|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 28, 2019 16:34:17 GMT -6
And then there's Lawrence O'Donnel.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 28, 2019 19:37:30 GMT -6
Way to go Democrats: www.foxnews.com/politics/dhs-bars-house-oversight-dems-from-visiting-cbp-facilities-at-border-after-rude-and-disruptive-behaviorBut sources told Fox News that DHS has revoked access to CBP facilities for the upcoming visit, citing staff behavior that “interfered” with law enforcement operations — including refusing to leave one site after their scheduled window, skipping some tours and being “rude” to officers. A DHS official said that ICE visits will still be allowed this week, but with a two-hour time limit. One of those visits took place on Tuesday. “Due to the operational burden placed on the field by their refusal to comply with instruction during last week’s STAFFDEL [staff delegation visit], CBP pulled the trip in which more site visits were to take place at CBP and ICE facilities this week,” a senior DHS official told Fox News in an email Wednesday. “DHS communicated to the committee that due to their conduct, CBP could not support visits from the committee this week.” “During discussions between Department and Committee staff, however, the Committee staff repeatedly stated that they do not intend to abide by DHS guidelines,” Ciccone wrote in the letter obtained by Fox News. “In light of this, we are unable to accommodate your staff’s visit … unless we receive a firm commitment that the Committee and its staff will comply fully with all existing guidelines and policies.” ............ Ranking member of the House Oversight Committee Jim Jordan (R-OH) also wrote a letter to Chairman Elijah Cummings and said that Dem staffers walked into Mexico “without consultation from the Department of State.” Jim Jordan also said that the staffers were “rude” and “dismissive” of law enforcement officials. “DHS asked the Committee to abide by the instructions of DHS personnel on the ground and to respect the significant operational interests of the border facilities visited,” Jordan wrote. “Unfortunately, at your apparent direction, Democrats refused to listen to law-enforcement instructions and made demands at the facilities ‘against the express written notice DHS had provided earlier.’”
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 28, 2019 22:13:01 GMT -6
And then there's Lawrence O'Donnel.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 29, 2019 3:54:23 GMT -6
Honestly, it’s way past time that someone held these people responsible for their outright lies, slander, threats, etc. It will be interesting to see how this case does moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 29, 2019 8:23:57 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2019/08/28/immigration-experts-montgomery-county-sanctuaryMontgomery County Executive Marc Elrich defended his sanctuary policies by saying ICE needs a judicial warrant to keep an illegal alien detained. Immigration experts objected to this claim, and ICE pointed out the Immigration and Nationality Act gives ICE supervisors the authority to issue arrest warrants. Montgomery County is a notable sanctuary county in the U.S. that has arrested five different illegal aliens on rape charges in the past month alone. A sanctuary county leader says the court system binds his government to release criminal illegal aliens, but immigration experts accused him of misconstruing the law. Democratic Montgomery County, Maryland, Executive Marc Elrich issued a statement in response to criticism his office received for the number of illegal aliens arrested on criminal charges. Montgomery County law enforcement arrested five illegal aliens on rape charges in the past month, drawing questions over the county’s sanctuary policies. Elrich said Tuesday the county cannot honor detainer requests from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) because the release of individuals is solely dependent on the court system. “In fact, the release of people — whether they are awaiting trial or have completed serving their sentences — are decisions made by the court system and not by the County government. That is the same process for everyone in the court system,” the county executive said. “It is the court system that determines whether someone is held without bail or whether a bail is set, and it is our court system alone, that decides when and how people are released.” “County police and our Correction and Rehabilitation departments are not authorized to detain someone based on an ICE detainer since it is NOT a judicial warrant, and no court has directed corrections to detain people beyond their release date,” Elrich continued. However, experts say Elrich is distorting how immigration enforcement policy works between local police and federal immigration authorities. “This is an absurd, insulting explanation for what amounts to sanctuary laws, even if the executive is in denial that he is running a sanctuary county,” Dale L. Wilcox, executive director and general counsel of Immigration and Reform Law Institute, said Wednesday to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Local jurisdictions absolutely have the right to honor ICE detainer requests, and many do. This appears to be a move by the county leaders to avoid responsibility for the fact that they are releasing dangerous criminals back into the community.” Detainers are requests ICE makes to a law enforcement agency, asking it to maintain custody of an illegal alien for up to 48 hours so that federal immigration authorities can apprehend the individual. Typically, detainer requests are made after local police arrest a suspected illegal immigrant for another crime.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 29, 2019 8:31:14 GMT -6
