Posted on

WATCH: Dem Sen. Dianne Feinstein Admits DACA is on “Shaky Legal Ground”

During an appearance on MSNBC with Chuck Todd Tuesday, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) was asked if DACA was legal. After a little bit of prodding, Senator Feinstein admitted DACA is on “shaky legal ground.”

Breitbart News reports:

Feinstein answered, “DACA was executive order. Legal is the law of passage of something. I — you know, there are ten attorneys general that are prepared to sue. I don’t want to get into that. The point is, DACA is here. And we’ve got 800,000 young people –.”

Todd then cut in to say, “Your answer indicates, though, that it’s on shaky legal ground.”

Feinstein stated, “It is. That’s why we need to pass a law, and we should do it.”

On Tuesday President Trump announced an end the Obama-era program that grants work permits to illegal immigrants who arrived in this country illegally with their lawbreaking parents or guardians.

After Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ announcement Barack Obama posted a statement on Facebook.
Obama calls DREAMERS “some of our best and brightest young people… who want to contribute to the country we love.”

Obama then plays his race card, something we are all very familiar with after his eight years in the White House.

What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation.

The post WATCH: Dem Sen. Dianne Feinstein Admits DACA is on “Shaky Legal Ground” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Posted on

Chicago: Thousands More Votes Than Voters In 2016, GOP Official Says

No problem there… Via Fox News: The head of the Chicago Republican Party is claiming the city reported thousands more votes cast than voters in the 2016 election — sparking a battle with Chicago officials who call the allegations overblown. First reported by the Chicago City Wire, the Chicago GOP filed a Freedom of Information […]

via Weasel Zippers

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2s3tLUa

Posted on

Anti-Trump Actress Alyssa Milano Gets Slammed For Tasteless National Prayer Day Tweet

There’s a lot of noise about so-called Trump Derangement Syndrome; while this seems like an over-used hyperbolic swipe at lefties, the term is actually fitting for actress Alyssa Milano.

On National Prayer Day, a day designated by President Donald Trump to offer prayer for the victims and the people fighting through the destruction of Hurricane Harvey, anti-hate Milano sought to bash the president, instead of applauding or merely ignoring the nonpartisan move like all the sane people.

The actress captioned the tweet with, “Remember, Sunday is National Asshole Day (by Presidential Proclamation)!”

Classy.

Milano was then hammered by folks across the political spectrum for her moronic tweet.

Ouch.

To be fair to Milano, she’s been going through some hard times. Since November, Pantsuit Queen Hill lost the election, Hollywood favorite Jon Ossoff lost the special election in Georgia, Milano reportedly evaded taxes (which is ironic because liberals love taxes and big government), and President Trump has remained in office despite her temper tantrums.

Life is hard.

via Daily Wire

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1TJbF1r

Posted on

Antifa Loses It When “Proud Boys” Make Their Rounds in Harvey Relief Efforts

Advertisement – story continues below

In the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, goodhearted Americans have traveled to Texas to aid in recovery efforts, including a “pro-Western fraternal organization” known as the Proud Boys.

The group, which celebrates Western civilization and its contributions to the world instead of apologizing for it, not only assisted in rescue efforts, but members also collected supplies for storm victims and stood in flood-ravaged neighborhoods with firearms to protect damaged homes from looters.

It was the latter of those efforts that attracted the attention of so-called “antifa” leftists who, of course, had a problem with the group walking around with guns, daring to use their Second Amendment rights to protect the community.

Advertisement – story continues below

After a picture of the Proud Boys holding guns while standing in calf-deep water was posted to social media, liberals came out of the woodwork to criticize them.

One Twitter user mocked the Proud Boys as being in Texas to “wave rifles around” in their efforts to prevent looting.

Advertisement – story continues below

proud boys texas

Actually, I’d be willing to bet that these guys would do a lot more than “wave their rifle around” if some looters tried to steal from a hurricane victim.

Another Twitter user labeled them “fascist paramilitaries.”

Advertisement – story continues below

In reality, these were men who, without concern for their own well-being, took up arms to protect a community from criminals.

“(W)hen I saw the picture of a group of Houston Proud Boys, it gave me joy. I saw men who were standing up for their communities,” a writer for the Proud Boys website noted.

Nevertheless, because some leftists believe that the Proud Boys are “fascist” and “racist,” they feel compelled to attack their well-intended actions in helping flood victims.

