What is it with liberals and death threats? Whenever someone disagrees with them they go straight to the violence. Because he is a raving lunatic, California Governor Jerry Brown actually threatened to kill people who more or less agreed with him. At a man-made global warming conference in Germany, Governor Moonbeam told a group of protesters that he wanted to “put them in the ground” so he could finish speaking.

Brown along with several other liberal US politicians were in Bonn, Germany illegally representing the United States and pledging their allegiance to the Paris Climate Accord. The Sacramento Bee reports that when it was Brown’s turn to bow to the global warming hoax a group of protesters interrupted him.

“And we even have characters like this here to make it the dialectic…,” said Brown of the protesters, unable to finish his sentence.

The protesters were saying something about wanting to eliminate polution from automobiles, but then again it’s possible Brown merely imagined this. He briefly addressed car emissions and then he thought he heard the protesters saying something about “the ground.” Of course they could have been saying his last name, but he heard “ground.”

“In the ground. I agree with you, in the ground. Let’s put you in the ground so we can get on with the show here,” said Brown.

Putting someone in the ground means murdering and burying them. There is no other meaning for this other than putting a dead body six feet deep. Jerry Brown literally just said he wanted to give these protesters a dirt nap so he could continue speaking.

It’s a good thing Brown is a liberal because if he were conservative the liberal media would have freaked the hell out over this. This ain’t even a “what if” situation because every innocent thing out of President Trump’s mouth gets twisted into a veiled death threat by the leftist fake news. If Trump had actually told protesters he wanted to put them in the ground, there would be about 50 democrats calling for his impeachment.

Brown wasn’t quite done making baffling statements. He apparently lost track of where he was when he said this to the protesters he previously threatened:

“This is very California. Thank you for bringing the diversity of dissent,” said Brown.

Um, he was in Germany. That ain’t even close to California. I mean, if he went to Oregon or some other bordering state, sure, but this is way the hell off.

Also, what the f*ck is the “diversity of dissent?” I’m sure he wouldn’t be celebrating dissent if it came from a conservative ideology. As governor of the most liberal state, he certainly as no tolerance for Constitutionally protected gun ownership rights, reasonable taxation, or the sanctity of life.

Just to prove that he’s been in lunar orbit since the 1970’s, another protester said something and he responded “I am Governor Jerry Brown” like he was surprised who he actually is. To sum things up, he’s the governor who thinks Bonn, Germany is in California and he wants to kill protesters, though he applauds their diversity. Why don’t any democrats question his mental health, but insist President Trump is unfit to hold office?

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter

MSNBC host Chris Hayes is calling out Democrats for not owning up to the sexual assault allegations against former President Bill Clinton.

Hayes tweeted that Democrats are “overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against [Clinton]”:

As gross and cynical and hypocrtical as the right’s “what about Bill Clinton” stuff is, it’s also true that Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017

The MSNBC host then posted a link to a BuzzFeed News story about Juanita Broaddrick’s allegation that Clinton raped her in 1978:

Read this account, in light of all we’ve been hearing and reading this last month, and ask yourself if it’s credible. https://t.co/8jymWjFpiF

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017

Clinton denied that he sexually assaulted Broaddrick and was never charged, according to BuzzFeed News.

BuzzFeed News reported that 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and other Democrats discredited Broaddrick’s allegations despite encouraging sexual assault victims to speak out against their predators.

The “reckoning” Hayes refers to was the hypocrisy of liberals who discredited the allegations against Clinton but encouraged other victims to speak out against those who assaulted them.

Hayes brought up the topic on Twitter Friday in light of the increasing number of sexual assault allegations against those in Hollywood, the media, and in politics.

Many companies believe that self-driving vehicles are the future — but they need to stop getting into accidents first.

Just two hours after a much-celebrated autonomous bus was unveiled in Las Vegas this week, it promptly got into a collision with a semi-truck.

Luckily, nobody was injured, and the fender-bender only caused minor damage. According to reports, the human driver of the semi was at fault in the collision, and received a citation for illegal backing.

Still, the inauspicious start was a stark reminder that self-driving technology is far from perfect. While there’s no way of knowing for sure, it’s entirely possible that if a human driver had been at the wheel of the city bus, he could have taken some action to avoid the collision.