Soros Pro-EU funded group threatens the Queen after she saves Brexit: www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/08/29/off-with-her-head-soros-funded-best-for-britain-group-threatens-queen-over-brexit/amp/The EU loyalist Best for Britain group appeared to invoke the fate of the beheaded King Charles I after Queen Elizabeth II agreed to prorogue (temporarily suspend) Parliament for a few weeks before the Brexit deadline. Following news that the Queen rubber-stamped Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s request to suspend the parliamentary session — the longest-running for almost 400 years — so that his government can bring forward a new legislative programme on October 14th, the George Soros-funded group tweeted that it would “make no sense for the Queen to back this deeply undemocratic, unconstitutional and fundamentally political manoeuvre from the government,” in comments later attributed to its CEO, Naomi Smith. “If the Queen is asked to help, she would do well to remember history doesn’t look too kindly on royals who aid and abet the suspension of democracy,” the anti-Brexit group added darkly, appearing to allude to the fate of the monarch’s ancestor Charles I, who tried to govern without Parliament and was in the end publicly beheaded. In fact, it is misleading to suggest the Queen’s decision to approve the Prime Minister’s request for a suspension has involved her in politics in a personal way, any more than the Houses of Parliament involve her in politics when they vote for a law and put it in front of her to receive the Royal Assent. In theory, the Queen could decline the “advice of her ministers” on Government decisions like whether or not to prorogue, as she could in theory refuse to grant her assent to parliamentary bills — but it is understood that she does not do so by constitutional convention, with her final decision on such matters being essentially ceremonial. Best for Britain’s assertion that prorogation is “unconstitutional” also seems dubious, as it would not have been approved if if there was no legal basis for it — and the great constitutional jurist A V Dicey was clear that “The House [of Commons] can in accordance with the constitution be deprived of power [when] there is fair reason to suppose that the opinion of the House is not the opinion of the electors” in his seminal Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 29, 2019 8:40:31 GMT -6
UK PM Johnson is getting the “Trump treatment “: www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/08/29/his-dark-materials-author-suggested-boris-should-be-hanged-from-nearest-lamp-post/His Dark Materials author Philip Pullman appeared to suggest that Prime Minister Boris Johnson should be publicly lynched shortly after writing that the country must “get rid of him” as “finally as possible”. The left-liberal atheist, noted for his hatred of C. S. Lewis’s children’s books — “blatantly racist”, “monumentally disparaging of women”, and “propaganda in the cause of the [Christian] religion”, in his estimation — wrote in a now-deleted Tweet: “When I hear the name ‘Boris Johnson’, for some reason the words ‘rope’ and ‘nearest lamp-post’ come to mind as well,” shortly after the Prime Minister announced he would be proroguing (temporarily suspending) Parliament for a few weeks. The practice of hanging public figures from lamp-posts first gained political currency during the French revolution, where the phrase “À la lanterne!” — “to the lamp-post!” — became synonymous with mob justice. Some hours went by before, following substantial backlash, the author finally clarified — or recanted — tweeting ” I don’t advocate hanging Boris Johnson” and claiming that events had “aroused my anger to the point where I temporarily lost my judgement”. He described his outburst as a “tactical error” — rather than “wrong” — but added: “I don’t apologise for the anger I feel; only for its intemperate expression.” Pullman’s graphic lamp-post tweet — which Twitter does not appear to have sanctioned as of the time of writing, despite it seeming to violate the social media platform’s rules on threatening or encouraging violence — followed another tweet on the decision to prorogue in which he said: “The ‘prime minister’ has finally come out as a dictator. I’ve had enough of being outraged. We must get rid of him and his loathsome gang as soon and as finally as possible.” What getting rid of the Prime Minister “as finally as possible” entailed was not specified, although a lamp-post lynching would certainly result in a decisive and permanent end to his premiership. The outburst from the famous children’s author came as part of a great outpouring of anger from anti-Brexit campaigners which saw accusations of dictatorship in the United Kingdom and even that a coup was underway.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2019 5:58:11 GMT -6
