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

Posted on

WATCH The Great Butt Crack Looter Get What’s Coming to Him in Texas

A rather obese black man with a gaping butt crack allegedly tried to steal some merchandise from a Houston area grocery store in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey.

The store had reportedly opened to allow people to get food items when the man allegedly made his move only to be chased down in the parking lot by customers and police who dealt with them in the manner they deemed appropriate.

The incident was captured on video by LiveLeak which describes it as:

Big Boy Gets Caught Stealing Chips Dip And Sweets From A Houston Foodarama During The Hurricane!

“Dude tried to steal out of foodarama in Houston tx during the hurricane. The workers caught him a fight breaks out workers team up with a cop to wrestle the big dude down.”

CHECK IT OUT

VIDEO

It could have turned out much worse for the big dude, many would just as soon shoot a looter on sight like this guy.

VIDEO

via Downtrend.com

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

Posted on

Want to Know if Google Censored the Page You’re on? Here’s the Icon to Look for

Advertisement – story continues below

Google recently earned widespread condemnation from the media after it was learned the multinational technology company used its influence three months ago to punish an organization that had spoken out negatively about it.

According to a New York Times piece from earlier this week, a think tank that relies on Google for a large part of its funding actually ousted a key player for writing a commentary piece that took sides against the technology giant in a legal case from the European Union. The incident stirred controversy in the online world, as well as charges that Google was using its considerable wealth and power to stifle criticism of its practices.

The truth is, however, that Google may have been using its monopoly power to target critics and competitors long before June.

Advertisement – story continues below

Flash back to 2011, when then-Forbes reporter Kashmir Hill met with Google sales representatives to discuss their then-new social network, Plus.

“The Google salespeople were encouraging Forbes to add Plus’s ‘+1’ social buttons to articles on the site, alongside the Facebook Like button and the Reddit share button,” she wrote this week for Gizmodo. “They said it was important to do because the Plus recommendations would be a factor in search results — a crucial source of traffic to publishers.”

The salespeople specifically told her that publishers who failed to place the “+1” social buttons on their websites would see their search results suffer. Troubled by this information, she chose to write a report about it — and surprise, surprise, “Google flipped out,” she wrote.

Advertisement – story continues below

“I was told by my higher-ups at Forbes that Google representatives called them saying that the article was problematic and had to come down,” she explained. “The implication was that it might have consequences for Forbes, a troubling possibility given how much traffic came through Google searches and Google News.”

The story wound up being pulled from Forbes and even completely erased from Google, with even its cache image disappearing, Hill wrote.

“That was unusual; websites captured by Google’s crawler did not tend to vanish that quickly,” Hill wrote, adding that it seems likely the company purposefully scrubbed her story from its search engine — the thought of which should frighten everyone.

“Deliberately manipulating search results to eliminate references to a story that Google doesn’t like would be an extraordinary, almost dystopian abuse of the company’s power over information on the internet,” she added, noting however that she lacks proof of this.

Advertisement – story continues below

To be clear, Google representatives have denied they ever scrubbed the engine of the article, though that’s somewhat hard to believe in light of the latest news about Google allegedly  targeting critics and competitors.

Consider what happened to Barry Lynn, who used to run the Open Markets initiative for the New American Foundation think tank. In June, The Times wrote, he penned a piece celebrating a decision by European antitrust regulators to levy a record fine against Google.

Within hours of the piece’s publication, Google’s executive chairman, Eric Schmidt, intervened by communicating “his displeasure” to the foundation’s president, Anne-Marie Slaughter, according to The Times.

This calculated move by Schmidt, who’d donated millions to the foundation and previously served as its chairman, had the desired effect: Slaughter summoned Lynn into her office and informed him that it was time for the foundation to “part ways” with his initiative.

“Google is very aggressive in throwing its money around Washington … and then pulling the strings,” Lynn told The Times. “People are so afraid of Google now.”

Literally every internet user should be concerned about charges that Google is and has been abusing its power as a corporation worth almost half a trillion dollars to silence competitors — as well as conservatives, though that’s a separate story in itself. The underlying point is that suspicions like this about Google’s behavior point to a problem — a big one, in fact, that should concern all conservatives and liberals.

Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about Google’s history of censoring its critics.

via Conservative Tribune

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

Posted on

Mark Levin: Here’s The Plan For Taking Down North Korea And China

On his radio show Thursday, Mark Levin laid out a plan for handling the militant communist state of North Korea and its key ally, China. The strategy, said Levin, has been provided to us by the man who finally forced the Soviets to end the Cold War, Ronald Reagan.

Amid seemingly ever-escalating threats and provocative actions by the totalitarian dictator Kim Jung Un, the West, said Levin, seems paralyzed, unable to see a way to bring North Korea to heel, particularly because of communist China’s support of the hostile authoritarian state.

“So what do we do?” asked Levin. “We take a page out of the ol’ Gipper’s book.”

Faced with a Soviet military with as much or even more nuclear capability than our own, said Levin, President Ronald Reagan moved more nuclear weapons closer to the USSR, an aggressive move that ended up having a significant impact on the Soviets’ approach to the Cold War.

