Kanye West’s Twitter account may have replaced Donald Trump’s as the most watched in the world.

The only consolation to the president, should this irk him, is that it’s all because Kanye deigned to praise President Trump — and slam former President Barack Obama.

While we’ve all seen plenty of tweets from the rap superstar in the news of late, this one is probably his best:

In fact, Chicago may have gotten worse during that period. But never mind that, at least as far as the media was concerned.

This didn’t get as much play as his “dragon energy,” remarks and it’s easy to see why — unlike stuff that can be mocked and used to create a narrative about Kanye, this raises an uncomfortable question about the city that both the former president and rapper have called home.

In a series of tweets on Thursday that have since been deleted, another prominent Trump supporter who’s received flak — Roseanne Barr — stood by the rapper’s characterization of the Windy City.

“(Kanye) is telling the truth about (Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s) Chicago,” the sitcom star wrote, according to Breitbart.

“Ppl (sic) do not want to hear the truth-that Chicago could be a better city for its citizens, but the establishment is corrupted.”

In a follow-up tweet, she added, “Let’s do something about #Chicago — all of us… instead of hurling insults and division.

“Let’s try efficient government and unity JUST THIS ONCE!”

That’s unlikely to happen, of course, at least as long as the city remains in the hands of Mayor Emanuel, formerly President Obama’s chief of staff, who has overseen Chicago’s descent into America’s gun crime capital despite some of America’s most draconian gun laws.

In fact, a 2017 study revealed that 20 percent of the increase in violent crime in the United States could be traced to Chicago alone, and 10 percent of it to just five neighborhoods.

RELATED: Kanye Banned from Radio Station Operated by White People

“Crime is incredibly geographically concentrated … which suggests that any sort of take on what’s causing this has to take an incredibly nuanced look because it’s not just what makes Chicago different from New York City, it’s what makes one neighborhood in Chicago different from other neighborhoods,” John Pfaff, a law professor at Fordham University in New York City, said at the time of the study’s release.

The fact that it’s geographically concentrated in Chicago, however, is no surprise. During the Obama administration, which was supposedly a renaissance for African-Americans in this country, Chicago saw a dramatic rise in crime. It also also fell from seventh to 21st when it came to the percentage of black households earning over $100,000 a year, according to the Chicago Tribune.

And yet, Cook County — the county where Chicago is located — also has the largest number of black residents in the United States. That number is dwindling, thanks to black flight from the city. However, it raises the question: If Obama was so great for African-Americans, what the heck happened to Chicago?

That’s a question Kanye would like answered. Roseanne wouldn’t mind an answer, either, from the sound of things. Sadly, that request is going to get lost in the media speculation over Kanye’s sanity and coverage of his other comments regarding slavery. If the media’s so willing to spend time on that, however, they should also be willing to spend some time covering what’s happened to the town Barack Obama likes to call home.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

Most of us remember having murals at our high schools. They usually contained simple things. The school mascot. Paeans to graduating classes past. The bloodied, decapitated head of the current president on the end of a spear.

What, you don’t remember that at your alma mater? Well, you’re clearly not a student at the MAAC Community Charter School in Chula Vista, California, where school officials are now answering a lot of questions after a mural depicting Trump a lá Kathy Griffin made the front pages.

According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, the mural was painted last weekend at an event called Battlegroundz, a scholarship fundraiser during which both students and amateur and professional artists utilize their talents to help out the school and/or make a horrifyingly violent political statement. (Whichever works.)

Artist Sasha Andrade was responsible for the part of the mural containing Trump’s head. “The mural depicts three warriors, each with different types of dress. One appears to be holding a human heart and another wears a leopard headdress and is holding a spear. At its end is the severed head of Trump, with the spear’s tip protruding from his mouth,” the Union-Tribune noted.

Classy! Here’s the work itself before it was removed, which is obviously extremely graphic.

Viewer discretion, as always, is advised.

San Diego school orders artist to change mural depicting Trump’s head on a spear https://t.co/1oy3wRlEx0 pic.twitter.com/onzDNwNETD

— The Hill (@thehill) May 5, 2018

The San Diego-area school, which serves 300 students ages 14-24, apologized for the mural, although not necessarily for the reasons you might think.