In fact, as pointed out by a Proud Boy, the group is decidedly not racist, fascist, homophobic or any other insult the left has thrown at them. They are just men who believe strongly in Western society.

“We are a fraternal organization like the Elks Lodge,” founder Gavin McInnes wrote for the Proud Boy magazine. “There are NO racial requirements to be in the Proud Boys. We don’t care what your sexual preference is and that includes guys dating trans.”

In addition, McInnes noted, although a majority of the group support President Donald Trump, some of even backed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.

Why do radical leftist groups like antifa have such a problem with Americans going out of their way to help others?

H/T BizPac Review

Like and share this article on Facebook and Twitter if you support this group helping in Texas hurricane relief efforts.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/2gEOIzE

Posted on

Liberals Suddenly Discover That Registering With A Federal Database Is A Bad Thing

The amazing thing about Donald Trump is he helps liberals see how things they once thought were good are suddenly bad. Take for instance federal registries. Liberals thought it would be a great idea to force all gun owners to register their weapons in a federal database and saw no potential for abuse of power. Now that Trump has ended DACA, they worry that hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who registered are at risk from having their names and address in a federal database. Is president Trump amazing or what?

When he was running the ship (into the ground) Obama decided to legislate from the Oval Office and granted amnesty to nearly a million illegal aliens with his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Because this “law” was created by executive order and bypassed the Congress, who are the ones who make our laws, DACA is completely unconstitutional. President Trump repealed DACA with instructions that Congress should get off their asses and pass meaningful immigration reform.

Under DACA, illegal aliens who were brought to this country by their illegal alien parents were granted temporary relief from deportation. Known as “DREAMers” people who were eligible for this program registered with the federal government and were given, among other things, work permits. Everyone who didn’t give a shit about our immigration laws or the security of American workers (I believe we call them liberals) rejoiced in this illegal action from Obama. Now however, they see a potential downside.

New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof was one of the first lefties to have that “oh shit” moment:

“Dreamers registered their addresses under DACA, so now the government knows exactly where to go to arrest them and their parents,” wrote Kristof.

Clearly liberals are bummed that people who are breaking the law might actually face justice, but this reaction also exposes some pretty serious hypocrisy. Liberals like Kristof and definitely his employer have for years supported a national gun registry. They wanted every gun owner in the US, except criminals, to register their names, addresses, and firearms with the federal government.

I never heard any liberals complaining that an abusive government could use that national gun registry to track down gun owners and confiscate their weapons. I don’t recall anyone on the left being concerned that a national gun registry could lead to the mass arrests of American gun owners. A gun registry would tell the government exactly where the gun owners live and what types of weapons they have. In the event that democrats were in power, they could use the registry to enact their goal of disarming the country and yet not one liberal uttered a word against it.

Yet now, registries are bad because the government could use them to enforce existing immigration laws. And really, that’s the biggest difference with this. Americans have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, while illegal aliens have no right to be in this country.

Ultimately it doesn’t matter how liberals got there, President Trump has shown them how bad federal registries and databases are. Now if only he could get them to understand how destructive illegal immigration, high taxes, and senseless regulations are as well as the fact that all civil rights are important, they could become normal productive members of society.

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter

via Downtrend.com

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://downtrend.com

Posted on

Feinstein Admits DACA on Shaky Legal Ground

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) gave a lengthy conceded Tuesday that the Obama-era executive action DACA was on "shaky legal ground."

On Tuesday, the Trump administration announced that it would phase-out DACA, with Attorney General Jeff Sessions emphasizing that the order constituted an "unconstitutional exercise of authority."

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA,  gave those brought into the United States illegally as children shelter from deportation. The executive order was implemented under President Barack Obama in June of 2012.

Chuck Todd, host of MSNBC’s "Meet the Press Daily," asked Feinstein straight: "Was DACA legal?"

"DACA was executive order," Feinstein said. "Legal is the law of passage of something. I, you know, there are ten attorneys general that are prepared to sue. I don’t want to get into that."

Feinstein then argued that DACA’s legality is now irrelevant.

"The point is, DACA is here. And we’ve got 800,000 young people who depend on it," she said.

Todd, clearly not satisfied, tried again.

"Your answer indicates, though, that it’s on shaky legal ground," he said.

"It is. That’s why we need to pass a law. And we should do it," Feinstein said.

