to check for warrants. They could have cared less about a “turn signal”. This was all about checking them for warrants. Unfortunately for the officers,  the man knew his rights, so he asked them what he had done to warrant being asked for ID. The man was a PASSENGER in the vehicle NOT the driver. The police cannot just ask you for ID for no reason, they must have “probable cause” to LEGALLY do this.

Of course the police engage in lying to the public EVERY DAY!!! This day was no different. The officer did not care that he was violating the man’s Constitutional rights. He wanted to see his ID! Because you know, America has become Nazi Germany and you don’t HAVE any rights here anymore.

Johnny Wheatcroft was about to check into a motel room. He makes the mistake of digging through a bag of his belongings. Then Officer Matt Schneider says “Don’t reach in your bag man. You said you don’t have any ID I don’t want you reaching in there”. Johnny Wheatcroft apologizes very cooperatively “Oh okay, I’m sorry”.

Then the cop asked him “What’s your name man?” Wheatcroft questions the officer “Why am I even being asked?” and the cop replies “You said you don’t have any ID (inaudible)”. Then Wheatcroft says “I don’t need an ID bro”. Then the scumbag cop says “Yeah, if your a passenger in a vehicle you need ID”. Wheatcroft asked “Why’s that? I have an ID but I don’t have to give it to you, I’ve done nothing wrong”.

Anyway, then the scumbag (Officer Matt Schneider) says “Well I can take you down to the station and fingerprint you” Wheatcroft is like “For what?”. Schneider says “Because we made a traffic stop on the vehicle brother” And it devolves from there.

Let me tell you something. Police DO NOT have the right to ask you for an ID without probable cause that you have committed (or are committing) some kind of crime in ANY of the 50 states no matter what their law states! You are protected by the Constitution. Unless the police are detaining you they have NO RIGHT to ask for your ID.

Of course cops mostly view you as having no rights, so if you try to assert them they’ll just put a BS charge on you and take you to jail anyway. One way to know if you are being “Detained” is to ask them “Am I being detained?” If they say “No” then you don’t have to show them sh*t!!! Legally anyway. But just like the Nazis, police will find a way to screw you if they want to! So unless you have a camera crew handy, you may want to give it some thought. Here’s a link to a video about ID and the police. https://youtu.be/s4nQ_mFJV4I

Officer Mathew Schneider apparently has made an appearance on the television show COPS, where they chased a guy and let the dog chew on him for a minute before calling him off. He’s a real prize, but at least that guy had ran and had a warrant. Not that that’s an excuse. Here’s a link to the scumbag on COPS

Video: SCUMBAG Mathew Schneider COPS

Asserting your rights pisses the police off! Especially scumbags like this guy. You see…. He has a small winkie, or he was beat up as a child, or maybe he’s a closet homosexual…. Whatever his problem is he’s going to take it out on SOMEONE!!! Today it just happened to be Johnny Wheatcroft, who THOUGHT he was going to assert his Constitutional rights. Nazis just don’t give a damn about your rights!!! Can you imagine??? Can you imagine if that was YOU??? What about if it was your SON and Grandchildren in that car???

Guys like Mathew Schneider need to be locked in Prison. Using your badge to bully people and take them to jail is MUCH WORSE than people who just bully. This scumbag could have killed that man!!! I know for a FACT he traumatized the guys kids!!!

Poor Johnny and (I think) his wife too sat in JAIL for 3 months because he could not afford bail!!! 3 months!!! Then prosecutors dropped the charges after seeing the horrific footage. But the prosecutor didn’t go after the scumbag bully cop or his scumbag cohorts! A prosecutor has a responsibility to prosecute wrong doing, or so we thought.

If you are a sadistic power abusing scumbag like Matt Schneider you just get a pass in Glendale, Arizona. The FACT that the police department itself not only did not pursue charges, but they actively covered for the guy! I think the prosecutor who failed to charge the cops, the police chief, every officer present that day, and any officers in the department involved in covering it up NEED TO GO TO PRISON!