“We understand that there was a mural painted at the event this past weekend that does not align with our school’s philosophy of non-violence,” a statement from MAAC Community Charter School director Tommy Ramirez read.

“We have been in communication with the artist — who has agreed to modify the artwork — to better align with the school’s philosophy.”

Note there’s nothing about the fact that it was basically envisioning the death of the president. Forget about the political implications of that at a school run by taxpayer funds. It doesn’t “align” with the “school’s philosophy of non-violence.” One can guess their reaction might have been slightly different had the head on the end of this spear been Barack Obama’s.

Unfortunately, the school’s philosophy of non-violence didn’t have them asking questions about the grotesque mural before people in the community did. They complained to the school, and local television station KUSI-TV soon dedicated coverage to the mural, which seemed to put the school on the defensive..

By Wednesday, the school had covered the mural in black plastic. By Friday, the cover was plywood and access was blocked by a vehicle.

RELATED: Fox News Host’s Stunning Anti-Trump Rant Sparks Social Media Firestorm

“Obviously there’s a lot of concern over what is depicted,” said Manny Rubio, public information officer with MAAC’s parent district, said about the numerous phone calls. “Because of that, they’re going to rework it. Our ultimate goal is that instruction continues and is not interrupted.”

“Francia Baluca, marketing and communications manager for MAAC, the nonprofit that oversees the school, said officials were looking into questions raised about the mural, including whether anyone knew of its content before it was painted and when school officials first became aware of it,” the Union-Tribune reported.

As for Sasha Andrade, she wasn’t available for comment Friday. However, she was quite talkative earlier in the week, when she bragged about the mural on Facebook.

“They can try to #censor it but here it is guys!!!!” she said on Wednesday, adding, “lets (sic) make this #viral lol who wants some stickers???” The message was topped off with hashtags like “#urwelcome” and “#freedomofexpression.” She later said comedian George Lopez had liked the mural and signed that post with the hashtag “#firstamendment.”

Just in case you were wondering whether Andrade had a sudden change of heart, the mural was still her Facebook banner. Apparently, her values haven’t brought themselves into alignment with the MAAC Community Charter School’s philosophy of non-violence yet. Give her time, I suppose.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen the president depicted in grotesque artworks that involve him being dead in some way, shape or form, usually involving decapitation. Whether it’s Kathy Griffin’s infamous effigial head incident or the Hieronymus Bosch-like portraits of Trump and various administration officials Jim Carrey seems fond of posting to Twitter these days, there’s enough of depressingly-violent Trump artwork out there to satiate even the most benumbed of “Faces of Death” devotees.

It is, however, the first time one of these abominations has appeared at a public school. That vile fact is reason enough to condemn this mural in the strongest terms. The fact that taxpayer funds were possibly involved in the creation of the painting — and almost certainly the venue in which it was painted — merely adds to the outrage. Perhaps it’s time that the Secret Service had a discussion with Ms. Andrade about just how far her “#firstamendment” privileges go when it involves tacitly calling for the assassination of the president.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

Leave it to James Woods to cut to the chase.

The Hollywood actor — a rock of conservative logic in a puddle of flaccid thinking — has built a well-earned reputation for cutting commentary on social issues.

But his question this week about the news that the Boy Scouts have officially, unconditionally surrendered to political correctness by changing their name was even sharper than usual.

And his logic was unassailable.

Now that the Boy Scouts no longer exist and must accept girls, how is it possible Girl Scouts still exist, but don’t accept boys?

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 3, 2018

Not even the biggest fans of the change have an answer.

Woods’ tweet was spurred by the news that the Boy Scouts of America — a revered name in youth development since it was incorporated in 1910 — would no longer be known by anything so gender-specific as the word “Boys.”

Instead, the organization will now be known as “Scouts BSA,” to reflect its decision last fall to buckle under to conformist pressures and open its ranks to girls.

The move might have been greeted with joy by liberals, but there’s no small amount of outrage — and contempt — among critics for the Scouts’ about-face, and the new name that symbolizes it.

As always, Woods tweet stirred up comment from all ends of the political spectrum, but there were quite a few that saw a dark force at work.