“The Metropolitan Police Department said officers responded at 12:07 p.m. to an accident involving the shuttle and a delivery truck on the 100 block of South Sixth Street, near Fremont Street,” reported the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

TRENDING: Fusion GPS Partner Refuses the 5th, Strikes Deal to Testify

“Police briefly closed a southbound lane of South Sixth Street from Fremont Street to Carson Avenue as they investigated,” the newspaper continued.

The robotic bus which was involved in the traffic accident is designed to hold about a dozen passengers, and ferry them around the city using GPS and other advanced sensors.

“The shuttle, which launched Wednesday, can talk to traffic signals and share the road with other vehicles while stopping for pedestrians,” the Review-Journal explained. “It is offering free rides for up to 11 passengers as it travels a half-mile loop in the Fremont East neighborhood.”

Autonomous vehicles have been taking to the streets in growing numbers recently. In September, the U.S. House passed the “Self Drive Act,” which eases regulations on those types of cars and paves the way for some 100,000 test vehicles to be placed on the roads annually.

The bill still has to become a law, but its support in the Senate is a sign that lawmakers are finally warming to the idea of the futuristic technology.

Interestingly, this isn’t the first bus accident to involve a driverless vehicle. Last year, a public bus in California was involved in an collision, but it was the other car in the crash that was autonomous.

“Google accepted at least some responsibility for the collision, which occurred on Valentine’s Day when one of the Lexus SUVs it has outfitted with sensors and cameras hit the side of the bus near the company’s headquarters in Mountain View, California,” reported the The Associated Press.

“No one was injured, according to an accident report Google wrote and submitted to the California Department of Motor Vehicles,” said the AP.

RELATED: Control Tower Audio Reveals “Active Shooters on Runway” During LV Massacre

Of course, no world-changing technology was ever developed without a few bumps along the way. However, rushing into a new era that takes the human out of the driver’s seat may not be the smartest approach.

In the coming years, Americans will have to decide just how comfortable they are handing the keys over to robots.

With that shift, practical and legal questions also emerge: Who is to blame if a self-driving car causes a serious accident? Can a programmer a thousand miles away be liable for a missed stop light? Will ethanol-fueled robot cars technically be drunk drivers?

Technology marches on. Driverless cars may be the inevitable future, but that doesn’t mean Americans can’t put the brakes on them… at least until all the bugs are worked out.

H/T Breitbart

If you find this technology interesting — or terrifying — please press “Share on Facebook” now!

Where do you think machine-driven cars will end up in society? Scroll down to comment below!

Bowe Bergdahl may be getting only a slap on the wrist, but his cowardly actions in Afghanistan forever changed the lives of several of the servicemen who risked their lives trying to find him.

Some of them, like Jimmy Hatch, had their bodies shattered and careers ended during firefights while they searched for the derelict Bergdahl.

Others lost close companions. While Navy SEAL Mike Toussaint was on a mission to find Bergdahl after he walked away from his post, his military service dog Remco was shot and killed.

While that tragic death is not as dramatic as if a human soldier had died, Remco was still considered part of the team — and his loss deeply affected Toussaint.

TRENDING: Fusion GPS Partner Refuses the 5th, Strikes Deal to Testify

“Nine days after Bergdahl’s desertion, SEAL team members Toussaint and Remco were sent on a hostage rescue operation in southeastern Afghanistan to search for the missing private,” explained the Washington Free Beacon.

Toussaint and fellow SEAL Jimmy Hatch had a pretty good idea that Bergdahl was a deserter, but they resolved to find him anyway.

“We all agreed we were going to go get him — he’s an American, that’s our job — but we all wanted to have a talk with him,” Toussaint said.

The mission began with a helicopter insertion, but right away there was trouble.

“His unit came under heavy fire even before their two helicopters landed, leaving the team surrounded while they disembarked,” reported the Free Beacon.

“As the unit advanced to the position where they believed Bergdahl was being held, Toussaint, Hatch, Remco, and a third shooter peeled off to pursue two men wearing traditional Afghan dress,” the report continued.

The SEALs were worried that one of the unidentified men might be the missing Bergdahl wearing local garb. They didn’t directly engage the targets out of concern for the private’s safety.