They should ALL be treated harsher than I would be treated for the same crime!!! Because they are in a position of trust, a position of enforcing the law. They should be held to a HIGHER standard than you and I!!! Check this out, this is their official response to their Crew of Nazi cops sexually assaulting this man and wrongfully imprisoning him and his wife, and sending his children to CPS after violently assaulting their father in front of them. This is their official statement and a 30 second clip of the nightmare where they try to claim one of the Nazis got “Knocked unconscious”. By the way, I’d say he was on the ground because he touched poor Johnny Wheatcroft as his partner was electrocuting him to death, and got a little charge himself.

Glendale Arizona Cover Story LIE

I’ve been up all night tweeting to Trump, the Senators of Arizona, every newsroom in America, along with many public figures and many leaders of the GOP. I’m pissed off about this. Are we as Americans going to sit still for abuses like this that go unpunished? This scumbag belongs at the end of a rope. But since we don’t do things like that anymore at the very least he needs to be prosecuted and sent to PRISON!!!

What Officer Mathew Schneider done to this man and his family is as wrong as it gets short of just outright murdering the man!!! Not only is he guilty of battery and aggravated sexual assault of Wheatcroft, he then locked the guy in jail FOR DOING NOTHING!!!

That’s justice huh? Frigging scumbag Schneider gets 3 days of paid suspension from work, and is out on patrol today, while poor Johnny Wheatcroft sits behind bars because he couldn’t afford the bond!!! I think his wife did too, not sure about that.

Add to that this innocent man’s children got to go to CPS, his vehicle was towed, and most likely (Unless he had a real good friend to pay his bills) he lost his car to the towing company, lost his house or apartment and all of it’s contents. His kids pictures, EVERYTHING! All because of this scumbag cop!!!

Boys in Blue, if you keep covering for guys like this you’re going to have problems!!! America is a nation of LAWS… And the police have to follow those LAWS just like the rest of us. If not, then this country is lost! We may as well get out the guns and ammo and get to it. Because I refuse to become a victim of a bunch of law breaking Nazis like this guy!!!

Enforce the law!!! Even if you enforce it each other. Because preferential enforcement is getting REAL OLD!!! Just like the DOJ and FBI who ALSO selectively enforce the laws.

They give Hillary Clinton and 10 other Democrats passes for “Lying to Congress” even when it has been PROVEN!!! But then you go and ARREST Roger Stone for the SAME EXACT THING! (without the proof)

It’s time to either straighten this country out or draw up battle lines, this kind of sh*t cannot continue. When the people charged with upholding the law are dishonest what kind of “LAW” do you have? I’ll tell you, you have MOB RULES.

You may as well be the mafia.

EVERYONE PLEASE MAKE SURE TO SHARE THIS!!!

CALL THE GLENDALE ARIZONA POLICE AND COMPLAIN!!!

CALL THE FBI AND DOJ

 

Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/GlendaleAZPD/

Twitter @GlendaleAZPD

Phone number (623) 930-3000

 

AMERICANS MAKE RECORD JOB GAINS AS MEDIA SUFFERS RECORD JOB LOSSES | FrontPage Mag

What’s bad for the media is good for America.

 

The winter freeze might have shut down entire cities, but it couldn’t slow down job growth as the economy roared through the cold and shattered projections with 304,000 non-farm jobs in January.

There were job gains everywhere from transportation (27,000) to health care (42,000) to hospitality (74,000). Under Trump, construction gained 338,000 jobs in 12 months while manufacturing picked up 261,000 jobs in that same period. There was good news for many industries, but bad news for one.

The media is freezing colder than the polar vortex with thousands of lost jobs in January and February.

Gannett, the giant behind USA Today and many local lefty papers such as the Arizona Republic, the Detroit Free Press and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, fired 400 employees.

McClatchy, another newspaper giant, which publishes the Miami Herald, the Kansas City Star and the Charlotte Observer, among many others, announced voluntary buyouts for 10% of its employees after having fired 3.5% of its staff or 140 employees back in August. Tronc, another publishing giant, has already been making major cuts at newspapers like the New York Daily News and the Los Angeles Times.

Reuters expects to cut 3,200 jobs or 12% of its global workforce, closing 55 offices by 2020. BuzzFeed fired 15% of its staff or 220 employees, wiping out its national security desk, most of its national news desk, LGBT team and entertainment team.