As crazy as it sounds, I honestly believe these leftist libnuts have a plan to make the men of America as weak and sissy-fied as possible so that our ability to defend our country will be greatly deminished!!

— Deb Williams ن (@DebWilliams57) May 3, 2018

RELATED: Starbucks Trainers Sends Shock Message to Jewish Group — You’re Gone

Because James, women on the Left are “neutralizing” men right before our very eyes. I’ve been warning men about this for awhile now. It will get worse unless it’s reversed.

— SusanKnowles (@SusanKnowles) May 3, 2018

And then there was this:

Thank you James. Why are news organizations not asking this simple question?

— Mason Lopez (@mglcll) May 3, 2018

The answer to that one, unfortunately, is obvious.

The media that destroyed its own credibility as an institution by its slavish devotion to the Barack Obama presidency isn’t capable of even questioning any part of the liberal agenda anymore.

It’s not even capable of understanding that it should be questioned.

No one questions the Girl Scouts because they’re an unthreatening American institution that, for most of us, means cookies every spring.

The Boy Scouts, however, were offensive to liberals because of their understandable reluctance to let gay men near young boys, emphasis on honesty and honorable behavior, self-reliance and a general attitude that it was important to teach boys to be men — what liberals today call “toxic masculinity.”

For liberal purposes, the Girl Scouts don’t have to be destroyed. The Boy Scouts do.

Forcing the group to accept gays was one step (The Associated Press laughably claims the group is stronger than ever since the move). Forcing it to accept girls is another. Now a name change that’s literally emasculating — “Scouts BSA” — is a third.

Woods wondered why the Girl Scouts still exist? At this rate, they might last longer than whatever the group formerly known as the Boy Scouts ends up.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

Six of the 200 alt-left Antifa extremists arrested on May 1st in Paris were presented before a court this week, with several of the alleged rioters coming from upper-middle class backgrounds.

Around 1,200 masked, alt-left Antifa militants took part in the rioting in Paris earlier this month, which saw several shops heavily vandalised and police officers attacked with firebombs.

Six of the 200 or so extremists arrested were brought to a Paris court this week on charges related to the rioting, allowing the public to see the backgrounds of the people who attempt to remain anonymous through their black bloc tactics, Franceinfo reports.

Several of the arrested extremists have been revealed to have privileged backgrounds, including one 29-year-old who earns as much as 4,200 euros per month as a consultant, and another who is the son of a researcher at the French National Center for Scientific Research, the country’s largest governmental research organisation.

PICTURES: Paris Burns as May Day Protests Turn to Riots https://t.co/FDvwxbc9rx

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) May 2, 2018

A young woman was also among the alt-left extremists, and admitted to lying about her identity to the police who arrested her, claiming that her name was Anne and that she was from Sweden when her name was actually Andrea and she is French.

The son of the researcher also admitted to giving a fake name to the police, and both were handed four weeks of pre-trial detention by the presiding judge as a result.

The profile of alt-left Antifa extremists often counters the group’s “working class” claims and, more often than not, according to Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the majority are men who live with their parents and do not have girlfriends.

Despite their often upper-middle-class origins, alt-left extremists have become more radical across Europe in recent months.

In France, several Antifa members who travelled to northern Syria recently threatened to return to fight the French state, targetting government officials, police, and intelligence officers while posing in masks with automatic rifles.

The group also said they would sabotage infrastructure in their war against the French state, in response to a series of evictions of alt-left activists occupying universities and other buildings.

In Germany, Antifa extremists injured hundreds of police at last year’s Hamburg G20 summit, and two members of the group were found in possession of a mobile bomb factory and chemicals used to make explosives recently.

 Follow Chris Tomlinson on Twitter at @TomlinsonCJ or email at ctomlinson(at)breitbart.com 

 

To the retail giant Amazon, “defending freedom” are dirty words.

That’s the takeaway from the behemoth’s decision to ban the conservative legal firm Alliance Defending Freedom from its fundraising options on the word of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a leftist activist group that uses its mainstream media popularity to remorselessly attack conservative organizations.

But the Alliance Defending Freedom is fighting back.