The first step we should take, the conservative host suggested, is follow Reagan’s lead by deploying nuclear weapons to South Korea and helping Japan arm itself with an advanced missile defense system.

Next, Levin said it was time to start working more closely with India, China’s biggest competitor and a country that geographically can help us “encircle” the massive communist state. Other key strategic partners we should “fund and support” are those in Hong Kong and inside the country who are resisting the communist party in China.

China’s economy is far more fragile than many believe, Levin underscored. If we are strategic in our political and economic moves, we can bring China to its knees similarly to the way the Soviet Union eventually imploded.

“Either we take this threat from North Korea and China seriously or we don’t,” Levin’s website notes in its summary of the podcast. “If we are the country that has the most powerful tools on the face of the earth but are unwilling to use them then we are not the most powerful country on the face of the earth.”

Here’s the audio:

VIDEO

via Daily Wire

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

Posted on

Watch: Judge Jeanine Demands Jim Comey Be Investigated Further

Politics

Watch: Judge Jeanine Demands Jim Comey Be Investigated Further

Jeanine-Comey

By Davis
on September 4, 2017 at 11:12am

Advertisement – story continues below

While much of the news for the past week has been focused on the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, there have been some major developments in the political world that deserve attention as well.

One of those developments involved former FBI Director James Comey, and revelations that he may have begun drafting his statement exonerating former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton before the investigation was even completed.

During her opening segment on Fox News, Judge Jeanine Pirro stated that it was time for the Justice Department to investigate “Mr. Holier-Than-Thou” Comey for his actions, Fox News reported.

Advertisement – story continues below

Pirro began by summing up the wrongs conducted by both the Justice Department and the State Department in allowing Clinton to get away with her crimes time and time again.

“Jim Comey — he needs to be the target of an active criminal investigation for obstruction of justice, conspiracy and perjury,” she demanded. “His prejudging an investigation before 17 witnesses and the target of that criminal investigation were even interviewed is the essence of public corruption.”

The allegations that Comey came to his decision before the investigation was even completed is very troubling, and shows that there was something much more sinister going on than we likely even know.

Advertisement – story continues below

Watch Pirro’s statements below:

VIDEO

Any halfway-decent investigator knows that you don’t just come to a conclusion before you have seen all the evidence. Doing so is proof of either extreme incompetence or outside influence.

“He lied to the senate judiciary committee when he said he only made the decision to not charge, which by the way was not his decision to make in the first place, after the investigation was completed,” Pirro continued.

Advertisement – story continues below

“Jim Comey, Mr. Holier-Than-Thou … has shown himself to be the essence of the swamp that Americans so want to clean up,” Pirro explained. “It is time to go after Jim Comey.”

It is becoming increasingly clear that the “investigation” into Clinton was nothing more than a sham. The swamp was determined not to let Clinton be charged with anything, and they won that particular battle.

Hopefully Trump won’t let them win this next round, and will actually open a real investigation into Clinton — one that is headed up by a prosecutor who will let the facts decide what course of action should be taken.

Share this on Facebook and Twitter and let us know if you think James Comey should be investigated.

via Conservative Tribune

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

Posted on

Pastor Describes Trump’s Visit to His Texas Church During Flood

Politics

Pastor Describes Trump’s Visit to His Texas Church During Flood

By V Saxena
on September 4, 2017 at 11:31am

Advertisement – story continues below

Responding to President Donald Trump’s visit a day earlier to Houston to offer aid and comfort to the victims of Hurricane Harvey, Pastor Ken Gurley of Houston’s First Church of Pearland described in vivid detail Sunday how it felt when the president stepped into his church.

“Everything in Houston has been just very dramatic, a lot of emotional struggles … to have the president, first lady, cabinet secretaries and others come, it was just a joy and it was like a shot of adrenaline,” he said on Fox News.

“He came across as very compassionate, as very concerned, extremely engaged in the process,” he added when asked about what had specifically inspired him about the president’s visit.

Advertisement – story continues below

Listen to his full statement below:

VIDEO

According to CBS News, the president and his wife, first lady Melania Trump, traveled Saturday first to Texas and then Louisiana. In Texas he “met with victims at a shelter,” “neighbors in a residential block affected by the storm” and volunteers at Pastor Gurley’s church.

Advertisement – story continues below

Continuing his discussion Sunday about the president’s trip, the pastor noted that after Hurricane Ike swept through southeast Texas in 2008, nobody seemed to care.

“The Monday morning after Ike was when Lehman Brothers went under and the financial panic began,” he said. “And we were lost, and basically no one communicated with us.”

But this time it’s been different: “To see an engaged administration come down, support the community of faith … and (Trump) walking into that room (in the church) and telling them that he’s with us, it was like the George W. Bush moment at 9/11.”

But the president did more than just speak. He also helped out.

Advertisement – story continues below

“He and the first lady actually joined in and started delivering goods, and he acted like an old pro at it — he was engaged,” Gurley said.

Naw, he’s not a “pro”; he’s just a really warmhearted guy who, frankly, has been misjudged by many, including nearly everyone in the media.

Please share this story on Facebook and Twitter and let us know what you think about Pastor Ken Gurley’s poignant words regarding the president’s visit Saturday to his church in Houston.

via Conservative Tribune

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