Interesting brief filed. thefederalist.com/2019/08/30/heres-people-used-transgender-telling-supreme-court/Here’s What People Who Used To Be Transgender Are Telling The Supreme Court
In an unusual amicus brief, a group of people who used to be transgender say that not only should gender identity not be a protected class, but that it's an imaginary construct of traumatized minds.By Nicole Russell The Supreme Court will hear a pivotal case in October on sex, gender identity, and discrimination: R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. As both sides build their cases, numerous influential organizations and individuals have filed amicus (friend of the court) briefs to aid the members of the Supreme Court in their understanding on this topic. One brief in particular stands out. It’s so powerful, it should not only persuade the Supreme Court but influence people on both sides of the transgender debate, particularly the mainstream media. There Is No Such Thing as Gender FluidityThe brief examines the personal testimonies of the following people, all of whom identified as transgender at one point, then reverted to affirming their sex: Walt Heyer, Jamie Shupe, Linda Seiler, Hacsi Horvath, Clifton Francis Burleigh Jr., Laura Perry, Jeffrey Johnston, Jeffrey McCall, and Kathy Grace Duncan. While regular Federalist readers may be familiar with regular contributor Heyer, the other names may be unfamiliar. Yet their stories are just as powerful. For starters, each of these people now believes, due to counseling, therapy, and personal experiences, that there is no such thing as gender fluidity or transgender. They now believe it is a fantasy many people try to make real. Take Shupe, American’s first person to secure legal recognition of a nonbinary, transgender identity. He is a former hero of the left. His transgenderism “became the driver for over a dozen states to adopt an X marker in addition to male and female on driver licenses.” He first identified as a “transgender woman,” then as nonbinary. The brief reads, “Publicly acknowledging that he is male and that his sex changes were a legal fiction has led to Mr. Shupe being shamed by the LGBTQ community for his beliefs that sex is binary and that those who struggle with gender identity issues need therapy and compassion, not to identify as a third gender.” Laura Perry is a former female to male transgender person who underwent hormone treatment and a double mastectomy. “Ms. Perry enjoyed the transition process at first, and she entered into a relationship with another transgender individual,” says the brief. “They attended LGBT events together but stopped when the members of the community developed hatred for her partner who was conservative. They viewed her partner as a ‘traitor.’ Ms. Perry and her partner also claim that ‘we thought these people are the most depressed people in the world,’ referring to the LGBT community. Soon after, Ms. Perry became aware of the fact that changing sex is not biologically possible, and that sex is binary.” Toward the end of Heyer’s story, the brief says, “For more than ten years Mr. Heyer has informally mentored and assisted scores of persons identifying as transgender who regret changing their appearance to that of the opposite sex. He encourages those who contact him who have gender dysphoria to seek psychological and psychiatric assessment for other disorders that are also present, which is the case in a majority of those who desire to identify as persons of the opposite sex.” These claims fly in the face of what many on the left, including the transgender person on the other side of this particular Supreme Court case, say. To make matters worse, the media have also attacked former transgender people and ridiculed their stories as unreal. Becoming Transgender Hurts More Than It HelpsAlmost every single person in the brief said they stopped being transgender with the help of therapy. It didn’t just help them heal, but also revealed that deeper emotional traumas were often the cause of their gender dysphoria and the reason they chose transgenderism in the first place. All of the people claim that those who proposed or helped them transition often (unknowingly) created more pain. Shupe suffered from PTSD after nearly 20 years of service in the military. The brief reads, “Mr. Shupe argues that his gender transitions were the result of his mental confusion and that he should have been treated with therapy rather than fictional identities. ‘I should have been treated. Instead, at every step, doctors, judges, and advocacy groups indulged my fiction.’” The brief describes Heyer’s journey as both a former transgender person and one who now counsels so many who struggle. From both perspectives, Heyer believes current transgender medical protocols fail to treat the root causes. Heyer now informally mentors people who also regret attempting to identify as a person of the opposite sex, such as by