At issue is Amazon’s reliance on the Southern Poverty Law Center for determining which groups are eligible to participate in a fundraising set-up known as AmazonSmile, which allows its customers to donate “.05 percent of the purchase price of eligible products” to an approved charitable organization.

Within the past several weeks, Alliance Defending Freedom learned that it was no longer one of the approved organizations eligible for donations, according to a news release on the ADF’s website, because the Southern Poverty Law Center was in charge of making the decision.

As the Daily Wire reported, potential donors who tried to use AmazonSmile to give money to ADF received the following message:

“The AmazonSmile Participation Agreement states that certain categories of organizations are not eligible to participate in AmazonSmile. We rely on the Southern Poverty Law Center to determine which charities are in certain ineligible categories. You have been excluded from the AmazonSmile program because the Southern Poverty Law Center lists Alliance Defending Freedom in an ineligible category.”

The ADF is mounting a public relations campaign against the Amazon decision, including publicizing a letter from its president, Michael Farris, to Amazon demanding that Amazon be more transparent about its practices.

“If you are going to rely on a discredited partisan organization like the SPLC to determine who is eligible to participate in AmazonSmile, you should disclose that in your policy and to your customers. Millions of Americans share our beliefs and thousands of Christian, Jewish, and Muslim religious organizations subscribe to them as well,” he wrote.

“Your customers have a right to know that you’ve placed such an organization as the gatekeeper to participation in a charitable program.”

On Thursday, Kristen Waggoner, senior vice president of the ADF, made an appearance on Fox News to call the decision out the SPLC in brutal terms.

Check out the interview here:

RELATED: Starbucks Trainers Sends Shock Message to Jewish Group — You’re Gone

Waggoner pointed out that the ADF is a legal group that has successfully argued cases in front of the Supreme Court of the United States. (Just last year, it won the precedent-setting Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Inc. v. Comer” case that found states can’t discriminate against schools because of their religious affiliations.)

The SPLC, on the other hand, she said, “is essentially a group that’s designed to slander other groups, and it’s a direct mail marketing scheme designed to pocket millions and millions of dollars off-shore.”

“They’ve publicly stated they are not a neutral watchdog group, but instead only go after those on the right, and their purpose is to destroy groups that disagree with their leftist ideology,” she said.

Anyone who’s even vaguely followed the news regarding the Southern Poverty Law Center recently knows what Waggoner is talking about.

While its origins may well have been the noble civil rights organization it pretends to be today, SPLC has long since evolved into little more than a weaponized arm of the militant leftst movement, branding conservative organizations as “hate groups.”

Sometimes those activities are simply dangerous – like the case of the “map” the SPLC published of facilities in the United States bearing the names of Confederate figures, deliberately putting school children at risk for “progressive” violence.

Sometimes they lead to violence, like the 2012 attack by a gunman on the conservative Family Research Council’s headquarters in Washington. The gunman, Floyd Lee Corkins II, told investigators he launched the attack because the SPLC had identified the Family Research Council as a “hate group,” according to the Washington Examiner.

And this is the organization Amazon is relying on to decide what groups are worthy of participation in its fundraising application?

Amazon is a private company, and if its CEO Jeff Bezos wants to rely on a soulless, cynical outfit like the Southern Poverty Law Center to make decisions about what charities are eligible for his organization’s help, that is, literally, his business.

But he should understand there could be business ramifications among millions of Americans who realize that to Amazon, “defending freedom” are dirty words.

They’re not to most Americans. And that could end up costing Amazon more than it expects.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

This grandfather might walk with a cane, but he’s quick on his feet.

A video of a Columbus, Ohio, police chase is lighting up social media this week thanks to the actions of a man visiting a public library with his granddaughter, and the action he took to help cops catch an armed suspect fleeing police.

It’s about as smooth as it gets.

Check out a YouTube video here, compiled from police dash cams, body cams, and surveillance cameras from inside the library.

We should all be so agile.

According to a Facebook post from the Columbus Police Department, the incident took place on April 3 when the man identified only as “Bill” was outside the library preparing to leave.

He heard police sirens and saw the chase heading his way. He had to make a choice.