The post Feinstein Admits DACA on Shaky Legal Ground appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://freebeacon.com

Posted on

PAPER: NSA Offered Hillary Clinton’s “Lost” Emails to FBI— Comey Turned Them Down

As Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election expands, one curious detail in Hillary Clinton’s email probe remains. The “lost” emails from Clinton’s private server aren’t lost — in fact — the NSA has them, but during the FBI’s investigation, Comey didn’t want to hear about it. 

New York Post reports:

Remember, the Republicans now control this committee. So bad news isn’t going to be stifled anymore.

Clinton, you probably remember, “lost” her private emails, which she’d been storing on a personal computer server. Comey chastised her harshly in a televised speech but then said there was a unanimous decision not to recommend prosecution.

Clinton’s emails, which were stolen by the Russians, have never been found. But as I’ve mentioned numerous times, the messages are still in the possession of the National Security Agency (NSA), which offered to give them to the FBI.

Comey turned down that offer, according to a source who has been very reliable.

I’ve also mentioned that Comey fibbed when he said his agents unanimously agreed that prosecution was unnecessary. In fact, my source says that FBI agents were irate about the decision not to go after Clinton.

James Comey’s irreparable reputation took another body blow last week after a memo emerged, written by the former FBI Director, appearing to exonerate Hillary Clinton of any wrongdoing in relation to her handling of classified information — prior to the investigation’s conclusion. With all the focus on Comey’s role in Hillary Clinton’s exoneration, it begs the question if the decision was made by a “higher power.”

No, not God.

But by a man who may think of himself as one — Barack Obama. National Review’s Andrew McCarthy believes Obama was the puppet master, so to speak, driving the narrative to insure Hillary was gotten off the hook, ensuring the Democrat Party continued its control over the White House.

National Review reports:

Let’s think about what else was going on in April 2016. I’ve written about it a number of times over the last year-plus, such as in a column a few months back: On April 10, 2016, President Obama publicly stated that Hillary Clinton had shown “carelessness” in using a private e-mail server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the [criminal statutes relevant to her e-mail scandal]). The president acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, its importance had been vastly overstated. This is precisely the reasoning that Comey relied on in ultimately absolving Clinton, as I recounted in the same column: On July 5, 2016, FBI director James Comey publicly stated that Clinton had been “extremely careless” in using a private email server to handle classified information, but he insisted that she had not intended to endanger national security (which is not an element of the relevant criminal statute).

The director acknowledged that classified information had been transmitted via Secretary Clinton’s server, but he suggested that, in the greater scheme of things, it was just a small percentage of the emails involved. Obama’s April statements are the significant ones. They told us how this was going to go. The rest is just details. In his April 10 comments, Obama made the obvious explicit: He did not want the certain Democratic nominee, the candidate he was backing to succeed him, to be indicted. Conveniently, his remarks (inevitably echoed by Comey) did not mention that an intent to endanger national security was not an element of the criminal offenses Clinton was suspected of committing – in classic Obama fashion, he was urging her innocence of a strawman crime while dodging any discussion of the crimes she had actually committed.

As we also now know – but as Obama knew at the time – the president himself had communicated with Clinton over her non-secure, private communications system, using an alias. The Obama administration refused to disclose these several e-mail exchanges because they undoubtedly involve classified conversations between the president and his secretary of state. It would not have been possible to prosecute Mrs. Clinton for mishandling classified information without its being clear that President Obama had engaged in the same conduct. The administration was never, ever going to allow that to happen.

As The Gateway Pundit reported on Friday, it looks like Comey has some explaining to do. The former FBI Director testified to Congress that he decided not to recommended charges in relation to handling of classified information, after the FBI interviewed Hillary Clinton on July 2, 2016. However, a new report reveals Comey penned a memo exonerating Clinton in the Spring.

The post PAPER: NSA Offered Hillary Clinton’s “Lost” Emails to FBI— Comey Turned Them Down appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/SIPp5X

Posted on

Steve Harvey Teams with Ben Carson on HUD Project Despite ‘Vicious’ Anti-Trump Backlash

Steve Harvey Teams with Ben Carson on HUD Project Despite ‘Vicious’ Anti-Trump Backlash

AP/AP

by Daniel Nussbaum5 Sep 20170

5 Sep, 2017
5 Sep, 2017

TV star Steve Harvey is apparently pressing ahead with his commitment to help the Trump administration on its Housing and Urban Development initiatives despite the fierce backlash he received for meeting with then-President-elect Trump in January.