adopting a different name and opposite-sex pronouns, wearing clothing and hairstyles typically associated with the opposite sex, using sex-segregated spaces and engaging in sex-segregated activities that correspond to the opposite sex, and changing their appearance to more closely resemble the opposite sex through makeup, clothing, surgery, and hormones. Heyer has seen firsthand the harm that can come from encouraging people down that path. Every person Heyer has mentored has concluded that he or she was not born transgender. They believe transgenderism is a learned behavior, a social ideology, not an innate condition from birth. Heyer says he has seen too much unhappiness and regret over the years from hormone therapy and surgeries to think otherwise. Outcomes of Seeking Surgery Instead of TherapyThe brief describes a number of possible outcomes if gender-confused people seek plastic surgery and opposite-sex hormones rather than receive help through therapy: Seeking to align one’s mind with reality has always been the preferred method for treating dysphorias, such as anorexia, xenomelia (the feeling that one or more limbs do not belong), or transdisability (believing one has a physical disability that does not actually exist). No one would ever address an anorexic person’s needs by providing a low-calorie diet, diet pills and stomach stapling. Moreover, one of the most comprehensive scientific studies tracking individuals who underwent sex-reassignment surgery revealed that (1) the rate of psychiatric hospitalization was approximately three times higher for postoperative individuals than a control group; (2) mortality rates and rates of criminal conviction also increased; (3) suicide attempts were almost five times more likely than before surgery; and (4) the likelihood of suicide following surgery was 19 times higher than the control group, adjusted for prior psychiatric illness. The brief continues: Hacsi Horvath is a Lecturer in the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco (“UCSF”) and is an expert in clinical epidemiology. For 13 years, Mr. Horvath identified as a female and now that he has de-transitioned feels angry he was encouraged to embrace that lifestyle. ‘I am far angrier that thousands of young people are being irreversibly altered and sterilized as they are inducted into a drug-dependent and medically-maimed lifestyle.’ The amicus brief also says, “Affirming the dysphoria in people suffering from gender identity issues as if they really were persons of the opposite sex only serves to lead those that are suffering with such issues away from finding the serenity and wholeness of being at peace with their bodies and identities. Forcing employers to affirm the denial of reality is not required by Title VII and is more likely to cause harm than good.” While this brief will only play a small role in this important case, its personal testimonies and arguments should influence public discourse.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2019 7:18:46 GMT -6
Former Canadian PM:
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2019 7:37:05 GMT -6
Brexit related: www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/scottish-judge-rejects-bid-stop-boris-johnson-suspending-parliament-ahead-brexit-dayOne attempt to stop UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson from 'proroguing' - or suspending - Parliament for five weeks in September and October to help prevent lawmakers from thwarting his plan to take the UK out of the EU with or without a deal has itself been foiled by a top court in Scotland, which on Friday rejected a request to stop the prime minister's plan, CNN reports. edition.cnn.com/uk/live-news/brexit-talks-challenge-intl-gbr/index.htmlThe action was brought by a cross-party group of 70 lawmakers opposed to a 'no deal' exit who were seeking an injunction against the attempt to prorogue Parliament until a final decision had been reached, and is one of three legal challenges to Johnson's plan to circumvent any challenges from Parliament. However, the ruling shouldn't be characterized as a defeat for Johnson. The judge in the case, Lord Raymond Doherty, ruled only that there is no need for an immediate order to block the plan, while moving forward a full decision on the matter until Thursday. "I'm not satisfied that it has been demonstrated that there's a need for an interim suspension or an interim interdict to be granted at this stage," Doherty said, according to PA. The suspension of Parliament is due to start Sept. 12, so opposing lawmakers have until then to secure a favorable ruling. And there are two other legal challenges currently moving forward. Next week, Gina Miller's challenge will be heard on Sept. 5 - she will be joined in her campaign by former PM John Major, according to a tweet. One legal expert, Good Law Project Director Jolyon Maugham said Friday's decision "just kicks the can a few days down the road." Meanwhile, Nigel Farage, founder of the Brexit Party and considered by some to be the 'godfather' of Brexit, complained about the 'remainer sabotage' on Twitter following the court cases. That tweet was in response to petitioners in the Scottish court demanding that Johnson provide an affidavit explaining why he wants to suspend parliament, something that could open him up to cross examination, according to the FT. With a full hearing now due before Scotland's Court of Session next Tuesday and Gina Miller and John Major's case set to be heard next Thursday, attention will now turn to Belfast's High Court, which will hear another challenge later on Friday. The legal challenges come as Johnson is trying to step up talks with the EU about possible modifications to the withdrawal agreement.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2019 8:25:31 GMT -6