“’Bill’ assessed the situation as fast as he could, cane in hand,” the police post stated. “He heard officers yelling multiple times to drop the gun. ‘Bill’ says with officers lagging a bit behind the suspect he did what he could to help them nab the armed man.

“’Bill’ stuck out a back leg to trip the suspect who was running from police. That move likely saved the 18-year-old suspect’s life. It also allowed police to catch up to him to make an arrest.”

The incident might have been a month old, but social media users were cheering Friday when it was getting publicized on Fox News; heroes like this are hard not to like.

WAY TO GO! Now THAT’S #BackingTheBlue!

— Dwight Worden (@shootist11263) May 5, 2018

RELATED: Christian Org Cancels CA Conference, Fears Anti-Bible Bill Will Make Them Criminals

That back step trip up move, on the POS was perfectly timed and outstanding.

You’re a hero grandpa! pic.twitter.com/wnXkI9SM3h

— Dr. Antlerdance (@Ghostrider189) May 5, 2018

That’s just so awesome! A citizen stepping in (or out lol) to assist police in stopping a dangerous thug! More people should have that mindset over trying to damage them!

— MyKidzDad (@KJVBAPTIST) May 5, 2018

That last post nails it. At a time when abusing cops is almost a routine part of any publicized arrest, the man showed how it can work when cops and civilians are on the same side. Too many liberals obviously don’t realize it, but law enforcement needs help sometimes, too.

According to the police Facebook report, cops found a Glock 9 mm handgun loaded with a high-capacity extended magazine carrying 29 bullets.

It wasn’t clear why police were chasing the man, identified as Shawn Briggs, in the first place, but the Facebook report notes that he already has a lengthy criminal record. Since that’s not easy to do by the age of 18, he’s clearly been headed for trouble for some time.

He just didn’t realize he was heading for it when he ran straight at a grandfather with a cane outside a public library.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!

No border wall funding, no border. That’s the ultimatum Donald Trump seemed to be giving Democrats at an event in Cleveland this weekend.

On Saturday, the president appeared at a round-table to discuss tax reform, but the conversation quickly turned to the problems with immigration and the border.

Trump stated that more funding was needed to build his much-touted wall — and hinted that if lawmakers didn’t provide it, the entire border could be shut down.

“We are fixing and building walls, but we need much more money and we are doing the job,” Trump said, according to The Washington Examiner.

“We may have to close up our country to get this straight because we either have a country or we don’t,” he continued.

As part of his remarks, the president pointed a finger at Democrats and suggested that their “catch and release” illegal immigration policies were allowing criminals to escape justice.

“You catch ’em, and then you release ’em,” he said.

One of the obstacles to constructing the proposed border wall is something Trump understands very well: dollars.

“We are going to demand Congress secure the border in the upcoming CR. Illegal immigration must end!” Trump recently declared. Funding is the key, but so far Congress has dragged its feet on the issue.

Lawmakers approved $1.6 billion in funding for the border wall as part of the “omnibus” spending bill, but this is just a drop in the bucket compared to the $25 billion amount that the president requested.

The Cleveland remark might have been off the cuff, but Trump said similar words during another stop in Michigan.

“That frustration manifested itself into threats to shut down the government over the issue. During a rally in Michigan last Saturday, Trump threatened to ‘close down the country’ for funds for his border wall,” reported The Examiner.

RELATED: Report: McCain Insiders Planning Trump Snub for Eventual Funeral

Of course, how you would shut down the border without having sufficient border security in the first place is a bit of a mystery. It’s a catch-22: If locking down the entire border for political leverage could be done, the president wouldn’t need to build the wall.

It’s possible Trump was alluding to an overall government shutdown, but that situation is something that both Republicans and Democrats want to avoid.

Either way, it increasingly seems like the president has the pulse of the people and knows there’s support for border security, but lawmakers don’t want to back him on this issue.

The result right now is a sort of stalemate. Trump will no doubt continue to raise the issue whenever possible, as he has since long before the election … but it will take more than words and campaign rallies to make this happen.

Maybe Trump does have a trick or two up his sleeve to push Congress into action — we certainly wouldn’t put it past him.

What do you think? Scroll down to comment below!