Verizon, which through a series of bad business decisions had inherited the Huffington Post, cut 7% or 800 jobs in its media division. HuffPo dumped its health and opinion section, along with various reporters. Vice Media is laying off 10% or 250 employees from its global staff. Mic’s staff was mostly let go back in November. And the bloodletting isn’t over. It’s just beginning.

Why is the media failing while the rest of the economy is thriving?

It used to be said that what’s good for General Motors is good for America. But what’s good for the media is bad for America. And what’s bad for the media appears to be remarkably good for America.

In 2009, as the economy was tanking, journalism school applications increased sharply. As the economy began to recover, J-School enrollment began to fall. Call it the Vulture Effect. Carrion eaters are attracted to death. When the death rate drops, they have to either learn to kill things or face extinction.

Consider the media’s destructive behavior of the last few years a classic example of CNN carrion eaters trying to trick the predators into fighting each other and making more carrion for them to feast on.

By 2016, the Bureau of Labor Statistics was projecting a 10% decline in employment for reporters and correspondents. After this winter, the BLS may need to sharply revise its estimates upward. Major media organizations are dumping 10% of their staff as a routine response to business model reverses.

The media does best when things are bad. It’s the same reason why Democrats have their strongest footholds in cities with massive poverty, gun violence and infant mortality. Or why starving children dig through the trash in Communist countries while the red billboards overhead tout Socialism.

Lefties claim that they want to make things better, but they only gain power by making things worse.

The media is terrible at trying to make good news happen. Its shrill insistence that the economy had recovered 5 minutes after Obama took the oath of office on a reflection in the mirror convinced no one. After 5 years, it had become a running joke with the flavor of late Soviet propaganda about wheat harvest percentages. But it can be quite effective at spreading bad news and convincing people it’s true.

Just look at how the media has managed to convince people that the global warming sky is falling, that Facebook trolls are a national security threat and that President Trump gets all his orders from Moscow.

If the media is going to make any money and gain any power, it’s got to go negative. But negativity is a tougher sell when times are good for most people. Except for the brooding vultures of the media.

A winter of Trumpian economic growth has been very bad for those birds.

The January media layoffs actually involve two different tracks of the industry. There’s the dead tree media track of the newspaper giants who have been steadily bleeding jobs ever since their customers realized that they didn’t need to pay twelve bucks a week and get ink smears on their hands just to read the local rewritten versions of the same lefty talking points from New York and Washington D.C.

And then there are the digital media operations fueled by venture capital cash that were going to be the Great New Hope of the mainstream media with slick snarky stories, their own in-house ad shops and lots of millennials writing about social justice outrages trending on social media for other millennials.

That’s the new media catastrophe. And the one that has occasioned the real wailing and tooth-gnashing.

“The BuzzFeed Layoffs as Democratic Emergency,” Farhad Manjoo shrieked in the New York Times. Farhad meant the other kind of “democratic”, but his headline was unintentionally correct. The media is a massive force multiplier for the Democrats. If it didn’t exist, national politics would look very different.

Imagine an America in which Democrats eavesdropping on Republicans, supporting cop killers, ISIS, Iran and infanticide weren’t met with immediate walls of media spin, lies, fake explainers and even more fake fact checks. Then imagine an America with a border wall, voter ID and a real War on Terror.

That’s a “Democratic emergency”. No question about it.

If the media falls, it will be the greatest moment for democracy since the fall of the Berlin Wall. The collapse of the Soviet Union revealed that the Evil Empire was really a bunch of boring bureaucrats who, through the magic of ideology and mass murder had acquired the ability to terrorize millions of people.

The unraveling of the media will reveal that the echo chamber that told us what to do and think, that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, that stole generations of progress and prosperity from a great nation, was really a bunch of otherwise unemployable Marxist grad students.

The media has blamed Google and Facebook for not giving it enough traffic. It’s redoubled its efforts to demand that the dot com giants give them even more money (Google and Facebook have already pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into the media), more privilege for their traffic and more power to censor conservative media under the guise of ‘fact checkers’ fighting a ‘fake news’ emergency.

Hatred has also been hurled at Gannett, McClatchy, Tribune, BuzzFeed, Bustle and Vice management which are pursuing merger and consolidation plans that will cost even more media jobs. They point to the profitability of some of these companies as proof that the layoffs are really capitalist greed.