The UK Remainers keep channeling in their Democrat cousins. The latest batch of news includes hypocrisy now: www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/08/30/ex-pm-who-suspended-parliament-joins-legal-challenge-to-boris-suspending-parliament/Sir John Major, the former British Prime Minister who prorogued Parliament in 1997 for allegedly cynical political reasons, has himself joined a legal effort against Boris Johnson for using the same constitutional mechanism.The former Conservative prime minister, who was the Europhile leader responsible for signing the United Kingdom up to the newly established European Union in 1993 through the controversial Maastricht Treaty, announced he would be joining a legal action brought against the government on Friday morning. While Sir John had previously promised to launch his own action, he instead decided to join one brought by anti-Brexit lawfare veteran Gina Miller, whose court cases have already succeeded in upending the Brexit process. The Prime Minister announced on Wednesday that he would be proroguing — Westminster jargon for temporarily suspending — Parliament for a five-week break over September and October, a move confirmed by the Queen at a Privy Council meeting in Scotland later that day. Despite the length of the prorogation, it takes place over a period that was already earmarked for a parliamentary recess (holiday), and according to the BBC only something between “three and eight” actual working days will be lost. Anti-Brexit campaigners claim the timing of Boris Johnson’s prorogation is intended to deny them parliamentary time to launch legislation to sabotage the Brexit process. This is despite the original calls for the use of prorogation to safeguard Brexit suggesting the suspension should take place while Brexit happens, not in the weeks leading up to it, and the short amount of actual parliamentary time being lost to the shutdown. The Prime Minister’s team, for their part, insist the prorogation is not informed by Brexit but rather in spite of it, ending the longest parlimentary session for 400 years to allow the government to bring forward a new policy programme covering a variety of areas including healthcare and policing. Tory chairman James Cleverley said the development was unsensational, summarising it as “Government to hold a Queen’s Speech, just as all new Governments do.” Sir John challenging the present leader of his own party in court comes despite his having been accused of using the prorogation mechanism for political ends himself when he was Prime Minister. It is claimed at the time of his suspending Parliament in 1997 that he had done so to delay the publication of a report into Members of Parliament allegedly taking cash in a corrupt manner — a major scandal at the time — in the run-up to that year’s election. When the idea of suspending Parliament to defend Brexit first gained traction earlier in the year Sir John said, apparently without irony, that “the idea of proroguing Parliament is utterly and totally unacceptable from any British parliamentarian or democrat. I for one would be prepared to go and seek judicial review to prevent Parliament being bypassed.” Sir John has also allied himself with other senior Remain figures to frustrate Brexit, the historic democratic decision taken by the British people in 2016 by a margin of over one million votes. In 2018, Major joined fellow former prime ministers Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, as well as Michael Hesseltine and Nick Clegg, to call for a second referendum to overturn the first — despite having previously ruled this out.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 30, 2019 9:54:57 GMT -6
www.dailywire.com/news/51212/high-school-bans-student-after-he-goes-shooting-james-barrett?ampHigh School Bans Student After He Goes To Shooting Range With His Mom, Snapchat Post by James Barrett August 30, 2019 A 16-year-old student at a Colorado high school was informed by the school district Wednesday that he was not allowed to return to classes until the school could conduct an investigation into an anonymous tip that he had posted "threatening" content online. In a story that has gained national attention from conservative sites, including RedState, the parents of a junior at Loveland High School learned Wednesday that their son could not appear on campus until the Thompson Valley School District (TVSD) conducted a full investigation into a "Safe-2-Tell" anonymous tip prompted by a Snapchat post by their teen son. As reported by Complete Colorado, 16-year-old Nathan Myers and his mother Justine Myers