Those traditionally dressed men disappeared into a field. As he was trained to do, the military working dog Remco went ahead to locate them. It was the last thing the dog would ever do.

RELATED: Flashback: The Heart-Pounding Story of Villanueva’s Bronze Star in Afghanistan

“It all happened real quick,” Toussaint said. “I remember seeing Remco get within a couple feet of their location and then he got shot in the head and came flying back out, I mean literally flying out.”

“Right about that time … because it all got chaotic real quick … Jimmy who was right to my right, got shot. I remember hearing him, I could tell he was in pain, and then all I remember was kind of like a fireworks show,” he recalled.

That SEAL, Senior Chief Petty Officer James Hatch, took a bullet in his right leg. It instantly shattered his femur. He survived, but his career as a Navy SEAL was over, and Hatch would have to undergo 18 surgeries over the next two years.

After just seeing his four-legged partner be killed, Toussaint charged through gunfire to take out the two enemy shooters using grenades. Later, he would receive a Silver Star for that action… and Remco would, as well.

He desperately tried to revive Remco as other soldiers worked on Hatch, but it was too late for the dog.

“We knowingly went out in hazardous situations, it’s just part of the job,” Toussaint admitted. “It’s not like I didn’t accept the reality of any of us not coming home on any given night, that’s just the realistic truth to it.”

With that said, Toussaint does put a significant amount of blame on Bowe Bergdahl, the private who deserted his post and ended up in enemy hands.

“[T]o have that night take place only because — solely because — we had a selfish American that walked off a base, it just makes it harder to swallow,” said Toussaint.

Bergdahl may now be free, but his conscience should not be clear. If he has any shred of decency or honor left, he ought to spend every day of his life thinking about the Americans who put their lives on the line to bring him home.

H/T Sarah Palin

Share this on Facebook and Twitter to spread this powerful story.

What do you think of Bergdahl’s light “punishment?” Scroll down to comment below!

After a top Democrat came forward and shed light on the corruption she uncovered during the 2016 presidential election, CNN’s response was trying to silence her.

Last week, Politico published an excerpt of a memoir by former interim Democratic National Committee chairwoman Donna Brazile, where she exposed how Democrat nominee Hillary Clinton rigged the Democrat primary.

On Monday, Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported that sources told him CNN had been directing its anchors and reporters to discredit Brazile because of her accusations against Clinton.

As noted by the Daily Caller, Carlson is blasting CNN for trying to criticize Brazile because she tried to expose Clinton for her corruption.

“According to highly informed sources we spoke to – highly informed – top management at CNN directed its employees to undermine Brazile’s credibility. Anchors and producers were vocally offended by her attacks on their friends, the Clintons,” Carlson said.

TRENDING: Fusion GPS Partner Refuses the 5th, Strikes Deal to Testify

Carlson slammed the liberal media outlet for trying to denigrate Brazile, who worked at CNN for years before she left to become the interim DNC chair in July 2016, simply because she exposed Clinton for her dirty tricks.

“If you’ve been watching that channel, you may have noticed CNN’s anchors suggesting that Donna Brazile cannot be trusted, precisely because she took part in efforts to break the primaries for Clinton,” he added. 

Carlson then played a short clip of several CNN anchors blasting Brazile and trying to convince viewers that she cannot be trusted.

Around the one minute mark in the video, the clip shows two segments in which CNN anchors Anderson Cooper and Brooke Baldwin are criticizing Brazile for sharing a debate question with Clinton before a March 2016 CNN town hall.

CNN cut ties with Brazile in October 2016 after WikiLeaks published leaked emails from Brazile showing that she gave the Clinton campaign information before the town hall.

According to Ad Week, CNN has denied Carlson’s claims that it directed its employees to discredit Brazile.

Brazile’s book is apparently packed with details about the Clinton campaign. In one chapter, she spoke about how top Clinton staffers treated her like a “slave.”

RELATED: Donna Brazile Played the Race Card on Hillary and It Was Oh So Sweet

Brazile also claimed that Clinton’s campaign rigged the DNC primary.

She explained that because former President Barack Obama had “left the party $24 million in debt” from his 2012 presidential election, the DNC was forced to rely on money from the Clinton campaign to survive the 2016 presidential election.