In an extensive interview with the Hollywood Reporter published Tuesday, the comedian and Family Feud host revealed that he has been meeting with HUD Secretary Dr. Ben Carson to discuss building what he called “vision centers” in New York City, to teach STEM subjects and computer programming to children.

“I’ve been to HUD twice,” Harvey told THR. “I’ve met with Dr. Carson and we’re actually trying to get it started. We’ve had meetings, and now we’re just waiting on the final notes. We have several teams in place. Hopefully before the year goes out, we’ll be making the announcement about the first vision center.”

President-elect Donald Trump, Greg Calhoun(L) and Steve Harvey exit the elevator to speak to the media following a meeting at Trump Tower on January 13, 2017 in New York. / AFP / Bryan R. Smith

The 60-year-old Steve Harvey Show star met with Trump at Trump Tower in Manhattan shortly before the presidential inauguration in January, telling reporters after the meeting that he had found Trump to be “congenial and sincere,” and that he would “sit with him anytime.”

Harvey told THR that he and Trump spoke about golf at the meeting, before Harvey volunteered his service in the area of inner city housing. Harvey also told the president that he had campaigned for Democrat Hillary Clinton, but that he was going to help him now that he had won.

“He wants to know how, so I say, ‘You’ve appointed Ben Carson as the head of Housing and Urban Development, and I’ve got keys to a lot of cities around this country from the years of performing that I’ve done. I can get an ear to them really quick and find out what their real needs are. Y’all keep closing schools in the cities. Why don’t we take those schools that are closing, put some HUD money in them, and reopen them as vision centers and teach STEM and computers and coding? If you connect me with Ben Carson, I can help him with that.’ A few minutes later, he had Ben Carson on the phone.”

Harvey’s work with Carson and HUD comes even after the comedian detailed the level of vitriol he faced after meeting with Trump in January. A number of celebrities and media personalities, including CNN’s Marc Lamont Hill and the rapper T.I., blasted Harvey for meeting with Trump.

Harvey defended the meeting in January, when he said he had an “obligation to take a seat at the table when invited.”

“It was so vicious that it really threw me,” he told THR. “I was being called names that I’ve never been called: Uncle Tom. A coon. A sellout. Because I went to see this man?!”

In April, Harvey told TMZ that he had met with HUD, and that Trump was keeping his promises to inner city communities on housing.

“As far as doing what he promised me he would do, he is doing it,” he said.

 

Follow Daniel Nussbaum on Twitter: @dznussbaum

via Breitbart News

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/uktKj3

Posted on

New Yorker writer finds the Cajun Navy troubling

As most of the nation celebrates the volunteerism so evident in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, a sense of disquiet seems to be afoot among fans of Big Government. People who spontaneously organize impressive responses might make the public feel as though government doesn’t have all the answers, and that self-reliance beats waiting for the government to solve their problems.  Why, that’s troubling.

Something like this mental process must have prompted New Yorker editor David Remnick to greenlight this article, titled, “Why does American need the Cajun Navy?” Benjamin Wallace-Wells (you already guessed the author would have a hyphenated last name, didn’t you?) writes:

…the stories of the storm are consolidating, much as they did following the floods last year in Baton Rouge, around the failures of the government’s preparations and response to the disaster, and the successes of private individuals’ rescue efforts. 

It’s just not fair for government to be the butt of criticism. Especially because:

Behind everything, escalating the stakes, is the willful ignorance of climate change that many local and national political leaders still cling to. In contrast to this, the actions of the Cajun Navy and other groups are celebrated. The heroism of the boaters is so vivid and so moving that it obscures the most important question about them: Why are they so needed in the first place?

I am sure readers have already guessed the answer to that question: mean old conservatives and Republicans have prevented the government from protecting us.

In the worldview of the New Yorker, government is the natural, default source of protection:

There is a cyclic pattern to the erosion of faith in government, in which politics saps the state’s capacity to protect people, and so people put their trust in other institutions (churches; self-organizing volunteer navies), and are more inclined to support anti-government politics. The stories of the storm and the navies exist on a libertarian skeleton. Through them, a particular idea of how society might be organized is coming into view.

It is evidently a bad thing that people put their trust in churches and the volunteer enterprises like the Cajun Navy, because they sap resources and trust that naturally belongs to The State. It doesn’t sound as though Mr. Wallace-Wells or his editors are very fond of that “particular idea of society” in which autonomous citizens make their own decisions and take care of themselves without state intervention in their lives. It’s the “Libertrian Skeleton,” and it’s here in time for Halloween. 