went to a shooting range on Tuesday, a moment that Nathan celebrated by posting a video on Snapchat showing some of the guns they were going to bring, including hand guns and an AR-15. The caption for the post read, "Finna be lit," which he explained to Complete Colorado is just slang used among his peers meaning he's "excited" about the chance to go to the range with his mom, who he hadn't seen in a few weeks due to his parents being separated. "While we were at her house getting ready to go, I took a video of five or six pistols and an AR-15," Nathan told the outlet. "None of them were loaded, they were all in their cases." "We had a great day," said Justine, a self-described gun enthusiast. "This is what we do. Nathan has been shooting many times with us. We are huge Second Amendment supporters." Nathan also posted video of them at the range: When they returned from shooting, Justine learned from messages left by Nathan's father that police officers had come to the house asking about his initial Snapchat post. "His father told them he was out shooting with me, I am an avid shooter," Justine explained. "So, the officers said he wasn't in trouble and left." Though the family thought the issue was settled, the next morning they were informed by the school district that Nathan could not return to classes. "I called to ask why I couldn't go, and they said it was a safety concern because the student who reported it was scared I was going to shoot up the school," Nathan said. The Myers say Nathan has never had any conflict with another student, enjoys a large circle of friends, and has no criminal record. The Myers' "threat assessment hearing" with TVSD was scheduled for 10 a.m. Thursday. Pro-Second Amendment site Rally for Our Rights' Lesley Hollywood reports that she spoke with Justine, "as well as two different attorneys who specialize in Second Amendment issues," and found that the school "is legally within their rights at this time." "According to the attorneys, the school has a protocol that must be followed when a report of a threat comes in through Safe 2 Tell or other means, even if the report is completely false – and there is nothing parents or students can legally do about it, even with a lawyer," she reports. Complete Colorado notes, however, that Colorado-based pro-Second Amendment organization Rocky Mountain Gun Owners "posted on Facebook that it would supply the family with legal representation if the student’s story 'bears out as first reported.'" Complete Colorado reached out to Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams to get his reaction to the situation. After sending him the Snapchat post with no context, the outlet asked Reams for his interpretation of the post. He said he thought it just seemed like a kid excited to go to a firing range. When he learned about the school district's response, he expressed disbelief. "This is exactly the mechanics of the Red Flag Law," Reams told the outlet. "Someone filed an anonymous complaint, without the other person knowing it was being filed, but instead of him being deprived of his Second Amendment rights, he’s being deprived of his ability to go to school without due process." The teen simply "exercised his First Amendment right to use his Second Amendment right," said Reams, adding, "I hope this doesn’t make him fear that in the future."
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Aug 30, 2019 19:10:05 GMT -6
Banning him from school won't keep him from showing up there. I don't believe the Parkland shooter was a current student. This is so fucking ridiculous. Reason #2437 why it was so important that Hillary did not win.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 31, 2019 8:12:49 GMT -6
Leftist with another Molotov cocktail attack: abc7chicago.com/florida-woman-throws-molotov-cocktail-into-uscis-office/5504064/A woman tossed a lit Molotov cocktail into the lobby of a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office in Oakland Park, Florida. But no major injuries were reported, according to a report of the incident sent to administration officials and viewed by The Associated Press. The woman walked into the office Friday afternoon and hurled a bottle filled with gasoline and a lit fuse. But the fuse disconnected from the bottle and didn’t ignite, according to the report. Law enforcement officials believe she intended to cause harm but the incident wasn’t related to other incidents where Homeland Security agencies were targeted… …A Homeland Security official condemned the attack and urged the public to express themselves peacefully and respectfully without trying to harm people. The official, who was not authorized to discuss an internal incident, spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity. The official said the attacks were unacceptable. Citizenship and Immigration Services handles legal immigration, and the agency has been in the spotlight recently. It is run by Acting Director Ken Cuccinelli, a supporter of President Trump’s hardline immigration policies who has presided over major recent changes that have prompted criticism from immigrant advocates. ..... So, when are the liberal leaders going to start condemning these attacks?