As such, the Clinton campaign essentially had full control of the DNC nearly a year before Clinton had even secured the nomination.

These are just a few of the bombshell revelations CNN reportedly didn’t want its viewers to learn about.

CNN is so afraid of Brazile exposing Clinton’s dirty tactics that it’s willing to have its anchors and employees attack Brazile rather than have her on one of their programs to discuss the claims.

This is just another example of how corrupt the mainstream media is and how far they are willing to go to suppress information they don’t want others to learn about.

H/T Daily Caller

Please like and share this story to show that sources revealed to Tucker Carlson that CNN told its anchors to criticize Donna Brazile after she exposed Hillary Clinton for her corruption!

What do you make of the revelations from Donna Brazile about Democrat corruption? Scroll down to comment below!

In an abhorrent turn of events, a Christian Canadian couple looking to adopt was denied the opportunity to give a home to a needy child just because they had the gall to honestly express what they believe in, reports The Daily Wire.

Specifically, the couple had their adoption application denied because their views on sexuality were contrary to the “official position of the Alberta government” — they believed that homosexuality was wrong, according to court documents as reported by the National Post.

“If we did not change our religious beliefs regarding sexuality, to conform to the beliefs of Child and Family Services, we would not be approved for adoption,” read an affidavit filed this week. The couple have not as yet been identified beyond initials C.D. and N.D., according to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.

What’s worse, the couple seems perfectly lovely and capable of caring for a child in every way.

The National Post does not state whether the couple already has children. However it does report that a copy of a Safe Home Study Report from earlier this year showed the couple to both be employed, homeowners, with a happy and healthy family and community.

TRENDING: Fusion GPS Partner Refuses the 5th, Strikes Deal to Testify

The couple wanted to adopt a child — up to three children, if they were siblings — between the ages of 7 and 17.

As most who are familiar with the adoption process know, kids from 7-17 are much less likely to be adopted than younger children.

In other words, these people were able to change a child’s life — or multiple children’s lives — for the better, and they were denied.

The report continued to note what would eventually prove to be this couple’s challenge — they recommended a “homosexual child” not be placed in the family because although the couple indicated that they’d love the child no matter what, they wouldn’t support the lifestyle.

You’d be hard-pressed to find a better answer from a Christian family.

However, a worker got in touch with the couple again and said that Child and Family services had gotten the report, and wanted to ask some follow-up questions.

Fair enough.

However, after further communication, in which the couple reportedly said that they’d seek counsel and support if their child had sexuality issues, the adoption application was rejected.

RELATED: Socialist Health Care Nightmare — Canadian Docs Say 4-5 Year Wait Times Happening

The couple was blatantly discriminated against.

And what did Minister of Children’s Services spokesman Aaron Manton have to say about the incident?

“Our government believes that every adoptive child deserves a safe, healthy, loving and inclusive home,” he said, according to the National Post.

“We want to ensure that, in all cases, the adoption process gives both children and parents the best possible outcomes, which is why the application process is thorough and rigorous.”

In other words, he doesn’t believe that the couple was inclusive enough.

The couple is not taking this incident lying down. They are charging the province of Alberta for religious discrimination.

“If left to stand, this decision would have grave consequences for the freedoms of all Canadians, not to mention adverse consequences for the many children who will never be adopted if the government continues with this discrimination,” said the couple’s lawyer, John Carpay, in a statement.

Carpay is also the president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.

This is the kind of “submit-or-be-ostracized” mentality that conservatives are accused of daily.

I hope you’ll join me in wishing this couple well — and the children whose lives they could change, too.

What do you think about this story? Please share this on Facebook and Twitter and let us know!

What does this decision tell you about life under liberals? Scroll down to comment below!

Almost like clockwork after virtually every mass shooting, some Democrats and liberals will seek to cast blame for the atrocity on the National Rifle Association, as if the organization itself helped pull the trigger to murder innocent people.

Following through on that smear of America’s oldest civil rights organization — dedicated to protecting the natural right to keep and bear arms for law-abiding citizens, to defend against government tyranny and violent criminals — many on the anti-gun side will deliberately conflate NRA membership with perpetrators of mass shootings.