Sure.

The digital media empires with their fake news, explainers and snarky social justice commentary were built by convincing investors that they could be as profitable as actual tech companies. BuzzFeed and the rest of the gang could have just shrugged and announced that failing to meet expectations would be the new reality. And that if their investors don’t like it, they can go and invest in tech startups.

Then in a year or two, it wouldn’t be a few hundred jobs being cut, but a few thousand.

Digital media is full of millennial socialists with an Ocasio-Cortez level grasp of economics who spend six figures on a useless degree in journalism from Columbia and are convinced that destroying Facebook will save them. Even though Facebook is the only reason that clickbait parasites like BuzzFeed even exist.

Finally, many in the media blame President Trump. In an ocean of economic prosperity, the media has become a desert island full of cannibalistic savages, devouring each other, while praying to Mueller.

But that’s not because of anything Trump did to the media. It’s about what he isn’t doing.

Obama’s divisive policies created social, cultural and economic insecurity across the spectrum. Trump’s politics have brought prosperity and economic security. And the media has refocused on stirring up insecurity among Democrats and Never Trumpers because they are its only remaining demographics.

The good times are here. And the media’s only customer base consists of people who don’t believe it.

A growing media indicates a loss of confidence by Americans. It shows that the divisive leftist tactics of the media are paying huge dividends in fear, uncertainty and doubt among ordinary people. A shrinking media however indicates that we are once again becoming an optimistic and confident nation.

The media’s loss of jobs is a very good thing. It’s a statement of confidence by Americans in America.

Source: FrontPage Mag



America at War

LOVES that meme!!! The Biased Liberal Media just loves taking pot shots at others, but they don’t like it so much when the cannon is pointed their direction!!!

 

There is NOTHING as sweet as Karma

Here’s a video from one of my favorite sites Black Pigeon Speaks

Bad news for the biased media really is good news for America!

Child Porn

I still remember when I was fairly young  and my family got cable television for the first time. Back then I think we had 5 network channels or so. So getting cable was a big deal!

One of the first movies that I recall watching on HBO was “The Blue Lagoon” which came out in 1980 starring Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins. Brooke Shields was 14 years old at the time. 

There was a considerable amount of nudity in the movie. The film was about 2 children who survived a shipwreck and ended up on a deserted island together. I’ve always wondered how Hollywood got away with showing a naked 14 year old Brooke Shields in the movie.

I’ve done some reading this morning and according to Wikipedia a “body double” was used. I’m not sure that I believe that after seeing the video I watched yesterday.

In this video Brooke had actually been in Playboy in 1975 when she was 10, and had been shown naked in another movie when she was only 12 years old!

How could law enforcement not prosecute these scumbags for taking advantage of this little girl? 

 

I was shocked when I saw this. I cannot imagine what I might do if I ran across someone responsible for something like this! And this was not some weirdo in a back room somewhere, this was Hollywood. 

The worlds Elites are apparently “Above the Law”. They are not above God’s laws.

 

Trump, Democrats, and winning in 2020

I watched an episode of Tucker Carlson on FOX News the other day that I wanted to share with everyone. I’m not big on watching “News” no matter who puts it out. All of the news channels have agendas these days so you can’t really just get the “News”.

So what you end up watching an “opinion piece”. I guess this would technically be an opinion piece too….. But I’m not representing it as “News” like they do.

When Trump was running for office I was not one of his supporters by any means. His long history of voting Democrat combined with campaign donations he had made to far left players in the Democratic Party convinced me that he was quite possibly going to turn out to be “Hillary Clinton by Proxy”. I didn’t trust him, and felt he was more of an “infiltrator” in the Republican Party.

A lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. And so far Trump has done a pretty good job, and has pretty much done what he said he’d do. So I’ll admit I was wrong about the guy. He has my full support these days. There is only a couple of things I’d really like to see him do that he has not done.

One of which is to put Hillary Clinton behind bars, along with Obama and Eric Holder. Wouldn’t it be nice if while Democrats investigate Trump for no reason at all, if Trump were to counter by charging his Justice Department with gathering evidence and prosecuting the corrupt administration which came before him???