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Aug 31, 2019 8:24:30 GMT -6
www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/08/31/msnbcs-chris-hayes-if-the-electoral-college-wasnt-in-the-constitution-it-would-be-unconstitutional/Friday on MSNBC’s “All In,” host Chris Hayes took on the Electoral College and how it can allow for candidates to win the presidency without a majority of the vote, which undermines the premise of one person, one vote. During his dissertation, Hayes made the astounding conclusion that if the Electoral College were not a part of the U.S. Constitution, it would be unconstitutional. “It’s basically this, do we actually really believe in democracy, right?” Hayes said. “The question before us now in the Electoral College question is, are we going to actually live up to the promise of one person one vote. Now, to be fair, it is not surprising the Republicans are defending the Electoral College, right. There’s a very obvious reason for that. Since 1992 we have had seven presidential elections. Republicans have won the popular vote one time, but they’ve gotten three presidents out of it which is a very sweet deal if you’re the Republican Party, right.” “You can see why on just basic tactical grounds why the Republican Party would want to continue a system in which they can lose a majority of votes and still get all the powers the presidency appointing the Supreme Court justices and judges and signing legislation, vetoing legislation, commanding the army, everything, right,” he continued. “All of that with less votes than the Democrat got. No wonder they like. But I think there’s actually a deeper philosophical thing happening which is the question of what exactly American democracy is for. And the weirdest thing about the Electoral College is the fact that it wasn’t specifically in the Constitution for the presidency, it would be unconstitutional.”
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 1, 2019 23:27:28 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 2, 2019 17:45:21 GMT -6
Best of Levin. He had on Bandy Lee, one of the doctors that wrote the book about Trump being mentally unstable. He had read her book and seemed to know it better than she did. I don't think she was used to interviews such as this one. It's in his 2nd hour if interested.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 2, 2019 17:46:41 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 2, 2019 17:51:33 GMT -6
Best of Levin. He had on Bandy Lee, one of the doctors that wrote the book about Trump being mentally unstable. He had read her book and seemed to know it better than she did. I don't think she was used to interviews such as this one. It's in his 2nd hour if interested. He told her she was a disgrace. I guess you know how things went.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 4, 2019 19:53:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 7, 2019 19:53:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Sept 16, 2019 14:01:06 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Sept 17, 2019 10:24:09 GMT -6
www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-49670973Two Australian citizens detained in Iran have been identified as Jolie King and Mark Firkin. Ms King, who also holds a UK passport, and Mr Firkin were blogging their travels in Asia and the Middle East. They were reportedly arrested 10 weeks ago near Tehran but news of the arrest, and that of another British-Australian woman, came to light on Wednesday. Australia said it had repeatedly raised their cases with Tehran, including in a meeting between officials last week… …In 2017, the couple left Western Australia to embark on a major trip driving across Asia to the UK. They were documenting their adventures on Instagram and Youtube, where they had more than 20,000 followers. Videos of their travel through a dozen countries featured their cultural interactions and often showed drone footage of the natural landscape. “Our biggest motivation… is to hopefully inspire anyone wanting to travel, and also try to break the stigma around travelling to countries which get a bad wrap [sic] in the media,” the pair wrote online.Few details of the circumstances of their arrest have been made public, but the Australian Broadcasting Corporation said they had reportedly been flying a drone without a permit. They are believed to be being held in Tehran’s Evin prison.
|
|
bk2x
Quarantined
Posts: 68
|
Post by bk2x on Sept 17, 2019 20:28:12 GMT -6
Wonder how they feel bout countries with a bad rep now.
|
|
|
Post by atl1979 on Sept 17, 2019 21:21:01 GMT -6
Wonder how they feel bout countries with a bad rep now. Will probably have had to cancel the next leg of the trip to N Korea.
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 18, 2019 0:30:11 GMT -6
From WSJ
Obama’s Netflix Film On Factory Closing Omits His Role In Forcing Its Closure
Higher Ground, the production company formed last year by Barack and Michelle Obama in conjunction with Netflix, recently released its first film. “American Factory” is a documentary about a General Motors plant in Moraine, Ohio, a suburb of Dayton. The plant closed in 2008 and was reopened by a Chinese auto glass manufacturer in 2015. The film follows the lives of both the laid-off American workers and the Chinese workers brought in to run the new plant.
It’s a fascinating and at times moving film. What’s interesting about it, though, is that it never once alludes to the part Mr. Obama played in diminishing the ability of Moraine’s laid off workers to transfer to other GM plants. The president’s role wasn’t indirect and isn’t a matter of dispute: His administration’s bailout deal for GM included a backroom exclusive agreement with the United Auto Workers….