As Independent Journal Review noted, some on the left even go so far as to accuse NRA members of being “murderous” or part of a “terrorist group” that actively encourages and even supports acts of depravity such as mass murder with a firearm.

However, despite the persistence of that smear, there has yet to be put forth any sort of evidence proving that NRA members commit mass shootings … not even one.

For the record, though there isn’t a set definition of what exactly constitutes a “mass shooting,” it is generally understood to include one or more shooters killing four or more individuals at random in a single event.

TRENDING: Fusion GPS Partner Refuses the 5th, Strikes Deal to Testify

That doesn’t include gang-related shootings, shootings that stemmed from the commission of a separate crime, such as armed robbery, or shootings involving family members or close acquaintances as targets, such as a domestic violence situation.

To be sure, many have explicitly looked for such evidence and come up lacking, and there have been wide-ranging discussions with various theories and assertions on the matter, as evidenced by Quora.

But again, no known NRA member has ever been a perpetrator of a mass shooting. None.

Even The Washington Post — not exactly a friendly forum when it comes to gun rights — has failed to put forward any evidence that an NRA member ever committed a mass shooting.

Indeed, the newspaper has compiled a wealth of information regarding mass shootings, dating back some 50 years, including the death toll of each shooting, type of weapons involved, and what is known of the shooters themselves.

Not a single one of the 135 shooters listed was identified as a member of the NRA.

If any of them were, you can bet the WaPo would plaster that information in the headline and opening paragraph, as well as sprinkled liberally throughout the rest of the article.

Were a known NRA member to commit a mass shooting, the rest of the liberal media would make certain that every single person in America knew everything there was to know about that individual.

RELATED: Joy Reid Tried Shaming Conservatives, James Woods Sets the Record Straight

Yet, that hasn’t happened, because no NRA members have committed a mass shooting.

Nevertheless, the left can be expected to continue trotting out this baseless allegation after the next shooting, and the one after that, and so on. Facts don’t matter, and they have an agenda to push.

Please share this on Facebook and Twitter to let everyone know how empty the accusations against the NRA really are.

What do you think of the liberal smear campaign against the NRA? Scroll down to comment below!

Senate Democrats pushed nine different gun controls during the past six weeks, and ABC News has now emerged with a tenth gun law which they suggest may be the ringer.

That law would legalize firearm confiscation orders like those in Washington state. Such orders allow a judge to issue an ex parte order for the confiscation of an American’s firearms. This means the order can be issued without the firearm owner even being present for the process. His or her first knowledge of the order would come when police knocked on their door to sweep the house for firearms.

According to ABC News, the orders are supported by Sandy Hook Promise, the gun control group to which Tim McGraw donated concert proceeds in July 2015. The firearm confiscation orders are also supported by Michael Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety.

In fact, ABC News reported that Everytown claims “4,500 Americans died due to gun violence in August” of this year. This claim is misleading in a number of ways.

For one, it does not differentiate between Americans who die due to suicide versus those who die via gun crime, homicide. Gun crime only makes up one-third of gun deaths each year in America. Two-thirds of the deaths are suicides.

The second misleading aspect of claiming “4,500 Americans died due to gun violence in August” is that the annual average for gun deaths is 31,000 to 33,000 (and the vast majority of these are suicides, as previously noted). If 4,500 were being killed each month, that would push the total number of gun deaths to 54,000 annually, which is an outlandish claim.

In addition to Washington state, gun confiscation orders exist in Oregon, Connecticut, and California. They were passed in California after Elliot Rodger complied with every state and federal gun control on the books, then drove around Santa Barbara shooting people on May 23, 2014. UCLA law professor Adam Winkler spoke with the National Journal about the orders and explained that they would not have stopped Rodger nor would they have stopped Sandy Hook Elementary School gunman Adam Lanza. The reason in both cases is because family would have had to recognize the propensity for violence in the two attackers, for the purposes of securing a confiscation order, and there is no indication that either family did.

Professor Winkler put it this way: “The truth is that it is very rare to know in advance when someone is going to be dangerous with a firearm. This is not going to make a huge dent in our gun violence statistics.”

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast. He is also the political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at awrhawkins@breitbart.com.