As most of the nation celebrates the volunteerism so evident in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, a sense of disquiet seems to be afoot among fans of Big Government. People who spontaneously organize impressive responses might make the public feel as though government doesn’t have all the answers, and that self-reliance beats waiting for the government to solve their problems.  Why, that’s troubling.

Something like this mental process must have prompted New Yorker editor David Remnick to greenlight this article, titled, “Why does American need the Cajun Navy?” Benjamin Wallace-Wells (you already guessed the author would have a hyphenated last name, didn’t you?) writes:

…the stories of the storm are consolidating, much as they did following the floods last year in Baton Rouge, around the failures of the government’s preparations and response to the disaster, and the successes of private individuals’ rescue efforts. 

It’s just not fair for government to be the butt of criticism. Especially because:

Behind everything, escalating the stakes, is the willful ignorance of climate change that many local and national political leaders still cling to. In contrast to this, the actions of the Cajun Navy and other groups are celebrated. The heroism of the boaters is so vivid and so moving that it obscures the most important question about them: Why are they so needed in the first place?

I am sure readers have already guessed the answer to that question: mean old conservatives and Republicans have prevented the government from protecting us.

In the worldview of the New Yorker, government is the natural, default source of protection:

There is a cyclic pattern to the erosion of faith in government, in which politics saps the state’s capacity to protect people, and so people put their trust in other institutions (churches; self-organizing volunteer navies), and are more inclined to support anti-government politics. The stories of the storm and the navies exist on a libertarian skeleton. Through them, a particular idea of how society might be organized is coming into view.

It is evidently a bad thing that people put their trust in churches and the volunteer enterprises like the Cajun Navy, because they sap resources and trust that naturally belongs to The State. It doesn’t sound as though Mr. Wallace-Wells or his editors are very fond of that “particular idea of society” in which autonomous citizens make their own decisions and take care of themselves without state intervention in their lives. It’s the “Libertrian Skeleton,” and it’s here in time for Halloween. 

via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1c2jbfc

Posted on

Reporters Pitch Hissy Fit After Huckabee Sanders Hits Them With Russia-Clinton Truth

Politics

Reporters Pitch Hissy Fit After Huckabee Sanders Hits Them With Russia-Clinton Truth

By Davis
on September 5, 2017 at 7:29am

Advertisement – story continues below

Now that Congress is back in session, we can expect to hear more stories about the Russian investigations despite a continued lack of evidence of any wrongdoing, and a narrative that continues to fall apart.

During a routine news briefing on Aug. 1, a reporter in the White House press room tried to ambush White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders with a question about Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with Russians during the election campaign. Huckabee Sanders shut the question down — and the reporter along with it.

“The only thing I see misleading is a year’s worth of stories that have been fueling a false narrative about this Russia collusion and a phony scandal based on anonymous sources,” she said after being asked if Trump Jr. had been misleading the public.

Advertisement – story continues below

Instead of just leaving it there and moving on to another question, Huckabee Sanders took the opportunity to remind everyone of how the Democrats have some serious ties to Russia that almost no one is talking about.

“The Democrats actually colluded with a foreign government like Ukraine,” Sanders said, “If you want to talk further about a relationship with Russia, look no further than the Clintons.”

At that moment, the reporter who had asked the question tried to interrupt, perhaps upset that his line of questioning had once again revealed just how inept the media has been at doing their job to hold all politicians accountable.

That’s the Washington media — they want to ask questions that embarrass the administration but can’t stand to hear questions that point out their own flaws and failures.

Huckabee Sanders then proceeded to hit all the familiar talking points, talking about Clinton’s paid speeches to Russia, the infamous uranium deal and other shady dealings that were exposed during the 2016 election.

“If you want to talk about somebody who’s actually been tough on Russia, look at President Trump,” she added.

The uproar from the press corps that came at the end of Huckabee Sanders’ comments shows just how much the media establishment hates it when the administration hits back.

Advertisement – story continues below

Indeed, Trump has a track record of actually being very tough on Russia — tougher than Obama was. Trump has shown that he isn’t going to simply back down to Russia President Vladimir Putin — he will fight for America’s interests.

We can undoubtedly expect more exchanges like this in the coming days as the Russia investigations restart, but we’re confident that Huckabee Sanders can hold her own against the media, while at the same time serving them an extra helping of humble pie.

Share this on Facebook and Twitter and let us know if you think this Russia narrative garbage will ever die down.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: http://ift.tt/1w7bvFX