The others were talked about on the January 09, 2019 edition of Tucker Carlson. Today’s thoughts comes from this episode, which I enjoyed and agreed with a good portion of it. Trump has done a great job standing up for the wall. But there is a couple of issues discussed in this video that he also needs to address. The abuse of Trump supporters is one, and the censoring of Conservatives by Tech companies is another. Trump should go after those who would harass his base, as well as go after tech giants who discriminate against them as well!!! If he does this I believe 2020 will be his. If not…. Someone else will promise to and quite possibly win.

I suggest that you watch the whole episode. Tucker talks about Democrats and how EVERY Liberal “News” channel marches in lock-step with Democratic talking points. The first part of the video shows numerous examples of Democrats pounding the phrase “Manufactured Crisis” into the heads of Americans. It’s sad. They resemble puppets.

At approximately 13:45 in the video Carlson brings Jonathon Harris (A Democratic Commentator) onto the show to discuss the #Wall. One thing is for sure, this guy wants to blame Trump for the government shutdown. He only does it 25 times or so. He is a professional double-talker and a liar, that is his job. He appeared to struggle keeping his talking points on track. And his attempt at claiming 5 Billion dollars for a wall was a “Waste of Money” didn’t seem to fly either. 5 billion only solves 1/3 of our #Immigration problem according to him. SOLD!!! I’ll take that.

Moving on to my main point. Democrats have been discriminating against Conservatives for some time now. Since Conservatives are Trumps base, he needs to go after these people with a VENGEANCE! Because like the video says, conservatives have been targeted by the previous administration, as well as by the tech companies for some time now. Alex Jones was essentially silenced and thrown off of social media. Even PayPal dropped him, so he can no longer accept money the way he always has. Where does this end? They claimed he was a Racist, yet they proved nothing. They just shut him down.

Corporate America is now discriminating against white people when hiring. They even admit to doing so! Religious Freedom is under attack by the left too.

Left wing lunatics are attacking people because they are Trump supporters. People are getting punched in the face, having their skulls bashed in with bike locks, getting fired from their jobs etc…. And nothing is being done about it. The guy who hit multiple people with a bike lock (which is felony assault with a deadly weapon) initially got charged with the crime, but it was later dropped!!! How do you justify dropping charges against a guy who assaulted multiple people using a deadly weapon??? Why has nobody been charged with finding out who is responsible for this??? Why is that person not in jail too???

These are the things Trump needs to address. And he needs to address them NOW!!!

Like Tucker Carlson says in the video, if any of this stuff would have happened to Obama supporters the FBI would have been in their house before they got home. Democrats are trying to keep Trump “back on his heels” by launching 1000 investigations into him.

Trump needs to take control of his own Justice Department and start countering their legal attacks on him with legal attacks on Democrats!!! You have Maxine Waters calling for violence against Trump and his staff……. That must be illegal! You have leftist lunatics attacking people for wearing a Trump hat….. I KNOW that’s illegal!

You have public companies discriminating against people for their political views, shadow banning and censoring conservatives on Facebook, Twitter, and Google. Not to mention those who have their accounts deleted or silenced for a period of time because the liberal owners of these companies don’t like what they are saying.

It’s time that Trump starts looking out for his base!!!

He needs to prosecute those in government who protect these thugs. And he needs to file lawsuits on every tech company out there. And anyone who attacks a Trump supporter out of the blue for wearing a hat or a t-shirt needs to be prosecuted for a hate crime!

It’s time that we stop the madness. Trump has been doing a pretty good job, and I’m not knocking the guy……… But it is past time he addresses these issues. Not only is it the right thing to do, but I feel he’d wrap up his re-election by doing so. Because voters care about THEIR RIGHTS, and right now Conservative voters’ right are being trampled on over and over again…. and without consequence.

That’s unacceptable. It’s time to regain some form of order in this country. Because one thing is for sure, it’s NOT going to get any better!!! It’s going to get worse and worse. The more these people are allowed to get away with the more they’ll try to get away with. Allowing violence without consequences against ANY American citizen is unacceptable.

But allowing violence against your supporters when you are the President??? That’s just crazy!!! I know he has had his plate full. I know Democrats have been badgering him with unsubstantiated investigations and lawsuits and personal attacks.

But it’s time for President Trump to reign them in. Direct the #DOJ to put an end to this, NOW!!!