A quick refresher. The Obama administration’s auto bailout highly favored the UAW and its members. The GM plant in Moraine was unionized by the IUE-CWA. So—despite being one of the top GM facilities for quality, efficiency and production in the country—it was shuttered, and its employees were put at the back of the line when requesting transfers to other GM plants. Any non-UAW employees looking to transfer were forced to start as new hires, wiping clean any wages, tenure, and benefits built up during careers at other GM plants.
“American Factory” documents the UAW’s efforts to unionize the reopened auto glass factory without any mention of the same union’s direct role in the GM plant’s closure. The Dayton community was left out in the cold—thousands of jobs lost, families devastated, longtime GM workers out on the street looking for work….
In the Obama economy, investment was tough to come by. With a punitive and outdated tax code, international investment was nearly impossible to attract. State and local officials—especially Moraine Mayor Elaine Allison —worked relentlessly and were able to convince a Chinese manufacturer to invest in and rebuild this once-great factory. Today that company employs several thousand people in what was its start-up operation in America….
The hypocrisy of this Obama-backed film is astounding. Mr. Obama fails to acknowledge his direct role in creating the hardships the Moraine workers weathered. He had nothing whatsoever to do with the plant’s reopening—that was all the work of state and local officials and community leaders.
To put the point bluntly: If the president had his way, there would have been no plant to make a documentary about. “American Factory” would have been “Abandoned Parking Lot.”
|
|
|
Post by kcrufnek on Sept 18, 2019 0:33:54 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Sept 18, 2019 9:44:19 GMT -6
So, rural Americans,(who are peaceful & law abiding), have to give up their firearms, but gang bangers,(responsible for most of the shootings), get to keep theirs?
On Tuesday Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) joined Tucker Carlson to discuss the Democrats’ red flag gun laws.
Rep. Buck said Democrats want to use the laws to take guns from rural Americans but that Democrats voted down his amendment to include gang members in the legislation.
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Sept 18, 2019 9:48:46 GMT -6
amp.dailycaller.com/2019/09/18/ed-buck-arrested-drugsDemocratic mega-donor and activist Ed Buck was arrested and charged Tuesday with operating a drug den out of his home in West Hollywood, and administering methamphetamine to a man who nearly died from an overdose last week. The Los Angeles District Attorney’s office accused Buck of injecting a 37-year-old man with methamphetamine at his home on Sept. 4 and Sept. 11, nearly causing him to overdose both times. Buck, 65, is charged with three counts: battery with serious bodily injury, the sale and transportation of a controlled substance, and maintaining a place for the sale or use of a controlled substance. While Buck’s latest alleged victim survived, at least two other men who’ve crossed paths with him have not been so lucky. A man named Gemmel Moore died from an overdose at Buck’s home in July 2017. Timothy Dean died there in January 2019. (RELATED: A Second Black Man Has Died At Democratic Mega-Donor Ed Buck’s Home)
|
|
|
Post by soonernvolved on Sept 18, 2019 12:09:30 GMT -6
Democrats want to censure one of their own, because she opposes President Trump only 81% of the time. Basically, she’s not left enough: www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/09/17/arizona-progressives-seek-censure-democratic-sen-kyrsten-sinema/2356605001/Here’s the thing: We really support Kyrsten Sinema, we want her to succeed, we want her to be the best senator in the country,” Dan O’Neal, state coordinator for Progressive Democrats of America, told the Arizona Republic. “But the way she is voting is really disappointing. We want Democrats to vote like Democrats and not Republicans.” ........ Felecia Rotellini, the Arizona Democratic Party’s chairwoman, told The Hill that the party will be hearing the case for a censure, but is unsure that it will pass. thehill.com/homenews/senate/461863-arizona-democratic-party-will-hold-vote-to-censure-kyrsten-sinema“We are a very diverse group and that means diversity of thought, as well,” Rotellini said. “I don’t think it reflects poorly on the party at all, I don’t think it’s an indication of a fracture. I think it’s an indication of a group of people who think differently and have a different perspective on the same topic.”
|
|