Because otherwise….. Trump is giving anyone running against him in 2020 ammunition.

 

CARAVAN JIHAD?| Jihad Watch

Jihadis among the migrant caravan is not as ridiculous as CNN would have you believe.

 

caravan

CNN on Monday once again posed as the intrepid and impartial fact checker, correcting the falsehoods spread by our ridiculous and hateful President, with the headline: “Trump seizes on right-wing media reports to suggest migrant caravan has been infiltrated by ‘unknown Middle Easterners.’” And as usual, the President is in reality far closer to the mark than CNN ever is. CNN has once again proven itself to be, as Trump has so aptly and indelibly put it, very fake news.

CNN noted that “In a tweet, the President warned that ‘criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in’ the caravan of thousands of Central American migrants fleeing poverty and violence.”

After that bit of legerdemain, CNN informs the Leftist marks who still take it seriously that Trump is, as expected, all wrong and going off half-cocked yet again: “The President did not support his claim with any evidence. Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Monday afternoon that Trump ‘absolutely’ had evidence to indicate there are Middle Easterners in the caravan. Sanders, however, did not provide specific information on the matter and it was still not clear what evidence Trump had to indicate the presence of such individuals in the caravan.”

The evidence is actually abundantly clear; CNN just doesn’t want you to know it exists. The Daily Caller reported Monday that Univision correspondent Francisco Santa Anna stated: “Yesterday when we were traveling through Guatemala, we noticed people from El Salvador and even people from Bangladesh. Can you imagine what they had to do to get here? They infiltrated themselves in this caravan and tried to cross with the crowd. That would have benefited them greatly.”

What’s more, Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales stated last Thursday that his security forces had caught “close to 100 people completely linked to terrorist issues, with ISIS and that not only have we arrested them within our territory, but they have been deported to their countries of origin.” Guatemala’s Secretary of Strategic Intelligence, Mario Duarte, confirmed that “the individuals intercepted, detained, prosecuted or returned to their country of origin, is close to 100.” He referred to “several citizens of Syrian origin who were detained with false documents were detained, for which they were prosecuted and subjected to criminal proceedings,” and then deported in 2016.

The establishment media has made a great deal of the fact that Morales did not say that Guatemalan authorities had caught 100 Islamic State jihadis among the throngs approaching the U.S. border now. However, this is a distinction without a difference. If Islamic State jihadis could enter Guatemala previously, they can do it again, and they may have joined this caravan.

Denis Omar Contreras, a leader of this latest march to the border, summarily dismissed this possibility: “There isn’t a single terrorist here.” Claiming that everyone on the way to the United States was from Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua, he added: “As far as I know there are no terrorists in these four countries, at least beyond the corrupt governments.”

As far as he knows. But how can Denis Omar Contreras be sure? Is there something that would make it impossible for jihadis to infiltrate this migrant group? We do know that jihadis have many times attempted to enter the United States by way of the Southern border. Here are just a few news stories from the last few years, related to such efforts:

Texas: Border patrol apprehends four Muslims from Bangladesh illegally crossing into US

Three Pakistani Muslims apprehended in U.S. at Arizona border

Mexico helping unvetted African migrants to U.S. border, many from Al-Shabaab jihadi hotbed

New Mexico: Muslim “refugee” with gas pipeline plans arrested in border county

Muslim captured coming over southern U.S. border had ties to Taliban

Pakistani Muslim arrested crossing Texas border, lied to FBI

Islamic State jihadi reveals plan to bring jihadis to U.S. via Mexico

Agents nab Pakistani Muslims with jihad terror connections crossing U.S. border

There is also considerable Hizballah activity in Latin America – activity that analysts have been warning for yearsis a threat to the United States.

But CNN and Denis Omar Contreras would have you believe that jihadists could not, simply could not possibly, have infiltrated this latest migrant caravan. Donald Trump is just being racist again to say so.

If some of those on their way to the U.S. get into the country and commit an act of jihad violence, will CNN and Contreras and all the others who are sneering at Trump today apologize? Don’t bet on it. But the best-case scenario will be that no one from this caravan will get in at all, and CNN and the rest can go back to calling Trump “racist” for keeping them out.

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of the New York Times bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His new book is The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

Share